Vaccine Adverse Effects Research Articles

Pitiríase Liquenoide e Vacina contra o Vírus Influenza- um raro efeito

INTRODUCTION The infection by the Influenza virus is considered a public health problem, causing severe illness and death, above all, in high-risk population. The vaccination against Influenza has proved to be effective in protecting patients and health professionals from nosocomial infections and in reducing absenteeism due to illness. Pityriasis Lichenoides represent a group of inflammatory skin diseases with a variable clinical spectrum. Cases of Pityriasis Lichenoides related to vaccination are rare, therefore, this work represents an opportunity to report about this syndrome, whilst contributing to the identification and clarification of one of the possible adverse effects of vaccination against Influenza. CASE DESCRIPTION We report a case of 59-years-old health professional man, who attended an Occupational Medicine consultation due to the arising of a three days evolution erythematous papules on the trunk, abdomen and upper limbs, associated with pruritus, after carrying out Influenza vaccine (Influvac TetraÒ), as part of the seasonal flu vaccination program at the Occupational Health Service. The diagnosis of Pityriasis Lichenoides induced by the Influenza vaccine was considered due to the clinical and histopathological data. DISCUSSION Amongst the general literature, there are few reported cases of Pityriasis Lichenoides in connection with Influenza vaccination. The most frequently associated vaccines are the anti-measles, anti-mumps, and anti-rubella, and only one case is reported with direct link to the vaccine against Influenza. The article has the particularity of focusing on a case over a health professional which carries a greater risk of exposure to the virus, resulting from professional activity. Nevertheless, is a chronic patient (diabetic) and at a higher risk of serious illness/complications. CONCLUSIONS Despite being a rare syndrome, we emphasize the right for a correct recognition, diagnosis and approach to this disease. Furthermore, the adherence to Influenza vaccination is strongly linked to the fear of adverse effects, which makes it crucial to train professionals involved in Influenza vaccination for correct counseling and follow-up in the vaccination process. KEY WORDS: Influenza, Vaccine, Pityriasis Lichenoides, Health-care Worker, Occupational Health, Work Medicine.

P-070 SARS-CoV2 antibody isotypes in seminal fluid of vaccinated men

Abstract Study question Are SARS-CoV2 antibody isotypes detectable in seminal fluid of vaccinated men Summary answer Systemic circulating SARS-CoV2 antibodies are likely to be precluded from transport to seminal plasma following vaccination in males What is known already Expedited development of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines led to public concerns regarding impacts of the novel vaccine on gametes in patients seeking assisted reproduction. Recent studies on ovarian follicular fluid from women post SARS-CoV2 infection or BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination show similar levels of SARS-CoV2 IgG antibodies in follicular fluid as those found in serum. To our knowledge, no study to date has examined if SARS-CoV2 antibody isotypes are detectable in seminal fluid of vaccinated men. Study design, size, duration This was a longitudinal cohort study of 17 normospermic male patients attending a fertility clinic associated with a tertiary university maternity hospital. Semen and matched peripheral blood samples were collected prior to vaccination (t = 0), within 46 + 18.9 hours of vaccine completion (acute; t = 1) and at 88.4 + 12 days (3 months; t = 2) post vaccination. Participants/materials, setting, methods Serum and seminal plasma anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike isotypes (IgA, IgM and IgG1) and immune factors (IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IFN-γ, TNF-α, IP-10; CXCL10, MCP-1, CCL2) were analysed using ELISA-based approaches at three time points. To rule out potential factors present in seminal plasma that could interfere with IgG detection, a commercial positive anti-Spike control was used to confirm detection in the ELISA assay. Self-reported symptoms and sperm parameters including count, motility, morphology, DNA damage were also quantified. Main results and the role of chance All semen samples were found to be negative for anti-SARS-CoV2 spike antibodies at all three time points indicating that systemic antibodies are likely precluded from transport to seminal plasma. Four out of 17 (23.5%) serum samples were negative for all three isotypes (IgM, IgA, IgG1) at < 72 hours post-vaccine completion, while one patient remained negative for all antibodies at 3 months post-vaccine. No global change from baseline was seen in reported symptoms, mean semen volume, semen pH, sperm concentration, motility, morphology or DNA damage in the acute or long phase. Two men showed a clinically relevant reduction in sperm motility alone in the acute phase that returned to normal by 3 months. Seminal plasma MCP-1 levels showed an acute but transient elevation post-vaccine, while IL-8 was marginally increased 3 months after completion of vaccination. Our findings also indicate a modest, positive correlation between serum levels of the anti-inflammatory cytokine IL-10 and self-reported symptoms in the acute post-vaccine period, with no correlation between serum IL-10 levels and change in sperm parameters from t = 0 to t = 1. Limitations, reasons for caution This study included a small population of only 17 men, all of whom were normospermic. Responses in men with subnormal baseline sperm parameters may differ and thus would be helpful to explore. Wider implications of the findings Our results show no significant adverse effect of vaccination. There may be temporary decline in sperm motility which could be more significant in men with poor baseline parameters. Further larger studies with inclusion of men with abnormal baseline parameters would be valuable to support timing of vaccination and treatment. Trial registration number not applicable

