National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: Addition of Intussusception as Injury for Rotavirus Vaccines to the Vaccine Injury Table, 35848-35851 [2015-14771]
Download as PDF
35848
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 120 / Tuesday, June 23, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
‘‘Exclusive’’. This document removes
MR series 11000 and 12000 from being
designated as ‘‘Exclusive’’. All other
parameters of the Final Rule remain the
same as published on June 5, 2015.
DATES: Effective June 23, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Barry S. Lineback, Telephone: (703)
603–2118.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
document corrects § 51–6.4 by removing
MR series 11000 and 12000 from
paragraphs (b), (c)(4), and (d) so the
series are no longer designated as
‘‘Exclusive’’. All other parameters of the
Final Rule remain the same as
published on June 5, 2015.
List of Subjects in 41 CFR Part 51–6
Procurement procedures.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, the Committee amends 41
CFR part 51–6 as follows:
PART 51–6—PROCUREMENT
PROCEDURES
1. The authority citation for part 51–
6 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 8501–8506.
§ 51–6.4
[Amended]
2. In § 51–6.4, in paragraphs (b), (c)(4),
and (d), remove ‘‘, 11000 (11000–
11999); 12000 (12000–12999)’’.
■
Dated: June 17, 2015.
Barry S. Lineback,
Director, Business Operations.
[FR Doc. 2015–15284 Filed 6–22–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6353–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
42 CFR Part 100
RIN 0906–AB00
National Vaccine Injury Compensation
Program: Addition of Intussusception
as Injury for Rotavirus Vaccines to the
Vaccine Injury Table
Health Resources and Services
Administration (HRSA), Department of
Health and Human Services (HHS).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
On July 24, 2013, the
Secretary of Health and Human Services
(the Secretary) published in the Federal
Register a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) proposing changes
to the regulations governing the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation
Program (VICP). Specifically, the
Secretary proposed revisions to the
Vaccine Injury Table (Table). The basis
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:21 Jun 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
for this change is consistent with the
Secretary’s findings that
intussusceptions can reasonably be
determined in some circumstances to be
caused by rotavirus vaccines. The
Secretary is now making this
amendment to the Table and to the
Qualifications and Aids to
Interpretation (QAI), described below
under Background Information, as
proposed in the NPRM. These
regulations will apply only to petitions
for compensation under the VICP filed
after this final rule becomes effective.
DATES: This final rule is effective July
23, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Avril M. Houston, Director, Division of
Injury Compensation Programs,
Healthcare Systems Bureau, HRSA,
Parklawn Building, Room 11C–06, 5600
Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, or
by telephone: (800) 338–2382. This is a
toll-free number.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background Information
Under Title XXI of the Public Health
Service Act, as amended (PHS Act),
individuals who demonstrate a vaccinerelated injury or death may receive
compensation through the VICP. To be
eligible for compensation from the
VICP, a petitioner must demonstrate
that the injured or deceased individual
received a vaccine set forth in the Table
(a ‘‘covered vaccine’’) and sustained a
vaccine-related injury or death. A
petitioner can prove a vaccine-related
injury or death in three ways. First, the
petitioner can show, by a
preponderance of the evidence, that the
vaccine recipient suffered an injury
listed in the Table corresponding with
the vaccine received, that the onset of
such injury occurred within the
timeframe specified in the Table, and
that the injury meets the requirements
set forth in the Table’s QAI. A Table
injury or death is given the legal
presumption that it was caused by the
vaccination. Sections 2111(c)(1)(C)(i),
2113(a)(1)(B), and 2114(a) of the PHS
Act. Second, if the petitioner cannot
demonstrate a Table injury, the
petitioner can prevail by proving, by a
preponderance of the evidence, that the
vaccine caused the injury or death (offTable injury). Third, a petitioner can
prevail by proving, by a preponderance
of the evidence, that the vaccine
significantly aggravated a pre-existing
condition. In all three cases, a petitioner
must also show that the injury was
sufficiently severe by demonstrating
that such person suffered the residual
effects of the injury for more than 6
months; died from the administration of
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
the vaccine; or that the alleged injury
resulted in inpatient hospitalization and
surgical intervention. Section
2111(c)(1)(D) of the PHS Act. If the
petitioner can prove a Table injury, offTable injury, or significant aggravation
of a pre-existing condition, the
petitioner is entitled to compensation
unless it is affirmatively shown that the
injury was caused by some factor
unrelated to the vaccination.
Under section 2114(e)(2) of the PHS
Act, when the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC)
recommends a vaccine for routine
administration to children, the Secretary
is required to amend the Table to
include such vaccine. Coverage becomes
effective when an excise tax is imposed
on the vaccine. Additionally, the
Secretary is authorized to include
specific injuries on the Table with
respect to each covered vaccine,
including the timeframe when the first
symptom or manifestation of the onset
of such adverse event may occur. The
Secretary may also define such injuries
through the QAI. Under section 2114(c)
of the PHS Act, the Secretary may make
such modifications to the Table by
promulgating regulations, with notice
and opportunity for a public hearing,
and at least 180 days of public
comment.
