Dataset Information

A broad assessment of covid-19 vaccine safety using tree-based data-mining in the vaccine safety datalink.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Except for spontaneous reporting systems, vaccine safety monitoring generally involves pre-specifying health outcomes and post-vaccination risk windows of concern. Instead, we used tree-based data-mining to look more broadly for possible adverse events after Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Janssen COVID-19 vaccination.

Methods

Vaccine Safety Datalink enrollees receiving ≥1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine in 2020-2021 were followed for 70 days after Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna and 56 days after Janssen vaccination. Incident diagnoses in inpatient or emergency department settings were analyzed for clustering within both the hierarchical ICD-10-CM code structure and the post-vaccination follow-up period. We used the self-controlled tree-temporal scan statistic and TreeScan software. Monte Carlo simulation was used to estimate p-values; p = 0.01 was the pre-specified cut-off for statistical significance of a cluster.

Results

There were 4.1, 2.6, and 0.4 million Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Janssen vaccinees, respectively. Clusters after Pfizer-BioNTech vaccination included: (1) unspecified adverse effects, (2) common vaccine reactions, such as fever, myalgia, and headache, (3) myocarditis/pericarditis, and (4) less specific cardiac or respiratory symptoms, all with the strongest clusters generally after Dose 2; and (5) COVID-19/viral pneumonia/sepsis/respiratory failure in the first 3 weeks after Dose 1. Moderna results were similar but without a significant myocarditis/pericarditis cluster. Further investigation suggested the fifth signal group was a manifestation of mRNA vaccine effectiveness after the first 3 weeks. Janssen vaccinees had clusters of unspecified or common vaccine reactions, gait/mobility abnormalities, and muscle weakness. The latter two were deemed to have arisen from confounding related to practices at one site.

Conclusions

We detected post-vaccination clusters of unspecified adverse effects, common vaccine reactions, and, for the mRNA vaccines, chest pain and palpitations, as well as myocarditis/pericarditis after Pfizer-BioNTech Dose 2. Unique advantages of this data mining are its untargeted nature and its inherent adjustment for the multiplicity of diagnoses and risk intervals scanned.

SUBMITTER: Yih WK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9755007 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A broad assessment of covid-19 vaccine safety using tree-based data-mining in the vaccine safety datalink.

Yih W Katherine WK Daley Matthew F MF Duffy Jonathan J Fireman Bruce B McClure David D Nelson Jennifer J Qian Lei L Smith Ning N Vazquez-Benitez Gabriela G Weintraub Eric E Williams Joshua T B JTB Xu Stanley S Maro Judith C JC

Vaccine 20221216 3

<h4>Background</h4>Except for spontaneous reporting systems, vaccine safety monitoring generally involves pre-specifying health outcomes and post-vaccination risk windows of concern. Instead, we used tree-based data-mining to look more broadly for possible adverse events after Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Janssen COVID-19 vaccination.<h4>Methods</h4>Vaccine Safety Datalink enrollees receiving ≥1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine in 2020-2021 were followed for 70 days after Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna and ...[more]

PMID: 36535825

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction Safety data on simultaneous vaccination (SV) with primary series monovalent COVID-19 vaccines and other vaccines are limited. We describe SV with primary series COVID-19 vaccines and assess 23 pre-specified health outcomes following SV among persons aged ≥5 years in the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). Methods We utilized VSD’s COVID-19 vaccine surveillance data from December 11, 2020-May 21, 2022. Analyses assessed frequency of SV. Rate ratios (RRs) were estimated by Poisson regression when the number of outcomes was ≥5 across both doses, comparing outcome rates between COVID-19 vaccinees receiving SV and COVID-19 vaccinees receiving no SV in the 1–21 days following COVID-19 vaccine dose 1 and 1–42 days following dose 2 by SV type received (“All SV”, “Influenza SV”, “Non-influenza SV”). Results SV with COVID-19 vaccines was not common practice (dose 1: 0.7 % of 8,455,037 persons, dose 2: 0.3 % of 7,787,013 persons). The most frequent simultaneous vaccines were influenza, HPV, Tdap, and meningococcal. Outcomes following SV with COVID-19 vaccines were rare (total of 56 outcomes observed after dose 1 and dose 2). Overall rate of outcomes among COVID-19 vaccinees who received SV was not statistically significantly different than the rate among those who did not receive SV (6.5 vs. 6.8 per 10,000 persons). Statistically significant elevated RRs were observed for appendicitis (2.09; 95 % CI, 1.06–4.13) and convulsions/seizures (2.78; 95 % CI, 1.10–7.06) in the “All SV” group following dose 1, and for Bell’s palsy (2.82; 95 % CI, 1.14–6.97) in the “Influenza SV” group following dose 2. Conclusion Combined pre-specified health outcomes observed among persons who received SV with COVID-19 vaccine were rare and not statistically significantly different compared to persons who did not receive SV with COVID-19 vaccine. Statistically significant adjusted rate ratios were observed for some individual outcomes, but the number of outcomes was small and there was no adjustment for multiple testing.

