Pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine solution for injection 0.5ml pre-filled syringes
Official documents, adverse reaction reporting, and safety monitoring
Report a side effect
Submit a Yellow Card report to the MHRA
Official medicine documents
Yellow Card
Report side effects (MHRA)
Drug safety updates
MHRA alerts for Pneumococcal vaccine
Safety monitoring data
Yellow Card reports
The MHRA Yellow Card scheme collects reports of suspected side effects from healthcare professionals and patients. View the Drug Analysis Profile (iDAP) for real-world adverse reaction data.
View Drug Analysis Profile
Browse all Drug Analysis Profiles A–Z
Browse all iDAP reports
Interactive Drug Analysis Profiles for all medicines
Report a side effect
Submit a Yellow Card report to the MHRA
Data from the MHRA Yellow Card scheme. A reported reaction does not necessarily mean the medicine caused it. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
EudraVigilance
The European Medicines Agency (EMA) collects suspected adverse reaction reports from across the EU/EEA through the EudraVigilance system. Search for safety data on this medicine.
Search EudraVigilance database
Browse substances A–Z in the European adverse reaction database
About EudraVigilance
Learn about EU pharmacovigilance and safety monitoring
EudraVigilance data is published by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). A suspected adverse reaction is not necessarily caused by the medicine.
2 branded products available
Part of the Pneumovax brand family (generic: Pneumococcal vaccine)
MHRA licensed products
View all licensed products for Pneumococcal vaccine on the MHRA register
Pneumovax 23 solution for injection 0.5ml pre-filled syringes
Pneumovax II vaccine solution for injection 0.5ml pre-filled syringes
This is the NHS Drug Tariff indicative price used for reimbursement purposes. It may not reflect the price paid by patients or pharmacies.
View full Drug TariffSource: NHS Drug Tariff via NHSBSA. Derived from dm+d VMPP (Virtual Medicinal Product Pack) pricing data. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
Therapeutically similar medicines
Similarity is based on WHO Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification and on a factual NHS dm+d therapeutic-grouping code prefix. Source data: NHS dm+d via TRUD (OGL v3.0), WHO ATC/DDD Index.
NHS prescribing volume and spending trends
Guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence
NICE clinical guidance(5)
Vaccine uptake in the general population (NG218)
Vaccine uptake in under 19s (QS145)
Pneumonia: diagnosis and management (NG250)
Meningitis (bacterial) and meningococcal disease: recognition, diagnosis and management (NG240)
Neonatal infection: antibiotics for prevention and treatment (NG195)
Source: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
Check stock at pharmacies and supply information
Pharmacy stock checkers
Search for this medicine at major UK pharmacy chains. These links open the retailer's own website — results depend on their current online catalogue.
Supply & safety information
Official UK regulator monitoring and safety alerts
Pharmacy links redirect to the retailer's own search and do not represent real-time stock levels. Shortage and safety information sourced from MHRA drug safety updates (gov.uk, Crown Copyright under OGL v3.0).
Codes for healthcare professionals and prescribing systems
These codes are used by healthcare IT systems and prescribers to identify this medicine.
NHS UK identifiers
Browse tools
SNOMED CT and dm+d codes from NHS TRUD (Technology Reference data Update Distribution), licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. ATC codes from the WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology (whocc.no).
Active and completed clinical studies from ClinicalTrials.gov
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM), National Institutes of Health (NIH). Data accessed via ClinicalTrials.gov API v2. Trial information is provided for research purposes and does not constitute medical advice.
Academic studies and reviews for this medicine's active substance
Showing the 50 most relevant studies.
Reviews & meta-analyses: 13 · Randomised trials: 19 · 1991–2026
Showing the 50 most relevant studies, sorted by most relevant.
F. Cutts, Syed M. A. Zaman, G. Enwere, et al.
Lancet, 2005
Takaya Maruyama, O. Taguchi, M. Niederman, et al.
The BMJ, 2010
A. Palmu, J. Jokinen, D. Borys, et al.
Lancet, 2012
K. Andrejko, Buddhika M Ratnasiri, William P. Hausdorff, et al.
The Lancet. Microbe, 2021
Calvin C. Daniels, P. D. Rogers, Chasity M. Shelton
The journal of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics : JPPT : the official journal of PPAG, 2016
G. Falkenhorst, C. Remschmidt, T. Harder, et al.
PLoS ONE, 2017
Nagra D, Bechman K, Adas M, et al.
2023
BackgroundPneumococcal pneumonia is an important cause of morbidity and mortality amongst patients with inflammatory arthritis. Vaccination is recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) but it remains unclear how vaccine efficacy is impacted by different immunosuppressive agents. Our objective was to compare the chance of a seroconversion following vaccination against pneumococcus in patients with inflammatory arthritis to that in the general population, as well as to compare the chance of seroconversion across different targeted therapies.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library databases from inception until 20 June 2023. We included randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Aggregate data were used to undertake a pairwise meta-analysis. Our primary outcome of interest was vaccine seroconversion. We accepted the definition of serological response reported by the authors of each study.ResultsTwenty studies were identified in the systematic review (2807 patients) with ten reporting sufficient data to be included in the meta-analysis (1443 patients). The chance of seroconversion in patients receiving targeted therapies, relative to the general population, was 0.61 (95% CI 0.35 to 1.08). The reduced odds of response were skewed strongly by the effects of abatacept and rituximab with no difference between patients on TNF inhibitors (TNFis) or IL-6 inhibition and healthy controls. Within different inflammatory arthritis populations the findings remained consistent, with rituximab having the strongest negative impact on vaccine response. TNF inhibition monotherapy was associated with a greater chance of vaccine response compared with methotrexate (2.25 (95% CI 1.28 to 3.96)). JAK inhibitor (JAKi) studies were few in number and did not present comparable vaccine response endpoints to include in the meta-analysis. The information available does not suggest any significant detrimental effects of JAKi on vaccine response.ConclusionThis updated meta-analysis confirms that, for most patients with inflammatory arthritis, pneumococcal vaccine can be administered with confidence and that it will achieve comparable seroconversion rates to the healthy population. Patients on rituximab were the group least likely to achieve a response and further research is needed to explore the value of multiple-course pneumococcal vaccination schedules in this population.
