Received Feb 27, 2026
| Type | Name | Manufacturer | Dose | Lot | Route / Site |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TDAP | TDAP (ADACEL) | SANOFI PASTEUR | UNK | — | OT |
received an extra dose of adacel with no reported adverse event; Initial information received on 26-Feb-2026 regarding an unsolicited valid non-serious case received from a other health professional. This case is linked to this case US-SA-2026SA062033. This case involves a 9 years old male patient who received an extra dose of suspect Diphtheria-2/Tetanus/5 Ac Pertussis Vaccine [Adacel] with no reported adverse event. The patient's past medical history, medical treatment(s), vaccination(s) and family history were not provided. Concomitant medications included Polio vaccine inact 3v (Vero) (Ipol), Hepatitis b vaccine (Hepatitis b), Measles vaccine, Mumps vaccine, Rubella vaccine (Mmr) and Pneumococcal vaccine conj 20v (CRM197) (Prevnar 20) for Immunisation. On 08-Nov-2021, the patient received an unknown dose of suspect Diphtheria-2/Tetanus/5 Ac Pertussis Vaccine, Suspension for injection (lot number, expiry date and strength not reported) via unknown route in unknown administration site for Immunization On 25-Feb-2026 he also received extra 0.5 ml dose of suspect Diphtheria-2/Tetanus/5 Ac Pertussis Vaccine, Suspension for injection, lot: U8671AA, expiry date : 31-Oct-2027 ,frequency: once, Strength:standard not reported via intramuscular route in the left arm for Immunization with no reported adverse event (extra dose administered) (latency: same day). It was reported "Practice coordinator called and reported that they have a patient in their clinic yesterday (25Feb2026) who received an extra dose of IPOL and ADACEL. She asked if it would affect the patient in any way. She said that the patient was correctly administered with PENTACEL on 20-Sep-2016, 04-Jan-2017, and 13-May-2017". 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.; Sender's Comments: US-SA-2026SA062033:
Ipol; Hepatitis b; Mmr; Prevnar 20