Search

Background: The Accelerated Development of VAccine beNefit-risk Collaboration in Europe (ADVANCE) is a public-private partnership aiming to develop and test a system for rapid benefit-risk (B/R) monitoring of vaccines using European electronic health record (eHR) databases. This proof-of-concept study aimed to test the feasibility of near real-time (NRT) monitoring of vaccination coverage, benefits and risks based on multiple European eHR databases, using acellular pertussis vaccination in children aged <6 years as test case., Methods: A qualitative feasibility assessment on NRT monitoring was carried out using a survey and face-to-face discussion with ADVANCE data partners. Subsequently, a dynamic cohort study was conducted containing two distinct observation periods: a first period to establish a baseline (Jan 2014 to Mar 2018) and a subsequent 3-month period to test the actual feasibility of weekly NRT monitoring, based on which data latencies were calculated. An interactive web-application was additionally developed to facilitate the visual monitoring of vaccination coverage, the vaccine preventable disease incidence rates (benefits) and the incidence rates of adverse events (risks)., Results: Nine databases from four countries (Denmark, Italy, Spain and UK) participated in the qualitative feasibility assessment. Of them, five databases took part in the dynamic cohort study, with 5 databases providing baseline data and 3 databases participating to the NRT monitoring, providing data extractions on an almost weekly basis. The median data latency (time between event date and data release date) was between 1 and 2 weeks except for the benefit and risk events in one of the databases (latency 16 weeks)., Conclusion: Three European eHR databases successfully demonstrated the feasibility of providing data for weekly NRT monitoring, with short data latencies of 1-2 weeks for most events., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Tom de Smedt, Chris McGee, Hanne-Dorthe Emborg, Marco Villa, Talita Duarte-Salles, declared no potential conflicts of interest. Kaatje Bollaerts and Maria Alexandridou received consultancy fees from GSK for work unrelated to the submitted work. Rosa Gini declared that her institution is participating in studies funded by Novartis, Eli Lilly, and Daiichi outside the scope of this project. Claudia Bartolini declared she has received grants from PHARMO Institute for work outside the submitted work. Simon de Lusignan declared he has received funding through his University to conduct enhanced surveillance of influenza vaccine (GSK), and is a member Seqirus and Sanofi Pasteur advisory boards for which he received personal payment within the limits defined by his university. Myint TinTin Htar declared that she is employed by Pfizer and holds company shares. Miriam Sturkenboom declared that she has received grants from Novartis, CDC and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, for work unrelated to the submitted work. Lina Titievsky declared that she is employed by Pfizer and holds company stocks/shares. Vincent Bauchau declared that he is employed by GSK and holds company shares., (Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The Accelerated Development of Vaccine benefit-risk Collaboration in Europe (ADVANCE) public-private collaboration, aimed to develop and test a system for rapid benefit-risk monitoring of vaccines using healthcare databases in Europe. The objective of this proof-of-concept (POC) study was to test the feasibility of the ADVANCE system to generate incidence rates (IRs) per 1000 person-years and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for risks associated with whole cell- (wP) and acellular- (aP) pertussis vaccines, occurring in event-specific risk windows in children prior to their pre-school-entry booster., Methods: The study population comprised almost 5.1 million children aged 1 month to <6 years vaccinated with wP or aP vaccines during the study period from 1 January 1990 to 31 December 2015. Data from two Danish hospital (H) databases (AUH and SSI) and five primary care (PC) databases from, UK (THIN and RCGP RSC), Spain (SIDIAP and BIFAP) and Italy (Pedianet) were analysed. Database-specific IRRs between risk vs. non-risk periods were estimated in a self-controlled case series study and pooled using random-effects meta-analyses., Results: The overall IRs were: fever, 58.2 (95% CI: 58.1; 58.3), 96.9 (96.7; 97.1) for PC DBs and 8.56 (8.5; 8.6) for H DBs; convulsions, 7.6 (95% CI: 7.6; 7.7), 3.55 (3.5; 3.6) for PC and 12.87 (12.8; 13) for H; persistent crying, 3.9 (95% CI: 3.8; 3.9) for PC, injection-site reactions, 2.2 (95% CI 2.1; 2.2) for PC, hypotonic hypo-responsive episode (HHE), 0.4 (95% CI: 0.4; 0.4), 0.6 (0.6; 0.6) for PC and 0.2 (0.2; 0.3) for H; and somnolence: 0.3 (95% CI: 0.3; 0.3) for PC. The pooled IRRs for persistent crying, fever, and ISR, adjusted for age and healthy vaccinee period were higher after wP vs. aP vaccination, and lower for convulsions, for all doses. The IRR for HHE was slightly lower for wP than aP, while wP was