Lessons Learned From Enhancing Vaccine Pharmacovigilance Activities During PsA-TT Introduction in African Countries, 2010-2013

Landscape review of active vaccine safety surveillance activities for COVID-19 vaccines globally

Background

Evidence of COVID-19 vaccine safety relied upon the global vaccine monitoring infrastructure due to shortened clinical development timelines and emergency use licensure. Differences in AVSS capacity between high-income countries (HICs) versus low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) were known prior to the pandemic.

Objective

To assess the global landscape of COVID-19 vaccine AVSS activities to identify gaps in safety evidence generation across vaccine products and populations with a focus on LMICs.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was conducted in January 2022 on AVSS activities evaluating adverse events following immunization (AEFI). Data collected included country, targeted population, COVID-19 vaccine product(s), design of surveillance/monitoring activities or study, and AEFIs to be monitored.To supplement these findings, we conducted a literature review of COVID-19 vaccine safety activities published in PubMed through January 2023. Observational activities assessing AEFI, specifically adverse events of special interest (AESI), following routine use of COVID-19 vaccines in medical practice were included; systematic reviews, benefit/risk assessments, clinical trials, and case reports/series were excluded.

Results

The survey, completed by 34 respondents and compiled with reviews of 7 publicly available Risk Management Plans from five vaccine manufacturers, identified 79 monitoring activities in HICs, 24 in LMICs, and 9 in multiple regions. Most activities in LMICs were planned cohort event monitoring (CEM) studies (n = 18); two multi-national hospital-based sentinel surveillance studies for AESI were ongoing. Activities in LMICs evaluated multiple COVID-19 vaccine products simultaneously and were sponsored by health authorities. The literature review identified 1245 unique citations, of which 379 met inclusion criteria. The majority evaluated vaccines primarily used in high-income countries: Pfizer BioNTech (Comirnaty; n = 303), Moderna (mRNA-1273; n = 164), AstraZeneca (AZD1222; n = 126), and Janssen (Ad26.COV2.S); n = 62); 14 citations assessed vaccines used exclusively in LMICs: Sinovac (CoronaVac), Beijing CNBG (BBIBP-Corv), Bharat (Covaxin), SII (Covashield), and Gamaleya (Gam-Covid-Vac) vaccines.

Conclusions

Robust safety evidence for input into benefit/risk assessments is likely unavailable for most COVID-19 vaccines used primarily in LMICs due to emphasis on cohort event monitoring methods. Goals for equitable vaccine access should be coupled with investment and support for building infrastructure and capacity for safety evidence generation to inform policy and regulatory decisions at local levels.

Strategies and interventions to strengthen pharmacovigilance systems in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

The slow progress of pharmacovigilance (PV) in low-income and middle-income countries (LMIC) raises questions about core challenges on the growth of PV, and the appropriateness of strategies used so far to develop PV. Therefore, this scoping review aims to describe strategies and interventions to strengthen PV in LMIC and to propose recommendations for future investments in PV capacity building.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Publications included were primary studies, articles, policy and guideline papers, describing interventions to strengthen PV in LMIC.

METHODS

The review was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidelines on conducting scoping reviews. Literature searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, PDQ-evidence, CINAHL and other relevant websites from January 1990 to January 2021. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts. One reviewer performed data extraction and descriptive analysis, which were reviewed by two other reviewers.

RESULTS

10 922 unique titles were screened and 152 were eligible for full text review. Of these, 57 and an additional 13 reports from grey literature fulfilled eligibility criteria for inclusion in the review. These were grouped into two categories: (1) Interventions aimed at increasing PV knowledge and adverse drug reactions (ADR) reporting (45 papers), primarily education of healthcare professionals (HCP), alone or in combination with other interventions such as mobile and electronic reporting and (2) Interventions aimed at strengthening various components of the national PV system (25 papers), describing strategies or mixed interventions implemented at the national level, targeting different components of the national PV system.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of this review suggest that educating HCP on ADR reporting is the most common approach to build PV capacity in LMIC. Though important, education alone is insufficient and should ideally be organised within the holistic framework of strengthening national PV systems, with a focus on also building capacity for advanced activities such as signal detection.

RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine-proven safe and effective?

In October, 2021, WHO recommended that the RTS,S malaria vaccine, with its strong safety profile and high impact, be provided to children from age 5 months in regions with moderate to high Plasmodium falciparum malaria transmission. The evidence base included phase 3 trials in seven African countries and an ongoing malaria vaccine implementation programme (MVIP) in three African countries. We highlight problems with the MVIP mortality data, including potential confounding, inappropriate use of severe malaria as a surrogate marker, a statistically non-significant effect, and assessment after 2 years instead of the stipulated 4 years, which could have inflated the benefits and deflated the risks associated with the vaccine. We conclude that the claimed impact of the MVIP on mortality is not based on enough scientific evidence and that the MVIP findings do not rule out the possibility of increased mortality among vaccinated girls compared with vaccinated boys, as observed in the phase 3 studies. The MVIP should adhere fully to the planned analyses and the data should be made available for independent assessment. Roll-out of the vaccine elsewhere should include rigorous evaluation, especially of its safety.

