BACKGROUND: On June 8, 2021, a new 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV20, PREVNAR 20(®), Pfizer, Inc.) was licensed for use in adults aged ≥ 18 years by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). OBJECTIVE: To describe reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) after administration of the 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in adults. METHODS: We searched the VAERS for reports of adverse events involving persons aged ≥ 19 years who received PCV20 during October 20, 2021, through December 31, 2023. Our evaluation included automated analysis of reports, clinical review of serious reports and pre-specified events of special interest, empirical Bayesian data mining to assess for disproportionate reporting, and estimation of reporting rates for reports of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS). RESULTS: The VAERS received 1976 reports after PCV20 administration in persons aged ≥ 19 years (6% of reports involved serious events). The most common adverse events among persons aged 19-64 years (n = 798) were injection-site reactions (231, 29%), pain (134, 17%), erythema (118, 15%), and fever (117, 15%). For persons aged ≥ 65 years (n = 1178), the most common adverse events were injection-site reactions (417, 35%), pain (180, 15%), pain in extremity (162, 14%), and erythema (158, 13%). A data mining alert (EB05 = 3.812) for the MedDRA Preferred Term "Guillain-Barre syndrome" was observed for serious reports. Clinical review verified 11 of 20 GBS reports; 7/11 vaccine recipients were aged ≥ 65 years. Among the 11 verified cases, the median time from vaccination to symptom onset was 14 days. Five persons received another vaccine on the same visit. The reporting rate of GBS after PCV20 receipt was 0.5 cases per million doses distributed. No other safety concern was identified. CONCLUSIONS: During the period of this post-licensure review of PCV20, we found most reports were non-serious and comprised mostly local and systemic (e.g., fever) reactions consistent with prelicensure studies. In serious reports, we also identified a data mining alert for GBS after receipt of PCV20, which Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the FDA are investigating further. No other new or unexpected safety concern was identified.

BACKGROUND: In response to the 2022 mpox outbreak in the United States, people with higher potential for exposure to mpox were recommended to receive 2 doses of the JYNNEOS vaccine. Vaccine safety was monitored using 2 complementary systems. METHODS: The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is a passive surveillance system that accepts reports of adverse events after vaccination. VAERS is capable of rapidly identifying rare adverse events and unusual reporting patterns. Medical records were requested and reviewed for adverse events of special interest, including myocarditis. Adverse event reporting rates were calculated as the number of verified adverse event cases divided by the number of JYNNEOS doses administered. V-safe for mpox was a voluntary smartphone-based vaccine safety surveillance system that sent enrolled persons text messages linked to health surveys asking about reactions and health impact events occurring after vaccination. RESULTS: There were 1,207,056 JYNNEOS doses administered in the United States. VAERS received 1927 reports for JYNNEOS. The myocarditis reporting rate per million doses was 2.69 after dose 1 and 8.64 after dose 2. V-safe had 213 participants complete at least one health survey. Rates of injection site and systemic reactions were similar in the first week after dose 1 and dose 2. CONCLUSIONS: JYNNEOS vaccine safety surveillance findings from VAERS and v-safe did not identify any unexpected safety concerns. The VAERS reporting rate for myocarditis was similar to previously published population background rates.

We identified U.S. reports of postmenopausal bleeding in the VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) between December 13, 2020, and December 13, 2021. Among 711,224 VAERS reports after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination, during our study period, we identified 554 presumptive postmenopausal bleeding reports; 434 were further classified as verified based on data abstracted from reports and medical records, when available. In the United States, by December 14, 2021, 58.8 million women aged 50 years or older had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, corresponding to approximately seven verified VAERS postmenopausal bleeding reports per 1 million women aged 50 years or older who received a COVID-19 vaccine. Reports of postmenopausal bleeding after COVID-19 vaccination in VAERS were rare, and causes of postmenopausal bleeding based on medical record review were consistent with known causes of postmenopausal bleeding.

BACKGROUND: Pregnant persons are at increased risk of severe COVID-19 illness. Bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccination is recommended for everyone, including pregnant persons. However, data are limited on the safety of bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and summarize reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a national spontaneous reporting system, among pregnant persons who received bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. METHODS: VAERS U.S. reports of adverse events (AEs) in pregnant persons who received the bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine from 9/1/2022-03/31/2023 were identified. Clinicians reviewed all reports and available medical records. AEs of these reports were compared with AEs reported to VAERS following monovalent mRNA COVID-19 booster vaccination in pregnancy. RESULTS: VAERS received 136 reports for pregnant persons who received bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine; 87 (64 %) after BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), and 48 (35 %) after mRNA-1273 (Moderna); 28 (20.6 %) reports were classified as serious. The most common pregnancy-specific outcomes reported included 12 (8.8 %) spontaneous abortions (<20 weeks gestation), 6 (4.4 %) episodes of preterm delivery, and 5 (3.7 %) reports of preeclampsia. One stillbirth (≥20 weeks gestation) was reported. No maternal or infant deaths were reported. There were 6 reports of AEs in infants, which included 3 reports of admissions to the neonatal intensive care unit: two infants with low birth weight, and one infant with a patent ductus arteriosus and patent foramen ovale. Non-pregnancy-specific adverse events were mostly COVID-19 infection and systemic reactions (e.g., headache, fatigue). Pregnancy-specific conditions were reported less frequently after bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccination compared to monovalent mRNA COVID-19 booster vaccination (3rd and 4th dose). CONCLUSIONS: Based on this review of reports to VAERS, the safety profile of bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant persons was comparable to that observed for monovalent mRNA COVID-19 booster vaccination (3rd and 4th dose) in pregnant persons.

