Allergic reactions including anaphylaxis after receipt of the first dose of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine - United States, December 14-23, 2020

Comirnaty-induced cardiopulmonary distress and other symptoms of complement-mediated pseudo-anaphylaxis in a hyperimmune pig model: Causal role of anti-PEG antibodies

Background

Comirnaty, Pfizer-BioNTech's polyethylene-glycol (PEG)-containing Covid-19 vaccine, can cause hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs), or rarely, life-threatening anaphylaxis in a small fraction of immunized people. A causal role of anti-PEG antibodies (Abs) has been proposed, but causality has not yet proven in an animal model. The aim of this study was to provide such evidence using pigs immunized against PEG, which displayed very high levels of anti-PEG antibodies (Abs). We also aimed to find evidence for a role of complement activation and thromboxane A2 release in blood to explore the mechanism of anaphylaxis.

Methods

Pigs (n = 6) were immunized with 0.1 mg/kg PEGylated liposome (Doxebo) i.v., and the rise of anti-PEG IgG and IgM were measured in serial blood samples with ELISA. After ∼2-3 weeks the animals were injected i.v. with 1/3 human dose of the PEGylated mRNA vaccine, Comirnaty, and the hemodynamic (PAP, SAP) cardiopulmonary (HR, EtCO2,), hematological (WBC, granulocyte, lymphocyte and platelet counts) parameters and blood immune mediators (anti-PEG IgM and IgG antibodies, thromboxane B2, C3a) were measured as endpoints of HSRs (anaphylaxis).

Results

The level of anti-PEG IgM and IgG rose 5-10-thousand-fold in all of 6 pigs immunized with Doxebo by day 6, after which time all animals developed anaphylactic shock to i.v. injection of 1/3 human dose of Comirnaty. The reaction, starting within 1 min involved maximal pulmonary hypertension and decreased systemic pulse pressure amplitude, tachycardia, granulo- and thrombocytopenia, and skin reactions (flushing or rash). These physiological changes or their absence were paralleled by C3a and TXB2 rises in blood.

Conclusions

Consistent with previous studies, these data show a causal role of anti-PEG Abs in the anaphylaxis to Comirnaty, which involves complement activation, and, hence, it represents C activation-related pseudo-anaphylaxis. The setup provides the first large-animal model for mRNA-vaccine-induced anaphylaxis in humans.

Adverse reactions to cosmetic implants after COVID-19 vaccination: A literature review

BACKGROUND

As the world's population of people vaccinated with the COVID-19 vaccine increases, adverse reactions are increasingly being reported. There have been progressive reports of the effects of COVID-19 vaccination on cosmetic fillers or prostheses, but they have not been reviewed based on their clinical morphologic patterns. This article reviewed the progress of research on adverse reactions to cosmetic implants after COVID-19 vaccination.

METHODS

We researched the English-language literature up to October 15, 2022, using predefined keywords to identify relevant studies about adverse reactions to cosmetic implants after the COVID-19 vaccination, collecting patient characteristics, implant type, the time interval between vaccination and implantation or injection, time of onset, symptoms, treatments, and outcomes.

RESULTS

Among the adverse reactions to implants associated with COVID-19 vaccination, we distinguished between (1) injectable fillers and (2) surgical prosthetic implants. The most common adverse reactions were at the site of hyaluronic acid injection and breast prosthesis after Pfizer vaccination, mainly DIRs, and mainly manifested as edema, rash, fever, and capsular contracture. This paper also reported the possible causes, treatments of DIRs, and limitations of current studies.

CONCLUSIONS

In this article, we attempted to investigate and discuss all the adverse reactions of cosmetic implants related to COVID-19 vaccination in the current literature, to unmask these reactions and make a more accurate assessment of vaccine safety.

Use of adrenaline to manage suspected anaphylaxis following COVID-19 vaccination: An Australian retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The rate of anaphylaxis following COVID-19 vaccinations is estimated to be 2-11 cases per million doses administered. However, adrenaline is occasionally used in individuals who are later diagnosed with immunisation stress-related responses, as their initial presenting signs and symptoms can appear similar to that of anaphylaxis. This study aims to describe the clinical profile of individuals who had received adrenaline following a COVID-19 vaccine and their subsequent revaccination outcomes.

