Estimating baseline rates of adverse perinatal and neonatal outcomes using a facility-based surveillance approach: A prospective observational study from the WHO Global Vaccine Safety Multi-Country Collaboration on safety in pregnancy.

Background: Most perinatal and neonatal deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), yet, quality data on burden of adverse outcomes of pregnancy is limited in such countries. Methods: A network of 21 maternity units, across seven countries, undertook surveillance for low birthweight, preterm birth, small for gestational age (SGA), stillbirths, congenital microcephaly, in-hospital neonatal deaths, and neonatal infections in a cohort of over 85,000 births from May 2019 - August 2020. For each outcome, site-specific rates per 1,000 livebirths (or per 1,000 total births for stillbirth) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Descriptive sensitivity analysis was conducted to gain insight regarding underreporting of four outcomes at 16 sites. Findings: Estimated rates varied across countries and sites, ranging between 43·3-329·5 and 21·4-276·6/1000 livebirths for low birthweight and preterm birth respectively and 11·8-81/1,000 livebirths for SGA. No cases of congenital microcephaly were reported by three sites while the highest estimated rate was 13/1,000 livebirths. Neonatal infection and neonatal death rates varied between 1·8-73 and 0-59·9/1000 livebirths respectively while stillbirth rates ranged between 0-57·1/1000 total births across study sites. Results from the sensitivity analysis confirmed the underreporting of congenital microcephaly and SGA in our study. Interpretation: Our study establishes site-specific baseline rates for important adverse perinatal and neonatal outcomes and addresses a critical evidence gap towards improved monitoring of benefits and risks of emerging pregnancy and neonatal interventions. Funding: The study was sponsored by the World Health Organization with funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Operational lessons learned in conducting an international study on pharmacovigilance in pregnancy in resource-constrained settings: The WHO Global Vaccine safety Multi-Country collaboration project.

The WHO Global Vaccine Safety Multi-Country Collaboration study on safety in pregnancy aims to estimate the minimum detectable risk for selected perinatal and neonatal outcomes and assess the applicability of standardized case definitions for study outcomes and maternal immunization in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This paper documents the operational lessons learned from the study. A prospective observational study was conducted across 21 hospitals in seven countries. All births occurring at sites were screened to identify select perinatal and neonatal outcomes from May 2019 to August 2020. Up to 100 cases per outcome were recruited to assess the applicability of standardized case definitions. A multi-pronged study quality assurance plan was implemented. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on site functioning and project implementation was also assessed. Multi-layered ethics and administrative approvals, limited clinical documentation, difficulty in identifying outcomes requiring in-hospital follow-up, and poor quality internet connectivity emerged as important barriers to study implementation. Use of electronic platforms, application of a rigorous quality assurance plan with frequent interaction between the central and site teams helped improve data quality. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted data collection for up to 6 weeks in some sites. Our study succeeded in establishing an international hospital-based surveillance network for evaluating perinatal and neonatal outcomes using common study protocol and procedures in geographically diverse sites with differing levels of infrastructure, clinical and health-utilization practices. The enhanced surveillance capacity of participating sites shall help support future pharmacovigilance efforts for pregnancy interventions.

WHO global vaccine safety multi-country collaboration project on safety in pregnancy: Assessing the level of diagnostic certainty using standardized case definitions for perinatal and neonatal outcomes and maternal immunization.

