|
Vaccine
Safety
Overview
of Vaccine Safety
|
Importance of
Vaccine Safety
|
Perhaps the greatest
success story in public health is the reduction of infectious diseases
resulting from the use of vaccines. Routine immunization has eradicated
smallpox from the globe and led to the near elimination of wild polio
virus. Vaccines have reduced preventable infectious diseases to an all-time
low and now few people experience the devastating effects of measles,
pertussis and other illnesses. Prior to approval by the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA), vaccines are extensively tested by scientists to
ensure that they are effective and safe. Vaccines are the best defense we
have against infectious diseases. However, no vaccine is 100% safe or
effective. Differences in the way individual immune systems react to a
vaccine account for rare occasions when people are not protected following
immunization or when they experience side effects.1,2,3
As infectious
diseases continue to decline, some people have become less interested in
the consequences of preventable illnesses like diphtheria and tetanus.
Instead, they have become increasingly concerned about the risks associated
with vaccines. After all, vaccines are given to healthy individuals, many
of whom are children, and therefore a high standard of safety is required.
Since vaccination is such a common and memorable event, any illness
following immunization may be attributed to the vaccine. While some of
these reactions may be caused by the vaccine, many of them are unrelated
events that occur after vaccination by coincidence. Therefore, the
scientific research that attempts to distinguish true vaccine side effects
from unrelated, chance occurrences is crucial. This knowledge is necessary
in order to maintain public confidence in immunization programs. As science
continues to advance, we are constantly striving to develop safer vaccines
and improve delivery in order to better protect ourselves against disease.
This overview will focus on vaccine research, how vaccines are licensed,
how safety is monitored, and how risks are communicated to the public.1,2,3
Top
|
National
Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA)
|
The topic of vaccine
safety became prominent during the mid 1970's with increases in lawsuits
filed on behalf of those presumably injured by the diphtheria, pertussis,
tetanus (DPT) vaccine.4 Legal decisions were made and
damages awarded despite the lack of scientific evidence to support vaccine
injury claims.4 As a result of the liability, prices
soared and several manufacturers halted production. A vaccine
shortage resulted and public health officials became concerned about the
return of epidemic disease. In order to reduce liability and respond
to public health concerns, Congress passed the National Childhood Vaccine
Injury Act (NCVIA) in 1986. This act was influential in many ways.
1.
As
a result of the NCVIA, the National Vaccine Program Office (NVPO) was
established within the Department of Health and Human Services
(DHHS). The responsibility of NVPO is to coordinate
immunization-related activities between all DHHS agencies including the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Food and Drug
Administration (FDA), National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Health
Resources and Services Administration (HRSA).
2.
The
NCVIA requires that all health care providers who administer vaccines
containing diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio, measles, mumps, rubella,
hepatitis B, Haemophilus influenzae type b and varicella must
provide a Vaccine Information Statement (VIS) to the vaccine recipient,
their parent or legal guardian prior to each dose. A VIS must be
given with every vaccination including each dose in a multi-dose
series. Each VIS contains a brief description of the disease as well
as the risks and benefits of the vaccine. VISs are developed by the
CDC and distributed to state and local health departments as well as
individual providers.
3.
The
NCVIA also mandates that all health care providers must report certain
adverse events following vaccination to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting
System (VAERS). This system will be described in detail later in the
overview.
4.
Under
the NCVIA, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP) was
created to compensate those injured by vaccines on a "no fault"
basis. This program will be described in detail later in the
overview.
5.
The
NCVIA established a committee from the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to
review the existing literature on vaccine adverse events (health effects
occurring after immunization that may or may not be related to the
vaccine). This group concluded that there are limitations in our knowledge
of the risks associated with vaccines. Of the 76 adverse events they
reviewed for a causal relationship, 50 (66%) had no or inadequate research.1
Specifically, IOM identified the following problems:
1.
limited
understanding of biological processes that underlie adverse events
2.
incomplete
and inconsistent information from individual reports
3.
poorly
constructed research studies (not enough people enrolled for a long enough
period of time)
4.
inadequate
systems to track vaccine adverse events
5.
few
experimental studies published in the medical literature.1
Significant progress has been made over the past few years to better
monitor adverse events and conduct research relevant to vaccine safety.4,5
Top
|
Monitoring
Vaccine Safety:
Pre-licensure
|
Before vaccines are
licensed by the FDA, they are extensively tested in the laboratory and in
human beings to ensure their safety. First, computers are used to predict
how the vaccine will interact with the immune system. Then researchers test
the vaccine on animals including mice, guinea pigs, rabbits and monkeys.
