Side effects and Immunogenicity following administration of the Sputnik V COVID-19 vaccine in health care workers in Iran

COVID-19 vaccines breakthrough infection and adverse reactions in medical students: a nationwide survey in Iran

Introduction

There are different types of COVID-19 vaccines approved worldwide. Since no national studies focus on vaccine-related adverse reactions and breakthrough cases, this study aimed to investigate the rate of adverse events and COVID-19 infection in medical students in Iran.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included Iranian medical students who received two doses of COVID-19 vaccines. The medical team gathered the demographic characteristics, comorbidities, type of vaccine, adverse events following vaccination, and history of COVID-19 infection data through a phone interview. The frequency of adverse events and breakthrough infection was stratified by vaccine type (ChAdOx1-S, Gam-COVID-Vac, and BIBP-CorV).

Results

A total of 3,591 medical students enrolled in this study, of which 57.02% were females, with a mean age of 23.31 + 4.87. A PCR-confirmed and suspicious-for-COVID-19 breakthrough infection rate of 4.51 and 7.02% was detected, respectively. There was no significant relation between breakthrough infection and gender, BMI, blood groups, and comorbidities. However, there was a significant difference in breakthrough infection rate among different types of vaccines (p = 0.001) and history of COVID-19 infection (p = 0.001). A total of 16 participants were hospitalized due to COVID-19 infection after vaccination for reasons such as dyspnea, abnormal imaging, or decreased oxygen saturation. No severe infection or death was observed in the studied population.

Conclusion

Vaccination prevented severe COVID-19 infection, although a high breakthrough infection rate was evident among Iranian medical students during the Delta variant's peak. Vaccine effectiveness may be fragile during emerging new variants and in high-exposure settings. Moreover, adverse events are rare, and the benefits of vaccination outweigh the side effects. However, many limitations challenged this study, and the results should be cautious.

Exploring the reported adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines among vaccinated Arab populations: a multi-national survey study

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been a major challenge worldwide for the past years with high morbidity and mortality rates. While vaccination was the cornerstone to control the pandemic and disease spread, concerns regarding safety and adverse events (AEs) have been raised lately. A cross-sectional study was conducted between January 1st and January 22nd, 2022, in six Arabic countries namely Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria, Libya, Iraq, and Algeria. We utilized a self-administered questionnaire validated in Arabic which encompassed two main parts. The first was regarding sociodemographic data while the second was about COVID-19 vaccination history, types, doses, and experienced AEs. A multistage sampling was employed in each country, involving the random selection of three governorates from each country, followed by the selection of one urban area and one rural area from each governorate. We included the responses of 1564 participants. The most common AEs after the first and second doses were local AEs (67.9% and 46.6%, respectively) followed by bone pain and myalgia (37.6% and 31.8%, respectively). After the third dose, the most common AEs were local AEs (45.7%) and fever (32.4%). Johnson and Johnson, Sputnik Light, and Moderna vaccines showed the highest frequency of AEs. Factors associated with AEs after the first dose included an increase in age (aOR of 61-75 years compared to the 12-18 years group: 2.60, 95% CI: 1.59-4.25, p = 0.001) and male gender (OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.63-0.82, p < 0.001). The cumulative post-vaccination COVID-19 disease was reported with Sinovac (16.1%), Sinopharm (15.8%), and Johnson and Johnson (14.9) vaccines. History of pre-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection significantly increases the risk of post-vaccination COVID-19 after the first, second, and booster doses (OR: 3.09, CI: 1.9-5.07, p < 0.0001; OR: 2.56, CI: 1.89-3.47, p < 0.0001; and OR: 2.94, CI: 1.6-5.39, p = 0.0005 respectively). In conclusion, AEs were common among our participants, especially local AEs. Further extensive studies are needed to generate more generalizable data regarding the safety of different vaccines.

Immunogenicity and adverse events of the COVID-19 vaccines in healthy and individuals with autoimmune diseases in an Iranian population

Introduction: Recent studies have proposed various COVID-19 vaccines to control the disease and protect susceptible individuals. However, immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in various populations are not well identified yet. Therefore, this study aimed to elucidate the efficacy and safety of the BBIBP-CorV (Sinopharm) and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (Oxford-AstraZeneca) vaccines in healthy subjects and patients with autoimmune diseases.Methods: Study population included 121 healthy subjects and 100 patients with autoimmune diseases. Immunization was performed based on the national vaccination protocols. Of the 221 volunteers, 201 subjects received Sinopharm and 20 cases were vaccinated with Oxford-AstraZeneca. During a 1-year follow-up, the immunogenicity was measured by ELISA before primary vaccination and 1 to 3 months after secondary immunization. Side effects were studied before entering the study and 1 week after the second dose.Results: Vaccination had a positive impact on the induction of immunogenic response (p < .0001). The rates of seropositive vaccine responses were 80% and 75% in subjects vaccinated with the Sinopharm and Oxford-AstraZeneca, respectively. The neutralizing antibody values were significantly higher in subjects with autoimmune diseases than those without autoimmunity (p < .05). The rate of adverse events were 38% and 42% in subjects vaccinated with the Sinopharm and Oxford-AstraZeneca, respectively. The rates of immunogenic responses induced with the Sinopharm and Oxford-AstraZeneca were, respectively, 76% and 81.5% in seropositive subjects, while they were 63.8% and 79.1% in seronegative subjects vaccinated with the Sinopharm and Oxford-AstraZeneca, respectively. Individuals previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 showed a significant reduction in the value of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies compared with seronegative subjects (p < .01-.05). Seropositive individuals vaccinated with the Sinopharm had significantly higher the percentages of vaccine-related adverse events than seronegative persons (p < .05). There was no significant difference between seronegative and seropositive individuals vaccinated with the Oxford-AstraZeneca.Conclusion: Our findings revealed that the Sinopharm and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines are effective in the production of neutralizing antibodies in healthy subjects and patients with autoimmune disorders undergoing immunosuppressive therapies without considerable reactogenicity.

Spontaneous spinal epidural haematoma following COVID-19 vaccination: a case report

Introduction

COVID-19 vaccination side effects are rare but important medical situations. Spine-affecting side effects are amongst the rarest, but exceedingly important. Haemorrhagic spinal manifestations of COVID-19 and its vaccines are less reported with little knowledge about them.

Case presentation

An 80-year-old male who received his first shot of the COVID-19 vaccine had developed COVID-19 pneumonia, weakness, and sensory problems in his legs followed by sphincter incontinence within 5 days period. MRI showed a spontaneous epidural spinal epidural haematoma (SSEDH) in T10-L1. He underwent laminectomy and haematoma evacuation. One month follow-up showed no clinical improvement.

Discussion

To our knowledge, this was the first post-vaccination SSEDH and second in haemorrhagic spinal complications following COVID-19 vaccination. Considering the neuropathogenesis pathway of COVID-19 and its vaccines, there are common mechanisms of action that could potentially justify post-vaccination SSEDH such as seen in COVID-19 infection, itself. Early Neurosurgical intervention and better preoperative neurological status could be a beneficial modifier for favourable clinical outcomes.

Conclusion

SSEDH and COVID-19 vaccine coincidence is a rare clinical event, still no solid association could be scientifically explained. Further studies are required for a reliable pathophysiologic association. Early diagnosis, interdisciplinary medical approach, and faster intervention are the cornerstone of the treatment paradigm.

Vaccination effects on reducing COVID-19 complications in pregnancy: A large-scale report from Iran

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of maternal coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination on preventing severe complications of COVID-19 in pregnant women.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted in pregnant women infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during pregnancy and/or for up to 6 weeks postpartum between September 1, 2021, to January 30, 2022. The data was retrieved from a national database. The pregnant women were divided into two groups of vaccinated and unvaccinated. The proposed outcomes (the need for hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, and mechanical ventilation and products of conception complications) were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Approximately 90 000 pregnant women infected with COVID-19 were included in the study. The data of the vaccinated (19 922) and unvaccinated (70 147) groups were analyzed and compared. Pregnant patients in the vaccinated group had a significantly lower rate of hospitalization (21.2% vs 29.4%) (odds ratio [OR], 0.648 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.625-0.673], P = 0.0001) and intensive care unit admission (3.7% vs 7.8%) (OR, 0.453 [95% CI, 0.382-0.535], P = 0.0001). The need for mechanical ventilation was also lower, although not statistically significant, in the vaccinated group than in the unvaccinated group (30 of 155 [19.4%] vs 418 of 1597 [26.2%]) (OR, 0.677 [95% CI, 0.448-1.024], P = 0.063). Cesarean section (54.3% vs 58.1%) (OR, 0.856 [95% CI, 0.751-0.977], P = 0.021) and stillbirth (0.4% vs 3.6%) (OR, 0.097 [95% CI, 0.026-0.252], P = 0.0001) were also significantly lower in the vaccinated patients. Most pregnant women in the vaccinated group (18 484-96.14%) received Sinopharm BIBP COVID-19 inactivated vaccine. No significant differences were seen in the effect of different types of COVID-19 vaccines on reducing COVID-19 complications in infected pregnant patients.

CONCLUSION

Maternal COVID-19 immunization is effective in reducing COVID-19 complications in infected pregnant women.

Side effects of COVID-19 vaccines in the middle eastern population

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused severe worldwide health concerns since its first description as the SARS-COV-2 virus in December 2019. The wide dissemination of this virus, together with the lack of treatment, prompted vaccine development within a short period of time to elicit a protective immunity against COVID-19. Due to their rapid development, potential subsequent side effects of COVID-19 vaccines were overlooked, which might lead to many health concerns. This is especially true for patients at a greater risk of harm from COVID-19, such as pregnant women, children, and patients with pre-existing chronic diseases. In this review, we provide a summary of common to rare side effects of administrated COVID-19 vaccines in a Middle Eastern population. We have found that the distinction between side effects from COVID-19 vaccines in terms of frequency and severity is attributed to the differences in study populations, gender, and age. Pain at the injection site, fever, headache, fatigue, and muscle pain were the most common reported side effects. Vaccinated subjects with previous COVID-19 infection exhibited an equivalent neutralizing response after just one dose compared to two doses of vaccine. Consequently, individuals who experienced more side effects had significantly higher antibody levels. This indicates that having better immunity correlates with higher antibody levels, leading to a higher frequency of vaccine side effects. Individuals with underlying comorbidities, particularly having known allergies and with illnesses such as diabetes and cancer, might be more prone to post-vaccination side effects. Studies of a high-risk population in Middle Eastern countries are limited. Future studies should be considered to determine long-term side effects, side effects after booster doses, and side effect differences in cases of heterologous and homologous vaccination for better understanding and proper handling of high-risk populations and patients who experience these side effects.

Sputnik V vaccine perception and hesitancy in a tertiary health care centre transformed to Covid-19 vaccine centre: A case study

BACKGROUND

Sputnik V vaccine was approved in India in April 2021 to tackle the pandemic situation. However, there was lack of information on the effects, side effects, and peoples' perception toward it. The present case study aims to evaluate the vaccine coverage, the awareness, and perception toward it and compare the adverse effects after each dose.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A unique case study was conducted in a sample of 200 participants comparing 2 groups of population who took first and second dose of Sputnik V vaccine during June to November 2021. The data were collected by a prevalidated questionnaire, follow-up telephonic interviews focused on knowledge, awareness, side effects of vaccine, and analyzed using descriptive statistics such as frequency, percentages, mean, and standard deviation.

RESULTS

The vaccine coverage for first and second doses were 98.3% and 96.5%, respectively. The mean age of the participant was 29 + 9.5 years and majority 68.5% were males. Seventeen percent experienced the S/E for the vaccine with 9.5% from second dose. There were usual side effects; however, it was more after second dose of vaccination. Friends and healthcare workers were the main source of information (33.5%) and motivation (43%). Majority (73.5%) were aware of the side effects. Forty three point five percent took vaccine attributed to its protective role, availability, and peer pressure. There was no significant association between type of doses and side effects of the respective doses of vaccine.

CONCLUSION

The vaccine coverage was >90%. Participants were well aware of the vaccine and side effects which were more in second dose. However, there was no significant difference between the two doses of vaccine.

Adverse Effects Reported and Insights Following Sinopharm COVID-19 Vaccination

Vaccines are promising strategies for controlling COVID-19; however, COVID-19 vaccine side effects play a central role in public confidence in the vaccine and its uptake process. This study aimed to provide evidence on the post-vaccination early side effects of the BBIBP-CorV (Sinopharm) vaccine. This cross-sectional survey-based study was conducted between November 2021 and January 2022 among recipients of the BBIBP-CorV vaccine, using a questionnaire-based survey. Our final sample consisted of 657 participants, including 392 women. Among the study cases, only 103 (15.7%) participants received one dose of vaccine, and the rest received both doses (N = 554, 84.3%). Systemic symptoms (first dose: N = 187, both doses: N = 128) were the most commonly reported events after vaccination, and among them, injection site pain (first dose: 19.3%, both doses: 12.9%) was the most prevalent adverse effect. All reporting events were mild and resolved in less than 3 days without hospitalization. Among the participants, females and young people aged 35-65 were more prone to manifest side effects (N = 169, 53.3%) after the vaccine injection. Furthermore, our results revealed that the recipients who were suffering from underlying diseases, including diabetes, renal disorder, and respiratory illness, reported fewer adverse responses after vaccination in comparison with healthy individuals. Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 may lead to some adverse reactions in recipients. However, the frequency of post-vaccination early side effects differed in people, but all responses were slight and temporary.

