Search

Timely and effective evaluation of vaccine safety signals for newly developed vaccines introduced in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) is essential. The study tested the development of a global network of hospital-based sentinel sites for vaccine safety signal verification and hypothesis testing. Twenty-six sentinel sites in sixteen countries across all WHO regions participated, and 65% of the sites were from LMIC. We describe the process for the establishment and operationalization of such a network and the lessons learned in conducting a multi-country collaborative initiative. 24 out of the 26 sites successfully contributed data for the global analysis using standardised tools and procedures. Our study successfully confirmed the well-known risk estimates for the outcomes of interest. The main challenges faced by investigators were lack of adequate information in the medical records for case ascertainment and classification, and access to immunization data. The results suggest that sentinel hospitals intending to participate in vaccine safety studies strengthen their systems for discharge diagnosis coding, medical records and linkage to vaccination data. Our study confirms that a multi-country hospital-based network initiative for vaccine safety monitoring is feasible and demonstrates the validity and utility of large collaborative international studies to monitor the safety of new vaccines introduced in LMICs. (C) 2017 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Background & objectives Vaccine safety signals require investigation, which may be done rapidly at the population level using ecological studies, before embarking on hypothesis-testing studies. Incidence rates were used to assess a signal of narcolepsy following AS03-adjuvanted monovalent pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1) influenza vaccination among children and adolescents in Sweden and Finland in 2010. We explored the utility of ecological data to assess incidence of narcolepsy following exposure to pandemic H1N1 virus or vaccination in 10 sites that used different vaccines, adjuvants, and had varying vaccine coverage. Methods We calculated incidence rates of diagnosed narcolepsy for periods defined by influenza virus circulation and vaccination campaign dates, and used Poisson regression to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) comparing the periods during which wild-type virus circulated and after the start of vaccination campaigns vs. the period prior to pH1N1 virus circulation. We used electronic health care data from Sweden, Denmark, the United Kingdom, Canada (3 provinces), Taiwan, Netherlands, and Spain (2 regions) from 2003 to 2013. We investigated interactions between age group and adjuvant in European sites and conducted a simulation study to investigate how vaccine coverage, age, and the interval from onset to diagnosis may impact the ability to detect safety signals. Results Incidence rates of narcolepsy varied by age, continent, and period. Only in Taiwan and Sweden were significant time-period-by-age-group interactions observed. Associations were found for children in Taiwan (following pH1N1 virus circulation) and Sweden (following vaccination). Simulations showed that the individual-level relative risk of narcolepsy was underestimated using ecological methods comparing post- vs. pre-vaccination periods; this effect was attenuated with higher vaccine coverage and a shorter interval from disease onset to diagnosis. Conclusions Ecological methods can be useful for vaccine safety assessment but the results are influenced by diagnostic delay and vaccine coverage. Because ecological methods assess risk at the population level, these methods should be treated as signal-generating methods and drawing conclusions regarding individual-level risk should be avoided.