II. Discussion of the Final Rule
As discussed in the NPRM (78 FR
44512, July 24, 2013), the Secretary has
reviewed the currently available data
regarding the Rotarix and RotaTeq
vaccines and the risk of intussusception.
The background of the RotaShield
experience in the U.S. and the
published literature from Mexico,
Brazil, Australia, and the U.S. supports
a small attributable risk of
intussusception after the first and
second doses of Rotarix and RotaTeq
(with a greater amount of data
supporting an association with the first
dose of both vaccines). Evidence shows
the increased risk within the 1–7 days
following immunization with peaks in
the fourth and fifth days. As a
consequence, the Secretary is amending
the Table to add the injury of
intussusception to the general Table
category of ‘‘rotavirus vaccines’’ to
allow a presumption of causation for
claims that meet the requirements set
forth in the Table for that injury. To
allow for a generous timeframe that will
capture any cases related to the vaccine
after day 7, the Secretary has assigned
an onset interval of 1–21 days under
sections 2114(c) and (e) of the PHS Act.
The Secretary will stay informed of
new information in the scientific and
medical field about intussusception and
E:\FR\FM\23JNR1.SGM
23JNR1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 120 / Tuesday, June 23, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
rotavirus vaccines and may propose
changes in the future if such
information warrants changes to the
Table. In addition, the Secretary
recognizes that one goal of the VICP is
to provide compensation to petitioners
harmed by vaccines through a less
adversarial system. Therefore, the
Secretary feels that adding the Table
injury of intussusception after the first
and second doses of rotavirus vaccines
with a window of 1–21 days is
appropriate.
The QAI section of the Table defines
the injury of ‘‘intussusception’’ as the
invagination of a segment of intestine
into the next segment of intestine,
resulting in bowel obstruction,
diminished arterial blood supply, and
blockage of the venous blood flow. This
is characterized by a sudden onset of
abdominal pain that may be manifested
by anguished crying, irritability,
vomiting, abdominal swelling, and/or
passing of stools mixed with blood and
mucus. The definition for presumption
of vaccine causation only applies to the
first and second dose of vaccine, and
excludes intussusception occurring with
or after the third dose. The third dose
of rotavirus vaccines lacks sufficient
evidence showing risk.
The definition also delineates the
alternative causes of intussusception
which, if present in a case, would
prevent it from qualifying as a Table
injury. The alternative causes were
classified into four categories: infectious
diseases; anatomic lead points;
anatomic bowel abnormalities; and
underlying gastrointestinal or systemic
diseases. Cases of intussusception
where the onset was within 14 days
after an infectious disease secondary to
non-enteric or enteric adenovirus, other
enteric viruses (such as Enterovirus),
enteric bacteria (such as Campylobacter
jejuni), or enteric parasites (such as
Ascaris lumbricoides) would not qualify
as a Table injury. Proof of these
alternate causes may be demonstrated
by clinical signs and symptoms and
need not be confirmed by culture or
serologic testing.
Cases of intussusception in a person
with a pre-existing condition identified
as the lead point for intussusception,
such as intestinal masses and cystic
structures (e.g., polyps; tumors;
Meckel’s diverticulum; lymphoma; or
duplication cysts), would not qualify as
a Table injury. Additionally, cases of
intussusception in a person with
abnormalities of the bowel, including
congenital anatomic abnormalities,
anatomic changes after abdominal
surgery, and other anatomic bowel
abnormalities caused by mucosal
hemorrhage, trauma, or abnormal
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:21 Jun 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
intestinal blood vessels (such as Henoch
Scholein purpura, hematoma, or
hemangioma); or in a person with
underlying conditions or systemic
diseases associated with
intussusception (such as cystic fibrosis,
celiac disease, or Kawasaki disease)
would not qualify as a Table injury.
Petitioners may be eligible for
compensation for vaccine-related cases
of intussusception in which the onset is
before 1 day or beyond 21 days, or
where the condition does not satisfy the
criteria under the QAI for
intussusception (an ‘‘off-Table’’ claim);
however, the petitioners will be
required to prove causation-in-fact.
Regardless of whether the claim satisfies
the criteria in the Table, all petitioners
must demonstrate sufficient severity of
the injury by proving that the injured
person: 1) suffered the residual effects
or complications of the alleged vaccinerelated injury for more than 6 months
after vaccine’s administration; 2) died
from administration of the vaccine; or 3)
sustained inpatient hospitalization and
surgery as a result of the alleged
vaccine-related injury. Section
2111(c)(1)(D), PHS Act (42 U.S.C.
300aa–11(c)(1)(D)). In the case of
rotavirus vaccine administration and
subsequent intussusception, the
Secretary does not consider a reduction
of intussusception with therapeutic
enemas to be ‘‘surgical intervention.’’
Petitions must also be filed within the
applicable statute of limitations. The
general statute of limitations applicable
to petitions filed with the VICP, set forth
in section 2116(a) of the PHS Act (42
U.S.C. 300aa–16(a)), continues to apply.
