ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: We examined adverse event (AE) reports relating to cabotegravir/rilpivirine (CAB/RPV) in the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS), focusing on therapeutic failure (TF) and non-therapeutic failure (NTF) outcomes. METHODS: FAERS is a database of AE and medication error reports from post-marketing surveillance. The study was granted exempt approval by the Binghamton University Institutional Review Board. We queried reports for CAB/RPV in the FAERS system from 1 January 2021 to 31 March 2024. TFs were defined as involving any of the following terms: viral load increased, virological failure, pathogen resistance, blood HIV RNA increased, treatment failure, drug ineffective, viral mutation identified, viraemia, and therapy non-responder. The top 20 most common AEs were also identified. Means, standard deviations, and percentages were used to characterize the sample. RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 2605 reports. The reported sex of the study cohort was 50% male (n = 1295), 19% female (n = 505), and 31% unspecified (n = 805), with a mean ± standard deviation (SD) age of 46.9 ± 12.4 years (n = 378). The top three most reported AEs were TFs, product dose omissions, and injection site pain, with 377 (14.5%), 354 (13.6%), and 331 (12.7%) cases, respectively. The mean ± SD weight of people with a report of TF versus NTF was 101.8 ± 33.4 kg and 87.7 ± 26.7 kg, respectively (p = 0.0175). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that healthcare professionals should have a heightened awareness of potential challenges with CAB/RPV administration, including TFs and dose omissions in real-world settings.
ABSTRACT
The serious nature of post-vaccination anaphylaxis requires healthcare professionals to be adequately trained to respond to these hypersensitivity emergencies. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes reported with cases of vaccine anaphylaxis stratified by administration setting. We queried reports in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database from 2017 to 2022 and identified cases involving anaphylaxis with an onset within one day of vaccine administration. The primary outcome was the combined prevalence of death or disability for each setting while the secondary outcome was the prevalence of hospitalization. Adjusted (age, sex, prior history of allergy, vaccine type) odds ratios (aOR) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using logistic regression analysis. A total of 2041 cases of anaphylaxis comprised the primary study cohort with representation in the sample from all 50 US states and the District of Columbia. The mean age was 43.3 ± 17.5 years, and most cases involved women (79.9%). Cases of anaphylaxis were reported after receiving a coronavirus vaccine (85.2%), influenza vaccine (5.9%), tetanus vaccine (2.2%), zoster vaccine (1.6%), measles vaccine (0.7%), and other vaccine (4.5%). Outcomes associated with reports of vaccine anaphylaxis included 35 cases of death and disability and 219 hospitalizations. Compared with all other settings, the aOR of death and disability when anaphylaxis occurred was 1.92 (95% CI, 0.86-4.54) in a medical provider's office, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.26-2.43) in a pharmacy and 1.01 (95% CI, 0.15-3.94) in a public health clinic. Compared with all other settings, the aOR of hospitalization when anaphylaxis occurred was 1.02 (95% CI, 0.71-1.47) in a medical provider's office, 1.06 (95% CI, 0.72-1.54) in a pharmacy, and 1.12 (95% CI, 0.61-1.93) in a public health clinic. An analysis of a national database across six years revealed no significant differences in the odds of death/disability and odds of hospitalization associated with post-vaccination anaphylaxis in the medical office, pharmacy, and public health clinic compared with all other settings. This study expands our understanding of the safety of immunization services and reinforces that all settings must be prepared to respond to such an emergency.