INTRODUCTION: Bivalent mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines may be simultaneously administered with other recommended vaccines, including seasonal influenza vaccines. However, few studies have evaluated the safety of co-administration of bivalent mRNA COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to describe reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) after co-administration of bivalent mRNA COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines. METHODS: We searched the VAERS database for reports of adverse events (AEs) following co-administration of bivalent mRNA COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines during the period of September 1, 2022-March 31, 2023. We assessed the characteristics of these reports and described the most frequently reported AEs. Clinicians reviewed available medical records for reports of serious AEs and adverse events of special interest (AESI). RESULTS: During the period of 1 September 2022 through 31 March 2023, VAERS received 3689 reports of AEs following co-administration of bivalent mRNA COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines. The median age of vaccinees was 59 years (interquartile range 39, 70 years); 342 reports (9.3%) were classified as serious. The most common AEs among non-serious reports were severe-acute-respiratory-syndrome-related coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) infection (785, 23.5%), cough (592, 17.7%), and fatigue (568, 17.0%). The most common AEs among serious reports were Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection (88, 25.7%), dyspnea (81, 23.7%), and condition aggravated (55, 16.1%). DISCUSSION: Reports of AEs following co-administration of bivalent mRNA COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines did not reveal any unusual or unexpected patterns of AEs. Increased reporting of certain events (e.g., COVID-19) was expected due to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reporting requirements. CDC and FDA will continue to monitor the safety of co-administration of mRNA COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines.

The GSK and Pfizer respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccines are both indicated for adults aged 60 years and older, but only the Pfizer product is approved for use in pregnancy to prevent RSV-associated lower respiratory tract disease in infants aged younger than 6 months. To assess for vaccine administration errors (ie, administration of the GSK RSV vaccine to pregnant persons) VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System), a U.S. passive reporting system, was searched for the time period from August 2023 to January 2024. A total of 113 reports of these administration errors were identified. Most reports (103, 91.2%) did not describe an adverse event. These administration errors are preventable with proper education and training and other preventive measures.

BACKGROUND: In May 2011, the first trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine exclusively for intradermal administration (TIV-ID) was licensed in the US for adults aged 18-64 years. OBJECTIVE: To characterize adverse events (AEs) after TIV-ID reported to the US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a spontaneous reporting surveillance system. METHODS: We searched VAERS for US reports after TIV-ID among persons vaccinated from July 1, 2011-February 28, 2013. Medical records were requested for reports coded as serious (death, hospitalization, prolonged hospitalization, disability, life-threatening-illness), and those suggesting anaphylaxis. Clinicians reviewed available information and assigned a primary clinical category to each report. Empirical Bayesian data mining was used to identify disproportional AE reporting following TIV-ID. Causality was not assessed. RESULTS: VAERS received 466 reports after TIV-ID; 9 (1.9%) were serious, including one reported fatality in an 88-year-old vaccinee. Median age was 43 years (range 4-88 years). The most common AE categories were: 218 (46.8%) injection site reactions; 89 (19.1%) other non-infectious (comprised mainly of constitutional signs and symptoms); and 74 (15.9%) allergy. Eight reports (1.7%) of anaphylaxis were verified by the Brighton criteria or a documented physician diagnosis. Disproportional reporting was identified for three AEs: 'injection site nodule', 'injection site pruritus', and 'drug administered to patient of inappropriate age'. The findings for the first two AEs were expected. Twenty-four reports of vaccinees <18 years or ≥ 65 years were reported, and 14 of 24 were coded with the AE 'drug administered to patient of inappropriate age'. CONCLUSIONS: Review of VAERS reports did not identify any new or unexpected safety concerns after TIV-ID. Injection site reactions were the most commonly reported AEs, similar to the pre-licensure clinical trials. Use of TIV-ID in younger and older individuals outside the approved age range highlights the need for education of healthcare providers regarding approved TIV-ID use.