In addition, section 2116(b) of the PHS
Act identifies a specific exception to
this statute of limitations that applies
when the effect of a revision to the
Table makes a previously ineligible
person eligible to receive compensation
or when an eligible person’s likelihood
of obtaining compensation significantly
increases. Under this section,
individuals who may be eligible to file
petitions based on the revised Table
may file a petition for compensation not
later than two years after the effective
date of the revision if the injury or death
occurred not more than eight years
before the effective date of the revision
of the Table (42 U.S.C. 300aa–16(b)).
III. Comments and Responses
The comment period for this
regulation ran for 6 months (July 24,
2013–January 21, 2014) and included
two public hearings that were held on
January 13, 2014, and April 28, 2014.
The Secretary received ten comments as
a result of this process. None of the
commenters objected to the Secretary’s
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
35849
proposal to add intussusception as an
injury for rotavirus vaccines to the
Table, and the overwhelming majority
of commenters expressed their support
for the proposal. In addition,
commenters raised four additional
points. Below is a summary of those
points and the Secretary’s responses to
them.
1. Notice to Potential Petitioners
COMMENT: A commenter suggested
that the Secretary make additional
efforts to increase public awareness
about expanding the Table and to
increase the general public awareness
about the VICP.
RESPONSE: The Secretary will
continue efforts to increase the general
public’s awareness about the VICP,
including revisions to the Table.
2. Demonstrating Severity of Injury
COMMENT: One commenter
suggested that the definition of surgical
intervention be broadened to include
therapeutic enema treatment.
RESPONSE: Defining the term
‘‘surgical intervention’’ is beyond the
scope of the Table amendments. While
the preamble to both the NPRM and
final rule includes the Secretary’s view
that a reduction of intussusception with
an enema is not a ‘‘surgical
intervention,’’ such language is not
included in the regulatory text. Further,
the definition of ‘‘surgical intervention’’
is decided by the court.
3. Onset Time Frame
COMMENT: A commenter stated that
none of the data for either vaccine
supports an association with
intussusception for days 8–21 after dose
2 and suggested that the Secretary
consider revising the time frame for
qualification as a Table injury after dose
2 to 1–7 days.
RESPONSE: The Secretary has
considered the approach suggested by
the commenter and also the
recommendation of the Advisory
Commission on Childhood Vaccines
(ACCV). The ACCV unanimously
recommended the proposed change of
1–21 days for all rotavirus vaccines.
The ACCV’s ‘‘Guiding Principles for
Recommending Changes to the Vaccine
Injury Table,’’ consist of two
overarching principles: (1) the Table
should be scientifically and medically
credible; and (2) where there is credible
scientific and medical evidence both to
support and to reject a proposed change
(addition or deletion) to the Table, the
change should, whenever possible, be
made to the benefit of petitioners. The
Guiding Principles were established in
2006 to assist the ACCV in evaluating
E:\FR\FM\23JNR1.SGM
23JNR1
35850
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 120 / Tuesday, June 23, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
proposed Table revisions and
determining whether to recommend
Table changes to the Secretary. The
ACCV followed these Guiding
Principles in making its
recommendations to the Secretary for
revising this Table. Therefore, the
Secretary has decided that the 1–21 day
timeframe for both vaccines is the best
approach to capture any cases related to
the vaccine after day 7.
4. Published Studies since the
Publication of the NPRM
COMMENT: A commenter identified
studies that have been published since
the initial NPRM was published.
RESPONSE: The Secretary has
reviewed these studies and found that
the most recent data have shown a small
but statistically significant increased
risk of intussusception within 7 days
after the first and second doses of the
licensed rotavirus vaccines. However, as
discussed above, following the Guiding
Principles, the ACCV unanimously
recommended the proposed change of
1–21 days for all rotavirus vaccines.
Therefore, the Secretary has decided
that the 1–21 day timeframe for both
vaccines is the best approach to capture
any cases related to the vaccine after
day 7.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
IV. Regulatory Impact Analysis
HHS has examined the impact of this
rulemaking as required by Executive
Order 12866 on Regulatory Planning
and Review, Executive Order 13563 on
Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review, the Congressional Review Act
(5 U.S.C. 804(2)), the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA), section 202 of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995, section 654(c) of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act of 1999, and Executive Order 13132
on Federalism.
Executive Order 12866 directs
agencies to assess all costs and benefits
of available regulatory alternatives and,
when rulemaking is necessary, to select
regulatory approaches that provide the
greatest net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health,
safety, distributive, and equity effects).
In addition, under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, if a rule has a significant
economic effect on a substantial number
of small entities, the Secretary must
specifically consider the economic
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:21 Jun 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
effect of a rule on small entities and
analyze regulatory options that could
lessen the impact of the rule.
Executive Order 12866 requires that
all regulations reflect consideration of
alternatives, costs, benefits, incentives,
equity, and available information.
Regulations must meet certain
standards, such as avoiding an
unnecessary burden. Regulations that
are ‘‘significant’’ because of cost,
adverse effects on the economy,
inconsistency with other agency actions,
effects on the budget, or novel legal or
policy issues, require special analysis.