METHODS

We examined notifications of cases who had received adrenaline following a COVID-19 vaccine in New South Wales, Australia. The cases were classified into Brighton Collaboration Case Definition (BCCD) for anaphylaxis, their clinical presentation, management and subsequent revaccination outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

From 22 February 2021 to 30 September 2021, there were 222 cases where adrenaline was administered. Of these, 32 (14 %) fulfilled Level 1 BCCD, 59 (27%) Level 2, 2 (1%) Level 3, 97 (44%) Level 4 and 32 (14 %) Level 5. The most commonly reported symptoms were sensation of throat closure (n = 116, 52%), difficulty breathing (n = 82, 37%) and nausea (n = 55, 25 %). Of the 176 (79%) individuals who proceeded to further vaccination, 89 (51%) received the same vaccine formulation and only 14 (8%) experienced another allergic adverse event with 9 (5%) receiving adrenaline.

CONCLUSION

Less than one in five individuals who received adrenaline met Level 1 BCCD criteria for anaphylaxis. Many reactions that were treated with adrenaline had little to no diagnostic certainty of anaphylaxis and in such cases repeat vaccination had a high likelihood of being tolerated. Increased awareness and education on objective signs and symptoms of anaphylaxis is required to ensure appropriate use of adrenaline.

Management of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine-induced cutaneous complications: A comprehensive literature review

Despite the numerous reports of cutaneous manifestations associated with vaccines for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the relationship between COVID-19 vaccines and cutaneous side effects remains unevaluated. In this review, we examine these manifestations and their management. Reported dermatoses included injection-site reaction (early and delayed), type I allergic reaction, morbilliform eruption, pityriasis rosea, Sweet syndrome, lichen planus, psoriasis, herpes zoster reactivation, erythema multiforme, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN). The most common COVID-19 vaccination-related cutaneous manifestations are delayed local reactions, approximately 66% of which are associated with the Moderna vaccine, and 33% with the Pfizer vaccine. Aside from mild injection-site reactions, severe reactions include anaphylaxis and TEN. Most reactions, except for Stevens-Johnson syndrome and anaphylaxis, though unpredictable and unpreventable are mild and can be treated symptomatically. Findings from this review should allow primary care physicians and dermatologists to reach faster diagnosis and initiate prompt intervention.

Sex-Related Differences in the Pharmacological Response in SARS-CoV-2 Infection, Dyslipidemia, and Diabetes Mellitus: A Narrative Review

Pharmacological responses vary by sex in several illnesses. This narrative review summarizes sex variations in pharmaceutical response in SARS-CoV-2 infection, dyslipidemia, and diabetes mellitus. Infection with SARS-CoV-2 is more severe and deadly in men than women. This may be attributed to immunological responses, genetics, and hormones. Some research shows that men may respond better to genomic vaccinations and females to antiviral medications such as remdesivir (Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech). In dyslipidemia, women tend to have greater HDL-C and lower LDL-C than men. Some studies show that females may need lower statin dosages than men to obtain equal LDL-C reductions. Ezetimibe co-administered with a statin significantly improved lipid profile indicators in men compared to women. Statins reduce dementia risk. Atorvastatin decreased dementia risk in males (adjusted HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.88-0.97), whereas lovastatin lowered dementia risk in women (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58-0.95). In diabetes mellitus, evidence suggests that females may have a higher risk of developing certain complications such as diabetic retinopathy and neuropathy, despite having lower rates of cardiovascular disease than males. This could be the result of differences in hormonal influences and genetic factors. Some research shows females may respond better to oral hypoglycemic medications such as metformin. In conclusion, sex-related differences in pharmacological response have been observed in SARS-CoV-2 infection, dyslipidemia, and diabetes mellitus. Further research is needed to better understand these differences and to develop personalized treatment strategies for males and females with these conditions.

DNA Vaccines for Epidemic Preparedness: SARS-CoV-2 and Beyond

We highlight the significant progress in developing DNA vaccines during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Specifically, we provide a comprehensive review of the DNA vaccines that have progressed to Phase 2 testing or beyond, including those that have received authorization for use. DNA vaccines have significant advantages with regard to the rapidity of production, thermostability, safety profile, and cellular immune responses. Based on user needs and cost, we compare the three devices used in the SARS-CoV-2 clinical trials. Of the three devices, the GeneDerm suction device offers numerous benefits, particularly for international vaccination campaigns. As such, DNA vaccines represent a promising option for future pandemics.

