Prevention of pertussis, tetanus, and diphtheria among pregnant and postpartum women and their infants recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP).

In 2005, two tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccines were licensed and recommended for use in adults and adolescents in the United States: ADACEL (sanofi pasteur, Swiftwater, Pennsylvania), which is licensed for use in persons aged 11--64 years, and BOOSTRIX (GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals, Rixensart, Belgium), which is licensed for use in persons aged 10-18 years. Both Tdap vaccines are licensed for single-dose use to add protection against pertussis and to replace the next dose of tetanus and diphtheria toxoids vaccine (Td). Available evidence does not address the safety of Tdap for pregnant women, their fetuses, or pregnancy outcomes sufficiently. Available data also do not indicate whether Tdap-induced transplacental maternal antibodies provide early protection against pertussis to infants or interfere with an infant's immune responses to routinely administered pediatric vaccines. Until additional information is available, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommends that pregnant women who were not vaccinated previously with Tdap: 1) receive Tdap in the immediate postpartum period before discharge from hospital or birthing center, 2) may receive Tdap at an interval as short as 2 years since the most recent Td vaccine, 3) receive Td during pregnancy for tetanus and diphtheria protection when indicated, or 4) defer the Td vaccine indicated during pregnancy to substitute Tdap vaccine in the immediate postpartum period if the woman is likely to have sufficient protection against tetanus and diphtheria. Although pregnancy is not a contraindication for receiving Tdap vaccine, health-care providers should weigh the theoretical risks and benefits before choosing to administer Tdap vaccine to a pregnant woman. This report 1) describes the clinical features of pertussis, tetanus, and diphtheria among pregnant and postpartum women and their infants, 2) reviews available evidence of pertussis vaccination during pregnancy as a strategy to prevent infant pertussis, 3) summarizes Tdap vaccination policy in the United States, and 4) presents recommendations for use of Td and Tdap vaccines among pregnant and postpartum women.

Postlicensure safety surveillance for quadrivalent human papillomavirus recombinant vaccine.

CONTEXT: In June 2006, the Food and Drug Administration licensed the quadrivalent human papillomavirus (types 6, 11, 16, and 18) recombinant vaccine (qHPV) in the United States for use in females aged 9 to 26 years; the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices then recommended qHPV for routine vaccination of girls aged 11 to 12 years. OBJECTIVE: To summarize reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) following receipt of qHPV. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Review and describe adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) reported to VAERS, a national, voluntary, passive surveillance system, from June 1, 2006, through December 31, 2008. Additional analyses were performed for some AEFIs in prelicensure trials, those of unusual severity, or those that had received public attention. Statistical data mining, including proportional reporting ratios (PRRs) and empirical Bayesian geometric mean methods, were used to detect disproportionality in reporting. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Numbers of reported AEFIs, reporting rates (reports per 100,000 doses of distributed vaccine or per person-years at risk), and comparisons with expected background rates. RESULTS: VAERS received 12 424 reports of AEFIs following qHPV distribution, a rate of 53.9 reports per 100,000 doses distributed. A total of 772 reports (6.2% of all reports) described serious AEFIs, including 32 reports of death. The reporting rates per 100,000 qHPV doses distributed were 8.2 for syncope; 7.5 for local site reactions; 6.8 for dizziness; 5.0 for nausea; 4.1 for headache; 3.1 for hypersensitivity reactions; 2.6 for urticaria; 0.2 for venous thromboembolic events, autoimmune disorders, and Guillain-Barré syndrome; 0.1 for anaphylaxis and death; 0.04 for transverse myelitis and pancreatitis; and 0.009 for motor neuron disease. Disproportional reporting of syncope and venous thromboembolic events was noted with data mining methods. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the AEFI rates were not greater than the background rates compared with other vaccines, but there was disproportional reporting of syncope and venous thromboembolic events. The significance of these findings must be tempered with the limitations (possible underreporting) of a passive reporting system.

Real-time polymerase chain reaction detection of Bordetella pertussis DNA in acellular pertussis vaccines.

