Association of Self-reported High-Risk Allergy History With Allergy Symptoms After COVID-19 Vaccination

Significant association between asthma and a lower risk of mortality among COVID-19 patients in Spain: A meta-analysis

Background

Various prevalences of asthma in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been reported in different regions, and the association between asthma and COVID-19 subsequent mortality has been in debate. Thus, this study aimed to investigate whether there was a significant association between asthma and COVID-19 mortality in Spain through a meta-analysis.

Methods

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were strictly complied with conducting this study. The pooled odds ratio (OR) with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated by a random-effects model. The I 2 statistics for heterogeneity, sensitivity analysis for robustness, Begg's test, and Egger's test for publication bias, along with subgroup analyses for confounding bias, were also performed to support the foundation of this study.

Results

The meta-analysis revealed that asthma was significantly associated with a lower risk of mortality among COVID-19 patients in Spain with a random-effects model (pooled OR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.69-0.88, I 2 = 35%). Further subgroup analyses by male proportion and sample size also indicated that a statistically significant negative correlation did exist between asthma and COVID-19 mortality. Robustness and no publication on-bias were evidenced by sensitivity analysis, Egger's test, and Begg's test, respectively.

Conclusion

In conclusion, patients with asthma were found to have a lower risk of mortality from COVID-19 in Spain, especially among elderly patients. In addition, asthmatic patients infected with COVID-19 may be at risk of death compared to non-asthmatic patients, which is not a cause for undue concern, thereby reducing the burden of medication.

Risk Factors Associated with Cutaneous Reactions Following COVID-19 Vaccine Immunisation: A Registry-Based Case-Control Study

Background

In Malaysia, following extensive COVID-19 vaccination, Hospital Kuala Lumpur reported an increase in cutaneous reactions post-immunisation. To understand this, a case-control study was initiated to identify potential risk factors.

Methods

This registry-based, unmatched case-control study encompasses all adverse event following immunisation (AEFI) reports associated with COVID-19 vaccines, received by the Department of Pharmacy at Hospital Kuala Lumpur through the Malaysian Adverse Drug Reactions Advisory Committee (MADRAC) AEFI reporting forms. Twenty-four potential risk factors were evaluated, including demographic information, medical history, food allergies, COVID-19 vaccination history and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, were evaluated using MADRAC AEFI reporting forms. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated using univariable and multivariable logistic regression.

Results

Cutaneous reactions were more frequent in middle-aged females, especially after the first COVID-19 vaccine dose. These reactions, primarily mild and generalised, included pruritus and urticaria. Notably, 52% were delayed reactions (more than 4 h post-vaccination). Factors associated with increased risk of cutaneous reaction following COVID-19 immunisation included history of seafood and shellfish allergy (adjusted odds ratio [adjOR]: 2.11; 95% CI: 1.12, 3.96; P = 0.020), history of vaccine allergy (adjOR: 4.07; 95% CI: 1.44, 11.54; P = 0.008), past dermatological diseases (adjOR: 5.48; 95% CI: 2.03, 14.78; P = 0.001), and past medication allergy (adjOR: 2.12; 95% CI: 1.36, 3.31; P = 0.001).

Conclusion

Self-reported histories of allergies to vaccines, foods or medications were found to increase the likelihood of cutaneous reactions following COVID-19 vaccination. These reactions, which were predominantly mild, did not hinder the administration of the second vaccine dose. The majority of reactions occurred after the first dose, manifesting as generalised pruritus and urticaria. They were effectively managed with oral antihistamines and low-dose corticosteroids, thereby avoiding the need for hospitalisation.

Vaccine hesitancy in patients presenting to a specialized allergy center: clinical relevant sensitizations, impact on mental health and vaccination rates

Introduction

The COVID vaccination program with new types of vaccinations and early reports of allergic reactions to vaccines led to vaccination hesitancy in patients with allergies. In this study, we aimed to characterize patients who present at an allergy center with specific questions regarding risk assessment to COVID vaccines in comparison to regular allergy center patients.

