Novel Oral Poliovirus Vaccine 2 Safety Evaluation during Nationwide Supplemental Immunization Activity, Uganda, 2022.

Given its enhanced genetic stability, novel oral poliovirus vaccine type 2 was deployed for type 2 poliovirus outbreak responses under World Health Organization Emergency Use Listing. We evaluated the safety profile of this vaccine. No safety signals were identified using a multipronged approach of passive and active surveillance.

Progress in Immunization Safety Monitoring - Worldwide, 2020-2022.

Effective surveillance of adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) primarily relies on the collaboration of two partners: national regulatory authorities (NRAs) and national expanded programs on immunization (EPIs). In December 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) Global Advisory Committee for Vaccine Safety recommended a new case-based indicator of national capacity to monitor immunization safety: at least one serious AEFI reported per 1 million total population per year. To achieve this indicator, WHO-affiliated countries and territories (WHO countries) rely upon data generated from functional AEFI surveillance systems. This report describes 2020-2022 global, regional, and national progress in use of the newly introduced immunization safety monitoring indicator and progress on joint AEFI reporting from national EPIs and NRAs. Among WHO countries, 51 (24%) of 214 implemented the new indicator in 2020, 111 (52%) of 214 implemented it in 2021, and 92 (43%) of 215 in 2022. In 2020, 41 (19%) WHO countries reported AEFI data jointly from EPIs and NRAs; this increased to 55 (26%) in 2021 and 57 (27%) in 2022. These findings, resulting in part from the intensified support for COVID-19 vaccination, demonstrate that national AEFI surveillance systems increasingly support the timely use and sharing of case-based immunization safety data, but work is still needed to strengthen global vaccine safety monitoring.

CDC's COVID-19 International Vaccine Implementation and Evaluation Program and Lessons from Earlier Vaccine Introductions.

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) supports international partners in introducing vaccines, including those against SARS-CoV-2 virus. CDC contributes to the development of global technical tools, guidance, and policy for COVID-19 vaccination and has established its COVID-19 International Vaccine Implementation and Evaluation (CIVIE) program. CIVIE supports ministries of health and their partner organizations in developing or strengthening their national capacities for the planning, implementation, and evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination programs. CIVIE's 7 priority areas for country-specific technical assistance are vaccine policy development, program planning, vaccine confidence and demand, data management and use, workforce development, vaccine safety, and evaluation. We discuss CDC's work on global COVID-19 vaccine implementation, including priorities, challenges, opportunities, and applicable lessons learned from prior experiences with Ebola, influenza, and meningococcal serogroup A conjugate vaccine introductions.

Evaluation of Vaccine Safety After the First Public Sector Introduction of Typhoid Conjugate Vaccine-Navi Mumbai, India, 2018.

BACKGROUND: In December 2017, the World Health Organization (WHO) prequalified the first typhoid conjugate vaccine (TCV; Typbar-TCV). While no safety concerns were identified in pre- and postlicensure studies, WHO's Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety recommended robust safety evaluation with large-scale TCV introductions. During July-August 2018, the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (NMMC) launched the world's first public sector TCV introduction. Per administrative reports, 113 420 children 9 months-14 years old received TCV. METHODS: We evaluated adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) using passive and active surveillance via (1) reports from the passive NMMC AEFI surveillance system, (2) telephone interviews with 5% of caregivers of vaccine recipients 48 hours and 7 days postvaccination, and (3) chart abstraction for adverse events of special interest (AESIs) among patients admitted to 5 hospitals using the Brighton Collaboration criteria followed by ascertainment of vaccination status. RESULTS: We identified 222/113 420 (0.2%) vaccine recipients with AEFIs through the NMMC AEFI surveillance system: 211 (0.19%) experienced minor AEFIs, 2 (0.002%) severe, and 9 serious (0.008%). At 48 hours postvaccination, 1852/5605 (33%) caregivers reported ≥1 AEFI, including injection site pain (n = 1452, 26%), swelling (n = 419, 7.5%), and fever (n = 416, 7.4%). Of the 4728 interviews completed at 7 days postvaccination, the most reported AEFIs included fever (n = 200, 4%), pain (n = 52, 1%), and headache (n = 42, 1%). Among 525 hospitalized children diagnosed with an AESI, 60 were vaccinated; no AESIs were causally associated with TCV. CONCLUSIONS: No unexpected safety signals were identified with TCV introduction. This provides further reassurance for the large-scale use of Typbar-TCV among children 9 months-14 years old.

