Received Jun 27, 2025
| Type | Name | Manufacturer | Dose | Lot | Route / Site |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RAB | RABIES (NO BRAND NAME) | UNKNOWN MANUFACTURER | 4 | Unknown | — |
The patient was vaccinated with four doses of Rabies vaccine and did not receive the fifth dose for post exposure; Case reference number US-BN-2025-000139 is a spontaneous case initially received from consumer via Med Communication (reference number: USBAV25-0131) on 16-Jan-2025 and concern a patient with unspecified age and gender. The patient's medical history and concomitant medication details were not provided. On unspecified date, the patient had exposure to rabies On unspecified date, unknown of time after exposure to the rabies, the patient received the first dose of rabies vaccine (brand name; unknow; batch number: unknown) along with its consitutent parts prefilled syringe, needle for injection and needle for reconstitution, at unknown dose, route or site of administration for post exposure prophylaxis. On unspecified date, unknown of time after exposure to the rabies, the patient received the second dose of rabies vaccine (brand name; unknow; batch number: unknown) along with its consitutent parts prefilled syringe, needle for injection and needle for reconstitution, at unknown dose, route or site of administration. On unspecified date, unknown of time after exposure to the rabies, the patient received the third dose of rabies vaccine (brand name; unknow; batch number: unknown) along with its consitutent parts prefilled syringe, needle for injection and needle for reconstitution, at unknown dose, route or site of administration. On unspecified year on 14-Nov, unknown of time after exposure to the rabies, the patient received the fourth dose of rabies vaccine (brand name; unknow; batch number: unknown) along with its consitutent parts prefilled syringe, needle for injection and needle for reconstitution, at unknown dose, route or site of administration. As reported, the patient received only four doses of rabies vaccine (explicitly coded as 'incomplete course of vaccination'). On unspecified date, the patient had another exposure after waking up to a bat. On unspecified date, reported as on day zero, for unknown amount of time from the bat bite, the patient received the first dose of rabies vaccine (brand name; unknow; batch number: unknown) along with its consitutent parts prefilled syringe, needle for injection and needle for reconstitution, at unknown dose, route or site of administration for post exposure prophylaxis. On unspecified date, reported as on day third, for unknown amount of time from the bat bite, the patient received the second dose of rabies vaccine (brand name; unknow; batch number: unknown) along with its consitutent parts prefilled syringe, needle for injection and needle for reconstitution, at unknown dose, route or site of administration At the time of initial report, it was unknown if the patient experienced any adverse events due Rabes vaccine. No further information was provided.; Reporter's Comments: A patient with unspecified age and gender received only four doses of rabies vaccine for post exposure prophylaxis, which is considered as incomplete course of vaccination. It was unknown if the patient experienced any adverse events due Rabes vaccine. Incomplete course of vaccination is considered as listed per company convention. The patient's medical history and concomitant medication details were not provided. Incomplete course of vaccination is not related to the suspect vaccine, but to a human factor. This case is considered as non-serious.; Sender's Comments: A patient with unspecified age and gender received only four doses of rabies vaccine for post exposure prophylaxis, which is considered as incomplete course of vaccination. It was unknown if the patient experienced any adverse events due Rabes vaccine. Incomplete course of vaccination is considered as listed per company convention. The patient's medical history and concomitant medication details were not provided. Incomplete course of vaccination is not related to the suspect vaccine, but to a human factor. This case is considered as non-serious.
Comments: NONE