Reporting rates of yellow fever vaccine 17D or 17DD-associated serious adverse events in pharmacovigilance data bases: systematic review.
ABSTRACT To assess the reporting rates of serious adverse events attributable to yellow fever vaccination with 17D and 17DD strains as reported in pharmacovigilance databases, and assess reasons for differences in reporting rates.
We searched 9 electronic databases for peer reviewed and grey literature (government reports, conferences), in all languages. Reference lists of key studies were also reviewed to identify additional studies.
We identified 2,415 abstracts, of which 472 were selected for full text review. We identified 15 pharmacovigilance databases which reported adverse events attributed to yellow fever vaccination, of which 10 contributed data to this review with about 107,600,000 patients (allowing for overlapping time periods for the studies of the US VAERS database), and the data are very heavily weighted (94%) by the Brazilian database. The estimates of serious adverse events form three groups. The estimates for Australia were low at 0/210,656 for "severe neurological disease" and 1/210,656 for YEL-AVD, and also low for Brazil with 9 hypersensitivity events, 0.23 anaphylactic shock events, 0.84 neurologic syndrome events and 0.19 viscerotropic events cases/million doses. The five analyses of partly overlapping periods for the US VAERS database provide an estimate of 3.6/cases per million YEL-AND in one analysis and 7.8 in another, and 3.1 YEL-AVD in one analysis and 3.9 in another. The estimates for the UK used only the inclusive term of "serious adverse events" not further classified into YEL-And or YEL-AND and reported 34 "serious adverse events." The Swiss database used the term "serious adverse events" and reported 7 such events (including 4 "neurologic reactions") for a reporting rate of 25 "serious adverse events"/million doses.
Reporting rates for serious adverse events following yellow fever vaccination are low. Differences in reporting rates may be due to differences in definitions, surveillance system organisation, methods of reporting cases, administration of YFV with other vaccines, incomplete information about denominators, time intervals for reporting events, the degree of passive reporting, access to diagnostic resources, and differences in time periods of reporting.
- Journal of Travel Medicine 11/2013; 20(6):344-5. · 1.68 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Yellow fever (YF) vaccine is considered safe; however, severe illness and death following vaccination have been reported. Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) and US Department of Defense (DoD) data were used to identify adverse reactions following YF vaccination. Within the VSD, YF-vaccine-exposed subjects were compared to age-, site-, and gender-matched unexposed subjects. YF-vaccine-exposed DoD subjects were studied using a risk-interval design. For both cohorts, ICD-9 codes were analyzed for allergic and local reactions, mild systemic reactions, and possible visceral and neurologic adverse events (AEs). The VSD cohort received 47,159 doses from 1991 through 2006. The DoD cohort received 1.12 million doses from 1999 through 2007. Most subjects received other vaccines simultaneously. In the VSD cohort, rates of allergic, local, and mild systemic reactions were not statistically different between YF-vaccine-exposed and -unexposed subjects. In the DoD, there was an increased risk for outpatient allergic events in the period following vaccination with YF and other vaccines rate ratios [RR 3.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.35-4.41] but with no increased risk for inpatient allergic reactions. In both cohorts, inpatient ICD-9 codes for visceral events were significantly less common following vaccination; inpatient codes for neurologic events were less common in the VSD YF-vaccine-exposed adult cohort, but did not differ between exposed and unexposed periods in the DoD. In the DoD, one fatal case of YF-vaccine-associated viscerotropic disease (YF-vaccine-AVD) was detected. The estimated death rate was 0.89 for 1,000,000 YF vaccine doses (95% CI 0.12-6.31/1,000,000 doses). No YF vaccine-associated deaths occurred in the VSD. In these closed cohorts we did not detect increased risk for visceral or neurologic events following YF vaccination. The death rate following YF vaccine was consistent with previous reports. These data support current recommendations for use of YF vaccine in young healthy individuals. These data are inadequate to judge safety of YF vaccines in elderly patients.Journal of Travel Medicine 10/2013; · 1.68 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: In March 2013, the World Health Organization (WHO) Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunisation (SAGE) considered a number of issues in order to update the WHO Position Paper on Yellow Fever (2003). A key conclusion of this review was that a single dose of yellow fever (YF) vaccine appears to confer life-long protection against YF disease, and that a booster dose of YF vaccine is not needed to maintain immunity. While the efficacy of YF vaccine in the majority of vaccine recipients is not in doubt, the WHO announcement is somewhat surprising as there are some limitations in the evidence base, but more importantly, this announcement is not accompanied by any imminent change in the International Health Regulations 2005. The tension between what is considered best clinical practice and the law will be difficult to reconcile for many health professionals, travellers, and the travel industry, in an area of travel medicine that is already subject to debate and confusion. This commentary reviews the recent WHO announcement, and considers the practical implications for health professionals providing YF vaccine to international travellers.Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease 09/2013; · 1.54 Impact Factor