Standardized case definitions strengthen post-marketing safety surveillance of new vaccines by improving generated data, interpretation and comparability across surveillance systems. The Global Alignment of Immunization Safety Assessment in Pregnancy (GAIA) project developed standardized case definitions for 21 key obstetric and neonatal terms following the Brighton Collaboration (BC) methodology. In this prospective cohort study, we assessed the applicability of GAIA definitions for maternal immunization exposure and for low birth weight (LBW), preterm birth, small for gestational age (SGA), stillbirth, neonatal death, neonatal infection, and congenital microcephaly. We identified the missing data elements that prevented identified cases and exposures from meeting the case definition (level 1-3 of BC diagnostic certainty). Over a one-year period (2019-2020), all births occurring in 21 sites (mostly secondary and tertiary hospitals) in 6 Low Middle Income Countries and 1 High Income Country were recorded and the 7 perinatal and neonatal outcome cases were identified from routine medical records. Up to 100 cases per outcome were recruited sequentially from each site. Most cases recruited for LBW, preterm birth and neonatal death met the GAIA case definitions. Birth weight, a key parameter for all three outcomes, was routinely recorded at all sites. The definitions for SGA, stillbirth, neonatal infection (particularly meningitis and respiratory infection) and congenital microcephaly were found to be less applicable. The main barrier to obtaining higher levels of diagnostic certainty was the lack of sonographic documentation of gestational age in first or second trimester. The definition for maternal immunization exposure was applicable, however, the highest level of diagnostic certainty was only reached at two sites. Improved documentation of maternal immunization will be important for vaccine safety studies. Following the field-testing of these 8 GAIA definitions, several improvements are suggested that may lead to their easier implementation, increased standardization and hence comparison across studies.

Economic and immunisation safety surveillance characteristics of countries implementing no-fault compensation programmes for vaccine injuries.

Improvements in vaccine safety surveillance and investigative capacity lead to identification of rare reactions attributable to vaccination. As a result, the issue of fair compensation for those who experience vaccine injuries is gaining growing attention. Although vaccine injury compensation programmes (VICP) have been developed in a few countries for more than 50 years, no global policy guidance to guide vaccine injury compensation in all countries wishing to adopt such compensation schemes is currently available. To update the landscape analysis of no-fault compensation programmes and characterize VICP implementing countries, we conducted a survey of all 194 Member States from the World Health Organization and received feedback from 151. This analysis describes the economic and vaccine safety surveillance characteristics of Member States implementing VICPs. This analysis describes the characteristics of 25 Member States implementing a compensation programmes. Characteristics examined include economic, vaccination and safety surveillance indicators. Twenty of the 25 Member States (80%) with compensation programmes are categorized as high-income countries, 20/25 (80%) met the Global Vaccine Action Plan (GVAP) safety indicator of reporting at least ten annual reports of adverse events following immunization per 100,000 population, 21/25 (84%) met the GVAP coverage indicator by achieving greater than 90% third dose of Diphtheria, Tetanus and Pertussis vaccine (DTP3) and 17/25 (68%) assessed vaccine hesitancy in 2017. All Member States with VICP have a national immunization technical advisory group. This study identified growing interest in the implementation of no-fault compensation programs beyond high-income countries. Global policies guiding compensation should be developed for countries regardless of the maturity of their immunization programmes. RESEARCH IN CONTEXT: As a result of improved vaccine safety surveillance, World Health Organization (WHO) Member States are facing situations where known untoward serious vaccine reactions are documented, including in low- and middle-income settings. This has led to increased interest for the development of national no-fault compensation policies for vaccine injuries. As of 2010, compensation schemes for vaccine related injuries had been identified and characterized in 19 out of 194 WHO member states. All these programmes were in the industrialized world with none in low- and middle-income countries. Previous reviews have described the characteristics of the existing programmes based on the six common elements identified by Evans in 1999 with less emphasis on characteristics from countries implementing these no-fault compensation programmes. This manuscript aimed to identify predictors of countries implementing no-fault compensation programmes for vaccine injuries and update the inventory of existing programmes as part of a more comprehensive global landscape evaluation of existing programmes. This information will be useful for country self-evaluation and future compensation policy formulation as discussion to develop policies guiding the implementation of vaccine injury compensation continues to gain growing attention.

Mapping the landscape of global programmes to evaluate health interventions in pregnancy: the need for harmonised approaches, standards and tools.

