Nephrotic syndrome following four-component meningococcal B vaccination: Epidemiologic investigation of a surveillance signal.

BACKGROUND: In May 2014, a mass vaccination campaign with four-component meningococcal serogroup B (4CMenB) vaccine was launched in a localized region of Quebec, Canada experiencing high invasive meningococcal B disease endemicity. Active post-marketing surveillance identified several cases of nephrotic syndrome (NS) among ∼49,000 vaccinated individuals aged 2 months to 20 years. We report the epidemiologic investigation of this potential vaccine safety signal. METHODS: Active vaccine safety surveillance was conducted electronically, with participants completing an online questionnaire prompted at 7 days after each dose and 6 months following the last dose. Additional NS cases were sought from provincial hospitalization and emergency room databases. RESULTS: In the year following the first dose of 4CMenB vaccination, four confirmed NS cases (three hospitalized) were identified among vaccinated children 2-5-years-old with onset several months post-vaccination. None had renal biopsy but given their age, and positive response to steroids, idiopathic NS was presumptively diagnosed. Among vaccinated children 1-9-years-old, the NS incidence in the year post-vaccination was 17.7 per 100,000 (1 per 5650 vaccinees) with an NS hospitalization rate (i.e. excluding the outpatient case) that was 3.6-fold higher (95%CI = 0.7-11.8; p = 0.12) than the rest of the province for the same period, and 8.3-fold greater (95%CI = 1.1-62.0; p = 0.039) than during the eight years preceding the immunization campaign in the affected region. CONCLUSION: Active safety surveillance identified an unexpected increase in NS incidence following 4CMenB vaccination. Further epidemiological investigation identified four vaccinated cases in total over a 12 month period of follow up. The greater risk in vaccinees had wide confidence intervals with he lower limit including or just above the nul value, an observation with no or marginal statistical significance. The temporal association with vaccination may be explained by other causes and/or chance clustering of a rare event unrelated to vaccination. To confirm or refute a potential link to vaccination, surveillance in other jurisdictions administering 4CMenB to children 1-9-years-old is needed.

Short-term safety of 4CMenB vaccine during a mass meningococcal B vaccination campaign in Quebec, Canada.

BACKGROUND: To address a high incidence of serogroup B invasive meningococcal disease (IMD-B) in the Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean region, Quebec, Canada, a mass vaccination campaign targeting nearly 60,000 individuals ≤20 years old was launched in May 2014. Because of the limited clinical experience with the four-component meningococcal B vaccine (4CMenB), active surveillance for adverse events following immunization (AEFI) was conducted. This paper reports 4CMenB AEFI surveillance findings. METHODS: Active surveillance assessed AEFIs with acute onset within 7-days post-immunization, AEFI-associated absenteeism and medical consultations, impact of antipyretic prophylaxis and coadministration of other vaccines. RESULTS: By July 17, 2015, 83% and 77% of the 59,098 individuals targeted by the campaign had received a first and a second dose of 4CMenB. The incidence of fever on days1-2 was highest in children <2 years old but only 0.6% reported a temperature ≥40◦C. Among children <10 years old, ≥2doses of acetaminophen prophylaxis significantly reduced fever incidence on days1-2 after dose1&2. Absenteeism or a medical consultation during the 7 days following vaccination was reported by 6.2% of vaccinees post-dose1 and 9.2% post-dose2 and was most often reported in association with fever/malaise (4.2%) or injection site reactions (3.6%). CONCLUSION: Large-scale population-based surveillance identified a 7-day reactogenicity profile consistent with earlier clinical trials with the 4CMenB vaccine but indicating frequent AEFI-associated absenteeism and medical consultations affecting the societal cost of this vaccine. We conclude acceptable vaccine safety and risk-benefit profile overall on the short term, particularly as an intervention to address a high regional incidence of IMD-B.

Prevalence of risk factors for acquiring measles during the 2011 outbreak in Quebec and impact of the province-wide school-based vaccination campaign on population immunity.

