• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Challenges in conducting post-authorisation safety studies (PASS): A vaccine manufacturer's view

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Vaccine. 2017 Apr 29. pii: S0264-410X(17)30550-9. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.04.058. [Epub ahead of print]
[h=1]Challenges in conducting post-authorisation safety studies (PASS): A vaccine manufacturer's view.[/h] Cohet C[SUP]1[/SUP], Rosillon D[SUP]2[/SUP], Willame C[SUP]3[/SUP], Haguinet F[SUP]4[/SUP], Marenne MN[SUP]5[/SUP], Fontaine S[SUP]6[/SUP], Buyse H[SUP]7[/SUP], Bauchau V[SUP]8[/SUP], Baril L[SUP]9[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]

[h=3]Abstract[/h] Post-authorisation safety studies (PASS) of vaccines assess or quantify the risk of adverse events following immunisation that were not identified or could not be estimated pre-licensure. The aim of this perspective paper is to describe the authors' experience in the design and conduct of twelve PASS that contributed to the evaluation of the benefit-risk of vaccines in real-world settings. We describe challenges and learnings from selected PASS of rotavirus, malaria, influenza, human papillomavirus and measles-mumps-rubella-varicella vaccines that assessed or identified potential or theoretical risks, which may lead to changes to risk management plans and/or to label updates. Study settings include the use of large healthcare databases and de novo data collection. PASS methodology is influenced by the background incidence of the outcome of interest, vaccine uptake, availability and quality of data sources, identification of the at-risk population and of suitable comparators, availability of validated case definitions, and the frequent need for case ascertainment in large databases. Challenges include the requirement for valid exposure and outcome data, identification of, and access to, adequate data sources, and mitigating limitations including bias and confounding. Assessing feasibility is becoming a key step to confirm that study objectives can be met in a timely manner. PASS provide critical information for regulators, public health agencies, vaccine manufacturers and ultimately, individuals. Collaborative approaches and synergistic efforts between vaccine manufacturers and key stakeholders, such as regulatory and public health agencies, are needed to facilitate access to data, and to drive optimal study design and implementation, with the aim of generating robust evidence.
Copyright ? 2017 GSK Biologicals SA. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.


[h=4]KEYWORDS:[/h] Adverse event; Challenges; PASS; Pharmacoepidemiology; Safety; Vaccine

PMID: 28465097 DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.04.058
 
Back
Top Bottom