B.P. v. HHS - DTaP, encephalopathic developmental regression into autism, as well as immunoglobulin deficiencies, exacerbated by underlying mitochondrial dysfunction (2017)

On January 27, 2014, Christina E. Pope, on behalf of her minor son B.P., filed a petition seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.

The petition alleged that the Diphtheria Tetanus acellular-Pertussis (DTaP) and pneumococcal conjugate (PCV) vaccines B.P. received on May 11, 2011, caused him to develop an encephalopathic developmental regression into autism, along with immunoglobulin deficiencies, exacerbated by underlying mitochondrial dysfunction. Petitioner's counsel was Richard Gage.

Respondent's counsel was Lynn E. Ricciardella.

Special Master Brian H. Corcoran presided over the case.

The Special Master reviewed the medical records and expert reports. Petitioner contended that B.P. experienced immediate adverse reactions post-vaccination, including fever and irritability, and subsequently lost developmental milestones.

However, contemporaneous medical records did not corroborate these claims, indicating normal development for the period following the vaccinations. Concerns about B.P.'s development, including possible developmental delay and autism, were first noted in the medical records in January 2012, approximately eight months after the vaccinations.

Petitioner's experts, Dr. Harum and Dr.

Kinsbourne, proposed theories linking the vaccines to B.P.'s condition, suggesting aggravation of an underlying mitochondrial disorder. Respondent's expert, Dr.

Cohen, opined that B.P. did not have a mitochondrial illness or dysfunction and that his condition was more consistent with idiopathic autism. The Special Master found that the medical evidence did not support a diagnosis of mitochondrial dysfunction or disease, and that B.P. did not experience an acute post-vaccination reaction or regression.

The Special Master also found that Petitioner's causation theory lacked reliability and was not supported by persuasive expert testimony or medical literature, and that the alleged onset of symptoms was too far removed from the vaccination date to establish a medically acceptable temporal relationship. Ultimately, the Special Master granted Respondent's motion to dismiss, finding that Petitioner had not met her burden of proof under the Althen standard for establishing causation-in-fact.

The case was dismissed without an award.