Clinical Surveillance and Evaluation of Suspected Ebola Cases in a Vaccine Trial During an Ebola Epidemic: The Sierra Leone Trial to Introduce a Vaccine Against Ebola.

Clinical Trials Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov [NCT02378753] and Pan African Clinical Trials Registry [PACTR201502001037220].

Articles Published and Downloaded by Public Health Scientists: Analysis of Data From the CDC Public Health Library, 2011-2013.

OBJECTIVE: To describe scientific information usage and publication patterns of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Public Health Library and Information Center patrons. DESIGN: Administratively collected patron usage data and aggregate data on CDC-authored publications from the CDC Library for 3 consecutive years were analyzed. SETTING: The CDC Public Health Library and Information Center, which serves CDC employees nationally and internationally. PARTICIPANTS: Internal patrons and external users of the CDC Library. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Three-year trends in full-text article publication and downloads including most common journals used for each purpose, systematic literature searches requested and completed, and subscriptions to a weekly public health current literature awareness service. RESULTS: From 2011 to 2013, CDC scientists published a total of 7718 articles in the peer-reviewed literature. During the same period, article downloads from the CDC Library increased 25% to more than 1.1 million, completed requests for reviews of the scientific literature increased by 34%, and electronic subscriptions to literature compilation services increased by 23%. CONCLUSIONS: CDC's scientific output and information use via the CDC Library are both increasing. Researchers and field staff are making greater use of literature review services and other customized information content delivery. Virtual public health library access is an increasingly important resource for the scientific practice of public health.

Autoimmune hepatitis: Brighton Collaboration case definition and guidelines for data collection, analysis, and presentation of immunisation safety data.

This report introduces a Brighton Collaboration (BC) case definition for autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), which has been classified as a priority adverse event of special interest (AESI), as there were possible cases seen following COVID-19 vaccination. The case definition was developed by a group of subject matter and BC process experts to facilitate safety data comparability across pre- and post-licensure clinical trials, as well as pharmacovigilance activities in multiple settings with diverse resources and healthcare access. The usual BC case definition development process was followed in an expedited manner, and took two months to complete, including finalising the manuscript for publication, instead of the usual 1 year development time. It includes a systematic review of the literature and an expert consensus to define levels of diagnostic certainty for AIH, and provides specific guidelines for data collection and analysis. Histology, serological and biochemical tests and exclusion of alternate diagnosis were considered necessary to define the levels of certainty (definitive, probable and possible). AEFI reports of suspected AIH were independently classified by the WG members to test its useability and these classifications were used to finalise the case definition. The document underwent peer review by external AIH experts and a Reference Group of vaccine safety stakeholders in high-, low- and middle-income countries to ensure case definition useability, applicability, and scientific integrity. The expedited process can be replicated for development of other standardised case definitions for priority AESIs for endemics and epidemics. While applicable to cases reported following immunisation, the case definition is independent of lapsed time following vaccination and, as such, can also be used to determine background incidence for vaccinated and unvaccinated control groups in studies of causal association. While use of this case definition is also appropriate for the study of safety of other products including drugs, it is not meant to guide clinical case management.

Implementation of data triangulation and dashboard development for COVID-19 vaccine adverse event following immunisation (AEFI) data in Nigeria.

Nigeria began administering COVID-19 vaccines on 5 March 2021 and is working towards the WHO's African regional goal to fully vaccinate 70% of their eligible population by December 2022. Nigeria's COVID-19 vaccination information system includes a surveillance system for COVID-19 adverse events following immunisation (AEFI), but as of April 2021, AEFI data were being collected and managed by multiple groups and lacked routine analysis and use for action. To fill this gap in COVID-19 vaccine safety monitoring, between April 2021 and June 2022, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in collaboration with other implementing partners led by the Institute of Human Virology Nigeria, supported the Government of Nigeria to triangulate existing COVID-19 AEFI data. This paper describes the process of implementing published draft guidelines for data triangulation for COVID-19 AEFI data in Nigeria. Here, we focus on the process of implementing data triangulation rather than analysing the results and impacts of triangulation. Work began by mapping the flow of COVID-19 AEFI data, engaging stakeholders and building a data management system to intake and store all shared data. These datasets were used to create an online dashboard with key indicators selected based on existing WHO guidelines and national guidance. The dashboard went through an iterative review before dissemination to stakeholders. This case study highlights a successful example of implementing data triangulation for rapid use of AEFI data for decision-making and emphasises the importance of stakeholder engagement and strong data governance structures to make data triangulation successful.

