Abstract
Background The 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.
Methods A 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.
Results In 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.
Conclusion This 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.
Competing Interest Statement
AH reports unrelated grants from Independent Research Fund Denmark, Lundbeck Foundation and Novo Nordisk Foundation. AH is a Scientific Board Member of VAC4EU.
Funding Statement
No specific funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The analyses were performed as surveillance activities as part of the advisory tasks of the governmental institution Statens Serum Institut (SSI) for the Danish Ministry of Health. SSIs purpose is to monitor and fight the spread of disease in accordance with section 222 of the Danish Health Act. According to Danish law, national surveillance activities conducted by SSI do not require approval from an ethics committee. Both the Danish Governmental law firm and the compliance department of SSI have approved that the study is fully compliant with all legal, ethical, and IT-security requirements and there are no further approval procedures required for such studies.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data in this study is individual-level health information which is sensitive and cannot be shared by the authors.