The Secretary has determined that no
resources are required to implement the
requirements in this rule. Compensation
will be made in the same manner used
prior to the revisions of this final rule.
The only purpose of this rule is to
lessen the burden of proof for potential
petitioners. Therefore, in accordance
with the Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980 (RFA) and the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Act of 1996,
which amended the RFA, the Secretary
certifies that this rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
The Secretary has also determined
that this rule does not meet the criteria
for a major rule as defined by Executive
Order 12866, and it would not have a
major effect on the economy or federal
expenditures. The Secretary has
determined that this rule is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ within the meaning of the statute
providing for Congressional Review of
Agency Rulemaking, 5 U.S.C. 801.
Similarly, it will not have effects on
State, local, and tribal governments, or
on the private sector such as to require
consultation under the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
The Secretary finds that the
provisions of this rule will not have an
adverse effect on family well-being,
because this rule does not affect the
following family elements: family
safety; family stability; marital
commitment; parental rights in the
education, nurture, and supervision of
their children; family functioning;
disposable income or poverty; or the
behavior and personal responsibility of
youth, as determined under section
654(c) of the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act of
1999.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
This rule is not being treated as a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, the rule has not been
reviewed by the Office of Management
and Budget. As stated above, this rule
would modify the Table based on legal
authority.
Impact of the New Rule
This rule will have the effect of
making it easier for future VICP
petitioners alleging the injury of
intussusception as the result of a
rotavirus vaccine that meets the criteria
in the Table to receive the Table’s
presumption of causation (which
relieves them of having to prove that the
vaccine actually caused or significantly
aggravated the injury).
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This final rule has no information
collection requirements.
List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 100
Biologics, Health insurance, and
Immunization.
Dated: May 27, 2015.
James Macrae,
Acting Administrator, Health Resources and
Services Administration.
Approved: June 5, 2015.
Sylvia M. Burwell,
Secretary.
Therefore, for the reasons stated in the
preamble, the Department of Health and
Human Services amends 42 CFR part
100 as follows:
PART 100—VACCINE INJURY
COMPENSATION
1. The authority citation for part 100
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: Secs. 312 and 313 of Public
Law 99–660 (42 U.S.C. 300aa–1 note); 42
U.S.C. 300aa–10 to 300aa–34; 26 U.S.C.
4132(a); and sec. 13632(a)(3) of Public Law
103–66.
2. Amend § 100.3 as follows:
a. Amend paragraph (a) by revising
Item XI in the table.
■ b. Add paragraph (b)(3).
The revision and addition read as
follows:
■
■
§ 100.3
Vaccine injury table.
(a) * * *
E:\FR\FM\23JNR1.SGM
23JNR1
35851
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 120 / Tuesday, June 23, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
Vaccine
Illness, disability, injury or condition covered
*
*
XI. Rotavirus vaccines ......................................
*
*
*
A. Intussusception ............................................
B. Any acute complication or sequela (including death) of an illness, disability, injury, or
condition referred to above which illness,
disability, injury, or condition arose within
the time period prescribed.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(3) Intussusception. (i) For purposes
of paragraph (a) of this section,
intussusception means the invagination
of a segment of intestine into the next
segment of intestine, resulting in bowel
obstruction, diminished arterial blood
supply, and blockage of the venous
blood flow. This is characterized by a
sudden onset of abdominal pain that
may be manifested by anguished crying,
irritability, vomiting, abdominal
swelling, and/or passing of stools mixed
with blood and mucus.
(ii) For purposes of paragraph (a) of
this section, the following shall not be
considered to be a Table
intussusception:
(A) Onset that occurs with or after the
third dose of a vaccine containing
rotavirus;
(B) Onset within 14 days after an
infectious disease associated with
intussusception, including viral disease
(such as those secondary to non-enteric
or enteric adenovirus, or other enteric
viruses such as Enterovirus), enteric
bacteria (such as Campylobacter jejuni),
or enteric parasites (such as Ascaris
lumbricoides), which may be
demonstrated by clinical signs and
symptoms and need not be confirmed
by culture or serologic testing;
(C) Onset in a person with a preexisting condition identified as the lead
point for intussusception such as
intestinal masses and cystic structures
(such as polyps, tumors, Meckel’s
diverticulum, lymphoma, or duplication
cysts);
(D) Onset in a person with
abnormalities of the bowel, including
congenital anatomic abnormalities,
anatomic changes after abdominal
surgery, and other anatomic bowel
abnormalities caused by mucosal
hemorrhage, trauma, or abnormal
intestinal blood vessels (such as Henoch
Scholein purpura, hematoma, or
hemangioma); or
(E) Onset in a person with underlying
conditions or systemic diseases
associated with intussusception (such as
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:16 Jun 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
*
[FR Doc. 2015–14771 Filed 6–22–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4165–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management
Agency
44 CFR Part 64
[Docket ID FEMA–2015–0001; Internal
Agency Docket No. FEMA–8385]
Suspension of Community Eligibility
Federal Emergency
Management Agency, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This rule identifies
communities where the sale of flood
insurance has been authorized under
the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) that are scheduled for
suspension on the effective dates listed
within this rule because of
noncompliance with the floodplain
management requirements of the
program. If the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) receives
documentation that the community has
adopted the required floodplain
management measures prior to the
effective suspension date given in this
rule, the suspension will not occur and
a notice of this will be provided by
publication in the Federal Register on a
subsequent date. Also, information
identifying the current participation
status of a community can be obtained
from FEMA’s Community Status Book
(CSB). The CSB is available at https://
www.fema.gov/fema/csb.shtm.
