H1N1 and Seasonal Influenza Vaccine Safety in the Vaccine Safety Datalink Project

Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States
American journal of preventive medicine (Impact Factor: 4.53). 08/2011; 41(2):121-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2011.04.004
Source: PubMed


The emergence of pandemic H1N1 influenza virus in early 2009 prompted the rapid licensure and use of H1N1 monovalent inactivated (MIV) and live, attenuated (LAMV) vaccines separate from seasonal trivalent inactivated (TIV) and live, attenuated (LAIV) influenza vaccines. A robust influenza immunization program in the U.S. requires ongoing monitoring of potential adverse events associated with vaccination.
To prospectively conduct safety monitoring of H1N1 and seasonal influenza vaccines during the 2009-2010 season.
The Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) Project monitors ∼9.2 million members in eight U.S. medical care organizations. Electronic data on vaccines and pre-specified adverse events were updated and analyzed weekly for signal detection from November 2009 to April 2010 using either a self-controlled design or a current versus historical comparison. Statistical signals were further evaluated using alternative approaches to identify temporal clusters and to control for time-varying confounders.
As of May 1, 2010, a total of 1,345,663 MIV, 267,715 LAMV, 2,741,150 TIV, and 157,838 LAIV doses were administered in VSD. No significant associations were noted during sequential analyses for Guillain-Barré syndrome, most other neurologic outcomes, and allergic and cardiac events. For MIV, a statistical signal was observed for Bell's palsy for adults aged ≥25 years on March 31, 2010, using the self-controlled approach. Subsequent analyses revealed no significant temporal cluster. Case-centered logistic regression adjusting for seasonality demonstrated an OR for Bell's palsy of 1.26 (95% CI=0.97, 1.63).
No major safety problems following H1N1 or seasonal influenza vaccines were detected in the 2009-2010 season in weekly sequential analyses. Seasonality likely contributed to the Bell's palsy signal following MIV. Prospective safety monitoring followed by rigorous signal refinement is critical to inform decision-making by regulatory and public health agencies.

1 Follower
6 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Post-licensure medical product safety surveillance is important for detecting adverse events potentially not identified pre-licensure. Historically, post-licensure safety monitoring has been accomplished using passive reporting systems and by conducting formal Phase IV randomized trials or large epidemiological studies, also known as safety surveillance or pharmacovigilance studies. However, crucial gaps in the safety evidence base provided by these approaches have led to high profile product withdrawals and growing public concern about unknown health risks associated with licensed products. To address the limitations of existing surveillance systems and to facilitate more accurate and rapid detection of safety problems, new systems involving active surveillance of large, population-based cohorts using observational health care utilization databases are being developed. In this article, we review common statistical methods that have been employed previously for post-licensure safety monitoring, including data mining and sequential hypothesis testing, and assess which methods may be promising for potential use within this newly proposed prospective observational cohort monitoring framework. We discuss gaps in existing approaches and identify areas where methodological development is needed to improve the success of safety surveillance efforts in this setting.
    Statistical Methods in Medical Research 12/2011; 24(2). DOI:10.1177/0962280211413452 · 4.47 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Many challenges arise when conducting a sequentially monitored medical product safety surveillance evaluation using observational electronic data captured during routine care. We review existing sequential approaches for potential use in this setting, including a continuous sequential testing method that has been utilized within the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) and group sequential methods, which are used widely in randomized clinical trials. Using both simulated data and preliminary data from an ongoing VSD evaluation, we discuss key sequential design considerations, including sample size and duration of surveillance, shape of the signaling threshold, and frequency of interim testing. All designs control the overall Type 1 error rate across all tests performed, but each yields different tradeoffs between the probability and timing of true and false positive signals. Designs tailored to monitor efficacy outcomes in clinical trials have been well studied, but less consideration has been given to optimizing design choices for observational safety settings, where the hypotheses, population, prevalence and severity of the outcomes, implications of signaling, and costs of false positive and negative findings are very different. Analytic challenges include confounding, missing and partially accrued data, high misclassification rates for outcomes presumptively defined using diagnostic codes, and unpredictable changes in dynamically accessed data over time (e.g., differential product uptake). Many of these factors influence the variability of the adverse events under evaluation and, in turn, the probability of committing a Type 1 error. Thus, to ensure proper Type 1 error control, planned sequential thresholds should be adjusted over time to account for these issues.
    Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety 01/2012; 21 Suppl 1(S1):62-71. DOI:10.1002/pds.2324 · 2.94 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Bacterial and viral infections have been shown to induce relapses and accelerate the progression of multiple sclerosis (MS). Vaccination to prevent communicable disease in such patients is, therefore, of key importance. Reports of potentially detrimental effects of immunization on the course of MS, however, have prompted patients and physicians to adopt a cautious attitude towards the use of vaccines. The risks associated with a number of vaccines have been investigated in patients with MS. Vaccines against some diseases, such as tetanus and hepatitis B, are not associated with an elevated risk of MS exacerbation, whereas vaccines against other diseases, such as yellow fever, are contraindicated in patients with MS. Many patients with MS receive immunosuppressive or immunomodulatory therapy, which could make them more susceptible to infectious diseases and might also affect their ability to respond to immunization. Here, we review the indications for and possible adverse effects of vaccines in patients with MS, and address issues of vaccination in the context of immunomodulatory therapy for MS.
    Nature Reviews Neurology 01/2012; 8(3):143-51. DOI:10.1038/nrneurol.2012.8 · 15.36 Impact Factor
Show more