A Bivalent Omicron-Containing Booster Vaccine against Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: The safety and immunogenicity of the bivalent omicron-containing mRNA-1273.214 booster vaccine are not known. METHODS: In this ongoing, phase 2-3 study, we compared the 50-µg bivalent vaccine mRNA-1273.214 (25 µg each of ancestral Wuhan-Hu-1 and omicron B.1.1.529 [BA.1] spike messenger RNAs) with the previously authorized 50-µg mRNA-1273 booster. We administered mRNA-1273.214 or mRNA-1273 as a second booster in adults who had previously received a two-dose (100-µg) primary series and first booster (50-µg) dose of mRNA-1273 (≥3 months earlier). The primary objectives were to assess the safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of mRNA-1273.214 at 28 days after the booster dose. RESULTS: Interim results are presented. Sequential groups of participants received 50 µg of mRNA-1273.214 (437 participants) or mRNA-1273 (377 participants) as a second booster dose. The median time between the first and second boosters was similar for mRNA-1273.214 (136 days) and mRNA-1273 (134 days). In participants with no previous severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, the geometric mean titers of neutralizing antibodies against the omicron BA.1 variant were 2372.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2070.6 to 2718.2) after receipt of the mRNA-1273.214 booster and 1473.5 (95% CI, 1270.8 to 1708.4) after receipt of the mRNA-1273 booster. In addition, 50-µg mRNA-1273.214 and 50-µg mRNA-1273 elicited geometric mean titers of 727.4 (95% CI, 632.8 to 836.1) and 492.1 (95% CI, 431.1 to 561.9), respectively, against omicron BA.4 and BA.5 (BA.4/5), and the mRNA-1273.214 booster also elicited higher binding antibody responses against multiple other variants (alpha, beta, gamma, and delta) than the mRNA-1273 booster. Safety and reactogenicity were similar with the two booster vaccines. Vaccine effectiveness was not assessed in this study; in an exploratory analysis, SARS-CoV-2 infection occurred in 11 participants after the mRNA-1273.214 booster and in 9 participants after the mRNA-1273 booster. CONCLUSIONS: The bivalent omicron-containing vaccine mRNA-1273.214 elicited neutralizing antibody responses against omicron that were superior to those with mRNA-1273, without evident safety concerns. (Funded by Moderna; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04927065.).

Adverse infant outcomes following low-risk pregnancies in England: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data describing adverse infant outcomes in infants born to women with a low risk of complications during pregnancy, such as those who may be enrolled in maternal immunization trials. This retrospective study estimated incidence proportions of infant outcomes in different cohorts of liveborn infants in England between 2005 and 2017. METHODS: The incidence proportions of 10 infant outcomes were calculated for liveborn infants from pregnancies represented in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Mother-Baby Link (MBL) and linkage to Hospital Episode Statistics (HES). Three infant cohorts were designed: (1) the all pregnancies infants cohort (N = 185,119), (2) the all pregnancies with a gestational age (GA) ≥ 24 weeks infants cohort (N = 183,869), and (3) the low-risk pregnancies infants cohort (LR infants cohort, N = 121,871), which included pregnancies with a GA ≥ 24 weeks and no diagnosis of predefined high-risk medical conditions until 24 weeks GA. RESULTS: The most common adverse infant outcome in the three infant cohorts was macrosomia (e.g., 1,085.9/10,000 live births in the LR infants cohort), followed by minor congenital anomalies (e.g., 800.6/10,000 in the LR infants cohort), very low/low birth weight (e.g., 400.6/10,000 in the LR infants cohort), and major congenital anomalies (e.g., 270.4/10,000 in the LR infants cohort). The incidence proportions for early-onset sepsis, very low/low birth weight, and minor and major congenital anomalies were lower in the LR infants than in the other cohorts (non-overlapping confidence intervals [CIs]). The incidence proportions of neonatal death, infant death, late-onset sepsis, macrosomia, small for GA, and large for GA were similar between cohorts (overlapping CIs). CONCLUSIONS: This study generated background rates of adverse infant outcomes from liveborn infants of all and low-risk pregnancies represented in the CPRD Pregnancy Register MBL and linkage to HES. The results indicate lower incidence proportions of several adverse infant outcomes in infants from low-risk pregnancies compared to all pregnancies, illustrating the importance of considering maternal risk factors. These background rates may facilitate the interpretation of safety data from maternal immunization trials and of pharmacovigilance data from maternal vaccines. They may also be of interest for other interventions studied in pregnant women.

