VAERS Explorer
Back to explore

Report #2832764

Received Mar 24, 2025

A note on interpretation. VAERS reports are unverified and may be incomplete or coincidental. A report does not establish that a vaccine caused an event, and counts should not be used to calculate incidence or infer causation. Full disclaimer

Overview

Sex
Female
Age
1.3 yrs
State
TX
Recovered
Unknown
Vaccinated
Mar 5, 2025
Onset
Mar 5, 2025
Days to onset
0
Hospital days
—

Vaccines (1)

TypeNameManufacturerDoseLotRoute / Site
TDAPTDAP (ADACEL)SANOFI PASTEUR43CA10C1OT / LL

Symptoms (2)

No adverse eventProduct administered to patient of inappropriate age

Symptom narrative

they have a patient who is 15 months and 18 days old who was given adacel instead of daptacel with no reported adverse event; Initial information received on 19-Mar-2025 regarding an unsolicited valid non-serious case received from a other health professional. This case involves a 15 months and 18 days old female patient who was administered diphtheria-2/tetanus/5 AC pertussis vaccine [Ada-Cel] instead of DaptaCel with no reported adverse event. The patient's past medical history, medical treatment(s), vaccination(s) and family history were not provided. Concomitant medications included Varicella zoster vaccine live (Oka/Merck) (Varivax); and HIB vaccine (Hib) both for Immunisation. On 05-Mar-2025, the patient received 0.5ml (Dose 4) dose of suspect diphtheria-2/tetanus/5 AC pertussis vaccine, Strength standard, Frequency once and lot 3CA10C1 with expiry date 31-Dec-2025 via intramuscular route in the left thigh for immunization instead of daptacel with no reported adverse event (wrong product administered) (Latency Same day). Reportedly, A 15 months and 18 days old who was given ADACEL instead of Daptacel. The caller states that this was 4th dose in the tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis vaccination series for the patient and the other doses were given with Vaxelis. Action taken was not applicable. This suspected adverse reaction report is submitted and classified as a medication error solely and exclusively to ensure the marketing authorization holder's compliance with the requirements set out in the Directive 2001/83/EC and Module VI of the Good Pharmacovigilance Practices. The classification as a medical error is in no way intended, nor should it be interpreted or construed as an allegation or claim made by the marketing authorization holder that any third party has contributed to or is to be held liable for the occurrence of this medication error.

Other medications

Varivax; Hib