RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There is a growing literature base regarding menstrual changes following COVID-19 vaccination among premenopausal people. However, relatively little is known about uterine bleeding in postmenopausal people following COVID-19 vaccination. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine trends in incident postmenopausal bleeding diagnoses over time before and after COVID-19 vaccine introduction, and to describe cases of new-onset postmenopausal bleeding after COVID-19 vaccination. STUDY DESIGN: For postmenopausal bleeding incidence calculations, monthly population-level cohorts consisted of female Kaiser Permanente Northwest members aged ≥45 years. Those diagnosed with incident postmenopausal bleeding in the electronic medical record were included in monthly numerators. Members with preexisting postmenopausal bleeding or abnormal uterine bleeding, or who were at increased risk of bleeding due to other health conditions, were excluded from monthly calculations. We used segmented regression analysis to estimate changes in the incidence of postmenopausal bleeding diagnoses from 2018 through 2021 in Kaiser Permanente Northwest members meeting the inclusion criteria, stratified by COVID-19 vaccination status in 2021. In addition, we identified all members with ≥1 COVID-19 vaccination between December 14, 2020 and August 14, 2021, who had an incident postmenopausal bleeding diagnosis within 60 days of vaccination. COVID-19 vaccination, diagnostic procedures, and presumed bleeding etiology were assessed through chart review and described. A temporal scan statistic was run on all cases without clear bleeding etiology. RESULTS: In a population of 75,530 to 82,693 individuals per month, there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of incident postmenopausal bleeding diagnoses before and after COVID-19 vaccine introduction (P=.59). A total of 104 individuals had incident postmenopausal bleeding diagnosed within 60 days following COVID-19 vaccination; 76% of cases (79/104) were confirmed as postvaccination postmenopausal bleeding after chart review. Median time from vaccination to bleeding onset was 21 days (range: 2-54 days). Among the 56 postmenopausal bleeding cases with a provider-attributed etiology, the common causes of bleeding were uterine or cervical lesions (50% [28/56]), hormone replacement therapy (13% [7/56]), and proliferative endometrium (13% [7/56]). Among the 23 cases without a clear etiology, there was no statistically significant clustering of postmenopausal bleeding onset following vaccination. CONCLUSION: Within this integrated health system, introduction of COVID-19 vaccines was not associated with an increase in incident postmenopausal bleeding diagnoses. Diagnosis of postmenopausal bleeding in the 60 days following receipt of a COVID-19 vaccination was rare.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Humanos , Femenino , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/efectos adversos , Posmenopausia , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , COVID-19/complicaciones , Hemorragia Uterina/epidemiología , Hemorragia Uterina/etiología , Vacunación/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There is evidence suggesting that COVID-19 vaccination may be associated with small, transitory effects on uterine bleeding, possibly including menstrual timing, flow, and duration, in some individuals. However, changes in health care seeking, diagnosis, and workup for abnormal uterine bleeding in the COVID-19 vaccine era are less clear. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on incident abnormal uterine bleeding diagnosis and diagnostic evaluation in a large integrated health system. STUDY DESIGN: Using segmented regression, we assessed whether the availability of COVID-19 vaccines was associated with changes in monthly, population-based rates of incident abnormal uterine bleeding diagnoses relative to the prepandemic period in health system members aged 16 to 44 years who were not menopausal. We also compared clinical and demographic characteristics of patients diagnosed with incident abnormal uterine bleeding between December 2020 and October 13, 2021 by vaccination status (never vaccinated, vaccinated in the 60 days before diagnosis, vaccinated >60 days before diagnosis). Furthermore, we conducted detailed chart review of patients diagnosed with abnormal uterine bleeding within 1 to 60 days of COVID-19 vaccination in the same time period. RESULTS: In monthly populations ranging from 79,000 to 85,000 female health system members, incidence of abnormal uterine bleeding diagnosis per 100,000 person-days ranged from 8.97 to 19.19. There was no significant change in the level or trend in the incidence of abnormal uterine bleeding diagnoses between the prepandemic (January 2019-January 2020) and post-COVID-19 vaccine (December 2020-December 2021) periods. A comparison of clinical characteristics of 2717 abnormal uterine bleeding cases by vaccination status suggested that abnormal bleeding among recently vaccinated patients was similar or less severe than abnormal bleeding among patients who had never been vaccinated or those vaccinated >60 days before. There were also significant differences in age and race of patients with incident abnormal uterine bleeding diagnoses by vaccination status (Ps<.02). Never-vaccinated patients were the youngest and those vaccinated >60 days before were the oldest. The proportion of patients who were Black/African American was highest among never-vaccinated patients, and the proportion of Asian patients was higher among vaccinated patients. Chart review of 114 confirmed postvaccination abnormal uterine bleeding cases diagnosed from December 2020 through October 13, 2021 found that the most common symptoms reported were changes in timing, duration, and volume of bleeding. Approximately one-third of cases received no diagnostic workup; 57% had no etiology for the bleeding documented in the electronic health record. In 12% of cases, the patient mentioned or asked about a possible link between their bleeding and their recent COVID-19 vaccine. CONCLUSION: The availability of COVID-19 vaccination was not associated with a change in incidence of medically attended abnormal uterine bleeding in our population of over 79,000 female patients of reproductive age. In addition, among 2717 patients with abnormal uterine bleeding diagnoses in the period following COVID-19 vaccine availability, receipt of the vaccine was not associated with greater bleeding severity.