BNT162b2 Vaccine-Associated Myo/Pericarditis in Adolescents: A Stratified Risk-Benefit Analysis

Vaccine Impact Bonds: An Alternative Way of Allocating the Economic Risks of Mass Vaccination Programs

Vaccines can be an appropriate tool for combating pandemics. Accordingly, expectations were high when the first Covid-19 vaccines were administered. However, even though the vaccines have not met these high initial expectations, vaccine manufacturers and their investors were making large profits, while most of the associated economic risks have remained with the taxpaying public. Thus, this paper applies the concept of social impact bonds to mass vaccination programs by conceptualizing vaccine impact bonds (VIBs) as an alternative to the advance purchase agreements (APAs) for Covid-19 vaccines. Rather than rewarding vaccine manufacturers and their investors based on the quantity of doses distributed, VIBs intend to link the real-world vaccine impact to the financial returns of vaccine manufacturers and their investors. This paper indicates that VIBs can theoretically shift the economic risks of mass vaccination programs from the taxpaying public to private investors, thereby aligning commercial and public interests. However, it also identifies several major weaknesses such as the complexity of defining and evaluating the vaccine impact as well as the inherent trade-off between relieving taxpayers (through VIBs) and allowing innovation. As these substantial drawbacks outweigh the theoretical strengths of VIBs, this paper calls for further research in order to identify better alternatives to the Covid-19 vaccine contracts.

Quantitative Benefit-Risk Assessment of Vaccination Against COVID-19: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

With the introduction of COVID-19 vaccines, there has been a proliferation of quantitative benefit-risk assessments (qBRAs). Prior work on other types of vaccines has found that published qBRAs have not always clearly reported methods and/or results needed to assist in the application of the qBRA findings. The aim was to systematically identify, review, and critically assess published COVID-19 vaccine qBRA. The ultimate goal is to support the future development of robust qBRA for existing, new, and updated vaccines.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed COVID-19 vaccine qBRAs identified from multiple sources through April 17, 2023, including literature databases, selected Health Authority websites, and a grey literature search. We critically assessed whether key features typical of qBRA were presented in these reports.

RESULTS

We identified 37 COVID-19 vaccine qBRAs from screening 2220 publications and 18 other sources. The qBRAs were conducted on two mRNA and two adenoviral vector COVID-19 vaccines. Only one qBRA represented low- and middle-income countries. Although many qBRAs used simple calculations (n = 25), more complex models were presented in 15 reports. Simple approaches were able to employ stratification by age and/or sex to highlight safety issues affecting specific demographic groups and scenarios to account for changes in viral transmission and vaccine effectiveness over time. Details regarding data sources and analytic methods were missing or limited in some reports.

CONCLUSIONS

This comprehensive description and critical assessment of COVID-19 vaccine qBRAs together with available guidance can be used to support the development of robust and transparent future vaccine qBRAs.

Unraveling Cardiovascular Risks and Benefits of COVID-19 Vaccines: A Systematic Review

The rapid development and deployment of mRNA and non-mRNA COVID-19 vaccines have played a pivotal role in mitigating the global pandemic. Despite their success in reducing severe disease outcomes, emerging concerns about cardiovascular complications have raised questions regarding their safety. This systematic review critically evaluates the evidence on the cardiovascular effects of COVID-19 vaccines, assessing both their protective and adverse impacts, while considering the challenges posed by the limited availability of randomized controlled trial (RCT) data on these rare adverse events. In adherence to PRISMA 2020 guidelines, we conducted a systematic review using the Scopus database, incorporating articles published from January 2020 to July 2024. Our search included terms related to COVID-19 vaccines and cardiovascular conditions. We selected relevant studies from case-control studies, cohort studies, and clinical trials, while excluding descriptive analyses, cross-sectional studies, and conference reports. Case reports were also included due to the limited availability of extensive RCT data on the rare cardiovascular adverse events associated with COVID-19 vaccines. Of the 6037 articles initially screened, 410 were assessed in detail and 175 studies were ultimately included. The review identified a variety of cardiovascular adverse effects associated with COVID-19 vaccines. mRNA vaccines were primarily linked to myocarditis and pericarditis, particularly in younger males, with lower cardiac risks compared to COVID-19 infection. Adenoviral vector vaccines were associated with thrombosis and thrombocytopenia. Inactivated vaccines had fewer severe cardiovascular reports but still presented risks. Takotsubo cardiomyopathy was most commonly observed following mRNA vaccination. Case reports provided valuable additional insights into these rare events, highlighting clinical presentations and potential risk factors not fully captured by larger epidemiological studies. This review reveals a nuanced cardiovascular risk profile for COVID-19 vaccines, with mRNA vaccines linked to rare myocarditis and pericarditis in young males and a higher incidence of Takotsubo cardiomyopathy in females. Adenoviral vaccines show a notable association with thrombosis. Despite these risks, the benefits of vaccination in preventing severe COVID-19 outcomes outweigh the potential complications, underscoring the importance of continued surveillance, case report documentation, and personalized risk assessment. The inclusion of case reports was critical, as they provided valuable real-world data that complemented the findings from large-scale studies and RCTs.