Once the vaccine successfully completes these laboratory tests, it is
approved for use in clinical studies by the FDA. During clinical trials,
the vaccine is tested on human beings. Participation in these studies is
completely voluntary. Many individuals choose to contribute their time and
energy for the advancement of science. Informed consent must be obtained
from all participants before they become involved in research. This ensures
that they understand the purpose of the study, potential risks and are
willing to participate. Volunteers agree to receive the vaccine and undergo
any medical testing necessary to assess its safety and efficacy.6
Vaccine licensure is
a lengthy process that may take ten years or longer. The FDA requires that
vaccines undergo three phases of clinical trials in human beings before
they can be licensed for use in the general public. Phase one trials are
small, involving only 20-100 volunteers, and last only a few months. The
purpose of phase one trials is to evaluate basic safety and identify very
common adverse events. Phase two trials are larger and involve several
hundred participants. These studies last anywhere from several months to
two years and collect additional information on safety and efficacy. Data
gained from phase two trials can be used to determine the composition of
the vaccine, how many doses are necessary and a profile of common adverse
events. Unless the vaccine is completely ineffective or causes serious side
effects, the trials are expanded to phase three which involve several
hundred to several thousand volunteers. Typically these trials last several
years. Because the vaccinated group can be compared to those who have not
received the vaccine, researchers are able to identify true side effects.1,3,6,7,8
If the clinical
trials demonstrate that the vaccine is safe and effective, the manufacturer
applies to the FDA for two licenses, one for the vaccine (product license)
and one for the production plant (establishment license). During the
application process, the FDA reviews the clinical trial data and proposed
product labeling. In addition, the FDA inspects the plant and goes over
manufacturing protocols to ensure that vaccines are produced in a safe and
consistent manner. Only after the FDA is satisfied that the vaccine is safe
is it licensed for use in the general population.7
Top
|
Monitoring Vaccine
Safety: Post-licensure
|
After a vaccine is
licensed for public use, its safety is continually monitored. The FDA
requires all manufacturers to submit samples from each vaccine lot prior to
its release. In addition, the manufacturers must provide the FDA with their
test results for vaccine safety, potency and purity. Each lot must be
tested because vaccines are sensitive to environmental factors (like
temperature) and can be contaminated during production. During the last ten
years, only three vaccine lots have been recalled by the FDA. One lot was
mislabeled and another was contaminated with particles during production. A
third lot was recalled after the FDA discovered potential problems with the
manufacturing process at a production plant.7
While clinical trials
provide important information on vaccine safety, the data are somewhat
limited because of the small number (hundreds to thousands) of study
participants. Rare side effects and delayed reactions may not be evident
until the vaccine is administered to millions of people. Therefore, the
Federal Government has established a surveillance system to monitor adverse
events that occur following vaccination. This project is known as the
Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). More recently,
large-linked databases (LLDBs) containing information on millions of
individuals have been created in order to study rare vaccine side effects. 1,3
Top
|
Vaccine Adverse
Event Reporting System (VAERS)
|
The National
Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 mandated that all health care
providers report certain adverse events that occur following vaccination.
As a result, the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) was
established by the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC) in 1990. VAERS provides a mechanism for the collection and analysis
of adverse events associated with vaccines currently licensed in the United
States. Adverse events are defined as health effects that occur after
immunization that may or may not be related to the vaccine. VAERS data are
continually monitored in order to detect previously unknown adverse events
or increases in known adverse events.1,9
Approximately
10,000-12,000 VAERS reports are filed annually, with 20% classified as
serious (causing disability, hospitalization, life threatening illness or
death).1 Anyone can file a VAERS report including health care
providers, manufacturers, vaccine recipients or, when appropriate,
parents/guardians. Those who have experienced an adverse reaction following
immunization are encouraged to seek help from a health care professional
when filling out the form. VAERS forms can be obtained in several ways. Each
year the form is mailed to more than 200,000 physicians specializing in
pediatrics, family practice, internal medicine, infectious diseases,
emergency medicine, obstetrics and gynecology. In addition, copies are sent
to health departments and clinics that administer vaccines. The VAERS form
requests the following information: the type of vaccine received, the
timing of vaccination, the onset of the adverse event, current illnesses or
medication, past history of adverse events following vaccination and demographic
information about the recipient (age, gender, etc.). The form is
pre-addressed and stamped so it can be mailed directly to VAERS. To request
a VAERS form or assistance in filling in out, call 1-800-822-7967.1,9
A contractor, under
the supervision of FDA and CDC, collects the information and enters it into
a database. Those reporting an adverse event to VAERS receive a
confirmation letter by mail indicating that the form was received. This
letter will contain a VAERS identification number. Additional information
may be submitted to VAERS using the assigned identification number.