Adverse events following immunization reporting and impact on immunization services in informal settlements in Nairobi, Kenya: a prospective mixed-methods study

Introduction

adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) are thought to contribute to cases of vaccine hesitancy, yet little data exists describing the state of reporting and management of AEFIs. This study investigated the occurrence and influence of AEFIs on vaccine hesitancy in an informal settlement of Nairobi.

Methods

this was a prospective mixed-methods study involving 7 focus group discussions, 8 key informant interviews and 457 face-to-face interviews with caregivers. Caregivers were recruited at/or before the 6 week clinic visit and assessed for occurrence of AEFIs in their children at the subsequent 10- and 14-week visits and a follow-up two weeks following the 14 weeks visit via phone calls.

Results

in this study, 12.3% (56/457) of the infants experienced an AEFI. Of these, 19 did not report for the next scheduled vaccine. Fever was the most common AEFI, for which most caregivers (66.7%) used Paracetamol as antipyretic, while 20.8% sought help from a nearby health facility. Three of the 56 AEFIs (convulsions) that occurred in study participants could be classified as severe reactions. Diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus (DPT 3) completion rate was 75.3%. Most (96.4%) caregivers considered immunization an important strategy for child survival. Vaccine hesitancy occurred among 3.6% of participants, 30% of whom attributed their hesitancy to occurrence of AEFIs. The review of health records revealed that no AEFI had been reported from any of the study facilities.

Conclusion

cases of adverse events following immunization are not reported in Mathare Valley and they do have implications for vaccine hesitancy by some caregivers.

Landscape analysis of pharmacovigilance and related practices among 34 vaccine manufacturers' from emerging countries

Developing Countries' Vaccine Manufacturers Network was tasked with the strategic goal of seeking solutions, jointly with manufacturers, for enabling the stable, sustainable supply of quality vaccines to developing countries to increase global immunization. As vaccines are given to millions of healthy people, including children, to prevent life-threatening diseases, vaccines must meet high safety standards. Vaccine safety monitoring is of paramount importance to maintain trust in vaccination programs globally. Once a vaccine is licensed and recommended for use, its safety and effectiveness must be monitored during its whole lifecycle, as the safety profile and protective effectiveness may change over time. A well-established safety governance model across the organization with underlying processes for data collection, signal and risk management and communication is essential. A "fit for purpose" pharmacovigilance system may vary as it depends on several factors. However, all vaccine manufacturers strive to achieve a pharmacovigilance system satisfying Good Pharmacovigilance Practices, in compliance with national, international and supranational requirements, as applicable. A landscape analysis, using a questionnaire covering nine pharmacovigilance key areas related to an effective system, was conducted to understand the existing pharmacovigilance structures, practices and expertise of vaccine manufacturers from emerging countries, on an institutional level. 34 of the 43 contacted manufacturers participated voluntarily. The survey results show that all respondents have established vaccine safety capacity, mainly in collecting and handling adverse events following immunization and implementing standardized processes; the survey also shows differences in the maturity of the manufacturers' pharmacovigilance system, Quality Management System, signal and risk management, and safety governance. The analysis provides a tool for manufacturers to gain a "bird's-eye" view of the structure of pharmacovigilance key areas and the operational dimensions covered by each area, to benchmarking against international expectations, serving as a basis to further strengthen pharmacovigilance systems, to support accelerated global vaccine supply.

The use and significance of vaccination cards

Vaccination cards are useful health records that contain information about vaccination dates and dosage. This information is helpful for parents, vaccination providers, and public health researchers. However, as they currently are structured, many vaccination cards are very difficult to read by non-experts, like parents, and even by health-care providers. Many families also lose these vaccination cards; among the top 10 countries with the most unvaccinated children, the proportion of families who were able to find their vaccination cards and give them to researchers was low, ranging from 20.7% in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to 69.2% in South Africa. Moreover, some families report that not having a vaccination card during a vaccination visit resulted in them being unable to obtain a vaccine (8% in one study in Ethiopia and 16% in one study in Bangladesh). This commentary provides recommendations about how vaccination cards should be used by parents, health-care providers, and researchers, and comments on their continued relevance in an era with increased use of electronic registries.

Elimination of Epidemic Meningitis in the African Region: Progress and Challenges: 2010-2016

BACKGROUND

Epidemics of meningococcal disease constitute a major public health challenge in Africa, affecting mostly the 24 countries of the meningitis belt. These epidemics led to a call for a call for a safe, effective and affordable conjugate vaccine against the major serogroup responsible for recent epidemics by leaders of the region.

