The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency announced on October 20 that the UK marketing authorisation for IXCHIQ, the live attenuated chikungunya vaccine made by Valneva, has been withdrawn. Acting on advice from the Commission on Human Medicines after a review of post authorisation safety data, the MHRA concluded that the vaccine’s benefit risk balance is no longer favourable for UK travellers. Healthcare professionals must no longer prescribe, supply or administer it, and remaining stock is to be disposed of under local policies.
The safety record behind the decision is specific. Since authorisation, serious adverse reactions have been reported, including chikungunya like symptoms and rare neurological events such as encephalitis. Cases occurred predominantly in older adults and people with underlying conditions, but were also reported in people with no known health conditions, and some resulted in hospitalisation or death. IXCHIQ was indicated for adults travelling to high risk areas, a population for whom the underlying disease risk is episodic and travel dependent, which is what makes the risk side of the balance decisive: a vaccine given to healthy travellers ahead of a possible exposure is held to a stricter safety standard than one given against a present threat.
The MHRA was explicit about what the decision does not require. People who have already received IXCHIQ and had no side effects face no identified risk, need no revaccination and need no other medical intervention. Anyone who experienced a suspected reaction should seek medical advice and report it through the Yellow Card scheme, and professionals are asked to keep reporting suspected reactions even after withdrawal.
For UK travel medicine, prevention now rests on the alternative chikungunya vaccine the MHRA pointed clinicians toward, plus mosquito bite avoidance and current travel health advice. The withdrawal also lands on Valneva’s broader IXCHIQ position: the UK decision is a national benefit risk judgment on traveller use, and other regulators’ assessments, which have included age restrictions rather than withdrawal, remain their own.