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.

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.

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.