OBJECTIVE

This paper documents experiences with efforts at eliminating epidemic meningitis in the African Region.

METHOD

The meningoccocal serogroup A conjugate vaccine was developed, licensed and offered to more than 235 million people through mass vaccination campaigns in 16 countries since 2010. Future plans include providing the vaccine to the remaining countries in the African Meningitis Belt and, to implement the vaccine into routine national infant immunization programme and to organise catch-up immunization campaigns every 5 years for unvaccinated <5 year-olds who had missed their routine vaccinations.

RESULTS

The success of the project is evidenced by the large declines in cases of group A meningococcal disease since 2010, with no cases reported in vaccinated persons across the 16 countries, reflecting the highly effective nature of the vaccine. The successful control of serogroup A meningococcal disease has highlighted the need to tackle other meningococcal serogroups through development of polyvalent conjugate vaccines with the aim of eliminating epidemics of meningococcal meningitis in the African region.

Causality assessment of serious and severe adverse events following immunization in India: a 4-year practical experience

BACKGROUND

India has implemented the World Health Organization's revised Causality Assessment Protocol for adverse events following immunization (AEFI). We describe the number and types of serious/severe AEFIs, including deaths.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Analysis of causality classification of reported serious/severe AEFIs from 1 January 2012 to 7 January 2016 was done. Classification includes (A) consistent with causal association to immunization; (B) indeterminate; (C) coincidental association; or (D) unclassifiable. We present descriptive statistics across each category.

RESULTS

Analysis of causality assessment completed for 1037 reports of serious AEFIs: 499 (48%) were causally associated, 84 (8%) were indeterminate, 323 (31%) were coincidental, and 131 (13%) were unclassifiable. Of the 499 reports in the A category, the events were causally linked to vaccine product for 189 (18%), to immunization error for 135 (13%), and to immunization anxiety for 175 (17%). Among 279 reported deaths, more than half (55%; n = 153) were coincidental events and 37% were unclassifiable.

CONCLUSIONS

Causality assessment of AEFI cases is an important component of vaccination programs and post-marketing surveillance of vaccines. Field reporting and investigation of AEFIs can be improved for many severe or serious reports, most of which are not causally linked to the vaccination program.

Introduction and Rollout of a New Group A Meningococcal Conjugate Vaccine (PsA-TT) in African Meningitis Belt Countries, 2010-2014

Background. A group A meningococcal conjugate vaccine (PsA-TT) was developed specifically for the African “meningitis belt” and was prequalified by the World Health Organization (WHO) in June 2010. The vaccine was first used widely in Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger in December 2010 with great success. The remaining 23 meningitis belt countries wished to use this new vaccine.

Methods. With the help of African countries, WHO developed a prioritization scheme and used or adapted existing immunization guidelines to mount PsA-TT vaccination campaigns. Vaccine requirements were harmonized with the Serum Institute of India, Ltd.

Results. Burkina Faso was the first country to fully immunize its 1- to 29-year-old population in December 2010. Over the next 4 years, vaccine coverage was extended to 217 million Africans living in 15 meningitis belt countries.

Conclusions. The new group A meningococcal conjugate vaccine was well received, with country coverage rates ranging from 85% to 95%. The rollout proceeded smoothly because countries at highest risk were immunized first while attention was paid to geographic contiguity to maximize herd protection. Community participation was exemplary.

Enhancing Vaccine Safety Capacity Globally: A Lifecycle Perspective

Major vaccine safety controversies have arisen in several countries beginning in the last decades of 20th century. Such periodic vaccine safety controversies are unlikely to go away in the near future as more national immunization programs mature with near elimination of target vaccine-preventable diseases that result in relative greater prominence of adverse events following immunizations, both true reactions and temporally coincidental events. There are several ways in which vaccine safety capacity can be improved to potentially mitigate the impact of future vaccine safety controversies. This paper aims to take a "lifecycle" approach, examining some potential pre- and post-licensure opportunities to improve vaccine safety, in both developed (specifically U.S. and Europe) and low- and middle-income countries.

Enhancing vaccine safety capacity globally: A lifecycle perspective

Major vaccine safety controversies have arisen in several countries beginning in the last decades of 20th century. Such periodic vaccine safety controversies are unlikely to go away in the near future as more national immunization programs mature with near elimination of target vaccine-preventable diseases that result in relative greater prominence of adverse events following immunizations, both true reactions and temporally coincidental events. There are several ways in which vaccine safety capacity can be improved to potentially mitigate the impact of future vaccine safety controversies. This paper aims to take a "lifecycle" approach, examining some potential pre- and post-licensure opportunities to improve vaccine safety, in both developed (specifically U.S. and Europe) and low- and middle-income countries.