Pfizer:
37003436 SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) vaccine, mRNA-BNT162b2 0.1 MG/ML Injectable Suspension
Moderna:
37003518 SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) vaccine, mRNA-1273 0.2 MG/ML Injectable Suspension
1 Like
Only now I’ve realized why I don’t really like this mapping:
It’s valid while the only formulation exists. Let them introduce a lower dosage or something else, we are screwed up. For sure, official mappings will be fixed, but it’s an additional work and a big pain to constantly review the custom mappings done here and there.
But the problem is that we don’t have any better option - CVX is very specific too (or very general).
So this is another reason to build a homemade vocabulary for vaccines.
1 Like
Hi Alexander,
What would be better - using the official mappings if they could be more easily maintained, or building a homemade vocabulary?
I might be able to maintain the official mappings automatically. I have the technology to remap automatically (it’s new).
Also, out of curiosity, why would a custom vocabulary not also require updating if dosages were changing?
1 Like
Probably if they introduce, let’s say, child dose, the vaccine will have different concentration. So we will be able to reflect it using RxNorm.
On the other making a homemade vocabulary is tempting idea as we can fully control it.
But it also requires more maintanance and effort.
For now I would stick to RxNorm, so users would be able to map their records to standard concepts.
1 Like
Thank you for the concept_ids, @Dymshyts!
I have watched the source coding for data elements related to Covid evolve over time. When COVID-19 was first identified as a disease in our EHR source data, it was an internal custom text string mapped via an internal mapping table to multiple SNOMED codes. The EHR now maps to the ICD10CM codes for COVID-19 disease. We also had lab Measurement data coded to custom, internal identifiers that are now all mapped to appropriate LOINC codes. I hope the drug coding will also evolve into standard coding. If not, I will post new source values as they appear in our data 
Well, there’s already a standard coding:
CVX is already in OMOP Vocabulary.
CPT4 is going to be available in Athena tomorrow
what about NDC @Alexdavv?
And RxNorm and CVX makes a standard vocabulary for vaccines.
I was talking the source data being coded with a national terminology versus the internal custom coding the EHR is using now I searched for the CVX, CPT4, NDC and RxNorm codes at our source. None were found. I only found the text strings
1 Like
Actually both. RxNorm provides specific drug products, CVX works on a high level, while homemade vocabulary can help join everything into one system. So the mappings is not the key problem.
Sounds very interesting. Want to show it?
We’d not map to the specific dosages unless the source explicitly states it.
Moderna would be mapped to “COVID-19 mRNA-1273 spike protein vaccine” without indication of the entire formulation/dosage.
Righ, it will work for official vocabularies where every other code is the entire drug product.
As for custom mapping, “Pfizer, SARS-COV2 (COVID-19) VACCINE” may change the meaning over time. So once it happened, we need to get back to all the ETL done and review it.
It was released with new codes/mappings.
1 Like
Yes, sure - you can see the description on www.dynaccurate.com. We’re currently leaving the funding research program in three weeks and then we can distribute the technology. I’d be very happy to set up a test for OHDSI.
1 Like
Hi @mik, I just wanted to check if you are on track for the bulk of the work in Feb and March. Unfortunately, 2022 is too late for us. Is there a way to move up the time line b/c COVID vaccines are being coded as CVX, CPT, and RxNorm in EHR systems in the US and without these mappings it makes it difficult on the analytics side. Thanks!
Karthik, can you elaborate on the CPT codes you mention. This page (Find your COVID-19 Vaccine CPT® Codes | American Medical Association) shows codes 0001A and 0011A. But are those modifiers (those only have two characters) in addition to CPT codes 91300 to 91303.
Oh, great to hear! The last version I downloaded didn’t have it or had missing relationships. Now the only piece is the CVX to RxNorm mappings, so we can use one vocabulary for drug analyses.
I found another custom source value which lacks a code, "JOHNSON & JOHNSON, SARS-COV2 (COVID-19) VACCINE ". What’s the appropriate concept_id for it?
I am ETLing COVID-19 vaccinations collected using a section of the 5July2021 WHO COVID-19 Core CRF into the OMOP CDM. How do you suggest I proceed?
Keep in mind that in future versions of the CRF we expect that the lists of vaccines administered will grow.
Our source data has new source values for COVID-19 vaccines. What are the most accurate mappings for the following:
MODERNA, 100 MCG, SARS-COV2 (COVID-19) VACCINE
MODERNA, 50 MCG, SARS-COV2 (COVID-19) VACCINE BOOSTER
PFIZER, PED 5-11, SARS-COV2 (COVID-19) VACCINE
Are we missing some of the vaccines even in the CVX?
The most painful thing is RxNorm doesn’t make a difference on the ingredient level and we have to map to the drug components / clinical drugs. It works unless the low-dose formulation is on the market, but it’s already there and we have to address it somehow.
So let’s get back to the issue:
Supposed to be a classic Moderna, so SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) vaccine, mRNA-1273 0.2 MG/ML Injectable Suspension
Low-dose booster, but the mapping is the same - SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) vaccine, mRNA-1273 0.2 MG/ML Injectable Suspension
The thing is we’re losing the distinction between the two.
Currently we map it uphill to SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) vaccine, mRNA spike protein losing the distinction even between Pfizer and Moderna.
We are aware of the issue and currently working on the solutions at the OMOP vocabulary end.