Using 2 real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays for Bordetella pertussis, 2 of 5 acellular pertussis vaccines were found to contain B. pertussis DNA. Because residual DNA in vaccines can cause environmental contamination, the administration of acellular pertussis vaccines to patients should be physically separated from the collection of patients' specimens for testing of B. pertussis DNA by real-time PCR.

Preventing tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis among adults: use of tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid and acellular pertussis vaccine recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and recommendation of ACIP, supported by the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC), for use of Tdap among health-care personnel.

On June 10, 2005, a tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid and acellular pertussis vaccine (Tdap) formulated for use in adults and adolescents was licensed in the United States for persons aged 11-64 years (ADACEL, manufactured by sanofi pasteur, Toronto, Ontario, Canada). Prelicensure studies demonstrated safety and efficacy, inferred through immunogenicity, against tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis when Tdap was administered as a single booster dose to adults. To reduce pertussis morbidity among adults and maintain the standard of care for tetanus and diphtheria prevention and to reduce the transmission of pertussis to infants and in health-care settings, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends that: 1) adults aged 19-64 years should receive a single dose of Tdap to replace tetanus and diphtheria toxoids vaccine (Td) for booster immunization against tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis if they received their last dose of Td >or=10 years earlier and they have not previously received Tdap; 2) intervals shorter than 10 years since the last Td may be used for booster protection against pertussis; 3) adults who have or who anticipate having close contact with an infant aged <12 months (e.g., parents, grandparents aged <65 years, child-care providers, and health-care personnel) should receive a single dose of Tdap to reduce the risk for transmitting pertussis. An interval as short as 2 years from the last Td is suggested; shorter intervals can be used. When possible, women should receive Tdap before becoming pregnant. Women who have not previously received Tdap should receive a dose of Tdap in the immediate postpartum period; 4) health-care personnel who work in hospitals or ambulatory care settings and have direct patient contact should receive a single dose of Tdap as soon as feasible if they have not previously received Tdap. An interval as short as 2 years from the last dose of Td is recommended; shorter intervals may be used. These recommendations for use of Tdap in health-care personnel are supported by the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC). This statement 1) reviews pertussis, tetanus and diphtheria vaccination policy in the United States; 2) describes the clinical features and epidemiology of pertussis among adults; 3) summarizes the immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety data of Tdap; and 4) presents recommendations for the use of Tdap among adults aged 19-64 years.

Preventing tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis among adolescents: use of tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid and acellular pertussis vaccines recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP).

During spring 2005, two tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid and acellular pertussis vaccine (Tdap) products formulated for use in adolescents (and, for one product, use in adults) were licensed in the United States (BOOSTRIX, GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals, Rixensart, Belgium [licensed May 3, 2005, for use in persons aged 10-18 years], and ADACEL, sanofi pasteur, Toronto, Ontario, Canada [licensed June 10, 2005, for use in persons aged 11-64 years]). Prelicensure studies demonstrated safety and efficacy against tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis when Tdap was administered as a single booster dose to adolescents. To reduce pertussis morbidity in adolescents and maintain the standard of care for tetanus and diphtheria protection, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends that: 1) adolescents aged 11-18 years should receive a single dose of Tdap instead of tetanus and diphtheria toxoids vaccine (Td) for booster immunization against tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis if they have completed the recommended childhood diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and whole cell pertussis vaccine (DTP)/ diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and acellular pertussis vaccine (DTaP) vaccination series (five doses of pediatric DTP/DTaP before the seventh birthday; if the fourth dose was administered on or after the fourth birthday, the fifth dose is not needed) and have not received Td or Tdap. The preferred age for Tdap vaccination is 11-12 years; 2) adolescents aged 11-18 years who received Td, but not Tdap, are encouraged to receive a single dose of Tdap to provide protection against pertussis if they have completed the recommended childhood DTP/DTaP vaccination series. An interval of at least 5 years between Td and Tdap is encouraged to reduce the risk for local and systemic reactions after Tdap vaccination. However, an interval less than 5 years between Td and Tdap can be used; and 3) vaccine providers should administer Tdap and tetravalent meningococcal conjugate vaccine (Menactra, sanofi pasteur, Swiftwater, Pennsylvania) to adolescents aged 11-18 years during the same visit if both vaccines are indicated and available. This statement 1) reviews tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis vaccination policy in the United States, with emphasis on adolescents; 2) describes the clinical features and epidemiology of pertussis among adolescents; 3) summarizes the immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety data of the two Tdap vaccines licensed for use among adolescents; and 4) presents recommendations for tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis vaccination among adolescents aged 11-18 years.