Sinovac COVID-19 Side Effects in Hypertensive Patients: An Observational Study From Pakistan.

Background The most important factor in combating the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was the provision ofsafe and effective vaccines. The acceptance of vaccines is impacted by several variables, including beliefs about the vaccine's safety and adverse effects. Vaccine side effects can vary depending on the type, but they are often moderate, localized, transient, and self-limiting. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the prevalence of side effects experienced after receiving the Sinovac vaccine by participants hypertensive and non-hypertensive participants. Methodology This was a cross-sectional, multicenter study that was performed using non-probability sampling. The study duration was six months from May 1, 2022, to October 31, 2022. The study involved 600 individuals who had either received the first or second dose of the Sinovac vaccine. For categorical data, frequencies and percentages were documented. The chi-square test was applied to determine the association between local and systemic side effects among hypertensive and non-hypertensive participants. Results The study findings showed that out of 600 participants, there were 187 (62.3%) males and 113 (37.7%) females with hypertension, and 222 (74.0%) males and 78 (26.0%) females without hypertension, with a significant association(p = 0.002). Following the first dose of the Sinovac vaccine, fever was the most commonly reported side effect in 153 (51.0%) hypertensive participants and 62 (20.7%) non-hypertensive participants, with a significant association(p < 0.001). Similarly, following the second dose of the Sinovac vaccine, fever was the most commonly reported side effect in 108 (36.0%) hypertensive participants and 57 (19.0%) non-hypertensive participants, with a significant association(p < 0.001). Conclusions This study concluded that the presence of hypertension significantly increased the manifestations of local and systemic side effects compared with non-hypertensive participants. Moreover, fever, pain, and swelling at the injection site were the most commonly reported side effects after receiving the first and second doses of the Sinovac vaccine.

Unvaccinated, Just Like Everybody Else. Vaccine Hesitancy in a Romanian Religious Community

Abstract Vaccine hesitancy was a widespread phenomenon during the COVID-19 pandemic. It held back large-scale immunization in countries where vaccines were available and it aggravated the pandemic. The way we understand vaccine hesitancy in postmodern societies emphasizes individual risks, reflexivity, and patients making informed decisions. But how is vaccine hesitancy experienced in traditional communities? We explored answers to this question through ethnographic interviews conducted in the least vaccinated village in Romania. In this Pentecostal community, vaccination decisions were made at the community level, where an informal norm of vaccine refusal was dominant. This norm emerged through two types of interactions – local and mediated interactions – as collective discussions were centred on religious interpretations of Biblical fragments and on information from TV shows and social media about the adverse effects of vaccines. People formed symbolic alliances with influential actors in their community who were unvaccinated, such as the mayor and the pastor, and with citizens from Western European countries who also refused COVID-19 vaccination. Mainstream fears of vaccination were expressed during the interviews, concerning paralysis and death resulting from vaccination and mistrust in official authorities. Vaccination accentuated pre-existing differences in status, demarcating people with a high level of education working at the village hall, who were vaccinated, from those with a lower socio-economic status, who were not vaccinated.

Impact of social media messages on perceived risk and severity of adverse effects and regret of HPV vaccination: The moderating role of decision-making preference.