Optimising reporting of adverse events following immunisation by healthcare workers in Ghana: A qualitative study in four regions.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the emphasis on reporting of Adverse Events Following Immunisation (AEFIs) during didactic training sessions, especially prior to new vaccine introductions, it remains low in Ghana. We explored the factors underlying the under-reporting of AEFI by healthcare workers (HCWs) to provide guidance on appropriate interventions to increase reporting. METHODS: We conducted an exploratory descriptive in-depth study of the factors contributing to low reporting of AEFI among HCWs in four regions in Ghana. Key informant interviews (KII) were held with purposively selected individuals that are relevant to the AEFI reporting process at the district, regional, and national levels. We used KII guides to conduct in-depth interviews and used NVivo 10 qualitative software to analyse the data. Themes on factors influencing AEFI reporting were derived inductively from the data, and illustrative quotes from respondents were used to support the narratives. RESULTS: We conducted 116 KIIs with the health managers, regulators and frontline HCWs and found that lack of information on reportable AEFIs and reporting structures, misunderstanding of reportable AEFIs, heavy workload, cost of reporting AEFIs, fear of blame by supervisors, lack of motivation, and inadequate feedback as factors responsible for underreporting of AEFIs. Respondents suggested that capacity building for frontline HCWs, effective supervision, the provision of motivation and feedback, simplification of reporting procedures, incentives for integrating AEFI reporting into routine monitoring and reporting, standardization of reporting procedures across regions, and developing appropriate interventions to address the fear of personal consequences would help improve AEFI reporting. CONCLUSION: From the perspectives of a broad range of key informants at all levels of the vaccine safety system, we found multiple factors (both structural and behavioural), that may impact HCW reporting of AEFI in Ghana. Improvements in line with the suggestions are necessary for increased AEFI reporting in Ghana.

Thrombosis and thromboembolism: Brighton collaboration case definition and guidelines for data collection, analysis, and presentation of immunization safety data.

This is a Brighton Collaboration case definition of thrombosis and thromboembolism to be used in the evaluation of adverse events following immunization, and for epidemiologic studies for the assessment of background incidence or hypothesis testing. The case definition was developed by a group of experts convened by the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) in the context of active development of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. The case definition format of the Brighton Collaboration was followed to develop a consensus definition and defined levels of certainty, after an exhaustive review of the literature and expert consultation. The document underwent peer review by the Brighton Collaboration Network and by selected expert reviewers prior to submission.

Enhanced surveillance for adverse events following immunization during the 2019 typhoid conjugate vaccine campaign in Harare, Zimbabwe.

BACKGROUND: During February 25-March 4, 2019, Zimbabwe's Ministry of Health and Child Care conducted an emergency campaign using 342,000 doses of typhoid conjugate vaccine (TCV) targeting individuals 6 months-15 years of age in eight high-risk suburbs of Harare and up to 45 years of age in one suburb of Harare. The campaign represented the first use of TCV in Africa outside of clinical trials. METHODS: Three methods were used to capture adverse events during the campaign and for 42 days following the last dose administered: (1) active surveillance in two Harare hospitals, (2) national passive surveillance, and (3) a post-campaign coverage survey. RESULTS: Thirty-nine adverse events were identified during active surveillance, including 19 seizure cases (16 were febrile), 16 hypersensitivity cases, 1 thrombocytopenia case, 1 anaphylaxis case, and two cases with two conditions. Only 21 (54%) of 39 patients were hospitalized and 38 recovered without sequelae. Attack rates per 100,000 TCV doses administered were highest for seizures (6.27) and hypersensitivity (5.02). Only 6 adverse events were reported through passive surveillance by facilities other than the two active surveillance hospitals. A total of 177 (10%) of 1,817 vaccinees surveyed reported experiencing an adverse event during the post-campaign coverage survey, of which 25 (14%) sought care. CONCLUSIONS: In line with previous evaluations of TCV, enhanced adverse event monitoring during an emergency campaign supports the safety of TCV. The majority of reported events were minor or resulted in recovery without long-term sequelae. Attack rates for seizures and hypersensitivity were low compared with previous active surveillance studies conducted in Kenya and Burkina Faso. Strengthening adverse event monitoring in Zimbabwe and establishing background rates of conditions of interest in the general population may improve future safety monitoring during new vaccine introductions.

