Lack of association between acellular pertussis vaccine and seizures in early childhood

Do vaccines cause epilepsy? Review of cases in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program

OBJECTIVE

The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 created the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), a no-fault alternative to the traditional tort system. Since 1988, the total compensation paid exceeds $5 billion. Although epilepsy is one of the leading reasons for filing a claim, there has been no review of the process and validity of the legal outcomes given current medical information. The objectives were to review the evolution of the VICP program in regard to vaccine-related epilepsy and assess the rationale behind decisions made by the court.

METHODS

Publicly available cases involving epilepsy claims in the VICP were searched through Westlaw and the US Court of Federal Claims websites. All published reports were reviewed for petitioner's theories supporting vaccine-induced epilepsy, respondent's counterarguments, the final decision regarding compensation, and the rationale underlying these decisions. The primary goal was to determine which factors went into decisions regarding whether vaccines caused epilepsy.

RESULTS

Since the first epilepsy case in 1989, there have been many changes in the program, including the removal of residual seizure disorder as a vaccine-related injury, publication of the Althen prongs, release of the acellular form of pertussis, and recognition that in genetic conditions the underlying genetic abnormality rather than the immunization causes epilepsy. We identified 532 unique cases with epilepsy: 105 with infantile spasms and 427 with epilepsy without infantile spasms. The petitioners' experts often espoused outdated, erroneous causation theories that lacked an acceptable medical or scientific foundation and were frequently criticized by the court.

SIGNIFICANCE

Despite the lack of epidemiological or mechanistic evidence indicating that childhood vaccines covered by the VICP result in or aggravate epilepsy, these cases continue to be adjudicated. After 35 years of intense litigation, it is time to reconsider whether epilepsy should continue to be a compensable vaccine-induced injury.

Lack of association between febrile seizures and vaccines containing diphtheria, tetanus, and acellular pertussis in Chinese children

BACKGROUND

The association between the administration of vaccines containing diphtheria, tetanus, and acellular pertussis (DTaP) and febrile seizures (FSs) is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the risk of FSs after the administration of DTaP-containing vaccines in Chinese children aged 1 to 23 months.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A self-controlled case series (SCCS) design was adopted based on data from the Ningbo Regional Health Information Platform (NRHIP). The observation period was from 1 to 23 months of age. The relative incidences (RIs) within 0 to 3 days, 4 to 7 days, and 0 to 7 days after the administration of DTaP-containing vaccines were estimated. The remaining observation period was the control period.

RESULTS

The RIs within 0 to 3 days, 4 to 7 days, and 0 to 7 days after any dose of DTaP-containing vaccines were 1.14 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.52), 0.89 (95% CI 0.65 to 1.23), and 1.02 (95% CI 0.82 to 1.26), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides reassuring evidence that there is no increased risk of FSs immediately after the administration of DTaP-containing vaccines, which might serve to reassure both professionals and families with regard to the risk of FSs associated with DTaP-containing vaccines.

Current Approaches to Vaccine Safety Using Observational Data: A Rationale for the EUMAEUS (Evaluating Use of Methods for Adverse Events Under Surveillance-for Vaccines) Study Design

Post-marketing vaccine safety surveillance aims to detect adverse events following immunization in a population. Whether certain methods of surveillance are more precise and unbiased in generating safety signals is unclear. Here, we synthesized information from existing literature to provide an overview of the strengths, weaknesses, and clinical applications of epidemiologic and analytical methods used in vaccine monitoring, focusing on cohort, case-control and self-controlled designs. These designs are proposed to be evaluated in the EUMAEUS (Evaluating Use of Methods for Adverse Event Under Surveillance-for vaccines) study because of their widespread use and potential utility. Over the past decades, there have been an increasing number of epidemiological study designs used for vaccine safety surveillance. While traditional cohort and case-control study designs remain widely used, newer, novel designs such as the self-controlled case series and self-controlled risk intervals have been developed. Each study design comes with its strengths and limitations, and the most appropriate study design will depend on availability of resources, access to records, number and distribution of cases, and availability of population coverage data. Several assumptions have to be made while using the various study designs, and while the goal is to mitigate any biases, violations of these assumptions are often still present to varying degrees. In our review, we discussed some of the potential biases (i.e., selection bias, misclassification bias and confounding bias), and ways to mitigate them. While the types of epidemiological study designs are well established, a comprehensive comparison of the analytical aspects (including method evaluation and performance metrics) of these study designs are relatively less well studied. We summarized the literature, reporting on two simulation studies, which compared the detection time, empirical power, error rate and risk estimate bias across the above-mentioned study designs. While these simulation studies provided insights on the analytic performance of each of the study designs, its applicability to real-world data remains unclear. To bridge that gap, we provided the rationale of the EUMAEUS study, with a brief description of the study design; and how the use of real-world multi-database networks can provide insights into better methods evaluation and vaccine safety surveillance.

Vaccination and childhood epilepsies

INTRODUCTION

The evidence relating vaccination to febrile seizures and epilepsy is evaluated with an emphasis on febrile seizures (FS), Dravet syndrome (DS), West syndrome, and other developmental and epileptic encephalopathies.

METHODS

A systematic literature review using search words vaccination/immunization AND febrile seizures/epilepsy/Dravet/epileptic encephalopathy/developmental encephalopathy was performed. The role of vaccination as the cause/trigger/aggravation factor for FS or epilepsies and preventive measures were analyzed.