The impact of COVID-19 status and vaccine type following the first dose on acute heart disease: A nationwide retrospective cohort study in South Korea

Recent studies have suggested an increased incidence of myocarditis and pericarditis following mRNA vaccination or COVID-19. However, the potential interaction effect between vaccine type and COVID-19 on heart disease risk remains uncertain. Our study aimed to examine the impact of COVID-19 status and vaccine type following the first dose on acute heart disease in the Korean population, using data from the National Health Insurance Service COVID-19 database (October 2018-March 2022). We sought to provide insights for public health policies and clinical decisions pertaining to COVID-19 vaccination strategies. We analysed heart disease risk, including acute cardiac injury, acute myocarditis, acute pericarditis, cardiac arrest, and cardiac arrhythmia, in relation to vaccine type and COVID-19 within 21 days after the first vaccination date, employing Cox proportional hazards models with time-varying covariates. This study included 3,350,855 participants. The results revealed higher heart disease risk in individuals receiving mRNA vaccines than other types (adjusted HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.35-1.62). Individuals infected by SARS-CoV-2 also exhibited significantly higher heart disease risk than those uninfected (adjusted HR, 3.56; 95% CI, 1.15-11.04). We found no significant interaction effect between vaccine type and COVID-19 status on the risk of acute heart disease. Notably, however, younger individuals who received mRNA vaccines had a higher heart disease risk compared to older individuals. These results may suggest the need to consider alternative vaccine options for the younger population. Further research is needed to understand underlying mechanisms and guide vaccination strategies effectively.

The Motivation for COVID-19 Vaccination and Preventive Behavior

COVID-19, a viral infection that emerged in late 2019, induces a severe acute respiratory syndrome marked by significant clinical symptoms, and the potential for progressive respiratory failure and death. People facing the threat of COVID-19 not only feared being infected, but were also worried about the side-effects of vaccination. This conflict affected their epidemic prevention behavior. To understand this issue, the present study explored whether infection anxiety affected the psychological avoidance or approach to getting vaccinated and the intention to take epidemic prevention measures. The study implemented a cross-sectional, web-based survey. We created questionnaires using Surveycake, an online e-form questionnaire platform. We used the snowball sampling method via a social media app to recruit participants. If individuals were willing to participate in the research, we emailed the e-form questionnaire link to them to collect data. After questionnaire collection, 288 questionnaires were returned, and 277 valid questionnaires were obtained for structural equation modeling analysis. According to the statistical results, it was found that infection anxiety was positively related to avoidance-avoidance conflict, and the power of infection anxiety on avoidance conflict was 23.0%. Infection anxiety was negatively related to approach-approach conflict regarding vaccination, and the power of infection anxiety on approach-approach conflict was 22.0%. Approach-approach conflict regarding vaccination was negatively related to prevention behavior, while avoidance-avoidance conflict regarding vaccination was positively related to prevention behavior. The two conflicts explained 12.5% of the total variance in prevention behavior. The study results highlight the long-term importance of achieving vaccine goals in order to prepare for future health emergencies similar to the recent COVID-19 pandemic.

Myopericarditis following COVID-19 vaccination in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Myopericarditis is a rare but serious coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine-related adverse event primarily affecting adolescents. Given recent approvals for childhood vaccination, we performed a meta-analysis investigating myopericarditis following messenger ribonucleic acid COVID-19 vaccination in children aged <19 years, focusing on its overall risk and high-risk subgroups.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase and Scopus from inception to 1 August 2022 for observational studies reporting myopericarditis in temporal relation to paediatric COVID-19 vaccination. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses (DerSimonian and Laird) on myopericarditis (primary outcome), myocarditis and pericarditis (secondary outcomes).

RESULTS

Of 2115 studies, 12 (59,229,160 doses) studies were included in our analysis. There were 19.8 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.4-37.6) myopericarditis cases reported per million doses in children, compared to 23.7 (95% CI: 12.2-46.1) cases in adults (eight studies, 376,899,888 doses; P = 0.70). Compared to the second dose (34.4, 95% CI: 15.2-77.8), the number of cases post-first dose was significantly lower (9.1, 95% CI: 4.4-18.8; P = 0.017), while the number of cases post-third dose was not higher than that of post-second dose (28.4, 95% CI: 10.4-61.8; P = 0.57, global P = 0.031). Males were at higher risk of myopericarditis (67.4, 95% CI: 36.5-124.5) than females (6.9, 95% CI: 3.1-15.3; P < 0.0001). Finally, the number of cases was higher (overall P < 0.0001) among children aged ≥12 years (39.9, 95% CI: 24.1-66.0) than among children aged <12 years (3.0, 95% CI: 2.3-3.9).

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis showed 19.8 cases of myopericarditis per million doses among children, not significantly different from that of adults. Higher risk subgroups included adolescents, males, and those receiving their second dose of vaccination.

COVID-19 vaccines: history of the pandemic's great scientific success and flawed policy implementation

The COVID-19 vaccine has been a miraculous, life-saving advance, offering staggering efficacy in adults, and was developed with astonishing speed. The time from sequencing the virus to authorizing the first COVID-19 vaccine was so brisk even the optimists appear close-minded. Yet, simultaneously, United States' COVID-19 vaccination roll-out and related policies have contained missed opportunities, errors, run counter to evidence-based medicine, and revealed limitations in the judgment of public policymakers. Misplaced utilization, contradictory messaging, and poor deployment in those who would benefit most-the elderly and high-risk-alongside unrealistic messaging, exaggeration, and coercion in those who benefit least-young, healthy Americans-is at the heart. It is important to consider the history of COVID-19 vaccines to identify where we succeeded and where we failed, and the effects that these errors may have more broadly on vaccination hesitancy and routine childhood immunization programs in the decades to come.

Who is "anti-science"?

Objectives

"Anti-science" accusations are common in medicine and public health, sometimes to discredit scientists who hold opposing views. However, there is no such thing as "one science". Epistemology recognizes that any "science" is sociologically embedded, and therefore contextual and intersubjective. In this paper, we reflect on how "science" needs to adopt various perspectives to give a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of a phenomenon.

Study design

Opinion paper.

Methods

Based on a targeted literature survey, we first clarify the known limits of traditional scientific methods and then reflect on how the scientific reporting about Covid-19 mRNA vaccines has evolved.