Facilitating safety evaluation in maternal immunization trials: a retrospective cohort study to assess pregnancy outcomes and events of interest in low-risk pregnancies in England.

BACKGROUND: Maternal characteristics like medical history and health-related risk factors can influence the incidence of pregnancy outcomes and pregnancy-related events of interest (EIs). Data on the incidence of these endpoints in low-risk pregnant women are needed for appropriate external safety comparisons in maternal immunization trials. To address this need, this study estimated the incidence proportions of pregnancy outcomes and pregnancy-related EIs in different pregnancy cohorts (including low-risk pregnancies) in England, contained in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Pregnancy Register linked to Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) between 2005 and 2017. METHODS: The incidence proportions of 7 pregnancy outcomes and 15 EIs were calculated for: (1) all pregnancies (AP) represented in the CPRD Pregnancy Register linked to HES (AP cohort; N = 298 155), (2) all pregnancies with a gestational age (GA) ≥ 24 weeks (AP24+ cohort; N = 208 328), and (3) low-risk pregnancies (LR cohort; N = 137 932) with a GA ≥ 24 weeks and no diagnosis of predefined high-risk medical conditions until 24 weeks GA. RESULTS: Miscarriage was the most common adverse pregnancy outcome in the AP cohort (1 379.5 per 10 000 pregnancies) but could not be assessed in the other cohorts because these only included pregnancies with a GA ≥ 24 weeks, and miscarriages with GA ≥ 24 weeks were reclassified as stillbirths. Preterm delivery (< 37 weeks GA) was the most common adverse pregnancy outcome in the AP24+ and LR cohorts (742.9 and 680.0 per 10 000 pregnancies, respectively). Focusing on the cohorts with a GA ≥ 24 weeks, the most common pregnancy-related EIs in the AP24+ and LR cohorts were fetal/perinatal distress or asphyxia (1 824.3 and 1 833.0 per 10 000 pregnancies), vaginal/intrauterine hemorrhage (799.2 and 729.0 per 10 000 pregnancies), and labor protraction/arrest disorders (752.4 and 774.5 per 10 000 pregnancies). CONCLUSIONS: This study generated incidence proportions of pregnancy outcomes and pregnancy-related EIs from the CPRD for different pregnancy cohorts, including low-risk pregnancies. The reported incidence proportions of pregnancy outcomes and pregnancy-related EIs are largely consistent with external estimates. These results may facilitate the interpretation of safety data from maternal immunization trials and the safety monitoring of maternal vaccines. They may also be of interest for any intervention studied in populations of pregnant women.

Development of a Scale to Measure Trust in Public Health Authorities: Prevalence of Trust and Association with Vaccination.

Infectious disease outbreaks highlight the importance of trust in public health authorities to avoid fear and improve adherence to recommendations. There is currently no established and validated measure for trust in public health authorities. We aimed to develop and validate an instrument that measures trust in public health authorities and to assess the association between trust in public health authorities and vaccine attitudes. We developed 20 items to measure trust in public health authorities. After implementing a survey in January 2020, we investigated relationships between the items, reduced the number of items, and identified latent constructs of the scale. We assessed variability in trust and how trust was associated with vaccine attitudes, beliefs, and self-reported vaccine acceptance. The pool was reduced to a 14-item trust in public health authorities scale and we found that this trust model was strongly associated with acceptance of vaccines. Our scale can be used to examine the relationship between trust in public health authorities and adherence to public health recommendations. The measure needs to be validated in other settings to determine whether they are associated with other areas where the public question public health authority recommendations.

In silico analysis of autoimmune diseases and genetic relationships to vaccination against infectious diseases.