Methods

A total of 50 patient charts of patients with risk assessment for COVID vaccination (COV group) and 50 regular allergy center patients (ALL group) were assessed for documented allergies, comorbidities, total IgE, and tryptase levels and hospital anxiety and depression score (HADS). Skin prick testing (SPT) with additives of COVID vaccines [polyethylene glycol (PEG), polysorbate] were performed if indicated based on medical history.

Results

Patients who presented for examination prior to a possible COVID vaccination were mostly female (86%) and had more frequently reported allergic reactions to drugs in the past, but only in a minor group (28%) were the reactions qualified as anaphylaxis. The group COV patients scored significantly higher in the HADS for anxiety and depression than the regular group ALL patients. The same trend was observed when data were corrected for gender. It is worth noting that patients without any prior contact to COVID vaccines scored comparable regarding anxiety to patients with prior reaction to COVID vaccinations, but significantly higher in the depression score. In 19 patients (38%) who met the indications for SPT for the suspicious contents PEG and Polysorbate 80, the tests did not show a positive result. Furthermore, 84% of patients underwent the prick test, but only 15% of patients who received consultation alone agreed to vaccination at our center. No vaccination-related event was documented in these patients.

Discussion

In conclusion, vaccination hesitancy was frequently elicited by negative experiences with drugs and putative drug allergies. Female patients predominate in this patient group, and the anxiety and depression scores were significantly elevated. Allergological workup, including SPT, led to a high rate of subsequent vaccinations, whereas a discussion with the patients about risks and individualized advice for vaccination without testing only rarely resulted in documented vaccinations.

Temporal changes in factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among Chinese adults: Repeated nationally representative survey

Background

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has been cited as one of the main obstacles impacting vaccine coverage. However, factors that affect hesitancy may change over time. Understanding these evolving concerns and adapting strategies accordingly are crucial for effectively addressing vaccine hesitancy effectively and promoting public health. We aimed to explore the temporal changes in factors associated with COVID-19 VH during the COVID-19 pandemic and assess the dynamic evolution of VH.

Methods

In August 2022 and February 2023, repeated online surveys were undertaken to collect information from 5378 adults across four regions of China. Multiple linear regression models assessed the influencing factors of COVID-19 VH. The association between protective motive theory (PMT) (perceived severity, susceptibility, benefits, barriers, and self-efficacy) and VH was evaluated by structural equation modeling (SEM).

Results

Repeated measures showed that 573 (10.7%) and 1598 (29.7%) of the 5378 participants reported COVID-19 VH in the baseline and follow-up surveys, respectively. Educational levels, chronic disease, history of allergy, COVID-19 infection, and trust in medical staff and vaccine developers were positively associated with COVID-19 VH (P＜0.05). The application of SEM revealed that perceived severity, susceptibility, vaccination barriers, and self-efficacy in the PMT directly impacted on VH (P＜0.05). In addition, severity, susceptibility, benefits, and barriers had a significant direct effect on self-efficacy as β = 0.113, β = 0.070, β = 0.722, β = -0.516 respectively with P < 0.001.

Conclusion

The prevalence of COVID-19 VH was relatively low in the baseline survey and much higher in the follow-up survey, with a significant increase in hesitancy rates among mainland Chinese residents. Acknowledging the substantial impact on the shaping of COVID-19 VH, one must consider factors including perceived severity, susceptibility, vaccination barriers, and self-efficacy.

Background rates for severe cutaneous reactions in the US: Contextual support for safety assessment of COVID-19 vaccines and novel biologics

