VAERS Explorer
Back to explore

Report #2849914

Received Jul 16, 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
Male
Age
12 yrs
State
AR
Recovered
Unknown
Vaccinated
Sep 4, 2018
Onset
Nov 20, 2018
Days to onset
77
Hospital days
—

Vaccines (1)

TypeNameManufacturerDoseLotRoute / Site
MNQMENINGOCOCCAL CONJUGATE (MENACTRA)SANOFI PASTEUR1—OT

Symptoms (1)

Inappropriate schedule of product administration

Symptom narrative

Child received two doses of MENACTRA in 2018 (two months apart: 9/4/2018 and 11/20/2018) and now the patient is due for a dose at 18, with no reported adverse event; Initial information received on 09-Jul-2025 regarding an unsolicited valid non-serious case received from a other health professional. This case involves a 12 years old male patient who received two doses of Meningococcal A-C-Y-W135 (D Conj) Vaccine [Menactra] in 2018 (two months apart: 04-Sep-2018 and 20-Nov-2018) and now the patient is due for a dose at 18, with no reported adverse event. The patient's past medical history, medical treatment(s), vaccination(s) and family history were not provided. On 04-Sep-2018, the patient received a dose 1 of suspect Meningococcal A-C-Y-W135 (D Conj) Vaccine, Solution for injection, (lot number, expiry date and strength not reported) via unknown route in unknown administration site for Immunization. On 20-Nov-2018, (two months apart) the patient received another dose 2 of the same suspect vaccine for Immunization and now the patient is due for a dose at 18, with no reported adverse event (inappropriate schedule of product administration) (latency: same day). Information on the batch number was requested corresponding to the one at time of event occurrence. 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.