Search

Background: In August 2010 reports of a possible association between exposure to AS03 adjuvanted pandemic A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccine and occurrence of narcolepsy in children and adolescents emerged in Sweden and Finland. In response to this signal, the background rates of narcolepsy in Europe were assessed to rapidly provide information for signal verification., Methods: We used a dynamic retrospective cohort study to assess the narcolepsy diagnosis rates during the period 2000-2010 using large linked automated health care databases in six countries: Denmark, Finland, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom., Results: Overall, 2608 narcolepsy cases were identified in almost 280 million person years (PY) of follow up. The pooled incidence rate was 0.93 (95% CI: 0. 90-0.97) per 100,000 PY. There were peaks between 15 and 30 year of age (women>men) and around 60 years of age. In the age group 5-19 years olds rates were increased after the start of pandemic vaccination compared to the period before the start of campaigns, with rate ratios (RR) of 1.9 (95% CI: 1.1-3.1) in Denmark, 6.4 (95% CI: 4.2-9.7) in Finland and 7.5 (95% CI: 5.2-10.7) in Sweden. Cases verification in the Netherlands had a significant effect on the pattern of incidence over time., Conclusions: The results of this incidence study provided useful information for signal verification on a population level. The safety signal of increased narcolepsy diagnoses following the start of the pandemic vaccination campaign as observed in Sweden and Finland could be observed with this approach. An increase in narcolepsy diagnoses was not observed in other countries, where vaccination coverage was low in the affected age group, or did not follow influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccination. Patient level analyses in these countries are being conducted to verify the signal in more detail., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Natural health products are promoted to the public as equally or more effective and less toxic than conventional drugs. However, some 'natural' medicines are known to have adverse effects. From April 2002 to August 2007, 18 suspected adverse reactions associated with propolis-containing products were reported to the national surveillance system of natural health products, coordinated by the Italian National Health Institute. Sixteen reports concerned allergic reactions (with dermatological or respiratory symptoms), while two concerned the digestive tract. Some of the reactions were serious: six patients were admitted to hospital or visited an emergency department and in two of these a life-threatening event was reported. In seven patients (four of whom were children), an allergic predisposition was indicated. Propolis, a resinous substance collected by honeybees from the buds of living plants, has been used for several purposes (dermatitis, laryngitis, oral ulcers) because of its wide range of suggested activities (antibacterial, antiviral, antifungal, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant and chemopreventive actions). However, propolis is also a potent sensitizer and should not be used in patients with an allergic predisposition, in particular an allergy to pollen. In Italy, products containing bee derivatives (bee pollen, royal jelly or propolis) are available to the public as food supplements. No label warning of possible adverse reactions is found on the packaging, although it is well known that atopic and asthmatic individuals may be at an increased risk of allergic reactions after using these products. The public and healthcare practitioners should be aware of the risk of allergic reactions to products derived from bees and a warning should be added to the packaging of these products.