New vaccines designed to prevent diseases endemic in low and middle -income countries (LMICs) are now being introduced without prior record of utilization in countries with robust pharmacovigilance systems. To address this deficit, our objective was to demonstrate feasibility of an international hospital based network for the assessment of potential epidemiological associations between serious and rare adverse events and vaccines in any setting. This was done through a proof-of-concept evaluation of the risk of immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) and aseptic meningitis (AM) following administration of the first dose of measles-mumps-containing vaccines using the self-controlled risk interval method in the primary analysis. The World Health Organization (WHO) selected 26 sentinel sites (49 hospitals) distributed in 16 countries of the six WHO regions. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) of 5.0 (95% CI: 2.5-9.7) for ITP following first dose of measles-containing vaccinations, and of 10.9 (95% CI: 4.2-27.8) for AM following mumps-containing vaccinations were found. The strain-specific analyses showed significantly elevated ITP risk for measles vaccines containing Schwarz (IRR: 20.7; 95% CI: 2.7-157.6), Edmonston- Zagreb (IRR: 11.1; 95% CI: 1.4-90.3), and Enders'Edmonston (IRR: 8.5; 95% CI: 1.9-38.1) strains. A significantly elevated AM risk for vaccines containing the Leningrad-Zagreb mumps strain (IRR: 10.8; 95% CI: 1.3-87.4) was also found. This proof-of-concept study has shown, for the first time, that an international hospital-based network for the investigation of rare vaccine adverse events, using common standardized procedures and with high participation of LMICs, is feasible, can produce reliable results, and has the potential to characterize differences in risk between vaccine strains. The completion of this network by adding large reference hospitals, particularly from tropical countries, and the systematic WHO-led implementation of this approach, should permit the rapid post-marketing evaluation of safety signals for serious and rare adverse events for new and existing vaccines in all settings, including LMICs. (C) 2017 World Health Organization. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contains fulltext : 196252.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) Objectives: The objectives of this study were to explore inter-study heterogeneity in the pharmacokinetics (PK) of orally administered rifampicin, to derive summary estimates of rifampicin PK parameters at standard dosages and to compare these with summary estimates for higher dosages. Methods: A systematic search was performed for studies of rifampicin PK published in the English language up to May 2017. Data describing the Cmax and AUC were extracted. Meta-analysis provided summary estimates for PK parameter estimates at standard rifampicin dosages. Heterogeneity was assessed by estimation of the I2 statistic and visual inspection of forest plots. Summary AUC estimates at standard and higher dosages were compared graphically and contextualized using preclinical pharmacodynamic (PD) data. Results: Substantial heterogeneity in PK parameters was evident and upheld in meta-regression. Treatment duration had a significant impact on the summary estimates for rifampicin PK parameters, with Cmax 8.98 mg/L (SEM 2.19) after a single dose and 5.79 mg/L (SEM 2.14) at steady-state dosing, and AUC 72.56 mg.h/L (SEM 2.60) and 38.73 mg.h/L (SEM 4.33) after single and steady-state dosing, respectively. Rifampicin dosages of at least 25 mg/kg are required to achieve plasma PK/PD targets defined in preclinical studies. Conclusions: Vast inter-study heterogeneity exists in rifampicin PK parameter estimates. This is not explained by the available modifying variables. The recommended dosage of rifampicin should be increased to improve efficacy. This study provides an important point of reference for understanding rifampicin PK at standard dosages as efforts to explore higher dosing strategies continue in this field.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the cardiovascular safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and estimate the risk of hospital admission for heart failure with use of individual NSAIDs. DESIGN: Nested case-control study. SETTING: Five population based healthcare databases from four European countries (the Netherlands, Italy, Germany, and the United Kingdom). PARTICIPANTS: Adult individuals (age >/=18 years) who started NSAID treatment in 2000-10. Overall, 92 163 hospital admissions for heart failure were identified and matched with 8 246 403 controls (matched via risk set sampling according to age, sex, year of cohort entry). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Association between risk of hospital admission for heart failure and use of 27 individual NSAIDs, including 23 traditional NSAIDs and four selective COX 2 inhibitors. Associations were assessed by multivariable conditional logistic regression models. The dose-response relation between NSAID use and heart failure risk was also assessed. RESULTS: Current use of any NSAID (use in preceding 14 days) was found to be associated with a 19% increase of risk of hospital admission for heart failure (adjusted odds ratio 1.19; 95% confidence interval 1.17 to 1.22), compared with past use of any NSAIDs (use >183 days in the past). Risk of admission for heart failure increased for seven traditional NSAIDs (diclofenac, ibuprofen, indomethacin, ketorolac, naproxen, nimesulide, and piroxicam) and two COX 2 inhibitors (etoricoxib and rofecoxib). Odds ratios ranged from 1.16 (95% confidence interval 1.07 to 1.27) for naproxen to 1.83 (1.66 to 2.02) for ketorolac. Risk of heart failure doubled for diclofenac, etoricoxib, indomethacin, piroxicam, and rofecoxib used at very high doses (>/=2 defined daily dose equivalents), although some confidence intervals were wide. Even medium doses (0.9-1.2 defined daily dose equivalents) of indomethacin and etoricoxib were associated with increased risk. There was no evidence that celecoxib increased the risk of admission for heart failure at commonly used doses. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of hospital admission for heart failure associated with current use of NSAIDs appears to vary between individual NSAIDs, and this effect is dose dependent. This risk is associated with the use of a large number of individual NSAIDs reported by this study, which could help to inform both clinicians and health regulators.