The global COVID-19 public health crisis has resulted in extraordinary collaboration to expeditiously develop vaccines and therapeutics. The safety of these biologics is closely monitored by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Novel products may have limited safety data, and although serious medical outcomes associated with vaccination are rare, knowledge of background incidence rates of medical conditions in the US population puts reported adverse events (AEs) in perspective for further study. Although relatively minor vaccination skin reactions are common, rare instances of severe delayed hypersensitivity reactions such as erythema multiforme (EM), Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), and SJS/TEN overlap syndrome may occur. To aid in the assessment of these events, we performed a literature search in PubMed and Web of Science on the background incidence of EM, SJS, SJS/TEN, and TEN in the US population and on published reports of these conditions occurring post-vaccination. The US background annual incidence rates per million individuals of all ages ranged from 5.3 to 63.0 for SJS, from 0.4 to 5.0 for TEN, and from 0.8 to 1.6 for SJS/TEN. Since these conditions may overlap, some studies reported rates for EM/SJS/TEN combined, however we did not find studies with exclusive EM incidence rates. The published literature, including studies of reports submitted to the FDA/CDC Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), describes post-vaccination EM, SJS, SJS/TEN and/or TEN as rare occurrences. The vaccines most frequently associated with these conditions were measles, mumps, and rubella; diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis; and varicella. The majority of VAERS reports of EM, SJS, SJS/TEN, or TEN occurred in children within 30 days of vaccination. This review summarizes background rates of these disorders in the general population and published AEs among vaccine recipients, to support safety surveillance of COVID-19 vaccines and other biologics.

An Update in COVID-19 Vaccine Reactions in 2023: Progress and Understanding

It has been 3 years since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was initially declared, and 2 years have passed since the first COVID-19 vaccines were introduced. Since then, 13.2 billion COVID-19 vaccine doses have been administered worldwide, largely with multiple doses of messenger RNA vaccines. Although mild local and systemic adverse effects after COVID-19 vaccination are common, serious adverse effects following immunization are rare, particularly when compared with the large number of vaccine doses administered. Immediate and delayed reactions are relatively common and present similarly to allergic and hypersensitivity reactions. Despite this, reactions generally do not commonly recur, cause sequelae, or contraindicate revaccination. In this Clinical Management Review, we provide an updated perspective of COVID-19 vaccine reactions, their spectrum and epidemiology, and recommended approaches to evaluation and management.

[Experiencia en la vacunación frente a la COVID-19 en personas con antecedentes de alergia.]

OBJECTIVE

A common consultation since the beginning of the vaccination campaign against COVID-19 was related to people with a history of allergy to drugs or other vaccines. The objective of the study was to describe what happened after the administration of the vaccine against COVID-19 in people with a history of moderate and severe allergy, vaccinated against COVID-19 in a Primary Care Emergency Center (PCEC).

METHODS

Observational descriptive study with sixty-four people with a history of moderate and severe allergy was carried out, vaccinated in PCEP, between May and October 2021, in the Barcelonés Nord and Maresme (Barcelona province), after assessment by primary care pharmacologists and pharmacists. The percentage of people with adverse events that occurred after vaccination during their stay in the PCEP, the types detected and severity were calculated. Subsequently, a telephone survey was conducted to determine patient satisfaction. A descriptive analysis (calculation of proportions) was performed.

RESULTS

The mean age of 49.7 years (from twelve to ninety-four years) and 90.6% were women. 87.5% of the administered vaccines were Comirnaty®. Adverse events occurring after vaccination were detected in fifteen patients (23.4%), of whom four (6.25%) were manifestations of hypersensitivity, all classified as mild. The reasons for vaccination were a history of allergy to NSAIDs (45.3%), antibiotics (32.8%), analgesics (17.2%), vaccines (28.1%), other substances (40.6%) and anaphylaxis (26.6%). The degree of general satisfaction was 9.11 (out of 10).

CONCLUSIONS

The percentage of patients with a history of anaphylaxis and allergic drug reactions who present hypersensitivity reactions to COVID-19 vaccines is 6.25% and all are mild.

Updated beliefs and shaken confidence: evidence from vaccine hesitancy caused by experiencing "COVID arm"

BACKGROUND

Public health depends largely on people's knowledge, beliefs, or behaviors regarding their health and medical treatments. Although works based on the health belief model have shown that public beliefs about medical treatments affect willingness to take the treatments, little is known about the effects of changes in beliefs on attitudes toward treatment. How one's past experiences relate to one's beliefs about a given medical treatment is worth considering.