Pregnant women and their babies are among the populations most vulnerable to untoward health outcomes. Yet current standards for evaluating health interventions cannot be met during pregnancy because of lack of adequate evidence. The situation is even more concerning in low-income and middle-income countries, where the need for effective interventions is the greatest. Meeting the Sustainable Development Goals for health will require strengthened attention to maternal and child health. In this paper we examine ongoing initiatives aimed at improving the assessment of maternal interventions. We review current methodologies to monitor outcomes of maternal interventions and identify where harmonisation is needed. Based on this analysis we identify settings where different minimal data sets should be considered taking into consideration the clinical realities. Stronger coordination mechanisms and a roadmap to support harmonised monitoring of maternal interventions across programmes and partners, working on improving pregnancy and early childhood health events, will greatly enhance ability to generate evidence-based policies.

Vaccine safety surveillance in pregnancy in low- and middle-income countries using GAIA case definitions: A feasibility assessment.

BACKGROUND: Global efforts to adequately monitor safety of new vaccines for pregnant women in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) are needed. The Global Alignment of Immunization Safety Assessment in pregnancy (GAIA) project recently published case definitions based on levels of diagnostic certainty for pregnancy- and neonatal outcomes and maternal vaccination. As a preliminary step to assessing the applicability of these definitions in LMICs, WHO selected sites and conducted a feasibility assessment to evaluate their ability to identify and classify selected outcomes (preterm birth, neonatal death, neonatal invasive bloodstream infection (NI-BSI), stillbirth) and maternal vaccination. METHODS: Candidate sites were initially screened using a questionnaire. For each outcome, eligible sites were asked to retrospectively identify and collect information for three individuals born in 2016. Subsequently, outcomes were classified by level of diagnostic certainty. RESULTS: Fifty-one sites (15 countries) were screened; 32 of them (9 countries) participated in the assessment and identified 315 subjects with the outcomes of interest. Twenty-four sites (8 countries) identified at least one subject per outcome and agreed to continue participating. The majority (80%) of preterm births, neonatal deaths, and NI-BSI subjects, but only 50% of stillbirths, could be assessed for diagnostic certainty. The main reasons for not classifying stillbirths were insufficient information to distinguish between antepartum and intrapartum stillbirth (29%); or that not all data for one subject fit into a single level of diagnostic certainty (35%). Forty-nine percent of mothers were considered vaccinated, 6% not-vaccinated, and vaccination status could not be assessed in 44% of them. DISCUSSION: GAIA case definitions for four neonatal outcomes and maternal vaccination were successfully piloted in 24 sentinel sites across four WHO regions. Our assessment found that modification of the stillbirth definition could help avoid potential misclassification. Vaccine safety monitoring in LMICs will benefit from systematic recording of all vaccinations during pregnancy.

Intussusception in Young Children: Protocol for Multisite Hospital Sentinel Surveillance in India.

India has recently introduced a rotavirus vaccine under a universal immunization program. There is limited information on intussusception, an adverse event, following immunization in children from India. We are conducting sentinel surveillance for intussusception in children aged under two years at 19 hospitals. The sentinel sites' selection followed a multistage process. The surveillance combines retrospective surveillance for 69 months and prospective surveillance for 18 months. The suspected intussusception cases shall be reviewed for capturing confirmed cases and detailed data collection and classification according to Brighton Collaboration criteria. Data shall be analysed to describe epidemiology, trends, regional and seasonal variations, clinical profiles, management modalities, and outcomes of intussusception. The combination of prospective and retrospective surveillance shall be informative about the trend of intussusception over the last seven years in India. At four sites where rotavirus vaccines have been introduced, the change in intussusception trends shall be documented. The potential association with rotavirus vaccines and other vaccines shall be assessed using case-control and self-controlled case series methodology. Results are forthcoming. The results shall support the national vaccine safety surveillance effort by providing baseline estimates of intussusception for continued monitoring. The surveillance protocol and site selection processes shall inform similar vaccine-safety surveillance in India and other developing countries.