BACKGROUND: A large measles outbreak occurred in Quebec, Canada, in 2011. Although nearly two-thirds of the cases occurred in only two health districts, a mass vaccination campaign targeting all Quebec elementary and high school students without valid two-dose history was undertaken to prevent future outbreaks. We compared rates of non-vaccination and age at first measles vaccine dose among students in the two most-affected districts and the rest of the province and estimated the improvement in overall student measles immunity due to the mass school-based vaccination campaign. METHODS: Data were extracted from the provincial vaccination registry for students in kindergarten to grade 11 during the 2011/2012 school year. A telephone survey was conducted in three sub-groups: students whose first measles vaccine dose recorded in the vaccination registry was received during the 2011 school vaccination campaign; students with no dose recorded in the registry whose parents refused receipt during the school campaign; and students with no dose recorded in the registry and no information about parental consent/refusal during the school campaign. RESULTS: Neither the prevalence of being non-vaccinated nor a younger age at first pediatric dose were higher in the two most-affected districts versus the rest of the province. The school campaign vaccinated nearly 8% of all students including 7% who previously received at least one dose. Before the outbreak, 3% of students were not vaccinated and one-third of these (1%/3%) were vaccinated during the campaign. The campaign likely increased the absolute school population immunity by just 1.7%. CONCLUSION: The concentration of measles cases in the two most-affected health districts during the large Quebec outbreak is not explained by more students who were unvaccinated or who had received their first vaccine dose at a younger age. The vaccination campaign reached one-third of unvaccinated students and only marginally improved population immunity.

Risk of Recurrence of Adverse Events Following Immunization: A Systematic Review.

CONTEXT: Reimmunizing patients who had an adverse event following immunization (AEFI) is sometimes a challenge because there are limited data on the risk and severity of AEFI recurrence. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the literature on the risk of AEFI recurrence. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library. STUDY SELECTION: We included articles in English or French published before September 30, 2016. Articles were selected if they estimated the risk of AEFI recurrence in at least 5 individuals. Studies with experimental vaccines were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION: Data on study design, setting, population, vaccines, and AEFI recurrence were extracted. RESULTS: Twenty-nine articles were included. Among patients with a history of hypotonic hyporesponsive episode (n = 398), anaphylaxis (n = 133), or seizures (n = 60) who were reimmunized, events recurred in 0% to 0.8%. Allergic-like events recurred in 30 of 594 reimmunized patients. Fever recurred in 0% to 84% of 836 reimmunized patients, depending on the vaccine and dose number. Among children with extensive limb swelling after the fourth dose of diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis vaccine, recurrence was higher when the fifth dose was given withthe full-antigen formulation (78%) compared with the reduced-antigen formulation (53%, P = .02) LIMITATIONS: Many studies, included few patients, and those with severe AEFIs were often not reimmunized. CONCLUSIONS: Despite vaccines being administered to millions of people annually, there are few studies in which researchers evaluated AEFI recurrence. Published studies suggest that reimmunization is usually safe. However in these studies, severe cases were often not reimmunized.

Clinical Approach Used in Medical Consultations for Allergic-Like Events Following Immunization: Case Series Report in Relation to Practice Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: The Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters (JTFPP) guidelines for the investigation and reimmunization of patients who experienced allergic-like events (ALEs) after immunization are predicated on the likelihood of anaphylaxis, assessed through the time to symptom onset (≤ or >4 hours) and number of systems involved. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to compare the management of a series of patients with ALE in actual practice relative to JTFPP guidelines and to discuss key concepts and considerations in their use. METHODS: This retrospective study was based on a chart review of patients who consulted for suspected vaccine-associated ALEs at a large allergy department in Canada. RESULTS: Only 3 of the 135 patients who presented ALEs after immunization were referred for suspected anaphylaxis. There was no significant difference in the frequency of skin testing or reimmunization of patients whatever the time to symptom onset or number of systems involved in the ALE. Eight patients whose initial ALE occurred within 1 hour after immunization had a recurrence on reimmunization. Another patient whose initial ALE occurred 10 hours after influenza immunization had throat tightening and difficulty swallowing without objective signs. CONCLUSIONS: Most ALEs after immunization are not suggestive of anaphylaxis and should not be managed as such. The definition of anaphylaxis in the JTFPP guidelines is nonspecific and may need to be revisited. Restricting skin testing and graded dose reimmunization to patients whose ALE onset is ≤1 hour (compatible with IgE-mediated reaction) and to those meeting specific clinical criteria for anaphylaxis (whatever the timing) is likely a sufficiently sensitive and cautious approach.

Immunizing Patients With Adverse Events After Immunization and Potential Contraindications to Immunization: A Report From the Special Immunization Clinics Network.