DATES: The effective date of each
community’s scheduled suspension is
the third date (‘‘Susp.’’) listed in the
third column of the following tables.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you want to determine whether a
SUMMARY:
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
*
Sfmt 4700
*
*
*
1–21 days
Not applicable
*
cystic fibrosis, celiac disease, or
Kawasaki disease).
*
*
*
*
*
PO 00000
Time period for first symptom or manifestation
of onset or of significant aggravation after
vaccine administration
particular community was suspended
on the suspension date or for further
information, contact Bret Gates, Federal
Insurance and Mitigation
Administration, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–4133.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NFIP
enables property owners to purchase
Federal flood insurance that is not
otherwise generally available from
private insurers. In return, communities
agree to adopt and administer local
floodplain management measures aimed
at protecting lives and new construction
from future flooding. Section 1315 of
the National Flood Insurance Act of
1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4022,
prohibits the sale of NFIP flood
insurance unless an appropriate public
body adopts adequate floodplain
management measures with effective
enforcement measures. The
communities listed in this document no
longer meet that statutory requirement
for compliance with program
regulations, 44 CFR part 59.
Accordingly, the communities will be
suspended on the effective date in the
third column. As of that date, flood
insurance will no longer be available in
the community. We recognize that some
of these communities may adopt and
submit the required documentation of
legally enforceable floodplain
management measures after this rule is
published but prior to the actual
suspension date. These communities
will not be suspended and will continue
to be eligible for the sale of NFIP flood
insurance. A notice withdrawing the
suspension of such communities will be
published in the Federal Register.
In addition, FEMA publishes a Flood
Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) that
identifies the Special Flood Hazard
Areas (SFHAs) in these communities.
The date of the FIRM, if one has been
published, is indicated in the fourth
column of the table. No direct Federal
financial assistance (except assistance
pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency
E:\FR\FM\23JNR1.SGM
23JNR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 120 (Tuesday, June 23, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35848-35851]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-14771]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
42 CFR Part 100
RIN 0906-AB00
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: Addition of
Intussusception as Injury for Rotavirus Vaccines to the Vaccine Injury
Table
AGENCY: Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Department
of Health and Human Services (HHS).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On July 24, 2013, the Secretary of Health and Human Services
(the Secretary) published in the Federal Register a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) proposing changes to the regulations governing the
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP). Specifically, the
Secretary proposed revisions to the Vaccine Injury Table (Table). The
basis for this change is consistent with the Secretary's findings that
intussusceptions can reasonably be determined in some circumstances to
be caused by rotavirus vaccines. The Secretary is now making this
amendment to the Table and to the Qualifications and Aids to
Interpretation (QAI), described below under Background Information, as
proposed in the NPRM. These regulations will apply only to petitions
for compensation under the VICP filed after this final rule becomes
effective.
DATES: This final rule is effective July 23, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Avril M. Houston, Director,
Division of Injury Compensation Programs, Healthcare Systems Bureau,
HRSA, Parklawn Building, Room 11C-06, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD
20857, or by telephone: (800) 338-2382. This is a toll-free number.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background Information
Under Title XXI of the Public Health Service Act, as amended (PHS
Act), individuals who demonstrate a vaccine-related injury or death may
receive compensation through the VICP. To be eligible for compensation
from the VICP, a petitioner must demonstrate that the injured or
deceased individual received a vaccine set forth in the Table (a
``covered vaccine'') and sustained a vaccine-related injury or death. A
petitioner can prove a vaccine-related injury or death in three ways.
First, the petitioner can show, by a preponderance of the evidence,
that the vaccine recipient suffered an injury listed in the Table
corresponding with the vaccine received, that the onset of such injury
occurred within the timeframe specified in the Table, and that the
injury meets the requirements set forth in the Table's QAI. A Table
injury or death is given the legal presumption that it was caused by
the vaccination. Sections 2111(c)(1)(C)(i), 2113(a)(1)(B), and 2114(a)
of the PHS Act. Second, if the petitioner cannot demonstrate a Table
injury, the petitioner can prevail by proving, by a preponderance of
the evidence, that the vaccine caused the injury or death (off-Table
injury). Third, a petitioner can prevail by proving, by a preponderance
of the evidence, that the vaccine significantly aggravated a pre-
existing condition. In all three cases, a petitioner must also show
that the injury was sufficiently severe by demonstrating that such
person suffered the residual effects of the injury for more than 6
months; died from the administration of the vaccine; or that the
alleged injury resulted in inpatient hospitalization and surgical
intervention. Section 2111(c)(1)(D) of the PHS Act. If the petitioner
can prove a Table injury, off-Table injury, or significant aggravation
of a pre-existing condition, the petitioner is entitled to compensation
unless it is affirmatively shown that the injury was caused by some
factor unrelated to the vaccination.