10543 Background: The HPV vaccine has proven to be a highly effective and safe public health intervention for reducing the risk of various types of cancer. Despite its efficacy and safety, misinformation and negative opinions about the vaccine on social media can lead to negative emotions such as regret among those who have received it. This study investigated the impact of different content of social media messages on perceived risk and severity of adverse effects and regret of HPV vaccination. Methods: An experiment was designed to expose participants to messages posted on social media that manipulated the number of Vaccine Adverse Effects and the appeal used (narrative vs. statistics). The study measured the effect of the message on decisional regret and also assessed preferred level of involvement with medical decision-making. The online study was implemented among college students enrolled in a Midwestern or a South Texas university. We used structural equation modeling (SEM) to systematically test the relationships between the variables of interest. Results: A total of 721 participants were exposed to the experimental materials and completed the questionnaire. The results of the SEM (with overall good fitness of RMSEA = 0.015, CMIN/df = 1.172) suggest that messages that contained more numeric information (standardized regression weights [Std Reg Wght = 0.161]) and more adverse effects of the HPV vaccine (Std Reg Wght = 0.076) led to a higher perception of the risk of vaccine adverse effects. The severity of adverse effects was significantly associated with the number of side effects in the message (Std Reg Wght = 0.147). This increase in perceived risk (Std Reg Wght = 0.182) and severity of side effects of the vaccine (Std Reg Wght = 0.163) seem to increase decisional regret. However, this relationship was moderated by individuals’ preferences for making their own medical decisions. Individuals with a higher preference to make their own health decisions were less likely to experience decisional regret (Std Reg Wght = -0.238). Conclusions: Messages on social media can exacerbate negative emotions and lead to hesitation in following future medical advice. Encouraging individuals to play a more active role in their medical decision-making appears to reduce this negative emotion and increase their confidence in health decisions.

The Incidence and Severity of COVID-19 Infection Post Vaccination in Saudi Arabia.

Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Presently, there is ongoing continuous research for more therapeutic options with a wide variety of vaccine availability. However, many people have worried about the vaccine's side effects. Hence, the current study was conducted to determine the prevalence of vaccinated individuals, side effects, and the rate of infectivity post vaccination including the three doses of vaccinations. Methods A cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey was conducted using Google Forms (Google, Inc., Mountain View, CA). Five hundred forty-three individuals participated and reported their status of COVID-19 infection, vaccination, and side effects. All the participants from Saudi Arabia received all the vaccine shots including the booster dose. Results Most of the Saudi nationals were fully vaccinated, and most received Pfizer vaccines for their first and second shots. Pain at the injection site was reported as the most common adverse effect followed by fever, headache, fatigue, and joint pain. Conclusion From the findings, it is concluded that most of the population of Saudi Arabia was vaccinated effectively. Pain at the injection site is identified as the primary adverse effect of vaccination. Most of the population is vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine. Long-term side effect monitoring is recommended with large population studies to confirm the status of vaccines and adverse effects.

Adverse Effects of Covid-19 Vaccine; an Observational Studymainly Focusing on the Cutaneous Reactions in Both Genders

Objective: COVID-19 caused a deleterious impact on the health care system globally.The roll out of vaccines seems to be the only effective way to curtail the spread of disease.The purpose of this study is to assess the dermatological adverse effect of post COVID-19vaccination on a gender basis. Methodology: This was an observational,cross-sectional,questionnaire-based survey conducted in Pakistan.The sample comprises 518 participants. The questionnaire was self-designed. The trial lasted six months, from August 1, 2022, until January 31, 2023. We used a non-probability sampling technique.Dermatological adverse effects like burning pain, redness, rashes, and lymphadenopathy at the injection site were recorded.Fever was also noted. All the participants have received booster shots or double doses of any one of CCOVID-19 vaccines, such as AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Sinovac, Sinopharm,Pakvac, etc. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.Qualitative data was reported as frequency and percentage, and quantitativedata was reported as standard deviation and mean. Results: The study included 518 subjects, of whom 262 were males and 256 were females. The mean age of male is 42.70±14.05 years and female is 39.04±14.6years with a significant difference observed between them (p=0.004). The most common complaint among dermatological adverse effects after first was pain. 106(40.5%) male and 132(51.6%) female reported painwith a significant difference observed between them (p=0.011) followed by swelling which was reported by 92(35.1%) males and 120(46.9%) females with a significant difference observed between them (p=0.006).Burning was reported in 92(35.1%) male and 148(57.8%) female with a significant difference observed between them(p&lt;0.001). Fever was also quite commonly reported in both male 116(44.3%) and female 178(69.5%) with significantdifference observed between them (p&lt;0.001),Likewise post 2nd dose of vaccination, pain was most commonly noted in 90(34.4%) male and female 124(48.4%) female with significant difference observed between them (p=0.001). Moreover, burning was reported by 80(30.5%) malesand 132(51.6%) females with a significant difference observed between them (p&lt;0.001). rashes were reported by76(29.0%) males and 100(39.1%) females with a significant difference observed between them (p=0.016), lymphadenopathy was also significantly associated with genders, (p&lt;0.001). Conclusion: This study concluded that the burning pain,redness,rashes,and lymphadenopathywere the most prevalent side effects in male and female post 1st and 2ndCOVID-19 vaccination.Furthermore fever was also reported in majority of subjects.In addition to this higher percentage of side effects were recorded in females as comparedto males. Keywords: COVID-19 vaccination, vaccine adverse effects, pain, fever.