Abstract licence: CC BY
Wannarong T, Ekpatanaparnich P, Boonyasiri A, et al.
2023
- Otitis Media
- Mastoiditis
- Otitis Media with Effusion
ObjectiveTo assess the effect of the pneumococcal vaccine (PCV) toward the surgical management and complications of otitis media.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Scopus, and clinicaltrial.gov.Review methodsA systematic search was performed using a combination of keywords and standardized terms about PCV and surgical management or complications of otitis media. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, studies were screened by 3 independent reviewers. Risk of bias assessment, followed by meta-analysis in only randomized-controlled trials was conducted. Vaccine efficacy (VE) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were reported.ResultsOf the 2649 abstracts reviewed, 27 studies were included in the qualitative analysis and were categorized into 6 outcomes: tympanostomy tube insertion, otitis media with effusion (OME), mastoiditis, spontaneous tympanic membrane (TM) perforation, recurrent acute otitis media (AOM), and severe AOM. Fifteen studies were included in the meta-analysis to evaluate the rate of tympanostomy tube insertion, OME, and recurrent AOM. PCV was significantly more effective in lowering the rate of tympanostomy tube insertion (VE, 22.2%; 95% CI, 14.6-29.8) and recurrent AOM (VE, 10.06%; 95% CI, 7.46-12.65) when compared with the control group, with no significant difference in reducing the incidence of OME. The qualitative analysis revealed that PCV had efficacy in preventing severe AOM and spontaneous TM perforation but the effect on mastoiditis remained unclear.ConclusionThe PCV was effective in reducing the rate of tympanostomy tube insertion and the incidence of recurrent AOM with a nonsignificant effect in preventing OME in children.
Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND
Vo NX, Pham HL, Bui UM, et al.
2024
Objectives: Pneumococcal disease (PD), caused by S. pneumoniae, is a serious global health issue, primarily for adults over 65, due to its high mortality and morbidity rates. Recently, broader-serotype vaccines have been introduced to cope with tremendous hospital costs and decreasing quality of life. Our study aims to systematically review the cost-effectiveness of current PCVs (pneumococcal conjugate vaccines) and PPVs (pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine) from 2018 to April 2024. Methods: Articles were identified through PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane. Key outcomes include an improved incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), with the article's quality assessed via the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022). In total, 23 studies were included, with 22 studies of high quality and 1 of moderate quality. Results: These articles showed that PCV20 was the most cost-effective option compared with other vaccines, including PPV23, PCV13, PCV15, and PCV15/PPV23, for both young and older adults, regardless of risk factors. PCV20, when used alone, saved greater costs than PCV20, followed by PPV23. Conclusions: For countries applying lower-valency vaccines, switching to PCV20 as a single regimen would be the most beneficial for averting pneumococcal cases and reducing costs in adults aged 18-64 and over 65.
Abstract licence: CC BY
Vo NX, Pham HL, Bui UM, et al.
2024
Pneumococcal disease, caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae is the leading cause of high mortality in children worldwide. The tremendous direct cost of hospital admissions and significant indirect costs from productivity loss contributed considerably to the economic burden, with vaccination being the only efficient way against the illness. Our study aims to summarize the cost-effectiveness of the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV) implemented in the pediatric population. Employing online databases from Pubmed, Embase, and Medline, we looked for economic evaluation from 2018 until March 2024. The Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICER) and Quality-Adjusted-Life-Years (QALY) were the primary outcomes for measuring PCV's cost-effectiveness. A 28-item CHEERS 2022 checklist was applied to assess the quality of collected studies. Of the 16 papers found, 9/16 discussed the lower-valent vaccine (PCV13, PCV10) and 7/16 examined the higher-valent vaccine. (PCV20, PCV15). PCV13 and PCV10 required more cost and generated more QALY compared to no vaccination. Both PCV15 and PCV20 averted substantial healthcare costs and yielded greater quality of life than PCV13. Additionally, PCV20 was a dominant strategy compared to PCV15. Utilizing PCV13 is a very cost-effective option compared to not getting vaccinated. Transitioning from PCV13 to PCV20 would result in higher QALY gain and more cost-saving than switching to PCV15.
Abstract licence: CC BY
Sources: aggregated from Europe PMC (EMBL-EBI), OpenAlex, Crossref, PubMed and other open scholarly databases. Retracted articles are excluded. Study information is provided for research purposes and does not constitute medical advice.
Scientific data (pharmacology, interactions, ADME) is not yet available for this medicine. Clinical sections are sourced from the NHS dm+d database.