Development of Peptic Ulcer following Second Shot of Sputnik V Vaccine: A Case Report and Literature Review of Rare Side Effects of Sputnik V Vaccine

Considering the global spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), it is expected that vaccination against its causative agent, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), will reduce the related morbidity and mortality. However, the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines and their potential and unknown side effects are a matter of concern. With the ongoing development and implementation of COVID-19 vaccination programs around the world, the side effects, safety, and effectiveness of these vaccines are gradually being reported, providing researchers with valuable information that can affect the production and utilization of the COVID-19 vaccines. The present study intended to report a case of peptic ulcer disease (PUD) development following vaccination with Gam-COVID-Vac, a vector-based COVID-19 vaccine containing two recombinant human adenoviruses (rAd26 and rAd5).

New Onset Autoimmune Diseases after the Sputnik Vaccine

The vertiginous advance for identifying the genomic sequence of SARS-CoV-2 allowed the development of a vaccine including mRNA-based vaccines, inactivated viruses, protein subunits, and adenoviral vaccines such as Sputnik. This study aims to report on autoimmune disease manifestations that occurred following COVID-19 Sputnik vaccination. Patients and Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on patients with new-onset autoimmune diseases induced by a post-COVID-19 vaccine between March 2021 and December 2022, in two referral hospitals in Mexico City and Argentina. The study evaluated patients who received the Sputnik vaccine and developed recent-onset autoimmune diseases. Results: Twenty-eight patients developed recent-onset autoimmune diseases after Sputnik vaccine. The median age was 56.9 ± 21.7 years, with 14 females and 14 males. The autoimmune diseases observed were neurological in 13 patients (46%), hematological autoimmune manifestations occurred in 12 patients (42%), with thrombotic disease observed in 10 patients (28%), and autoimmune hemolytic anemia in two patients (7.1%). Rheumatological disorders were present in two patients (7.1%), and endocrine disorders in one patient (3.5%). Principio del formulario Conclusion: Although the COVID-19 Sputnik vaccine is generally safe, it can lead to adverse effects. Thrombosis and Guillain-Barre were the most frequent manifestations observed in our group of patients.

Adverse Events among Beneficiaries who Received a Dose of Sputnik V Vaccine at a Tertiary Care Hospital in Coastal Karnataka, India

Introduction

Vaccination has played a vital role in containing the COVID-19 pandemic. Sputnik V was the third vaccine approved for emergency use in India. The objectives of the present study were to document the adverse events following Sputnik V vaccination and the factors associated with adverse events.

Methodology

This cross-sectional study was conducted during September and October 2021 in a teaching hospital of Karnataka. Ethics approval and CTRI registration were obtained before collecting the data. All persons receiving at least one dose of vaccine were invited to participate and baseline information was collected after written informed consent. They were contacted telephonically to enquire about the adverse events. Data were entered in Microsoft Excel and analyzed using SPSS Version 23 to describe percentages and proportions.

Results

The median age of 2532 participants was 31 (IQR 25-39) years and 60.4% were males. Minor adverse events were seen among 29.4% participants. Most common symptoms with first dose were fever, vaccination site tenderness, myalgia and headache, and with second dose were fever, myalgia, headache, and vaccination site tenderness. No severe adverse events were reported in our study. The adverse events were seen more among females (P < 0.05) and with the first dose (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Most common adverse events were similar to symptoms suggested by the vaccine manufacturers with fever being the most common one. A follow-up after a longer lag time may be recommended to enquire whether the vaccinees developed serious adverse events.

Side effects of Sputnik V, Oxford-AstraZeneca, Sinopharm, and Covaxin and their associations with other variables among healthcare workers of a tertiary hospital in Iran

BACKGROUND

Misinformation about the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccines' side effects (SEs) has led to concerns about and mistrust of vaccine safety. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccines' SEs.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional survey-based study on the healthcare workers (HCWs) of a tertiary hospital in Iran, the SEs of Sputnik V, Oxford-AstraZeneca, Sinopharm, and Covaxin were evaluated through a face-to-face interview by a researcher-made questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 368 HCWs received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. The prevalence of people with at least one SE was higher among those who received the Oxford-AstraZeneca (95.8 %) and Sputnik V (92.1 %) vaccines than those who received Covaxin (70.5 %) or Sinopharm (66.7 %). Following the first and second doses, injection site pain (50.3 % and 58.2 %), body/muscle pain (53.5 % and 39.4 %), fever (54.5 % and 32.9 %), headache (41.3 % and 36.5 %), and fatigue (44.4 % and 32.4 %) were the most common SEs. Overall, SEs were often initiated within 12 h and subsided within 72 h of vaccination. The prevalence of SEs after the first dose of Sputnik V was higher among those aged ≤ 31 years (93.3 %) than those aged > 31 years (80.5 %). In the Sputnik V group, the number of SEs experienced after the first dose was higher in women with underlying diseases than those without such diseases. Furthermore, the body mass index of participants with SEs was lower than that of participants without SEs.

CONCLUSION

Compared to Sinopharm or Covaxin, the Sputnik V and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines were associated with a higher prevalence of SEs, a greater number of SEs per individual, and more severe SEs.

COVID-19 Therapeutics: Use, Mechanism of Action, and Toxicity (Vaccines, Monoclonal Antibodies, and Immunotherapeutics)

SARS-CoV-2 emerged in December 2019 and led to the COVID-19 pandemic. Efforts to develop therapeutics have led to innovations such as mRNA vaccines and oral antivirals. Here we provide a narrative review of the biologic therapeutics used or proposed to treat COVID-19 during the last 3 years. This paper, along with its companion that covers xenobiotics and alternative remedies, is an update to our 2020 paper. Monoclonal antibodies prevent progression to severe disease, are not equally effective across variants, and are associated with minimal and self-limited reactions. Convalescent plasma has side effects like monoclonal antibodies, but with more infusion reactions and less efficacy. Vaccines prevent progression for a larger part of the population. DNA and mRNA vaccines are more effective than protein or inactivated virus vaccines. After mRNA vaccines, young men are more likely to have myocarditis in the subsequent 7 days. After DNA vaccines, those aged 30-50 are very slightly more likely to have thrombotic disease. To all vaccines we discuss, women are slightly more likely to have an anaphylactic reaction than men, but the absolute risk is small.

Reactogenicity within the first week after Sinopharm, Sputnik V, AZD1222, and COVIran Barekat vaccines: findings from the Iranian active vaccine surveillance system

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the reactogenicity effects of COVID-19 vaccines, used in Iran.

METHODS

At least 1000 people were followed up with phone calls or self-report in a mobile application within 7 days after vaccination. Local and systemic reactogenicities were reported overall and by subgroups.

