Protocol of safe vaccination against COVID-19 in patients with high risk of allergic reactions

Analysis of Allergy and Hypersensitivity Reactions to COVID-19 Vaccines According to the EudraVigilance Database

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic presented a new challenge in modern medicine: the development of vaccines was followed by massive population vaccinations. A few reports on post-vaccination allergic reactions have made patients and medical personnel uneasy as to COVID-19 vaccines' allergic potential. Most of the studies in this area to date have been small, and some that were based on global databases skipped most of the allergic diseases and concentrated only on anaphylaxis. We aimed to analyze the incidence of serious allergic reactions based on the EudraVigilance (EV) database, regardless of the reported symptoms and allergy mechanism.

METHODS

The total number of administrated vaccine doses was extracted on 5 October 2023 from Vaccine Tracker and included all administrations since vaccinations began in the European Economic Area (EEA). Data on serious allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines were extracted from the EudraVigilance database with the same time point. The code names of 147 allergic symptoms or diseases were used.

RESULTS

The frequency of serious allergic reactions per 100,000 administered vaccine doses was 1.53 for Comirnaty, 2.16 for Spikevax, 88.6 for Vaxzevria, 2.11 for Janssen, 7.9 for Novavax, 13.3 for VidPrevtyn Beta, and 3.1 for Valneva. The most prevalent reported reactions were edema (0.46) and anaphylaxis (0.40). Only 6% of these reactions were delayed hypersensitivity-oriented.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall frequency of potential serious allergic reactions to COVID-19 is very rare. Therefore, COVID-19 vaccines seem to be safe for human use. The lowest frequency of allergic reaction was observed for Comirnaty and the highest for Vaxzevria.

Incidence and Outcomes of COVID-19 Vaccine Hypersensitivity Reactions and Success of COVID-19 Vaccine Provocation Tests Post Previous COVID-19 Vaccine Hypersensitivity

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to high mortality rates. There have been reports of hypersensitivity reactions with mild to severe symptoms. The COVID-19 vaccine provocation test is a vaccination protocol for individuals with a history of hypersensitivity. This study aims to determine the benefits of COVID-19 vaccine provocation tests in patients with a history of hypersensitivity reactions to COVID-19 vaccines and its influencing factors. Objective: To determine the incidence, severity, outcome of hypersensitivity reactions, and success of the COVID-19 vaccine provocation test. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted, using subjects taken from medical record data at the RSCM who had received COVID-19 vaccination with a history of hypersensitivity. Data was taken from the COVID-19 vaccination records at the RSCM, BPJS Health Primary Care application. Results: From a total of 29,036 doses of the COVID-19 vaccine, 44 patients experienced hypersensitivity reactions. As many as 38.64% did not continue vaccination, 2.27% experienced mild hypersensitivity, and 59.44% were successfully vaccinated. Conclusions: People with a history of hypersensitivity reactions to COVID-19 vaccines can still receive subsequent COVID-19 vaccinations at healthcare facilities equipped with anaphylaxis kits and immunology allergists.

The usability of testing skin reaction applying skin prick tests with Comirnaty (Pfizer, USA) vaccine in detecting the risk of developing post-vaccination immediate hypersensitivity response (anaphylaxis) after administration of this vaccine

Introduction

COVID-19 vaccines became a relevant element of prevention during COVID-19 pandemic. It is worth highlighting the importance of severe allergic post-vaccination reactions.

Aim

To evaluate the usability of skin reaction tests using skin prick tests with Comirnaty (Pfizer, USA) vaccine in risk detection of the post-vaccine immediate hypersensitivity reaction (anaphylaxis) after administration of this vaccine [PvIHR(A)].

Material and methods

The analysis embraces 102 people, 85 women and 17 men with a history of immediate hypersensitivity (anaphylaxis) [IHR(A)]. Detailed medical history was collected and skin prick tests were made among participants. The positive and negative test results were illustrated in Figure 1.

Results

As it stands in Table 1, considering all participants of the study, a positive result of the skin prick tests was obtained only in 2 cases, a negative result in 99 and 1 result was questionable. The two positive results were found in participants from a group with a previous PvIHR(A) in their past medical history and they decided not to get vaccinated. The one questionable result was of a person that had PvIHR(A) after administration of the first dose of Comirnaty vaccine (Pfizer, USA). This person decided to get vaccinated again and there was no PvIHR(A) observed.