BACKGROUND: Near universal administration of vaccines mandates intense pharmacovigilance for vaccine safety and a stringently low tolerance for adverse events. Reports of autoimmune diseases (AID) following vaccination have been challenging to evaluate given the high rates of vaccination, background incidence of autoimmunity, and low incidence and variable times for onset of AID after vaccinations. In order to identify biologically plausible pathways to adverse autoimmune events of vaccine-related AID, we used a systems biology approach to create a matrix of innate and adaptive immune mechanisms active in specific diseases, responses to vaccine antigens, adjuvants, preservatives and stabilizers, for the most common vaccine-associated AID found in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. RESULTS: This report focuses on Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA), Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE), and Idiopathic (or immune) Thrombocytopenic Purpura (ITP). Multiple curated databases and automated text mining of PubMed literature identified 667 genes associated with RA, 448 with SLE, 49 with ITP and 73 with GBS. While all data sources provided valuable and unique gene associations, text mining using natural language processing (NLP) algorithms provided the most information but required curation to remove incorrect associations. Six genes were associated with all four AIDs. Thirty-three pathways were shared by the four AIDs. Classification of genes into twelve immune system related categories identified more "Th17 T-cell subtype" genes in RA than the other AIDs, and more "Chemokine plus Receptors" genes associated with RA than SLE. Gene networks were visualized and clustered into interconnected modules with specific gene clusters for each AID, including one in RA with ten C-X-C motif chemokines. The intersection of genes associated with GBS, GBS peptide auto-antigens, influenza A infection, and influenza vaccination created a subnetwork of genes that inferred a possible role for the MAPK signaling pathway in influenza vaccine related GBS. CONCLUSIONS: Results showing unique and common gene sets, pathways, immune system categories and functional clusters of genes in four autoimmune diseases suggest it is possible to develop molecular classifications of autoimmune and inflammatory events. Combining this information with cellular and other disease responses should greatly aid in the assessment of potential immune-mediated adverse events following vaccination.

Three-month antibody persistence of a bivalent Omicron-containing booster vaccine against COVID-19.

We previously presented day 29 interim safety and immunogenicity results from a phase 2/3 study (NCT04927065) comparing the Omicron-BA.1-containing bivalent vaccine mRNA-1273.214 (50-µg) to the 50-µg mRNA-1273 booster in adults who previously received the mRNA-1273 primary series (100-µg) and mRNA-1273 first booster (50-µg) dose. Primary endpoints were safety, non-inferiority of the neutralizing antibody (nAb) and seroresponse against Omicron BA.1, superiority of the nAb response against Omicron-BA.1, and non-inferiority of the nAb response against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 for second boosters of mRNA-1273.214 versus mRNA-1273 at days 29 and 91. The key secondary endpoint was the seroresponse difference of mRNA-1273.214 versus mRNA-1273 against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 at days 29 and day 91. Participants were sequentially enrolled and dosed with 50-µg of mRNA-1273 (n = 376) or mRNA-1273.214 (n = 437) as second booster doses. Here we present day 91 post-booster results. In participants with no pre-booster, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-infection (SARS-CoV-2), mRNA-1273.214 elicited Omicron-BA.1-nAb titers (95% confidence interval [CI]) that were significantly higher (964.4 [834.4-1114.7]) than those of mRNA-1273 (624.2 [533.1-730.9]) and similar to those of mRNA-1273 against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 at day 91. mRNA-1273.214 also induced higher binding antibody responses against Omicron BA.1 and alpha, gamma and delta variants than mRNA-1273. Safety profiles were similar for both vaccines. The Omicron-BA.1 bivalent vaccine improved antibody responses compared to mRNA-1273 through 90 days post-booster.

Original SARS-CoV-2 monovalent and Omicron BA.4/BA.5 bivalent COVID-19 mRNA vaccines: phase 2/3 trial interim results.

This ongoing, open-label, phase 2/3 trial compared the safety and immunogenicity of the Omicron BA.4/BA.5-containing bivalent mRNA-1273.222 vaccine with the ancestral Wuhan-Hu-1 mRNA-1273 as booster doses. Two groups of adults who previously received mRNA-1273 as primary vaccination series and booster doses were enrolled in a sequential, nonrandomized manner and received single-second boosters of mRNA-1273 (n = 376) or bivalent mRNA-1273.222 (n = 511). Primary objectives were safety and the noninferiority or superiority of neutralizing antibody (nAb) responses against Omicron BA.4/BA.5 and ancestral SARS-CoV-2 with the D614G mutation (ancestral SARS-CoV-2 (D614G)), 28 days post boost. Superiority and noninferiority were based on prespecified success criteria (lower bounds of 95% CI > 1 and < 0.677, respectively) of the mRNA-1273.222:mRNA-1273 geometric mean ratios. Bivalent Omicron BA.4/BA.5-containing mRNA-1273.222 elicited superior nAb responses against BA.4/BA.5 versus mRNA-1273 and noninferior responses against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 (D614G) at day 29 post boost in participants without detectable prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Day 29 seroresponses against Omicron BA.4/BA.5 were higher for mRNA-1273.222 than for mRNA-1273 and similar against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 (D614G), both meeting noninferiority criterion. The safety profile of mRNA-1273.222 was similar to that previously reported for mRNA-1273 with no new safety concerns identified. Continued monitoring of neutralization and real-world vaccine effectiveness are needed as additional divergent-virus variants emerge. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT04927065.