Results

The first reports of the Covid-19 mRNA vaccines randomised controlled trial results showed impressive efficacy. Nevertheless, an abundant literature has since depicted a far more nuanced picture of the effectiveness and safety of those vaccines over the medium-term. We organise them around five themes: (i) differentiating between relative and absolute reduction; (ii) taking account of time in reporting effectiveness; (iii) taking account of all outcomes, including adverse effects; (iv) stratifying effectiveness and considering other decision criteria (efficiency, equity, and acceptance); (v) changing the outcome of concern and assessing vaccines' effectiveness on mortality.

Conclusions

Science offers a wide range of perspectives on a given study object. Only the process of deliberation amongst scientists and other stakeholders can result in accepted new knowledge useful to support decision-making. Unfortunately, by trying to reduce "science" to simple messages set in stone, scientists can become the worse enemies of science.

Safety outcomes following COVID-19 vaccination and infection in 5.1 million children in England

The risk-benefit profile of COVID-19 vaccination in children remains uncertain. A self-controlled case-series study was conducted using linked data of 5.1 million children in England to compare risks of hospitalisation from vaccine safety outcomes after COVID-19 vaccination and infection. In 5-11-year-olds, we found no increased risks of adverse events 1-42 days following vaccination with BNT162b2, mRNA-1273 or ChAdOX1. In 12-17-year-olds, we estimated 3 (95%CI 0-5) and 5 (95%CI 3-6) additional cases of myocarditis per million following a first and second dose with BNT162b2, respectively. An additional 12 (95%CI 0-23) hospitalisations with epilepsy and 4 (95%CI 0-6) with demyelinating disease (in females only, mainly optic neuritis) were estimated per million following a second dose with BNT162b2. SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with increased risks of hospitalisation from seven outcomes including multisystem inflammatory syndrome and myocarditis, but these risks were largely absent in those vaccinated prior to infection. We report a favourable safety profile of COVID-19 vaccination in under-18s.

The Ethical Obligation for Research During Public Health Emergencies: Insights From the COVID-19 Pandemic

In times of crises, public health leaders may claim that trials of public health interventions are unethical. One reason for this claim can be that equipoise-i.e. a situation of uncertainty and/or disagreement among experts about the evidence regarding an intervention-has been disturbed by a change of collective expert views. Some might claim that equipoise is disturbed if the majority of experts believe that emergency public health interventions are likely to be more beneficial than harmful. However, such beliefs are not always justified: where high quality research has not been conducted, there is often considerable residual uncertainty about whether interventions offer net benefits. In this essay we argue that high-quality research, namely by means of well-designed randomized trials, is ethically obligatory before, during, and after implementing policies in public health emergencies (PHEs). We contend that this standard applies to both pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical interventions, and we elaborate an account of equipoise that captures key features of debates in the recent pandemic. We build our case by analyzing research strategies employed during the COVID-19 pandemic regarding drugs, vaccines, and non-pharmaceutical interventions; and by providing responses to possible objections. Finally, we propose a public health policy reform: whenever a policy implemented during a PHE is not grounded in high-quality evidence that expected benefits outweigh harms, there should be a planned approach to generate high-quality evidence, with review of emerging data at preset time points. These preset timepoints guarantee that policymakers pause to review emerging evidence and consider ceasing ineffective or even harmful policies, thereby improving transparency and accountability, as well as permitting the redirection of resources to more effective or beneficial interventions.

COVID-19 vaccine boosters for young adults: a risk benefit assessment and ethical analysis of mandate policies at universities

In 2022, students at North American universities with third-dose COVID-19 vaccine mandates risk disenrolment if unvaccinated. To assess the appropriateness of booster mandates in this age group, we combine empirical risk-benefit assessment and ethical analysis. To prevent one COVID-19 hospitalisation over a 6-month period, we estimate that 31 207-42 836 young adults aged 18-29 years must receive a third mRNA vaccine. Booster mandates in young adults are expected to cause a net harm: per COVID-19 hospitalisation prevented, we anticipate at least 18.5 serious adverse events from mRNA vaccines, including 1.5-4.6 booster-associated myopericarditis cases in males (typically requiring hospitalisation). We also anticipate 1430-4626 cases of grade ≥3 reactogenicity interfering with daily activities (although typically not requiring hospitalisation). University booster mandates are unethical because they: (1) are not based on an updated (Omicron era) stratified risk-benefit assessment for this age group; (2) may result in a net harm to healthy young adults; (3) are not proportionate: expected harms are not outweighed by public health benefits given modest and transient effectiveness of vaccines against transmission; (4) violate the reciprocity principle because serious vaccine-related harms are not reliably compensated due to gaps in vaccine injury schemes; and (5) may result in wider social harms. We consider counterarguments including efforts to increase safety on campus but find these are fraught with limitations and little scientific support. Finally, we discuss the policy relevance of our analysis for primary series COVID-19 vaccine mandates.

Increased Risk of Thyroid Eye Disease Following Covid-19 Vaccination

CONTEXT

SARS-CoV-2 infection and Covid-19 vaccines have been associated with thyroid disorders.

OBJECTIVE

We analyzed the risk of thyroid eye disease (TED) following Covid-19 vaccination. This was a self-controlled case series study at a tertiary referral center for TED. A total of 98 consecutive patients with newly developed (n = 92) or reactivated (n = 6) TED occurring between January 1, 2021, and August 31, 2022, were included. TED was assessed in patients undergoing Covid-19 vaccination. Person-days were defined as exposed if TED occurred 1 to 28 days after vaccination, and unexposed if occurring outside this time window. Conditional Poisson regression models were fitted to calculate incidence rate ratio (IRR) and 95% CI of exposed vs unexposed. Sensitivity analyses were conducted considering different exposed periods, and effect modification by potential TED risk factors.

RESULTS

Covid-19 vaccines were administered in 81 people, 25 (31%) of whom developed TED in exposed and 56 (69%) in unexposed periods. The IRR for TED was 3.24 (95% CI 2.01-5.20) and 4.70 (95% CI 2.39-9.23) in patients below 50 years of age. Sex, smoking, and radioiodine treatment did not modify the association between TED and vaccination. TED risk was unrelated to the number of vaccine doses, and progressively decreased over time following vaccination (P trend = .03).