Project description:BackgroundUnderstanding the long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on health care utilization is important to health care organizations and policy makers for strategic planning, as well as to researchers when designing studies that use observational electronic health record data during the pandemic period.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the changes in health care utilization across all care settings among a large, diverse, and insured population in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study within 8 health care organizations participating in the Vaccine Safety Datalink Project using electronic health record data from members of all ages from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021. The visit rates per person-year were calculated monthly during the study period for 4 health care settings combined as well as by inpatient, emergency department (ED), outpatient, and telehealth settings, both among all members and members without COVID-19. Difference-in-difference analysis and interrupted time series analysis were performed to assess the changes in visit rates from the prepandemic period (January 2017 to February 2020) to the early pandemic period (April-December 2020) and the later pandemic period (July-December 2021), respectively. An exploratory analysis was also conducted to assess trends through June 2023 at one of the largest sites, Kaiser Permanente Southern California.ResultsThe study included more than 11 million members from 2017 to 2021. Compared with the prepandemic period, we found reductions in visit rates during the early pandemic period for all in-person care settings. During the later pandemic period, overall use reached 8.36 visits per person-year, exceeding the prepandemic level of 7.49 visits per person-year in 2019 (adjusted percent change 5.1%, 95% CI 0.6%-9.9%); inpatient and ED visits returned to prepandemic levels among all members, although they remained low at 0.095 and 0.241 visits per person-year, indicating a 7.5% and 8% decrease compared to pre-pandemic levels among members without COVID-19, respectively. Telehealth visits, which were approximately 42% of the volume of outpatient visits during the later pandemic period, were increased by 97.5% (95% CI 86.0%-109.7%) from 0.865 visits per person-year in 2019 to 2.35 visits per person-year in the later pandemic period. The trends in Kaiser Permanente Southern California were similar to those of the entire study population. Visit rates from January 2022 to June 2023 were stable and appeared to be a continuation of the use levels observed at the end of 2021.ConclusionsTelehealth services became a mainstay of the health care system during the late COVID-19 pandemic period. Inpatient and ED visits returned to prepandemic levels, although they remained low among members without evidence of COVID-19. Our findings provide valuable information for strategic resource allocation for postpandemic patient care and for designing observational studies involving the pandemic period.

Project description:In the last two years, the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been a scientific and social challenge worldwide. Vaccines have been the most effective intervention for reducing virus transmission and disease severity. However, virus genetic variants are still circulating among vaccinated individuals with different symptomatology disease cases. Understanding the protective or disease associated mechanisms in vaccinated individuals is relevant to advance in vaccine development and implementation. To address this objective, serum protein profiles were characterized by quantitative proteomics and data analysis algorithms in four cohorts of vaccinated individuals uninfected and SARS-CoV-2 infected with asymptomatic, nonsevere and severe disease symptomatology. The results showed that immunoglobulins were the most overrepresented proteins in infected cohorts when compared to PCR-negative individuals. The immunoglobulin profile varied between different infected cohorts and correlated with protective or disease associated capacity. Overrepresented immunoglobulins in PCR-positive individuals correlated with protective response against SARS-CoV-2, other viruses, and thrombosis in asymptomatic cases. In nonsevere cases, correlates of protection against SARS-CoV-2 and HBV together with risk of myasthenia gravis and allergy and autoantibodies were observed. Patients with severe symptoms presented risk for allergy, chronic idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, and autoantibodies. The analysis of underrepresented immunoglobulins in PCR-positive compared to PCR-negative individuals identified vaccine-induced protective epitopes in various coronavirus proteins including the Spike receptor-binding domain RBD. Non-immunoglobulin proteins were associated with COVID-19 symptoms and biological processes. These results evidence host-associated differences in response to vaccination and the possibility of improving vaccine efficacy against SARS-CoV-2.

Project description:During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, conclusively evaluating possible associations between COVID-19 vaccines and potential adverse events was of critical importance. The National Academy of Medicine of Korea established the COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Center (CoVaSC) with support from the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency to investigate the scientific relationship between COVID-19 vaccines and suspected adverse events. Although determining whether the COVID-19 vaccine was responsible for any suspected adverse event necessitated a systematic approach, traditional causal inference theories, such as Hill's criteria, encountered certain limitations and criticisms. To facilitate a systematic and evidence-based evaluation, the United States Institute of Medicine, at the request of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, offered a detailed causality assessment framework in 2012, which was updated in the recent report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) in 2024. This framework, based on a weight-of-evidence approach, allows the independent evaluation of both epidemiological and mechanistic evidence, culminating in a comprehensive conclusion about causality. Epidemiological evidence derived from population studies is categorized into four levels-high, moderate, limited, or insufficient-while mechanistic evidence, primarily from biological and clinical studies in animals and individuals, is classified as strong, intermediate, weak, or lacking. The committee then synthesizes these two types of evidence to draw a conclusion about the causal relationship, which can be described as "convincingly supports" ("evidence established" in the 2024 NASEM report), "favors acceptance," "favors rejection," or "inadequate to accept or reject." The CoVaSC has established an independent committee to conduct causality assessments using the weight-of-evidence framework, specifically for evaluating the causality of adverse events associated with COVID-19 vaccines. The aim of this study is to provide an overview of the weight-of-evidence framework and to detail the considerations involved in its practical application in the CoVaSC.

Dataset Information

A broad assessment of covid-19 vaccine safety using tree-based data-mining in the vaccine safety datalink.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

A broad assessment of covid-19 vaccine safety using tree-based data-mining in the vaccine safety datalink.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets