Received Nov 6, 2025
| Type | Name | Manufacturer | Dose | Lot | Route / Site |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FLU3 | INFLUENZA (SEASONAL) (FLUBLOK) | SANOFI PASTEUR | UNK | — | OT |
patient was upset getting FLUBLOK instead of the FLUZONE HD with no reported adverse event; Initial information received on 29-Oct-2025 regarding an unsolicited valid non-serious case received from a other health professional. This case involves an unknown age female patient who was administered with Influenza Trivalent Recombinant Vaccine [Flublok] instead of the Influenza Vaccine Trivalent [Fluzone Hd] 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 of suspect Influenza Trivalent Recombinant Vaccine, Solution for injection (lot number, expiry date and strength not reported) via unknown route in unknown administration site for Immunization instead of the fluzone hd with no reported adverse event (wrong product administered) (latency: same day). Information on the batch number was requested corresponding to the one at time of event occurrence. Reportedly, reporter stated that healthcare organization previously had Fluzone, but this season they are only carrying Flublok. One of the doctors reporter work with keeps calling Flublok the high dose vaccine. Even though it has more kick to it than the regular flu vaccine that we have (Flulaval), it still is a little bit less than Fluzone High Dose. Reporter have been doing research and the numbers for each one respectively regarding strength is 15, 45, and 60. Reporter is aware that Flublok and Fluzone are a part of a trio of the recommended ones for 65 and above, but feel like it would be more accurate to call the Flublok a high dose or elevated dose. (Just not high dose). It feel like telling a patient that it is High Dose is like giving them an orange and calling it a tangerine. 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.