CONCLUSION

The risk of TED was significantly increased after Covid-19 vaccination, especially in people below 50 years of age. Possible mechanisms include spike protein interaction with the angiotensin-converting enzyme II receptor, cross-reactivity with thyroid self-proteins, and immune reactions induced by adjuvants. We suggest monitoring of individuals undergoing Covid-19 vaccination, especially if young and at risk for autoimmunity.

Risk of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Messenger RNA Vaccination-Associated Myocarditis and Pericarditis - A Systematic Review of Population-Based Data

Purpose

Early studies showed that the risks of mRNA vaccine-associated myocarditis and pericarditis are low but with substantial variation across studies. Study characteristics, ethnicity, vaccine types, dose intervals, and SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence may influence the rates of myocarditis and pericarditis after mRNA vaccination in population-based studies.

Methods

We comprehensively searched MEDLINE for relevant articles published before November 30, 2022. We also searched the websites of health authorities in several countries for unpublished surveillance data on myocarditis and pericarditis after mRNA vaccination. The outcome of interest was the incidence of myocarditis and pericarditis developed after mRNA vaccination for COVID-19.

Results

A total of 17 studies form 10 countries were included for review. We noted that considerable heterogeneity in study characteristics, including surveillance method, case definition, and observation period, may partially be responsible for the widely varied reported rates. Studies from countries that adopted active surveillance reported higher rates than those using passive surveillance. Compared to BNT162b2 vaccine, mRNA-1273 may have a higher risk of myocarditis only in young men after the second dose. Our comparison of sex-, age-, vaccine type-, and dose-specific rates of myocarditis across countries did not support the hypothesis that individuals with recent SARS-CoV-2 infection and young Asian males were at higher risk. We also could not find sufficient evidence to conclude whether extending the between-dose interval could reduce myocarditis incidence following mRNA vaccination.

Conclusion

Differences in the study characteristics must be fully considered when comparing the risks of mRNA vaccine-related myocarditis and pericarditis in different countries.

Updated Considerations for the Immunopharmacological Aspects of the "Talented mRNA Vaccines"

Messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines belong to a new class of medications, RNA therapeutics, including both coding and non-coding RNAs. The use of mRNA as a therapy is based on the biological role of mRNA itself, namely its translation into a functional protein. The goal of mRNA vaccines is to produce a specific antigen in cells to elicit an immune response that might be prophylactic or therapeutic. The potential of mRNA as vaccine has been envisaged for years but its efficacy has been clearly demonstrated with the approval of COVID-19 vaccines in 2021. Since then, mRNA vaccines have been in the pipeline for diseases that are still untreatable. There are many advantages of mRNA vaccines over traditional vaccines, including easy and cost-effective production, high safety, and high-level antigen expression. However, the nature of mRNA itself and some technical issues pose challenges associated with the vaccines' development and use. Here we review the immunological and pharmacological features of mRNA vaccines by discussing their pharmacokinetics, mechanisms of action, and safety, with a particular attention on the advantages and challenges related to their administration. Furthermore, we present an overview of the areas of application and the clinical trials that utilize a mRNA vaccine as a treatment.

Incidence of myopericarditis after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination: A meta-analysis with focus on adolescents aged 12-17 years

BACKGROUND

The incidence of myopericarditis after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination among adolescents aged 12-17 years remains unknown. Therefore, we conducted a study to pool the incidence of myopericarditis following COVID-19 vaccination in this age group.

METHODS

We did a meta-analysis by searching 4 electronic databases until February 6, 2023. The following main keywords were used: "COVID-19", "vaccines", "myocarditis", "pericarditis", and "myopericarditis". Observational studies reporting on adolescents aged 12-17 years who had myopericarditis in temporal relation to receiving mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were included. The pooled incidence of myopericarditis and 95 % confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a single-group meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included. The pooled incidences of myopericarditis after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination among adolescents aged 12-17 years were 43.5 (95 % CI, 30.8-61.6) cases per million vaccine doses for both BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 (39 628 242 doses; 14 studies), and 41.8 (29.4-59.4) cases for BNT162b2 alone (38 756 553 doses; 13 studies). Myopericarditis was more common among males (66.0 [40.5-107.7] cases) than females (10.1 [6.0-17.0] cases) and among those receiving the second dose (60.4 [37.6-96.9] cases) than those receiving the first dose (16.6 [8.7-31.9] cases). The incidences of myopericarditis did not differ significantly when grouped by age, type of myopericarditis, country, and World Health Organization region. None of the incidences of myopericarditis pooled in the current study were higher than those after smallpox vaccinations and non-COVID-19 vaccinations, and all of them were significantly lower than those in adolescents aged 12-17 years after COVID-19 infection.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidences of myopericarditis after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination among adolescents aged 12-17 years were very rare; they were not higher than other important reference incidences. These findings provide an important context for health policy makers and parents with vaccination hesitancy to weight the risks and benefits of mRNA COVID-19 vaccination among adolescents aged 12-17 years.

