A vacinação é uma das ações mais efetivas para proteger o indivíduo e a população contra doenças imunopreveníveis. Vacinas são produtos seguros e eficazes, porém, como qualquer outro medicamento, podem causar eventos adversos, que ganham maior visibilidade na medida em que as doenças são controladas, eliminadas ou erradicadas. Este trabalho analisou as ações de vigilância de eventos adversos pós-vacinação (EAPV) com base em dados da literatura científica e sites de programas de imunizações, agências reguladoras e de saúde, além da expertise dos autores nas áreas de imunizações e farmacovigilância. Com o aumento do número de vacinas no calendário básico e a ampliação do acesso da população, tornou-se fundamental o estabelecimento de um sistema eficiente de vigilância de EAPV no Brasil. Entretanto, a subnotificação de casos no Brasil e em outros países dificulta a detecção de EAPV, principalmente os raros. Informações sempre atualizadas sobre o benefício/risco das vacinas permitem que programas de imunizações deem respostas rápidas e claras aos rumores de EAPV. Isso garante a confiabilidade no sistema, ainda mais diante do crescente movimento antivacinista e a influência cada vez maior das mídias sociais na opinião pública.

Immunization is one of the most effective measures to protect individuals and the population against vaccine-preventable diseases. Vaccines are safe and effective products, but like any other drug they can cause adverse events, which tend to become more visible as the diseases are controlled, eliminated, or eradicated. This study analyzed activities in the surveillance of adverse events following immunization (AEFI) based on data from the scientific literature, websites of immunization programs and health andregulatory agencies, and the authors’ expertise in the areas of immunizations and pharmacovigilance. With the increase in the number of vaccines in the basic immunization schedule and expansion of the population’s access, it has become essential to establish an efficient surveillance system for AEFI in Brazil. However, underreporting of cases in Brazil and in other countries hinders the detection of AEFI, especially rare events. Constantly updated information on vaccines’ risks and benefits allows immunization programs to provide rapid and clear responses to rumors of AEFI. This ensures the system’s reliability, especially in the face of the growing antivaccine movement and the increasing influence of social media in public opinion.

La vacunación es una de las acciones más efectivas para proteger al individuo y a la población contra enfermedades inmunoprevenibles. Las vacunas son productos seguros y eficaces, sin embargo, como cualquier otro medicamento, pueden causar eventos adversos, que tienen mayor visibilidad según se controlen, eliminen o se erradiquen las enfermedades. Este trabajo analizó las acciones de vigilancia de eventos adversos posvacunación (EAPV), basándose en datos de la literatura científica y sitios web de programas de inmunizaciones, agencias reguladoras y de salud, además de la expertise de los autores en las áreas de inmunizaciones y farmacovigilancia. Con el aumento del número de vacunas en el calendario básico y la ampliación del acceso de la población, se hizo fundamental el estabelecimiento de un sistema eficiente de vigilancia de EAPV en Brasil. Sin embargo, la subnotificación de casos en Brasil y en otros países dificulta la detección de EAPV, principalmente, los raros. Informaciones siempre actualizadas sobre el beneficio/riesgo de las vacunas permiten que programas de inmunizaciones proporcionen respuestas rápidas y claras a los rumores sobre EAPV. Esto garantiza la confianza en el sistema, incluso más aún ante el creciente movimiento antivacunas y la influencia cada vez mayor de los redes sociales en la opinión pública.

A vacinação é uma das ações mais efetivas para proteger o indivíduo e a população contra doenças imunopreveníveis. Vacinas são produtos seguros e eficazes, porém, como qualquer outro medicamento, podem causar eventos adversos, que ganham maior visibilidade na medida em que as doenças são controladas, eliminadas ou erradicadas. Este trabalho analisou as ações de vigilância de eventos adversos pós-vacinação (EAPV) com base em dados da literatura científica e sites de programas de imunizações, agências reguladoras e de saúde, além da expertise dos autores nas áreas de imunizações e farmacovigilância. Com o aumento do número de vacinas no calendário básico e a ampliação do acesso da população, tornou-se fundamental o estabelecimento de um sistema eficiente de vigilância de EAPV no Brasil. Entretanto, a subnotificação de casos no Brasil e em outros países dificulta a detecção de EAPV, principalmente os raros. Informações sempre atualizadas sobre o benefício/risco das vacinas permitem que programas de imunizações deem respostas rápidas e claras aos rumores de EAPV. Isso garante a confiabilidade no sistema, ainda mais diante do crescente movimento antivacinista e a influência cada vez maior das mídias sociais na opinião pública.