RESULTS

The presence of one or more local and systemic adverse effects after the first dose of vaccines was 58.9% [(95% Confidence Intervals): 57.5-60.3)] and 60.5% (59.1-61.9), respectively. These rates were reduced to 53.8% (51.2-55.0) and 50.8% (48.8-52.7) for the second dose. The most common local adverse effect reported for all vaccines was pain in the injection site. During the first week after the first dose of vaccines, the frequency of the pain for Sinopharm, AZD1222, Sputnik V, and Barekat was 35.5%, 86.0%, 77.6%, and 30.9%, respectively. The same rates after the second dose were 27.3%, 66.5%, 63.9%, and 49.0%. The most common systemic adverse effect was fatigue. In the first dose, it was 30.3% for Sinopharm, 67.4% for AZD1222, 47.6% for Sputnik V, and 17.1% for Barekat. These rates were reduced to 24.6%, 37.1%, 36.5%, and 19.5%, in the second dose of vaccines. AZD1222 had the highest local and systemic adverse effects rates. The odds ratio of local adverse effects of the AZD1222 vaccine compared to the Sinopharm vaccine were 8.73 (95% CI 6.93-10.99) in the first dose and 4.14 (95% CI 3.32-5.17) in the second dose. Barekat and Sinopharm had the lowest frequency of local and systemic adverse effects. Compared to Sinopharm, systemic adverse effects were lower after the first dose of Barekat (OR = 0.56; 95% CI 0.46-0.67). Reactogenicity events were higher in women and younger people. Prior COVID-19 infection increased the odds of adverse effects only after the first dose of vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

Pain and fatigue were the most common reactogenicities of COVID-19 vaccination. Reactogenicities were less common after the second dose of the vaccines. The adverse effects of AZD1222 were greater than those of other vaccines.

An update on COVID-19: SARS-CoV-2 variants, antiviral drugs, and vaccines

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a highly contagious and pathogenic virus that first appeared in late December 2019. This SARS-CoV-2 causes an infection of an acute respiratory disease called "coronavirus infectious disease-2019 (COVID-19). The World Health Organization (WHO) declared this SARS-CoV-2 outbreak a great pandemic on March 11, 2020. As of January 31, 2023, SARS-CoV-2 recorded more than 67 million cases and over 6 million deaths. Recently, novel mutated variants of SARS-CoV are also creating a serious health concern worldwide, and the future novel variant is still mysterious. As infection cases of SARS-CoV-2 are increasing daily, scientists are trying to combat the disease using numerous antiviral drugs and vaccines against SARS-CoV-2. To our knowledge, this is the first comprehensive review that summarized the dynamic nature of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, SARS-CoV-2 variants (a variant of concern and variant of interest), antiviral drugs and vaccines utilized against SARS-CoV-2 at a glance. Hopefully, this review will enable the researcher to gain knowledge on SARS-CoV-2 variants and vaccines, which will also pave the way to identify efficient novel vaccines against forthcoming SARS-CoV-2 strains.

COVID-19 Ramifications: A Scientific Approach to Bridge the Existing Gap between COVID Vaccines Hesitancy and Effectiveness

The 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has been a major dilemma all over the world since December 2019. Several types of COVID-19 vaccines were developed for public utilization to halt the widespread of the disease; however, vaccine hesitancy is one major factor that prevents a successful control of this pandemic. This study aimed to summarize the different kinds of available COVID-19 vaccines and their effectiveness, and to assess the associated factors regarding vaccine hesitancy of the general population to bridge the gap existing between the two factors.1 3

Assessment of early and post COVID-19 vaccination antibody response in healthcare workers: a multicentre cross-sectional study on inactivated, mRNA and vector-based vaccines

In this multicentre study, we compared the status of antibody production in healthcare personnel (HCP) before and after vaccination using different brands of COVID-19 vaccines between March 2021 and September 2021. Out of a total of 962 HCP enrolled in our study, the antibody against the S1 domain of SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 48.3%, 95.5% and 96.2% of them before, after the first and the second doses of the vaccines, respectively. Our results showed post-vaccination infection in 3.7% and 5.9% of the individuals after the first and second doses of vaccines, respectively. The infection was significantly lower in HCP who presented higher antibody titres before the vaccination. Although types of vaccines did not show a significant difference in the infection rate, a lower infection rate was recorded for AstraZeneca after the second vaccination course. This rate was equal among individuals receiving a second dose of Sinopharm and Sputnik. Vaccine-related side effects were more frequent among AstraZeneca recipients after the first dose and among Sputnik recipients after the second dose. In conclusion, our results showed diversity among different brands of COVID-19 vaccines; however, it seems that two doses of the vaccines could induce an antibody response in most of HCP. The induced immunity could persist for 3-5 months after the second vaccination course.

Short-term Side Effects of COVID-19 Vaccines (Astrazeneca, Sputnik-V, and Sinopharm) in Health Care Workers: A Cross-Sectional Study in Iran

Background: The occurrence of side effects of vaccines plays an important role in their acceptance by people. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the side effects of COVID-19 vaccines (Sputnik-V, AstraZeneca, and Sinopharm) in Neyshabur health care workers (HCWs). Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed to evaluate the side effects of COVID-19 vaccines among the HCWs of the Neyshabur University of Medical Sciences from July 31, 2021, to September 6, 2021, by using a self-report checklist. We sent our checklist via an internet link to collect data such as demographic data of participants, previous COVID-19 infection (PCR+), vaccine information and side effects of vaccines. Mean, median and standard deviation were used to determine descriptive statistics and a logistic regression model was also used to determine the relationship between the type of vaccine and its side effects. Results: 317 participants filled out the checklist; among them 47% (N= 149), 21.14% (N= 67), and 31.86% (N= 101) have been vaccinated with Sputnik-V, AstraZeneca, and Sinopharm, respectively. The percentage of side effects after the first dose was 62.15% (N= 197). The Percentage of local side effects was 76% (N= 241) and systemic side effects were 29.36% (N= 95). The most common side effects in all three vaccines were injection site pain (75.08%, N= 240), muscle pain (62.46%, N=198) and headache (52.05%, N=165). Also, the odds ratio of injection site pain, chill and sweating in those who received the AstraZeneca vaccine was 3.9(95% CI, 1.7-9.3), 3.7 (95% CI, 1.8-7.3), and 3.2 (95% CI, 1.7-63), of those who received the Sputnik V vaccine (p ≤ 0.001). Conclusion: The most common side effects among our participants were injection site pain, muscle pain, and headache. Most of the post-vaccination side effects are mild to moderate in severity and self-limited. Reported side effects were more common in recipients with AstraZeneca than in those with Sputnik-V and Sinopharm.