Prevalence and natural history of monoclonal and polyclonal B-cell lymphocytosis in a residential adult population.

BACKGROUND: Monoclonal B-cells can be detected in the peripheral blood of some adults without B-cell malignancies, a condition recently termed monoclonal B-cell lymphocytosis (MBL). The risk of individuals with MBL progressing to a B-cell malignancy is unknown. Polyclonal B-cell lymphocytosis (PCBL) has not been systematically studied in the general population. METHODS: We obtained lymphocyte subset counts on 1,926 residential adults aged 40-76 years in a series of environmental health studies between 1991 and 1994. We then conducted two follow-ups in 1997 and 2003 on consenting participants with B-cell lymphocytosis, which included nine participants with MBL. To ascertain the clinical implications of MBL, we reviewed medical records and death certificates. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of MBL was 0.57% (11/1,926): nine cases at baseline and two additional cases identified at follow-up. Two (19%) MBL cases subsequently developed a B-cell malignancy; MBL persisted in the remaining nine cases (81%). All PCBL cases where no clone emerged regressed to normal B-cell counts over the follow-up period. MBL was significantly more frequent in residents near a hazardous waste site than in the control populations (age-adjusted OR 6.2; 95%CI 1.1-36.2). CONCLUSION: MBL confers an elevated risk for developing a B-cell malignancy, although it occurs only in a minority of cases. PCBL is most often a transient state, but a monoclonal population can emerge and persist. Prospective studies are needed to distinguish stable from progressive forms of B-cell lymphocytosis and to clarify the etiologic role of environmental exposures.

B-cell monoclonal lymphocytosis and B-cell abnormalities in the setting of familial B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Among all hematologic malignancies, B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia (BCLL) has the highest familial clustering (three- to sevenfold increase), strongly suggesting a genetic component to its etiology. Familial BCLL can be used as a model to study the early pathogenesis of this disease. METHODS: We examined nine kindreds from the National Cancer Institute's Familial BCLL Registry, consisting of 19 affected members with BCLL and 33 clinically unaffected first-degree relatives. Flow cytometric immunophenotyping to detect a B-cell monoclonal lymphocytosis (BCML) was performed. Monoclonality was confirmed by polymerase chain reaction analysis of whole blood DNA. Cell cycle analysis for aneuploidy was conducted. RESULTS: In all affected individuals, we observed the classic BCLL CD5/CD19/CD20/CD23 immunophenotypic patterns. Six of the 33 unaffected individuals (18%) had evidence of BCML. Additional individuals (13/33, 39%) showed some other abnormality, whereas 14 individuals (42%) were normal. Based on an estimated prevalence of 0.7% for BCML in the general population, the finding of six subjects (18%) with clonal abnormalities in this relatively modest sample was significantly greater than expected (i.e., 18% vs. 0.7%, P < 5.7 x 10(-9)). CONCLUSIONS: Individual components of BCML and other B-cell abnormalities were observed in almost half of the apparently unaffected individuals. Our findings suggested that BCML may be an early detectable abnormality in BCLL. The spectrum of some of these observed abnormalities suggested the involvement of different B-cell subpopulations or different pathways in clonal evolution. Population-based, longitudinal studies will be required to determine the incidence of BCML and other B-cell abnormalities and their relation to disease progression in BCLL and other closely related B-cell lymphoproliferative disorders.

