Safety of anthrax vaccine: an expanded review and evaluation of adverse events reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

PURPOSE: To assess the safety of a licensed anthrax vaccine (AVA) given to more than 500,000 US military personnel, through review and medical evaluation of adverse events (AEs) reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). METHODS: AEs were summarized by person, vaccine lot, type, frequency and impact. A Delphic approach was used to tentatively assess causality in an effort to detect serious AEs (SAEs) or other medically important AEs (OMIAEs) possibly attributable to AVA. RESULTS: The Anthrax Vaccine Expert Committee (AVEC) reviewed 1841 reports describing 3991 AEs (9.4 reports/10,000 doses of AVA) that were submitted to VAERS from 1Q1998 through 4Q2001. One hundred forty-seven reports described an SAE or OMIAE, of which 26 were tentatively rated as possible, probable or certain consequences of vaccination (injection-site reaction [12], 'anaphylactic-like reaction' [5] and eight other systemic AEs [1-2 each]). CONCLUSIONS: This review produced no evidence for an unusual rate of any SAE or OMIAE attributable to AVA. It supported an earlier impression that AVA may cause significant local inflammation and should be administered over the deltoid rather than the triceps to avoid direct or compression injury to the ulnar nerve. The subjects of VAERS reports tended to be older than all recipients of AVA. Females generally had and/or reported AEs more often than males, but transient articular reactions were surprisingly more common in males. Variations in the frequency or severity (as judged by hospitalization and/or loss of duty) of reported AEs did not suggest a significant problem with (1) a particular lot of AVA, (2) recurrent AEs after multiple doses or (3) vaccination of persons with a concomitant illness or those given other vaccines or medications.

Concomitant administration of a bivalent Haemophilus influenzae type b-hepatitis B vaccine, measles-mumps-rubella vaccine and varicella vaccine: safety, tolerability and immunogenicity.

BACKGROUND: The study was done to verify that concomitant administration of a bivalent Haemophilus influenzae type b-hepatitis B vaccine (Comvax), measles-mumps-rubella vaccine (M-M-RII) and varicella vaccine (Varivax) would be well-tolerated and suitably immunogenic with respect to all vaccine antigens. METHODS: We randomized 822 healthy 12- to 15-month-old children (1:1) to receive concomitant injections of Comvax, M-M-RII and Varivax (concomitant group) or Comvax followed 6 weeks later by injections of M-M-RII and Varivax (nonconcomitant group). Blood samples taken before and 6 weeks after vaccination were tested for antibodies to all vaccine antigens. RESULTS: Vaccinations were generally well-tolerated. Children in the concomitant and nonconcomitant treatment groups were similar with respect to the safety endpoint of primary interest (16.1 and 19.5%, respectively, had a fever > or =103 degree F rectally at any time within 14 days after either of two clinic visits). Fifteen serious adverse events were reported (eight in the concomitant group and seven in the nonconcomitant group); all resolved. Elements of two serious adverse events (fever, fever and measles-like rash; both in concomitant group children) were considered possibly related to vaccination. One child was withdrawn from the study because of a nonserious adverse event subsequently judged to be unrelated to vaccination. Similar proportions of vaccinees in the concomitant and nonconcomitant groups developed satisfactory antibody responses to the H. influenzae polysaccharide, polyribosylribitol phosphate (97.8 to 98.7%), hepatitis B surface antigen (99.2 to 100%), measles virus (99.4 to 99.6%), mumps virus (98.4 to 99.2%), rubella virus (100%) and varicella virus (93.2 to 94.6%). CONCLUSION: Concomitant administration of Comvax, M-M-RII and VARIVAX at the 12- or 15-month clinic visit is one satisfactory way of delivering some of the multiple vaccines indicated during the second year of life.

Renal artery embolization: a first line treatment option for end-stage hydronephrosis.