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Hemorragia Uterina , Humanos , Femenino , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/efectos adversos , Adulto , Hemorragia Uterina/etiología , Adulto Joven , COVID-19/prevención & control , COVID-19/complicaciones , Adolescente , Incidencia , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacunación/efectos adversos , Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Vaccine-associated enhanced disease (VAED) is a theoretical concern with new vaccines, although trials of authorized vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have not identified markers for VAED. The purpose of this study was to detect any signals for VAED among adults vaccinated against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we assessed COVID-19 severity as a proxy for VAED among 400 adults hospitalized for COVID-19 from March through October 2021 at eight US healthcare systems. Primary outcomes were admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) and severe illness (score ≥6 on the World Health Organization [WHO] Clinical Progression Scale). We compared the risk of outcomes among those who had completed a COVID-19 vaccine primary series versus those who were unvaccinated. We incorporated inverse propensity weights for vaccination status in a doubly robust regression model to estimate the causal average treatment effect. RESULTS: The causal risk ratio in vaccinated versus unvaccinated was 0.36 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15-0.94) for ICU admission and 0.46 (95% CI, 0.25-0.76) for severe illness. CONCLUSION: Among hospitalized patients, reduced disease severity in those vaccinated against COVID-19 supports the absence of VAED.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Hospitalización , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Adulto , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , COVID-19/prevención & control , COVID-19/epidemiología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/efectos adversos , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , Estudios Transversales , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Vacunación/efectos adversosRESUMEN
Recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) (Shingrix; GlaxoSmithKline, Brentford, United Kingdom) is an adjuvanted glycoprotein vaccine that was licensed in 2017 to prevent herpes zoster (shingles) and its complications in older adults. In this prospective, postlicensure Vaccine Safety Datalink study using electronic health records, we sequentially monitored a real-world population of adults aged ≥50 years who received care in multiple US Vaccine Safety Datalink health systems to identify potentially increased risks of 10 prespecified health outcomes, including stroke, anaphylaxis, and Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS). Among 647,833 RZV doses administered from January 2018 through December 2019, we did not detect a sustained increased risk of any monitored outcome for RZV recipients relative to either historical (2013-2017) recipients of zoster vaccine live, a live attenuated virus vaccine (Zostavax; Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, New Jersey), or contemporary non-RZV vaccine recipients who had an annual well-person visit during the 2018-2019 study period. We confirmed prelicensure trial findings of increased risks of systemic and local reactions following RZV. Our study provides additional reassurance about the overall safety of RZV. Despite a large sample, uncertainty remains regarding potential associations with GBS due to the limited number of confirmed GBS cases that were observed.
Asunto(s)
Vacuna contra el Herpes Zóster , Herpes Zóster , Humanos , Anciano , Vacuna contra el Herpes Zóster/efectos adversos , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Estudios Prospectivos , Herpes Zóster/epidemiología , Herpes Zóster/prevención & control , Herpesvirus Humano 3 , Vacunas AtenuadasRESUMEN
In the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD), we previously reported no association between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination in early pregnancy and spontaneous abortion (SAB). The present study aims to understand how time since vaccine rollout or other methodological factors could affect results. Using a case-control design and generalized estimating equations, we estimated the odds ratios (ORs) of COVID-19 vaccination in the 28 days before a SAB or last date of the surveillance period (index date) in ongoing pregnancies and occurrence of SAB, across cumulative 4-week periods from December 2020 through June 2021. Using data from a single site, we evaluated alternative methodological approaches: increasing the exposure window to 42 days, modifying the index date from the last day to the midpoint of the surveillance period, and constructing a cohort design with a time-dependent exposure model. A protective effect (OR = 0.78, 95% confidence interval: 0.69, 0.89), observed with 3-cumulative periods ending March 8, 2021, was attenuated when surveillance extended to June 28, 2021 (OR = 1.02, 95% confidence interval: 0.96, 1.08). We observed a lower OR for a 42-day window compared with a 28-day window. The time-dependent model showed no association. Timing of the surveillance appears to be an important factor affecting the observed vaccine-SAB association.