METHODS

We implemented an online panel survey in February 2021 and March 2022 in Japan before and after COVID-19 vaccines were administered to the public within the country. We exploited delayed localized hypersensitivity reactions to COVID-19 vaccines, namely, "COVID arm", as an exogenous shock to investigate the relationship between past negative experiences and current beliefs about medical treatments or science. "COVID arm" was an unexpected side effect and thus likely caused updated beliefs about the vaccine. Out of the nonprobability sample of 15,000 respondents in the first wave in February 2021, 9,668 respondents also responded to the second wave conducted in March 2022. Outcome variables were whether experiencing "COVID arm" affected the respondents' 1) confidence in vaccine safety, 2) willingness to take the next dose of COVID-19 vaccines, 3) acknowledgment of the importance of vaccination, and 4) confidence in science. We measured the impact of experience with "COVID arm" on changes in the probability that survey respondents would respond affirmatively to questions posed about the issues listed above.

RESULTS

Experiencing "COVID arm" significantly lowered confidence in the safety of vaccination by 4.3 percentage points, which was approximately 6% of the sample mean for the first wave, and lowered the probability of taking a second dose of the COVID-19 vaccine by 1.5 percentage points. These adverse impacts were observed after conditioning background characteristics and prior confidence in vaccination. Experiencing "COVID arm" affected neither the acknowledged importance of vaccination nor confidence in science in a statistically significant way.

CONCLUSIONS

An unexpected and uncomfortable shock regarding beliefs about a treatment decreases willingness to take the treatment. An appropriate public health policy should account for this effect.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The survey was preregistered with the American Economic Association's RCT Registry (Fukai et al., 2022).

The Safety and Effectiveness of mRNA Vaccines Against SARS-CoV-2

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has resulted in numerous deaths worldwide, along with devastating economic disruptions, and has posed unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems around the world. In the wake of COVID-19's emergence in 2019, a variety of vaccine technologies were formulated and developed, including those that drew from the technology employed in messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines, designed to curb the disease's transmission and manage the pandemic. mRNA vaccine has several advantages over traditional ones, and hence its development has received considerable attention recently. Researchers believe the mRNA vaccine technology will emerge as the leading technology because it is potent, inexpensive, rapidly developed, and safe. This article provides an overview of mRNA vaccines with a special focus on the efficacy and safety of the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccines against the different variants of COVID-19 and compare them with the Oxford-AstraZeneca (viral vector) and Sinopharm (inactivated virus) vaccines. The clinical data reviewed in this article demonstrate that the currently authorized Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccines are highly safe and potent against different variants of COVID-19, especially in comparison with Oxford-AstraZeneca (viral vector) and Sinopharm (inactivated virus) vaccines.

Effects of COVID-19 and Influenza Vaccination on Rheumatic Diseases: Results From a Survey of Patient-Reported Outcomes After Vaccination

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare the occurrence of adverse events (AEs) and disease flares after vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and influenza in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARDs).

METHODS

Between November 2021 and March 2022, a survey was conducted among patients with ARD who received COVID-19 and influenza vaccinations. The questionnaire included 11 mandatory and closed-ended questions, and the following items were collected: medical history, immunization history, type of vaccine, patient-reported AEs, flare-up of the underlying disease after vaccination, and a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 or influenza. We compared the occurrence of vaccine-related adverse reactions to the COVID-19 and influenza vaccines based on the survey results. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify the factors affecting AEs or disease flares and to compare the post-vaccine response to mixed and matched vaccines.

RESULTS

We analyzed 601 adults with ARD who received the COVID-19 vaccine, with a mean age of 49.6 years (80.5% female). A total of 255 participants (42.4%) received a complete course of primary vaccination, 342 (56.9%) completed the booster dose, and 132 (38.6%) received a mixed vaccine. The frequencies of AEs (188 [52.2%] vs. 21 [5.8%]; P < 0.001) and disease flares (58 [16.2%] vs. 5 [1.4%]; P < 0.001) after COVID-19 vaccination were significantly higher than those after influenza vaccination. In the risk factor analysis, previous allergic reaction to other vaccines (odds ratio, 1.95; confidence interval, 1.07-3.70; P = 0.034) was the only factor associated with the occurrence of AEs. There was no difference in the post-vaccine responses between the mixed and matched vaccines.

