Evaluation of autoimmune safety signal in observational vaccine safety studies

Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California
Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics (Impact Factor: 2.37). 09/2012; 8(9). DOI: 10.4161/hv.21268
Source: PubMed


Autoimmune safety evaluation is an important component of post-licensure vaccine safety evaluation. Recently, we published the findings from a large observational safety study of the quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine in females. From this study, based on two large managed care organizations, we have obtained some empirical data that may prove useful for the design of future vaccine safety studies within a managed care environment. For autoimmune conditions, a major challenge in vaccine safety study is to determine true incident cases in relation to the timing of vaccination. We found expert case review of medical records an indispensable component for autoimmune safety studies based on electronic health records. Case identification should also be expanded to include the use of laboratory test results or other relevant measures in addition to the disease specific ICD-9 diagnosis codes, when applicable. Furthermore, we recommend the parallel use of both safety signal evaluation that involves pattern evaluation for conditions that are more common, and statistical comparisons for conditions that are rather rare. Finally, we recommend an accompanying vaccine uptake study to understand the potential selection bias and confounding in a given study population that should be addressed with data collection and analytical techniques.

1 Follower
1 Read
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To assess the risk of serious adverse events after vaccination of adolescent girls with quadrivalent human papillomavirus (qHPV) vaccine. Register based cohort study. Denmark and Sweden, October 2006 to December 2010. 997 585 girls aged 10-17, among whom 296 826 received a total of 696 420 qHPV vaccine doses. Incident hospital diagnosed autoimmune, neurological, and venous thromboembolic events (53 different outcomes) up to 180 days after each qHPV vaccine dose. Only events with at least five vaccine exposed cases were considered for further assessment. Rate ratios adjusted for age, country, calendar year, and parental country of birth, education, and socioeconomic status were estimated, comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated person time. For outcomes where the rate ratio was significantly increased, we regarded three criteria as signal strengthening: analysis based on 20 or more vaccine exposed cases (reliability), rate ratio 3.0 or more (strength), and significantly increased rate ratio in country specific analyses (consistency). We additionally assessed clustering of events in time and estimated rate ratios for a risk period that started on day 181. Among the 53 outcomes, at least five vaccine exposed cases occurred in 29 and these were analysed further. Whereas the rate ratios for 20 of 23 autoimmune events were not significantly increased, exposure to qHPV vaccine was significantly associated with Behcet's syndrome, Raynaud's disease, and type 1 diabetes. Each of these three outcomes fulfilled only one of three predefined signal strengthening criteria. Furthermore, the pattern of distribution in time after vaccination was random for all three and the rate ratios for these outcomes in the period from day 181 after vaccination were similar to the rate ratios in the primary risk period. The rate ratios for five neurological events were not significantly increased and there were inverse associations with epilepsy (rate ratio 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.54 to 0.80) and paralysis (0.56, 0.35 to 0.90). There was no association between exposure to qHPV vaccine and venous thromboembolism (0.86, 0.55 to 1.36). This large cohort study found no evidence supporting associations between exposure to qHPV vaccine and autoimmune, neurological, and venous thromboembolic adverse events. Although associations for three autoimmune events were initially observed, on further assessment these were weak and not temporally related to vaccine exposure. Furthermore, the findings need to be interpreted considering the multiple outcomes assessed.
    BMJ (online) 10/2013; 347(oct09 4):f5906. DOI:10.1136/bmj.f5906 · 17.45 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: As screening methods evolve and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination efforts gain traction, knowledge of the current evidence on effectiveness of prevention methods is critical to support further development of programs. Screening has dramatically reduced cervical cancer incidence and mortality; however, further progress could be made with implementing new screening techniques, such as HPV DNA testing. Continued focus has been given to methods such as visual inspection with acetic acid/Lugol's iodine (VIA/VILI) and self-testing, which may provide an alternative in settings and populations wherein infrastructural challenges and logistical barriers pose challenges to achieving high screening coverage. Postlicensure studies of HPV vaccine show continued effectiveness against genital warts, the first outcome possible to measure. Of note, age-at-vaccination seems to play a pivotal role in effectiveness. Studies examining safety of the HPV vaccines could not confirm any increased risk associated with vaccination. Existing cervical screening techniques are effective; however, programs should consider implementing HPV DNA testing where applicable and further process developments for alternative methods may result in improved results. The HPV vaccine is safe and effective and should be given before sexual debut to achieve maximum protection.
    Current opinion in oncology 11/2013; 26(1). DOI:10.1097/CCO.0000000000000034 · 4.47 Impact Factor


1 Read
Available from