RESULTS

From 1428 results, 846 duplicates and 447 irrelevant articles were eliminated; 120 were analyzed.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence that vaccinations cause epilepsy in healthy populations. Vaccinations do not cause epileptic encephalopathies but may be non-specific triggers to seizures in underlying structural or genetic etiologies. The first seizure in DS may be earlier in vaccinated versus non-vaccinated patients, but developmental outcome is similar in both groups. Children with a personal or family history of FS or epilepsy should receive all routine vaccinations. This recommendation includes DS. The known risks of the infectious diseases prevented by immunization are well established. Vaccination should be deferred in case of acute illness. Acellular pertussis DTaP (diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis) is recommended. The combination of certain vaccine types may increase the risk of febrile seizures however the public health benefit of separating immunizations has not been proven. Measles-containing vaccine should be administered at age 12-15 months. Routine prophylactic antipyretics are not indicated, as there is no evidence of decreased FS risk and they can attenuate the antibody response following vaccination. Prophylactic measures (preventive antipyretic medication) are recommended in DS due to the increased risk of prolonged seizures with fever.

Self-controlled case series design in vaccine safety: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

: An increasing number of vaccine safety studies using the self-controlled case-series (SCCS) design have been conducted in the last decade. However, there has been no comprehensive evaluation of the methodology and reporting quality of these observational studies. The purpose of this paper is to document the methodological features of studies that focused on vaccine safety using the SCCS design, and to evaluate the reporting quality of these studies to suggest future improvements on appropriate design and transparent reporting.

METHODS

: Databases including Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus and Chinese databases were searched from inception to May 31, 2021. All observational studies regarding vaccine safety using a SCCS design were selected. Information regarding methodological elements were extracted. In addition, reporting quality was assessed using the REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely collected health Data statement for PharmacoEpidemiology (RECORD-PE).

RESULTS

: Of the 105 studies identified, administrative databases were the main data source for vaccination records and adverse events following immunization (AEFI). 28 articles (27%) used multiple designs to verify the association, and the results obtained with the SCCS design were robust. The top three AEFI studied were intussusception, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and convulsions. Only 21 studies (20%) reported the approach for case validation by chart review. The healthy vaccinee effect was considered by 51studies (49%), with 16 of them (31%) using extended SCCS models to alleviate this effect. Overall, the reporting quality of included studies could be improved.

CONCLUSIONS

: This study systematically reviewed the methodology of studies regarding vaccine safety using a SCCS design and critically assessed their respective reporting quality. Case validation, the validity of assumptions for standard SCCS, and quality of reporting should be given more importance in future research projects.

Current Take on Systemic Sclerosis Patients' Vaccination Recommendations

Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a rare autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic disease. The prevalence of SSc ranges from 7 to 700 cases per million worldwide. Due to multiple organ involvement and constant inflammatory state, this group of patients presents an increased risk of infectious diseases. This paper aimed to gather the up-to-date evidence on vaccination strategies for patients with SSc and to be a useful tool for the prevention and management of infectious diseases. The authors conducted a scoping review in which each paragraph presents data on a specific vaccine’s safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy. The work deals with the following topics: SARS-CoV-2, seasonal influenza, S. pneumoniae, HAV, HBV, HZV, N. meningitidis, H. influenzae, HPV, and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis.

Vaccination deferral among children with seizures in Zhejiang: influence, recommendation, safety and implications

OBJECTIVES

Delayed vaccination in children with seizures was common in China. This study aims to describe the vaccination status, reasons for vaccination deferral, vaccination recommendations and the safety for these patients in Zhejiang.

METHODS

1539 children included were divided into febrile seizure (FS) group, epilepsy (EP) group, unclassified seizure group and other symptomatic seizure group. Medical records and reasons for the vaccination deferral were collected by questionnaire. Vaccination data and Adverse Event Following Immunization were retrieved from vaccination booklets.

RESULTS

The main diseases of children enrolled were FS (756, 49.1%) and EP (443, 28.8%). Most of them (95.6%) were vaccinated on time before the onset of seizure, but their vaccination was delayed after seizure occurred. 76.1% were recommended to receive vaccines normally, of which the FS group accounted for the highest proportion (90.3%). 88.73% of them were vaccinated as recommended, and no serious side effects or seizure occurred. The main reason for vaccination deferral was providers' and parents' hesitation to have them vaccinated.

CONCLUSION

Seizures were overestimated as a contraindication for vaccination in China. Routine vaccination was safe in most circumstances. It is essential to educate providers and parents about the benefits and contraindications of vaccination in children with seizures.

Safety and tolerability of the novel 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccines among people with epilepsy (PwE): A cross-sectional study

Background

People with epilepsy (PwE) were concerned about the safety of the novel 2019 Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) vaccines.

Objective

This study aimed to assess the side effects experienced by PwE following vaccination with COVID-19 vaccines and to identify the causes of vaccine hesitation.

Methods

We administered a questionnaire to PwE, who visited the epilepsy clinic at Ibn Sina Hospital in Kuwait during the first two working weeks of April 2021. It included socio-demographic, epilepsy status, and vaccination data. In addition, we asked those who were not vaccinated yet about the reasons and their plan.