Asunto(s)
Aborto Espontáneo , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Femenino , Humanos , Embarazo , Aborto Espontáneo/inducido químicamente , Aborto Espontáneo/epidemiología , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/efectos adversos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Vacunación/efectos adversosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Racial and ethnic disparities in influenza vaccination coverage among pregnant women in the United States have been documented. This study assessed the contribution of vaccine-related attitudes to coverage disparities. METHODS: Surveys were conducted following the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 influenza seasons in a US research network. Using electronic health record data to identify pregnant women, random samples were selected for surveying; non-Hispanic Black women and influenza-unvaccinated women were oversampled. Regression-based decomposition analyses were used to assess the contribution of vaccine-related attitudes to racial and ethnic differences in influenza vaccination. Data were combined across survey years, and analyses were weighted and accounted for survey design. RESULTS: Survey response rate was 41.2% (721 of 1748) for 2019-2020 and 39.3% (706 of 1798) for 2020-2021. Self-reported influenza vaccination was higher among non-Hispanic White respondents (79.4% coverage, 95% CI 73.1%-85.7%) than Hispanic (66.2% coverage, 95% CI 52.5%-79.9%) and non-Hispanic Black (55.8% coverage, 95% CI 50.2%-61.4%) respondents. For all racial and ethnic groups, a high proportion (generally >80%) reported being seen for care, recommended for influenza vaccination, and offered vaccination. In decomposition analyses, vaccine-related attitudes (e.g., worry about vaccination causing influenza; concern about vaccine safety and effectiveness) explained a statistically significant portion of the observed racial and ethnic disparities in vaccination. Maternal age, education, and health status were not significant contributors after controlling for vaccine-related attitudes. CONCLUSIONS: In a setting with relatively high influenza vaccination coverage among pregnant women, racial and ethnic disparities in coverage were identified. Vaccine-related attitudes were associated with the disparities observed.
Asunto(s)
Disparidades en Atención de Salud , Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Cobertura de Vacunación , Femenino , Humanos , Embarazo , Vacunas contra la Influenza/administración & dosificación , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Mujeres Embarazadas , Estados Unidos , Vacunación , Cobertura de Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Grupos Raciales , EtnicidadRESUMEN
We identified 10 women hospitalized with respiratory syncytial virus infection during pregnancy. Diagnoses included pneumonia/atelectasis (5), respiratory failure (2), and sepsis (2). Six had obstetrical complications during hospitalization, including 1 induced preterm birth. One required intensive care unit admission and mechanical ventilation. Four infants had complications at birth.
Asunto(s)
Nacimiento Prematuro , Infecciones por Virus Sincitial Respiratorio , Femenino , Hospitalización , Humanos , Lactante , Recién Nacido , Recien Nacido Prematuro , Embarazo , Mujeres Embarazadas , Nacimiento Prematuro/epidemiología , Infecciones por Virus Sincitial Respiratorio/complicaciones , Infecciones por Virus Sincitial Respiratorio/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
By September 21, 2021, an estimated 182 million persons in the United States were fully vaccinated against COVID-19.* Clinical trials indicate that Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273), and Janssen (Johnson & Johnson; Ad.26.COV2.S) vaccines are effective and generally well tolerated (1-3). However, daily vaccination rates have declined approximately 78% since April 13, 2021; vaccine safety concerns have contributed to vaccine hesitancy (4). A cohort study of 19,625 nursing home residents found that those who received an mRNA vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) had lower all-cause mortality than did unvaccinated residents (5), but no studies comparing mortality rates within the general population of vaccinated and unvaccinated persons have been conducted. To assess mortality not associated with COVID-19 (non-COVID-19 mortality) after COVID-19 vaccination in a general population setting, a cohort study was conducted during December 2020-July 2021 among approximately 11 million persons enrolled in seven Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) sites.§ After standardizing mortality rates by age and sex, this study found that COVID-19 vaccine recipients had lower non-COVID-19 mortality than did unvaccinated persons. After adjusting for demographic characteristics and VSD site, this study found that adjusted relative risk (aRR) of non-COVID-19 mortality for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was 0.41 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.38-0.44) after dose 1 and 0.34 (95% CI = 0.33-0.36) after dose 2. The aRRs of non-COVID-19 mortality for the Moderna vaccine were 0.34 (95% CI = 0.32-0.37) after dose 1 and 0.31 (95% CI = 0.30-0.33) after dose 2. The aRR after receipt of the Janssen vaccine was 0.54 (95% CI = 0.49-0.59). There is no increased risk for mortality among COVID-19 vaccine recipients. This finding reinforces the safety profile of currently approved COVID-19 vaccines in the United States.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , Mortalidad/tendencias , Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Niño , Prestación Integrada de Atención de Salud , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Riesgo , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
Importance: Safety surveillance of vaccines against COVID-19 is critical to ensure safety, maintain trust, and inform policy. Objectives: To monitor 23 serious outcomes weekly, using comprehensive health records on a diverse population. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study represents an interim analysis of safety surveillance data from Vaccine Safety Datalink. The 10â¯162â¯227 vaccine-eligible members of 8 participating US health plans were monitored with administrative data updated weekly and supplemented with medical record review for selected outcomes from December 14, 2020, through June 26, 2021. Exposures: Receipt of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) COVID-19 vaccination, with a risk interval of 21 days for individuals after vaccine dose 1 or 2 compared with an interval of 22 to 42 days for similar individuals after vaccine dose 1 or 2. Main Outcomes and Measures: Incidence of serious outcomes, including acute myocardial infarction, Bell palsy, cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, myocarditis/pericarditis, pulmonary embolism, stroke, and thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome. Incidence of events that occurred among vaccine recipients 1 to 21 days after either dose 1 or 2 of a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine was compared with that of vaccinated concurrent comparators who, on the same calendar day, had received their most recent dose 22 to 42 days earlier. Rate ratios (RRs) were estimated by Poisson regression, adjusted for age, sex, race and ethnicity, health plan, and calendar day. For a signal, a 1-sided P < .0048 was required to keep type I error below .05 during 2 years of weekly analyses. For 4 additional outcomes, including anaphylaxis, only descriptive analyses were conducted. Results: A total of 11â¯845â¯128 doses of mRNA vaccines (57% BNT162b2; 6â¯175â¯813 first doses and 5â¯669â¯315 second doses) were administered to 6.2 million individuals (mean age, 49 years; 54% female individuals). The incidence of events per 1â¯000â¯000 person-years during the risk vs comparison intervals for ischemic stroke was 1612 vs 1781 (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.87-1.08); for appendicitis, 1179 vs 1345 (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.73-0.93); and for acute myocardial infarction, 935 vs 1030 (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.89-1.18). No vaccine-outcome association met the prespecified requirement for a signal. Incidence of confirmed anaphylaxis was 4.8 (95% CI, 3.2-6.9) per million doses of BNT162b2 and 5.1 (95% CI, 3.3-7.6) per million doses of mRNA-1273. Conclusions and Relevance: In interim analyses of surveillance of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, incidence of selected serious outcomes was not significantly higher 1 to 21 days postvaccination compared with 22 to 42 days postvaccination. While CIs were wide for many outcomes, surveillance is ongoing.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19/efectos adversos , Vacuna nCoV-2019 mRNA-1273 , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anafilaxia/epidemiología , Anafilaxia/etiología , Vacuna BNT162 , Niño , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Miocarditis/epidemiología , Miocarditis/etiología , Vigilancia en Salud Pública , Factores de Tiempo , Vacunas Sintéticas/efectos adversos , Adulto Joven , Vacunas de ARNmRESUMEN
Pregnant women might be at increased risk for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), possibly related to changes in their immune system and respiratory physiology* (1). Further, adverse birth outcomes, such as preterm delivery and stillbirth, might be more common among pregnant women infected with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 (2,3). Information about SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy is rapidly growing; however, data on reasons for hospital admission, pregnancy-specific characteristics, and birth outcomes among pregnant women hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 infections are limited. During March 1-May 30, 2020, as part of Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) surveillance of COVID-19 hospitalizations, 105 hospitalized pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection were identified, including 62 (59%) hospitalized for obstetric reasons (i.e., labor and delivery or another pregnancy-related indication) and 43 (41%) hospitalized for COVID-19 illness without an obstetric reason. Overall, 50 (81%) of 62 pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection who were admitted for obstetric reasons were asymptomatic. Among 43 pregnant women hospitalized for COVID-19, 13 (30%) required intensive care unit (ICU) admission, six (14%) required mechanical ventilation, and one died from COVID-19. Prepregnancy obesity was more common (44%) among pregnant women hospitalized for COVID-19 than that among asymptomatic pregnant women hospitalized for obstetric reasons (31%). Likewise, the rate of gestational diabetes (26%) among pregnant women hospitalized for COVID-19 was higher than it was among women hospitalized for obstetric reasons (8%). Preterm delivery occurred in 15% of pregnancies among 93 women who delivered, and stillbirths (fetal death at ≥20 weeks' gestation) occurred in 3%. Antenatal counseling emphasizing preventive measures (e.g., use of masks, frequent hand washing, and social distancing) might help prevent COVID-19 among pregnant women,§ especially those with prepregnancy obesity and gestational diabetes, which might reduce adverse pregnancy outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Infecciones por Coronavirus/terapia , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Neumonía Viral/diagnóstico , Neumonía Viral/terapia , Complicaciones Infecciosas del Embarazo/terapia , Complicaciones Infecciosas del Embarazo/virología , Adolescente , Adulto , COVID-19 , Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Femenino , Instituciones de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pandemias , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , Embarazo , Complicaciones Infecciosas del Embarazo/epidemiología , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
PURPOSE: The need to develop methods for studying the safety of childhood immunization schedules has been recognized by the Institute of Medicine and Department of Health and Human Services. The recommended childhood immunization schedule includes multiple vaccines in a visit. A key concern is safety of concomitant (same day) versus separate day vaccination. This paper addresses a methodological challenge for observational studies using a self-controlled design to investigate the safety of concomitant vaccination. METHODS: We propose a process for distinguishing which of several concomitantly administered vaccines is responsible for increased risk of an adverse event while adjusting for confounding due to relationships between effect modifying risk factors and concomitant vaccine combinations. We illustrate the approach by re-examining the known increase in risk of seizure 7 to 10 days after measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccination and evaluating potential independent or modifying effects of other vaccines. RESULTS: Initial analyses suggested that DTaP had both an independent and potentiating effect on seizure. After accounting for the relationship between age at vaccination and vaccine combination, there was little evidence for increased risk of seizure with same day administration of DTaP and MMR; incidence rate ratio, 95% confidence interval 1.2 (0.9-1.6), P value = θ.226. CONCLUSION: We have shown that when using a self-controlled design to investigate safety of concomitant vaccination, it can be critically important to adjust for time-invariant effect modifying risk factors, such as age at time of vaccination, which are structurally related to vaccination patterns due to recommended immunization schedules.