An approach for preparing and responding to adverse events following immunization reported after hepatitis B vaccine birth dose administration.

The success of immunization programs in lowering the incidence of vaccine preventable diseases (VPDs) has led to increased public attention on potential health risks associated with vaccines. As a result, a scientifically rigorous response to investigating reported adverse events following immunization (AEFI) and effective risk communications strategies are critical to ensure public confidence in immunization. Globally, an estimated 257 million people have chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, which causes more than 686,000 premature deaths from liver cancer and cirrhosis. Hepatitis B vaccination is the most effective way to prevent mother-to-child transmission of HBV infection, especially when a timely birth dose is given within 24 h of birth. However, an infant's risk of dying is highest in the neonatal period, and thus, administering HepB-BD within 24 h of birth overlaps with the most fragile period in an infant's life. A working group formed in July 2016 following the publication of the case reports of the effects on vaccination coverage of media reports of infant deaths after HepB-BD administration in China and Vietnam. The goal of the working group was to create a framework and describe best practices for preparing for and responding to AEFI reported after HepB-BD administration, using existing resources. The framework includes six steps, including three preparation steps and three response steps. This document is written for national and regional immunization program staff. Prior to using the framework for preparation and response to AEFIs reported after HepB-BD administration, staff members should be familiar with how AEFI are detected, reported, and investigated in the country. The document might also be of interest to national regulatory staff members who monitor vaccine safety within the country.

Barriers to healthcare workers reporting adverse events following immunization in four regions of Ghana.

Despite didactic training on adverse events following immunization (AEFI) in Ghana, the reporting ratio of AEFI was 1.56 per 100,000 surviving infants in 2015, below the minimum reporting ratio of 10. We aimed to estimate the proportion of health care workers (HCWs) reporting AEFI and to identify barriers to reporting. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of HCWs in four regions in Ghana. A simple random sample of 176 health facilities was selected and up to two HCWs were randomly selected per facility. We used the Rao-Scott Chi-squared test to compare factors associated with reporting of AEFI in the last year. We used an open-ended question to identify reasons for low reporting. One supervisor from each facility, responsible for overall reporting and management of AEFI, was also interviewed. A total of 306 HCWs from 169 facilities were interviewed. Of these, 176 (57.5%) reported they had ever encountered an AEFI. Of the 120 who had encountered an AEFI in the last year, 66 (55.0%) indicated they had reported the AEFI, and 38 (31.7%) completed a reporting form. HCWs (n = 120) reported multiple barriers to reporting of AEFI; the most common barriers were fear of personal consequences (44.1%), lack of knowledge or training (25.2%), and not believing an AEFI was serious enough to report (22.2%). Discussion of AEFI during the last supervisory visit was significantly associated with reporting in the past year (OR 7.39; p < .001). Of 172 supervisors interviewed, 65 (37.8%) mentioned their facilties had ever encountered an AEFI; over 90% of facilities had reporting forms. We identified low reporting of AEFI and multiple barriers to reporting among HCWs in the four selected regions of Ghana. Discussing AEFI during supervisory visits with HCWs might improve reporting. Additionally, strategies to address fear of personal consequences as a barrier to reporting of AEFI are needed.

Use of a new global indicator for vaccine safety surveillance and trends in adverse events following immunization reporting 2000-2015.