Characteristics of immune response profile in patients with immediate allergic and autoimmune urticarial reactions induced by SARS-CoV-2 vaccines

Severe allergic reactions following SARS-COV-2 vaccination are generally rare, but the reactions are increasingly reported. Some patients may develop prolonged urticarial reactions following SARS-COV-2 vaccination. Herein, we investigated the risk factors and immune mechanisms for patients with SARS-COV-2 vaccines-induced immediate allergy and chronic urticaria (CU). We prospectively recruited and analyzed 129 patients with SARS-COV-2 vaccine-induced immediate allergic and urticarial reactions as well as 115 SARS-COV-2 vaccines-tolerant individuals from multiple medical centers during 2021-2022. The clinical manifestations included acute urticaria, anaphylaxis, and delayed to chronic urticaria developed after SARS-COV-2 vaccinations. The serum levels of histamine, IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-8, IL-17 A, TARC, and PARC were significantly elevated in allergic patients comparing to tolerant subjects (P-values = 4.5 × 10^-5-0.039). Ex vivo basophil revealed that basophils from allergic patients could be significantly activated by SARS-COV-2 vaccine excipients (polyethylene glycol 2000 and polysorbate 80) or spike protein (P-values from 3.5 × 10^-4 to 0.043). Further BAT study stimulated by patients' autoserum showed positive in 81.3% of patients with CU induced by SARS-COV-2 vaccination (P = 4.2 × 10^-13), and the reactions could be attenuated by anti-IgE antibody. Autoantibodies screening also identified the significantly increased of IgE-anti-IL-24, IgG-anti-FcεRI, IgG-anti-thyroid peroxidase (TPO), and IgG-anti-thyroid-related proteins in SARS-COV-2 vaccines-induced CU patients comparing to SARS-COV-2 vaccines-tolerant controls (P-values = 4.6 × 10^-10-0.048). Some patients with SARS-COV-2 vaccines-induced recalcitrant CU patients could be successfully treated with anti-IgE therapy. In conclusion, our results revealed that multiple vaccine components, inflammatory cytokines, and autoreactive IgG/IgE antibodies contribute to SARS-COV-2 vaccine-induced immediate allergic and autoimmune urticarial reactions.

Adverse effects, perceptions and attitudes related to BNT162b2, mRNA-1273 or JNJ-78436735 SARS-CoV-2 vaccines: Population-based cohort

Long-term control of SARS-CoV-2 requires effective vaccination strategies. This has been challenged by public mistrust and the spread of misinformation regarding vaccine safety. Better understanding and communication of the longer-term and comparative experiences of individuals in the general population following vaccination are required. In this population-based longitudinal study, we included 575 adults, randomly selected from all individuals presenting to a Swiss reference vaccination center, for receipt of BNT162b2, mRNA1273, or JNJ-78436735. We assessed the prevalence, onset, duration, and severity of self-reported adverse effects over 12 weeks following vaccination. We additionally evaluated participants' perceptions of vaccines, trust in public health authorities and pharmaceutical companies, and compliance with public health measures. Most participants reported at least one adverse effect within 12 weeks following vaccination. Adverse effects were mostly mild or moderate, resolved within three days, and rarely resulted in anaphylaxis or hospitalizations. Female sex, younger age, higher education, and receipt of mRNA-1273 were associated with reporting adverse effects. Compared to JNJ-78436735 recipients, a higher proportion of mRNA vaccine recipients agreed that vaccination is important, and trusted public health authorities. Our findings provide real-world estimates of the prevalence of adverse effects following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and highlight the importance of transparent communication to ensure the success of current or future vaccination campaigns.

The role of machine learning in health policies during the COVID-19 pandemic and in long COVID management

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic is arguably one of the most challenging health crises in modern times. The development of effective strategies to control the spread of SARS-CoV-2 were major goals for governments and policy makers. Mathematical modeling and machine learning emerged as potent tools to guide and optimize the different control measures. This review briefly summarizes the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic evolution during the first 3 years. It details the main public health challenges focusing on the contribution of mathematical modeling to design and guide government action plans and spread mitigation interventions of SARS-CoV-2. Next describes the application of machine learning methods in a series of study cases, including COVID-19 clinical diagnosis, the analysis of epidemiological variables, and drug discovery by protein engineering techniques. Lastly, it explores the use of machine learning tools for investigating long COVID, by identifying patterns and relationships of symptoms, predicting risk indicators, and enabling early evaluation of COVID-19 sequelae.