Results

A total of 111 PwE were surveyed, with 82 being vaccinated and 29 being unvaccinated. Out of the 82 vaccinated, 66 (80.5%) reported at least one side effect. Patients who received the Pfizer BioNTech mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2) (first, second dosage); and the Oxford-AstraZenecaa chimpanzee adenovirus-vectored vaccine (ChAdOx1nCoV-19) (first dose) had the following reactions: Pain at the injection site (40%, 67.6%), 43.8%, fatigue (47%, 32.4%), 46.9%, Headache (33.3%, 35.3%), 34.4% and Myalgia (40%, 35%), 50% respectively. Local site effects, including pain (67.6% vs. 40%, p = < 0.001) and redness (26.5% vs 6.7%, p = 0.019), were more statistically significantly after the second dose of BNT162b2 vaccine compared to the first dose of the same vaccine. While there was no significant difference in systemic side effects frequencies between the two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine. The systemic side effects were more statistically significantly after the first dose of ChAdOx1nCoV-19 compared to the first dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine and those included fever (56.3% vs 13.3%, p = < 0.001), chills (37.5% vs 6.7%, p = < 0.001), myalgia (50% vs 40%, p = < 0.001) and arthralgia (25% vs 6.7%, p = 0.021). The local site reactions were not significantly different between the first doses of both vaccines. Among the subgroup who had vaccine-related side effects, 66.7% were females, 90.9% were 55 or younger, 63.6% were on polytherapy, 74% had side effects for one day or less, and 95% were symptoms free by the end of the first-week post-vaccination. Symptoms were mild in 68% of the patients and moderate in 29.3%. Most patients (93.9%) did not report seizure worsening after vaccination. The relative risk of seizure worsening after the first and second doses of BNT162b2 and the first dose of ChAdOx1nCoV-19 vaccines was 1.027 (95% CI 0.891–1.183), 1.019 (95% CI 0.928-1.119), and 1.026 (95% CI 0.929–1.134) respectively. After the first dose of BNT162b2, one patient reported the development of status epilepticus. Among the non-vaccinated group, 34.9% were still indecisive, while 37.9% rejected the vaccination. Fear of adverse effects (42.9%) and fear of epilepsy worsening (23.8%) were the main reasons for vaccine hesitation.

Conclusions

This study shows that the two vaccines under consideration (BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1nCoV-19) have a good safety profile and a low risk of epilepsy worsening among a cohort of PwE in Kuwait.

A Review of Febrile Seizures: Recent Advances in Understanding of Febrile Seizure Pathophysiology and Commonly Implicated Viral Triggers

Febrile seizures are one of the commonest presentations in young children, with a 2-5% incidence in Western countries. Though they are generally benign, with rare long-term sequelae, there is much to be learned about their pathophysiology and risk factors. Febrile seizures are propagated by a variety of genetic and environmental factors, including viruses and vaccines. These factors must be taken into consideration by a clinician aiming to assess, diagnose and treat a child presenting with fevers and seizures, as well as to explain the sequelae of the febrile seizures to the concerned parents of the child. Our article provides an overview of this common childhood condition, outlining both the underlying mechanisms and the appropriate clinical approach to a child presenting with febrile seizures.

An infant who suffered seizures many times after pentavalent vaccination: A case report

Although rare, serious adverse effects may be seen after vaccination. Especially, the whole-cell pertussis vaccine has been held responsible for neurological side effects, as the most important problem in vaccination. With the advancement in vaccination technologies, whole-cell pertussis vaccine has been replaced by acellular pertussis vaccine, and neurological side effects have been significantly reduced. Herein, we present a 2-month-old male infant who suffered from generalized tonic-clonic seizures many times, possibly due to acellular pertussis after pentavalent vaccination, including diphtheria, acellular pertussis, tetanus, inactive polio, Haemophilus influenzae type B, and conjugate pneumococcal vaccine (BCG, DaBT-IPA-Hib, CPV).

Adverse Events Following Immunization Among Children With Epilepsy: A Self-Controlled Case Series

BACKGROUND

In children with epilepsy, fever and illness are known triggers for seizure; therefore, clinicians and parents could be concerned that immunization-induced inflammation and fever could also trigger seizures. We sought to estimate the risk of emergency department (ED) visit or hospitalization for epilepsy/seizure and all causes after immunization in children younger than 7 years of age with epilepsy.

METHODS

We conducted a self-controlled case series of children diagnosed with epilepsy before their 7th birthday and immunized from 2005 to 2015 in Ontario (population 14.2 million) and Manitoba (population 1.3 million), Canada, using administrative healthcare data. We estimated the age- and season-adjusted relative incidence (aRI) of epilepsy/seizure-related and all-cause ED visits/hospitalizations during various risk periods 0-28 days after inactivated and live immunizations versus a control period 35-83 days postimmunization. Estimates from each province were analyzed separately and then combined in a random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The combined risk of epilepsy/seizure-related hospitalization/ED visit was increased 0-2 days after inactivated vaccines (aRI = 1.5, 95% confidence interval: 1.1-1.9) and 7-10 days after live vaccines (aRI = 1.9, 1.4-2.7). For all-cause ED visit/hospitalization, the combined aRI estimate was 0.9 (0.8-1.2) 0-2 days after inactivated vaccines and 1.3 (1.1-1.5) 7-10 days after live vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of epilepsy/seizure-related ED visit/hospitalization was modestly increased among children with epilepsy during peak periods of fever and inflammation following inactivated and live vaccines. These risks must be balanced against the risk of complications from vaccine-preventable diseases.

Causality assessment of adverse events following immunization: the problem of multifactorial pathology

The analysis of Adverse Events Following Immunization (AEFI) is important in a balanced epidemiological evaluation of vaccines and in the issues related to national vaccine injury compensation programs. If manufacturing defects or vaccine storage and delivering errors are excluded, the majority of adverse reactions to vaccines occur as excessive or biased inflammatory and immune responses. These unwanted phenomena, occasionally severe, are associated with many different endogenous and exogenous factors, which often interact in complex ways. The confirmation or denial of the causal link between an AEFI and vaccination is determined pursuant to WHO guidelines, which propose a four-step analysis and algorithmic diagramming. The evaluation process from the onset considers all possible "other causes" that can explain the AEFI and thus exclude the role of the vaccine. Subsequently, even if there was biological plausibility and temporal compatibility for a causal association between the vaccine and the AEFI, the guidelines ask to look for any possible evidence that the vaccine could not have caused that event. Such an algorithmic method presents some concerns that are discussed here, in the light of the multifactorial nature of the inflammatory and immune pathologies induced by vaccines, including emerging knowledge of genetic susceptibility to adverse effects. It is proposed that the causality assessment could exclude a consistent association of the adverse event with the vaccine only when the presumed "other cause" is independent of an interaction with the vaccine. Furthermore, the scientific literature should be viewed not as an exclusion criterion but as a comprehensive analysis of all the evidence for or against the role of the vaccine in causing an adverse reaction. These issues are discussed in relation to the laws that, in some countries, regulate the mandatory vaccinations and the compensation for those who have suffered serious adverse effects.