CONCLUSION

The results of the survey of patients with ARD revealed that patient-reported AEs and underlying disease flares after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine were significantly higher than those after the influenza vaccine.

Side Effects of COVID-19 Vaccines in Pregnant and Lactating Mexican Women and Breastfed Infants: A Survey-Based Study

COVID-19 vaccines' safety has been extensively studied; however, further analysis is required in pregnant women, nursing mothers, and breastfed infants. Our aim was to compare the extension and severity of self-reported COVID-19 vaccine side effects in pregnant and breastfeeding women, and breastfed infants. In this cross-sectional study, COVID-19-vaccinated subjects were enrolled using an online survey in Mexico. Women were classified by pregnancy and breastfeeding status at the time of vaccination (n = 3167). After the first or only dose, there was a trend toward fewer systemic effects in pregnant women (p = 0.06). BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) had a higher frequency of local symptoms in pregnancy. Lactating women experienced fewer local symptoms after the first or single dose (p = 0.04) and the opposite occurred after the second dose (p = 0.001). ChAdOx1 (AstraZeneca) increased the chances of developing both local and systemic symptoms after the first dose but decreased them after the second dose. The severity was similar across groups, although the result of lack of association in pregnancy requires studies with a larger sample size. Irritability was the most reported symptom in breastfed infants. This study contributes to the knowledge about the side effects in pregnant and lactating women, and breastfed babies.

Identifying and Managing Those at Risk for Vaccine-Related Allergy and Anaphylaxis

Immediate hypersensitivity reactions to vaccines, the most severe of which is anaphylaxis, are uncommon events occurring in fewer than 1 in a million doses administered. These reactions are infrequently immunoglobulin E-mediated. Because they are unlikely to recur, a reaction to a single dose of a vaccine is rarely a contraindication to redosing. This narrative review article contextualizes the recent knowledge we have gained from the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic rollout of the new mRNA platform with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines within the much broader context of what is known about immediate reactions to other vaccinations of routine and global importance. We focus on what is known about evidence-based approaches to diagnosis and management and what is new in our understanding of mechanisms of immediate vaccine reactions. Specifically, we review the epidemiology of immediate hypersensitivity vaccine reactions, differential diagnosis for immune-mediated and nonimmune reaction clinical phenotypes, including how to recognize immunization stress-related responses. In addition, we highlight what is known about mechanisms and review the rare but important contribution of excipient allergies and specifically when to consider testing for them as well as other key features that contribute to safe evaluation and management.

A Nationwide Survey of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccinee's Experiences on Adverse Events and Its Associated Factors

BACKGROUND

Although coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines have been distributed worldwide under emergency use authorization, the real-world safety profiles of mRNA vaccines still need to be clearly defined. We aimed to identify the overall incidence and factors associated with adverse events (AEs) following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.

METHODS

We conducted web-based survey from December 2 to 10 in 2021 with a 2,849 nationwide sampled panel. Study participants were individuals who had elapsed at least two-weeks after completing two dosing schedules of COVID-19 vaccination aged between 18-49 years. We weighted the participants to represent the Korean population. The outcome was the overall incidence of AEs following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination and associated factors. We estimated the weighted odds ratios (ORs) using multivariable logistic regression models to identify the factors associated with AEs.

RESULTS

Of the 2,849 participants (median [interquartile range] age, 35 [27-42] years; 51.6% male), 90.8% (n = 2,582) for the first dose and 88.7% (n = 2,849) for the second dose reported AEs, and 3.3% and 4.3% reported severe AEs, respectively. Occurrence of AEs was more prevalent in mRNA-1273 (OR, 2.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.59-2.67 vs. BNT162b2), female sex (1.88; 1.52-2.32), and those with dermatologic diseases (2.51; 1.32-4.77). History of serious allergic reactions (1.96; 1.06-3.64) and anticoagulant medication use (4.72; 1.92-11.6) were associated with severe AEs.

