Robert Niziol v. HHS - MMR, herpes simplex virus (HSV) encephalitis (2020)

Filed 2015-12-01Decided 2020-04-24Vaccine MMR
deniedcognitive/developmental

Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]

On December 1, 2015, Robert Niziol filed a petition on behalf of his minor child, S.N., alleging that the measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine administered on November 29, 2012, and the Hepatitis A virus (HAV), influenza (flu), and Prevnar 13 vaccines administered on December 6, 2012, caused S.N. to develop encephalitis. S.N. was approximately 18 months old at the time of the MMR vaccination.

Following the MMR vaccine, S.N. reportedly experienced lethargy, vomiting, and fever, leading to seizure activity and hospitalization on December 16, 2012. Medical records confirmed the presence of herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1) DNA in her cerebrospinal fluid, and her condition was consistent with encephalitis.

Treatment included antiviral medication and a hemicraniectomy to manage brain swelling. Petitioner's experts, Dr.

Marcel Kinsbourne and Dr. Vera Byers, argued that the MMR vaccine induced temporary immunosuppression, allowing a latent HSV infection to proliferate and cause encephalitis.

They pointed to S.N.'s low T and B cell counts during her illness as evidence of this immunosuppression. Respondent's expert, Dr.

Michael Silverman, contended that S.N.'s immune cell abnormalities were a normal response to severe infection and sepsis, not indicative of pre-existing or vaccine-induced immunosuppression. He also argued that the specific measles vaccine strain S.N. received was not known to cause significant immunosuppression and that the medical literature did not support a causal link between the MMR vaccine and HSV encephalitis.

Special Master Herbrina Sanders found that Petitioner failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the MMR vaccine caused S.N.'s encephalitis. The Special Master noted inconsistencies in the expert testimony and a lack of definitive scientific support for the proposed mechanism of action.

The petition was denied. Petitioner was represented by Diana L.

Stadelnikas of Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA, and Respondent was represented by Voris E. Johnson of the United States Department of Justice.

Experts named in this decision

Source PDFs 2 total · 2 downloaded