Dataset Information

Spontaneously reported adverse events following COVID-19 basic and booster immunizations in the Netherlands.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

The rapid roll-out of novel COVID-19 vaccines made near real-time post-marketing safety surveillance essential to identify rare and long-term adverse events following immunization (AEFIs). In light of the ongoing booster vaccination campaigns, it is key to monitor changes in observed safety patterns post-vaccination. The effect of sequential COVID-19 vaccinations, as well as heterologous vaccination sequences, on the observed post-vaccination safety pattern, remains largely unknown.

Methods

The primary objective of this study was to describe the profile of spontaneously reported AEFIs following COVID-19 vaccination in the Netherlands, including the primary and booster series. Reports from consumers and healthcare professionals were collected via a COVID-19 vaccine-tailored online reporting form by the National Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb (Lareb) between 6 January 2021 and 31 August 2022. The data were used to describe the most frequently reported AEFIs per vaccination moment, the consumer experienced burden per AEFI, and differences in AEFIs reported for homologous and heterologous vaccination sequences.

Results

Lareb received 227,884 spontaneous reports over a period of twenty months. Overall, a high degree of similarity in local and systemic AEFIs per vaccination moment was observed, with no apparent change in the number of reports of serious adverse events after multiple COVID-19 vaccinations. No differences in the pattern of reported AEFIs per vaccination sequence was observed.

Conclusion

Spontaneous reported AEFIs demonstrated a similar reporting pattern for homologous and heterologous primary and booster series of COVID-19 vaccination in the Netherlands.

SUBMITTER: van der Boor SC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10208249 | biostudies-literature | 2023 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Spontaneously reported adverse events following COVID-19 basic and booster immunizations in the Netherlands.

van der Boor Saskia C SC Schmitz-de Vries Else T J ETJ Smits Dennis D Scholl Joep H G JHG Rolfes Leàn L van Hunsel Florence F

Vaccine 20230524 29

<h4>Introduction</h4>The rapid roll-out of novel COVID-19 vaccines made near real-time post-marketing safety surveillance essential to identify rare and long-term adverse events following immunization (AEFIs). In light of the ongoing booster vaccination campaigns, it is key to monitor changes in observed safety patterns post-vaccination. The effect of sequential COVID-19 vaccinations, as well as heterologous vaccination sequences, on the observed post-vaccination safety pattern, remains largely ...[more]

PMID: 37286408

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Analysing data on adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in health facilities is an essential step to help develop effective strategies to reduce their incidence. The objective was to analyse spontaneous ADR reports sent to the Ghanaian Food and Drugs Authority (FDA) by two reporting health facilities over 5 years. Methods: Data from duplicate spontaneous ADR reports sent to the FDA (Ghana) from 2014 to 2018 were extracted. The relationship between independent variables such as age, sex, and source of drugs and ADR outcomes was assessed with either chi-square or a Cramer's V test for association where appropriate. Results: Type A reactions (65.2%) were the most prevalent of the ADRs, followed by Type B (34.1%), with the majority (80%) of patients affected recovering fully. The majority of Type A reactions (54.1%) occurred in the clinic, while the majority of Type B reactions (43.5%) occurred in the hospital. The skin and central nervous system (CNS) were the most affected (70.8%) organs. A higher incidence of CNS and skin-related ADRs was recorded in patients older than 30 (RR = 1.28 (1.07-1.53)). Also, females were more likely to experience a CNS-related ADR. The seriousness of the ADR was found to be significantly associated with the (1) type of prescriber, (2) whether the drug was prescribed, or (3) whether the drug regimen prescribed was appropriate. Even though, in 86% of cases, the offending drug was withdrawn within the first 5 days, it exceeded 20 days in about 6% of cases. The record of allergy status in a patient's folder and the source of the drug were significantly associated with the chance that the offending drug was withdrawn. However, recording ADRs did not influence whether the offending drug was stopped. Conclusion: Most of the ADRs experienced by patients could be avoided if the current systems are improved to prevent the rechallenge of offending drugs. Efforts to improve and update patient medication records and steps to ensure continuity of care are essential in preventing these adverse drug events.