The NVX-CoV2373 (Novavax) COVID-19 vaccine is a recombinant spike protein nanoparticle vaccine with Matrix-M adjuvant. Novavax is authorized and recommended as a primary 2-dose monovalent vaccination series in persons aged ≥12 years to prevent COVID-19 and as a monovalent booster dose in persons aged ≥18 years who are unable to or unwilling to receive an mRNA COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (1). | | Top | | Investigation and Outcomes | During July 13, 2022–March 13, 2023, a total of 69,227 Novavax doses were administered to persons aged ≥12 years in the United States, and 230 reports of adverse events (AEs) after Novavax vaccination were received by the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) (2). The median age of patients in the reports was 45 years (IQR = 31–61 years); 152 (66.1%) reports concerned females, and 104 (45.2%) concerned non-Hispanic White persons (Table). Within the study period, VAERS received no reports concerning pregnant women. Most VAERS reports (211; 91.7%) were classified as nonserious.* The most commonly reported AEs included dizziness (33; 14.3%), fatigue (26; 11.3%), and headache (25; 10.9%).

We assessed the safety of hexavalent vaccine (DTaP-IPV-Hib-HepB) in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. Five hundred-one reports of adverse events (AEs) were identified; 21 (4.2%) were serious. Most frequently reported AEs were fever (10.2%) and injection site erythema (5.4%). AEs reported were consistent with findings from pre-licensure studies.

As of May 7, 2023, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends that all children aged 6 months-5 years receive at least 1 age-appropriate bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose. Depending on their COVID-19 vaccination history and history of immunocompromise, these children might also need additional doses* (1-3). Initial vaccine safety findings after primary series vaccination among children aged 6 months-5 years showed that transient local and systemic reactions were common whereas serious adverse events were rare (4). To characterize the safety of a third mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose among children aged 6 months-5 years, CDC reviewed adverse events and health surveys reported to v-safe, a voluntary smartphone-based U.S. safety surveillance system established by CDC to monitor health after COVID-19 vaccination (https://vsafe.cdc.gov/en/) and the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a U.S. passive vaccine safety surveillance system co-managed by CDC and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (https://vaers.hhs.gov/) (5). During June 17, 2022-May 7, 2023, approximately 495,576 children aged 6 months-4 years received a third dose (monovalent or bivalent) of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine and 63,919 children aged 6 months-5 years received a third dose of Moderna vaccine.(†) A third mRNA COVID-19 vaccination was recorded for 2,969 children in v-safe; approximately 37.7% had no reported reactions, and among those for whom reactions were reported, most reactions were mild and transient. VAERS received 536 reports after a third dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine for children in these age groups; 98.5% of reports were nonserious and most (78.4%) were classified as a vaccination error.(§) No new safety concerns were identified. Preliminary safety findings after a third dose of COVID-19 vaccine for children aged 6 months-5 years are similar to those after other doses. Health care providers can counsel parents and guardians of young children that most reactions reported after vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna vaccine were mild and transient and that serious adverse events are rare.

BACKGROUND: Following the authorization and recommendations for use of the U.S. COVID-19 vaccines, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)'s Immunization Safety Office (ISO) responded to inquiries and questions from public health officials, healthcare providers, and the general public on COVID-19 vaccine safety. METHODS: We describe COVID-19 vaccine safety inquiries, by topic, received and addressed by ISO from December 1, 2020-August 31, 2022. RESULTS: Of the 1978 COVID-19 vaccine-related inquiries received, 1655 specifically involved vaccine safety topics. The most frequently asked-about topics included deaths following vaccination, myocarditis, pregnancy, and reproductive health outcomes, understanding or interpreting data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), and thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: Inquiries about vaccine safety generally reflect issues that receive media attention. ISO will continue to monitor vaccine safety inquiries and provide accurate and timely information to healthcare providers, public health officials, and the general public.