Asunto(s)
Vacuna contra Difteria, Tétanos y Tos Ferina/efectos adversos , Esquemas de Inmunización , Vacuna contra el Sarampión-Parotiditis-Rubéola/efectos adversos , Convulsiones/epidemiología , Vacunación/efectos adversos , Factores de Edad , Factores de Confusión Epidemiológicos , Vacuna contra Difteria, Tétanos y Tos Ferina/administración & dosificación , Registros Electrónicos de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Humanos , Lactante , Masculino , Vacuna contra el Sarampión-Parotiditis-Rubéola/administración & dosificación , Estudios Observacionales como Asunto/métodos , Proyectos de Investigación , Convulsiones/inducido químicamente , Factores de Tiempo , Vacunación/métodosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Although current rotavirus vaccines were not associated with an increased risk of intussusception in large trials before licensure, recent postlicensure data from international settings suggest the possibility of a small increase in risk of intussusception after monovalent rotavirus vaccination. We examined this risk in a population in the United States. METHODS: Participants were infants between the ages of 4 and 34 weeks who were enrolled in six integrated health care organizations in the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) project. We reviewed medical records and visits for intussusception within 7 days after monovalent rotavirus vaccination from April 2008 through March 2013. Using sequential analyses, we then compared the risk of intussusception among children receiving monovalent rotavirus vaccine with historical background rates. We further compared the risk after monovalent rotavirus vaccination with the risk in a concurrent cohort of infants who received the pentavalent rotavirus vaccine. RESULTS: During the study period, 207,955 doses of monovalent rotavirus vaccine (including 115,908 first doses and 92,047 second doses) were administered in the VSD population. We identified 6 cases of intussusception within 7 days after the administration of either dose of vaccine. For the two doses combined, the expected number of intussusception cases was 0.72, resulting in a significant relative risk of 8.4. For the pentavalent rotavirus vaccine, 1,301,810 doses were administered during the study period, with 8 observed intussusception cases (7.11 expected), for a nonsignificant relative risk of 1.1. The relative risk of chart-confirmed intussusception within 7 days after monovalent rotavirus vaccination, as compared with the risk after pentavalent rotavirus vaccination, was 9.4 (95% confidence interval, 1.4 to 103.8). The attributable risk of intussusception after the administration of two doses of monovalent rotavirus vaccine was estimated to be 5.3 per 100,000 infants vaccinated. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective postlicensure study of more than 200,000 doses of monovalent rotavirus vaccine, we observed a significant increase in the rate of intussusception after vaccination, a risk that must be weighed against the benefits of preventing rotavirus-associated illness. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.).
Asunto(s)
Intususcepción/etiología , Vacunas contra Rotavirus/efectos adversos , Estudios de Cohortes , Humanos , Inmunización Secundaria , Lactante , Intususcepción/epidemiología , Distribución de Poisson , Riesgo , Estados Unidos , Vacunas Atenuadas/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Pneumonia poses a significant burden to the U.S. health-care system. However, there are few data focusing on severe pneumonia, particularly cases of pneumonia associated with specialized care in intensive care units (ICU). METHODS: We used administrative and electronic medical record data from six integrated health care systems to estimate rates of pneumonia hospitalizations with ICU admissions among adults during 2006 through 2010. Pneumonia hospitalization was defined as either a primary discharge diagnosis of pneumonia or a primary discharge diagnosis of sepsis or respiratory failure with a secondary diagnosis of pneumonia in administrative data. ICU admissions were collected from internal electronic medical records from each system. Comorbidities were identified by ICD-9-CM codes coded during the current pneumonia hospitalization, as well as during medical visits that occurred during the year prior to the date of admission. RESULTS: We identified 119,537 adult hospitalizations meeting our definition for pneumonia. Approximately 19% of adult pneumonia hospitalizations had an ICU admission. The rate of pneumonia hospitalizations requiring ICU admission during the study period was 76 per 100,000 population/year; rates increased for each age-group with the highest rates among adults aged ≥85 years. Having a co-morbidity approximately doubled the risk of ICU admission in all age-groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates a significant burden of pneumonia hospitalizations with an ICU admission among adults in our cohort during 2006 through 2010, especially older age-groups and persons with underlying medical conditions. These findings reinforce current strategies aimed to prevent pneumonia among adults.
