Alisha N. Pankiw v. HHS - Influenza, inflammatory arthritis (2021)

Alisha Pankiw received an influenza vaccination on September 28, 2012. She alleged that this vaccine caused her to develop inflammatory arthritis.

Twelve days later, she presented with joint pain and swelling, and was diagnosed with acute arthritis. Her primary care physician noted it was unlikely to be rheumatoid arthritis but possibly inflammatory arthritis related to her postpartum status.

Over the following months, she saw multiple specialists, including a rheumatologist, who noted undifferentiated arthritis and considered the possibility of seronegative rheumatoid arthritis, but also noted her pregnancy could complicate diagnosis. Her condition was described as asymmetric inflammatory polyarthritis associated with a positive ANA, and her rheumatologist ultimately determined it resolved by September 5, 2013.

The petitioner filed a petition for compensation, alleging the flu vaccine caused her arthritis. The Secretary contested the claim, arguing she failed to present a scientific theory linking the vaccine to arthritis, evidence that the vaccine caused her specific injury, and a proximate temporal relationship.

The Special Master denied compensation, finding that Ms. Pankiw failed to prove she had rheumatoid arthritis and that her asserted medical theory of molecular mimicry, previously rejected in another case, was not persuasive for flu vaccine-induced arthritis.

The Court of Federal Claims reviewed the Special Master's decision and found that the Special Master erred by failing to adequately consider Dr. Thornberry's diagnosis of inflammatory arthritis and the doctor's opinion attributing the condition to the flu vaccine.

The court vacated the Special Master's decision and remanded the case for further proceedings, emphasizing the need for an accurate reflection of the record and the petitioner's specific diagnoses.