UNLABELLED: Conventionally poorly functioning hydronephrotic kidneys have been removed if they are symptomatic. In our unit, patients are offered renal artery embolization as an alternative treatment option. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifteen patients (11 male, 4 female) with a mean age of 32.9 yr (20-51 yrs) have undergone renal artery embolization for symptomatic hydronephrosis with poor function. Mean follow-up was 64.13 weeks (range 14-200). All patients had loin pain and hydronephrosis. Twelve patients had primary pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction (PUJO). Two patients had poorly functioning hydronephrotic kidneys secondary to chronic calculous obstruction. One patient had chronic pain in an obstructed but reasonably functioning kidney following a previous pyeloplasty for PUJO which demanded intervention. Mean split function on renography was 11% (range 0-46%). Selective renal artery embolization was carried out under antibiotic cover using a 7 Fr balloon occlusion catheter and absolute alcohol, steel coils, and polyvinyl alcohol particles. RESULTS: Nine patients developed post-embolization syndrome of self-limiting pain and pyrexia with no evidence of sepsis. One patient required readmission with this condition. One patient developed a hematoma at the puncture site. Mean hospital stay was 2.3 days. Fourteen patients are happy with the result and are completely pain free. One patient has minor discomfort but is delighted with the result. Nine patients have had follow-up ultrasound confirming resolution of the hydronephrosis. CONCLUSION: Renal artery embolization is an effective, safe, well-tolerated minimally invasive treatment option in end-stage hydronephrosis and we routinely offer it as an alternative to nephrectomy.

Protective efficacy of hepatitis B vaccine without HBIG in infants of HBeAg-positive carrier mothers in Thailand.

The primary objective of this study was to estimate the efficacy of a recombinant hepatitis B vaccine (H-B-VAXII) in preventing chronic hepatitis B infection when given alone without concomitant hepatitis B immune globulin (HBIG) to healthy Thai infants born of HBeAg-positive carrier mothers. The infants received a 0.5 ml (5 micro g HBsAg) intramuscular injection of H-B-VAXII either at birth, 1, and 6 months of age (Schedule A) or at birth, 1, 2, and 12 months of age (Schedule B). Blood drawings for the determination of hepatitis B virus (HBV) serologic markers were scheduled 4, 9, and 13 months following the initial dose of vaccine. At 13 months, 5 (10%) of 50 infants vaccinated on Schedule A and 7 (14.9%) of 47 infants vaccinated on Schedule B had experienced chronic HBV infection. Based on an expected infection rate in unimmunized infants of either 70 or 90%, the overall efficacy for both schedules combined was estimated to be 82.3% (95% CI: 70.6, 90.6) or 86.2% (95% CI: 77.1, 92.7), respectively. Corresponding schedule-specific estimates were for Schedule A: 85.7% (95% CI: 68.8, 95.3) or 88.9% (95% CI: 75.8, 96.3) and for Schedule B: 78.7% (95% CI: 59.6, 91.1) or 83.4% (95% CI: 68.6, 93.1). These results suggest that in areas of high endemicity, where mothers may not always be screened for HBV infection, routine vaccination of infants at birth with a course of hepatitis B vaccine alone should be highly protective, even for very high-risk infants of HBeAg-positive mothers.

Persistence of antibody and immunologic memory in children immunized with hepatitis B vaccine at birth.

Forty-two healthy children immunized with a course of hepatitis B vaccine beginning at birth were tested at 6 years of age for persistence of anti-hepatitis B antibody (anti-HBs) and then given a booster dose of vaccine. Although nearly one-half had become seronegative, all retained robust immunologic memory and rapidly regained a protective anti-HBs titer of at least 10 mIU/ml after booster vaccination.

Field evaluation of the efficacy and immunogenicity of recombinant hepatitis B vaccine without HBIG in newborn Vietnamese infants.

