Characteristics and Comparison of Adverse Events of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccines Reported to the United States Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System Between 14 December 2020 and 8 October 2021

The WHO Algorithm for Causality Assessment of Adverse Effects Following Immunization with Genetic-Based Anti-COVID-19 Vaccines: Pitfalls and Suggestions for Improvement

Clarifying and differentiating the causes of diseases is an essential step in any clinical activity, but it takes on particular relevance and complexity in the case that arise following vaccinations. The WHO has proposed a protocol that uses a list of specific questions about vaccine-related adverse events and an algorithm for making a judgement. Here, we analyze and discuss the important limitations of this protocol when applied to the new genetic-based anti-COVID-19 vaccines, particularly once dealing with rare and unexpected pathological events. The main controversial aspects concern: (a) the prevailing consideration of other possible causes; (b) the biological plausibility and the choice of an appropriate time window to consider adverse effects possibly caused by vaccines; (c) the reference to scientific literature, which may be very limited and often controversial in early stages of introducing new vaccines because of the short period of observation; (d) the final classification of the algorithm into only three classes, which leaves ample space for the "indeterminate" category. Failure to address these issues may lead to distorted pharmacovigilance reports with significant consequences on the benefit/harm assessment. In anticipation of possible future pandemics managed with new vaccines, the WHO algorithm needs to be revised with appropriate protocols for monitoring and evaluation of adverse effects that take into account the novel mechanism of action and real-world epidemiological data.

Adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination: A comprehensive analysis of spontaneous reporting data in Ghana

Vaccines are important public health tools and formed part of the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. Five COVID-19 vaccines were given Emergency Use Authorization in Ghana and deployed during the pandemic. Early phase trials of the vaccines were mostly not conducted in Africans. This study examines safety data during their deployment under real-life conditions in Ghana. This study analysed secondary data on COVID-19 vaccine-related adverse events following immunization (AEFI) reported to the Ghana Food and Drugs Authority (GFDA) between March 2021 and June 2022 using STATA. AEFIs were coded with their Preferred Terms using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities, version 24.0. Statistical tests examined associations between demographic characteristics, vaccine types, seriousness, and AEFI outcomes. Binary logistic regression model assessed factors associated with serious AEFIs, while the GFDA's Joint COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Review Committee provided causality assessments of serious AEFIs. Overall cumulative incidence of AEFIs was about 25 per 100,000 persons vaccinated. Across the five vaccines, majority of the AEFIs reported were not serious (98.7%) with higher incidences in those below 50 years (74.0%) and females (51.2%). The most common AEFIs recorded were headache (52.9%), pains (44.4%), pyrexia (35.1%), chills (16.7%) and injection site pain (15.6%). Relative to those 50 years and above, the odds of serious AEFI were 60% less among those aged <30 years (aOR = 0.40, CI: [0.19, 0.86], p = 0.019). However, a causality assessment of the 57 serious AEFIs indicated only 8 (14%) were vaccine product-related. There was a low incidence of AEFIs following deployment of the vaccines in Ghana with a much lower incidence of serious AEFIs. Informing the public about the safety of the vaccines and potential side effects may increase trust and acceptance, decreasing hesitancy in current and future vaccination programmes.

Moral characteristics predicting COVID-19 vaccination

OBJECTIVE

The current study aims to assess, for the first time, whether vaccination is predicted by different behavioral and cognitive aspects of moral decision-making.

BACKGROUND

Studies linking moral factors to vaccination have largely examined whether vaccination decisions can be explained by individual differences in the endorsement of various principles and norms central to deontology-based arguments in vaccination ethics. However, these studies have overlooked whether individuals prioritize norms over other considerations when making decisions, such as maximizing consequences (utilitarianism).

METHOD

In a sample of 1492 participants, the current study assessed whether vaccination is explained by individual differences in three aspects of moral decision-making (consequence sensitivity, norm sensitivity, and action tendency), while also considering ethics position (idealism, relativism) and moral identity.

