Article

Yellow fever vaccine-associated viscerotropic disease (YEL-AVD) and corticosteroid therapy: eleven United States cases, 1996-2004.

National Immunization Program, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, USA.
The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene (Impact Factor: 2.53). 09/2006; 75(2):333-6.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT During 1996 through 2004, 29 cases of yellow fever vaccine-associated viscerotropic disease (YEL-AVD) have been reported worldwide; 17 were fatal. Stress-dose corticosteroid (SDS) therapy has recently been found to improve survival among patients with septic shock but benefit for the treatment of YEL-AVD patients in septic shock is unknown. We retrospectively reviewed medical records of 11 U.S. YEL-AVD cases reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) from 1996 through 2004. Four of 11 case-patients received SDS; 3 of these 4 (75%) survived. Seven patients did not receive SDS and 2 (29%) survived. Altered mental status was documented on admission for 5 of the 11 patients; 4 of these 5 did not receive SDS and died, whereas one received SDS and survived. The use of stress-dose steroids might be a factor that influenced the survival of these YEL-AVD patients and should be further evaluated in the management of both YEL-AVD and wild-type yellow fever septic shock.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
75 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We evaluated whether coadministration of the yellow fever (YF) virus vaccine with human immunoglobulin (Ig) that contained YF virus-neutralizing antibodies would reduce post-vaccination viremia without compromising immunogenicity and thus, potentially mitigate YF vaccine-associated adverse events. We randomized 80 participants to receive either YF vaccine and Ig or YF vaccine and saline placebo. Participants were followed for 91 days for safety and assessments of viremia and immunogenicity. There were no differences found between the two groups in the proportion of vaccinated participants who developed viremia, seroconversion, CD8(+) and CD4(+) T-cell responses, and cytokine responses. These results argue against one putative explanation for the increased reporting of YF vaccine side effects in recent years (i.e., a change in travel clinic practice after 1996 when hepatitis A prophylaxis with vaccine replaced routine use of pre-travel Ig), thus potentially removing an incidental YF vaccine-attenuating effect of anti-YF virus antibodies present in Ig (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00254826).
    The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene 12/2012; · 2.53 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To identify the rate of serious adverse events attributable to yellow fever vaccination with 17D and 17DD strains reported in active and passive surveillance data. We conducted a systematic review of published literature on adverse events associated with yellow fever. We searched 9 electronic databases for peer reviewed and grey literature in all languages. There were no restrictions on date of publication. Reference lists of key studies were also reviewed to identify additional studies. We identified 66 relevant studies: 24 used active, 17 a combination of passive and active (15 of which were pharmacovigilance databases), and 25 passive surveillance. ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE: A total of 2,660,929 patients in general populations were followed for adverse events after vaccination, heavily weighted (97.7%) by one large Brazilian study. There were no observed cases of viscerotropic or neurotropic disease, one of anaphylaxis and 26 cases of urticaria (hypersensitivity). We also identified four studies of infants and children (n=2199), four studies of women (n=1334), and one study of 174 HIV+, and no serious adverse events were observed. PHARMACOVIGILANCE DATABASES: 10 of the 15 databases contributed data to this review, with 107,621,154 patients, heavily weighted (94%) by the Brazilian database. 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 provided an estimate of 6.6 YEL-AVD and YEL-AND cases per million, and estimates between 11.1 and 15.6 of overall "serious adverse events" per million. The estimates for the UK were higher at 34 "serious adverse events" and also for Switzerland with 14.6 "neurologic events" and 40 "serious events not neurological"/million doses. PASSIVE SURVEILLANCE: Six studies of campaigns in general populations included 94,500,528 individuals, very heavily weighted (99%) by the Brazilian data, and providing an estimate of 0.51 serious AEFIs/million doses. Five retrospective reviews of hospital or clinic records included 60,698 individuals, and no serious AEFIs were proven. The data are heavily weighted (96%) by the data from the Hospital for Tropical Diseases, London. Two studies included 35,723 children, four studies included 138 pregnant women, six studies included 191 HIV+ patients, and there was one review of patients who were HIV+, and no serious AEFIs were proven. The databases in each country used different definitions, protocols, surveillance mechanisms for the initial identification and reporting of cases, and strategies for the clinical and laboratory follow up of cases. The pharmacovigilance databases provide three sets of estimates: a low estimate from the Brazilian and Australian data, a medium estimate from the US VAERS data, and a higher estimate from the UK and Swiss data. The estimates from the active surveillance data are lower (and strongly influenced by the Brazilian data) and the estimates from the passive surveillance studies are also lower (strongly influenced by the London Hospital for Tropical Diseases data from the early 1950s). Sophisticated pathology, histopathology and tests such as PCR amplicon sequencing are needed to prove that serious adverse events were actually caused by the yellow fever vaccine, and the availability of such diagnostic capability is strongly biased towards recent reports from developed countries. Despite these variations in the estimation of serious harm, overall the 17D and 17DD yellow fever vaccine has proven to be a very safe vaccine and is highly effective against an illness with high potential mortality rates.
    Vaccine 06/2011; 29(28):4544-55. · 3.77 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Patients with rheumatic diseases are more susceptible to infection, due to the underlying disease itself or to its treatment. The rheumatologist should prevent infections in those patients, vaccination being one preventive measure to be adopted. Yellow fever is one of such infectious diseases that can be avoided.The yellow fever vaccine is safe and effective for the general population, but, being an attenuated live virus vaccine, it should be avoided whenever possible in rheumatic patients on immunosuppressive drugs. Considering that yellow fever is endemic in a large area of Brazil, and that vaccination against that disease is indicated for those living in such area or travelling there, rheumatologists need to know that disease, as well as the indications for the yellow fever vaccine and contraindications to it. Our paper was aimed at highlighting the major aspects rheumatologists need to know about the yellow fever vaccine to decide about its indication or contraindication in specific situations.
    Revista Brasileira de Reumatologia 04/2013; 53(2):206-210. · 0.86 Impact Factor