Under section 2114(e)(2) of the PHS Act, when the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends a vaccine for routine
administration to children, the Secretary is required to amend the
Table to include such vaccine. Coverage becomes effective when an
excise tax is imposed on the vaccine. Additionally, the Secretary is
authorized to include specific injuries on the Table with respect to
each covered vaccine, including the timeframe when the first symptom or
manifestation of the onset of such adverse event may occur. The
Secretary may also define such injuries through the QAI. Under section
2114(c) of the PHS Act, the Secretary may make such modifications to
the Table by promulgating regulations, with notice and opportunity for
a public hearing, and at least 180 days of public comment.
II. Discussion of the Final Rule
As discussed in the NPRM (78 FR 44512, July 24, 2013), the
Secretary has reviewed the currently available data regarding the
Rotarix and RotaTeq vaccines and the risk of intussusception. The
background of the RotaShield experience in the U.S. and the published
literature from Mexico, Brazil, Australia, and the U.S. supports a
small attributable risk of intussusception after the first and second
doses of Rotarix and RotaTeq (with a greater amount of data supporting
an association with the first dose of both vaccines). Evidence shows
the increased risk within the 1-7 days following immunization with
peaks in the fourth and fifth days. As a consequence, the Secretary is
amending the Table to add the injury of intussusception to the general
Table category of ``rotavirus vaccines'' to allow a presumption of
causation for claims that meet the requirements set forth in the Table
for that injury. To allow for a generous timeframe that will capture
any cases related to the vaccine after day 7, the Secretary has
assigned an onset interval of 1-21 days under sections 2114(c) and (e)
of the PHS Act.
The Secretary will stay informed of new information in the
scientific and medical field about intussusception and
[[Page 35849]]
rotavirus vaccines and may propose changes in the future if such
information warrants changes to the Table. In addition, the Secretary
recognizes that one goal of the VICP is to provide compensation to
petitioners harmed by vaccines through a less adversarial system.
Therefore, the Secretary feels that adding the Table injury of
intussusception after the first and second doses of rotavirus vaccines
with a window of 1-21 days is appropriate.
The QAI section of the Table defines the injury of
``intussusception'' as the invagination of a segment of intestine into
the next segment of intestine, resulting in bowel obstruction,
diminished arterial blood supply, and blockage of the venous blood
flow. This is characterized by a sudden onset of abdominal pain that
may be manifested by anguished crying, irritability, vomiting,
abdominal swelling, and/or passing of stools mixed with blood and
mucus. The definition for presumption of vaccine causation only applies
to the first and second dose of vaccine, and excludes intussusception
occurring with or after the third dose. The third dose of rotavirus
vaccines lacks sufficient evidence showing risk.
The definition also delineates the alternative causes of
intussusception which, if present in a case, would prevent it from
qualifying as a Table injury. The alternative causes were classified
into four categories: infectious diseases; anatomic lead points;
anatomic bowel abnormalities; and underlying gastrointestinal or
systemic diseases. Cases of intussusception where the onset was within
14 days after an infectious disease secondary to non-enteric or enteric
adenovirus, other enteric viruses (such as Enterovirus), enteric
bacteria (such as Campylobacter jejuni), or enteric parasites (such as
Ascaris lumbricoides) would not qualify as a Table injury. Proof of
these alternate causes may be demonstrated by clinical signs and
symptoms and need not be confirmed by culture or serologic testing.
Cases of intussusception in a person with a pre-existing condition
identified as the lead point for intussusception, such as intestinal
masses and cystic structures (e.g., polyps; tumors; Meckel's
diverticulum; lymphoma; or duplication cysts), would not qualify as a
Table injury. Additionally, cases of intussusception in a person with
abnormalities of the bowel, including congenital anatomic
abnormalities, anatomic changes after abdominal surgery, and other
anatomic bowel abnormalities caused by mucosal hemorrhage, trauma, or
abnormal intestinal blood vessels (such as Henoch Scholein purpura,
hematoma, or hemangioma); or in a person with underlying conditions or
systemic diseases associated with intussusception (such as cystic
fibrosis, celiac disease, or Kawasaki disease) would not qualify as a
Table injury.