Enhancing global vaccine pharmacovigilance: Proof-of-concept study on aseptic meningitis and immune thrombocytopenic purpura following measles-mumps containing vaccination.

New vaccines designed to prevent diseases endemic in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) are now being introduced without prior record of utilization in countries with robust pharmacovigilance systems. To address this deficit, our objective was to demonstrate feasibility of an international hospital-based network for the assessment of potential epidemiological associations between serious and rare adverse events and vaccines in any setting. This was done through a proof-of-concept evaluation of the risk of immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) and aseptic meningitis (AM) following administration of the first dose of measles-mumps-containing vaccines using the self-controlled risk interval method in the primary analysis. The World Health Organization (WHO) selected 26 sentinel sites (49 hospitals) distributed in 16 countries of the six WHO regions. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) of 5.0 (95% CI: 2.5-9.7) for ITP following first dose of measles-containing vaccinations, and of 10.9 (95% CI: 4.2-27.8) for AM following mumps-containing vaccinations were found. The strain-specific analyses showed significantly elevated ITP risk for measles vaccines containing Schwarz (IRR: 20.7; 95% CI: 2.7-157.6), Edmonston-Zagreb (IRR: 11.1; 95% CI: 1.4-90.3), and Enders'Edmonston (IRR: 8.5; 95% CI: 1.9-38.1) strains. A significantly elevated AM risk for vaccines containing the Leningrad-Zagreb mumps strain (IRR: 10.8; 95% CI: 1.3-87.4) was also found. This proof-of-concept study has shown, for the first time, that an international hospital-based network for the investigation of rare vaccine adverse events, using common standardized procedures and with high participation of LMICs, is feasible, can produce reliable results, and has the potential to characterize differences in risk between vaccine strains. The completion of this network by adding large reference hospitals, particularly from tropical countries, and the systematic WHO-led implementation of this approach, should permit the rapid post-marketing evaluation of safety signals for serious and rare adverse events for new and existing vaccines in all settings, including LMICs.

Building capacity for active surveillance of vaccine adverse events in the Americas: A hospital-based multi-country network.

New vaccines designed to prevent diseases endemic in low and middle-income countries are being introduced without prior utilization in countries with robust vaccine pharmacovigilance systems. Our aim was to build capacity for active surveillance of vaccine adverse events in the Americas. We describe the implementation of a proof-of-concept study for the feasibility of an international collaborative hospital-based active surveillance system for vaccine safety. The study was developed and implemented in 15 sentinel sites located in seven countries of the region of the Americas, under the umbrella of the World Health Organization (WHO) Global Vaccine Safety Initiative. The study evaluated the associations between measles-mumps-rubella vaccines and two well-recognized adverse events: Immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) and aseptic meningitis. The regional network contributed 63 confirmed ITP and 16 confirmed aseptic meningitis eligible cases to the global study, representing, respectively, 33% and 19% of the total cases. To ensure long-term sustainability and usefulness to investigate adverse events following new vaccine introductions in low and middle-income countries, the network needs to be strengthened with additional sites and integrated into national health systems.

Operational lessons learned in conducting a multi-country collaboration for vaccine safety signal verification and hypothesis testing: The global vaccine safety multi country collaboration initiative.

Timely and effective evaluation of vaccine safety signals for newly developed vaccines introduced in low and middle- income countries (LMICs) is essential. The study tested the development of a global network of hospital-based sentinel sites for vaccine safety signal verification and hypothesis testing. Twenty-six sentinel sites in sixteen countries across all WHO regions participated, and 65% of the sites were from LMIC. We describe the process for the establishment and operationalization of such a network and the lessons learned in conducting a multi-country collaborative initiative. 24 out of the 26 sites successfully contributed data for the global analysis using standardised tools and procedures. Our study successfully confirmed the well-known risk estimates for the outcomes of interest. The main challenges faced by investigators were lack of adequate information in the medical records for case ascertainment and classification, and access to immunization data. The results suggest that sentinel hospitals intending to participate in vaccine safety studies strengthen their systems for discharge diagnosis coding, medical records and linkage to vaccination data. Our study confirms that a multi-country hospital-based network initiative for vaccine safety monitoring is feasible and demonstrates the validity and utility of large collaborative international studies to monitor the safety of new vaccines introduced in LMICs.