Are We Facing a Tsunami of Vaccine Hesitancy or Outdated Pandemic Policy in Times of Omicron? Analyzing Changes of COVID-19 Vaccination Trends in Poland

In this study, we analyzed Polish COVID-19 vaccination data until January 2023 from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control to understand individual decision making during the milder Omicron wave. Our findings show a general decline in subsequent vaccine uptake. As the number of government-provided doses increased, completion rates among certain low-risk groups dropped to less than 1%. Elderly individuals, especially those aged 70–79, showed greater adherence but also exhibited decreased interest in subsequent boosters. Healthcare workers exhibited a dramatic shift in their attitude, disregarding the recommended schedule. The overwhelming majority opted out of receiving the second boosters, while the remaining individuals adjusted their timing based on infection trends or the availability of updated boosters. Two factors positively influenced vaccination decisions: societal influence and the availability of updated boosters. Lower-risk individuals were more likely to postpone vaccination until updated boosters were available. Our findings highlight that while Polish policy aligns with international guidelines, it fails to garner significant adherence from the Polish population. Previous studies have shown that vaccinating low-risk groups resulted in more sick days due to adverse events following immunization than the days gained by preventing infection. Consequently, we advocate for the official abandonment of this policy, as its practical abandonment has already taken place, and persisting in pretending otherwise only serves to erode public trust. Therefore, we propose a shift toward treating COVID-19-like influenza with vaccination for vulnerable individuals and those who have close contact with them before the season.

Are We Facing a Tsunami of Vaccine Hesitancy or Outdated Pandemic Policy in Times of Omicron? Analyzing Changes of COVID-19 Vaccination Trends in Poland

In this study, we analyzed Polish COVID-19 vaccination data until January 2023 from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control to understand individual decision making during the milder Omicron wave. Our findings show a general decline in subsequent vaccine uptake. As the number of government-provided doses increased, completion rates among certain low-risk groups dropped to less than 1%. Elderly individuals, especially those aged 70-79, showed greater adherence but also exhibited decreased interest in subsequent boosters. Healthcare workers exhibited a dramatic shift in their attitude, disregarding the recommended schedule. The overwhelming majority opted out of receiving the second boosters, while the remaining individuals adjusted their timing based on infection trends or the availability of updated boosters. Two factors positively influenced vaccination decisions: societal influence and the availability of updated boosters. Lower-risk individuals were more likely to postpone vaccination until updated boosters were available. Our findings highlight that while Polish policy aligns with international guidelines, it fails to garner significant adherence from the Polish population. Previous studies have shown that vaccinating low-risk groups resulted in more sick days due to adverse events following immunization than the days gained by preventing infection. Consequently, we advocate for the official abandonment of this policy, as its practical abandonment has already taken place, and persisting in pretending otherwise only serves to erode public trust. Therefore, we propose a shift toward treating COVID-19-like influenza with vaccination for vulnerable individuals and those who have close contact with them before the season.

COVID-19 Vaccines and Myocarditis: An Overview of Current Evidence

COVID-19 vaccines have been widely used to reduce the incidence and disease severity of COVID-19. Questions have lately been raised about the possibility of an association between COVID-19 vaccines and myocarditis, an inflammatory condition affecting the myocardium, or the middle layer of the heart. Myocarditis can be caused by infections, immune reactions, or toxic exposure. The incidence rate of myocarditis and pericarditis was calculated to be 5.98 instances per million COVID-19 vaccine doses delivered, which is less than half of the incidences after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Myocarditis rates in people aged 12 to 39 years are around 12.6 cases per million doses following the second dose of mRNA vaccination. Adolescent men are more likely than women to develop myocarditis after receiving mRNA vaccines. The objectives of this systematic review and meta-analysis are to find out how often myocarditis occurs after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine, as well as the risk factors and clinical repercussions of this condition. Nevertheless, the causal relationship between vaccination and myocarditis has been difficult to establish, and further research is required. It is also essential to distinguish between suggested cases of myocarditis and those confirmed by endomyocardial biopsy.

COVID-19 vaccine induced myocarditis in young males: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Myocarditis is a rare but significant adverse event associated with COVID-19 vaccination, especially for men under 40. If the risk of myocarditis is not stratified by pertinent risk factors, it may be diluted for high-risk and inflated for low-risk groups. We sought to assess how the risk of myocarditis is reported in the literature.

METHODS

In accordance with PRISMA standards, we reviewed primary publications in PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar and MedRxiv (through 3/2022) and included studies that estimated the incidence of myocarditis/pericarditis after receiving either the BNT162b2 (Pfizer), mRNA-1273 (Moderna) or Ad26COVS1 (Janssen) vaccine. The main outcome was the percentage of studies using 4, 3, 2, 1 or 0 stratifiers (i.e. sex, age, dose number and manufacturer) when reporting the highest risk of myocarditis. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of myocarditis in males after dose 1 and 2 of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine.

RESULTS

The 29 included studies originated in North America, Europe, Asia, or were Worldwide. Of them, 28% (8/29) used all four stratifiers, and 45% (13/29) used 1 or 0 stratifiers. The highest incidence of myocarditis ranged from 8.1-39 cases per 100,000 persons (or doses) in studies using four stratifiers. Six studies reported an incidence greater than 15 cases per 100,000 persons (or doses) in males aged 12-24 after dose 2 of an mRNA-based vaccine.

CONCLUSIONS

Only one in four articles reporting myocarditis used four stratifiers, and men younger than 40 receiving a second dose of an mRNA vaccine are at greatest risk.

Paediatric safety assessment of BNT162b2 vaccination in a multistate hospital-based electronic health record system in the USA: a retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

The emergency use authorisation of BNT162b2 (tozinameran; Comirnaty, Pfizer-BioNTech) for children aged 5-17 years has resulted in rapid vaccination in the paediatric population. However, there are few studies of adverse events associated with vaccination in children. The aim of this study was to systematically assess the adverse events of two-dose BNT162b2 vaccination in the paediatric population.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of patient electronic health records (EHRs) of children aged 5-17 years who received the primary two-dose series of the BNT162b2 vaccine between Jan 5, 2021, and Aug 5, 2022, at the Mayo Clinic Health System (MN, FL, AZ, IA, and WI), USA. Using natural language processing, we automatically curated adverse events reported by physicians in EHR clinical notes before and after vaccination. To determine significant adverse events after BNT162b2 vaccination, we calculated risk differences, which was defined as the percentage difference between the rate of children with an adverse event after a vaccine dose and the baseline rate of children with an adverse event before vaccination. 95% CIs and p values were calculated using the Miettinen and Nurminen score method.