Colitis with Hypereosinophilia following the Second Dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine: A Case Report with a Literature Review

A 61-year-old man presented with a 7-day history of watery diarrhea and loss of appetite after receiving the second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Laboratory studies showed significant eosinophilia and an elevated IgE level (white cell count, 18.4×10⁹/L; eosinophil count, 9.5×10⁹/L; and IgE level, 540 IU/L). Symptoms resolved 10 days after vaccination without any steroids or antiallergic medications, and the eosinophil count had also returned to within normal limits 2 months later. Several cases of eosinophilic disorders following receipt of any type of injectable COVID-19 vaccine have been reported, so the etiology should be examined.

A Case Series and Literature Review of Telogen Effluvium and Alopecia Universalis after the Administration of a Heterologous COVID-19 Vaccine Scheme

COVID-19 vaccines have positively changed the course of the pandemic. They entered the market after only one year of the initial trials, which that yielded positive results in terms of safety and efficacy. However, after inoculating billions of people in the most extensive vaccination campaign worldwide, mild but common and some rare but potentially fatal adverse events have been reported. Among several self-reported adverse events, hair loss and alopecia have been linked to COVID-19 mRNA or viral vector vaccines. We tracked and followed a series of five cases with post-vaccine telogen effluvium and alopecia development in Ecuador. Here, we reported the clinical presentation of two women and three men with the diagnosis of post-vaccine hair loss. All patients received a heterologous vaccination scheme (mRNA and attenuated virus vaccine) with an additional viral vector booster associated with the apparition of telogen effluvium and alopecia universalis between 3 and 17 days after the vaccine was administered.

The associations between COVID-19 vaccination and psychological disorders among healthcare workers in China

INTRODUCTION

COVID-19 has caused an unprecedented psychological affection that might impact the nationwide vaccination program in China. This study was to explore the association between COVID-19 vaccination and psychological disorders among healthcare workers.

METHODS

The study included 1571 healthcare workers from an anonymous online survey. Participants' sociodemographic characteristics, uptake data for the COVID-19 vaccine, and scores of the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21) were collected. Nonparametric tests were conducted to compare the mean scores of DASS-21 between different subgroups. The potential factors related to psychological disorders of healthcare workers were analyzed using logistic regression.

RESULTS

The vaccination rate was 69.6 %, the incidence of vaccine-related adverse events was 35.13 %, and the prevalence of depression, anxiety, and stress were 24.8 %, 32 %, and 33.4 % in this study, respectively. Compared to vaccinated participants (single-dose and double-dose vaccines), unvaccinated participants got significantly higher mean scores of DASS-21 (p < 0.05 for all). Vaccinated participants who suffered no adverse events scored significantly lower than those who suffered 1-2 or ≥3 adverse events (p < 0.05 for all). Vaccination was negatively associated with higher depression, anxiety, and stress, however, the number of vaccine-related adverse events was positively associated with them.

LIMITATIONS

As this is a cross-sectional study, we could only speculate on the causality.

CONCLUSIONS

An obvious impact of the psychological disorders on the COVID-19 vaccine coverage and related adverse events was detected in this study. Public health agencies should attach great importance to the psychological states of our citizens before getting vaccinated.

Immunogenicity, effectiveness, safety and psychological impact of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines

In December 2019, a new single-stranded RNA coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, appeared in China and quickly spread around the world leading to a pandemic. Infection with SARS-CoV-2 generates symptoms ranging from asymptomatic to severe, occasionally requiring hospitalization in intensive care units, and, in more severe cases, leading to death. Scientists and researchers around the world have made a real race against time to develop various vaccines to slow down and stop the spread of the virus. In addition to conventional viral vector vaccines, new generation mRNA vaccines, BNT152b2 (Comirnaty) and mRNA-1273 (Spikevax), have been developed respectively by Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna. These vaccines act on immune cells to induce an immune response with the production of specific antibodies against Spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, and to stimulate the differentiation of T and B memory cells. The objective of this review is to provide a detailed picture of the validity of these new vaccines and the safety of vaccination. Not only was the immunogenic effect of mRNA vaccines evaluated, but also the psychosocial impact they had on the population. The data collected show that this type of vaccine can also be an excellent candidate for future treatment and eradication of possible new pathologies with viral and non-viral etiology.