BACKGROUND: Since 2012, reports of primary ovarian insufficiency (POI) temporally associated with receipt of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine have been published leading to questions about a potential causal association. A Vaccine Safety Datalink study did not find an increased risk for POI after vaccination. We reviewed the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) to describe POI reports. METHODS: We searched VAERS, a U.S. passive surveillance system, for domestic POI reports received from 01/01/1990 to 12/31/2017 after any vaccination. The search used both Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activity Preferred Terms and a text-based search for POI and its symptoms. All reports were reviewed, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) guidelines for POI diagnosis were applied. Data mining for disproportionate reporting was conducted. RESULTS: Six hundred fifty-two reports met the search criteria and clinical review identified 19 POI reports. Most reports (n = 16) were received between 2013 and 2017. The median age at vaccination was 14.5 years (range 10-25 years) and the median interval between first dose of vaccination and reporting the event to VAERS was 43 months (range 4-132 months; mean 59.6 months). Four reports met ACOG diagnostic criteria; one with an underlying cause (47XXX chromosomal abnormality) reported. Eleven reports documented menstrual irregularity ≥ 3 months; 5 had ≥ 1 laboratory test result used to diagnose POI. Eighteen of 19 reports described receipt of HPV vaccine with or without other vaccines. Other vaccines reported were meningococcal conjugate vaccine, hepatitis A, varicella and tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid and acellular pertussis. Disproportionate reporting was found for three relevant coding terms after HPV vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: POI is rarely reported to VAERS. Most reports contained limited diagnostic information and were submitted after published cases of POI following HPV vaccination. Results of our review do not suggest a safety concern.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines may be co-administered with other recommended vaccines, including seasonal influenza vaccines. However, few studies have evaluated the safety of co-administration of mRNA COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines. OBJECTIVE: To describe reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) after co-administration of mRNA COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines. METHODS: We searched the VAERS database for reports of adverse events (AEs) following co-administration of mRNA COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines and following a first booster dose mRNA COVID-19 vaccine alone, during July 1, 2021-June 30, 2022. We assessed the characteristics of these reports and described the most frequently reported MedDRA preferred terms (PTs). Clinicians reviewed available medical records for serious reports and reports of adverse events of special interest (AESI) and categorized the main diagnosis by system organ class. RESULTS: From July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022, VAERS received 2,449 reports of adverse events following co-administration of mRNA COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines. Median age of vaccinees was 48 years (IQR: 31, 66); 387 (15.8%) were classified as serious. Most reports (1,713; 69.3%) described co-administration of a first booster dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine with seasonal influenza vaccine. The most common AEs among non-serious reports were injection site reactions (193; 14.5%), headache (181; 13.6%), and pain (171; 12.8%). The most common AEs among reports classified as serious were dyspnea (38; 14.9%), COVID-19 infection (32; 12.6%), and chest pain (27; 10.6%). DISCUSSION: This review of reports to VAERS following co-administration of mRNA COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines did not reveal any unusual or unexpected patterns of AEs. Increased reporting of certain events (e.g., COVID-19 disease) was expected. CDC will continue to monitor the safety of co-administration of mRNA COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines, including co-administration involving bivalent mRNA COVID-19 booster vaccines that have been recommended for people ages ≥ 6 months in the United States.

BACKGROUND: . The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is the United States national passive vaccine safety surveillance system. We updated the data on the safety of single-antigen varicella vaccine (VAR) and assessed the safety of combination measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella vaccine (MMRV) licensed in the United States using VAERS data. METHODS: US VAERS reports received after administration of VAR and MMRV during 2006-2020 were identified. Reports were analyzed by vaccine type, age, seriousness, most common adverse events (AEs), and concomitant vaccines. We reviewed medical records of selected reports of AEs of special interest and conducted empirical Bayesian data mining to identify disproportionally reported AEs. RESULTS: During 2006-2020, approximately 132.8 million VAR doses were distributed; 40 684 reports were received in VAERS (30.6/100 000 doses distributed), with 4.1% classified as serious (1.3/100 000 doses distributed). Approximately 35.5 million MMRV doses were distributed; 13 325 reports were received (37.6/100 000 doses distributed) with 3.3% classified as serious (1.3/100 000 doses distributed). The most common adverse health events after both VAR and MMRV were injection site reactions (31% and 27%), rash (28% and 20%), and fever (12% and 14%), respectively. Vaccination errors accounted for 23% of reports after VAR administration and 41% after MMRV administration, but ≥95% of them did not describe an adverse health event. AEs associated with evidence of vaccine strain varicella-zoster virus (vVZV) infection included meningitis, encephalitis, herpes zoster, and 6 deaths (all in immunocompromised persons with contraindications for vaccination). No new or unexpected AE was disproportionally reported. CONCLUSIONS: No new or unexpected safety findings were detected for VAR and MMRV given as recommended, reinforcing the favorable safety profiles of these vaccines. Providers should obtain specimens for viral testing and strain-typing for serious AEs if they consider vVZV as the possible causative agent.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and summarize reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a national spontaneous reporting system, in pregnant people who received a booster dose of mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine. METHODS: We searched VAERS for U.S. reports of adverse events in pregnant people who received a booster dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine from September 22, 2021, to March 24, 2022. Clinicians reviewed reports and available medical records. RESULTS: The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System received 323 reports of adverse events in pregnant people who received a booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine; 178 (55.1%) after BNT162b2 from Pfizer-BioNTech and 145 (44.9%) after mRNA-1273 from Moderna. Seventy-two (22.3%) reports were coded as serious. One neonatal death was reported, but no maternal deaths occurred. Pregnancy-specific outcomes included 56 (17.3%) spontaneous abortions (before 20 weeks of gestation), eight (2.5%) episodes of vaginal bleeding, five (1.5%) stillbirths (at or after 20 weeks of gestation), four (1.2%) episodes of preeclampsia, and two (0.6%) preterm deliveries. Reporting rates for stillbirth and preterm delivery were below background rates. Ten instances of adverse events in neonates were reported, which included two reports of birth defects. Non-pregnancy-specific adverse events (n=207; 64.1%) were mostly systemic (eg, headache, fatigue) and local reactions and occurred in proportions comparable with those seen in pregnant people who received the primary COVID-19 vaccination series and reported to VAERS during the same period. CONCLUSION: Review of reports after a booster dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in pregnant people in VAERS found their safety profile was comparable with that of published reports after primary COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant people.

