Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40495022›Full record

ArticleDrug safety2025

Comparison of Adverse Events in Pregnant Persons Receiving COVID-19 and Influenza Vaccines: A Disproportionality Analysis Using Combined Data from US VAERS and EudraVigilance Spontaneous Report Databases.

Leonardo Roque-Pereira, Malede Mequanent Sisay, Comfort K Ogar, Carlos E Durán, Eugene van Puijenbroek, Daniel Weibel, Katia Verhamme, Miriam Sturkenboom

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Drug safety, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Leonardo Roque-PereiraDepartment of Data Science and Biostatistics, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands. L.RoquePereira@umcutrecht.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5878-5088
Malede Mequanent SisayDepartment of Data Science and Biostatistics, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Comfort K OgarDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Carlos E DuránDepartment of Data Science and Biostatistics, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1853-3641
Eugene van PuijenbroekPharmacoTherapy, Epidemiology, Economics, University of Groningen, Groningen Research Institute of Pharmacy, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Daniel WeibelDepartment of Data Science and Biostatistics, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Katia VerhammeDepartment of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Miriam SturkenboomDepartment of Data Science and Biostatistics, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough multiple post-licensure studies demonstrated that coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are safe for use during pregnancy, none of them have identified a signal of disproportionate reporting.

aimTo assess the disproportionality in reported adverse events among pregnant persons receiving COVID-19 vaccination compared with influenza vaccines in spontaneous reporting databases.

methodsIndividual case safety reports (ICSRs) with COVID-19 vaccines (Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson) and influenza vaccines were retrieved from spontaneous reporting databases in the Vaccine Adverse Event Report System (VAERS) and the EudraVigilance (EV) system between 1 December 2020 and 31 October 2023. Both datasets were combined through a common data model. Pregnancy-associated ICSRs were identified using adaptations to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) algorithm based on age groups and key medical conditions. We compared the disproportionate reporting of High-Level Terms (HLT) after COVID-19 vaccines of interest (e.g. mRNA vaccine) with another COVID-19 viral vector-based/protein subunit and influenza vaccines during pregnancy. The proportional reporting ratio (PRR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated using a combined dataset. PRR met the predefined criteria (PRR ≥ 2, lower 95% CI ≥ 2 and N ≥ 3), confirming a potential signal of disproportionate reporting (SDR).

resultsA total of 22,383 pregnancy-related ICSRs were included. Five associations met the PRR threshold: inborn errors of steroid synthesis 35.1 (95% CI 7.8-158.3); non-site-specific embolism and thrombosis 15.9 (95% CI 3.1-82.2); general signs and symptoms not elsewhere classified (NEC) 11.17 (95% CI 3.3-38.1); peripheral nervous system disorders congenital NEC 4.2 (95% CI 2.3-7.7); and vascular anomalies congenital NEC 3.7 (95% CI 2.4-5.6), all associated with viral vector-based/protein subunit.

conclusionsDespite this analysis, several statistical disproportionalities were identified during pregnancy; the case-by-case analysis shows that embolism and thrombosis require prioritized investigation through proper causal inference studies.

Indexed as

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsCOVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesInfluenza VaccinesAdultDatabases, FactualFemaleHumansPharmacovigilancePregnancyUnited StatesYoung AdultCOVID-19 VaccinesInfluenza Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID40495022
PMCPMC12423122

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.