Asunto(s)
Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Neumonía/epidemiología , Adolescente , Adulto , Distribución por Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios de Cohortes , Comorbilidad , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Femenino , Humanos , Clasificación Internacional de Enfermedades , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Análisis Multivariante , Factores de Riesgo , Distribución por Sexo , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is a potentially life-threatening allergic reaction. The risk of anaphylaxis after vaccination has not been well described in adults or with newer vaccines in children. OBJECTIVE: We sought to estimate the incidence of anaphylaxis after vaccines and describe the demographic and clinical characteristics of confirmed cases of anaphylaxis. METHODS: Using health care data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink, we determined rates of anaphylaxis after vaccination in children and adults. We first identified all patients with a vaccination record from January 2009 through December 2011 and used diagnostic and procedure codes to identify potential anaphylaxis cases. Medical records of potential cases were reviewed. Confirmed cases met the Brighton Collaboration definition for anaphylaxis and had to be determined to be vaccine triggered. We calculated the incidence of anaphylaxis after all vaccines combined and for selected individual vaccines. RESULTS: We identified 33 confirmed vaccine-triggered anaphylaxis cases that occurred after 25,173,965 vaccine doses. The rate of anaphylaxis was 1.31 (95% CI, 0.90-1.84) per million vaccine doses. The incidence did not vary significantly by age, and there was a nonsignificant female predominance. Vaccine-specific rates included 1.35 (95% CI, 0.65-2.47) per million doses for inactivated trivalent influenza vaccine (10 cases, 7,434,628 doses given alone) and 1.83 (95% CI, 0.22-6.63) per million doses for inactivated monovalent influenza vaccine (2 cases, 1,090,279 doses given alone). The onset of symptoms among cases was within 30 minutes (8 cases), 30 to less than 120 minutes (8 cases), 2 to less than 4 hours (10 cases), 4 to 8 hours (2 cases), the next day (1 case), and not documented (4 cases). CONCLUSION: Anaphylaxis after vaccination is rare in all age groups. Despite its rarity, anaphylaxis is a potentially life-threatening medical emergency that vaccine providers need to be prepared to treat.
Asunto(s)
Anafilaxia/epidemiología , Anafilaxia/etiología , Vacunación/efectos adversos , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Niño , Preescolar , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Riesgo , Vacunas/efectos adversos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
IMPORTANCE: The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends the tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine for pregnant women during each pregnancy, regardless of prior immunization status. However, safety data on repeated Tdap vaccination in pregnancy is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether receipt of Tdap vaccine during pregnancy administered in close intervals from prior tetanus-containing vaccinations is associated with acute adverse events in mothers and adverse birth outcomes in neonates. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective cohort study in 29,155 pregnant women aged 14 through 49 years from January 1, 2007, through November 15, 2013, using data from 7 Vaccine Safety Datalink sites in California, Colorado, Minnesota, Oregon, Washington, and Wisconsin. EXPOSURES: Women who received Tdap in pregnancy following a prior tetanus-containing vaccine less than 2 years before, 2 to 5 years before, and more than 5 years before. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Acute adverse events (fever, allergy, and local reactions) and adverse birth outcomes (small for gestational age, preterm delivery, and low birth weight) were evaluated. Women who were vaccinated with Tdap in pregnancy and had a prior tetanus-containing vaccine more than 5 years before served as controls. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in rates of medically attended acute adverse events or adverse birth outcomes related to timing since prior tetanus-containing vaccination. [table: see text]. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among women who received Tdap vaccination during pregnancy, there was no increased risk of acute adverse events or adverse birth outcomes for those who had been previously vaccinated less than 2 years before or 2 to 5 years before compared with those who had been vaccinated more than 5 years before. These findings suggest that relatively recent receipt of a prior tetanus-containing vaccination does not increase risk after Tdap vaccination in pregnancy.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra Difteria, Tétanos y Tos Ferina Acelular/administración & dosificación , Atención Prenatal/normas , Toxoide Tetánico/administración & dosificación , Vacunación/métodos , Adolescente , Adulto , Estudios de Cohortes , Vacunas contra Difteria, Tétanos y Tos Ferina Acelular/efectos adversos , Femenino , Humanos , Recién Nacido , Recién Nacido Pequeño para la Edad Gestacional , Persona de Mediana Edad , Embarazo , Nacimiento Prematuro , Estudios Retrospectivos , Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Vaccination is associated with syncope in adolescents. However, incidence of vaccine-associated syncope and resulting injury, and how it compares to syncope incidence following other medical procedures, is not known. Here, we describe the incidence of syncope and syncope-related injury in adolescents following vaccination and routine venipuncture. METHODS: We identified all Kaiser Permanente Northwest members ages 9-18 years with a vaccination or routine venipuncture and a same-day International Classification of Diseases diagnosis of syncope from 2013 through 2019. All cases were chart reviewed to establish chronology of events (vaccination, venipuncture, syncope, and injury, as applicable) and to attribute cause to vaccination or venipuncture. Incidence rates for vaccine-associated and venipuncture-associated syncope were calculated overall, by sex and age group. Syncope events resulting in injury were assessed for each event type. RESULTS: Of 197,642 vaccination and 12,246 venipuncture events identified, 549 vaccination and 67 venipuncture events had same-day syncope codes. Chart validation confirmed 59/549 (10.7%) events as vaccine-associated syncope, for a rate of 2.99 per 10,000 vaccination events (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.27-3.85) and 20/67 (29.9%) events as venipuncture-associated syncope, for a rate of 16.33 per 10,000 venipuncture events (95% CI: 9.98-25.21). The incidence rate ratio of vaccine-associated to venipuncture-associated syncope events was 0.18 (95% CI: 0.11-0.31). The incidence of vaccine-associated syncope increased with each additional simultaneously administered vaccine, from 1.51 per 10,000 vaccination events (95% CI: 0.93-2.30) following a single vaccine to 9.94 per 10,000 vaccination events (95% CI: 6.43-14.67) following three or more vaccines. Syncope resulted in injury in about 15% of both vaccine and venipuncture events. DISCUSSION: Syncope occurs more commonly following venipuncture than vaccination. The number of simultaneously administered vaccines is a risk factor for postvaccination syncope in adolescents.