BACKGROUND: For patients who have experienced adverse events following immunization (AEFI) or who have specific medical conditions, there is limited evidence regarding the best approach to immunization. The Special Immunization Clinics (SICs) Network was established to standardize patient management and assess outcomes after reimmunization. The study objective was to describe the first 2 years of the network's implementation. METHODS: Twelve SICs were established across Canada by infectious diseases specialists and allergists. Inclusion criteria were as follows: local reaction ≥ 10 cm, allergic symptoms < 24 hours postimmunization, neurologic symptoms and other AEFI or medical conditions of concern. Eligible patients underwent a standardized evaluation, causality assessment was performed, immunization recommendations were made by expert physicians and patients were followed up to capture AEFI. After individual consent, data were transferred to a central database for analysis. RESULTS: From June 2013 to May 2015, 151 patients were enrolled. Most were referred for prior AEFI (132/151, 87%): 42 (32%) for allergic-like reactions, 31 (23%) for injection-site reactions, 20 (15%) for neurologic symptoms and 39 (30%) for other systemic symptoms. Nineteen patients (13%) were seen for underlying conditions that complicated immunization. Reimmunization was recommended for 109 patients, 60 of whom (55%) were immunized and followed up. Eleven patients (18%) experienced recurrence of their AEFI; none were serious (eg, resulting in hospitalization, permanent disability or death). CONCLUSIONS: The most frequent reasons for referral to a SIC were allergic-like events and injection site reactions. Reimmunization was safe in most patients. Larger studies are needed to determine outcomes for specific types of AEFI.

Short and long-term safety of the 2009 AS03-adjuvanted pandemic vaccine.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed the short and the long term safety of the 2009 AS03 adjuvanted monovalent pandemic vaccine through an active web-based electronic surveillance. We compared its safety profile to that of the seasonal trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) for 2010-2011. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Health care workers (HCW) vaccinated in 2009 with the pandemic vaccine (Arepanrix ® from GSK) or HCW vaccinated in 2010 with the 2010-2011 TIV were invited to participate in a web-based active surveillance of vaccine safety. They completed two surveys the day-8 survey covered the first 7 days post-vaccination and the day-29 survey covered events occurring 8 to 28 days after vaccination. Those who reported a problem were called by a nurse to obtain details. The main outcome was the occurrence of a new health problem or the worsening of an existing health condition that resulted in a medical consultation or work absenteeism. For the pandemic vaccine, a six-month follow-up for the occurrence of serious adverse events (SAE) was conducted. Among the 6242 HCW who received the pandemic vaccine, 440 (7%) reported 468 events compared to 328 of the 7645 HCW (4.3%) who reported 339 events after the seasonal vaccine. The 2009 pandemic vaccine was associated with significantly more local reactions than the 2010-2011 seasonal vaccine (1% vs. 0.03%, p<0.001). Paresthesia was reported by 7 HCW (0.1%) after the pandemic vaccine but by none after the seasonal vaccine. For the pandemic vaccine, no clustering of SAE was found in the 6 month follow-up. CONCLUSION: The 2009 pandemic vaccine seems to have a good safety profile, similar to the 2010-2011 TIV, with the exception of local reactions. This surveillance was adequately powered to identify AE associated with an excess risk ≥1 per 1000 vaccinations but is insufficient to detect rare AE. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01289418, NCT01318876.

Identification of catalytically important amino acid residues of Streptomyces lividans acetylxylan esterase A from carbohydrate esterase family 4.

Multiple sequence alignment of Streptomyces lividans acetylxylan esterase A and other carbohydrate esterase family 4 enzymes revealed the following conserved amino acid residues: Asp-12, Asp-13, His-62, His-66, Asp-130, and His-155. These amino acids were mutated in order to investigate a functional role of these residues in catalysis. Replacement of the conserved histidine residues by alanine caused significant reduction of enzymatic activity. Maintenance of ionizable carboxylic group in side chains of amino acids at positions 12, 13, and 130 seems to be necessary for catalytic efficiency. The absence of conserved serine excludes a possibility that the enzyme is a serine esterase, in contrast to acetylxylan esterases of carbohydrate esterase families 1, 5, and 7. On the contrary, total conservation of Asp-12, Asp-13, Asp-130, and His-155 along with dramatic decrease in enzyme activity of mutants of either of these residues lead us to a suggestion that acetylxylan esterase A from Streptomyces lividans and, by inference, other members of carbohydrate esterase family 4 are aspartic deacetylases. We propose that one component of the aspartate dyad/triad functions as a catalytic nucleophile and the other one(s) as a catalytic acid/base. The ester/amide bond cleavage would proceed via a double displacement mechanism through covalently linked acetyl-enzyme intermediate of mixed anhydride type.