A study involving more than 2,000 infants was conducted in Vietnam to assess the field effectiveness and immunogenicity of recombinant hepatitis B vaccine given at birth, 1 month, 2 months, without concomitant hepatitis B immune globulin (HBIG). All received a 5 microg dose of H-B-VAX II at birth. Infants born to non-carrier mothers (Group 1; N = 1798) then received 2.5 microg doses at 1 and 2 months of age, while infants of HBeAg-negative (Group 2; N = 125) or HBeAg-positive (Group 3; N = 88) carrier mothers received 5 microg doses. No Group 1 or 2 vaccinees were infected. In Group 3, 12 (14.6%) of 82 infants did become infected (estimated efficacy 84%). 98.0-98.6% of uninfected infants who were tested for anti-HBs developed a seroprotective concentration > or = 10 IU/L. In hyperendemic Vietnam, where routine maternal screening and passive-active prophylaxis of high-risk infants with vaccine plus HBIG is not feasible, administration of vaccine alone to all newborns may control effectively HBV infection.

Response to recombinant hepatitis B vaccine in children and adolescents with chronic renal failure.

BACKGROUND: Diminished antibody responses to the dosage of hepatitis B (HB) vaccine indicated for healthy adults has led to a greater dosage recommendation (40 microg of HB surface antigen [HBsAg]) for adults with chronic renal failure (CRF), but an appropriate dosage for children with CRF has not been established. METHODS: Seventy-eight children and adolescents with CRF (22 patients, predialysis; 42 patients, chronic dialysis therapy; 14 renal transplant recipients) aged 1 to 19 years (mean, 10.1 years) were enrolled onto a study to test a three 20-microg dose course of the HB vaccine Recombivax HB (Merck & Co, Inc, West Point, PA). RESULTS: The vaccine was well tolerated; no patient had a serious adverse event attributable to vaccine, and no patient withdrew from the study because of an adverse event. Overall, 91% of 66 patients administered three doses had a protective titer of 10 mIU/mL or greater for antibody against HBsAg (anti-HBs) and a geometric mean titer (GMT) of 733 mIU/mL, with seroprotection rates and GMTs among predialysis, dialysis, and renal transplant patients of 100% (4,140 mIU/mL), 94% (419 mIU/mL), and 64% (152 mIU/mL), respectively. All (100%) predialysis patients had a 10-mIU/mL or greater anti-HBs titer after only two doses of vaccine compared with 64% of dialysis patients and 50% of transplant recipients. Eighty-eight percent of 57 fully vaccinated patients tested 12 months after the first dose retained a 10-mIU/mL or greater anti-HBs titer. CONCLUSION: A regimen of three 20-microg doses of Recombivax HB is suitably immunogenic for children with CRF not administered immunosuppressive medication. When possible, at least two, and preferably all three, doses of vaccine should be administered before progression to end-stage renal disease.

Safety of anthrax vaccine: a review by the Anthrax Vaccine Expert Committee (AVEC) of adverse events reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

PURPOSE: To assess the safety of a licensed anthrax vaccine given to nearly 400,000 US military personnel, reports of adverse events (AEs) submitted to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) were reviewed and evaluated medically. METHODS: The Anthrax Vaccine Expert Committee (AVEC), a civilian panel of private-sector physicians and other scientists, reviewed 602 VAERS reports using a Delphic approach (structured expert consensus) to assess the causal relationship between vaccination and the reported AEs and sought to identify unexpected patterns in the occurrence of medically important events. Reports were entered into a database and used to profile AEs with respect to person, type/location, relative frequency, severity/impact, concomitant illness or receipt of other drugs or vaccines, and vaccine lot. RESULTS: Nearly half the reports noted a local injection-site AE, with more than one-third of these involving a moderate to large degree of inflammation. Six events qualified as serious AEs (SAEs), and all were judged to be certain consequences of vaccination. Three-quarters of the reports cited a systemic AE (most common: flu-like symptoms, malaise, rash, arthralgia, headache), but only six individual medically important events were judged possibly or probably due to vaccine (aggravation of spondyloarthropathy (2), anaphylactoid reaction, arthritis (2), bronchiolitis obliterans organizing pneumonia). CONCLUSIONS: Since some cases of local inflammation involved distal paresthesia, AVEC recommends giving subcutaneous injections of AVA over the inferior deltoid instead of the triceps to avoid compression injury to the ulnar nerve. At this time, ongoing evaluation of VAERS reports does not suggest a high frequency or unusual pattern of serious or other medically important AEs.