FINDINGS

56 436 individuals aged 5-17 years (20 227 aged 5-11 years and 36 209 aged 12-17 years) with EHRs in the Mayo Clinic Health Systems were included in the study. Overall, the reporting of adverse events remained low in passive surveillance. Serious adverse events were rare after the first and second doses of BNT162b2, with rates of anaphylaxis (six [0·01%] of 56 436), myocarditis (five [0·01%]), and pericarditis (three [0·01%]) consistent with previous studies. Among the 20 227 5-11-year-olds, there were increased risks of fatigue (58 after second dose vs 41 before first dose; risk difference [RD]_dose2 0·08% [95% CI -0·01 to 0·18], p=0·044) and fever (104 after second dose vs 77 before first dose; RD_dose2 0·13% [0·00 to 0·27], p=0·022) after the second dose. Among the 36 209 12-17-year-olds, there were increased risks of arthralgia (69 after second dose vs 48 before first dose; RD_dose2 0·06% [-0·00 to 0·12], p=0·026), chills (58 after second dose vs 40 before first dose; RD_dose2 0·05% [-0·00 to 0·11], p=0·034), and myalgia (96 after second dose vs 73 before first dose; RD_dose2 0·06% [-0·01 to 0·14], p=0·038) after the second dose. Although the overall incidence was low, there was an increased risk of myocarditis in males aged 12-17 years after the second dose (five after second dose vs zero before first dose; RD_dose2 0·03% [0·01 to 0·07], p=0·013), with median age being 15 years (IQR 14 to 16).

INTERPRETATION

Overall, this data suggests that vaccination with BNT162b2 in the paediatric population is generally safe and well-tolerated. Further research is warranted to investigate the basis for the increased risk of myocarditis in adolescent males. Additionally, further studies are needed to confirm whether the findings in our study population apply to the whole vaccinated paediatric population.

FUNDING

nference.

Immune Response and Molecular Mechanisms of Cardiovascular Adverse Effects of Spike Proteins from SARS-CoV-2 and mRNA Vaccines

The SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus responsible for the COVID-19 disease) uses the Spike proteins of its envelope for infecting target cells expressing on the membrane the angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) enzyme that acts as a receptor. To control the pandemic, genetically engineered vaccines have been designed for inducing neutralizing antibodies against the Spike proteins. These vaccines do not act like traditional protein-based vaccines, as they deliver the message in the form of mRNA or DNA to host cells that then produce and expose the Spike protein on the membrane (from which it can be shed in soluble form) to alert the immune system. Mass vaccination has brought to light various adverse effects associated with these genetically based vaccines, mainly affecting the circulatory and cardiovascular system. ACE2 is present as membrane-bound on several cell types, including the mucosa of the upper respiratory and of the gastrointestinal tracts, the endothelium, the platelets, and in soluble form in the plasma. The ACE2 enzyme converts the vasoconstrictor angiotensin II into peptides with vasodilator properties. Here we review the pathways for immunization and the molecular mechanisms through which the Spike protein, either from SARS-CoV-2 or encoded by the mRNA-based vaccines, interferes with the Renin-Angiotensin-System governed by ACE2, thus altering the homeostasis of the circulation and of the cardiovascular system. Understanding the molecular interactions of the Spike protein with ACE2 and the consequent impact on cardiovascular system homeostasis will direct the diagnosis and therapy of the vaccine-related adverse effects and provide information for development of a personalized vaccination that considers pathophysiological conditions predisposing to such adverse events.

Safety of COVID-19 Vaccines in Patients with Autoimmune Diseases, in Patients with Cardiac Issues, and in the Healthy Population

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been a challenge for the whole world since the beginning of 2020, and COVID-19 vaccines were considered crucial for disease eradication. Instead of producing classic vaccines, some companies pointed to develop products that mainly function by inducing, into the host, the production of the antigenic protein of SARS-CoV-2 called Spike, injecting an instruction based on RNA or a DNA sequence. Here, we aim to give an overview of the safety profile and the actual known adverse effects of these products in relationship with their mechanism of action. We discuss the use and safety of these products in at-risk people, especially those with autoimmune diseases or with previously reported myocarditis, but also in the general population. We debate the real necessity of administering these products with unclear long-term effects to at-risk people with autoimmune conditions, as well as to healthy people, at the time of omicron variants. This, considering the existence of therapeutic interventions, much more clearly assessed at present compared to the past, and the relatively lower aggressive nature of the new viral variants.

Higher Troponin Levels on Admission are associated With Persistent Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Lesions in Children Developing Myocarditis After mRNA-Based COVID-19 Vaccination

BACKGROUND

Acute pericarditis/myocarditis is a rare complication of the mRNA-based vaccines and although mostly self-limiting, long-term sequelae remain unclear.

METHODS

We enrolled all patients admitted to the emergency department between September 2021 and February 2022 meeting the CDC work case definition, with symptoms onset after mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine. Alternative virologic causes were excluded. Clinical data, laboratory values, cardiologic evaluation, electrocardiogram (ECG), and echocardiogram (ECHO) were collected on admission, at discharge, and during follow-up in all patients. Cardiac Magnetic Resonance (CMR) was performed only in those with signs consistent with myocarditis.

