Search

Additional file 2. .pdf: Search strategy.

Additional file 1. .pdf: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist.

Additional file 3. .pdf: Excluded studies, with reasons for exclusion.

IntroductionAlthough the European Medicines Agency (EMA) encourage coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination in pregnant women, the scientific evidence supporting the use of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy is still limited.AimWe aimed to investigate adverse events following immunization (AEFI) with COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy.MethodsWe retrieved Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSRs) related to the use of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy from the EudraVigilance database for the year 2021. We analyzed AEFI related to the mother and fetus/newborn. The reporting odds ratio (ROR) was computed to compare the reporting probability of spontaneous abortion between COVID-19 vaccines.ResultsDuring the study period, among 1,315,315 ICSRs related to COVID-19 vaccines, we retrieved 3,252 (0.25%) reports related to the use in pregnancy. More than half (58.24%) of ICSRs were submitted by non-healthcare professionals. Although the majority (87.82%) of ICSRs concerned serious AEFI, their outcomes were mostly favorable. In this study, 85.0% of total ICSRs referred to pregnant women (n = 2,764), while 7.9% referred to fetuses/newborns (n = 258). We identified 16,569 AEFI. Moreover, 55.16% were AEFI not related to pregnancy (mostly headache, pyrexia, and fatigue), while 17.92% were pregnancy-, newborn-, or fetus-related AEFI. Among pregnancy-related AEFI, the most reported was spontaneous abortion. Messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines had a lower reporting probability of spontaneous abortion than viral vector-based vaccines (ROR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69–0.93). Moderna and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines had a higher reporting probability of spontaneous abortion (ROR 1.2, 95% CI 1.05–1.38 and ROR 1.26, 95% CI 1.08–1.47, respectively), while a lower reporting probability was found for Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine compared with all other COVID-19 vaccines (ROR 0.73, 95% CI 0.64–0.84). In addition, 5.8% of ICSRs reported a fatal outcome.ConclusionsNo strong insight of unknown AEFI associated with COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant women was observed. Considering the high risk associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, our analysis suggests that the benefits of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy outweigh the possible risks. However, it is important to continue monitoring the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines in this subpopulation.

Considering the clinical significance for myocarditis and pericarditis after immunization with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, the present pharmacovigilance study aimed to describe these events reported with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). From 1990 to July 2021, the mRNA vaccines were the most common suspected vaccines related to suspected cases of myocarditis and/or pericarditis (myocarditis: N = 1,165; 64.0%; pericarditis: N = 743; 55.1%), followed by smallpox vaccines (myocarditis: N = 222; 12.2%; pericarditis: N = 200; 14.8%). We assessed all suspected cases through the case definition and classification of the Brighton Collaboration Group, and only definitive, probable, and possible cases were included in the analysis. Our findings suggested that myocarditis and pericarditis mostly involve young male, especially after the second dose with a brief time to onset. Nevertheless, this risk is lower (0.38/100,000 vaccinated people; 95% CI 0.36–0.40) than the risk of developing myocarditis after SARS-CoV-2 infection (1000–4000 per 100,000 people) and the risk of developing “common” viral myocarditis (1–10 per 100,000 people/year). Comparing with the smallpox vaccine, for which is already well known the association with myocarditis and pericarditis, our analysis showed a lower probability of reporting myocarditis (ROR 0.12, 95% CI 0.10–0.14) and pericarditis (ROR 0.06, 95% CI 0.05–0.08) following immunization with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

Remdesivir was recommended for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. As already reported in the Summary of Product Characteristics, most of remdesivir’s safety concerns are hepatoxicity and nephrotoxicity related. However, some cases have raised concerns regarding the potential cardiac events associated with remdesivir, therefore, the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee of the European Medicines Agency requested to investigate all available data. Therefore, we analyzed all Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSRs) collected in the EudraVigilance database focusing on cardiac adverse events. From April to December 2020, 1375 ICSRs related to remdesivir were retrieved from EudraVigilance, of which 863 (62.8%) were related to male and (43.3%) adult patients. A total of 82.2% of all AEs (N = 2604) was serious and one third of the total ICSRs (N = 416, 30.3%) had a fatal outcome. The most frequently reported events referred to hepatic/hepatobiliary disorders (19.4%,), renal and urinary disorders (11.1%) and cardiac events (8.4%). Among 221 cardiac ICSRs, 69 reported fatal outcomes. Other drugs for cardiovascular disorders were reported as suspected/concomitant together with remdesivir in 166 ICSRs (75.1%), 62 of which were fatal. Moreover, the mean time to overall cardiac event was 3.3 days (±2.2). Finally, disproportionality analysis showed a two-fold increased risk of reporting a cardiac adverse event associated with remdesivir compared to both hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin. This study showed that remdesivir could be associated to risk of cardiac events, suggesting a potential safety signal which has not been completely evaluated yet. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.