Causality assessment of adverse events following immunization: the problem of multifactorial pathology

The analysis of Adverse Events Following Immunization (AEFI) is important in a balanced epidemiological evaluation of vaccines and in the issues related to vaccine injury compensation programs. The majority of adverse reactions to vaccines occur as excessive or biased inflammatory and immune responses. These unwanted phenomena, occasionally severe, are associated with many different endogenous and exogenous factors, which often interact in complex ways. The confirmation or denial of the causal link between an AEFI and vaccination is determined pursuant to WHO guidelines, which propose a four-step analysis and algorithmic diagramming. The evaluation process from the onset considers all possible "other causes" that might explain the AEFI and thus exclude the role of the vaccine. Subsequently, even if there was biological plausibility and temporal compatibility for a causal association between the vaccine and the AEFI, the guidelines ask to look for any possible evidence that the vaccine could not have caused that event. Such an algorithmic method presents several concerns that are discussed here, in the light of the multifactorial nature of the inflammatory and immune pathologies induced by vaccines, including emerging knowledge of genetic susceptibility to adverse effects. It is proposed that the causality assessment could exclude a consistent association of the adverse event with the vaccine only when the presumed "other cause" is independent of an interaction with the vaccine. Furthermore, the scientific literature should be viewed not as an exclusion criterion but as a comprehensive analysis of all the evidence for or against the role of the vaccine in causing an adverse reaction. Given these inadequacies in the evaluation of multifactorial diseases, the WHO guidelines need to be reevaluated and revised. These issues are discussed in relation to the laws that, in some countries, regulate the mandatory vaccinations and the compensation for those who have suffered serious adverse effects.

Vaccine safety in infants and children

Immunization is crucial to maintaining public health. This article addresses the benefits of childhood vaccinations and educates parents on the myths surrounding possible adverse reactions.

Self-controlled case series studies: Just how rare does a rare non-recurrent outcome need to be?

The self-controlled case series method assumes that adverse outcomes arise according to a non-homogeneous Poisson process. This implies that it is applicable to independent recurrent outcomes. However, the self-controlled case series method may also be applied to unique, non-recurrent outcomes or first outcomes only, in the limit where these become rare. We investigate this rare outcome assumption when the self-controlled case series method is applied to non-recurrent outcomes. We study this requirement analytically and by simulation, and quantify what is meant by 'rare' in this context. In simulations we also apply the self-controlled risk interval design, a special case of the self-controlled case series design. To illustrate, we extract data on the incidence rate of some recurrent and non-recurrent outcomes within a defined study population to check whether outcomes are sufficiently rare for the rare outcome assumption to hold when applying the self-controlled case series method to first or unique outcomes. The main findings are that the relative bias should be no more than 5% when the cumulative incidence over total time observed is less than 0.1 per individual. Inclusion of age (or calendar time) effects will further reduce bias. Designs that begin observation with exposure maximise bias, whereas little or no bias will be apparent when there is no time trend in the distribution of exposures, or when exposure is central within time observed.

Comparison of adverse events following immunisation with acellular and whole-cell pertussis vaccines: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Two types of vaccines are currently licensed for use against pertussis: whole-cell (wP) and acellular pertussis (aP). There is evidence that wP confers more durable immunity than aP, however wP has been more frequently associated with adverse events following immunisation (AEFI). A comparison of the frequency of AEFI with the first doses of wP and aP has not yet been clearly documented. This must be done in light of recent considerations to move towards a wP prime-aP boost vaccination strategy in low and middle-income countries.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the frequency of AEFI associated with the first dose of the wP and aP vaccines. We also compared the frequency of AEFI associated with subsequent doses of wP.

METHODS

This systematic review was carried out in strict accordance with the published protocol.

RESULTS

High heterogeneity amongst included one-armed studies did not allow for pooling of prevalence estimates. The prevalence estimates of AEFI at first vaccine dose of wP ranged from 0 to 75%, while the prevalence estimates of AEFI at first vaccine dose of aP ranges from 0 to 39%. The prevalence estimates of adverse events following second and third vaccine dose of wP ranged from 0 to 71% and 0 to 61%, respectively. Risk ratios among two-armed studies showed an increased risk of adverse events with first dose of wP compared to aP [local reaction RR 2.73 (2.33, 3.21), injection site pain RR 4.15 (3.24, 5.31), injection site swelling RR 4.38 (2.70, 7.12), fever over 38 °C RR 9.21 (5.39, 15.76), drowsiness RR 1.34 (1.18, 1.52) and vomiting RR 1.28 (0.91, 1.79)].

CONCLUSION

Our results confirm that, when comparing the first dose, wP is more reacotgenic than aP. The proposed wP prime followed by aP boost pertussis vaccine strategy should be approached with caution.

Safety Surveillance of Diphtheria and Tetanus Toxoids and Acellular Pertussis (DTaP) Vaccines

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety of currently licensed diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis (DTaP) vaccines in the United States by using data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a spontaneous reporting surveillance system.

METHODS

We searched VAERS for US reports of DTaP vaccinations occurring from January 1, 1991, through December 31, 2016, and received by March 17, 2017. We reviewed available medical records for all death reports and a random sample of reports classified as nondeath serious. We used Empirical Bayesian data mining to identify adverse events that were disproportionally reported after DTaP vaccination.