Selected cases of serious adverse reactions are followed up at 60 days and
one year post-vaccination to check the recovery status of the patient. The
FDA and CDC have access to VAERS data and use this information to monitor
vaccine safety and conduct appropriate research studies. VAERS data (minus
any personal information) is also available to the public. 1,9
While VAERS provides
useful information on vaccine safety, the data are somewhat limited.
Specifically, judgments about causality (whether the vaccine was truly
responsible for an adverse event) cannot be made from VAERS reports because
of incomplete information. VAERS reports often lack important information
such as laboratory results. As a result, researchers have turned more
recently to large-linked databases (LLDBs) in order to study vaccine
safety. LLDBs provide scientists with access to the complete medical
records of millions of individuals receiving vaccines (all identifying
information is deleted to protect the confidentiality of the patient). One
example of a LLDB is the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) project described
below, which is coordinated by the CDC. Studies conducted using
LLDBs, like the VSD, are also known as post-marketing research or phase
four clinical trials. 1
Top
|
Vaccine Safety
Datalink (VSD) Project
|
The gaps that exist
in the scientific knowledge of rare vaccine side effects prompted the CDC
to develop the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) project in 1990. This project
involves partnerships with seven large health maintenance organizations
(HMOs) to continually monitor vaccine safety. VSD is an example of a
large-linked database (LLDB) and includes information on more than six
million people. All vaccines administered within the study population are
recorded. Available data include vaccine type, date of vaccination,
concurrent vaccinations (those given during the same visit), the
manufacturer, lot number and injection site. Medical records are then
monitored for potential adverse events resulting from immunization. The VSD
project allows for planned vaccine safety studies as well as timely
investigations of hypotheses. At present, the VSD project is examining
potential associations between vaccines and a number of serious conditions.
The database is also being used to test new vaccine safety hypotheses that
result from the medical literature, VAERS, changes in the immunization
schedule or from the introduction of new vaccines. This project is a
powerful and cost-effective tool for the on-going evaluation of vaccine
safety.1,10
Top
|
Vaccine Injury
Compensation Program
|
In order to reduce
the liability of manufacturers and health care providers, the National
Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 established the National Vaccine
Injury Compensation Program (NVICP). This program is intended to compensate
those individuals who have been injured by vaccines on a
"no-fault" basis. No fault means that people filing claims are
not required to prove negligence on the part of either the health care
provider or manufacturer to receive compensation. The program covers all
routinely recommended childhood vaccinations. Settlements are based on the
Vaccine Injury Table which summarizes the adverse events caused by
vaccines. This table was developed by a panel of experts who reviewed the
medical literature and identified the serious adverse events that are
reasonably certain to be caused by vaccines. Examples of table injuries
include anaphylaxis (severe allergic reaction), paralytic polio and
encephalopathy (general brain disorder). The Vaccine Injury Table was
created to justly compensate those injured by vaccines while separating out
unrelated claims. As more information becomes available from research on
vaccine side effects, the Vaccine Injury Table is updated. 11,12
Individuals and their
families can qualify for compensation in three ways. First, is to show that
an injury found on the Vaccine Injury Table occurred in the appropriate
time interval following immunization. The other two ways to qualify include
proving that the vaccine caused the condition or demonstrating that the
vaccine worsened or aggravated a pre-existing condition. 11,12
The vaccine injury
compensation process begins when an individual files a petition with the
United States Court of Federal Claims. At that point, a physician from the
program reviews the petition to determine whether it meets the criteria for
compensation. This recommendation is not binding. A Court attorney then
reviews the case and makes an initial decision for or against entitlement
to compensation. Decisions may be appealed to the Court of Federal Claims,
and then to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. This process occurs at no
cost to the individual filing the claim. NVICP is coordinated by the
Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Justice. For
more information on the program or for assistance in making a claim, call
1-800-338-2382.11,12
Top
|
Improvements in
Vaccine Safety
|
In the last decade,
numerous changes in vaccine production and administration have reduced the
number of adverse events and resulted in safer vaccines. A more purified
acellular pertussis (aP) vaccine has been licensed for use and has replaced
the whole-cell pertussis vaccine used in DTP (diphtheria, tetanus,
pertussis vaccine). Several studies have evaluated the safety and efficacy
of DTaP as compared to DTP and have concluded that DTaP is effective in
preventing disease and that mild side effects and serious adverse events
occurred less frequently when the DTaP vaccine was given.3
Recent changes in the schedule of polio vaccines have also resulted in
fewer reports of serious side effects. In 1997, the Advisory Committee on
Immunization Practice recommended a change in the vaccination schedule to include
sequential administration of inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) and oral polio
vaccine (OPV).13 This sequential schedule was expected to
produce a high level of individual protection against the disease caused by
wild polio virus, while reducing by 50 to 70% vaccine-associated paralytic
polio (VAPP) that occurs in 8-10 people a year who receive OPV.14
Today, only IPV is on the recommended childhood immunization schedule.