U.S. Postlicensure safety surveillance for adolescent and adult tetanus, diphtheria and acellular pertussis vaccines: 2005-2007.

BACKGROUND: Pre-licensure clinical trials for two U.S. licensed tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccines did not reveal any major safety concerns. However, routine use in large adolescent and adult populations could reveal rare and potentially serious adverse events (AEs). METHODS: To characterize reported AEs following Tdap vaccination and identify potential safety concerns warranting further evaluation, we analyzed data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and assessed the frequency and proportions of AEs and reporting rates (reports per 100,000 vaccine doses distributed). RESULTS: A total of 2090 reports (7% were serious; 55% listed Tdap alone) involving Tdap vaccines were submitted to VAERS May 2005-June 2007. The crude reporting rate was 10.2 per 100,000 vaccine doses distributed. The median age of vaccinees was 22 years, and the female to male ratio was about 2 to 1. The majority of reports described common local and systemic signs and symptoms, such as injection site reactions, fever, and headache. Rarely reported AEs included myopericarditis, demyelinating diseases of the central nervous system, Guillain-Barré Syndrome, syncope, encephalopathy/encephalitis, seizure, Bell's palsy, anaphylaxis, and thrombocytopenia. CONCLUSIONS: Because adolescents and adults were not routinely vaccinated against pertussis in the past, this surveillance summary provides important - and reassuring - information about the use of Tdap in these age groups. Although subject to the limitations of passive surveillance, the findings of this VAERS review support the pre-licensure clinical trial data with regard to the safety of the U.S. licensed Tdap vaccines. Continued monitoring of clinically significant AEs that are temporally associated with Tdap vaccination and further assessment of such events using controlled observational studies may provide additional information about the safety of these vaccines.

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.

Algorithm to assess causality after individual adverse events following immunizations.

Assessing individual reports of adverse events following immunizations (AEFI) can be challenging. Most published reviews are based on expert opinions, but the methods and logic used to arrive at these opinions are neither well described nor understood by many health care providers and scientists. We developed a standardized algorithm to assist in collecting and interpreting data, and to help assess causality after individual AEFI. Key questions that should be asked during the assessment of AEFI include: Is the diagnosis of the AEFI correct? Does clinical or laboratory evidence exist that supports possible causes for the AEFI other than the vaccine in the affected individual? Is there a known causal association between the AEFI and the vaccine? Is there strong evidence against a causal association? Is there a specific laboratory test implicating the vaccine in the pathogenesis? An algorithm can assist with addressing these questions in a standardized, transparent manner which can be tracked and reassessed if additional information becomes available. Examples in this document illustrate the process of using the algorithm to determine causality. As new epidemiologic and clinical data become available, the algorithm and guidelines will need to be modified. Feedback from users of the algorithm will be invaluable in this process. We hope that this algorithm approach can assist with educational efforts to improve the collection of key information on AEFI and provide a platform for teaching about causality assessment.

Evaluation of immunization rates and safety among children with inborn errors of metabolism.

BACKGROUND: Children with inherited metabolic disorders are a potential high-risk group for vaccine-preventable diseases, yet information regarding immunization rates and vaccine safety within this population is limited. METHODS: Using Northern California Kaiser Permanente's electronic medical record, we identified children with inborn errors of metabolism from 1990 to 2007. We assessed immunization rates among infants with inborn errors of metabolism born at Northern California Kaiser Permanente matched to healthy infants (1 to 20), comparing both vaccines received by 2 years of age and age at vaccination. We assessed postvaccination adverse events among children up to 18 years old with inborn errors of metabolism, separately comparing emergency-department visits and hospitalizations during postvaccine days 0 to 30 (primary) and days 0 to 14 (secondary). RESULTS: Comparing infants with inborn errors of metabolism (n = 77) versus matched control subjects (n = 1540), similar proportions were up to date for vaccines at 2 years of age, and there was no evidence of delay in receipt of recommended vaccines during the first year. Vaccination of children with inborn errors of metabolism (n = 271) was not associated with any significant increase in emergency-department visits or hospitalizations during the 30 days after vaccination. Secondary analyses suggested that there may be increased rates of hospitalizations 2 weeks after vaccination for the sickest 1- to 4-year-old children. CONCLUSIONS: Children with inborn errors of metabolism at Northern California Kaiser Permanente received vaccines on the same immunization schedule as healthy infants. Immunization was not associated with increased risk for serious adverse events during the month after vaccination, providing overall reassurance that routine vaccination of children with inborn errors of metabolism does not result in adverse effects.