RESULTS

Supportive vaccination (vaccine uptake accompanied by a positive attitude toward vaccines) was associated with utilitarianism (increased consequence sensitivity) and increased tolerance to risks and harm toward others. Meanwhile, although those in the non-vaccinated group was associated with higher harm sensitivities, they neither supported nor received the COVID vaccines (when vaccines prevent harm from infection).

CONCLUSION

Pro-vaccination messages may be made more effective by addressing perceptions of harms associated with vaccines and infections, respectively.

COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients with Chronic Liver Disease

Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 has become a central public health issue, primarily for vulnerable populations such as individuals with Chronic Liver Disease (CLD). Increased COVID-19-related mortality and disease severity has been noted in this subgroup of patients. Severe COVID-19 tends to further deregulate liver function in patients with chronic liver failure or cirrhosis and even reactivate hepatitis in people living with HBV or HCV. In addition, impaired hepatic function leads to several limitations in possible therapeutic interventions. Chronic hepatic dysregulation, along with the underlying cirrhosis-associated immune dysfunction (CAID), leads to a decreased immune response to vaccination that, in turn, may result in reduced efficacy rates and lowered lasting protection. According to current guidelines, timely vaccination and frequent booster shot administration are deemed necessary in this context. Vaccination-related adverse events are mostly mild in nature and similar to those reported in the general population, whereas the incidence of liver injury following vaccination is relatively rare. We aimed to review available evidence and recommendations associated with COVID-19 vaccination in patients with chronic liver disease, and provide insight to current issues and future directions.

Analyses of reported severe adverse events after immunization with SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in the United States: One year on

Objective

To analyze rates of reported severe adverse events after immunization (sAEFI) attributed to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in the United States (US) using safety surveillance data.

Methods

Observational study of sAEFI reported to the vaccine adverse events reporting system (VAERS) between December 13, 2020, to December 13, 2021, and attributed to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination programs across all US states and territories. All sAEFI in conjunction with mRNA (BNT-162b2 or mRNA-1273) or adenovector (Ad26.COV2.S) vaccines were included. The 28-day crude cumulative rates for reported emergency department (ED) visits and sAEFI viz. hospitalizations, life-threatening events and deaths following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination were calculated. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of reported sAEFI were compared between mRNA and adenovector vaccines using generalized Poisson regression models.

Results

During the study period, 485 million SARS-CoV-2 vaccines doses were administered nationwide, and 88,626 sAEFI reported in VAERS. The 28-day crude cumulative reporting rates per 100,000 doses were 14.97 (95% confidence interval, 14.86-18.38) for ED visits, 5.32 (5.26-5.39) for hospitalizations, 1.72 (1.68-1.76) for life-threatening events, and 1.08 (1.05-1.11) for deaths. Females had two-fold rates for any reported AEFI compared to males, but lower adjusted IRRs for sAEFI. Cumulative rates per dose for reported sAEFI attributed to adenovector vaccine were 2-3-fold higher, and adjusted IRRs 1.5-fold higher than mRNA vaccines.

Conclusions

Overall cumulative rates for reported sAEFI following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in the US over 1 year were very low; single-dose adenovector vaccine had 1.5-fold higher adjusted rates for reported sAEFI, which may however equate with multiple-doses mRNA vaccine regimens. These data indicate absence of high risks of sAEFI following SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and support safety equipoise between mRNA and adenovector vaccines. Public health messaging of these data is critical to overcome heuristic biases. Furthermore, these data may support ongoing adenovector vaccine use, especially in low- and middle-income countries due to affordability, logistical and cold chain challenges.