Reporting of adverse events following immunization (AEFI) is a key component for functional vaccine safety monitoring system. The aim of our study is to document trends in the AEFI reporting ratio globally and across the six World Health Organization (WHO) regions. We describe the number of AEFI reports communicated each year through the World Health Organization/United Nations Children's Fund Joint Reporting Form on Immunization from 2000 to 2015. The AEFI reporting ratios (annual AEFI reports per 100,000 surviving infants) were calculated to identify WHO countries (n = 191 in 2000 and n = 194 by 2015) that met a minimal reporting ratio of 10, a target set by the Global Vaccine Action Plan for vaccine safety monitoring as a proxy measure for a functional AEFI reporting system. The number of countries reporting any AEFI fluctuated over time but with progress from 32 (17%) in 2000 to 124 (64%) in 2015. In 2015, the global average AEFI reporting ratio was 549 AEFI reports per 100,000 surviving infants. The number of countries with AEFI reporting ratios greater than 10 increased from 8 (4%) in 2000 to 81 (42%) in 2015. In 2015, 60% of countries in the WHO Region of the Americas reported at least 10 AEFI per 100,000 surviving infants, followed by 55% in European Region, 43% in Eastern Mediterranean Region, 33% in Western Pacific Region, 27% in South-East Asia Region and 21% in African Region. Overall, AEFI reporting has increased over the past sixteen years worldwide, but requires strengthening in a majority of low- and middle- income countries. The AEFI reporting ratio is useful for benchmarking and following trends over time; but does not provide information on the quality of the reporting system and does not guarantee capacity to detect and manage a vaccine safety problem at a national level. Additional efforts are required to ensure and improve data quality, AEFI reporting and surveillance of immunization safety in every country.

Second symposium on the definition and management of anaphylaxis: summary report--second National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease/Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network symposium.

There is no universal agreement on the definition of anaphylaxis or the criteria for diagnosis. In July 2005, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease and Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network convened a second meeting on anaphylaxis, which included representatives from 16 different organizations or government bodies, including representatives from North America, Europe, and Australia, to continue working toward a universally accepted definition of anaphylaxis, establish clinical criteria that would accurately identify cases of anaphylaxis with high precision, further review the evidence on the most appropriate management of anaphylaxis, and outline the research needs in this area.

Guideline for collection, analysis and presentation of safety data in clinical trials of vaccines in pregnant women.

Vaccination during pregnancy is increasingly being used as an effective approach for protecting both young infants and their mothers from serious infections. Drawing conclusions from published studies in this area can be difficult because of the inability to compare vaccine trial results across different studies and settings due to the heterogeneity in the definitions of terms used to assess the safety of vaccines in pregnancy and the data collected in such studies. The guidelines proposed in this document have been developed to harmonize safety data collection in all phases of clinical trials of vaccines in pregnant women and apply to data from the mother, fetus and infant. Guidelines on the prioritization of the data to be collected is also provided to allow applicability in various geographic, cultural and resource settings, including high, middle and low-income countries.

Clinical assessment of serious adverse events in children receiving 2009 H1N1 vaccination.

BACKGROUND: Monovalent 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccines were licensed and administered in the United States during the H1N1 influenza pandemic between 2009 and 2013. METHODS: Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System received reports of adverse events following immunization (AEFI) after H1N1 vaccination. Selected reports were referred to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment network for additional review. We assessed causality using modified World Health Organization criteria. RESULTS: There were 3,928 reports of AEFI in children younger than age 18 years after 2009 H1N1 vaccination received by January 31, 2010. Of these, 214 (5.4%) were classified as serious nonfatal and 109 were referred to Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment for further evaluation. Ninety-nine (91%) had sufficient initial information to begin investigation and are described here. The mean age was 8 years (range, 6 months-17 years) and 38% were female. Median number of days between vaccination and symptom onset was 2 (range, -11 days to +41 days). Receipt of inactivated, live attenuated, or unknown type of 2009 H1N1 vaccines was reported by 68, 26 and 5 cases, respectively. Serious AEFI were categorized as neurologic events in 47 cases, as hypersensitivity in 15 cases and as respiratory events in 10 cases. At the time of evaluation, recovery was described as complete (61), partial (16), no improvement (1), or unknown (21). Causality assessment yielded the following likelihood of association with 2009 H1N1 vaccination: 8 definitely; 8 probably; 21 possibly; 43 unlikely; 17 unrelated; and 2 unclassifiable. CONCLUSIONS: Most AEFI in children evaluated were not causally related to vaccine and resolved without sequelae. Detailed clinical assessment of individual serious AEFI can provide reassurance of vaccine safety.