Comparison of Biological, Pharmacological Characteristics, Indications, Contraindications, Efficacy, and Adverse Effects of Inactivated Whole-Virus COVID-19 Vaccines Sinopharm, CoronaVac, and Covaxin: An Observational Study.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is an emerging viral zoonotic illness that has developed a distinctive and threatening situation globally. Worldwide, many vaccines were introduced to fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. The present study aims to compare the bio-pharmacological characteristics, indications, contraindications, efficacy, and adverse effects of inactivated whole-virus COVID-19 vaccines, Sinopharm, CoronaVac, and Covaxin. Initially, 262 documents and 6 international organizations were selected. Finally, 41 articles, fact sheets, and international organizations were included. The data were recorded from the World Health Organization (WHO), Food and Drug Administration (FDA) USA, Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus. The results demonstrated that these three inactivated whole-virus COVID-19 vaccines, Sinopharm, CoronaVac, and Covaxin, received emergency approval from the FDA/WHO, and all three of these vaccines are beneficial for the prevention of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Sinopharm vaccine has been recommended during pregnancy and for people of all age groups, and the CoronaVac and Covaxin vaccines are recommended for people over 18 years of age and older. These three vaccines have recommended intramuscular doses of 0.5 mL each, with a 3-4 week interval. These three vaccines can be stored in a refrigerator at +2 to +8 °C. The common adverse effects of these vaccines are pain at the injection site, redness, fatigue, headache, myalgias, general lethargy, body ache, arthralgia, nausea, chills, fever, and dizziness. The overall mean efficiency for the prevention of the COVID-19 disease is 73.78% for Sinopharm, 70.96% for CoronaVac, and 61.80% for Covaxin. In conclusion, all three inactivated whole-virus COVID-19 vaccines, Sinopharm, CoronaVac, and Covaxin, are beneficial for the prevention of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, evidence suggests that the overall impact of Sinopharm is slightly better than that of CoronaVac and Covaxin.

Expectations and Prior Experiences Associated With Adverse Effects of COVID-19 Vaccination

Uptake of vaccination against COVID-19 is strongly affected by concerns about adverse effects. Research on nocebo effects suggests that these concerns can amplify symptom burden. To investigate whether positive and negative expectations prior to COVID-19 vaccination are associated with systemic adverse effects. This prospective cohort study analyzed the association of expected benefits and risks of vaccination, adverse effects at first vaccination, and observed adverse effects in close contacts with severity of systemic adverse effects among adults receiving a second dose of messenger RNA (mRNA)-based vaccines between August 16 and 28, 2021. A total of 7771 individuals receiving the second dose at a state vaccination center in Hamburg, Germany, were invited to participate; of these, 5370 did not respond, 535 provided incomplete information, and 188 were excluded retrospectively. The mobile application m-Path was used for data collection. Primary outcome was a composite severity index of systemic adverse effects in 12 symptom areas measured once daily with an electronic symptom diary over 7 consecutive days. Data were analyzed by mixed-effects multivariable ordered logistic regression adjusted for prevaccine symptom levels and observation times. A total of 10 447 observations from 1678 individuals receiving vaccinations (BNT162b2 [Pfizer BioNTech] in 1297 [77.3%] and mRNA-1273 [Moderna] in 381 [22.7%]) were collected. The participants' median age was 34 (IQR, 27-44) years, and 862 (51.4%) were women. The risk for more severe adverse effects was higher for persons expecting a lower benefit of vaccination (odds ratio [OR] for higher expectations, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.63-0.83]; P < .001), expecting higher adverse effects of vaccination (OR, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.23-1.58]; P < .001), having experienced higher symptom burden at the first vaccination (OR, 1.60 [95% CI, 1.42-1.82]; P < .001), scoring higher on the Somatosensory Amplification Scale (OR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.06-1.38]; P = .004), and if the vaccine mRNA-1273 was given rather than BNT162b2 (OR, 2.45 [95% CI, 2.01-2.99]; P < .001). No associations were seen for observed experiences. In this cohort study, several nocebo effects occurred in the first week after COVID-19 vaccination. The severity of systemic adverse effects was associated not only with vaccine-specific reactogenicity but also more negative prior experiences with adverse effects from the first COVID-19 vaccination, more negative expectations regarding vaccination, and tendency to catastrophize instead of normalize benign bodily sensations. Clinician-patient interactions and public vaccine campaigns may both benefit from these insights by optimizing and contextualizing information provided about COVID-19 vaccines.