Signs, Symptoms, and Side-Effects Presented by Different Types of COVID-19 Vaccines: A Prospective Cohort Study

The concern about post-COVID-19 vaccine complications still remains. In addition, the evidence on Sinopharm, Sputnik V, Covaxin, and, in particular, COVIran Barekat, as well as comparisons between them by dosage after post-vaccination, is scarce. This study aimed to investigate and compare the prevalence of self-reported post-vaccination signs and symptoms following the first and second doses of different types of COVID-19 vaccines. Research design and methods: This prospective cohort study was conducted on more than 1500 health professionals who had received at least one dose of any type of Sputnik V, Sinopharm, Oxford AstraZeneca, Covaxin, and COVIran Barekat vaccines in Iran. The survey questionnaire was sent to participants online, 28 days after receiving each dose of the vaccine. Results: About 73% of health professionals reported at least one post-vaccination sign or symptom, developing mostly within the first 12 h (69.9%) and lasting up to 12 h (59.0%). Pain and tenderness at the injection site, fever, and muscle pain were the most common post-vaccination signs and symptoms in all vaccines, which were significantly higher in the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine (p < 0.001) for both the first and second doses. The incidence rate of all post-vaccination signs and symptoms was significantly higher in the first dose than in the second dose (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine showed the highest incidence rate, onset, and lasting time of signs and symptoms in both doses; however, they were not life-threatening. The onset time of signs and symptoms was significantly higher for the COVIran Barekat and Oxford AstraZeneca vaccines in both the first and second doses.

A Comprehensive Review on the Current Vaccines and Their Efficacies to Combat SARS-CoV-2 Variants

Since the first case of Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in 2019, SARS-CoV-2 infection has affected many individuals worldwide. Eventually, some highly infectious mutants-caused by frequent genetic recombination-have been reported for SARS-CoV-2 that can potentially escape from the immune responses and induce long-term immunity, linked with a high mortality rate. In addition, several reports stated that vaccines designed for the SARS-CoV-2 wild-type variant have mixed responses against the variants of concern (VOCs) and variants of interest (VOIs) in the human population. These results advocate the designing and development of a panvaccine with the potential to neutralize all the possible emerging variants of SARS-CoV-2. In this context, recent discoveries suggest the design of SARS-CoV-2 panvaccines using nanotechnology, siRNA, antibodies or CRISPR-Cas platforms. Thereof, the present comprehensive review summarizes the current vaccine design approaches against SARS-CoV-2 infection, the role of genetic mutations in the emergence of new viral variants, the efficacy of existing vaccines in limiting the infection of emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants, and efforts or challenges in designing SARS panvaccines.

A comprehensive insight into current control of COVID-19: Immunogenicity, vaccination, and treatment

The healthy immune system eliminates pathogens and maintains tissue homeostasis through extraordinarily complex networks with feedback systems while avoiding potentially massive tissue destruction. Many parameters influence humoral and cellular vaccine responses, including intrinsic and extrinsic, environmental, and behavioral, nutritional, perinatal and administrative parameters. The relative contributions of persisting antibodies and immune memory as well as the determinants of immune memory induction, to protect against specific diseases are the main parameters of long-term vaccine efficacy. Natural and vaccine-induced immunity and monoclonal antibody immunotherapeutic, may be evaded by SARS-CoV-2 variants. Besides the complications of the production of COVID-19 vaccinations, there is no effective single treatment against COVID-19. However, administration of a combined treatment at different stages of COVID-19 infection may offer some cure assistance. Combination treatment of antiviral drugs and immunomodulatory drugs may reduce inflammation in critical COVID-19 patients with cytokine release syndrome. Molnupiravir, remdesivir and paxlovid are the approved antiviral agents that may reduce the recovery time. In addition, immunomodulatory drugs such as lactoferrin and monoclonal antibodies are used to control inflammatory responses in their respective auto-immune conditions. Therefore, the widespread occurrence of highly transmissible variants like Delta and Omicron indicates that there is still a lot of work to be done in designing efficient vaccines and medicines for COVID-19. In this review, we briefly discussed the immunological response against SARS-CoV-2 and the vaccines approved by the World Health Organization (WHO) for COVID-19, their mechanisms, and side effects. Moreover, we mentioned various treatment trials and strategies for COVID-19.

Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia

Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) is primarily a complication of adenoviral vector-based covid-19 vaccination. In VITT, thrombocytopenia and thrombosis mediated by anti-platelet factor 4 (PF4) antibodies can be severe, often characterized by thrombosis at unusual sites such as the cerebral venous sinus and splanchnic circulation. Like in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and spontaneous HIT, VITT antibodies recognize PF4-polyanion complexes and activate PF4-treated platelets but additionally bind to un-complexed PF4, a critical finding that could be leveraged for more specific detection of VITT. Intravenous immunoglobulin and non-heparin-based anticoagulation remain the mainstay of treatment. Second dose/boosters of mRNA covid-19 vaccines appear safe in patients with adenoviral vector-associated VITT. Emerging data is consistent with the possibility that ultra-rare cases of VITT may be seen in the setting of mRNA and virus-like particle (VLP) technology-based vaccinations and until more data is available, it is prudent to consider VITT in the differential diagnosis of all post-vaccine thrombosis and thrombocytopenia reactions.

Viral vector and nucleic acid vaccines against COVID-19: A narrative review

After about 2 years since the first detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections in Wuhan, China, in December 2019 that resulted in a worldwide pandemic, 6.2 million deaths have been recorded. As a result, there is an urgent need for the development of a safe and effective vaccine for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Endeavors for the production of effective vaccines inexhaustibly are continuing. At present according to the World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 vaccine tracker and landscape, 153 vaccine candidates are developing in the clinical phase all over the world. Some new and exciting platforms are nucleic acid-based vaccines such as Pfizer Biontech and Moderna vaccines consisting of a messenger RNA (mRNA) encoding a viral spike protein in host cells. Another novel vaccine platform is viral vector vaccine candidates that could be replicating or nonreplicating. These types of vaccines that have a harmless viral vector like adenovirus contain a genome encoding the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, which induces significant immune responses. This technology of vaccine manufacturing has previously been used in many human clinical trials conducted for adenoviral vector-based vaccines against different infectious agents, including Ebola virus, Zika virus, HIV, and malaria. In this paper, we have a review of nucleic acid-based vaccines that are passing their phase 3 and 4 clinical trials and discuss their efficiency and adverse effects.

