4.5 Article

Association study between herpes zoster reporting and mRNA COVID-19 vaccines (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273)

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
Volume 88, Issue 7, Pages 3529-3534

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.15280

Keywords

COVID-19; disproportionality; herpes zoster; mRNA vaccines; pharmacovigilance

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There is an increased risk of herpes zoster (HZ) following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, especially among older individuals. Data from the worldwide pharmacovigilance database show a significantly higher reporting of HZ with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines compared to influenza vaccines. The risk of reporting HZ is reduced among individuals under 40 years old compared to older individuals.
Several cases of herpes zoster (HZ) following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273) have been reported, and the first epidemiological evidence suggests an increased risk. We used the worldwide pharmacovigilance database VigiBase to describe HZ cases following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. We performed disproportionality analyses (case/non-case statistical approach) to assess the relative risk of HZ reporting in mRNA COVID-19 vaccine recipients compared to influenza vaccine recipients and according to patient age. To 30 June 2021, of 716 928 reports with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, we found 7728 HZ cases. When compared to influenza vaccines, mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were associated with a significantly higher reporting of HZ (reporting odds ratio 1.9, 95% CI 1.8-2.1). Furthermore, we found a reduced risk of reporting HZ among under 40-year-old persons compared to older persons (reporting odds ratio 0.39, 95% CI 0.36-0.41). Mild and infrequent HZ reactions may occur shortly after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, at higher frequency than reported with influenza vaccination, especially in patients over 40 years old. Further analyses are needed to confirm this risk.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available