Reporting of Allergic Reactions During Pfizer-BioNTech BNTT162B2 Vaccination in Israel

Background

In December 2020, the Israeli Ministry of Health launched a national vaccination campaign against SARS-CoV-2. Concomitant sporadic reports on anaphylactic responses in other countries raised safety concerns at the outset of this operation.

Objective

To characterize reports on allergic reactions to coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines.

Methods

Allergy events were reported by health care professionals throughout the country to Israeli Ministry of Health Division of Epidemiology via a Web-based computerized national vaccine registry. The study period was from December 19, 2020 to September 13, 2021, during which 14,475,979 injections were administered.

Results

Allergic reactions were reported in 463 subjects, 99.3% of whom received Pfizer-BioNTech BNTT162B2. The reporting rate was 106 per million in December 2020. From January to May 2021, a reduction was observed to 66, 18, 14, eight, and zero per million, and reporting remained low until September. Mean age of subjects was 48.9 ± 16.7 years (range, 15-96 years) with a female preponderance of 78%. Epinephrine was administered in 34 subjects. Validated immediate allergy was observed in only 37 cases (8%), suggesting 2.5 to 3.3 bona fide reactions per million. In subjects with reactions classified as severe (n = 46), plausible allergy was identified in 36% to 41% of cases. A history of allergy was associated with high false reporting of immediate reactions (83%). Allergic events after the first dose did not compromise adherence to subsequent doses.

Conclusions

Excessive reporting of allergy declined over time and did not affect adherence to vaccination. The existence of previous allergy may affect reporting profiles, but not the occurrence of vaccine allergy.

A Comparative Analysis of a Self-Reported Adverse Events Analysis after Receiving One of the Available SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Schemes in Ecuador

The COVID-19 pandemic has put a lot of pressure on health systems worldwide. Mass vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 has reduced morbidity and mortality worldwide. Despite their safety profiles, vaccines, as with any other medical product, can cause adverse events. Yet, in countries with poor epidemiological surveillance and monitoring systems, reporting vaccine-related adverse events is a challenge. The objective of this study was to describe self-reported vaccine adverse events after receiving one of the available COVID-19 vaccine schemes in Ecuador. A cross-sectional analysis based on an online, self-reported, 32-item questionnaire was conducted in Ecuador from 1 April to 15 July 2021. Participants were invited by social media, radio, and TV to voluntarily participate in our study. A total of 6654 participants were included in this study. Furthermore, 38.2% of the participants reported having at least one comorbidity. Patients received AstraZeneca, Pfizer, and Sinovac vaccines, and these were distributed 38.4%, 31.1%, and 30.5%, respectively. Overall, pain or swelling at the injection site 17.2% (n = 4500) and headache 13.3% (n = 3502) were the most reported adverse events. Women addressed events supposedly attributable to vaccination or immunization [ESAVIs] (66.7%), more often than men (33.2%). After receiving the first dose of any available COVID-19 vaccine, a total of 19,501 self-reported ESAVIs were informed (87.0% were mild, 11.5% moderate, and 1.5% severe). In terms of the vaccine type and brand, the most reactogenic vaccine was AstraZeneca with 57.8%, followed by Pfizer (24.9%) and Sinovac (17.3%). After the second dose, 6776 self-reported ESAVIs were reported (87.1% mild, 10.9% moderate, and 2.1% severe). AstraZeneca vaccine users reported a higher proportion of ESAVIs (72.2%) in comparison to Pfizer/BioNTech (15.9%) and Sinovac Vaccine (11.9%). Swelling at the injection site, headache, muscle pain, and fatigue were the most common ESAVIs for the first as well as second doses. In conclusion, most ESAVIs were mild. AstraZeneca users were more likely to report adverse events. Participants without a history of COVID-19 infection, as well as those who received the first dose, were more prone to report ESAVIs.

