Search

Background: The rate of true vaccine allergy is unknown. Children with potential IgE-mediated adverse events following immunization (AEFI) should undergo allergy investigation that may include skin testing or challenge. Previous protocols tend to be highly conservative and often suggest invasive testing for all, a practice not evidence based, technically difficult, and unpleasant in children. It has more recently been suggested that skin testing may be restricted to those with allergic-like events within the first hour and those with a history of anaphylaxis., Objective: We aimed to describe the outcome of vaccine skin testing and challenge in children referred to a tertiary pediatric hospital with a potential IgE-mediated AEFI. The secondary aim was to identify any significant risk factors for vaccine allergy., Methods: A retrospective review of all children (<18 years) who underwent vaccine skin testing (skin prick testing or intradermal testing [IDT]) or challenge over a 5-year period (May 1, 2011, to April 30, 2016) at the Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne is presented., Results: There were 95 admissions in 73 children. Eight percent (6 of 73) of children had confirmed vaccine allergy (positive skin testing or challenge to the index vaccination). Two had positive IDT to a suspect vaccine but challenge negative to an alternative brand vaccine. Two had negative IDT but subsequent positive challenge and two had immediate urticaria on challenge without prior skin testing. All children in the positive group either had index reaction within 15 minutes of vaccination or had history consistent with anaphylaxis., Conclusions: The vast majority of children (92%) presenting with a potential IgE-mediated AEFI are able to tolerate challenge to a suspect vaccine without reaction. We present our investigation protocol recommending skin testing in all children with anaphylaxis and challenge with a suspect vaccine if negative testing or previous nonanaphylactic potential IgE-mediated AEFI., (Crown Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Incorporating combination vaccines, such as the measles-mumps-rubella-varicella (MMRV) vaccine, into immunization schedules should be evaluated from a benefit-risk perspective. Use of MMRV vaccine poses challenges due to a recognized increased risk of febrile seizures (FSs) when used as the first dose in the second year of life. Conversely, completion by age 2 years of measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella immunization may offer improved disease control., Objective: To evaluate the effect on safety and coverage of earlier (age 18 months) scheduling of MMRV vaccine as the second dose of measles-containing vaccine (MCV) in Australia., Design, Setting, and Participants: Prospective active sentinel safety surveillance comparing the relative incidence (RI) of FSs in toddlers given MMRV and measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) and a national cohort study of vaccine coverage rates and timeliness before and after MMRV vaccine introduction were conducted. All Australian children aged 11 to 72 months were included in the coverage analysis, and 1471 Australian children aged 11 to 59 months were included in the FS analysis, with a focus on those aged 11 to 23 months., Main Outcomes and Measures: MMRV vaccine safety, specifically, the RI of FSs after MMRV vaccine at age 18 months, compared with risk following MMR vaccine and vaccine uptake for 2-dose MCV and single-dose varicella vaccine, focusing on timeliness., Results: Of the 1471 children, the median age at first FS was 21 months (interquartile range [IQR], 14-31 months). Three hundred ninety-one children were aged 11 to 23 months and had at least 1 FS included in the analysis; of these, 207 (52.9%) were male. A total of 278 children (71.1%) had received MMR followed by MMRV vaccine, 97 (24.8%) had received MMR vaccine only, and 16 (4.1%) had received neither vaccine. There was no increased risk of FSs (RI, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.55-2.13) in the 5 to 12 days following MMRV vaccine given as the second MCV to toddlers. Febrile seizures occurred after dose 1 of MMR vaccine at a known low increased risk (RI, 2.71; 95% CI, 1.71- 4.29). Following program implementation, 2-dose MCV coverage at age 36 months exceeded that obtained at age 60 months in historical cohorts recommended to receive MMR vaccine before school entry, and on-time vaccination increased by 13.5% (from 58.9% to 72.4%). Despite no change in the scheduled age of varicella vaccine, use of MMRV vaccine was associated with a 4.0% increase in 1-dose varicella vaccine coverage., Conclusions and Relevance: To our knowledge, this is the first study to provide evidence of the absence of an association between use of MMRV vaccine as the second dose of MCV in toddlers and an increased risk of FSs. Incorporation of MMRV vaccine has facilitated improvements in vaccine coverage that will potentially improve disease control.