The coverage of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and the willingness to receive the SARS-CoV-2 variant vaccine among employees in China

BackgroundCOVID-19, which is caused by SARS-CoV-2, is a major global health threat. The dominant variant of SARS-CoV-2 has changed over time due to continuous evolution. We aimed to evaluate the coverage of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination among employees in China, explore their willingness to receive the SARS-CoV-2 variant vaccine and examine the potential factors influencing vaccination coverage and willingness.MethodsA cross-sectional epidemiological survey was conducted online from January 1, 2022, to January 30, 2022. The information collected in the survey included sociodemographic characteristics, lifestyle habits, vaccination coverage, willingness to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 variants and the reasons for vaccination and willingness. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the associations of potential factors with the rate of vaccination and the willingness to be vaccinated.ResultsAmong 62,395 eligible participants, the coverage of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was 98.9% for at least one dose and 70.1% for a booster. The great majority of vaccinated individuals (94.4%) voluntarily received the vaccine. A total of 60,694 respondents (97.7%) were willing to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 variants, mainly due to confidence in the effectiveness of vaccines (92.8%). A total of 1431 respondents were unwilling to be vaccinated, mainly because of concerns about the adverse effects of vaccines (77.6%). Longer education duration was associated with a higher rate of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and willingness to be vaccinated. General or poor health status and having no history of influenza vaccination were associated with a lower rate of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and willingness to be vaccinated. Additionally, we observed a significant positive association of abuse experience with the willingness to be vaccinated.ConclusionAlthough the rate of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and the willingness to be vaccinated were relatively high in the study population, there were still some respondents with vaccine hesitancy. Relevant strategies based on significant related factors should be developed and implemented to encourage vaccination.

Understanding influencing attributes of COVID-19 vaccine preference and willingness-to-pay among Chinese and American middle-aged and elderly adults: A discrete choice experiment and propensity score matching study.

COVID-19 has imposed burdens on public health systems globally. Owing to the urgency of vaccination, this study aimed at comparing the differences in preference and willingness to pay of COVID-19 vaccine among Chinese and American middle-aged and elderly adults. A cross-sectional survey containing demographic questions, rating their acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination with and without recommendations from friends, family members or employers (the social cues referred to in our study), and a discrete choice experiment understanding COVID-19 vaccine preference and willingness to pay was conducted to collect data. Propensity score matching was utilized to adjust confounding factors of baseline characteristics and the relative importance of respondents' preference for each attribute and its level was estimated using a conditional logit model. Then, willingness to pay was calculated. In total, 3,494 (2,311 and 1,183 from China and the United States, respectively) completed the questionnaire, among which 3,444 questionnaires were effective. After propensity score matching, 1,604 respondents with 802 from the US and 802 from China were included. Under the influence of the social cues, Chinese respondents' vaccine acceptance decreased from 71.70 to 70.70%, while American respondents' vaccine acceptance increased from 74.69 to 75.81%. The discrete choice experiment showed that American respondents regarded the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccine as the most important attribute, whereas Chinese respondents attached the highest importance to the cost of vaccination. But overall, the COVID-19 vaccine with the higher efficacy, the milder adverse effect, the lower cost, and the longer duration will promote the preference of the public in both countries. Additionally, the public were willing to spend the most money for a reduction in COVID-19 vaccine adverse effect from moderate to very mild (37.476USD for the United States, 140.503USD for China), followed by paying for the 1% improvement in its efficacy and paying for the one-month extension of its duration. Given the impact of social cues on vaccine acceptance, Chinese government should promote reasonable vaccine-related information to improve national vaccination acceptance. Meanwhile, considering the influence of COVID-19 attributes on public preference and willingness to pay, regulating the vaccine pricing, improving the efficacy of the vaccine, reducing its adverse effect, and prolonging the duration of the vaccine works will contribute to vaccine uptake.