CONCLUSION

Approximately 90% of participants reported AEs following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. Substantial factors, including vaccine type (mRNA-1273), female sex, and dermatologic diseases were associated with AEs. Our findings could aid policymakers in establishing vaccination strategies tailored to those potentially susceptible to AEs.

Vaccine confidence among those living with allergy during the COVID pandemic (ACCORD): A scoping review

Background

Reports of allergic reactions to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines, coupled with an "infodemic" of misinformation, carry the potential to undermine confidence in the COVID-19 vaccines. However, no attempts have been made to comprehensively synthesize the literature on how allergic disease and fear of allergic reactions to the vaccines contribute to hesitancy.

Objectives

Our aim was to review the academic and gray literature on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and allergic reactions.

Methods

We searched 4 databases (CINAHL, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and Embase) using a search strategy developed by content and methodologic experts. No restrictions were applied regarding COVID-19 vaccine type, country of study, or patient age. Eligible articles were restricted to 10 languages.

Results

Of the 1385 unique records retrieved from our search, 60 articles (4.3%) were included. Allergic reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine were rare but slightly more common in individuals with a history of allergic disease. A fifth of the studies (13 of 60 [22%]) discussed vaccine hesitancy due to possibility of an allergic reaction. Additionally, the present review identified research on details of vaccine-related anaphylaxis (eg, a mean and median [excluding clinical trial data] of 12.4 and 5 cases per million doses, respectively) and allergic reactions (eg, a mean and median [excluding clinical trial data] of 489 and 528 cases per million doses, respectively).

Conclusion

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among individuals living with allergy and among those with no history of allergic disease may be affected by fear of an allergic reaction. Despite the low incidence of allergic reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine, fear of such reactions is one of the most commonly cited concerns reported in the literature.

From Immunogen to COVID-19 vaccines: Prospects for the post-pandemic era

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected millions of people and posed an unprecedented burden on healthcare systems and economies worldwide since the outbreak of the COVID-19. A considerable number of nations have investigated COVID-19 and proposed a series of prevention and treatment strategies thus far. The pandemic prevention strategies implemented in China have suggested that the spread of COVID-19 can be effectively reduced by restricting large-scale gathering, developing community-scale nucleic acid testing, and conducting epidemiological investigations, whereas sporadic cases have always been identified in numerous places. Currently, there is still no decisive therapy for COVID-19 or related complications. The development of COVID-19 vaccines has raised the hope for mitigating this pandemic based on the intercross immunity induced by COVID-19. Thus far, several types of COVID-19 vaccines have been developed and released to into financial markets. From the perspective of vaccine use in globe, COVID-19 vaccines are beneficial to mitigate the pandemic, whereas the relative adverse events have been reported progressively. This is a review about the development, challenges and prospects of COVID-19 vaccines, and it can provide more insights into all aspects of the vaccines.

Side effects of Pfizer/BioNTech (BNT162b2) COVID-19 vaccine reported by the Birzeit University community

BACKGROUND

The Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine was the first to receive emergency authorization and approval from the FDA. Therefore, it is preferred by most recipients; however, many people are concerned about the vaccine's side effects. At the time of the study, December 2021, Palestine lacked a national reporting system for monitoring adverse vaccine effects. Therefore, this study investigates the post-vaccine adverse events following the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine administration in Palestine and identifies the occurrence, extent, and severity among university staff, employees, and students at Birzeit University.

METHOD

A questionnaire-based retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted using a university website (Ritaj), social media platforms (e.g., Facebook and Telegram), and in-person interviews. The Chi-square, Fisher's exact, and McNemar's tests were used to investigate significant relationships. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 22.