RESULTS

We observed 13 patients (11M and 2F), median age 15 years, affected by acute pericarditis/myocarditis after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination (11 after Comirnaty® and 2 after Spikevax®). Symptoms'onset occurred at a median of 5 days (range, 1 to 41 days) after receiving mRNA vaccine (13 Prizer 2 Moderna): 4 patients (31%) after the 1st dose, 6 (46%) after the 2nd, and 3 (23%) after 3rd dose. Increased levels of high-sensitive troponin T (hsTnT) (median 519,5 ng/mL) and N-terminal-pro hormone BNP (NT-proBNP) (median 268 pg/mL) and pathognomonic ECG and ECHO abnormalities were detected. On admission, 7 of 13 (54%) presented with myopericarditis, 3 (23%) with myocarditis, and 3 (23%) with pericarditis; CMR was performed in 5 patients upon pediatric cardiologist prescription and findings were consistent with myocarditis. At 12 weeks of follow-up, all but one patient (92%), still presenting mild pericardial effusion at ECHO, were asymptomatic with normal hsTnT and NT-proBNP levels and ECG. On CMR 6 of 9 patients showed persistent, although decreased, myocardial injury. Higher hsTnT levels on admission significantly correlated with persistent CMR lesions.

CONCLUSION

Evidence of persistent CMR lesions highlights the need for a close and standardized follow-up for those patients who present high hsTnT levels on admission.

Management of cardiovascular symptoms after Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in teenagers in the emergency department

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular complications after Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 (BNT) vaccination are a concern, especially in adolescents. We analyzed the risk factors for myocarditis after BNT vaccination.

METHODS

We used a special evaluation protocol for all patients aged 12-18 years who presented to our emergency department with cardiovascular symptoms after BNT vaccination.

RESULTS

A total of 195 patients (109 boys and 86 girls) were enrolled. Eleven (5.6%) patients presented with arrhythmia (arrhythmia group), 14 (7.2%) had a diagnosis of pericarditis/myocarditis (the peri/myocarditis group), and the remaining 170 were controls (no cardiac involvement). Chest pain (77.6%) was the most common symptom. The median time from vaccination to symptom onset was 3 days. In the peri/myocarditis group (13 myocarditis and 1 pericarditis), the median time to the peak troponin T level was 5 days after vaccination. Abnormal electrocardiographic changes, including ST-T changes and conduction blocks, were more commonly detected in the peri/myocarditis group (85.7% vs. 12.4% in the control group, p < 0.01). Echocardiography revealed normal ventricular function in all patients. Symptoms were resolved before discharge in all, with the median duration of hospital stay being 4 days. The electrocardiography was the most appropriate screening tool for myocarditis, with a sensitivity and specificity of 85.7% and 87.6%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Pericarditis or myocarditis was diagnosed in 7.2% of adolescents presenting to the emergency department with cardiovascular symptoms after BNT vaccination. In addition to the troponin T level, ECG change listed above can be used as a screening tool for vaccine-induced cardiac complications.

COVID-19 vaccination and carditis in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) vaccination has been associated with the development of carditis, especially in children and adolescent males. However, the rates of these events in the global setting have not been explored in a systematic manner. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to investigate the rates of carditis in children and adolescents receiving COVID-19 vaccines.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase and several Latin American databases were searched for studies. The number of events, and where available, at-risk populations were extracted. Rate ratios were calculated and expressed as a rate per million doses received. Subgroup analysis based on the dose administered was performed. Subjects ≤ 19 years old who developed pericarditis or myocarditis following COVID-19 vaccination were included.

RESULTS

A total of 369 entries were retrieved. After screening, 39 articles were included. Our meta-analysis found that 343 patients developed carditis after the administration of 12,602,625 COVID-19 vaccination doses (pooled rate per million: 37.76; 95% confidence interval [CI] 23.57, 59.19). The rate of carditis was higher amongst male patients (pooled rate ratio: 5.04; 95% CI 1.40, 18.19) and after the second vaccination dose (pooled rate ratio: 5.60; 95% CI 1.97, 15.89). In 301 cases of carditis (281 male; mean age: 15.90 (standard deviation [SD] 1.52) years old) reported amongst the case series/reports, 261 patients were reported to have received treatment. 97.34% of the patients presented with chest pain. The common findings include ST elevation and T wave abnormalities on electrocardiography. Oedema and late gadolinium enhancement in the myocardium were frequently observed in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR). The mean length of hospital stay was 3.91 days (SD 1.75). In 298 out of 299 patients (99.67%) the carditis resolved with or without treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Carditis is a rare complication after COVID-19 vaccination across the globe, but the vast majority of episodes are self-limiting with rapid resolution of symptoms within days. Central illustration. Balancing the benefits of vaccines on COVID-19-caused carditis and post-vaccination carditis.

Serious adverse events of special interest following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in randomized trials in adults

INTRODUCTION

In 2020, prior to COVID-19 vaccine rollout, the Brighton Collaboration created a priority list, endorsed by the World Health Organization, of potential adverse events relevant to COVID-19 vaccines. We adapted the Brighton Collaboration list to evaluate serious adverse events of special interest observed in mRNA COVID-19 vaccine trials.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of serious adverse events reported in the placebo-controlled, phase III randomized clinical trials of Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in adults (NCT04368728 and NCT04470427), focusing analysis on Brighton Collaboration adverse events of special interest.

RESULTS

Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 10.1 and 15.1 per 10,000 vaccinated over placebo baselines of 17.6 and 42.2 (95 % CI -0.4 to 20.6 and -3.6 to 33.8), respectively. Combined, the mRNA vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 12.5 per 10,000 vaccinated (95 % CI 2.1 to 22.9); risk ratio 1.43 (95 % CI 1.07 to 1.92). The Pfizer trial exhibited a 36 % higher risk of serious adverse events in the vaccine group; risk difference 18.0 per 10,000 vaccinated (95 % CI 1.2 to 34.9); risk ratio 1.36 (95 % CI 1.02 to 1.83). The Moderna trial exhibited a 6 % higher risk of serious adverse events in the vaccine group: risk difference 7.1 per 10,000 (95 % CI -23.2 to 37.4); risk ratio 1.06 (95 % CI 0.84 to 1.33). Combined, there was a 16 % higher risk of serious adverse events in mRNA vaccine recipients: risk difference 13.2 (95 % CI -3.2 to 29.6); risk ratio 1.16 (95 % CI 0.97 to 1.39).

