Safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant and postpartum women in brazil

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

Background

Although COVID-19 vaccines are currently under use in pregnant and postpartum women, there is still lack of evidence regarding safety and effectiveness in these populations. This study aims to describe the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant and postpartum women in the early stage of vaccination campaign in Brazil.

Methods

This is an observational cross-sectional study using data from the Brazilian surveillance information system for adverse events (SI-EAPV) to characterize the safety of COVID-19 vaccines available (Sinovac/Butantan, Pfizer/BioNTech, AstraZeneca and Janssen) in Brazilian pregnant and postpartum women after receiving it from April to August 2021. A descriptive analysis was performed to assess the frequency and incidence rate of the adverse events (AE) for COVID-19 vaccines.

Results

A total of 3,333 adverse events following COVID-19 immunization were reported for the study population in the SIEAPV. The incidence of AE found was 309.4/100,000 doses (95% CI 297.23, 321.51). Regarding the four vaccines available in the country, Sinovac/Butantan had the lowest incidence (74.08/100,000 doses; 95% CI 63.47, 84.69). Systemic events were the most frequent notified for the group (82.07%), followed by local (11.93%) and maternal (4.74%), being most of them classified as non-severe (90.65%).

Conclusion

A similar pattern of AE as stated in other studies was found, with even better results for non-viral vector vaccines, corroborating to the recommendation of vaccination for these groups. Even though, further studies appraising a longer observation time are still needed to provide a broader safety aspect for the vaccines currently under use for this population.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.12.14.21267777: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Ethicsnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablePregnant women were identified in the datasets as those who reported to be pregnant at the time they received the vaccine and postpartum were considered those women who reported to be breastfeeding in the SI-EAPV and who declared to be at postpartum at the moment of the vaccination.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Surveillance Systems and Covered Population: In Brazil, records of adverse events following immunization (AEFI) in vaccinated individuals in the public services are made available by the General Coordination of the National Immunization Program (NIP).
    National Immunization Program
    suggested: (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, RRID:SCR_012976)
    Data analyses were conducted using Python version 3.6.5 (Python Software Foundation).
    Python
    suggested: (IPython, RRID:SCR_001658)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).


    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Our study has some limitations. The AEFI notifications used in this study are subject to limitations of passive surveillance system. This means that each health level routinely and periodically sends information about the events subject to surveillance at the immediately superior. In the same way, the classifications in the database might be susceptible to the interpretation of the person filling out the system, implying in the possibility of lack of uniformity in reporting the characteristics of the event and in the place where the information is filled in the form of the surveillance system. Although these systems generate valuable information regarding the description of the occurrence of adverse events, they usually do not allow establishing causality between the occurrence of AEFI and the vaccine.11,33–35 In that sense, our study is unable to evaluate AE outcomes that might occur in association with exposures earlier in pregnancy or postpartum period. Furthermore, the definition of postpartum women varied in the data sources used - which may underestimate the incidence in this population. In the same direction, the Brazilian obstetric observatory for COVID-19 has been showing that there are inconsistencies in the vaccination information fulfilling, since they found pregnant and postpartum women of male sex, and AEFI notified for COVID-19 vaccines administered previous to the vaccination campaign start and over 55 years old.4 Another potential limitation of our analyses i...

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.


    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.


    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.