RESULTS

In total, 1137 participants completed the questionnaire, 33.2% were males, and the mean age was 21.163 years. All participants received at least one dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Approximately one-third of participants reported no adverse effects after receiving the first, second, or third doses (34%, 33.6%, and 32.5%, respectively). The most commonly reported adverse events were fever, chills, headache, fatigue, pain and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, and joint pain. Allergic reactions were reported by 12.7% of the participants; furthermore, participants with a history of allergy or anaphylaxis before vaccination had a significantly higher tendency for post-vaccination allergic reactions. Eight participants reported rare side effects, including 7 (0.6%) cases of thrombocytopenia and one (0.1%) case of myocarditis. Males aged less than 20 years and smokers were significantly less likely to complain of adverse events. The number of reported side effects was significantly higher after the second vaccine dose than after the first dose. Finally, participants infected with COVID-19 before vaccination was significantly associated with side effects such as fever, chills, shortness of breath, and persistent cough.

CONCLUSION

In this study, the most common post- BNT162b2 Vaccination reported self-limiting side effects similar to those reported by Pfizer/BioNTech Company. However, higher rates of allergic reactions were reported in this sample. Rare side effects, such as thrombocytopenia and myocarditis, were reported by 8 participants. COVID vaccines have been developed at an accelerated pace, and vaccine safety is a top priority; therefore, standard monitoring through a national adverse event reporting system is necessary for safety assurance. Continuous monitoring and long-term studies are required to ensure vaccine safety.

COVID-19 vaccine provocation test outcome in high-risk allergic patients: A retrospective study from a tertiary hospital in Indonesia

Background

High COVID-19 vaccine coverage is essential. Patients who are considered high risk for hypersensitivity reactions and have had an allergic reaction to the COVID-19 vaccine are usually referred to an allergist for assessment of vaccination. Administration of a vaccine graded challenge (also known as a provocation test) is an option that can be considered in this population. This primary objective of this study is to describe the outcome of the COVID-19 vaccine provocation test and to understand the predicting factors associated with hypersensitivity reaction after the provocation test as the secondary objective.

Methods

Adult patients with a history of hypersensitivity reaction to the first COVID-19 vaccine and high-allergic patients who underwent COVID-19 vaccine provocation test up until May 2022 were included. A protocol using skin prick test (SPT), intradermal test (IDT), followed by graded challenge was developed for the determined vaccine used.

Results

A total of 232 patients were included in the analysis. Twenty-eight had hypersensitivity to their first COVID-19 vaccine dose and 204 were high risk for allergic reaction. Hypersensitivity reactions occurred in 20 patients (8.6%, 95% CI: 5-12.2%), consisting of 4 reactions after SPT, 9 after IDT, 7 during or after titrated challenge. Half of the reactions were mild; however, 3 patients developed severe reactions. Patients with history of anaphylaxis were more likely to experience hypersensitivity reaction after provocation test (aRR = 2.79, 95% CI: 1.05-7.42).

Conclusion

Provocation test in COVID-19 vaccination has a high success rate in patients with a history of hypersensitivity to the first COVID-19 vaccine and in high allergic patients. History of anaphylaxis is associated with hypersensitivity reaction after a COVID-19 vaccine provocation test.

Value-Based, Cost-Effective Care: The Role of the Allergist-Immunologist

Asthma and allergic disease impact millions of patients and are associated with high costs. Up to 30% of all medical care involves wasted spending. Across the spectrum of care provided by the allergist-immunologist, there are opportunities to improve value and reduce medical waste. Several examples highlight this reality. Evidence suggests that most patients may receive cost-effective care in the management of chronic spontaneous urticaria without the need for laboratory testing. For patients with asthma, although a single maintenance and reliever therapy approach may be cost-effective, insurance-mandated therapy changes are not, and may harm patients. Biologics may be very effective in improving asthma control but are too expensive for this indication-as demonstrated by cost-effectiveness analyses and highlighted by the Institute of Clinical and Economic Review, which concluded that the value-based price for asthma biologics ranges between $6500 and 14,3000 per year. Early introduction may prevent food allergy, but screening before first introduction is neither necessary nor cost-effective, although early salvage food oral immunotherapy may result in improved quality of life and cost savings. Evidence does not support the presence of allergic disease as a risk factor for anaphylaxis to coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination, and risk-stratified vaccination approaches do not appear cost-effective. Allergen immunotherapy is a very cost-effective treatment option. The practice of allergy-immunology has continued to evolve in recent years and can provide a leading example of high-value practice.