Asunto(s)
Flebotomía , Síncope , Vacunación , Adolescente , Humanos , Incidencia , Flebotomía/efectos adversos , Síncope/etiología , Síncope/complicaciones , Vacunación/efectos adversos , VacunasRESUMEN
Importance: COVID-19 vaccination is recommended throughout pregnancy to prevent pregnancy complications and adverse birth outcomes associated with COVID-19 disease. To date, data on birth defects after first-trimester vaccination are limited. Objective: To evaluate the associated risks for selected major structural birth defects among live-born infants after first-trimester receipt of a messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccine. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective cohort study of singleton pregnancies with estimated last menstrual period (LMP) between September 13, 2020, and April 3, 2021, and ending in live birth from March 5, 2021, to January 25, 2022. Included were data from 8 health systems in California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Minnesota, and Wisconsin in the Vaccine Safety Datalink. Exposures: Receipt of 1 or 2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses in the first trimester, as part of the primary series. Main Outcomes and Measures: Selected major structural birth defects among live-born infants, identified from electronic health data using validated algorithms, with neural tube defects confirmed via medical record review. Results: Among 42â¯156 eligible pregnancies (mean [SD] maternal age, 30.9 [5.0] years) 7632 (18.1%) received an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in the first trimester. Of 34â¯524 pregnancies without a first-trimester COVID-19 vaccination, 2045 (5.9%) were vaccinated before pregnancy, 13â¯494 (39.1%) during the second or third trimester, and 18â¯985 (55.0%) were unvaccinated before or during pregnancy. Compared with pregnant people unvaccinated in the first trimester, those vaccinated in the first trimester were older (mean [SD] age, 32.3 [4.5] years vs 30.6 [5.1] years) and differed by LMP date. After applying stabilized inverse probability weighting, differences in baseline characteristics between vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant persons in the first trimester were negligible (standardized mean difference <0.20). Selected major structural birth defects occurred in 113 infants (1.48%) after first-trimester mRNA COVID-19 vaccination and in 488 infants (1.41%) without first-trimester vaccine exposure; the adjusted prevalence ratio was 1.02 (95% CI, 0.78-1.33). In secondary analyses, with major structural birth defect outcomes grouped by organ system, no significant differences between infants vaccinated or unvaccinated in the first trimester were identified. Conclusions and Relevance: In this multisite cohort study, among live-born infants, first-trimester mRNA COVID-19 vaccine exposure was not associated with an increased risk for selected major structural birth defects.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Primer Trimestre del Embarazo , Humanos , Femenino , Embarazo , Estudios Retrospectivos , Adulto , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/efectos adversos , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , COVID-19/prevención & control , COVID-19/epidemiología , Recién Nacido , Anomalías Congénitas/epidemiología , Anomalías Congénitas/prevención & control , Nacimiento Vivo/epidemiología , Vacunación/efectos adversos , Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Although previous studies found no-increased mortality risk after COVID-19 vaccination, residual confounding bias might have impacted the findings. Using a modified self-controlled case series (SCCS) design, we assessed the risk of non-COVID-19 mortality, all-cause mortality, and four cardiac-related death outcomes after primary series COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: We analyzed all deaths between December 14, 2020, and August 11, 2021, among individuals from eight Vaccine Safety Datalink sites. Demographic characteristics of deaths in recipients of COVID-19 vaccines and unvaccinated individuals were reported. We conducted SCCS analyses by vaccine type and death outcomes and reported relative incidences (RI). The observation period for death spanned from the dates of emergency use authorization to the end of the study period (August 11, 2021) without censoring the observation period upon death. We pre-specified a primary risk interval of 28-day and a secondary risk interval of 14-day after each vaccination dose. Adjusting for seasonality in mortality analyses is crucial because death rates vary over time. Deaths among unvaccinated individuals were included in SCCS analyses to account for seasonality by incorporating calendar month in the models. RESULTS: For Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2), RIs of non-COVID-19 mortality, all-cause mortality, and four cardiac-related death outcomes were below 1 and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) excluded 1 across both doses and both risk intervals. For Moderna (mRNA-1273), RI point estimates of all outcomes were below 1, although the 95 % CIs of two RI estimates included 1: cardiac-related (RI = 0.78, 95 % CI, 0.58-1.04) and non-COVID-19 cardiac-related mortality (RI = 0.80, 95 % CI, 0.60-1.08) 14 days after the second dose in individuals without pre-existing cancer and heart disease. For Janssen (Ad26.COV2.S), RIs of four cardiac-related death outcomes ranged from 0.94 to 0.98 for the 14-day risk interval, and 0.68 to 0.72 for the 28-day risk interval and 95 % CIs included 1. CONCLUSION: Using a modified SCCS design and adjusting for temporal trends, no-increased risk was found for non-COVID-19 mortality, all-cause mortality, and four cardiac-related death outcomes among recipients of the three COVID-19 vaccines used in the US.