BACKGROUND: Pregnant persons are at increased risk of severe illness from COVID-19 infection, including intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, and death compared with non-pregnant persons of reproductive age. Limited data are available on the safety of COVID-19 vaccines administered during and around the time of pregnancy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and summarize reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a national spontaneous reporting system, in pregnant persons who received a COVID-19 vaccine to assess for potential vaccine safety problems. METHODS: We searched VAERS for US reports of adverse events (AEs) in pregnant persons who received a COVID-19 vaccine from 12/14/2020-10/31/2021. Clinicians reviewed reports and available medical records. Crude reporting rates for selected AEs were calculated, and disproportional reporting was assessed using data mining methods. RESULTS: VAERS received 3,462 reports of AEs in pregnant persons who received a COVID-19 vaccine; 1,831 (52.9%) after BNT162b2, 1,350 (38.9%) after mRNA-1273, and 275 (7.9%) after Ad26.COV2.S. Eight maternal deaths and 12 neonatal deaths were reported. Six-hundred twenty-one (17.9%) reports were serious. Pregnancy-specific outcomes included: 878 spontaneous abortions (<20 weeks), 101 episodes of vaginal bleeding, 76 preterm deliveries (<37 weeks), 62 stillbirths (≥20 weeks), and 33 outcomes with birth defects. Crude reporting rates for preterm deliveries and stillbirths, as well as maternal and neonatal mortality rates were below background rates from published sources. No disproportional reporting for any AE was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Review of reports to VAERS following COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant persons did not identify any concerning patterns of maternal or infant-fetal outcomes.

On November 4, 2019, the Food and Drug Administration approved high-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine (Fluzone High-Dose Quadrivalent; QIV-HD) for active immunization for the prevention of influenza disease in individuals 65 years of age and older. A prelicensure randomized, active-controlled, modified double-blind trial did not reveal any major differences in adverse events following QIV-HD versus Fluzone High-Dose (trivalent). To improve our understanding of the safety profile of QIV-HD, we reviewed and summarized reports of adverse events after QIV-HD to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). From July 30, 2020 through June 30, 2021, VAERS received 2,122 reports after QIV-HD. The vast majority (2,018; 95.1%) were non-serious and included events that had been observed in the prelicensure clinical trial, such as injection site reactions, fever, headache, and nausea. The most common serious events included Guillain-Barré syndrome, cellulitis or other local reactions, constitutional signs/symptoms (e.g., fever), and cardiovascular events. Our review did not reveal any new safety concerns. This information may enable policy makers, health officials, clinicians, and patients to make a more informed decision regarding vaccination strategies.

The first two COVID-19 vaccines, both of which contain messenger RNA (mRNA), BNT162b2 from Pfizer Inc/BioNTech and mRNA-1273 from Moderna and a third containing a recombinant replication-incompetent adenovirus type 26 (Ad26) vector, Ad26.COV2.S from Janssen Pharmaceuticals Companies of Johnson & Johnson, were authorized for emergency use in the United States by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in mid-December 2020 and at the end of February 2021, respectively [Citation1–3]. In the pre-emergency use authorization clinical trials for these vaccines, local and systemic reactions were the main types of adverse events (AE) observed. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) uses three systems to monitor the safety of COVID-19 vaccines: 1) the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), which is the front-line, national, spontaneous surveillance system [Citation4]; 2) v-safe, a new smartphone and Internet survey-based, after-vaccination health checker for people who receive COVID-19 vaccines [Citation5]; there is also the associated v-safe pregnancy registry which collects detailed pregnancy and medical history information from v-safe participants who report being pregnant around the time of vaccination [Citation6]; and 3) the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) which is a large linked database system used for active surveillance and traditional epidemiologic research [Citation7]. These complementary systems are being used to actively monitor the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in the United States [Citation8]. The results of this unprecedented and comprehensive effort are communicated through frequent presentations at the meetings of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and in several fast-tracked published reports.