Purpose Defining a study population and creating an analytic dataset from longitudinal healthcare databases involves many decisions. Our objective was to catalogue scientific decisions underpinning study execution that should be reported to facilitate replication and enable assessment of validity of studies conducted in large healthcare databases. Methods We reviewed key investigator decisions required to operate a sample of macros and software tools designed to create and analyze analytic cohorts from longitudinal streams of healthcare data. A panel of academic, regulatory, and industry experts in healthcare database analytics discussed and added to this list. Conclusion Evidence generated from large healthcare encounter and reimbursement databases is increasingly being sought by decision‐makers. Varied terminology is used around the world for the same concepts. Agreeing on terminology and which parameters from a large catalogue are the most essential to report for replicable research would improve transparency and facilitate assessment of validity. At a minimum, reporting for a database study should provide clarity regarding operational definitions for key temporal anchors and their relation to each other when creating the analytic dataset, accompanied by an attrition table and a design diagram. A substantial improvement in reproducibility, rigor and confidence in real world evidence generated from healthcare databases could be achieved with greater transparency about operational study parameters used to create analytic datasets from longitudinal healthcare databases.

Immunization in pregnancy provides a promising contribution to globally reducing neonatal and under-five childhood mortality and morbidity. Thorough assessment of benefits and risks for the primarily healthy pregnant women and their unborn babies is required. The GAIA project was formed in response to the call of the World Health Organization for a globally concerted approach to actively monitor the safety of vaccines and immunization in pregnancy programs. GAIA aims to improve the quality of outcome data from clinical vaccine trials in pregnant women with a specific focus on the needs and requirements for safety monitoring in LMIC.In the first year of the project, a large and functional network of experts was created. The first outputs include a guidance document for clinical trials of immunization in pregnancy, a basic data collection guide, ten case definitions of key obstetric and neonatal health outcomes, an ontology of key terms and a map of pertinent disease codes.The GAIA Network is designed as an open and growing forum for professionals sharing the GAIA vision and aim. Based on the initial achievements, tools and services are developed to support investigators and strengthen immunization in pregnancy programs with specific focus on LMIC.

BACKGROUND: In pharmacovigilance, spontaneous reporting databases are devoted to the early detection of adverse event ‘signals’ of marketed drugs. A common limitation of these systems is the wide number of concurrently investigated associations, implying a high probability of generating positive signals simply by chance. However it is not clear if the application of methods aimed to adjust for the multiple testing problems are needed when at least some of the drug-outcome relationship under study are known. To this aim we applied a robust estimation method for the FDR (rFDR) particularly suitable in the pharmacovigilance context. METHODS: We exploited the data available for the SAFEGUARD project to apply the rFDR estimation methods to detect potential false positive signals of adverse reactions attributable to the use of noninsulin blood glucose lowering drugs. Specifically, the number of signals generated from the conventional disproportionality measures and after the application of the rFDR adjustment method was compared. RESULTS: Among the 311 evaluable pairs (i.e., drug-event pairs with at least one adverse event report), 106 (34%) signals were considered as significant from the conventional analysis. Among them 1 resulted in false positive signals according to rFDR method. CONCLUSION: The results of this study seem to suggest that when a restricted number of drug-outcome pairs is considered and warnings about some of them are known, multiple comparisons methods for recognizing false positive signals are not so useful as suggested by theoretical considerations.

Introduction: Clinical trials indicate that oral BP reduce the incidence of osteoporotic fractures up to 60%. Although the safety of BP appears similar to placebo, adverse reaction reports have suggested an association between BP use and ONJ. On this concern, no epidemiological study including ‘validated’ cases of ONJ has been still conducted. Methods: A case-control study was nested into a cohort of 65,220 fractured osteoporotic patients. An Adjudication Committee selected codes plausibly related to ‘true’ cases of ONJ according to two levels of contiguity: level I ‘possibly contiguous with ONJ’ (e.g. 730.08 ‘multiple bone infections, site unspecified’), level II ‘probably contiguous with ONJ’ (e.g. 526.4 ‘jaw inflammation’). Up to 20 controls were matched to each case according to gender, age (±3 years), month and year of the cohort entry. Odds Ratio [OR; 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs)] of being exposed to BPs among cases vs. controls were estimated through conditional logistic regression model. Multivariable analysis includes use of steroids, proton pump inhibitors and diabetes as confounders. Results: Among (43 level I, 61 level II) 104 cases of ONJ the odds of being exposed to BPs was not different from controls (OR = 1.1; 95% CI: 0.6–1.1). When the analysis was restricted to level II cases, OR was 2.8 (95% CI, 1.3–5.9) higher among current users (last prescription within 1 year before the case’s date) of BP than never users. Conclusions: These findings seem to suggest an association between use of oral BP and ONJ. Further analyses on definitively validated cases are needed.