Impact of COVID-19 Vaccination on Pregnant Women.

In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, researchers across the world hastened to develop vaccines that would aid in bolstering herd immunity. Utilizing mRNA coding and viral vector technology, the currently approved vaccines were required to undergo extensive testing to confirm their safety for mass usage in the general population. However, clinical trials failed to test the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines in groups with weakened immune systems, especially pregnant women. Lack of information on the effects of vaccinations in pregnancy and the safety of fetuses are among the topmost reasons preventing pregnant women from receiving immunization. Thus, the lack of data examining the effects of COVID-19 vaccinations on pregnant women must be addressed. This review focused on the safety and efficacy of the approved COVID-19 vaccinations in pregnancy and their impact on both maternal and fetal immune responses. For that, we took the approach of combined systematic review/meta-analysis and compiled the available data from the original literature from PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE and Medline databases. All articles analyzed presented no adverse effects of vaccination in pregnancy, with varying conclusions on the degree of effectiveness. The majority of the findings described robust immune responses in vaccinated pregnant women, successful transplacental antibody transfer, and implications for neonatal immunity. Hence, findings from the cumulative data available can be helpful in achieving COVID-19 herd immunization, including pregnant women.

Vaccines for the prevention of infections in adults with haematological malignancies

Objectives This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows: To assess the benefits and adverse effects of vaccines for the prevention of infections in adults with haematological malignancies.

The Role of Immunity in the Pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 Infection and in the Protection Generated by COVID-19 Vaccines in Different Age Groups.

This study aims to review the available data regarding the central role of immunity in combating SARS-CoV-2 infection and in the generation of protection by vaccination against COVID-19 in different age groups. Physiologically, the immune response and the components involved in it are variable, both functionally and quantitatively, in neonates, infants, children, adolescents, and adults. These immunological differences are mirrored during COVID-19 infection and in the post-vaccination period. The outcome of SARS-CoV-2 infection is greatly dependent on the reaction orchestrated by the immune system. This is clearly obvious in relation to the clinical status of COVID-19 infection, which can be symptomless, mild, moderate, or severe. Even the complications of the disease show a proportional pattern in relation to the immune response. On the contrary, the commonly used anti-COVID-19 vaccines generate protective humoral and cellular immunity. The magnitude of this immunity and the components involved in it are discussed in detail. Furthermore, many of the adverse effects of these vaccines can be explained on the basis of immune reactions against the different components of the vaccines. Regarding the appropriate choice of vaccine for different age groups, many factors have to be considered. This is a cornerstone, particularly in the following age groups: 1 day to 5 years, 6 to 11 years, and 12 to 17 years. Many factors are involved in deciding the route, doses, and schedule of vaccination for children. Another important issue in this dilemma is the hesitancy of families in making the decision about whether to vaccinate their children. Added to these difficulties is the choice by health authorities and governments concerning whether to make children's vaccination compulsory. In this respect, although rare and limited, adverse effects of vaccines in children have been detected, some of which, unfortunately, have been serious or even fatal. However, to achieve comprehensive control over COVID-19 in communities, both children and adults have to be vaccinated, as the former group represents a reservoir for viral transmission. The understanding of the various immunological mechanisms involved in SARS-CoV-2 infection and in the preparation and application of its vaccines has given the sciences a great opportunity to further deepen and expand immunological knowledge. This will hopefully be reflected positively on other diseases through gaining an immunological background that may aid in diagnosis and therapy. Humanity is still in continuous conflict with SARS-CoV-2 infection and will be for a while, but the future is expected to be in favor of the prevention and control of this disease.