Top
At some point, almost
every person in the United States is vaccinated. Therefore, many
individuals question how vaccines are made, if they are effective and
whether they are safe.15 People seek answers to these questions
from a wide variety of sources including family, friends, health care
providers, the Internet, television and medical literature. The information
they receive is complex and, at times, inaccurate or misleading. Therefore,
health professionals have a responsibility to provide accurate,
understandable information and to handle vaccine safety concerns
appropriately. As mentioned previously, the NCVIA requires all health care
providers who administer vaccines to discuss the potential risks and
benefits of immunization. In these situations, risk communication is
a necessary skill.1
Risk communication
involves a dynamic exchange of information between individuals, groups and
institutions. This information must acknowledge and define the risks
associated with vaccination in a way the public can understand. This is
difficult given the current environment where few people experience the
devastation of vaccine-preventable diseases. It is further complicated by
the fact that immunization is associated with some degree of personal
discomfort when needles are used to administer vaccines.1
In 1996, the
Institute of Medicine's Vaccine Safety Forum held a workshop on risk
communication and vaccination. Three key concepts emerged:
"First, risk
communication is a dynamic process in which many participate, and these
individuals are influenced by a wide variety of circumstances, interests,
and information needs. Effective risk communication depends on the
providers' and recipients' understanding more than simply the risks and
benefits; background experiences and values also influence the
process."18 Good risk communication recognizes a
diversity of form and context needs in the general population.
Second, the goal that
all parties share regarding vaccine risk communication should be informed
decision making. Consent for vaccination is truly 'informed' when the
members of the public know the risks and benefits and make voluntary
decisions.
Finally, there is
often uncertainty about estimates of the risk associated with
vaccination. Risk communication is more effective when this
uncertainty is stated and when the risks are quantified as much as science
permits. Trust is a key component of the exchange of information at
every level, and overconfidence about risk estimates that are later shown
to be incorrect contributes to a breakdown of trust among public health
officials, vaccine manufacturers, and the public. Continued research
to improve the understanding of vaccine risks is critical to maximizing
mutual understanding and trust."19
Several resources are
available to address the risks and benefits of vaccination. Federal law
requires all health care providers who administer vaccines in the United
States to provide Vaccine Information Statements (VISs) to vaccine
recipients (or their parent/guardian) prior to each dose being
administered. VISs are developed by CDC and contain information on the
disease as well as the risks and benefits associated with immunization.
These documents, and others, can be obtained from the National Immunization
Hotline 1-800-232-2522 or from the National
Immunization Program's Web Page.
Top
|
Conclusion:
The Future of Vaccine Safety
|
The importance of
vaccine safety will continue to grow throughout the twenty-first
century. The development and licensure of new vaccines will add to
the already complicated immunization schedule. Scientists may also
perfect new ways of administering immunizations including edible vaccines and
needleless injections. However they are formulated or delivered,
vaccines will remain the most effective tool we possess for preventing
disease and improving public health in the future.
