A1 Vertaisarvioitu alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä lehdessä

Development of Real-Time Surveillance for Serious Adverse Events in a Pragmatic Clinical Trial Using National Registers in Finland




TekijätNieminen, Tuomo A.; Palmu, Arto A.; Auvinen, Raija; Kulathinal, Sangita; Auranen, Kari; Syrjänen, Ritva K.; Nieminen, Heta; Moore, Tamala Mallett; Pepin, Stephanie; Jokinen, Jukka

KustantajaDOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTD

KustannuspaikkaALBANY

Julkaisuvuosi2024

JournalClinical Epidemiology

Tietokannassa oleva lehden nimiCLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY

Lehden akronyymiCLIN EPIDEMIOL

Vuosikerta16

Aloitussivu901

Lopetussivu915

Sivujen määrä15

eISSN1179-1349

DOIhttps://doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S483034

Verkko-osoitehttps://doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S483034

Rinnakkaistallenteen osoitehttps://research.utu.fi/converis/portal/detail/Publication/478101651


Tiivistelmä

Purpose: We developed a hybrid safety surveillance approach for a large, pragmatic clinical trial of a high-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV-HD), using both active and passive data collection methods. Here, we present the methods and results for the passive register-based surveillance of serious adverse events (SAEs), which replaced conventional SAE reporting during the trial.

Patients and Methods: The trial recruited over 33,000 older adults of whom 50% received the QIV-HD while the rest received a standard-dose vaccine (QIV-SD) as a control vaccine. We collected diagnoses related to all acute hospitalizations during the six months following vaccination from national registers. During the blinded phase of the trial, we utilized a cohort study design and compared the incidences of 1811 ICD10 diagnosis groups (SAE categories) between the trial population and older adults vaccinated with the QIV-SD outside the trial, either during the study or the previous influenza season. Based on a real-time probabilistic comparison, we flagged SAE categories with higher incidence in the trial population and then evaluated possible causal associations between each flagged category and the trial intervention.

Results: Our novel approach to safety surveillance provided information, which we could evaluate in real-time during the trial. The trial participants experienced 1217 hospitalizations related to any SAE categories, contributed by 941 patients. We flagged 10 SAE categories for further analysis during the study but based on further data review, none presented strong evidence of causality with vaccination.

Conclusion: Safety signals can be detected and evaluated in real-time during a pragmatic vaccine trial with register-based follow-up, utilizing passive data collection and population level comparison. Compared to conventional methods of safety follow-up, this method is likely to be more comprehensive, objective and resource effective.


Ladattava julkaisu

This is an electronic reprint of the original article.
This reprint may differ from the original in pagination and typographic detail. Please cite the original version.




Julkaisussa olevat rahoitustiedot
This study was funded by Sanofi.


Last updated on 2025-27-01 at 19:34