Adverse Events of BNT162b2 (Pfizer) COVID-19 Vaccine in Children Aged 12 to 17 Years in Thailand

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been sabotaging the world over the last two years and vaccine is one of the key solutions. However, the concerns over its side effects can cause vaccine refusal, subsequently affecting many countries’ education system recovery plans. Objective: To actively evaluate adverse effects and their severity following COVID-19 immunization among schoolchildren aged 12 to 17 years, to support parents’ decision-making. Materials and Methods: The present study was an observational study whereby a Google-form survey on Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine adverse effects (CVAE) was responded between January and April 2022 by 537 participants. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze basic characteristics. Chi-square tests were performed for comparative analyses between junior (aged 12 to 15 years) versus senior (aged 16 to 17 years) high school students, and McNemar’s test for the first dose versus second dose groups analysis with a significance level set at p-value less than 0.05. Results: At least one CVAE was reported in 93.85% of the included participants, albeit mostly mild. The most common symptom as a local event was tenderness at the puncture site (82.50%), whereas systemic events were predominated by myalgia (74.67%). The second dose was associated with increased frequency and severity of adverse effects compared to the first dose (p&lt;0.001). The older age group had significantly more side effects compared to the younger group (p&lt;0.05). Conclusion: The high incidence of CVAEs in schoolchildren was predominated by mild symptoms, with the second dose and older group associated with increased frequency of symptoms. The predominance of mild symptoms found in the present study may help reduce the concerns of parents over CVAEs, ultimately accelerating vaccine coverage in the children group, which is still a gap in vaccine administration. Keywords: Coronavirus 2019; COVID-19 Vaccine; BNT162b2; Side effects; Adverse events; Adolescence

Prevalence, determinants, and reasons for malaria vaccine hesitancy among caregivers of under-five children in Nigeria: Results from a nationwide cross-sectional survey.

Malaria contributes to an enormous global burden of disease and mortality, especially in children. Approximately one in every four global cases and deaths from malaria occurs in Nigeria. This study aims to evaluate the prevalence and correlates of community hesitancy to the malaria vaccine, including the reasons for the hesitancy, following the approval of the RTS,S malaria vaccine by the World Health Organization (WHO). This was a nationwide cross-sectional online survey of Nigerian adults conducted from 20th October to 30th November 2021. Participants who replied 'no' or 'maybe' to a question assessing their willingness to accept the RTS,S malaria vaccine were considered "hesitant". We fit a multivariate logistic regression model to report the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the factors associated with vaccine hesitancy. Among 3377 total respondents (1961 [57.86%] males; mean age [SD]: 30[9.1]), 1010 (29.91%) were hesitant. Receiving information about the RTS,S malaria vaccine initially from healthcare workers (vs. the internet) (aOR:0.55; 95% CI:0.35-0.87) was significantly associated with lower odds of hesitancy. Conversely, earning a high income of over NGN100, 000 (vs.<NGN 30,000) per month (aOR: 2.10, 95% CI: 1.36-3.24), belonging to other religious groups (vs. Islam) (aOR:3.25, 95% CI:1.18-8.98), and having a family size of more than ten (vs.<5) (aOR:1.84; 95% CI:1.08-3.13) were significantly associated with a higher odds of hesitancy. The main reasons for vaccine hesitancy included fear of vaccine adverse effects (34.95%), availability of other malaria preventive measures (33.96%) and not seeing the positive effect of the vaccine in others first (32.97%). The findings of this survey provide a valuable blueprint for the development of targeted interventions to facilitate caregiver acceptance of the RTS,S vaccine.

Neurological sequelae of vaccines.

Vaccines are a safe and efficacious way to prevent a variety of infectious diseases. Over the course of their existence, vaccines have prevented immeasurable morbidity and mortality in humans. Typical symptoms of systemic immune activation are common after vaccines and may include local soreness, myalgias, nausea, and malaise. In the vast majority of cases, the severity of the infectious disease outweighs the risk of mild adverse reactions to vaccines. Rarely, vaccines may be associated with neurological sequela that ranges in severity from headache to transverse myelitis, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, and Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS). Often, a causal link cannot be confirmed, and it remains unclear if disease onset is directly related to a recent vaccination. This review serves to summarize reported neurologic sequelae of commonly used vaccines. It will also serve to discuss potential pathogenesis. It is important to note that many adverse events or reactions to vaccines are self-reported into databases, and causal proof cannot be obtained. Recognition of reported adverse effects of vaccines plays an important role in public health and education. Early identification of these symptoms can allow for rapid diagnosis and potential treatment. Vaccines are a safe option for prevention of infectious diseases.