RESULTS

VAERS received 50 157 reports after DTaP vaccination; 43 984 (87.7%) of them reported concomitant administration of other vaccines, and 5627 (11.2%) were serious. Median age at vaccination was 19 months (interquartile range 35 months). The most frequently reported events were injection site erythema (12 695; 25.3%), pyrexia (9913; 19.8%), injection site swelling (7542; 15.0%), erythema (5599; 11.2%), and injection site warmth (4793; 9.6%). For 3 of the DTaP vaccines, we identified elevated values for vaccination errors using Empirical Bayesian data mining.

CONCLUSIONS

No new or unexpected adverse events were detected. The observed disproportionate reporting for some nonserious vaccination errors calls for better education of vaccine providers on the specific indications for each of the DTaP vaccines.

Prevention of Pertussis, Tetanus, and Diphtheria with Vaccines in the United States: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)

This report compiles and summarizes all recommendations from CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding prevention and control of tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis in the United States. As a comprehensive summary of previously published recommendations, this report does not contain any new recommendations and replaces all previously published reports and policy notes; it is intended for use by clinicians and public health providers as a resource. ACIP recommends routine vaccination for tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis. Infants and young children are recommended to receive a 5-dose series of diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and acellular pertussis (DTaP) vaccines, with one adolescent booster dose of tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine. Adults who have never received Tdap also are recommended to receive a booster dose of Tdap. Women are recommended to receive a dose of Tdap during each pregnancy, which should be administered from 27 through 36 weeks’ gestation, regardless of previous receipt of Tdap. After receipt of Tdap, adolescents and adults are recommended to receive a booster tetanus and diphtheria toxoids (Td) vaccine every 10 years to assure ongoing protection against tetanus and diphtheria.

Risk of seizures after immunization in children with epilepsy: a risk interval analysis

BACKGROUND

In children with epilepsy, fever and infection can trigger seizures. Immunization can also induce inflammation and fever, which could theoretically trigger a seizure. The risk of seizure after immunization in children with pre-existing epilepsy is not known. The study objective was to determine the risk of medically attended seizure after immunization in children with epilepsy < 7 years of age.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of children < 7 years of age with epilepsy in Nova Scotia, Canada from 2010 to 2014. Hospitalizations, emergency visits, unscheduled clinic visits, and telephone calls for seizures were extracted from medical records. Immunization records were obtained from family physicians and Public Health with informed consent. We conducted a risk interval analysis to estimate the relative risk (RR) of seizure during risk periods 0-14, 0-2, and 5-14 days post-immunization versus a control period 21-83 days post-immunization.

RESULTS

There were 302 children with epilepsy who were eligible for the study. Immunization records were retrieved on 147 patients (49%), of whom 80 (54%) had one or more immunizations between the epilepsy diagnosis date and age 7 years. These 80 children had 161 immunization visits and 197 medically attended seizures. Children with immunizations had more seizures than either those with no immunizations or those with no records (mean 2.5 versus 0.7 versus 0.9, p < 0.001). The risk of medically attended seizure was not increased 0-14 days after any vaccine (RR = 1.1, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.5-2.8) or 0-2 days after inactivated vaccines (RR = 0.9, 95% CI: 0.1-7.1) versus 21-83 days post-immunization. No seizure events occurred 5-14 days after live vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

Children with epilepsy do not appear to be at increased risk of medically attended seizure following immunization. These findings suggest that immunization is safe in children with epilepsy, with benefits outweighing risks.

Febrile Seizure Risk after Vaccination in Children One to Five Months of Age

BACKGROUND

The risk of febrile seizure is temporarily increased for a few days after the administration of certain vaccines in children aged six to 23 months. Our objective was to determine the febrile seizure risk following vaccination in children aged one to five months, when six different vaccines are typically administered.

METHODS

We identified emergency department visits and inpatient admissions with International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, febrile seizure codes among children enrolled in nine Vaccine Safety Datalink participating health care organizations from 2006 through 2011. Febrile seizures were confirmed by medical record abstraction. We used the self-controlled risk-interval method to compare the incidence of febrile seizure during postvaccination days 0 to 1 (risk interval) versus days 14 to 20 (control interval).

RESULTS

We identified 15 febrile seizure cases that occurred after 585,342 vaccination visits. The case patients were aged three to five months. The patients had received a median of four (range two to six) vaccines simultaneously. The incidence rate ratio of febrile seizure after vaccination was 23 (95% confidence interval 5.13 to 100.8), and the attributable risk was 3.92 (95% confidence interval 1.68 to 6.17) febrile seizure cases per 100,000 persons vaccinated.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccination in children aged three to five months was associated with a large relative risk of febrile seizure on the day of and the day after vaccination, but the risk was small in absolute terms. Postvaccination febrile seizure should not be a concern for the vast majority of children receiving vaccines, but clinicians might take this risk into consideration when evaluating and treating children susceptible to seizures precipitated by fever.

Effect of prophylactic or therapeutic administration of paracetamol on immune response to DTwP-HepB-Hib combination vaccine in Indian infants

BACKGROUND

Vaccination is considered as the most cost effective method for preventing infectious diseases. Low grade fever is a known adverse effect of vaccination. In India, it is a common clinical practice to prescribe paracetamol either prophylactically or therapeutically to manage fever. Some studies have shown that paracetamol interferes with antibody responses following immunization. This manuscript reports the outcome of a post hoc analysis of data from a clinical trial of a pentavalent vaccine in Indian infants where paracetamol was not used or was used either as prophylaxis or for treatment of fever.

METHODS

Pre and post vaccine antibody levels against Diphtheria, Tetanus, Pertussis, Hepatitis B, Haemophilus influenzae type B were assessed in no paracetamol and paracetamol groups. The paracetamol group was further divided into prophylactic and treatment groups.