Identifying Modifiable Predictors of COVID-19 Vaccine Side Effects: A Machine Learning Approach

Side effects of COVID-19 or other vaccinations may affect an individual's safety, ability to work or care for self or others, and/or willingness to be vaccinated. Identifying modifiable factors that influence these side effects may increase the number of people vaccinated. In this observational study, data were from individuals who received an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine between December 2020 and April 2021 and responded to at least one post-vaccination symptoms survey that was sent daily for three days after each vaccination. We excluded those with a COVID-19 diagnosis or positive SARS-CoV2 test within one week after their vaccination because of the overlap of symptoms. We used machine learning techniques to analyze the data after the first vaccination. Data from 50,484 individuals (73% female, 18 to 95 years old) were included in the primary analysis. Demographics, history of an epinephrine autoinjector prescription, allergy history category (e.g., food, vaccine, medication, insect sting, seasonal), prior COVID-19 diagnosis or positive test, and vaccine manufacturer were identified as factors associated with allergic and non-allergic side effects; vaccination time 6:00-10:59 was associated with more non-allergic side effects. Randomized controlled trials should be conducted to quantify the relative effect of modifiable factors, such as time of vaccination.

Incidence of immediate allergic reactions to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in adults with drug allergies and other allergic disorders

Concerns have been raised about allergic reactions to messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines. A history of allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis to drugs, has been frequently reported in individuals with anaphylaxis to mRNA vaccines. To estimate the rate of immediate allergic reactions in patients with a history of drug allergy or other allergic disorders. We included adult patients who had received at least 1 dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine at the Special Hospital for Pulmonary Diseases between March 1, 2021, and October 1, 2021, and who reported a history of drug allergy or other allergic diseases (asthma, allergic rhinitis, atopic dermatitis, food or insect venom allergy, mastocytosis, idiopathic anaphylaxis, acute or chronic urticaria, and/or angioedema). Immediate allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis, occurring within 4 hours of vaccination were recorded. Six immediate allergic reactions were noted in the cohort of 1679 patients (0.36%). One patient experienced anaphylaxis (0.06%), which resolved after epinephrine administration, and the other reactions were mild and easily treatable. Most patients with a history of allergies can safely receive an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, providing adequate observation periods and preparedness to recognize and treat anaphylaxis.

Allergic Reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine (ARCOV) study: the McGill University Health Center (MUHC) experience

Background

Messenger RNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines have been associated with allergic reactions. A history of anaphylaxis has been suggested as a risk factor for such reactions. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) has been proposed as a possible culprit allergen.

Objective

To investigate possible PEG or polysorbate allergy among patients reporting prior reactions to COVID-19 vaccines or PEG and to report their subsequent tolerance of COVID-19 vaccines.

Methods

From January 1, 2021, to October 31, 2021, adult patients referred to the McGill University Health Centre allergy clinics who were considered at risk of anaphylaxis were prospectively recruited. The entry criteria were any documented history of reaction to a COVID-19 vaccine or reported allergy to PEG or polysorbate. Evaluated patients underwent skin prick testing (SPT) with PEG and polysorbate. After SPT, placebo-controlled vaccine challenges were carried out.

Results

Of the 44 patients recruited, 40 (90.1%) had reacted to the first vaccine dose, with 18 (45%) of them had anaphylactic reaction. All patients underwent SPT and 5 (11.3%) had a positive test result. A total of 39 patients (88.6%) underwent COVID-19 vaccine challenge at the allergy clinic. Most tolerated the vaccine, with 18 (40.1%) received a single full dose, 20 (45.4%) 2 split doses, and 6 (13.6%) a graded dosing protocol. Of the 40 patients who reacted to the first dose, 2 had immediate nonsevere allergic reactions to the second dose.

Conclusion

In this cohort of patients with a history of anaphylaxis and increased risk of allergic reactions to the COVID-19 vaccines, after allergist evaluation, including negative PEG skin testing result, the vaccine was safely administered without any serious adverse events.