Background: Anaphylaxis is a rare life-threatening adverse event following immunization (AEFI). Variability in presentation can make differentiation between anaphylaxis and other AEFI difficult. This study summarizes pediatric anaphylaxis AEFI reported to an Australian state-based passive surveillance system., Methods: All suspected and reported pediatric (<18 years) anaphylaxis AEFI notified to SAEFVIC (Surveillance of Adverse Events Following Vaccination In the Community) Melbourne, Australia, between May 2007 to May 2013 were analyzed. Clinical descriptions of the AEFI, using the internationally recognized Brighton Collaboration case definition (BCCD) and final outcome were documented., Results: 93% (25/27) of AEFI classified as anaphylaxis met BCCD criteria, with 36% (9/25), assessed as the highest level of diagnostic certainty (Level 1). Median age was 4.7 years (range 0.3-16.2); 48% of cases were male. The vaccine antigens administered included: diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis (DTaP) alone or in combination vaccines containing other antigens in 11 of 25 cases (44%); and live attenuated measles mumps rubella (MMR) vaccine for six (five also had other vaccines concomitantly administered). The estimated incidence rate of anaphylaxis for DTaP vaccines was 0.36 cases per 100,000 doses, and 1.25 per 100,000 doses for MMR vaccines. The majority of cases had rapid onset, but in 24% (6/25) of cases, first symptoms of anaphylaxis developed ≥30 min after immunization. In 60% (15/25) of cases, symptoms resolved ≤60 min of presentation. Intramuscular adrenaline was administered in 90% (18/25) of cases. All cases made a full recovery with no sequelae identified., Conclusion: This comprehensive case series of pediatric anaphylaxis as an AEFI identified that diagnostic criteria are useful when applied to a passive vaccine surveillance system when adequate clinical information is available. Anaphylaxis as an AEFI is rare and usually begins within 30 min of vaccination. However, healthcare professionals and vaccinees/parents should be aware that onset of anaphylaxis can be delayed beyond 30 min following immunization and that medical attention should be sought promptly if anaphylaxis is suspected., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Febrile seizures (FS) are common in childhood with incidence peaking in the second year of life when measles and varicella-containing vaccines are administered. This study aimed to examine the vaccine-attributable risk of FS following separate administration of MMR and monovalent varicella vaccines (VV) prior to a planned change to MMRV as the second dose of measles-containing vaccine at 18 months of age., Methods: All FS cases in children aged <5 years from 1st January 2012 to 30th April 2013 were identified from emergency department (ED) and inpatient databases at five Australian tertiary paediatric hospitals participating in PAEDS (Paediatric Active Enhanced Disease Surveillance). Immunization records were obtained from the Australian Childhood Immunization Register (ACIR). The relative incidence (RI) of FS following MMR dose 1 (MMR1) and VV in children aged 11-23 months was determined using the self-controlled case series (SCCS) method and used to calculate attributable risk., Results: There were 2013 FS episodes in 1761 children. The peak age at FS was 18 months. The risk of FS was significantly increased 5-12 days post receipt of MMR1 at 12 months (RI=1.9 [95% CI: 1.3-2.9]), but not after VV at 18 months (RI=0.6 [95% CI: 0.3-1.2]. The estimated excess annual number of FS post MMR1 was 24 per 100,000 vaccinated children aged 11-23 months (95% CI=7-49 cases per 100,000) or 1 per 4167 doses., Conclusions: Our study detected the expected increased FS risk post MMR1 vaccine at 12 months, but monovalent varicella vaccine at age 18 months was not associated with increased risk of FS. This provides baseline data to assess the risk of FS post MMRV, introduced in Australia as the second dose of measles-containing vaccine at 18 months of age in July 2013., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To provide strategies for immunization advocates on how best to participate in online discussion forums about immunization., Methods: Content and thematic analysis of an online discussion forum held following the national screening of a documentary about the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism scare. A subsample of branches containing more than 20 posts was analysed. Each distinct message (a "post") was coded for the author's manifest position on immunization, author type, topic, and evidence presented or sought., Results: From 103 distinct branches there were 1193 posts sent over a 3½ h period. We selected the 13 longest branches containing 466 posts from 166 individuals. One third of these individuals were explicitly critical of MMR immunization and one third sought information. The remainder were ambivalent but seeking no information (5%), supportive (14%), or unstated (15%). Among five author categories, only 4% identified themselves as health professionals. Topics included alleged adverse effects of immunization (35%); autism spectrum disorders treatment and causes (31%); vaccine ingredients (12%); a conspiracy (9%); immunization policies (8%); and measles, mumps or rubella (4%). Scientific concepts of evidence failed to compete with lay concepts and personal anecdotes prevailed., Conclusions: Health professionals and other advocates of immunization should engage in similar types of post-broadcast online discussion forums in a planned and strategic manner that accounts for the decision processes of lay people. This involves expanding and diversifying the support base of people contributing to the forum; setting the agenda; introducing messages known to influence behaviour; not overselling vaccination; and avoiding personal attacks., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

We linked the Australian Childhood Immunisation Register (ACIR) to South Australian (SA) hospital outcome data in order to evaluate the association between Measles Mumps and Rubella (MMR) and Diphtheria Tetanus Pertussis (DTP) vaccines and convulsions. Linkage occurred using probabilistic matching and data was analysed using the self-controlled case series methodology. An increase in febrile convulsions 6-11 days post-MMR vaccination was demonstrated which equates to a vaccine-attributable risk of 1 convulsion per 6753 vaccines. This study confirms the known association between MMR vaccination and febrile convulsions and in doing so demonstrates the feasibility of using the ACIR for data linkage and vaccine safety surveillance., ((c) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

It is an important component of any immunization programme that vaccine safety is monitored by carrying out surveillance for adverse events following immunization (AEFI). Such surveillance can be active or passive. Active surveillance will detect more AEFI, but the vast majority will be minor events. Passive surveillance is probably more appropriate for routine AEFI surveillance, while active surveillance can be used to monitor a new vaccine or to test whether a specific severe event is significantly associated with immunization. Australia has a predominantly passive surveillance system. The system has recently been centralized, providing useful national data on vaccine safety.