Immunization is one of the most effective measures to protect individuals and the population against vaccine-preventable diseases. Vaccines are safe and effective products, but like any other drug they can cause adverse events, which tend to become more visible as the diseases are controlled, eliminated, or eradicated. This study analyzed activities in the surveillance of adverse events following immunization (AEFI) based on data from the scientific literature, websites of immunization programs and health andregulatory agencies, and the authors’ expertise in the areas of immunizations and pharmacovigilance. With the increase in the number of vaccines in the basic immunization schedule and expansion of the population’s access, it has become essential to establish an efficient surveillance system for AEFI in Brazil. However, underreporting of cases in Brazil and in other countries hinders the detection of AEFI, especially rare events. Constantly updated information on vaccines’ risks and benefits allows immunization programs to provide rapid and clear responses to rumors of AEFI. This ensures the system’s reliability, especially in the face of the growing antivaccine movement and the increasing influence of social media in public opinion.

La vacunación es una de las acciones más efectivas para proteger al individuo y a la población contra enfermedades inmunoprevenibles. Las vacunas son productos seguros y eficaces, sin embargo, como cualquier otro medicamento, pueden causar eventos adversos, que tienen mayor visibilidad según se controlen, eliminen o se erradiquen las enfermedades. Este trabajo analizó las acciones de vigilancia de eventos adversos posvacunación (EAPV), basándose en datos de la literatura científica y sitios web de programas de inmunizaciones, agencias reguladoras y de salud, además de la expertise de los autores en las áreas de inmunizaciones y farmacovigilancia. Con el aumento del número de vacunas en el calendario básico y la ampliación del acceso de la población, se hizo fundamental el estabelecimiento de un sistema eficiente de vigilancia de EAPV en Brasil. Sin embargo, la subnotificación de casos en Brasil y en otros países dificulta la detección de EAPV, principalmente, los raros. Informaciones siempre actualizadas sobre el beneficio/riesgo de las vacunas permiten que programas de inmunizaciones proporcionen respuestas rápidas y claras a los rumores sobre EAPV. Esto garantiza la confianza en el sistema, incluso más aún ante el creciente movimiento antivacunas y la influencia cada vez mayor de los redes sociales en la opinión pública.

BACKGROUND Field testing required to license the combined measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine must take into account the current recommendation of the vaccine in Brazil: first dose at 12 months and second dose at 15 months of age in combination with a varicella vaccine. OBJECTIVES This study aimed to evaluate the clinical consistency, immunogenicity, and reactogenicity of three batches of MMR vaccine prepared with active pharmaceutical ingredients (API) from Bio-Manguinhos, Fiocruz (MMR-Bio), and compare it to a vaccine (MMR produced by GlaxoSmithKline) with different API. METHODS This was a phase III, randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority study of the MMR-Bio administered in infants immunised at health care units in Pará, Brazil, from February 2015 to January 2016. Antibody levels were titrated by immunoenzymatic assays. Adverse events were recorded in diaries. FINDINGS Seropositivity levels after MMR-Bio were 97.6% for measles, 84.7% for mumps, and 98.0% for rubella. After the MMRV vaccine, seroconversion rates and GMT increased substantially for mumps. In contrast, approximately 35% of the children had no detectable antibodies to varicella. Systemic adverse events were more frequent than local events. CONCLUSION The demonstration of batch consistency and non-inferiority of the Bio-MMR vaccine completed the technology transfer. This is a significant technological achievement with implications for immunisation programs.

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Multi-drug-resistant bacteria surveillance (MDR) systems are used to identify the epidemiology of MDR bacteria in neonates and children. This study aimed to describe the patterns by which MDR bacteria colonize and infect neonatal (NICU) and pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) patients in the state of Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil. METHODS A cross-sectional survey was performed using electronic data on NICU and PICU patients reported to the Rio de Janeiro State MDR bacteria surveillance system. All healthcare institutions that reported at least one case during the study period were included. RESULTS Between 2014 and 2017, 10,210 MDR bacteria cases, including 9261 colonizations and 949 infections, were reported. Among the colonizations, 5379 occurred in NICUs and 3882 in PICUs, while 405 infections occurred in NICUs and 544 in PICUs. ESBL producing Klebsiella sp and E. coli were the most reported colonization-causing agents in NICUs (1983/5379, 36.9%) and PICUs (1494/3882; 38.5%). The main causing bacteria reported in catheter-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI), ventilator associated pneumonia, and catheter-associated urinary tract infection in NICUs were Klebsiella sp and E.coli (56/156, 35.9%), carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (CRGNB) (22/65, 33.9%), and CRGNB (11/36, 30.6%) respectively, while in PICUs, they were MRSA (53/169, 31.4%), CRGNB (50/87, 57.4%), Klebsiella sp and E.coli (18/52, 34.6%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS MDR Gram-negative bacteria (ESBL producers and carbapenem-resistant bacteria) were the most reported agents among MDR bacteria reported to Rio de Janeiro surveillance system. Except for CLABSI in children, they caused all device-associated infections in NICUs and PICUs.