Omicron BA.1-containing mRNA-1273 boosters compared with the original COVID-19 vaccine in the UK: a randomised, observer-blind, active-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The omicron BA.1 bivalent booster is used globally. Previous open-label studies of the omicron BA.1 (Moderna mRNA-1273.214) booster showed superior neutralising antibody responses against omicron BA.1 and other variants compared with the original mRNA-1273 booster. We aimed to compare the safety and immunogenicity of omicron BA.1 monovalent and bivalent boosters with the original mRNA-1273 vaccine in a large, randomised controlled trial. METHODS: In this large, randomised, observer-blind, active-controlled, phase 3 trial in the UK (28 hospital and vaccination clinic sites), individuals aged 16 years or older who had previously received two injections of any authorised or approved COVID-19 vaccine, with or without an mRNA vaccine booster (third dose), were randomly allocated (1:1) using interactive response technology to receive 50 µg omicron BA.1 monovalent or bivalent vaccines or 50 µg mRNA-1273 administered as boosters via deltoid intramuscular injection. The primary outcomes were safety and immunogenicity at day 29, including prespecified non-inferiority and superiority of booster immune responses, based on the neutralising antibody geometric mean concentration (GMC) ratios of the monovalent and bivalent boosters compared with mRNA-1273. Safety was assessed in all participants who received first or second boosters, and primary immunogenicity outcomes were assessed in all participants who received the planned booster dose, had pre-booster and day 29 antibody data, had no major protocol deviations, and who were SARS-CoV-2-negative. The study is registered with EudraCT (2022-000063-51) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05249829) and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Feb 16 and March 24, 2022, 724 participants were randomly allocated to receive omicron BA.1 monovalent (n=366) or mRNA-1273 (n=357), and between April 2 and June 17, 2022, 2824 participants were randomly allocated to receive omicron BA.1 bivalent (n=1418) or mRNA-1273 (n=1395) vaccines as second boosters. Median durations (months) between the most recent COVID-19 vaccine and study boosters were similar for omicron BA.1 monovalent (4·0 months [IQR 3·6-4·7]) and mRNA-1273 (4·1 [3·5-4·7]), and for the omicron BA.1 bivalent (5·5 [4·8-6·2]) and mRNA-1273 (5·4 [4·8-6·2]) boosters. The omicron BA.1 monovalent and bivalent boosters elicited superior neutralising GMCs against the omicron BA.1 variant compared with mRNA-1273, with GMC ratios of 1·68 (99% CI 1·45-1·95) and 1·53 (1·41-1·67) at day 29 post-booster doses in participants without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. Both boosters induced non-inferior ancestral SARS-CoV-2 (Asp614Gly) immune responses with GMCs that were similar for the bivalent (2987·2 [95% CI 2814·9-3169·9]) versus mRNA-1273 (2911·3 [2750·9-3081·0]) and lower for the monovalent (2699·7 [2431·3-2997·7] vs 3020·6 [2776·5-3286·2]) boosters, with respective GMC ratios of 1·05 (99% CI 0·96-1·15) and 0·82 (95% CI 0·74-0·91). Results were comparable regardless of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection status. Incidences of solicited adverse reactions with the omicron BA.1 monovalent (335 [91·3%] of 367 participants) and omicron BA.1 bivalent (1285 [90·4%] of 1421 participants) boosters were similar to those observed previously for mRNA-1273, with no new safety concerns identified and no occurrences of fatal adverse events. INTERPRETATION: Omicron-containing booster vaccines generated superior immunogenicity against omicron BA.1 and comparable immunogenicity against the original strain with no new safety concerns. It remains important to continuously monitor the immune responses and real-world vaccine effectiveness as divergent SARS-CoV-2 variants emerge. FUNDING: Moderna.