Top
General Vaccine Safety
·
Epidemiology and
Prevention of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases, Vaccine Safety (Chapter 15)
·
Vaccine Safety:
Current and Future Challenges
·
Vaccine
Safety Resource List
·
Institute of Medicine,
Vaccine Safety Forum (1997)
·
World Health Organization's Web Page
on Vaccine Safety
·
National Vaccine Program
Office's Web Page on Vaccine Safety
·
Enhancing Vaccine
Safety
Vaccine Adverse Events
·
Institute
of Medicine, Adverse Effects of Pertussis and Rubella Vaccines (1991)
·
Institute
of Medicine, Adverse Events Associated with Childhood Vaccines: Evidence
Bearing on Causality (1994)
Vaccine Licensure
·
FDA Licensure of Vaccines
Monitoring Vaccine Safety
·
The Complicated Task of
Monitoring Vaccine Safety
The Vaccine Adverse Events
Reporting System (VAERS)
·
The Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System
(VAERS)
·
FDA's Web Site on VAERS
·
VAERS Table of Reportable
Events
·
VAERS Form
The Vaccine Safety Datalink
(VSD) Project
·
Vaccine Safety
Datalink Project: Current and Completed Studies
·
Vaccine Safety
Datalink References
·
Vaccine Safety
Datalink Project: A New Tool for Improving Vaccine Safety Monitoring in the
United States
National Vaccine Injury
Compensation Program (NVICP)
·
NVICP's Web Site
Risk Communication
·
Institute of Medicine, Risk
Communication and Vaccination (1997)
·
Current Vaccine
Information Statements (VISs)
·
Instructions
for Vaccine Information Statements (VISs)
Top
- Chen RT, Hibbs B.
Vaccine safety: Current and future challenges. Pediatric
Annals. July 1998; 27(7): 445-455.
- Ellenberg SS, Chen
RT. The complicated task of monitoring vaccine safety.
Public Health Reports. Jan/Feb 1997; 112: 10-19.
- Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention. (1997) Epidemiology and prevention of
vaccine-preventable diseases, vaccine safety (chapter 15).
Washington DC: Government Printing Office.
- Freed GL, Katz SL, Clark
SJ. Safety of vaccinations: Miss America, the media, and public
health. JAMA. 1996; 276(23): 1869-1872.
- Brink EW, Hinman
AR. The vaccine injury compensation act: The new law and
you. Contemporary Pediatrics. July 1989; 6(3): 28-32,
35-36, 39, 42.
- National Institutes of
Health. (1998) Understanding vaccines. Bethesda, MD:
NIH.
- Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) web site (http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/095_vacc.html)
- Chen RT, Orenstein
WA. Epidemiologic methods in immunization programs.
Epidemiologic Reviews. 1996; 18(2): 99-117.
- Chen RT, Rastogi SC,
Mullen JR, Hayes SW, Cochi SL, Donlon JA, Wassilak SG. The
Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Vaccine. 1994;
12(6): 542-550.
- Chen RT, Glasser JW,
Phodes PH, Davis RL, Barlow WE, Thompson RS, Mullooly JP, Black SB,
Shinefield HR, Badheim CM, Marcy SM, Ward JI, Wise RP, Wassilak SG,
Hadler SC. Vaccine safety datalink project: A new tool for
improving vaccine safety monitoring in the United States.
Pediatrics. June 1997; 99(6): 765-773.
- Vaccine Injury
Compensation Program web site (http://bhpr.hrsa.gov/vicp/vicp.html)
- National Immunization
Program, Satellite Course on Vaccine Safety and Risk
Communication. February 26, 1998.
- Advisory Committee on
Immunization Practice (ACIP). Poliomyelitis prevention in the United
States: Introduction of a sequential vaccination schedule of
inactivated poliovirus vaccine followed by oral poliovirus
vaccine. MMWR. 1997; 46 (RR-3); 1-25.
- Advisory Committee on
Immunization Practice (ACIP). Poliomyelitis prevention in the United
States: Introduction of a sequential vaccination schedule of
inactivated poliovirus vaccine followed by oral poliovirus
vaccine. MMWR. 1997; 46 (RR-3); 1-25.
- Offit PM, Bell LM.
What every parent should know about vaccines. New York: Simon
& Schuster Macmillan Company, 1998:1.
- Hance BJ, Chess C,
Sandman P. Industry risk communication manual. Chelsea, MI:
Lewis Publishers, 1990.
- Meszaros JR, Asch, DA,
Baron J, Hershey JC, Kunreuther H, Schwartz -Buzaglo J. Cognitive
processes and the decisions of some parents to forego pertussis
vaccination for their children. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996; 49:
697-703.
- Zeckhauser R.
Coverage for catastrophic illness. Public Policy 1973;
21:149-72.
- Institute of Medicine,
Vaccine Safety Forum. (1997). Risk communication and vaccination:
summary of a workshop. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
The Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention
National Immunization Program
Vaccine Safety and Development Activity
|