Conclusions

COVID-19 vaccination involves a low risk of anaphylaxis. Purposefulness of providing the skin prick tests using the mRNA vaccine is questionable, due to their low sensitivity and low specificity.

Clinical Application of In Vitro Tests for COVID-19 Vaccine Delayed Hypersensitivity Diagnostics

Drug hypersensitivity reactions can be classified as immediate or delayed. While diagnostic options for immediate reactions are well developed and standardized, delayed reactions (in many cases type IV according to Gell and Coombs) are a challenge for allergy work-up. In recent years, some in vitro markers have been proposed and used for delayed reactions, such as contact dermatitis. Primary strategy: Avoidance is difficult to achieve, especially for COVID-19 vaccinations, when immunity against infection is extremely important. The aim of our study was to evaluate the application of in vitro delayed hypersensitivity tests in COVID-19 vaccines. Seven patients with a positive history of severe delayed drug allergy were enrolled. Vein blood was collected to stimulate cells with the tested vaccines (Comirnaty, Janssen, Spikevax) and excipients with the assessment of CD40L, CD69, IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-10, IFNgamma, TNFalfa, and intracellular markers: granulysin and INFgamma. In addition, basophile activation tests, patch tests, skin prick tests, and intradermal tests were performed with the tested vaccine. Finally, the decision was made to either administer a vaccine or resign. Two out of seven patients were considered positive for drug hypersensitivity in the in vitro test according to the high vaccine stimulation index measured with CD69 (6.91 and 12.18) and CD40L (5.38 and 15.91). All patch tests, BATs, and skin tests were negative. Serum interleukin measurements were inconclusive as the impact of the vaccine itself on the immunity system was high. Intracellular markers gave uncertain results due to the lack of stimulation on the positive control. CD69 and CD40L could be reliable in vitro markers for delayed hypersensitivity to COVID-19 vaccines. Patch tests, skin tests, BATs, and serum interleukins did not confirm their usefulness in our study.

Protection against Severe Illness versus Immunity-Redefining Vaccine Effectiveness in the Aftermath of COVID-19

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have played a pivotal role in reducing the risk of developing severe illness from COVID-19, thus helping end the COVID-19 global public health emergency after more than three years. Intriguingly, as SARS-CoV-2 variants emerged, individuals who were fully vaccinated did get infected in high numbers, and viral loads in vaccinated individuals were as high as those in the unvaccinated. However, even with high viral loads, vaccinated individuals were significantly less likely to develop severe illness; this begs the question as to whether the main effect of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines is to confer protection against severe illness or immunity against infection. The answer to this question is consequential, not only to the understanding of how anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines work, but also to public health efforts against existing and novel pathogens. In this review, we argue that immune system sensitization-desensitization rather than sterilizing immunity may explain vaccine-mediated protection against severe COVID-19 illness even when the SARS-CoV-2 viral load is high. Through the lessons learned from COVID-19, we make the case that in the disease's aftermath, public health agencies must revisit healthcare policies, including redefining the term "vaccine effectiveness."

Desensitization Protocols for Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines in Patients with High Risk of Allergic Reactions

Vaccines for SAR-CoV-2 are the most effective preventive treatment able to reduce the risk of contracting the infection and experiencing worse outcomes whenever the infection is contracted. Despite their rarity, hypersensitivity reactions to the anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine have been described and could become the reason not to complete the vaccination. Desensitization protocols for other vaccines have been described and validated, while the use of this approach for anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines is still anecdotal. We herein describe our experience with 30 patients with previous allergic reactions to anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines or to any of their excipients, proving that they are effective and safe; only two patients experienced hypersensitivity reaction symptoms during the desensitization procedure. Moreover, in this article, we propose desensitization protocols for the most common anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

[Suspected allergy to COVID-19 vaccines: A retrospective study of 320 patients]

Introduction

The health context with COVID-19 pandemic has led to fast development of many vaccines against the SarS-Cov-2 virus. Four of them are currently available in France and contain polyethylene glycol (PEG) or polysorbate 80 as excipients, already described as causing anaphylaxis. French recommendations have been suggested by allergology authorities and proposed a course of action in the event of a suspected allergy to these vaccines. Thus, allergies to excipients were the only contraindication to COVID-19 vaccination. Our main objective was to determine the impact of these allergology vaccine recommendations on the management of these patients. Our secondary objective was to determine prevalence of true allergies to these vaccines.

Materials and methods

We conducted a unicentric descriptive retrospective study with all patients over 18 years of age referred for an allergological opinion before or after an injection of one of the anti-COVID-19 vaccines. Nineteen patients were classified into different interest groups, based on french recommendations.