Adverse events in pregnant women following administration of trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine and live attenuated influenza vaccine in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, 1990-2009.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to characterize reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) in pregnant women who received seasonal influenza vaccines to assess for potential vaccine safety concerns. STUDY DESIGN: We searched VAERS for reports of adverse events (AEs) in pregnant women who received trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) from July 1, 1990 through June 30, 2009, or live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) from July 1, 2003, through June 30, 2009. RESULTS: A total of 148 reports after TIV and 27 reports after LAIV were identified. Twenty TIV (13.5%) and 1 LAIV (4%) reports were classified as serious. No specific AEs were reported in 30 TIV (20.3%) and 16 LAIV (59%) reports. The most common pregnancy-specific AE was spontaneous abortion: 17 after TIV (11.5%) and 3 after LAIV (11%). The reporting rate of spontaneous abortion was 1.9 per million pregnant women vaccinated. CONCLUSION: No unusual patterns of pregnancy complications or fetal outcomes were observed in the VAERS reports of pregnant women after the administration of TIV or LAIV.

Ethical and policy implications of vaccinomics in the United States: community members' perspectives.

Objectives: We aimed to elucidate public values regarding the use of genomics to improve vaccine development and use (vaccinomics).Methods: Adults ≥18 years-old were recruited through social media and community organizations, and randomly assigned to one of four nested discussion groups in Boulder, CO and Baltimore, MD. Participants rated their confidence in vaccine safety and effectiveness prior to and after discussing vaccinomics. Before departing, they prioritized funding for vaccinomics versus federal priorities (vaccine safety and efficacy, new vaccines, and free vaccines) and chronic diseases (cancer, heart disease, and diabetes). Grounded Theory-influenced methods were used to identify themes.Results: Participants broadly supported vaccinomics. Emergent themes: concerns about reduced privacy/confidentiality, increased genetically based stigma/discrimination, and reduced agency to make vaccine-related decisions through genetically based prioritization. Participants supported vaccinomics' potential for increased personalization. Some participants favored prioritizing others over themselves during a vaccine shortage, while others did not. Some participants worried health insurance companies would discriminate against them based on information discovered through vaccinomics. Participants feared inequitable implementation of vaccinomics would contribute to discrimination and marginalization of vulnerable populations. Discussing vaccinomics did not impact perceptions of vaccine safety and effectiveness. Federal funding for vaccinomics was broadly supported.Conclusion: Participants supported vaccinomics' potential for increased personalization, noting policy safeguards to facilitate equitable implementation and protect privacy were needed. Despite some concerns, participants hoped vaccinomics would improve vaccine safety and effectiveness. Policies regarding vaccinomics' implementation must address public concerns about the privacy and confidentiality of genetic information and potential inequities in access to vaccinomics' benefits.

Vaccinomics: a cross-sectional survey of public values.

Objective: We characterize public values regarding vaccinomics, which aims to improve vaccine safety and effectiveness using genomics.Methods: Panel survey (2020) of ≥18-year-olds with embedded animation introduced vaccinomics. Sociodemographic, health, and vaccination-related items were adapted from validated scales. Novel items measured trust in public health authorities, vaccinomics-related values, and preferences for federal funding: vaccinomics compared with vaccine issues and chronic diseases. Beginning and end of survey confidence in vaccine safety was measured to assess potential changes. Data were weighted to the U.S. Census. Vaccinomics-related concerns were stratified by sociodemographic characteristics, vaccine hesitancy status (composite outcome), reported serious vaccine reactions, and trust in public health authorities (PHA). Log binomial regression models estimated associations between these variables and agency to make vaccine-related decisions.Results: Most (70.7%, N = 1,925) respondents expected vaccinomics would increase their vaccine confidence compared to now. Agreement was highest among those without serious vaccine reaction experience (unexperienced: 74.2% versus experienced: 62.3%), with high trust in PHA (high: 83.3% versus low: 57.4%), and low vaccine hesitancy among parents of teenagers (low: 78.8% versus high: 62.5%) and adults without minor children (low: 79.8% versus high: 60.6%; all p < .01). Belief that vaccination was an individual's choice was associated with reported serious reactions (adjusted Prevalence Ratio (aPR): 1.16; 95% CI: 1.07, 1.25) and low trust (aPR: 0.91; 0.84, 0.98). Beginning versus end of survey vaccine safety perceptions were similar.Conclusion: Federal funding, communications, and policies should assure the public that vaccinomics will not remove their decision-making power and engender trust in PHA.