Development of the Good Health Research Practice course: ensuring quality across all health research in humans.

Quality and ethics need to be embedded into all areas of research with human participants. Good Clinical Practice (GCP) guidelines are international ethical and scientific quality standards for designing, conducting, recording and reporting trials involving human participants. Compliance with GCP is expected to provide public assurance that the rights, safety and wellbeing of participants are protected and that the clinical research data are credible. However, whilst GCP guidelines, particularly their principles, are recommended across all research types, it is difficult for non-clinical trial research to fit in with the exacting requirements of GCP. There is therefore a need for guidance that allows health researchers to adhere to the principles of GCP, which will improve the quality and ethical conduct of all research involving human participants. These concerns have led to the development of the Good Health Research Practice (GHRP) course. Its goal is to ensure that research is conducted to the highest possible standards, similar to the conduct of trials to GCP. The GHRP course provides training and guidance to ensure quality and ethical conduct across all health-related research. The GHRP course has been run so far on eight occasions. Feedback from delegates has been overwhelmingly positive, with most delegates stating that the course was useful in developing their research protocols and documents. Whilst most training in research starts with a guideline, GHRP has started with a course and the experience gained over running the courses will be used to write a standardised guideline for the conduct of health-related research outside the realm of clinical trials, so that researchers, funders and ethics committees do not try to fit non-trials into clinical trials standards.

Promoting good health research practice in low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Good clinical practice (GCP) guidelines have been the source of improvement in the quality of clinical trials; however, there are limitations to the application of GCP in the conduct of health research beyond industry-sponsored clinical trials. The UNICEF/UNDP/World Bank/WHO Special Program for Research and Training in Tropical Disease is promoting good practice in all health research involving human through the Good Health Research Practice (GHRP) training program initiative. OBJECTIVE: To report the results of piloting the GHRP training program and formulate further steps to harness GHRP for promoting good practices in all health research involving human, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). DESIGN: The objective of this training is to impart knowledge and skills for the application of ethical and quality principles to the design, conduct, recording, and reporting of health research involving human participants based on the level of risk, to ensure a fit-for-purpose quality system. This has been formulated into five sequential modules to be delivered in a 4-day course. Four courses have been organized in the pilot phase (2014-2015). The courses have been evaluated and assessed based on course feedback (quantitative and qualitative data) collected during course implementation and qualitative email-based pre- and post-course evaluation. RESULTS: Participants were highly satisfied with the course content and its organization. The relevance and applicability of the course content resulted in positive feedback and an articulated willingness to adapt and disseminate the course. Action points to strengthen the training program have been identified, and showed the imminent need to develop a consensus with a broader range of key stakeholders on the final set of GHRP standards and means for implementation. CONCLUSIONS: There is an urgent need to harness the momentum to promote high-quality and ethical health research in LMICs through scaling up GHRP training and further development of GHRP principles into international standards.

Research Capacity Strengthening in Low and Middle Income Countries - An Evaluation of the WHO/TDR Career Development Fellowship Programme.