RESULTS

Similar rates of seroprotection/seroresponse for anti-D, anti-T, anti-wP, anti-PT, anti-HBs and anti-PRP were observed in all the groups. There was no clear tendency for difference in percentage seroprotection/seroresponse and geometric mean (GM) titers in any of the groups.

CONCLUSION

The study found no evidence that paracetamol usage either as prophylactic or for treatment impact immunological responses to DTwP-HepB-Hib combination vaccine. [Clinical trial registry of India (study registration number CTRI/2012/08/002872)].

Febrile Seizures After 2010-2011 Trivalent Inactivated Influenza Vaccine

OBJECTIVES

In the Post-Licensure Rapid Immunization Safety Monitoring Program, we examined risk of febrile seizures (FS) after trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) and 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) during the 2010-2011 influenza season, adjusted for concomitant diphtheria tetanus acellular pertussis-containing vaccines (DTaP). Assuming children would receive both vaccines, we examined whether same-day TIV and PCV13 vaccination was associated with greater FS risk when compared with separate-day vaccination.

METHODS

We used a self-controlled risk interval design, comparing the FS rate in a risk interval (0-1 days) versus control interval (14-20 days). Vaccinations were identified in claims and immunization registry data. FS were confirmed with medical records.

RESULTS

No statistically significant TIV-FS associations were found in unadjusted or adjusted models (incidence rate ratio [IRR] adjusted for age, seasonality, and concomitant PCV13 and DTaP: 1.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78 to 2.39). Adjusted for age and seasonality, PCV13 was significantly associated with FS (IRR 1.74, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.86), but not when further adjusting for concomitant TIV and DTaP (IRR 1.61, 95% CI 0.91 to 2.82). Same-day TIV and PCV13 vaccination was not associated with excess risk of FS when compared with separate-day vaccination (1.08 fewer FS per 100 000 with same day administration, 95% CI -5.68 to 6.09).

CONCLUSIONS

No statistically significant increased risk of FS was found for 2010-2011 TIV or PCV13, when adjusting for concomitant vaccines. Same-day TIV and PCV13 vaccination was not associated with more FS compared with separate-day vaccination.

Post-licensure rapid immunization safety monitoring program (PRISM) data characterization

BACKGROUND

The Post-Licensure Rapid Immunization Safety Monitoring (PRISM) program is the immunization safety monitoring component of FDA's Mini-Sentinel project, a program to actively monitor the safety of medical products using electronic health information. FDA sought to assess the surveillance capabilities of this large claims-based distributed database for vaccine safety surveillance by characterizing the underlying data.

METHODS

We characterized data available on vaccine exposures in PRISM, estimated how much additional data was gained by matching with select state and local immunization registries, and compared vaccination coverage estimates based on PRISM data with other available data sources. We generated rates of computerized codes representing potential health outcomes relevant to vaccine safety monitoring. Standardized algorithms including ICD-9 codes, number of codes required, exclusion criteria and location of the encounter were used to obtain the background rates.

RESULTS

The majority of the vaccines routinely administered to infants, children, adolescents and adults were well captured by claims data. Immunization registry data in up to seven states comprised between 5% and 9% of data for all vaccine categories with the exception of 10% for hepatitis B and 3% and 4% for rotavirus and zoster respectively. Vaccination coverage estimates based on PRISM's computerized data were similar to but lower than coverage estimates from the National Immunization Survey and Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set. For the 25 health outcomes of interest studied, the rates of potential outcomes based on ICD-9 codes were generally higher than rates described in the literature, which are typically clinically confirmed cases.

CONCLUSION

PRISM program's data on vaccine exposures and health outcomes appear complete enough to support robust safety monitoring.

Timely versus delayed early childhood vaccination and seizures

BACKGROUND

Little is known regarding the timing of childhood vaccination and postvaccination seizures.

METHODS

In a cohort of 323 247 US children from the Vaccine Safety Datalink born from 2004 to 2008, we analyzed the association between the timing of childhood vaccination and the first occurrence of seizure with a self-controlled case series analysis of the first doses of individual vaccines received in the first 2 years of life.

RESULTS

In infants, there was no association between the timing of infant vaccination and postvaccination seizures. In the second year of life, the incident rate ratio (IRR) for seizures after receipt of the first measles-mumps-rubella vaccine (MMR) dose at 12 to 15 months was 2.65 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.99-3.55); the IRR after an MMR dose at 16 to 23 months was 6.53 (95% CI 3.15-13.53). The IRR for seizures after receipt of the first measles-mumps-rubella-varicella vaccine (MMRV) dose at 12 to 15 months was 4.95 (95% CI 3.68-6.66); the IRR after an MMRV dose at 16 to 23 months was 9.80 (95% CI 4.35 -22.06).

CONCLUSIONS

There is no increased risk of postvaccination seizure in infants regardless of timing of vaccination. In year 2, delaying MMR vaccine past 15 months of age results in a higher risk of seizures. The strength of the association is doubled with MMRV vaccine. These findings suggest that on-time vaccination is as safe with regard to seizures as delayed vaccination in the first year of life, and that delayed vaccination in the second year of life is associated with more postvaccination seizures than on-time vaccination.

Vaccines and febrile seizures

Vaccine administration is the second leading cause of febrile seizures (FS). FS occurrence in children is a serious concern because it leads to public apprehension of vaccinations. This review discusses the clinical implications of FS, its potential link to vaccinations and its impact on official recommendations for vaccinations in children. Vaccines such as the pertussis antigen-containing vaccine, the measles-containing vaccine and the influenza vaccine have been linked to FS. However, FS events are very rare and are not usually associated with downstream complications or severe neurologic diseases. Considering their significant health benefits, vaccinations have not been restricted in the pediatric population. Nevertheless, vaccine-induced FS could be a problem, particularly in genetically predisposed children. Therefore, post-marketing surveillance studies are required to accurately assess the incidence of FS and identify individuals who are particularly susceptible to FS after vaccination.

