Adverse Menstrual Events Reported After and Before (or Without) COVID-19 Vaccination: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Observational Studies.
Frank Peinemann, Doris Oberle, Ursula Drechsel-Bäuerle, Brigitte Keller-Stanislawski
{"title":"Adverse Menstrual Events Reported After and Before (or Without) COVID-19 Vaccination: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Observational Studies.","authors":"Frank Peinemann, Doris Oberle, Ursula Drechsel-Bäuerle, Brigitte Keller-Stanislawski","doi":"10.1002/pds.5877","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Reports of adverse menstrual events emerged during the COVID-19 vaccination campaign in multiple countries. This raised the question whether these reports were caused by the vaccines. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate comparative studies on this topic (registered at PROSPERO [CRD42022324973]).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We included observational studies such as cohort studies and surveys comparing the response to self-reported questionnaires between post- versus pre-vaccination data. PubMed and Cochrane Library searches were conducted on 1 September 2023. The primary outcome was the incidence of any prespecified adverse menstrual event, and the outcome measure was the risk ratio. The meta-analysis was conducted by using the Mantel-Haenszel method and the random effects model. We summarized the results on risk factors as well as key findings of the studies included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We retrieved 161 references from electronic databases and additional sources such as references lists. Of those, we considered 21 comparative observational studies. The meta-analysis of any adverse menstrual adverse event reported in 12 studies resulted in a pooled estimate (risk ratio 1.13; 95% CI, 0.96-1.31) that did not favor any group. The analysis was constrained by considerable clinical and statistical heterogeneity. Risk factors for self-reported menstrual changes included a history of COVID-19 infection, the concern about COVID-19 vaccines, smoking, previous cycle irregularities, depression, and stress, and other issues.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The risk ratio did not favor any group and heterogeneity was prevalent among the studies. Most studies suggested that the reported changes were temporary, minor, and nonserious.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"33 8","pages":"e5877"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.5877","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Reports of adverse menstrual events emerged during the COVID-19 vaccination campaign in multiple countries. This raised the question whether these reports were caused by the vaccines. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate comparative studies on this topic (registered at PROSPERO [CRD42022324973]).
Methods: We included observational studies such as cohort studies and surveys comparing the response to self-reported questionnaires between post- versus pre-vaccination data. PubMed and Cochrane Library searches were conducted on 1 September 2023. The primary outcome was the incidence of any prespecified adverse menstrual event, and the outcome measure was the risk ratio. The meta-analysis was conducted by using the Mantel-Haenszel method and the random effects model. We summarized the results on risk factors as well as key findings of the studies included.
Results: We retrieved 161 references from electronic databases and additional sources such as references lists. Of those, we considered 21 comparative observational studies. The meta-analysis of any adverse menstrual adverse event reported in 12 studies resulted in a pooled estimate (risk ratio 1.13; 95% CI, 0.96-1.31) that did not favor any group. The analysis was constrained by considerable clinical and statistical heterogeneity. Risk factors for self-reported menstrual changes included a history of COVID-19 infection, the concern about COVID-19 vaccines, smoking, previous cycle irregularities, depression, and stress, and other issues.
Conclusions: The risk ratio did not favor any group and heterogeneity was prevalent among the studies. Most studies suggested that the reported changes were temporary, minor, and nonserious.
期刊介绍:
The aim of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety is to provide an international forum for the communication and evaluation of data, methods and opinion in the discipline of pharmacoepidemiology. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed reports of original research, invited reviews and a variety of guest editorials and commentaries embracing scientific, medical, statistical, legal and economic aspects of pharmacoepidemiology and post-marketing surveillance of drug safety. Appropriate material in these categories may also be considered for publication as a Brief Report.
Particular areas of interest include:
design, analysis, results, and interpretation of studies looking at the benefit or safety of specific pharmaceuticals, biologics, or medical devices, including studies in pharmacovigilance, postmarketing surveillance, pharmacoeconomics, patient safety, molecular pharmacoepidemiology, or any other study within the broad field of pharmacoepidemiology;
comparative effectiveness research relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics, and medical devices. Comparative effectiveness research is the generation and synthesis of evidence that compares the benefits and harms of alternative methods to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor a clinical condition, as these methods are truly used in the real world;
methodologic contributions of relevance to pharmacoepidemiology, whether original contributions, reviews of existing methods, or tutorials for how to apply the methods of pharmacoepidemiology;
assessments of harm versus benefit in drug therapy;
patterns of drug utilization;
relationships between pharmacoepidemiology and the formulation and interpretation of regulatory guidelines;
evaluations of risk management plans and programmes relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics and medical devices.