Sputnik-V reactogenicity and immunogenicity in the blood and mucosa: a prospective cohort study

Sputnik-V (Gam-COVID-Vac) is a heterologous, recombinant adenoviral (rAdv) vector-based, COVID-19 vaccine now used in > 70 countries. Yet there is a shortage of data on this vaccine's performance in diverse populations. Here, we performed a prospective cohort study to assess the reactogenicity and immunologic outcomes of Sputnik-V vaccination in Kazakhstan. COVID-19-free participants (n = 82 at baseline) were followed at day 21 after Sputnik-V dose 1 (rAd5) and dose 2 (rAd26). Self-reported local and systemic adverse events were captured using questionnaires. Blood and nasopharyngeal swabs were collected to perform SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic and immunologic assays. We observed that most of the reported adverse events were mild-to-moderate injection site or systemic reactions, no severe or potentially life-threatening conditions were reported, and dose 1 appeared to be more reactogenic than dose 2. The seroconversion rate was 97% post-dose 1, remaining the same post-dose 2. The proportion of participants with detectable virus neutralization was 83% post-dose 1, increasing to 98% post-dose 2, with the largest relative increase observed in participants without prior COVID-19 exposure. Dose 1 boosted nasal S-IgG and S-IgA, while the boosting effect of dose 2 on mucosal S-IgG, but not S-IgA, was only observed in subjects without prior COVID-19. Systemically, vaccination reduced serum levels of growth regulated oncogene (GRO), which correlated with an elevation in blood platelet count. Overall, Sputnik-V dose 1 elicited both blood and mucosal SARS-CoV-2 immunity, while the immune boosting effect of dose 2 was minimal. Thus, adjustments to the current vaccine dosing regimen are necessary to optimize immunization efficacy and cost-effectiveness. While Sputnik-V reactogenicity is similar to that of other COVID-19 vaccines, the induced alterations to the GRO/platelet axis warrant investigation of the vaccine's effects on systemic immunology.

Analysis of immunization time, amplitude, and adverse events of seven different vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 across four different countries

Background

Scarce information exists in relation to the comparison of seroconversion and adverse events following immunization (AEFI) with different SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Our aim was to correlate the magnitude of the antibody response to vaccination with previous clinical conditions and AEFI.

Methods

A multicentric comparative study where SARS-CoV-2 spike 1-2 IgG antibodies IgG titers were measured at baseline, 21-28 days after the first and second dose (when applicable) of the following vaccines: BNT162b2 mRNA, mRNA-1273, Gam-COVID-Vac, Coronavac, ChAdOx1-S, Ad5-nCoV and Ad26.COV2. Mixed model and Poisson generalized linear models were performed.

Results

We recruited 1867 individuals [52 (SD 16.8) years old, 52% men]. All vaccines enhanced anti-S1 and anti-S2 IgG antibodies over time (p<0.01). The highest increase after the first and second dose was observed in mRNA-1273 (p<0.001). There was an effect of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection; and an interaction of age with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, Gam-COVID-Vac and ChAdOx1-S (p<0.01). There was a negative correlation of Severe or Systemic AEFI (AEs) of naïve SARS-CoV-2 subjects with age and sex (p<0.001); a positive interaction between the delta of antibodies with Gam-COVID-Vac (p=0.002). Coronavac, Gam-COVID-Vac and ChAdOx1-S had less AEs compared to BNT162b (p<0.01). mRNA-1273 had the highest number of AEFIs. The delta of the antibodies showed an association with AEFIs in previously infected individuals (p<0.001).

Conclusions

The magnitude of seroconversion is predicted by age, vaccine type and SARS-CoV-2 exposure. AEs are correlated with age, sex, and vaccine type. The delta of the antibody response only correlates with AEs in patients previously exposed to SARS-CoV-2.

Registration number

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT05228912.

The effect of ACE inhibitors and ARBs on outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19

Background

Contradictory opinions exist regarding the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in patients with hypertension, which is the most common comorbidity associated with COVID-19. Herein, the effects of ACEIs and ARBs on outcomes of COVID-19 patients were evaluated.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, the outcomes of COVID-19 patients were compared between patients who received pretreatment ACEIs or ARBs and those who did not.

Results

The incidence of moderate and severe forms of COVID-19 was significantly higher in patients taking ACEI/ARB drugs (P-value = 0.012). Also, patients taking ACEI/ARB drugs (P-value = 0.034), patients with hypertension (P-value = 0.011), and patients with dyslipidemia (P-value = 0.011) experienced more severe forms of COVID-19. There was an association between increased length of hospital stay and dyslipidemia (P-value = 0.033) and the use of ACEI/ARB drugs (P-value = 0.041), while no correlation was found between other parameters in univariate linear regression analysis as well as multivariate linear regression. There was an association between increased mortality of patients with increasing age (P-value < 0.001), BMI greater than 30 kg/m² (P-value = 0.02), asthma (P-value = 0.003), and dyslipidemia (P-value = 0.045).

Conclusions

ACEI/ARB drugs put COVID-19 patients at high risk for moderate to severe forms of COVID-19 and higher length of hospital stay. Although, it is notable that these drugs did not significantly affect specific adverse outcomes of COVID-19, such as the need for admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), length of ICU stay, ventilation, and mortality.

Side Effects of COVID-19 Inactivated Virus vs. Adenoviral Vector Vaccines: Experience of Algerian Healthcare Workers

Healthcare workers were prioritized in vaccination campaigns globally because they are exposed to the highest risk of contamination by SARS-CoV-2. This study evaluated the self-reported post-vaccination side effects of inactivated (BBIBP-CorV and CoronaVac) and adenoviral vector-based (AZD1222, Gam-COVID-Vac and Ad26.COV2.S) vaccines among Algerian healthcare workers using a validated questionnaire. The final analysis included 721 healthcare workers, with a predominance of females (59.1%) and younger individuals 20–30 years old (39.4%). Less than half (49.1%) of the respondents reported at least one local side effect, while 53.8% reported at least one systemic side effect. These side effects were more prevalent among viral vector vaccinees than inactivated virus vaccinees. The most common local side effects were injection site pain (39%) and arm pain (25.4%), while fatigue (34.4%), fever (28.4%), headache (24.8%) and myalgia (22.7%) were the most prevalent systemic side effects. The side effects appeared earlier among inactivated virus vaccines recipients and generally lasted for 2 to 3 days for the two vaccinated groups. The risk factors associated with a higher prevalence of side effects included female gender, allergic individuals, individuals with regular medication, those who contracted the COVID-19 disease and those who received two doses for both inactivated and viral-based vaccines groups. Despite the higher prevalence of post-vaccination side effects among adenoviral vector vaccines recipients, both vaccines groups were equally effective in preventing symptomatic infections, and no life-threatening side effects were reported in either vaccine group.

Adverse effects following COVID-19 vaccination in Iran

Background

Vaccination is a key intervention to prevent COVID-19. Many vaccines are administered globally, yet there is not much evidence regarding their safety and adverse effects. Iran also faces this challenge, especially as data regarding the Sputnik V vaccine is sparse. Therefore, the aim of this study is to determine the adverse effects of the most commonly used vaccines in Iran.