DISCUSSION

The excess risk of serious adverse events found in our study points to the need for formal harm-benefit analyses, particularly those that are stratified according to risk of serious COVID-19 outcomes. These analyses will require public release of participant level datasets.

Myocarditis Following COVID-19 Vaccine Use: Can It Play a Role for Conditioning Immunization Schedules?

Myocarditis (MYO) is a relatively uncommon inflammatory disease that involves the heart muscle. It can be a very severe disease as it can lead to the development of acute or chronic heart failure and, in a not marginal number of cases, to death. Most of the cases are diagnosed in healthy people younger than 30 years of age. Moreover, males are affected about twice as much as females. Viruses are among the most common causes of MYO, but how viral infection can lead to MYO development is not precisely defined. After COVID-19 pandemic declaration, incidence rate of MYO has significantly increased worldwide because of the SARS-CoV-2 infection. After the introduction of anti-COVID-19 vaccines, reports of post-immunization MYO have emerged, suggesting that a further cause of MYO together with the SARS-CoV-2 infection could increase the risk of heart damage during pandemic. Main aim of this study is to discuss present knowledge regarding etiopathogenesis and clinical findings of MYO associated with COVID-19 vaccine administration and whether the risk of this adverse events can modify the initially suggested recommendation for the use of COVID-19 vaccines in pediatric age. Literature analysis showed that MYO is an adverse event that can follow the COVID-19 immunization with mRNA vaccines in few persons, particularly young adults, adolescents, and older children. It is generally a mild disease that should not modify the present recommendations for immunization with the authorized COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. Despite this, further studies are needed to evaluate presently undefined aspects of MYO development after COVID-19 vaccine administration and reduce the risk of development of this kind of vaccine complication. Together with a better definition of the true incidence of MYO and the exact role of the various factors in conditioning incidence variations, it is essential to establish long-term evolution of acute COVID-19 related MYO.

COVID-19 review shows that benefits of vaccinating children and adolescents appear to outweigh risks of post-vaccination myopericarditis

AIM

Myopericarditis after COVID-19 vaccination were the most serious adverse events reported in children over 5 years of age. We want summarize these cases, describing their incidence, clinical features, diagnostic pathways, therapeutic strategies and outcome.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was conducted until 20 March 2022 by bibliographic electronic databases. We included all reports of post-vaccination myopericarditis in children aged between 5 and 18 years.

RESULTS

All reported cases had elevated serum Troponin levels, associated with electrocardiogram changes, but often with normal echocardiogram. Cardiac magnetic resonance images always showed typical alterations. The pathogenetic mechanism is still unknown. Myocarditis following post-COVID vaccination is more frequent in males with an average age of about 15 years. Treatment involves the usage of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and the average hospitalization is about 3 days. The long-term consequences are not yet known, so these patients should be studied in a cardiological follow up and abstention from physical activity should be recommended.

CONCLUSION

The benefits of COVID-19 vaccination in children and adolescents appear to outweigh the risk of developing post-vaccination myopericarditis. We can also speculate a possible approval of vaccination in children under 5 years for the coming winter.

What Should We Do after the COVID-19 Vaccination? Vaccine-Associated Diseases and Precautionary Measures against Adverse Reactions

COVID-19 vaccines have been used to counteract the global COVID-19 pandemic. While these are effective, adverse reactions have been reported, such as injection-site pain, muscle ache, fever, palpitation, and chest discomfort. The release of inflammatory cytokines, such as interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-1β, is a potential mechanism for post-vaccine side-effects. Chest discomfort after the vaccination, including myocarditis and acute coronary syndrome, is a particularly serious adverse reaction. It is important to be familiar with the differential diagnoses of chest discomfort and organ-specific diseases associated with COVID-19 vaccines as the preparation for booster shots and vaccinations among children aged 5–11 years begins. High-intensity exercise, alcohol, tobacco smoking, and baths promote inflammatory cytokines, such as IL-6, which may exacerbate the adverse reactions after vaccination. Japanese data show that deaths during baths are the most common for several days after mRNA vaccination. Additionally, alcohol and tobacco smoking were identified as predictive factors of lower antibody titers after vaccination. In this review, we aimed to provide a few recommendations to prevent vaccine-associated disease.

The unintended consequences of COVID-19 vaccine policy: why mandates, passports and restrictions may cause more harm than good

Vaccination policies have shifted dramatically during COVID-19 with the rapid emergence of population-wide vaccine mandates, domestic vaccine passports and differential restrictions based on vaccination status. While these policies have prompted ethical, scientific, practical, legal and political debate, there has been limited evaluation of their potential unintended consequences. Here, we outline a comprehensive set of hypotheses for why these policies may ultimately be counterproductive and harmful. Our framework considers four domains: (1) behavioural psychology, (2) politics and law, (3) socioeconomics, and (4) the integrity of science and public health. While current vaccines appear to have had a significant impact on decreasing COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality burdens, we argue that current mandatory vaccine policies are scientifically questionable and are likely to cause more societal harm than good. Restricting people's access to work, education, public transport and social life based on COVID-19 vaccination status impinges on human rights, promotes stigma and social polarisation, and adversely affects health and well-being. Current policies may lead to a widening of health and economic inequalities, detrimental long-term impacts on trust in government and scientific institutions, and reduce the uptake of future public health measures, including COVID-19 vaccines as well as routine immunisations. Mandating vaccination is one of the most powerful interventions in public health and should be used sparingly and carefully to uphold ethical norms and trust in institutions. We argue that current COVID-19 vaccine policies should be re-evaluated in light of the negative consequences that we outline. Leveraging empowering strategies based on trust and public consultation, and improving healthcare services and infrastructure, represent a more sustainable approach to optimising COVID-19 vaccination programmes and, more broadly, the health and well-being of the public.