Global landscape analysis of no-fault compensation programmes for vaccine injuries: A review and survey of implementing countries.

To update the landscape analysis of vaccine injuries no-fault compensation programmes, we conducted a scoping review and a survey of World Health Organization Member States. We describe the characteristics of existing no-fault compensation systems during 2018 based on six common programme elements. No-fault compensation systems for vaccine injuries have been developed in a few high-income countries for more than 50 years. Twenty-five jurisdictions were identified with no-fault compensation programmes, of which two were recently implemented in a low- and a lower-middle-income country. The no-fault compensation programmes in most jurisdictions are implemented at the central or federal government level and are government funded. Eligibility criteria for vaccine injury compensation vary considerably across the evaluated programmes. Notably, most programmes cover injuries arising from vaccines that are registered in the country and are recommended by authorities for routine use in children, pregnant women, adults (e.g. influenza vaccines) and for special indications. A claim process is initiated once the injured party or their legal representative files for compensation with a special administrative body in most programmes. All no-fault compensation programmes reviewed require standard of proof showing a causal association between vaccination and injury. Once a final decision has been reached, claimants are compensated with either: lump-sums; amounts calculated based on medical care costs and expenses, loss of earnings or earning capacity; or monetary compensation calculated based on pain and suffering, emotional distress, permanent impairment or loss of function; or combination of those. In most jurisdictions, vaccine injury claimants have the right to seek damages either through civil litigation or from a compensation scheme but not both simultaneously. Data from this report provide an empirical basis on which global guidance for implementing such schemes could be developed.

The science of vaccine safety: Summary of meeting at Wellcome Trust.

Vaccines are everywhere hugely successful but are also under attack. The reason for the latter is the perception by some people that vaccines are unsafe. However that may be, vaccine safety, life any other scientific subject, must be constantly studied. It was from this point of view that a meeting was organized at the Wellcome Trust in London in May 2019 to assess some aspects of vaccine safety as subjects for scientific study. The objective of the meeting was to assess what is known beyond reasonable doubt and conversely what areas need additional studies. Although the meeting could not cover all aspects of vaccine safety science, many of the most important issues were addressed by a group of about 30 experts to determine what is already known and what additional studies are merited to assess the safety of the vaccines currently in use. The meeting began with reviews of the current situation in different parts of the world, followed by reviews of specific controversial areas, including the incidence of certain conditions after vaccination and the safety of certain vaccine components. Lastly, information about the human papillomavirus vaccine was considered because its safety has been particularly challenged by vaccine opponents. The following is a summary of the meeting findings. In addition to this summary, the meeting organizers will explore opportunities to perform studies that would enlarge knowledge of vaccine safety.

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

BACKGROUND: The rollout of the group A meningococcal vaccine, PsA-TT, in Africa's meningitis belt countries represented the first introduction of a vaccine specifically designed for this part of the world. During the first year alone, the number of people who received the vaccine through mass vaccination campaigns was several hundredfold higher than that of subjects who participated in the closely monitored clinical trials. Implementation of a system to identify rare but potentially serious vaccine reactions was therefore a high priority in the design and implementation of those campaigns. METHODS: National authorities and their technical partners set up effective vaccine pharmacovigilance systems, including conducting active surveillance projects. RESULTS: Implementation of national expert advisory groups to review serious adverse events following immunization in all countries and active monitoring of conditions of interest in 3 early-adopter countries did not identify particular concerns with the safety profile of PsA-TT, which had already provided tremendous public health benefits. CONCLUSIONS: Lessons learned from this experience will help to improve preparations for future vaccine introductions in resource-poor settings and capitalize on such efforts to advance vaccine safety systems in the future.

The Safety of PsA-TT in Pregnancy: An Assessment Performed Within the Navrongo Health and Demographic Surveillance Site in Ghana.

BACKGROUND: Group A meningococcal disease occurs in large epidemics within the meningitis belt of Africa that includes northern Ghana. Major epidemics in the meningitis belt have infection rates ranging from 100 to 800 per 100 000 population. In 2012, a group A meningococcal conjugate vaccine, PsA-TT (MenAfriVac), was introduced into the region in large campaigns. METHODS: We report here on the safety of this vaccine when used in pregnant women in the Navrongo region of Ghana. RESULTS: Rates of events in 1730 immunized pregnant women and their infants were compared to the rates of the same events in pregnant women who did not receive the vaccine during the campaign and also to women who were pregnant in the prior year. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence of any safety concerns when this vaccine was administered during pregnancy.

Active Surveillance for Adverse Events After a Mass Vaccination Campaign With a Group A Meningococcal Conjugate Vaccine (PsA-TT) in Mali.

BACKGROUND: The monovalent meningococcal A conjugate vaccine (PsA-TT, MenAfriVac) was developed for use in the "meningitis belt" of sub-Saharan Africa. Mali was 1 of 3 countries selected for early introduction. As this is a new vaccine, postlicensure surveillance is particularly important to identify and characterize possible safety issues. METHODS: The national vaccination campaign was phased from September 2010 to November 2011. We conducted postlicensure safety surveillance for PsA-TT in 40 government clinics from southern Mali serving approximately 400 000 people 1-29 years of age. We conducted analyses with individual-level data and population-level data, and we calculated rates of adverse events using the conditional exact test, a modified vaccine cohort risk interval method, and a modified self-controlled case series method for each outcome of interest, including 18 prespecified adverse events and 18 syndromic categories. RESULTS: An increased rate of clinic visits for fever within 3 days after vaccination was found using multiple methods for all age groups. Although other signals were found with some methods, complete assessment of all other prespecified outcomes and syndromic categories did not reveal that PsA-TT was consistently associated with any other health problem. CONCLUSIONS: No new safety concerns were identified in this study. These results are consistent with prelicensure data and other studies indicating that PsA-TT is safe. The approach presented could serve as a model for future active postlicensure vaccine safety monitoring associated with large-scale immunization campaigns in low-income countries.