Understanding the role of human variation in vaccine adverse events: the Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment Network.

The Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) Network is a collaboration between the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and 6 academic medical centers to provide support for immunization safety assessment and research. The CISA Network was established by the CDC in 2001 with 4 primary goals: (1) develop research protocols for clinical evaluation, diagnosis, and management of adverse events following immunization (AEFI); (2) improve the understanding of AEFI at the individual level, including determining possible genetic and other risk factors for predisposed people and subpopulations at high risk; (3) develop evidence-based algorithms for vaccination of people at risk of serious AEFI; and (4) serve as subject-matter experts for clinical vaccine-safety inquiries. CISA Network investigators bring in-depth clinical, pathophysiologic, and epidemiologic expertise to assessing causal relationships between vaccines and adverse events and to understanding the pathogenesis of AEFI. CISA Network researchers conduct expert reviews of clinically significant adverse events and determine the validity of the recorded diagnoses on the basis of clinical and laboratory criteria. They also conduct special studies to investigate the possible pathogenesis of adverse events, assess relationships between vaccines and adverse events, and maintain a centralized repository for clinical specimens. The CISA Network provides specific clinical guidance to both health care providers who administer vaccines and those who evaluate and treat patients with possible AEFI. The CISA Network plays an important role in providing critical immunization-safety data and expertise to inform vaccine policy-makers. The CISA Network serves as a unique resource for vaccine-safety monitoring efforts conducted at the CDC.

Overview of the Clinical Consult Case Review of adverse events following immunization: Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) network 2004-2009.

BACKGROUND: In 2004 the Clinical Consult Case Review (CCCR) working group was formed within the CDC-funded Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) Network to review individual cases of adverse events following immunizations (AEFI). METHODS: Cases were referred by practitioners, health departments, or CDC employees. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) searches and literature reviews for similar cases were performed prior to review. After CCCR discussion, AEFI were assessed for a causal relationship with vaccination and recommendations regarding future immunizations were relayed back to the referring physicians. In 2010, surveys were sent to referring physicians to determine the utility and effectiveness of the CCCR service. RESULTS: CISA investigators reviewed 76 cases during 68 conference calls between April 2004 and December 2009. Almost half of the cases (35/76) were neurological in nature. Similar AEFI for the specific vaccines received were discovered for 63 cases through VAERS searches and for 38 cases through PubMed searches. Causality assessment using the modified WHO criteria resulted in classifying 3 cases as definitely related to vaccine administration, 12 as probably related, 16 as possibly related, 18 as unlikely related, 10 as unrelated, and 17 had insufficient information to assign causality. The physician satisfaction survey was returned by 30 (57.7%) of those surveyed and a majority of respondents (93.3%) felt that the CCCR service was useful. CONCLUSIONS: The CCCR provides advice about AEFI to practitioners, assigns potential causality, and contributes to an improved understanding of adverse health events following immunizations.

Causality assessment of serious neurologic adverse events following 2009 H1N1 vaccination.