Alternatives to national average income data as eligibility criteria for international subsidies: a social justice perspective.

Current strategies to address global inequities in access to life-saving vaccines use averaged national income data to determine eligibility. While largely successful in the lowest income countries, we argue that this approach could lead to significant inefficiencies from the standpoint of justice if applied to middle-income countries, where income inequalities are large and lead to national averages that obscure truly needy populations. Instead, we suggest alternative indicators more sensitive to social justice concerns that merit consideration by policy-makers developing new initiatives to redress health inequities in middle-income countries.

Postlicensure safety surveillance for quadrivalent human papillomavirus recombinant vaccine.

CONTEXT: In June 2006, the Food and Drug Administration licensed the quadrivalent human papillomavirus (types 6, 11, 16, and 18) recombinant vaccine (qHPV) in the United States for use in females aged 9 to 26 years; the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices then recommended qHPV for routine vaccination of girls aged 11 to 12 years. OBJECTIVE: To summarize reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) following receipt of qHPV. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Review and describe adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) reported to VAERS, a national, voluntary, passive surveillance system, from June 1, 2006, through December 31, 2008. Additional analyses were performed for some AEFIs in prelicensure trials, those of unusual severity, or those that had received public attention. Statistical data mining, including proportional reporting ratios (PRRs) and empirical Bayesian geometric mean methods, were used to detect disproportionality in reporting. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Numbers of reported AEFIs, reporting rates (reports per 100,000 doses of distributed vaccine or per person-years at risk), and comparisons with expected background rates. RESULTS: VAERS received 12 424 reports of AEFIs following qHPV distribution, a rate of 53.9 reports per 100,000 doses distributed. A total of 772 reports (6.2% of all reports) described serious AEFIs, including 32 reports of death. The reporting rates per 100,000 qHPV doses distributed were 8.2 for syncope; 7.5 for local site reactions; 6.8 for dizziness; 5.0 for nausea; 4.1 for headache; 3.1 for hypersensitivity reactions; 2.6 for urticaria; 0.2 for venous thromboembolic events, autoimmune disorders, and Guillain-Barré syndrome; 0.1 for anaphylaxis and death; 0.04 for transverse myelitis and pancreatitis; and 0.009 for motor neuron disease. Disproportional reporting of syncope and venous thromboembolic events was noted with data mining methods. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the AEFI rates were not greater than the background rates compared with other vaccines, but there was disproportional reporting of syncope and venous thromboembolic events. The significance of these findings must be tempered with the limitations (possible underreporting) of a passive reporting system.

Evaluation of optic neuritis following human papillomavirus vaccination.

To assess the relationship between human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and occurrence of optic neuritis (ON) and to evaluate a claims-based algorithm for identification of ON. Females of 9-26 year olds in the HealthCore's Integrated Research Database (HIRDSM) with and without claims evidence of HPV vaccination between 2007 and 2012 were included in this study. Potential ON cases were identified using the claims-based algorithm, positive predictive value (PPV) was determined using medical chart review. For the claims analysis, two study designs, a self-controlled temporal scan statistic and a retrospective matched cohort analysis, were used. ON was defined based on an algorithm developed using diagnosis and procedure codes from the medical claims. The PPV for ON cases using charts that had enough information for reviewers to make a determination was 62.5% (95% CI: 49.5%-74.3%). With the self-controlled temporal scan statistic, the primary analysis restricting on recommended vaccination schedule timing showed an increased risk of potential ON after second dose (RR = 3.39; p = 0.03), this finding was not confirmed for any of the additional analyses performed for individual or combined doses. With the cohort design, there was no increased risk of potential ON following vaccination in either individual or combined dose analyses. The risk of potential ON was higher among participants with a history of prior autoimmune diseases. In conclusion, identifying confirmed ON cases through administrative claims data proved challenging. The claims-based analysis in this study did not provide evidence for an association of ON with HPV vaccination.

Overall conceptual framework for studying the genetics of autoimmune diseases following vaccination: a regulatory perspective.