Pregnant persons are at increased risk of severe illness from COVID-19. The first COVID-19 vaccines in the U.S. were authorized for emergency use in December 2020 and pregnant persons were eligible and could get vaccinated despite scarce safety data in this population. To monitor the safety of COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy, four surveillance systems are used by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System is a national, passive system that captures reports of potential adverse events. V-safe is a novel, active system that uses text messaging and web-based surveys to provide health check-ins after vaccination; and enrolls eligible v-safe participants in the v-safe pregnancy registry. The Vaccine Safety Datalink is a collaboration between the CDC and nine integrated health care organizations which performs near-real time surveillance and traditional epidemiologic studies on pregnant vaccine recipients. The CDC is committed to timely and comprehensive monitoring of COVID-19 vaccine safety in pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Many pregnant persons in the United States are receiving messenger RNA (mRNA) coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) vaccines, but data are limited on their safety in pregnancy. METHODS: From December 14, 2020, to February 28, 2021, we used data from the "v-safe after vaccination health checker" surveillance system, the v-safe pregnancy registry, and the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) to characterize the initial safety of mRNA Covid-19 vaccines in pregnant persons. RESULTS: A total of 35,691 v-safe participants 16 to 54 years of age identified as pregnant. Injection-site pain was reported more frequently among pregnant persons than among nonpregnant women, whereas headache, myalgia, chills, and fever were reported less frequently. Among 3958 participants enrolled in the v-safe pregnancy registry, 827 had a completed pregnancy, of which 115 (13.9%) resulted in a pregnancy loss and 712 (86.1%) resulted in a live birth (mostly among participants with vaccination in the third trimester). Adverse neonatal outcomes included preterm birth (in 9.4%) and small size for gestational age (in 3.2%); no neonatal deaths were reported. Although not directly comparable, calculated proportions of adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in persons vaccinated against Covid-19 who had a completed pregnancy were similar to incidences reported in studies involving pregnant women that were conducted before the Covid-19 pandemic. Among 221 pregnancy-related adverse events reported to the VAERS, the most frequently reported event was spontaneous abortion (46 cases). CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary findings did not show obvious safety signals among pregnant persons who received mRNA Covid-19 vaccines. However, more longitudinal follow-up, including follow-up of large numbers of women vaccinated earlier in pregnancy, is necessary to inform maternal, pregnancy, and infant outcomes.

On October 7, 2016, the Food and Drug Administration approved recombinant hemagglutinin quadrivalent influenza vaccine (RIV4) (Spodoptera frugiperda cell line; Flublok Quadrivalent) for active immunization for the prevention of influenza disease in individuals 18 years of age and older. Clinical trials did not reveal any major differences in adverse events or serious adverse events following Flublok Quadrivalent versus standard-dose quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine. To improve our understanding of the safety profile of this vaccine, we reviewed and summarized adverse event reports after Flublok Quadrivalent administration to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Through June 30, 2020, VAERS received 849 reports after RIV4 vaccination. The vast majority (810; 95%) were non-serious. Among serious events, there were 10 cases of Guillain-Barré syndrome, including 5 people who required mechanical ventilation and 2 people who died. Many allergic reactions were reported as non-serious, but required interventions to treat a life-threatening event, e.g., epinephrine, nebulizers, albuterol, glucocorticoids, and supplemental oxygen. Two people experienced a positive rechallenge (i.e., allergic reactions after repeated vaccination with RIV4), including a person who-despite premedication with antihistamines-developed respiratory difficulties, required epinephrine, and was transported to the emergency department. The occurrence of anaphylaxis and other allergic reactions in some individuals may reflect an underlying predisposition to atopy that may manifest itself after an exposure to any drug or vaccine, and does not necessarily suggest that Flublok Quadrivalent is particularly allergenic. Postmarketing safety surveillance will continue to be vital for understanding the benefits and risks of quadrivalent recombinant influenza vaccine.

BACKGROUND: In November 2012, the first cell cultured influenza vaccine, a trivalent subunit inactivated influenza vaccine (Flucelvax(®), ccIIV3), was approved in the United States for adults aged ≥18 years. A quadrivalent version (ccIIV4) was later approved in 2016 and replaced ccIIV3. The safety of ccIIV3 or ccIIV4 (ccIIV) was not assessed for pregnant women or their infants during pre-licensure studies. OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety of ccIIV administered during pregnancy in pregnant women and their infants whose reports were submitted to VAERS during 2013-2020. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We searched VAERS for United States reports of adverse events (AEs) in pregnant women who received ccIIV from 1 July 2013 through 31 May 2020. Clinicians reviewed reports and available medical records and assigned a primary clinical category for each report. Reports were coded as serious based on the Code of Federal Regulations definition. RESULTS: VAERS received 391 reports following ccIIV administered to pregnant women. Twenty-four (6.1%) were serious. Two neonatal deaths were reported. No maternal deaths occurred. Among reports with trimester information (n = 340), ccIIV was administered during the second trimester in 170 (50%). The most frequent pregnancy-specific AE was premature delivery in 85 (21.7%) reports, followed by dysmature placenta in 13 (3.3%) and pre-eclampsia/eclampsia in ten (2.3%). The most common non-pregnancy specific conditions were infectious conditions in 32 (8.2%). Among infant conditions, low birth weight was reported in 62 (15.9%) reports. Fifteen birth defects were reported; in 12 with gestational age information, administration of the vaccine occurred late in the second trimester or later. CONCLUSIONS: Review of maternal ccIIV reports in VAERS was not unexpectedly different from other maternal influenza vaccine safety VAERS reviews.

