Back

Safety of BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine batches: A nationwide cohort study

Hviid, A.; Bech Svalgaard, I.

2024-01-24 epidemiology
10.1101/2024.01.22.24301520 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundThe safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine has been extensively evaluated since the global rollout began. While serious adverse events are rare, safety issues continue to arise. This study evaluates the claim that earlier small vaccine batches were associated with higher rates of serious adverse events compared to later batches. MethodsA nationwide cohort study was conducted in Denmark, comprising individuals vaccinated with the BNT162b2 vaccine from 52 pre-defined batches classified into three pre-defined groups. Vaccinated individuals were matched 1:1 between batch groups on age, sex, and vaccination priority group. The study outcomes, included 27 serious adverse events, 2 negative control outcomes and all-cause mortality. Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) comparing rates between batch groups in the 28-days following vaccination. We conducted two comparisons of the early small batches to two groups of larger batches used later in the pandemic. ResultsIn the study period, 9,983,448 vaccinations were administered from batches in the three pre-defined groups. Slightly increased rates of arrhythmia were observed in both study comparisons, HRs 1.25 (95% CI,1.05-1.50) and 1.15 (1.00-1.31), respectively, but sensitivity analyses did not robustly support these associations. For the remaining outcomes, increased rates in both study comparisons were not observed. ConclusionThis nationwide cohort study provides reassurance regarding the safety of the BNT162b2 vaccine across different batches used in Denmark. The findings support the overall safety of the vaccine, with no clinically relevant variations in serious adverse event rates between batches.

Published in Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety (predicted rank #8) · training set

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.