VAERS Explorer
Back to explore

Report #2884200

Received Feb 4, 2026

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
Unknown
Age
Age unknown
State
SD
Recovered
Unknown
Vaccinated
Jan 19, 2026
Onset
Jan 19, 2026
Days to onset
0
Hospital days
—

Vaccines (1)

TypeNameManufacturerDoseLotRoute / Site
DTAPIPVHIBDTAP + IPV + HIB (PENTACEL)SANOFI PASTEURUNKUK356AAOT

Symptoms (2)

No adverse eventProduct preparation issue

Symptom narrative

received just one component or portion of the PENTACEL with no adverse event; Initial information received on 23-Jan-2026 regarding an unsolicited valid non-serious case received from a other health professional. This case involves an unknown age and unknown gender patient who received just one component or portion of the Diphtheria/Tetanus/5 Hybrid Ac Pertussis/Ipv(Vero)/Hib(Prp/T) Vaccine [Pentacel (Vero)], with no adverse event. The patient's past medical history, medical treatment(s), vaccination(s) and family history were not provided. On 19-Jan-2026, the patient received 0.7mL of suspect Diphtheria/Tetanus/5 Hybrid Ac Pertussis/Ipv(Vero)/Hib(Prp/T) Vaccine, Suspension for injection (lot UK356AA, expiry date 28-Feb-2027 and strength not reported) via intramuscular route in the thigh nos (not so specified) for Immunisation and just one component or portion of the pentacel with no adverse event (single component of a two-component product administered) (latency same day). It was reported "They said that they were aware that the two components must be mixed together first before being administered. Nurse confirmed that the powder component was administered and that it was reconstituted with sterile water prior to administration. The liquid component was not drawn up or administered. Nurse wanted to know if the vaccination should be repeated, or what the recommendations for their situation were." 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.