Methods

Using a retrospective cohort study design, 6600 subjects aged 18 years or older who had received two doses of any of the three COVID-19 vaccines (Sinopharm, AstraZeneca, and Sputnik V) were selected using a random sampling method between March and August 2021. Subjects were asked about any adverse effects of the vaccines by trained interviewers via telephone interview. Vaccine-related adverse effects in individuals during the first 72 h and subsequently following both doses of the vaccines were determined. The demographic variables, type of administered vaccine, adverse effects, and history of the previous infection with COVID-19 were collected. Descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation) and analytical statistics (Chi-squared and Wilcoxon tests) were performed at a 95% significance level using STATA software version 15 (STATA Corp, College Station, TX, USA).

Results

From 6600 participants, 4775 responded (response rate = 72.3%). Of the participants, 1460 (30.6%) received the AstraZeneca vaccine, 1564 (32.8%) received the Sinopharm vaccine and 1751 (36.7%) received the Sputnik V vaccine. 2653 participants (55.56%) reported adverse effects after the first dose and 1704 (35.7%) after the second dose. Sputnik V caused the most adverse effects with 1449 (82.7%) vaccine recipients reporting symptoms after the first or second dose, compared with 1030 (70.5%) for AstraZeneca and only 585 (37.4%) for the Sinopharm vaccine. The most common adverse effects after the first dose were fatigue (28.37%), chill/fever (26.86%), and skeletal pain (22.38%). These three adverse effects were the same for the second dose, although their prevalence was lower.

Conclusions

In this study, we demonstrate that the Sputnik V vaccine has the highest rate of adverse effects, followed by the AstraZeneca and Sinopharm vaccines. COVID-19 vaccines used in Iran are safe and there were no reports of serious adverse effects.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12879-022-07411-5.

Heterologous gam-covid-vac (sputnik V) / mRNA-1273 (moderna) vaccination induces a stronger humoral response than homologous sputnik V in a real-world data analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the homologous prime-boost vaccination scheme of Gam-COVID-Vac (Sputnik V, SpV) to its heterologous combination with mRNA-1273 (Moderna, Mod) vaccine.

METHODS

SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike (S)-receptor binding domain (RBD) IgG concentration was assessed three to seven weeks after complete vaccination. Reactogenicity was evaluated by declared side events and medical assistance required until day 7 post-boost.

RESULTS

Of 190 participants enrolled, 105 received homologous SpV/SpV and the remaining heterologous SpV/Mod vaccination scheme, respectively. Median (interquartile range, IQR) age was 54 (37-63) years, 132 out of 190 (69.5%) were female and 46 out of 190 (24.2%) individuals had a prior confirmed COVID-19. Anti-S-RBD IgG median (IQR) titers were significantly higher for SpV/Mod [2511 (1476-3992) BAU/mL] than for SpV/SpV [582 (209-1609) BAU/mL, p<0.001] vaccination scheme. In a linear model adjusted for age, gender, time to the serological assay and time between doses, SpV/Mod [4.154 (6.585-615.554), p<0.001] and prior COVID [3.732 (8.641-202.010), p<0.001] were independently associated with higher anti-S-RBD IgG values. A higher frequency of mild and moderate adverse effects was associated with the heterologous scheme [20 of 85 (23.5%) vs 13 of 105 (12,4%), p=0.043) and 27 of 85 (31,8%) vs 14 of 105 (13,3%), p=0.002], respectively, although it was well tolerated by all individuals and no medical assistance was required, although it was well tolerated by all individuals and no medical assistance was required.

CONCLUSION

The heterologous SpV/Mod combination against SARS-CoV-2 is well tolerated and significantly increases humoral immune response as compared to the homologous SpV/SpV immunization.

Adenovirus-based vaccines-a platform for pandemic preparedness against emerging viral pathogens

Zoonotic viruses continually pose a pandemic threat. Infection of humans with viruses for which we typically have little or no prior immunity can result in epidemics with high morbidity and mortality. These epidemics can have public health and economic impact and can exacerbate civil unrest or political instability. Changes in human behavior in the past few decades-increased global travel, farming intensification, the exotic animal trade, and the impact of global warming on animal migratory patterns, habitats, and ecosystems-contribute to the increased frequency of cross-species transmission events. Investing in the pre-clinical advancement of vaccine candidates against diverse emerging viral threats is crucial for pandemic preparedness. Replication-defective adenoviral (Ad) vectors have demonstrated their utility as an outbreak-responsive vaccine platform during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. Ad vectors are easy to engineer; are amenable to rapid, inexpensive manufacturing; are relatively safe and immunogenic in humans; and, importantly, do not require specialized cold-chain storage, making them an ideal platform for equitable global distribution or stockpiling. In this review, we discuss the progress in applying Ad-based vaccines against emerging viruses and summarize their global safety profile, as reflected by their widespread geographic use during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Relationship between blood clots and COVID-19 vaccines: A literature review

SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is one of the most critical pandemics during human civilization. Several therapeutic strategies for COVID-19 management have been offered; nonetheless, none of them seems to be sufficiently beneficial. In effect, vaccines have been proffered as a viable option. The critical issue now is to concentrate on protecting individuals against illness through immunization. One of the causes for concern among the researchers, physicians, and generally the whole community from the onset of vaccination has been the adverse effects (specifically blood clots) that may be observed after the injection of the COVID-19 vaccine. In some countries, such concerns have even resulted in the temporary or permanent discontinuation or abandonment of the application of some vaccines (especially AstraZeneca and Janssen). By evaluating rigorous studies published on this subject, the present article is aimed at identifying the association between blood clot incidence and COVID-19 vaccination. Various methods for producing the COVID-19 vaccines are analyzed, along with their possible pros and cons as well as common and rare side effects, especially VITT and blood clots. Finally, the differences of various vaccines on thrombotic events, WHO recommendations for VITT treatment, and blood clots statics are discussed.

Rheumatologists’ knowledge and perception of COVID-19 and related vaccines: the vaXurvey2 online survey

The study aimed to explore the experience of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) infection and vaccine adverse events (AEs) among rheumatologists. A validated questionnaire was distributed as a Google form to rheumatologists across the country via social networking sites from late December 2021 till early January 2022. The questionnaire included questions regarding participants' socio-demographic details, COVID-19 infection and vaccination details with special emphasis on AEs. Out of 246 responses, 228 were valid. 200 (81.3%) responders had received the vaccine. The mean age of the 228 participants was 37.9 ± 8.5 years, 196 were females and 32 males (F:M 6.1:1) from 18 governorates across the country. Comorbidities were present in 54 subjects (27%). There was a history of highly suspicious or confirmed COVID-19 infection in 66.7% that were all managed at home. The COVID-19 vaccine was received by 200 and a booster dose of 18.5%. Obesity and musculoskeletal involvement co-morbidities were present only in those with AEs (9.1% and 5.5% respectively). AEs were present in 82%; 66.7% had injection-site tenderness, 50% fatigue, 35.5% fever, 15% chills, 42.5% myalgia, 14.5% arthralgia, 8% low back pain, headache 31%, dizziness 10%, sleepliness 16% and 15% developed post-vaccine. There were no differences according to the geolocation regarding the occurrence of COVID-19 infection (p = 0.19) or AEs post-vaccine (p = 0.58). The adverse events were mostly mild to moderate and tolerable which makes this work in agreement with other studies that support the broad safety of the vaccine in favor of the global benefit from mass vaccination.