Safety of diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis and inactivated poliovirus (DTaP-IPV) vaccine

BACKGROUND

In 2008, a diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis, and inactivated poliovirus combined vaccine (DTaP-IPV) was licensed for use in children 4 through 6 years of age. While pre-licensure studies did not demonstrate significant safety concerns, the number vaccinated in these studies was not sufficient to examine the risk of uncommon but serious adverse events.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the risk of serious adverse events following DTaP-IPV vaccination.

METHODS

The study was conducted from January 2009 through September 2012 in the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) project. In the VSD, electronic vaccination and encounter data are updated and aggregated weekly as part of ongoing surveillance activities. Based on previous reports and biologic plausibility, eight potential adverse events were monitored: meningitis/encephalitis; seizures; stroke; Guillain-Barré syndrome; Stevens-Johnson syndrome; anaphylaxis; serious allergic reactions other than anaphylaxis; and serious local reactions. Adverse event rates in DTaP-IPV recipients were compared to historical incidence rates in the VSD population prior to 2009. Sequential probability ratio testing was used to analyze the data on a weekly basis.

RESULTS

During the study period, 201,116 children received DTaP-IPV vaccine. Ninety-seven percent of DTaP-IPV recipients also received other vaccines on the same day, typically measles-mumps-rubella and varicella vaccines. There was no statistically significant increased risk of any of the eight pre-specified adverse events among DTaP-IPV recipients when compared to historical incidence rates.

CONCLUSIONS

In this safety surveillance study of more than 200,000 DTaP-IPV vaccine recipients, there was no evidence of increased risk for any of the pre-specified adverse events monitored. Continued surveillance of DTaP-IPV vaccine safety may be warranted to monitor for rare adverse events, such as Guillain-Barré syndrome.

Self-controlled case series and misclassification bias induced by case selection from administrative hospital databases: application to febrile convulsions in pediatric vaccine pharmacoepidemiology

Vaccine safety studies are increasingly conducted by using administrative health databases and self-controlled case series designs that are based on cases only. Often, several criteria are available to define the cases, which may yield different positive predictive values, as well as different sensitivities, and therefore different numbers of selected cases. The question then arises as to which is the best case definition. This article proposes new methodology to guide this choice based on the bias of the relative incidence and the power of the test. We apply this methodology in a validation study of 4 nested algorithms for identifying febrile convulsions from the administrative databases of 10 French hospitals. We used a sample of 695 children aged 1 month to 3 years who were hospitalized in 2008-2009 with at least 1 diagnosis code of febrile convulsions. The positive predictive values of the algorithms ranged from 81% to 98%, and their sensitivities were estimated to be 47%-99% in data from 1 large hospital. When applying our proposed methods, the algorithm we selected used a restricted diagnosis code and position on the discharge abstract. These criteria, which resulted in the selection of 502 cases with a positive predictive value of 95%, provided the best compromise between high power and low relative bias.

Epilepsy and vaccinations: Italian guidelines

Reports of childhood epilepsies in temporal association with vaccination have had a great impact on the acceptance of vaccination programs by health care providers, but little is known about this possible temporal association and about the types of seizures following vaccinations. For these reasons the Italian League Against Epilepsy (LICE), in collaboration with other Italian scientific societies, has decided to generate Guidelines on Vaccinations and Epilepsy. The aim of Guidelines on Vaccinations and Epilepsy is to present recent unequivocal evidence from published reports on the possible relationship between vaccines and epilepsy in order to provide information about contraindications and risks of vaccinations in patients with epilepsy. The following main issues have been addressed: (1) whether contraindications to vaccinations exist in patients with febrile convulsions, epilepsy, and/or epileptic encephalopathies; and (2) whether any vaccinations can cause febrile seizures, epilepsy, and/or epileptic encephalopathies. Diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP) vaccination and measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination (MMR) increase significantly the risk of febrile seizures. Recent observations and data about the relationships between vaccination and epileptic encephalopathy show that some cases of apparent vaccine-induced encephalopathy could in fact be caused by an inherent genetic defect with no causal relationship with vaccination.

Signal identification and evaluation for risk of febrile seizures in children following trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in the Vaccine Safety Datalink Project, 2010-2011

In fall 2010 in the southern hemisphere, an increased risk of febrile seizures was noted in young children in Australia in the 24 h after receipt of trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) manufactured by CSL Biotherapies. Although the CSL TIV vaccine was not recommended for use in young children in the US, during the 2010-2011 influenza season near real-time surveillance was conducted for febrile seizures in the 0-1 days following first dose TIV in a cohort of 206,174 vaccinated children ages 6 through 59 months in the Vaccine Safety Datalink Project. On a weekly basis, surveillance was conducted with the primary approach of a self-controlled risk interval design and the secondary approach of a current vs. historical vaccinee design. Sequential statistical methods were employed to account for repeated analyses of accumulating data. Signals for seizures based on computerized data were identified in mid November 2010 using a current vs. historical design and in late December 2010 using a self-controlled risk interval design. Further signal evaluation was conducted with chart-confirmed febrile seizure cases using only data from the primary approach (i.e. self-controlled risk interval design). The magnitude of the incidence rate ratio and risk difference comparing risk of seizures in the 0-1 days vs. 14-20 days following TIV differed by receipt of concomitant 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13). Among children 6-59 months of age, the incidence rate ratio (IRR) for TIV adjusted for concomitant PCV13 was 2.4 (95% CI 1.2, 4.7) while the IRR for PCV13 adjusted for concomitant TIV was 2.5 (95% CI 1.3, 4.7). The IRR for concomitant TIV and PCV13 was 5.9 (95% CI 3.1, 11.3). Risk difference estimates varied by age due to the varying baseline risk for seizures in young children, with the highest estimates occurring at 16 months (12.5 per 100,000 doses for TIV without concomitant PCV13, 13.7 per 100,000 doses for PCV13 without concomitant TIV, and 44.9 per 100,000 doses for concomitant TIV and PCV13) and the lowest estimates occurring at 59 months (1.1 per 100,000 doses for TIV without concomitant PCV13, 1.2 per 100,000 doses for PCV13 without concomitant TIV, and 4.0 per 100,000 doses for concomitant TIV and PCV13). Incidence rate ratio and risk difference estimates were lower for children receiving TIV without concomitant PCV13 or PCV13 without concomitant TIV. Because of the importance of preventing influenza and pneumococcal infections and associated complications, our findings should be placed in a benefit-risk framework to ensure that population health benefits are maximized.

