1

It's been reported that some Nordic countries have suspended the Moderna vaccine from younger age groups, due to an increased incidence of myocarditis, seemingly relative to Pfizer.

However, even after looking at one of these agencies announcement (Norway's) in English, I don't see a concrete risk ratio given.

The Nordic registry study looking at the incidence of myocarditis and pericarditis has not been completed, and therefore has not yet been published and final conclusions cannot yet be drawn from this study. Norwegian monitoring data included in the Nordic registry study indicate an increased incidence after Moderna as the second dose. The Norwegian Institute of Public Health is therefore now issuing a reminder of the advice not to give Spikevax to those under 18 years of age, and clarifying that men under 30 years of age should consider choosing Comirnaty, as a precautionary measure. The same has been done in Sweden.

The knowledge that myocarditis can occur more often after using Spikevax than Comirnaty, also in somewhat older age groups, strengthens the previous assessment.

But also no data. Did the Swedish agency publish something more concrete?

The most recent news I found even says:

"A Nordic study involving Finland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark found that men under the age of 30 who received Moderna Spikevax had a slightly higher risk than others of developing myocarditis," director Mika Salminen from the health institute said.

Salminen said myocarditis, which means heart muscle inflammation, usually heals on its own in a few days. He said as a precaution Finland would only give Pfizer's vaccine to boys and young men.

But no number and no links...

What I could find are EMA numbers reported earlier (in July):

The EMA analysis of cases found:

  • Pfizer-BioNTech - 145 cases of myocarditis and 138 cases of pericarditis out of 177m doses given
  • Moderna - 19 case of myocarditis and 19 cases of pericarditis out of 20 million doses given

I'm guessing EMA didn't see those differences as statistically or clinically significant, between the vaccines.

So, to reiterate my question, what are the concrete numbers from the Nordic agencies? (I'm hoping they'd be published at one point soon-ish, given that they were confident to make a decision based on them.)

0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.