Between August 2012 and April 2013 the Career Development Fellowship programme of the Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (World Health Organization) underwent an external evaluation to assess its past performance and determine recommendations for future programme development and continuous performance improvement. The programme provides a year-long training experience for qualified researchers from low and middle income countries at pharmaceutical companies or product development partnerships. Independent evaluators from the Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute and the Barcelona Institute for Global Health used a results-based methodology to review the programme. Data were gathered through document review, surveys, and interviews with a range of programme participants. The final evaluation report found the Career Development Fellowship to be relevant to organizers' and programme objectives, efficient in its operations, and effective in its training scheme, which was found to address needs and gaps for both fellows and their home institutions. Evaluators found that the programme has the potential for impact and sustainability beyond the programme period, especially with the successful reintegration of fellows into their home institutions, through which newly-developed skills can be shared at the institutional level. Recommendations included the development of a scheme to support the re-integration of fellows into their home institutions post-fellowship and to seek partnerships to facilitate the scaling-up of the programme. The impact of the Professional Membership Scheme, an online professional development tool launched through the programme, beyond the scope of the Career Development Fellowship programme itself to other applications, has been identified as a positive unintended outcome. The results of this evaluation may be of interest for other efforts in the field of research capacity strengthening in LMICs or, generally, to other professional development schemes of a similar structure.

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.

Effective vaccine safety systems in all countries: a challenge for more equitable access to immunization.

Serious vaccine-associated adverse events are rare. To further minimize their occurrence and to provide adequate care to those affected, careful monitoring of immunization programs and case management is required. Unfounded vaccine safety concerns have the potential of seriously derailing effective immunization activities. To address these issues, vaccine pharmacovigilance systems have been developed in many industrialized countries. As new vaccine products become available to prevent new diseases in various parts of the world, the demand for effective pharmacovigilance systems in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) is increasing. To help establish such systems in all countries, WHO developed the Global Vaccine Safety Blueprint in 2011. This strategic plan is based on an in-depth analysis of the vaccine safety landscape that involved many stakeholders. This analysis reviewed existing systems and international vaccine safety activities and assessed the financial resources required to operate them. The Blueprint sets three main strategic goals to optimize the safety of vaccines through effective use of pharmacovigilance principles and methods: to ensure minimal vaccine safety capacity in all countries; to provide enhanced capacity for specific circumstances; and to establish a global support network to assist national authorities with capacity building and crisis management. In early 2012, the Global Vaccine Safety Initiative (GVSI) was launched to bring together and explore synergies among on-going vaccine safety activities. The Global Vaccine Action Plan has identified the Blueprint as its vaccine safety strategy. There is an enormous opportunity to raise awareness for vaccine safety in LMIC and to garner support from a large number of stakeholders for the GVSI between now and 2020. Synergies and resource mobilization opportunities presented by the Decade of Vaccines can enhance monitoring and response to vaccine safety issues, thereby leading to more equitable delivery of vaccines worldwide.

Impact of health research capacity strengthening in low- and middle-income countries: the case of WHO/TDR programmes.

BACKGROUND: Measuring the impact of capacity strengthening support is a priority for the international development community. Several frameworks exist for monitoring and evaluating funding results and modalities. Based on its long history of support, we report on the impact of individual and institutional capacity strengthening programmes conducted by the UNICEF/UNDP/World Bank/WHO Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR) and on the factors that influenced the outcome of its Research Capacity Strengthening (RCS) activities. METHODOLOGY AND PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: A mix of qualitative and quantitative methods (questionnaires and in-depth interviews) was applied to a selected group of 128 individual and 20 institutional capacity development grant recipients that completed their training/projects between 2000 and 2008. A semi-structured interview was also conducted on site with scientists from four institutions. Most of the grantees, both individual and institutional, reported beneficial results from the grant. However, glaring inequities stemming from gender imbalances and a language bias towards English were identified. The study showed that skills improvement through training contributed to better formulation of research proposals, but not necessarily to improved project implementation or communication of results. Appreciation of the institutional grants' impact varied among recipient countries. The least developed countries saw the programmes as essential for supporting basic infrastructure and activities. Advanced developing countries perceived the research grants as complementary to available resources, and particularly suitable for junior researchers who were not yet able to compete for major international grants. CONCLUSION: The study highlights the need for a more equitable process to improve the effectiveness of health research capacity strengthening activities. Support should be tailored to the existing research capacity in disease endemic countries and should focus on strengthening national health research systems, particularly in the least developing countries. The engagement of stakeholders at country level would facilitate the design of more specific and comprehensive strategies based on local needs.