Use of the self-controlled case-series method in vaccine safety studies: review and recommendations for best practice

The self-controlled case-series method was originally developed to investigate potential associations between vaccines and adverse events, and is now commonly used for this purpose. This study reviews applications of the method to vaccine safety investigations in the period 1995–2010. In total, 40 studies were reviewed. The application of the self-controlled case-series method in these studies is critically examined, with particular reference to the definition of observation and risk periods, control of confounders, assumptions and potential biases, methodological and presentation issues, power and sample size, and software. Comparisons with other study designs undertaken in the papers reviewed are also highlighted. Some recommendations are presented, with the emphasis on promoting good practice.

Update on childhood and adolescent immunizations: selected review of US recommendations and literature: part 2

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide a clinically relevant synopsis of research findings regarding childhood and adolescent vaccines.

RECENT FINDINGS

Vaccine coverage is relatively static or improving for the vaccines included in the 2010 annual harmonized immunization schedules. Providers should be reviewing patients' immunization records at each visit to take advantage of any opportunity to administer indicated, age-appropriate vaccines. There have been infectious disease outbreaks among highly immunized populations, although unvaccinated or undervaccinated individuals continue to play large roles in the spread of disease. Infants, many of whom are too young to be vaccinated, continue to bear a large disease burden, which underscores the importance of cocooning and, in some cases, vaccination of pregnant women. Influenza, measles, mumps, and rubella, varicella, hepatitis A, meningococcal conjugate, human papillomavirus, diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and acellular pertussis, and tetanus and diphtheria toxoids and acellular pertussis vaccines are reviewed in this second of two articles.

SUMMARY

New research on childhood and adolescent vaccines is anticipated to shape the practice of pediatric providers. Research will continue to provide the science to optimize protection and to promote the health and well being of all children and adolescents.

Update on available vaccines in India: report of the APPA VU 2010: I

The Asia Pacific Pediatric Association Vaccinology Update 2010 was held in Mumbai on November 13-14, 2010 to discuss the latest information on burden of infectious diseases, recent developments in vaccines and their impact on immunization practices against infectious diseases occurring in Indian children. During the conference the importance of including conjugate Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine and anti-rabies vaccines in routine immunization was stressed. Also, the need for giving a second dose of measles mumps rubella vaccine at school entry; and the need for a two-dose varicella vaccine regimen (first dose at 12-15 months of age and a second dose at age 4-6 years) was elucidated. Information related to vaccines which have become available in India in recent years, namely, inactivated poliovirus vaccine; diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis (DTaP) vaccine; conjugate pneumococcal vaccine; rotavirus vaccines; H1N1 vaccines; live attenuated hepatitis A virus vaccine; oral cholera vaccine; tetanus, reduced-dose diphtheria, acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine; and human papillomavirus vaccines were discussed.

A randomized placebo-controlled trial of acetaminophen for prevention of post-vaccination fever in infants

Background

Fever is common following infant vaccinations. Two randomized controlled trials demonstrated the efficacy of acetaminophen prophylaxis in preventing fever after whole cell pertussis vaccination, but acetaminophen prophylaxis has not been evaluated for prevention of fever following contemporary vaccines recommended for infants in the United States.

Methods

Children six weeks through nine months of age were randomized 1∶1 to receive up to five doses of acetaminophen (10–15 mg per kg) or placebo following routine vaccinations. The primary outcome was a rectal temperature ≥38°C within 32 hours following the vaccinations. Secondary outcomes included medical utilization, infant fussiness, and parents' time lost from work. Parents could request unblinding of the treatment assignment if the child developed fever or symptoms that would warrant supplementary acetaminophen treatment for children who had been receiving placebo.

Results

A temperature ≥38°C was recorded for 14% (25/176) of children randomized to acetaminophen compared with 22% (37/176) of those randomized to placebo but that difference was not statistically significant (relative risk [RR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.40–1.01). Children randomized to acetaminophen were less likely to be reported as being much more fussy than usual (10% vs 24%) (RR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.25–0.70) or to have the treatment assignment unblinded (3% vs 9%) (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.11–0.83) than those randomized to placebo. In age-stratified analyses, among children ≥24 weeks of age, there was a significantly lower risk of temperature ≥38°C in the acetaminophen group (13% vs. 25%; p = 0.03).

Conclusion

The results of this relatively small trial suggest that acetaminophen may reduce the risk of post-vaccination fever and fussiness.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00325819

Vaccinations and febrile seizures

The occurrence of seizures related to fever results from complex interactions among genetic and environmental factors. The issue of the relationship between vaccination and febrile seizures is complex. It is difficult to identify whether the febrile seizures result from a nonspecific fever caused by vaccination or if these are secondary to an encephalitis or encephalopathy caused by the vaccine. There is evidence showing that vaccination does trigger the onset of febrile seizures in one third of patients with Dravet syndrome. In general, febrile seizures that occur after vaccination do not seem to be different from febrile seizures from other causes, thus advances in knowledge about febrile seizures in general should be relevant to vaccine-associated febrile seizures.