VAERS Explorer
Back to explore

Report #2843941

Received Jun 4, 2025

Office visit
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
Male
Age
1.3 yrs
State
CO
Recovered
Unknown
Vaccinated
—
Onset
—
Days to onset
—
Hospital days
—

Vaccines (1)

TypeNameManufacturerDoseLotRoute / Site
IPVPOLIO VIRUS, INACT. (IPOL)SANOFI PASTEUR4Y1A201MOT

Symptoms (2)

Inappropriate schedule of product administrationNo adverse event

Symptom narrative

patient has already received three doses of IPOL prior, and a fourth dose was administered today, which was too soon, with no reported adverse event; Initial information received on 30-May-2025 regarding an unsolicited valid non-serious case received from a other health professional. This case involves a 15 months old male patient who was administered with fourth dose of IPV (VERO) [IPOL] today which was too soon, patient has already received three doses prior with no reported adverse event. The patient's past medical history, medical treatment(s), vaccination(s) and family history were not provided. On an unknown date, the patient received an unknown dose 4 of suspect IPV (VERO) Suspension for injection (lot Y1A201M and expiry date- 31-Jan-2027) (strength-unknown) via unknown route in unknown administration site for Immunization today which was too soon, patient has already received three doses prior with no reported adverse event (inappropriate schedule of product administration) (latency-same day). 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.