associated with somnolence only for dose 1 and dose 3 compared with aP., Conclusions: The estimated IRs and IRRs were comparable with published data, therefore demonstrating that the ADVANCE system was able to combine several European healthcare databases to assess vaccine safety data for wP and aP vaccination., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Caitlin Dodd, Talita Duarte-Salles, Gino Picelli, Lara Tramontan, Giorgia Danieli, Ana Correa, Chris McGee, Elisa Martín-Merino, Consuelo Huerta, Hanne-Dorthe Emborg, Kaatje Bollaerts, Klara Berencsi declared no conflicts of interest. Daniel Weibel declared personal fees from GSK outside the submitted work. Olivia Mahaux, Francois Haguinet and Vincent Bauchau declared that they are employed by GSK and hold shares from GSK. Lina Titievsky declared that she is employed Pfizer and holds stocks from Pfizer. Miriam Sturkenboom declared that she has received grants from Novartis, CDC and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation outside the submitted work., (Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: New vaccines are launched based on their benefit-risk (B/R) profile anticipated from clinical development. Proactive post-marketing surveillance is necessary to assess whether the vaccination uptake and the B/R profile are as expected and, ultimately, whether further public health or regulatory actions are needed. There are several, typically not integrated, facets of post-marketing vaccine surveillance: the surveillance of vaccination coverage, vaccine safety, effectiveness and impact., Objective: With this work, we aim to assess the feasibility and added value of using an interactive dashboard as a potential methodology for near real-time monitoring of vaccine coverage and pre-specified health benefits and risks of vaccines., Methods: We developed a web application with an interactive dashboard for B/R monitoring. The dashboard is demonstrated using simulated electronic healthcare record data mimicking the introduction of rotavirus vaccination in the UK. The interactive dashboard allows end users to select certain parameters, including expected vaccine effectiveness, age groups, and time periods and allows calculation of the incremental net health benefit (INHB) as well as the incremental benefit-risk ratio (IBRR) for different sets of preference weights. We assessed the potential added value of the dashboard by user testing amongst a range of stakeholders experienced in the post-marketing monitoring of vaccines., Results: The dashboard was successfully implemented and demonstrated. The feedback from the potential end users was generally positive, although reluctance to using composite B/R measures was expressed., Conclusion: The use of interactive dashboards for B/R monitoring is promising and received support from various stakeholders. In future research, the use of such an interactive dashboard will be further tested with real-life data as opposed to simulated data.

The Accelerated Development of VAccine beNefit-risk Collaboration in Europe (ADVANCE) is a public-private collaboration aiming to develop and test a system for rapid benefit-risk (B/R) monitoring of vaccines using electronic health record (eHR) databases in Europe. Proof-of-concept studies were designed to assess the proposed processes and system for generating the required evidence to perform B/R assessment and near-real time monitoring of vaccines. We aimed to test B/R methodologies for vaccines, using the comparison of the B/R profiles of whole-cell (wP) and acellular pertussis (aP) vaccine formulations in children as an example. We used multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to structure the B/R assessment combined with individual-level state transition modelling to build the B/R effects table. In the state transition model, we simulated the number of events in two hypothetical cohorts of 1 million children followed from first pertussis dose till pre-school-entry booster (or six years of age, whichever occurred first), with one cohort receiving wP, and the other aP. The benefits were reductions in pertussis incidence and complications. The risks were increased incidences of febrile convulsions, fever, hypotonic-hyporesponsive episodes, injection-site reactions and persistent crying. Most model parameters were informed by estimates (coverage, background incidences, relative risks) from eHR databases from Denmark (SSI), Spain (BIFAP and SIDIAP), Italy (Pedianet) and the UK (RCGP-RSC and THIN). Preferences were elicited from clinical and epidemiological experts. Using state transition modelling to build the B/R effects table facilitated the comparison of different vaccine effects (e.g. immediate vaccine risks vs long-term vaccine benefits). Estimates from eHR databases could be used to inform the simulation model. The model results could be easily combined with preference weights to obtain B/R scores. Existing B/R methodology, modelling and estimates from eHR databases can be successfully used for B/R assessment of vaccines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]