Comparing the Prevalence of Polypharmacy and Potential Drug-Drug Interactions in Nursing Homes and in the Community Dwelling Elderly of Emilia Romagna Region

Backround: We aimed at assessing the prevalence of polypharmacy and potential drug-drug interactions (DDIs) with clinical relevance in elderly patient on Emilia Romagna area. Both outpatients and residents in nursing homes were assessed, with only partially overlapping strategies. Methods: We defined a list of 190 pairs of potentially interacting drugs, based on literature appraisal and availability of therapeutic alternatives. January-June 2018 data on drug use in patients over 65 years-old were collected from nine Local Health Authorities of Emilia Romagna: data on community-dwelling subjects were extracted from archives of reimbursed prescriptions, while drug use in a sample of nursing homes was recorded from clinical charts in one index day within the same semester. The frequency of polypharmacy (at least five or at least 10 concurrent drugs) and of each DDI was calculated. Results: In line with different rates of polypharmacy (80% vs 16%), the risk of exposure to at least one interaction was 53.7% in nursing homes and 26.4% in outpatients. Among DDIs, in nursing homes antidepressants—anxiolytics (11.9%) ranked first, followed by antidepressants—aspirin (7.4%). In outpatients, ACE-inhibitors—non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) reached 7.2% followed by the calcium channel blockers—α-blockers (2.4%). Discussion: Polypharmacy and risk of DDIs appeared very different in the two settings, due to both technical and clinical reasons. In order to reduce use of benzodiazepines, NSAIDs, antidepressants and relevant DDIs, 1) defining alternative options for pain relief in elderly outpatients, and 2) implementing non-pharmacological management of insomnia and anxiety in nursing homes should be prioritized

Safety of COVID-19 Vaccines Among the Paediatric Population: Analysis of the European Surveillance Systems and Pivotal Clinical Trials

Background and Objectives: The European Medicine Agency extended the use of Comirnaty, Spikevax, and Nuvaxovid in paediatrics; thus, these vaccines require additional real-world safety evidence. Herein, we aimed to monitor the safety of COVID-19 vaccines through Covid-19 Vaccine Monitor (CVM) and EudraVigilance surveillance systems and the published pivotal clinical trials. Methods: In a prospective cohort of vaccinees aged between 5 and 17 years, we measured the frequency of commonly reported (local/systemic solicited) and serious adverse drug events (ADRs) following the first and second doses of COVID-19 vaccines in Europe using data from the CVM cohort until April 2022. The results of previous pivotal clinical trials and data in the EudraVigilance were also analysed. Results: The CVM study enrolled 658 first-dose vaccinees (children aged 5–11 years; n = 250 and adolescents aged 12–17 years; n = 408). Local/systemic solicited ADRs were common, whereas serious ADRs were uncommon. Among Comirnaty first and second dose recipients, 28.8% and 17.1% of children and 54.2% and 52.2% of adolescents experienced at least one ADR, respectively; injection-site pain (29.2% and 20.7%), fatigue (16.1% and 12.8%), and headache (22.1% and 19.3%) were the most frequent local and systemic ADRs. Results were consistent but slightly lower than in pivotal clinical trials. Reporting rates in Eudravigilance were lower by a factor of 1000. Conclusions: The CVM study showed high frequencies of local solicited reactions after vaccination but lower rates than in pivotal clinical trials. Injection-site pain, fatigue, and headache were the most commonly reported ADRs for clinical trials, but higher than spontaneously reported data

COVID-19 Vaccination in Pregnancy, Paediatrics, Immunocompromised Patients, and Persons with History of Allergy or Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection: Overview of Current Recommendations and Pre- and Post-Marketing Evidence for Vaccine Efficacy and Safety

To date, four vaccines have been authorised for emergency use and under conditional approval by the European Medicines Agency to prevent COVID-19: Comirnaty, COVID-19 Vaccine Janssen, Spikevax (previously COVID-19 Vaccine Moderna) and Vaxzevria (previously COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca). Although the benefit–risk profile of these vaccines was proven to be largely favourable in the general population, evidence in special cohorts initially excluded from the pivotal trials, such as pregnant and breastfeeding women, children/adolescents, immunocompromised people and persons with a history of allergy or previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, is still limited. In this narrative review, we critically overview pre- and post-marketing evidence on the potential benefits and risks of marketed COVID-19 vaccines in the above-mentioned special cohorts. In addition, we summarise the recommendations of the scientific societies and regulatory agencies about COVID-19 primary prevention in the same vaccinee categories