INTRODUCTION: In 2006 and 2008, two live, oral rotavirus vaccines, RotaTeq (RV5) and Rotarix (RV1), were introduced into the routine immunization program in the United States. A previous rotavirus vaccine, RotaShield, was associated with an increased risk of intussusception, with data suggesting an age-dependent variation in risk. Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) currently recommends that RV5 or RV1 immunization be initiated by age 14 weeks and 6 days and completed by 8 months 0 days. METHODS: We searched for U.S. VAERS reports of RV5, RV1, or unknown rotavirus vaccine brand among individuals aged ≥8 months. We analyzed reports by 2 age groups (individuals aged ≥8 months-≤5 years and ≥6 years), vaccine brand name, adverse event (AE) reported, classification of seriousness (death, non-death serious, and non-serious) and mode of exposure (direct vs. indirect exposure). For serious reports we reviewed available medical records and assigned a primary diagnosis. RESULTS: VAERS received a total of 344 U.S. reports following rotavirus vaccination among individuals ≥8 months of age, 32 (9.3%) were serious. In the younger age-group, 307 (99%) of 309 reports followed direct vaccination of the child. In contrast, in individuals aged ≥6 years, 21 (60%) of 35 reports were via potential indirect exposure to a vaccinated child. The frequently reported AEs in the younger age-group were inappropriate schedule of drug administration 104 (34%) and drug administered to patient of inappropriate age 45 (15%); in the older group these were accidental exposure 9 (26%) and eye irritation 7 (20%). No difference in the safety profile was observed between RV1 and RV5. CONCLUSIONS: We did not identify any unexpected AEs for RV vaccines among individuals aged ≥8 months. Health care providers should adhere to the ACIP recommended schedule and older individuals should apply necessary precautions to prevent potential secondary exposure from vaccinated children.

BACKGROUND: Underreporting is a limitation common to passive surveillance systems, including the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) that monitors the safety of U.S.-licensed vaccines. Nonetheless, previous reports demonstrate substantial case capture for clinically severe adverse events (AEs), including 47% of intussusception cases after rotavirus vaccine, and 68% of vaccine associated paralytic polio after oral polio vaccine. OBJECTIVES: To determine the sensitivity of VAERS in capturing AE reports of anaphylaxis and Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) following vaccination and whether this is consistent with previous estimates for other severe AEs. METHODS: We estimated VAERS reporting rates following vaccination for anaphylaxis and GBS. We used data from VAERS safety reviews as the numerator, and estimated incidence rates of anaphylaxis and GBS following vaccination from the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) studies as the denominator. We defined reporting sensitivity as the VAERS reporting rate divided by the VSD incidence rate. Sensitivity was reported as either a single value, or a range if data were available from >1 study. RESULTS: VAERS sensitivity for capturing anaphylaxis after seven different vaccines ranged from 13 to 76%; sensitivity for capturing GBS after three different vaccines ranged from 12 to 64%. For anaphylaxis, VAERS captured 13-27% of cases after the pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine, 13% of cases after influenza vaccine, 21% of cases after varicella vaccine, 24% of cases after both the live attenuated zoster and quadrivalent human papillomavirus (4vHPV) vaccines, 25% of cases after the combined measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine, and 76% of cases after the 2009 H1N1 inactivated pandemic influenza vaccine. For GBS, VAERS captured 12% of cases after the 2012-13 inactivated seasonal influenza vaccine, 15-55% of cases after the 2009 H1N1 inactivated pandemic influenza vaccine, and 64% of cases after 4vHPV vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: For anaphylaxis and GBS, VAERS sensitivity is comparable to previous estimates for detecting important AEs following vaccination.