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Humanos , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/efectos adversos , Ad26COVS1 , Vacuna BNT162 , COVID-19/prevención & control , Proyectos de Investigación , Vacunación/efectos adversosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To assess the validity of electronic health record (EHR)-based influenza vaccination data among adults in a multistate network. METHODS: Following the 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 influenza seasons, surveys were conducted among a random sample of adults who did or did not appear influenza-vaccinated (per EHR data) during the influenza season. Participants were asked to report their influenza vaccination status; self-report was treated as the criterion standard. Results were combined across survey years. RESULTS: Survey response rate was 44.7% (777 of 1740) for the 2018-2019 influenza season and 40.5% (505 of 1246) for the 2019-2020 influenza season. The sensitivity of EHR-based influenza vaccination data was 75.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 68.1, 81.1), specificity 98.4% (95% CI 92.9, 99.9), and negative predictive value 73.9% (95% CI 68.0, 79.3). CONCLUSIONS: In a multistate research network across two recent influenza seasons, there was moderate concordance between EHR-based vaccination data and self-report.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Adulto , Humanos , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Autoinforme , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Vacunación , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Estaciones del AñoRESUMEN
Importance: People with HIV (PWH) may be at increased risk for severe outcomes with COVID-19 illness compared with people without HIV. Little is known about COVID-19 vaccination coverage and factors associated with primary series completion among PWH. Objectives: To evaluate COVID-19 vaccination coverage among PWH and examine sociodemographic, clinical, and community-level factors associated with completion of the primary series and an additional primary dose. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used electronic health record data to assess COVID-19 vaccination information from December 14, 2020, through April 30, 2022, from 8 health care organizations of the Vaccine Safety Datalink project in the US. Participants were adults diagnosed with HIV on or before December 14, 2020, enrolled in a participating site. Main Outcomes and Measures: The percentage of PWH with at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine and PWH who completed the COVID-19 vaccine primary series by December 31, 2021, and an additional primary dose by April 30, 2022. Rate ratios (RR) and 95% CIs were estimated using Poisson regression models for factors associated with completing the COVID-19 vaccine primary series and receiving an additional primary dose. Results: Among 22â¯058 adult PWH (mean [SD] age, 52.1 [13.3] years; 88.8% male), 90.5% completed the primary series by December 31, 2021. Among 18â¯374 eligible PWH who completed the primary series by August 12, 2021, 15â¯982 (87.0%) received an additional primary dose, and 4318 (23.5%) received a booster dose by April 30, 2022. Receipt of influenza vaccines in the last 2 years was associated with completion of the primary series (RR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.15-1.20) and an additional primary dose (RR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.54-1.69). PWH with uncontrolled viremia (HIV viral load ≥200 copies/mL) (eg, RR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.85-0.95] for viral load 200-10â¯000 copies/mL vs undetected or <200 copies/mL for completing the primary series) and Medicaid insurance (eg, RR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.87-0.90] for completing the primary series) were less likely to be fully vaccinated. By contrast, greater outpatient utilization (eg, RR, 1.07 [95% CI, 1.05-1.09] for ≥7 vs 0 visits for primary series completion) and residence in counties with higher COVID-19 vaccine coverage (eg, RR, 1.06 [95% CI, 1.03-1.08] for fourth vs first quartiles for primary series completion) were associated with primary series and additional dose completion (RRs ranging from 1.01 to 1.21). Conclusions and Relevance: Findings from this cohort study suggest that, while COVID-19 vaccination coverage was high among PWH, outreach efforts should focus on those who did not complete vaccine series and those who have uncontrolled viremia.