Immune Response to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines

COVID-19 vaccines have been developed to confer immunity against the SARS-CoV-2 infection. Prior to the pandemic of COVID-19 which started in March 2020, there was a well-established understanding about the structure and pathogenesis of previously known Coronaviruses from the SARS and MERS outbreaks. In addition to this, vaccines for various Coronaviruses were available for veterinary use. This knowledge supported the creation of various vaccine platforms for SARS-CoV-2. Before COVID-19 there are no reports of a vaccine being developed in under a year and no vaccine for preventing coronavirus infection in humans had ever been developed. Approximately nine different technologies are being researched and developed at various levels in order to design an effective COVID-19 vaccine. As the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 is responsible for generating substantial adaptive immune response, mostly all the vaccine candidates have been targeting the whole spike protein or epitopes of spike protein as a vaccine candidate. In this review, we have compiled the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection and followed by the mechanism of action of various vaccine platforms such as mRNA vaccines, Adenoviral vectored vaccine, inactivated virus vaccines and subunit vaccines in the market. In the end we have also summarized the various adjuvants used in the COVID-19 vaccine formulation.

Immediate Hypersensitivity Reactions Induced by COVID-19 Vaccines: Current Trends, Potential Mechanisms and Prevention Strategies

As the world deals with the COVID-19 pandemic, vaccination remains vital to successfully end this crisis. However, COVID-19-vaccine-induced immediate hypersensitivity reactions presenting with potentially life-threatening systemic anaphylactic reactions are one of the reasons for vaccine hesitancy. Recent studies have suggested that different mechanisms, including IgE-mediated and non-IgE-mediated mast cell activation, may be involved in immediate hypersensitivity. The main culprits triggering hypersensitivity reactions have been suggested to be the excipients of vaccines, including polyethylene glycol and polysorbate 80. Patients with a history of allergic reactions to drugs, foods, or other vaccines may have an increased risk of hypersensitivity reactions to COVID-19 vaccines. Various strategies have been suggested to prevent hypersensitivity reactions, including performing skin tests or in vitro tests before vaccination, administering different vaccines for the primary and following boosters, changing the fractionated doses, or pretreating the anti-IgE antibody. This review discusses the current trends, potential mechanisms, and prevention strategies for COVID-19-vaccine-induced immediate hypersensitivity reactions.

Dermatomyositis post vaccine against SARS-COV2

Background

Dermatomyositis belongs to an infrequent group of diseases predominantly found in patients older than 40 years old and is characterized by dermal and muscular findings. This disease presents itself as proximal, ascending and symmetric weakness and typical dermatosis with findings such as elevated muscle enzymes, altered electromyography and typical changes in muscle biopsy; as of today, the etiology of the disease in unknown. The COVID-19 vaccine has been a fundamental tactic to achieve control of the coronavirus (SARS CoV2), and it’s clear that the benefits of getting the vaccine overweight the risks that might come along with it. Although rare, all adverse effects should be reported, this could help us to understand the elusive pathophysiology of inflammatory idiopathic myopathy.

Case presentation

In this text we will describe the case of a patient with dermatomyositis who was vaccinated against SARS CoV2 with BNT162b2 mRNA (Pfizer-BioNTech), showing a temporal relation between the vaccination and the beginning of her symptoms. We realized all the diagnostic approach to the suspected disease including electromyography, muscle biopsy and laboratory findings, corroborating the diagnosis. The patient received standard treatment for this disease (steroid therapy) and have a classic slow improvement.

Conclusions

Although it´s not possible to confirm a direct correlation between the vaccine and the onset of the disease, we considered that there are enough data to suspect that this could be a trigger event and therefore should always be considered a possible cause for a case of inflammatory idiopathic myopathy.

The SARS-CoV-2 mutations versus vaccine effectiveness: New opportunities to new challenges

BACKGROUND

The SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus epidemic is hastening the discovery of the most efficient vaccines. The development of cost-effective vaccines seems to be the only solution to terminate this pandemic. However, the vaccines' effectiveness has been questioned due to recurrent mutations in the SARS-CoV-2 genome. Most of the mutations are associated with the spike protein, a vital target for several marketed vaccines. Many countries were highly affected by the 2nd wave of the SARS-CoV-2, like the UK, India, Brazil and France. Experts are also alarming the further COVID-19 wave with the emergence of Omicron, which is highly affecting the South African populations. This review encompasses the detailed description of all vaccine candidates and COVID-19 mutants that will add value to design further studies to combat the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

The information was generated using various search engines like google scholar, PubMed, clinicaltrial.gov.in, WHO database, ScienceDirect, and news portals by using keywords SARS-CoV-2 mutants, COVID-19 vaccines, efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, COVID-19 waves.