Petitioners may be eligible for compensation for vaccine-related
cases of intussusception in which the onset is before 1 day or beyond
21 days, or where the condition does not satisfy the criteria under the
QAI for intussusception (an ``off-Table'' claim); however, the
petitioners will be required to prove causation-in-fact. Regardless of
whether the claim satisfies the criteria in the Table, all petitioners
must demonstrate sufficient severity of the injury by proving that the
injured person: 1) suffered the residual effects or complications of
the alleged vaccine-related injury for more than 6 months after
vaccine's administration; 2) died from administration of the vaccine;
or 3) sustained inpatient hospitalization and surgery as a result of
the alleged vaccine-related injury. Section 2111(c)(1)(D), PHS Act (42
U.S.C. 300aa-11(c)(1)(D)). In the case of rotavirus vaccine
administration and subsequent intussusception, the Secretary does not
consider a reduction of intussusception with therapeutic enemas to be
``surgical intervention.''
Petitions must also be filed within the applicable statute of
limitations. The general statute of limitations applicable to petitions
filed with the VICP, set forth in section 2116(a) of the PHS Act (42
U.S.C. 300aa-16(a)), continues to apply. In addition, section 2116(b)
of the PHS Act identifies a specific exception to this statute of
limitations that applies when the effect of a revision to the Table
makes a previously ineligible person eligible to receive compensation
or when an eligible person's likelihood of obtaining compensation
significantly increases. Under this section, individuals who may be
eligible to file petitions based on the revised Table may file a
petition for compensation not later than two years after the effective
date of the revision if the injury or death occurred not more than
eight years before the effective date of the revision of the Table (42
U.S.C. 300aa-16(b)).
III. Comments and Responses
The comment period for this regulation ran for 6 months (July 24,
2013-January 21, 2014) and included two public hearings that were held
on January 13, 2014, and April 28, 2014. The Secretary received ten
comments as a result of this process. None of the commenters objected
to the Secretary's proposal to add intussusception as an injury for
rotavirus vaccines to the Table, and the overwhelming majority of
commenters expressed their support for the proposal. In addition,
commenters raised four additional points. Below is a summary of those
points and the Secretary's responses to them.
1. Notice to Potential Petitioners
COMMENT: A commenter suggested that the Secretary make additional
efforts to increase public awareness about expanding the Table and to
increase the general public awareness about the VICP.
RESPONSE: The Secretary will continue efforts to increase the
general public's awareness about the VICP, including revisions to the
Table.
2. Demonstrating Severity of Injury
COMMENT: One commenter suggested that the definition of surgical
intervention be broadened to include therapeutic enema treatment.
RESPONSE: Defining the term ``surgical intervention'' is beyond the
scope of the Table amendments. While the preamble to both the NPRM and
final rule includes the Secretary's view that a reduction of
intussusception with an enema is not a ``surgical intervention,'' such
language is not included in the regulatory text. Further, the
definition of ``surgical intervention'' is decided by the court.
3. Onset Time Frame
COMMENT: A commenter stated that none of the data for either
vaccine supports an association with intussusception for days 8-21
after dose 2 and suggested that the Secretary consider revising the
time frame for qualification as a Table injury after dose 2 to 1-7
days.
RESPONSE: The Secretary has considered the approach suggested by
the commenter and also the recommendation of the Advisory Commission on
Childhood Vaccines (ACCV). The ACCV unanimously recommended the
proposed change of 1-21 days for all rotavirus vaccines.
The ACCV's ``Guiding Principles for Recommending Changes to the
Vaccine Injury Table,'' consist of two overarching principles: (1) the
Table should be scientifically and medically credible; and (2) where
there is credible scientific and medical evidence both to support and
to reject a proposed change (addition or deletion) to the Table, the
change should, whenever possible, be made to the benefit of
petitioners. The Guiding Principles were established in 2006 to assist
the ACCV in evaluating
[[Page 35850]]
proposed Table revisions and determining whether to recommend Table
changes to the Secretary. The ACCV followed these Guiding Principles in
making its recommendations to the Secretary for revising this Table.
Therefore, the Secretary has decided that the 1-21 day timeframe for
both vaccines is the best approach to capture any cases related to the
vaccine after day 7.
4. Published Studies since the Publication of the NPRM
COMMENT: A commenter identified studies that have been published
since the initial NPRM was published.
RESPONSE: The Secretary has reviewed these studies and found that
the most recent data have shown a small but statistically significant
increased risk of intussusception within 7 days after the first and
second doses of the licensed rotavirus vaccines. However, as discussed
above, following the Guiding Principles, the ACCV unanimously
recommended the proposed change of 1-21 days for all rotavirus
vaccines. Therefore, the Secretary has decided that the 1-21 day
timeframe for both vaccines is the best approach to capture any cases
related to the vaccine after day 7.
IV. Regulatory Impact Analysis
HHS has examined the impact of this rulemaking as required by
Executive Order 12866 on Regulatory Planning and Review, Executive
Order 13563 on Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review, the
Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 804(2)), the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA), section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995,
section 654(c) of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act of 1999, and Executive Order 13132 on Federalism.
Executive Order 12866 directs agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when rulemaking is
necessary, to select regulatory approaches that provide the greatest
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health, safety, distributive, and equity effects). In addition, under
the Regulatory Flexibility Act, if a rule has a significant economic
effect on a substantial number of small entities, the Secretary must
specifically consider the economic effect of a rule on small entities
and analyze regulatory options that could lessen the impact of the
rule.
Executive Order 12866 requires that all regulations reflect
consideration of alternatives, costs, benefits, incentives, equity, and
available information. Regulations must meet certain standards, such as
avoiding an unnecessary burden. Regulations that are ``significant''
because of cost, adverse effects on the economy, inconsistency with
other agency actions, effects on the budget, or novel legal or policy
issues, require special analysis.
The Secretary has determined that no resources are required to
implement the requirements in this rule. Compensation will be made in
the same manner used prior to the revisions of this final rule. The
only purpose of this rule is to lessen the burden of proof for
potential petitioners. Therefore, in accordance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) and the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Act of 1996, which amended the RFA, the Secretary certifies
that this rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
The Secretary has also determined that this rule does not meet the
criteria for a major rule as defined by Executive Order 12866, and it
would not have a major effect on the economy or federal expenditures.
The Secretary has determined that this rule is not a ``major rule''
within the meaning of the statute providing for Congressional Review of
Agency Rulemaking, 5 U.S.C. 801. Similarly, it will not have effects on
State, local, and tribal governments, or on the private sector such as
to require consultation under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
The Secretary finds that the provisions of this rule will not have
an adverse effect on family well-being, because this rule does not
affect the following family elements: family safety; family stability;
marital commitment; parental rights in the education, nurture, and
supervision of their children; family functioning; disposable income or
poverty; or the behavior and personal responsibility of youth, as
determined under section 654(c) of the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act of 1999.
This rule is not being treated as a ``significant regulatory
action'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the
rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. As
stated above, this rule would modify the Table based on legal
authority.
Impact of the New Rule
This rule will have the effect of making it easier for future VICP
petitioners alleging the injury of intussusception as the result of a
rotavirus vaccine that meets the criteria in the Table to receive the
Table's presumption of causation (which relieves them of having to
prove that the vaccine actually caused or significantly aggravated the
injury).
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This final rule has no information collection requirements.
List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 100
Biologics, Health insurance, and Immunization.
Dated: May 27, 2015.
James Macrae,
Acting Administrator, Health Resources and Services Administration.
Approved: June 5, 2015.
Sylvia M. Burwell,
Secretary.
Therefore, for the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department
of Health and Human Services amends 42 CFR part 100 as follows:
PART 100--VACCINE INJURY COMPENSATION
0
1. The authority citation for part 100 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 312 and 313 of Public Law 99-660 (42 U.S.C.
300aa-1 note); 42 U.S.C. 300aa-10 to 300aa-34; 26 U.S.C. 4132(a);
and sec. 13632(a)(3) of Public Law 103-66.
0
2. Amend Sec. 100.3 as follows:
0
a. Amend paragraph (a) by revising Item XI in the table.
0
b. Add paragraph (b)(3).
The revision and addition read as follows:
Sec. 100.3 Vaccine injury table.
(a) * * *
[[Page 35851]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time period for
first symptom or
Illness, manifestation of
disability, injury onset or of
Vaccine or condition significant
covered aggravation after
vaccine
administration
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
XI. Rotavirus vaccines.......... A. Intussusception 1-21 days
B. Any acute Not applicable
complication or
sequela
(including death)
of an illness,
disability,
injury, or
condition
referred to above
which illness,
disability,
injury, or
condition arose
within the time
period prescribed.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) * * *
(3) Intussusception. (i) For purposes of paragraph (a) of this
section, intussusception means the invagination of a segment of
intestine into the next segment of intestine, resulting in bowel
obstruction, diminished arterial blood supply, and blockage of the
venous blood flow. This is characterized by a sudden onset of abdominal
pain that may be manifested by anguished crying, irritability,
vomiting, abdominal swelling, and/or passing of stools mixed with blood
and mucus.
(ii) For purposes of paragraph (a) of this section, the following
shall not be considered to be a Table intussusception:
(A) Onset that occurs with or after the third dose of a vaccine
containing rotavirus;
(B) Onset within 14 days after an infectious disease associated
with intussusception, including viral disease (such as those secondary
to non-enteric or enteric adenovirus, or other enteric viruses such as
Enterovirus), enteric bacteria (such as Campylobacter jejuni), or
enteric parasites (such as Ascaris lumbricoides), which may be
demonstrated by clinical signs and symptoms and need not be confirmed
by culture or serologic testing;
(C) Onset in a person with a pre-existing condition identified as
the lead point for intussusception such as intestinal masses and cystic
structures (such as polyps, tumors, Meckel's diverticulum, lymphoma, or
duplication cysts);
(D) Onset in a person with abnormalities of the bowel, including
congenital anatomic abnormalities, anatomic changes after abdominal
surgery, and other anatomic bowel abnormalities caused by mucosal
hemorrhage, trauma, or abnormal intestinal blood vessels (such as
Henoch Scholein purpura, hematoma, or hemangioma); or
(E) Onset in a person with underlying conditions or systemic
diseases associated with intussusception (such as cystic fibrosis,
celiac disease, or Kawasaki disease).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-14771 Filed 6-22-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4165-15-P