The US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System contains case reports of autoimmune diseases (ADs) occurring following vaccinations. ADs are rare and occur in unvaccinated people, making the potential association between vaccines and ADs challenging to evaluate. Developing mechanistic pathways that link genes, immune mediators, vaccine components and ADs would be helpful for hypothesis generation, enhancing theories of biologic plausibility and grouping rare autoimmune adverse events to increase the ability to detect and evaluate safety signals. Here, we propose a conceptual framework for investigating the genetics of ADs as safety signals following vaccination, potentially contributing to the identification of relevant biomarkers. We also discuss a study design that incorporates genetic information into postmarket clinical evaluation of autoimmune adverse events following vaccination.

Novel algorithms for improved pattern recognition using the US FDA Adverse Event Network Analyzer.

The medical review of adverse event reports for medical products requires the processing of "big data" stored in spontaneous reporting systems, such as the US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). VAERS data are not well suited to traditional statistical analyses so we developed the FDA Adverse Event Network Analyzer (AENA) and three novel network analysis approaches to extract information from these data. Our new approaches include a weighting scheme based on co-occurring triplets in reports, a visualization layout inspired by the islands algorithm, and a network growth methodology for the detection of outliers. We explored and verified these approaches by analysing the historical signal of Intussusception (IS) after the administration of RotaShield vaccine (RV) in 1999. We believe that our study supports the use of AENA for pattern recognition in medical product safety and other clinical data.

Genomics and infectious disease: a call to identify the ethical, legal and social implications for public health and clinical practice.

Advances in genomics are contributing to the development of more effective, personalized approaches to the prevention and treatment of infectious diseases. Genetic sequencing technologies are furthering our understanding of how human and pathogen genomic factors - and their interactions - contribute to individual differences in immunologic responses to vaccines, infections and drug therapies. Such understanding will influence future policies and procedures for infectious disease management. With the potential for tailored interventions for particular individuals, populations or subpopulations, ethical, legal and social implications (ELSIs) may arise for public health and clinical practice. Potential considerations include balancing health-related benefits and harms between individuals and the larger community, minimizing threats to individual privacy and autonomy, and ensuring just distribution of scarce resources. In this Opinion, we consider the potential application of pathogen and host genomic information to particular viral infections that have large-scale public health consequences but differ in ELSI-relevant characteristics such as ease of transmission, chronicity, severity, preventability and treatability. We argue for the importance of anticipating these ELSI issues in advance of new scientific discoveries, and call for the development of strategies for identifying and exploring ethical questions that should be considered as clinical, public health and policy decisions are made.

Application of the immunological disease continuum to study autoimmune and other inflammatory events after vaccination.

In vaccine safety monitoring, the evaluation of possible autoimmune events is challenging. Developing grouping systems based on pathophysiology, instead of organ systems, may enhance our ability to identify or verify associations between vaccines and adverse immunologically mediated events in clinical trials and post-licensure surveillance. Emerging data suggest that self-directed tissue inflammation occurs along a continuum from innate immune-driven diseases to adaptive immune-driven diseases. Herein, we develop this proposed classification for the vaccination setting in which inflammatory diseases are placed along a continuum according to the two major arms of the immune system, the innate immune arm (mediated by cells including neutrophils, macrophages and complement) and the adaptive immune arm (cell-mediated and humoral response). We incorporate hypersensitivity reactions and molecular mimicry vaccine-related reactions into this mechanistic scheme. We show how this could have important implications to assess mechanisms of potential immune-mediated adverse events following vaccination.

Statistical, epidemiological, and risk-assessment approaches to evaluating safety of vaccines throughout the life cycle at the Food and Drug Administration.

The public health community faces increasing demands for improving vaccine safety while simultaneously increasing the number of vaccines available to prevent infectious diseases. The passage of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Amendment Act of 2007 formalized the concept of life-cycle management of the risks and benefits of vaccines, from early clinical development through many years of use in large numbers of people. Harnessing scientific and technologic advances is necessary to improve vaccine-safety evaluation. The Office of Biostatistics and Epidemiology in the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research is working to improve the FDA's ability to monitor vaccine safety by improving statistical, epidemiologic, and risk-assessment methods, gaining access to new sources of data, and exploring the use of genomics data. In this article we describe the current approaches, new resources, and future directions that the FDA is taking to improve the evaluation of vaccine safety.