Results

The vast majority of patients did not require a pre-vaccination allergological assessment. Indeed, only 25 patients received skin tests prior to vaccination. The rest of patients were able to be vaccinated without allergological assessment. Patients not vaccinated due to allergy to excipients represent less than 1% of the population (n = 3/320).

Conclusion

French recommendations made it possible to vaccinate the vast majority of patients included in our study. Allergy to PEG, polysorbate or their derivatives, the only contraindication to anti-COVID vaccination, according to the recommendations of February 2021, remains rare. Today, several authors propose tolerance inductions allowing the vaccination of patients allergic to PEGs or their derivatives with good tolerance.

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.

The conundrum of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine-induced anaphylaxis

Novel messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines have proven to be effective tools against coronavirus disease 2019, and they have changed the course of the pandemic. However, early reports of mRNA vaccine-induced anaphylaxis resulted in public alarm, contributing toward vaccine hesitancy. Although initial reports were concerning for an unusually high rate of anaphylaxis to the mRNA vaccines, the true incidence is likely comparable with other vaccines. These reactions occurred predominantly in young to middle-aged females, and many had a history of allergies. Although initially thought to be triggered by polyethylene glycol (PEG), lack of reproducibility of these reactions with subsequent dosing and absent PEG sensitization point away from an IgE-mediated PEG allergy in most. PEG skin testing has poor posttest probability and should be reserved for evaluating non-vaccine-related PEG allergy without influencing decisions for subsequent mRNA vaccination. Immunization stress-related response can closely mimic vaccine-induced anaphylaxis and warrants consideration as a potential etiology. Current evidence suggests that many individuals who developed anaphylaxis to the first dose of an mRNA vaccine can likely receive a subsequent dose after careful evaluation. The need to understand these reactions mechanistically remains critical because the mRNA platform is rapidly finding its way into other vaccinations and therapeutics.

Evaluation of pediatric patients with suspected polyethylene glycol and polysorbate allergy before mRNA SARS-CoV2 vaccination

mRNA vaccines, particularly, have been associated with an increased risk of allergic reactions and rarely anaphylaxis. Although rare, vaccine reactions can cause significant anxiety and fear in the population, leading to indecision and vaccine refusal. This study aimed to retrospectively evaluate the role of polyethylene glycol (PEG) sensitivity in vaccination decision-making in pediatric patients at high risk of allergy or with suspected allergic reactions to the first dose of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) vaccine. Seventeen enrolled patients were found to have decreased readiness to receive the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine after developing hypersensitivity to multiple and/or injectable drugs. Skin testing was performed. A basophil activation test with PEG-2000 and 4000 was performed on three patients who were ineligible for skin prick tests. Nine patients with negative tests received the vaccine without complications. One patient had urticarial angioedema despite negative tests. Three patients with positive tests did not agree to desensitization with the mRNA vaccine, and one of them was vaccinated with the inactivated COVID-19 vaccine. Four patients recurred despite negative tests. The general recommendation for patients describing severe reactions to drugs, foods, and allergens, such as toxins that do not contain the adjuvants of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, is to be routinely vaccinated with safety precautions. Excipients such as PEG and polysorbate-80 used in COVID-19 vaccines could be potential allergens, but this hypothesis is unclear. The predictive values of these adjuvants for skin testing and in vitro testing are controversial. Further research is needed on the hypersensitivity reactions of adjuvants, the predictive values of skin tests, and etiopathogenesis.

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.

Successful mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination and Colonoscopy After Oral Desensitization in a Patient With Polyethylene Glycol Allergy

Anaphylaxis to polyethylene glycol (PEG) is rare and mainly occurs with the use of laxatives containing PEG. Recently, an increasing number of PEG allergies have been reported, particularly those related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines. mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, such as the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccines, contain PEG2000 as an excipient and are contraindicated when allergy to a vaccine component exist. We report a 55-year-old woman's history as a case of successful mRNA COVID-19 vaccination and colonoscopy after oral desensitization to PEG in a patient with PEG allergy who required both COVID-19 vaccination and colon evaluation. Allergy to PEG was diagnosed based on clinical history, skin test results, and basophil histamine release testing. Oral desensitization effectively suppressed histamine release from basophils in response to PEG stimulation, suggesting that oral desensitization using PEG-based laxatives may be an effective treatment option for patients with allergy to the substance.