BACKGROUND: Adverse events occurring after vaccination are routinely reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). We studied serious adverse events (SAEs) of a neurologic nature reported after receipt of influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccine during the 2009-2010 influenza season. Investigators in the Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) network sought to characterize these SAEs and to assess their possible causal relationship to vaccination. METHODS: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) physicians reviewed all SAE reports (as defined by the Code of Federal Regulations, 21CFR§314.80) after receipt of H1N1 vaccine reported to VAERS between October 1, 2009 and March 31, 2010. Non-fatal SAE reports with neurologic presentation were referred to CISA investigators, who requested and reviewed additional medical records and clinical information as available. CISA investigators assessed the causal relationship between vaccination and the event using modified WHO criteria as defined. RESULTS: 212 VAERS reports of non-fatal serious neurological events were referred for CISA review. Case reports were equally distributed by gender (50.9% female) with an age range of 6 months to 83 years (median 38 years). The most frequent diagnoses reviewed were: Guillain-Barré Syndrome (37.3%), seizures (10.8%), cranial neuropathy (5.7%), and acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (3.8%). Causality assessment resulted in classification of 72 events as "possibly" related (33%), 108 as "unlikely" related (51%), and 20 as "unrelated" (9%) to H1N1 vaccination; none were classified as "probable" or "definite" and 12 were unclassifiable (6%). CONCLUSION: The absence of a specific test to indicate whether a vaccine component contributes to the pathogenesis of an event occurring within a biologically plausible time period makes assessing causality difficult. The development of standardized protocols for providers to use in evaluation of adverse events following immunization, and rapid identification and follow-up of VAERS reports could improve causality assessment.

Kawasaki disease after vaccination: reports to the vaccine adverse event reporting system 1990-2007.

BACKGROUND: Kawasaki disease (KD) is a multisystemic vasculitis primarily affecting children<5 years. A review of RotaTeq (rotavirus vaccine live) clinical trial data revealed higher, though not statistically significantly, KD rates among RotaTeq vaccines than placebo recipients. In June 2007, the RotaTeq label was revised accordingly. OBJECTIVES: To describe and assess KD reported to Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) for all US licensed vaccines. METHODS: We reviewed all KD reports received by VAERS from 1990 through mid-October 2007. Cases were characterized by age, gender, onset interval, and vaccine type. Proportional reporting ratio (PRR) was used to evaluate KD reporting for each vaccine compared with all others. Reporting rates were calculated using number of doses distributed as denominator. RESULTS: Through October 14, 2007, 107 KD reports were received by VAERS: 26 were categorized as classic cases, 19 atypical, 52 possible, and 10 were noncases. Of the 97 cases, 91% were children<5 years. There was no clustering of onset intervals after day 1 postvaccination. Before the RotaTeq label revision, the KD PRR was elevated only for Pediarix (DTaP, hepB, and IPV combined) but the KD reporting rate for Pediarix (0.59/100,000 person-years) was much lower than the background incidence rate (9-19/100,000 person-years) for children<5 years in the United States. After the revision, reporting of KD for RotaTeq was stimulated but the reporting rate for RotaTeq (1.47/100,000 person-years) was still much lower than the background rate. CONCLUSIONS: Our review does not suggest an elevated KD risk for RotaTeq or other vaccines. Continued postmarketing monitoring for KD is ongoing.

Adverse event reports following yellow fever vaccination.

Yellow fever (YF) vaccine has been used for prevention of YF since 1937 with over 500 million doses administered. However, rare reports of severe adverse events following vaccination have raised concerns about the vaccine's safety. We reviewed reports of adverse events following YF vaccination reported to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) from 2000 to 2006. We used estimates of age and sex distribution of administered doses obtained from a 2006 survey of authorized vaccine providers to calculate age- and sex-specific reporting rates of all serious adverse events (SAE), anaphylaxis, YF vaccine-associated neurotropic disease, and YF vaccine-associated viscerotropic disease. Reporting rates of SAEs were substantially higher in males and in persons aged > or =60 years. These findings reinforce the generally acceptable safety profile of YF vaccine, but highlight the importance of physician and traveler education regarding the risks and benefits of YF vaccination, particularly for travelers > or =60 years of age. Vaccination should be limited to persons traveling to areas where the risk of YF is expected to exceed the risk of serious adverse events after vaccination, or if not medically contraindicated, where national regulations require proof of vaccination to prevent introduction of YF.