BACKGROUND: Post marketing safety evaluations of quadrivalent meningococcal diphtheria-toxoid conjugate vaccine (MenACWY-D) have focused on post-vaccination risk of Guillain Barré syndrome (GBS), adverse events (AEs) after maternal vaccination, and comparative studies with the newer quadrivalent meningococcal CRM(197) conjugate vaccine (MenACWY-CRM). To provide an updated general safety assessment, we reviewed reports of AEs following MenACWY-D submitted to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). METHODS: VAERS is a national spontaneous reporting vaccine safety surveillance system co-administered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. We searched the VAERS database for U.S. reports of AEs after administration of MenACWY-D from January 2005 through June 2016. We conducted clinical reviews of serious reports after MenACWY-D administered alone, reports of MenACWY-D use during pregnancy, and reports of selected pre-specified outcomes. We screened for disproportionate reporting of AEs after MenACWY-D using empirical Bayesian data mining. RESULTS: VAERS received 13,075 U.S. reports after receipt of MenACWY-D; most (86%) described vaccination in adolescents, were classified as non-serious (94%), and described AEs consistent with pre-licensure studies. We did not find any evidence that reported deaths were related to vaccination. In serious reports, GBS and meningococcal infection were the most commonly reported medical conditions. Many reports of MenACWY-D use during pregnancy described inadvertent vaccination; most (61%) did not report any AE. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from our comprehensive review of reports to VAERS following MenACWY-D are consistent with data from pre-licensure studies and provide further reassurance on the safety of MenACWY-D.

BACKGROUND: On 12/23/2009 a new high-dose trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV3-HD) was licensed for adults aged ≥65 years. We assessed the post-licensure safety data for IIV3-HD in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) during 2011-2019. METHODS: We searched VAERS for reports after IIV3-HD during 1/1/2011-06/30/2019 in persons aged ≥65 years. Medical records were reviewed for all death reports and for certain pre-specified conditions (e.g. Guillain Barré Syndrome [GBS], anaphylaxis). We also reviewed certain groups who received IIV3-HD erroneously (e.g. pregnant women, children). Empirical Bayesian data mining was used to identify disproportional reporting. RESULTS: VAERS received 12,320 reports after IIV3-HD;723 reports (5.9%) were serious. The most common adverse events (AEs) among serious reports were pyrexia (30.2%), asthenia (28.9%), and dyspnea (24.9%), and among non-serious reports were injection site erythema (16.8%), pain in extremity (15.8%), and injection site pain (14.2%). Among 55 death reports, the most common causes of death were diseases of the circulatory system (n = 23;41.8%). Based on medical record review, there were 61 reports of GBS and 13 of anaphylaxis. There were 13 reports of pregnant-women who inadvertently received IIV3-HD; three reports described arm pain or local reactions, and 10 did not report any AE. Among 59 reports of children who erroneously received IIV3-HD, 31 experienced an AE (most commonly injection site or constitutional reactions) and the remaining 28 reports did not describe any AE. CONCLUSIONS: Post-licensure safety data of IIV3-HD during 9 influenza seasons revealed no new or unexpected safety concerns among individuals ≥65 years. Inadvertent administration of IIV3-HD to children or pregnant women was observed, although with no serious AEs reported. Training and education of providers in vaccine recommendations and groups for whom the vaccine is indicated may help in preventing these vaccine administration errors. This review provides baseline information for future monitoring of the quadrivalent-high-dose influenza vaccine.

Since 2005, a single dose of tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine has been recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) for adolescents and adults (1,2). After receipt of Tdap, booster doses of tetanus and diphtheria toxoids (Td) vaccine are recommended every 10 years or when indicated for wound management. During the October 2019 meeting of ACIP, the organization updated its recommendations to allow use of either Td or Tdap where previously only Td was recommended. These situations include decennial Td booster doses, tetanus prophylaxis when indicated for wound management in persons who had previously received Tdap, and for multiple doses in the catch-up immunization schedule for persons aged >/=7 years with incomplete or unknown vaccination history. Allowing either Tdap or Td to be used in situations where Td only was previously recommended increases provider point-of-care flexibility. This report updates ACIP recommendations and guidance regarding the use of Tdap vaccines (3).

INTRODUCTION: The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends vaccination with tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis vaccine (Tdap) in persons >/=65years of age. To date, few studies have assessed the safety of Tdap in this population. We aimed to summarize reports submitted to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) following receipt of Tdap in this age group. METHODS: We searched for and analyzed U.S. VAERS reports of Tdap among individuals >/=65years of age submitted from September 1, 2010 through December 31, 2018. We classified reports according to concurrent vaccination, seriousness, and outcome (death, non-death) and determined the frequency of reported adverse events (AEs). For serious reports, we reviewed available medical records. Data mining analyses were undertaken to detect disproportionality in reporting. RESULTS: VAERS received a total of 1,798 reports following Tdap, of which 104 (6%) were serious. The most common AEs were injection site erythema (26%; n=468), injection site pain (19%; n=335), injection site swelling (18%; n=329), and erythema (18%; n=321). We identified seven deaths; none were attributed to Tdap. Among serious non-death reports, nervous system disorders (35.1%; n=34) and infections and infestations (n=18.6%; n=18) were most commonly reported. Data mining did not identify any vaccine-AE combination reported more frequently than expected. CONCLUSIONS: We did not identify any new safety concern over nearly a decade of recommended Tdap use among adults >/=65years of age. Findings from this post-marketing review are consistent with prior post-marketing observations and pre-licensure studies.