Project description:IntroductionThe rapid rollout of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines for a large proportion of the population necessitates a strong emphasis on safety. Complementary to the existing spontaneous reporting system, The Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb conducted patient-reported cohort event monitoring (CEM).ObjectiveThe primary aim was to investigate differences in the frequencies of any and commonly reported, 'well-known', systemic adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) with four COVID-19 vaccines (Pfizer's Comirnaty®, Moderna's Spikevax®, AstraZeneca's Vaxzevria® and the Janssen vaccine). As a secondary aim, we analyzed the frequencies of well-known systemic adverse events after the first and, if applicable, second COVID-19 vaccinations, taking into account age, sex and prior COVID-19 infection.MethodsPatient-reported outcomes (PROs) in the Netherlands starting in February 2021 were analyzed using a prospective cohort design.ResultsData of 27,554 participants who received one vaccination and 20,682 participants who received complete immunization were analyzed. The percentage of patients reporting any AEFI was high and ranged from approximately 53% for the Pfizer vaccine to approximately 94% for the Moderna vaccine. The frequency of serious AEFIs was low, with the highest frequency found for the AstraZeneca vaccine (0.228%). AEFIs were most often experienced by participants receiving the first dose of the AstraZeneca and Janssen vaccines and the second dose of the Moderna vaccine; the Pfizer vaccine was associated with the lowest rate of AEFIs. Participants with a COVID-19 history before vaccination experienced commonly reported systemic AEFIs more frequently after the first vaccination than after the second vaccination. Women and young people experienced more AEFIs than men and older people, respectively.ConclusionsThe analysis of a large cohort provides important information about the rates of AEFIs across age groups, among brands of vaccines and between those with and without prior COVID-19 infection. Participants reported a high number of AEFIs in general, but the frequency of serious AEFIs was low.

Project description:BackgroundOral adverse events (AEs) following COVID-19 vaccination have been sporadically reported during the previous months, warranting further investigation for their prevalence and suspected relationship with vaccine-elicited immune response.MethodsA retrospective analysis using the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) data was conducted to evaluate AEs within the oral cavity (mucosa, tongue, lips, palate, dentition, salivary glands) and AEs involving taste and other sensations. Oral AEs reported after receiving COVID-19 vaccination (test group) and seasonal influenza vaccination (control group) were extracted and cross-tabulated to assess their relative prevalence.ResultsAmong the 128 solicited (suspected) oral AEs, oral paresthesia (0.872%) was most reported after receiving COVID-19 vaccines, followed by the swelling of lips (0.844%), ageusia (0.722%), oral hypoesthesia (0.648%), swollen tongue (0.628%), and dysgeusia (0.617%). The reported prevalence of oral AEs was higher in the COVID-19 vaccine group than in the seasonal influenza group. The distribution pattern of the most reported oral AEs was similar for both COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines. Female sex, older age (>39 years old), primer doses, and mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines exhibited a higher reported prevalence of oral AEs.ConclusionWithin the limitations of this study, COVID-19 vaccines were found to be associated with rare oral AEs that are predominantly similar to those emerging following seasonal influenza vaccines. The most commonly reported oral AEs were oral paraesthesia (mouth-tingling), lip swelling, and ageusia, representing various pathophysiologic pathways that remain unclear. Taste-related AEs should be acknowledged in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and the public should be adequately informed about a potential taste dysfunction after receiving the COVID-19 vaccination. Dentists and dental teams need to be aware of the prevalence, severity, and prognosis of oral AEs to inform their patients and increase public confidence in vaccines.

Project description:Background and aimsAccurate and transparent investigation of adverse events (AEs) following COVID-19 vaccination enhances social trust and confidence in vaccination programs. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccination-related AEs among medical sciences students.MethodsIn this cross-sectional study, a self-administered survey via Google Forms was conducted to evaluate AEs associated with the AZD1222 (Oxford-AstraZeneca) and BBIBP-CorV (Sinopharm) vaccines among medical sciences students. Data were collected following participation in a training program focused on the symptomatology of AEs, which was designed to reduce confirmation bias.ResultsA total of 263 medical sciences students from North Khorasan University of Medical Sciences, Bojnurd, Iran, participated in this study, with data collection occurring from August 8 to September 1, 2021. The median age of the study population was 23 years (IQR: 22-24), with 207 participants being female (78.7%). Following the first dose, the prevalence of AEs was significantly more common in the Oxford-AstraZeneca group compared to the Sinopharm group [OR 12.93 (5.57-30.03), p < 0.001]. However, in the second dose, there was no significant difference in the prevalence of AEs between the Oxford-AstraZeneca group compared to the Sinopharm group [OR 1.45 (0.86-2.46), p = 0.17]. Injection site pain, fever, body/muscle pain, headache, feeling unwell, and fatigue were the most common AEs associated with both vaccines, with variations in the prevalence between the vaccines and between doses. The type of vaccine and sex were the only factors influencing the prevalence of AEs. Notably, the odds of experiencing AEs were higher in women compared to men.ConclusionsThe findings of this study indicated that the prevalence of AEs was higher for the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine compared to the Sinopharm vaccine. Further research is necessary to explore the impact of utilizing standardized definitions and common terminology for COVID-19 vaccination-related AEs in ensuring accurate and consistent reporting.

Dataset Information

Spontaneously reported adverse events following COVID-19 basic and booster immunizations in the Netherlands.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Spontaneously reported adverse events following COVID-19 basic and booster immunizations in the Netherlands.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets