RSV Agent Requirements - Question for PHSC Community

Hi Taylor - just noticed a difference between the content of the two descriptions on your first post with the question for the group.

Here is the text from your message with the differences:
(Abrysvo = "...powder for suspension...")
(Arexvy = ".... powder and suspension for suspension for injection.." )


"As mentioned on the PHSC call yesterday, a new concept has been created for the recently approved RSV vaccine, Abrysvo:
• 55351000087104 |ABRYSVO 120 micrograms per 0.5 milliliter powder for suspension Pfizer Canada ULC (real clinical drug)|

The other RSV vaccine product approved in Canada is the following:
• 51301000087102 |AREXVY 120 micrograms per 0.5 milliliter powder and suspension for suspension for injection GlaxoSmithKline Inc. (real clinical drug)| "

Hi Taylor - just noticed a difference between the content of the two descriptions on your first post with the question for the group.

Here is the text from your message with the differences:
(Abrysvo = "...powder for suspension...")
(Arexvy = ".... powder and suspension for suspension for injection.." )


"As mentioned on the PHSC call yesterday, a new concept has been created for the recently approved RSV vaccine, Abrysvo:
• 55351000087104 |ABRYSVO 120 micrograms per 0.5 milliliter powder for suspension Pfizer Canada ULC (real clinical drug)|

The other RSV vaccine product approved in Canada is the following:
• 51301000087102 |AREXVY 120 micrograms per 0.5 milliliter powder and suspension for suspension for injection GlaxoSmithKline Inc. (real clinical drug)| "

Hi Cathy,

Thanks very much for your feedback. I am trying to follow your question about whether there are typos - could you please be more specific about the vaccine product definitions difference you mentioned?

Hello: My first question: why is the agent concept (antigen) named Human orthopneumovirus antigen, when the only human orthopneumovirus of concern with regards to immunologic products is called RSV, with two subtypes? That is confusing in itself. I recommend the agent concept be renamed.

Second: both Arexvy and Abrysvo are active immunizing agents (vaccines), with Arexvy being monovalent and Abrysvo being bivalent. It would seem logical to treat them as other products with multivalent options of different antigen subtypes/serotypes (i.e., is there a separate antigen concepts for Prevnar 13 and for Prevnar 20?).
Recommend having one agent concept (antigen) for both vaccines, but the agent concept should be renamed.

Also, recommend that the vaccine product descriptions contain "monovalent" and "bivalent" respectively, which is far more important information than the "powder for suspension" or "powder and suspension for suspension for injection" part of the descriptions. Note: The two vaccine product definitions differ in the posted question - are there typos?

Hi everyone,

As mentioned on the PHSC call yesterday, a new concept has been created for the recently approved RSV vaccine, Abrysvo:

• 55351000087104 |ABRYSVO 120 micrograms per 0.5 milliliter powder for suspension Pfizer Canada ULC (real clinical drug)|

The other RSV vaccine product approved in Canada is the following:

• 51301000087102 |AREXVY 120 micrograms per 0.5 milliliter powder and suspension for suspension for injection GlaxoSmithKline Inc. (real clinical drug)|

Currently, the agent concept that is mapped these products in the CVC / the parent concept in SNOMED is:

• 51311000087100 |Vaccine product containing only Human orthopneumovirus antigen (medicinal product)|

My question is whether more granular RSV agent concept(s) are required by the PHSC community? Or, is the high-level, unspecified concept sufficient?

Thank you!