How far are the new wave of mRNA drugs from us? mRNA product current perspective and future development

mRNA products are therapies that are regulated from the post-transcriptional, pre-translational stage of a gene and act upstream of protein synthesis. Compared with traditional small molecule drugs and antibody drugs, mRNA drugs had the advantages of simple design, short development cycle, strong target specificity, wide therapeutic field, and long-lasting effect. mRNA drugs were now widely used in the treatment of genetic diseases, tumors, and viral infections, and are expected to become the third major class of drugs after small molecule drugs and antibody drugs. The delivery system technology was the key to ensuring the efficacy and safety of mRNA drugs, which plays an important role in protecting RNA structure, enhancing targeting ability, reducing the dose of drug delivery, and reducing toxic side effects. Lipid nanoparticles (LNP) were the most common delivery system for mRNA drugs. In recent years, mRNA drugs have seen rapid development, with the number of drugs on the market increasing each year. The success of commercializing mRNA vaccines has driven a wave of nucleic acid drug development. mRNA drugs were clinically used in genetic diseases, oncology, and infectious diseases worldwide, while domestic mRNA clinical development was focused on COVID-19 vaccines, with more scope for future indication expansion.

Short-Term Adverse Effects Immediately after the Start of COVID-19 Booster Vaccination in Vietnam

Background: Risk communication is necessary to improve the booster vaccination rate, but Vietnam does not have a system to collect and disclose such information. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to clarify adverse reactions and their frequency in the early period after booster vaccination, and to obtain primary data for improving the booster vaccination rate. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among adults aged ≥18 years. Clinical data were collected 14 days after booster vaccination by using a standard questionnaire. Results: A total of 1322 participants were included with median age = 23 and sex ratio (Male/Female) = 0.53. AstraZeneca was the most commonly used vaccine for the first and second doses, while Pfizer was the most commonly used vaccine for booster shots. Injection site pain, fatigue, and myalgia were the most common side effect reported (71.9%, 28.1%, and 21.8%, respectively). Compared to previous COVID-19 vaccine injections, 81.9% of participants reported that their symptoms were similar or milder after receiving the booster dose. They were more likely to present injection site pain (OR = 1.43, p < 0.0001) and lymphadenopathy (OR = 4.76, p < 0.0001) after receiving the booster shot. Fever (OR = 0.33, p < 0.0001) and fatigue (OR = 0.77, p = 0.002) were less often reported after booster shots compared to the first and second injections. The severity of symptoms occurring after booster dose versus first and second doses increased significantly with each additional year of age and among participants receiving the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. Conclusion: Adverse reactions to booster vaccination are minor and their incidence is the same as for the first or the second vaccination. Multicenter studies with larger sample sizes on the side effects and safety of COVID-19 vaccine booster shots need to be conducted to make the population less worried, in order to increase the vaccination rate, to protect individuals’ and communities’ health.

Measuring parents' readiness to vaccinate themselves and their children against COVID-19

To reach high vaccination rates against COVID-19, children and adolescents should be also vaccinated. To improve childhood vaccination rates and vaccination readiness, parents need to be addressed since they decide about the vaccination of their children. We adapted the 7C of vaccination readiness scale to measure parents' readiness to vaccinate their children and evaluated the scale in a long and a short version in two studies. The study was first evaluated with a sample of N = 244 parents from the German COVID-19 Snapshot Monitoring (COSMO) and validated with N = 464 parents from the Danish COSMO. The childhood 7C scale showed acceptable to good psychometric properties in both samples and explained more than 80% of the variance in vaccination intentions. Additionally, differences in parents' readiness to vaccinate their children against COVID-19 were strongly determined by their readiness to vaccinate themselves, explaining 64% of the variance. Vaccination readiness and intentions for children changed as a function of the children's age explaining 93% of differences between parents in their vaccination intentions for their children. Finally, we found differences in correlations of components with self- versus childhood vaccination, as well as between the children's age groups in the prediction of vaccination intentions. Thus, parents need to be targeted in specifically tailored ways, based on the age of their child, to reach high vaccination rates in children. The scale is publicly available in several languages (www.vaccination-readiness.com).