The Side Effects and Adverse Clinical Cases Reported after COVID-19 Immunization

COVID-19 remains a deadly disease that poses a serious threat to humanity. COVID-19 vaccines protect the public and limit viral spread. However, public acceptance is significantly dependent on the efficacy and side effects (SEs) of the vaccinations being produced. Four important mechanisms have been examined for COVID-19 vaccines: DNA-based, mRNA-based, protein-based, and inactivated viruses. Vaccination safety research was formerly limited to manufacturer-sponsored studies, but numerous additional cross-sectional survey-based studies conducted globally have contributed to the generation of vaccine-related safety data reports. Twenty-seven studies and twenty-four case reports published-up till 2021 were overviewed for the presentation of SEs and their severity. Injection site pain remained the most dominant localized SE, while headache and fatigue were the most prevalent systemic SEs. Most studies reported that all vaccinations were safe, with very little or no adverse effects, but the nature of SEs was reported to be more persistent in DNA- and mRNA-based vaccines, while inactivated viral vaccines were associated with longer-duration SEs. Overall, SEs were found to be more dominant in women and youngsters. Case reports of adverse reactions have also been documented, but there is still a need to find out their pathological linkage with the COVID-19 vaccination.

Reported Adverse Effects and Attitudes among Arab Populations Following COVID-19 Vaccination: A Large-Scale Multinational Study Implementing Machine Learning Tools in Predicting Post-Vaccination Adverse Effects Based on Predisposing Factors

Background: The unprecedented global spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has imposed huge challenges on the healthcare facilities, and impacted every aspect of life. This has led to the development of several vaccines against COVID-19 within one year. This study aimed to assess the attitudes and the side effects among Arab communities after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine and use of machine learning (ML) tools to predict post-vaccination side effects based on predisposing factors. Methods: An online-based multinational survey was carried out via social media platforms from 14 June to 31 August 2021, targeting individuals who received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine from 22 Arab countries. Descriptive statistics, correlation, and chi-square tests were used to analyze the data. Moreover, extensive ML tools were utilized to predict 30 post vaccination adverse effects and their severity based on 15 predisposing factors. The importance of distinct predisposing factors in predicting particular side effects was determined using global feature importance employing gradient boost as AutoML. Results: A total of 10,064 participants from 19 Arab countries were included in this study. Around 56% were female and 59% were aged from 20 to 39 years old. A high rate of vaccine hesitancy (51%) was reported among participants. Almost 88% of the participants were vaccinated with one of three COVID-19 vaccines, including Pfizer-BioNTech (52.8%), AstraZeneca (20.7%), and Sinopharm (14.2%). About 72% of participants experienced post-vaccination side effects. This study reports statistically significant associations (p < 0.01) between various predisposing factors and post-vaccinations side effects. In terms of predicting post-vaccination side effects, gradient boost, random forest, and XGBoost outperformed other ML methods. The most important predisposing factors for predicting certain side effects (i.e., tiredness, fever, headache, injection site pain and swelling, myalgia, and sleepiness and laziness) were revealed to be the number of doses, gender, type of vaccine, age, and hesitancy to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Conclusions: The reported side effects following COVID-19 vaccination among Arab populations are usually non-life-threatening; flu-like symptoms and injection site pain. Certain predisposing factors have greater weight and importance as input data in predicting post-vaccination side effects. Based on the most significant input data, ML can also be used to predict these side effects; people with certain predicted side effects may require additional medical attention, or possibly hospitalization.

Pharmacist-directed Sputnik V (GAM-COVID-VAC) surveillance program: a prospective observational study in Southern India

OBJECTIVES

The study underwent to evaluate the adverse events, the incidence of COVID-19 and the participant's attitude and perception towards the vaccine following Sputnik V administration through an active surveillance program.

METHODS

The prospective observational study was conducted four months in the Sputnik V vaccination center that enrolled 700 participants. Sociodemographic details, medical histories, COVID-19 incidences and adverse events following immunization (AEFI) of each sample were collected through face-to-face interviews and a telephonic feedback system. A self-prepared and validated questionnaire addressed their acceptances and perceptions towards the vaccination drive.

RESULTS

Our study reported 42.1% of AEFIs after the first dose and 9.1% after the second. Fever, pain at the injection site, body pain, headache and fatigue were predominant, while dizziness and diarrhoea were rare. However, AEFIs were not influenced by the presence of comorbidities (p > 0.05). On the other hand, there were limited post immunization (1.8%) COVID-19 patients and that too with minor severity (p < 0.01). Our participants were overall satisfied with the Sputnik V immunization. However, those presented with AEFIs on the consecutive three days depicted slightly declined gratification (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our pharmacist-directed surveillance program on Sputnik V showed fewer events of AEFIs and negligible occurrence of COVID19 following immunization. Moreover, the population had appreciable attitude and positive perceptions towards Sputnik V vaccination.

New-onset autoimmune phenomena post COVID-19 vaccination

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has led to an unprecedented setback for global economy and health. Vaccination is one of the most effective intervention to substantially reduce severe disease and death due to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Vaccination programs are being rolled out globally, but most of these vaccines have been approved without extensive studies on their side effects and efficacy. Recently, new-onset autoimmune phenomena after COVID-19 vaccination have been reported increasingly (e.g., immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia, autoimmune liver diseases, Guillain-Barré syndrome, IgA nephropathy, rheumatoid arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus, etc.). Molecular mimicry, the production of particular autoantibodies and the role of certain vaccine adjuvants seem to be substantial contributors to autoimmune phenomena. However, whether the association between COVID-19 vaccine and autoimmune manifestations is coincidental or causal remains to be elucidated. Here, we summarize the emerging evidence about autoimmune manifestations occurring in response to certain COVID-19 vaccines. Although information pertaining to the risk of autoimmune disease as a consequence of vaccination is controversial, we merely propose our current understanding of autoimmune manifestations associated with COVID-19 vaccine. In fact, we do not aim to disavow the overwhelming benefits of mass COVID-19 vaccination in preventing COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. These reports could help guide clinical assessment and management of autoimmune manifestations after COVID-19 vaccination.