Side effects of Pfizer/BioNTech (BNT162b2) COVID-19 vaccine reported by the Birzeit University community

BackgroundThe Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine was the first to receive emergency authorization and approval from the FDA. Therefore, it is preferred by most recipients; however, many people are concerned about the vaccine’s side effects. At the time of the study, December 2021, Palestine lacked a national reporting system for monitoring adverse vaccine effects. Therefore, this study investigates the post-vaccine adverse events following the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine administration in Palestine and identifies the occurrence, extent, and severity among university staff, employees, and students at Birzeit University.MethodA questionnaire-based retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted using a university website (Ritaj), social media platforms (e.g., Facebook and Telegram), and in-person interviews. The Chi-square, Fisher’s exact, and McNemar’s tests were used to investigate significant relationships. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 22.ResultsIn total, 1137 participants completed the questionnaire, 33.2% were males, and the mean age was 21.163 years. All participants received at least one dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Approximately one-third of participants reported no adverse effects after receiving the first, second, or third doses (34%, 33.6%, and 32.5%, respectively). The most commonly reported adverse events were fever, chills, headache, fatigue, pain and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, and joint pain. Allergic reactions were reported by 12.7% of the participants; furthermore, participants with a history of allergy or anaphylaxis before vaccination had a significantly higher tendency for post-vaccination allergic reactions. Eight participants reported rare side effects, including 7 (0.6%) cases of thrombocytopenia and one (0.1%) case of myocarditis. Males aged less than 20 years and smokers were significantly less likely to complain of adverse events. The number of reported side effects was significantly higher after the second vaccine dose than after the first dose. Finally, participants infected with COVID-19 before vaccination was significantly associated with side effects such as fever, chills, shortness of breath, and persistent cough.ConclusionIn this study, the most common post- BNT162b2 Vaccination reported self-limiting side effects similar to those reported by Pfizer/BioNTech Company. However, higher rates of allergic reactions were reported in this sample. Rare side effects, such as thrombocytopenia and myocarditis, were reported by 8 participants. COVID vaccines have been developed at an accelerated pace, and vaccine safety is a top priority; therefore, standard monitoring through a national adverse event reporting system is necessary for safety assurance. Continuous monitoring and long-term studies are required to ensure vaccine safety.

Decision-making in childhood vaccination: vaccine hesitancy among caregivers of under-5 children from a tertiary care institution in Eastern India.

Acceptance of vaccines has been on a decline in recent times, with vaccine hesitancy being listed as one of the top 10 global health threats. This study analysed vaccine hesitancy and belief towards vaccination among caregivers of children aged below 5 years. In this cross-sectional study, 196 caregivers of children aged 6 months to below 5 years who had attended an immunization clinic at a tertiary care institute of Eastern India from March to May 2019 were surveyed. Consecutive sampling was used to recruit eligible study participants. The survey assessed the attitudes of parents towards childhood vaccination by using the Vaccine Hesitancy Scale and their beliefs towards vaccination. Univariate analysis was performed to assess the association of various sociodemographic factors with vaccine hesitancy. Among the caregivers, most (48%) mothers were aged 26-35 years, literate and homemakers. Vaccine hesitancy was observed in 9.18% of the participants. Only the age of the child was significantly associated with vaccine hesitancy. Nearly half (48.5%) of the participants were concerned about the serious adverse effects of vaccines, and a third (30.6%) agreed that newer vaccines are associated with higher risks than the older ones. Caregivers felt that vaccines are no longer required for uncommon diseases. Concerns regarding vaccine hesitancy are prevalent even among caregivers attending a tertiary care institute. Thus, additional studies are required to assess hesitancy in urban, rural, remote and inaccessible areas. Policymakers ought to conduct periodic assessments and implement necessary remedial measures for the long-term sustenance of the benefits of the national immunization programme.

Vaccination Approach Toward Monkeypox: An Urgent Call

Vaccination Approach Toward Monkeypox: An Urgent Call