RESULTS

This review has highlighted the evolution of SARS-CoV-2 variants and the vaccine efficacy. Currently, various vaccine candidates are undergoing several phases of development. Their efficacy still needs to check for newly emerged variants. We have focused on the evolution, multiple mutants, waves of the SARS-CoV-2, and different marketed vaccines undergoing various clinical trials and the design of the trials to determine vaccine efficacy.

CONCLUSION

Various mutants of SARS-CoV-2 arrived, mainly concerned with the spike protein, a key component to design the vaccine candidates. Various vaccines are undergoing clinical trial and show impressive results, but their efficacy still needs to be checked in different SARS-CoV-2 mutants. We discussed all mutants of SARS-CoV-2 and the vaccine's efficacy against them. The safety concern of these vaccines is also discussed. It is important to understand how coronavirus gets mutated to design better new vaccines, providing long-term protection and neutralizing broad mutant variants. A proper study approach also needs to be considered while designing the vaccine efficacy trials, which further improved the study outcomes. Taking preventive measures to protect from the virus is also equally important, like vaccine development.

Booster vaccination strategy: Necessity, Immunization Objectives, Immunization Strategy and Safety

At present, the global COVID-19 epidemic has not been completely controlled, and epidemic prevention and control still face severe challenges. As there is no specific treatment for COVID-19, promoting roll-out vaccinations and building herd immunity are still the most effective and economic measures to control the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the neutralizing antibody level in the recipients decreases with time, and the vaccine's protective efficacy gradually weakens. It is still inconclusive whether it is necessary to carry out booster vaccination to strengthen the immune barrier to infection. In this paper, we combined the existing data on the effectiveness and persistence of COVID-19 vaccines. We found that it is necessary to carry out a booster vaccination strategy. However, not all subjects need to receive one more dose of vaccine six months after the initial immunization. Priority should be given to the high-risk groups, such as the elderly and people with immunodeficiency. A heterologous booster can induce higher immune responses and enhance immune protection than homologous vaccinations. However, more scientific data and clinical studies are needed to verify the safety of heterologous vaccination strategies. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

COVID-19 phase 4 vaccine candidates, effectiveness on SARS-CoV-2 variants, neutralizing antibody, rare side effects, traditional and nano-based vaccine platforms: a review

The COVID-19 pandemic has endangered world health and the economy. As the number of cases is increasing, different companies have started developing potential vaccines using both traditional and nano-based platforms to overcome the pandemic. Several countries have approved a few vaccine candidates for emergency use authorization (EUA), showing significant effectiveness and inducing a robust immune response. Oxford-AstraZeneca, Pfizer-BioNTech's BNT162, Moderna's mRNA-1273, Sinovac's CoronaVac, Johnson & Johnson, Sputnik-V, and Sinopharm's vaccine candidates are leading the race. However, the SARS-CoV-2 is constantly mutating, making the vaccines less effective, possibly by escaping immune response for some variants. Besides, some EUA vaccines have been reported to induce rare side effects such as blood clots, cardiac injury, anaphylaxis, and some neurological effects. Although the COVID-19 vaccine candidates promise to overcome the pandemic, a more significant and clear understanding is needed. In this review, we brief about the clinical trial of some leading candidates, their effectiveness, and their neutralizing effect on SARS-CoV-2 variants. Further, we have discussed the rare side effects, different traditional and nano-based platforms to understand the scope of future development.

A Systematic Review of the Sex and Gender Reporting in COVID-19 Clinical Trials

Sex and gender have implications for COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and adverse effects from the vaccine. As vaccination is one of the key responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, it is vital that sex and gender differences be acknowledged, measured, and analysed in clinical research. Here, we systematically review published COVID-19 vaccine trials, both interventional and observational, to assess the quality of reporting of sex and gender. Of the 75 clinical trials on COVID-19 vaccines included in this review, only 24% presented their main outcome data disaggregated by sex, and only 13% included any discussion of the implications of their study for women and men. Considering the sex differences in adverse events after vaccination, and the gendered aspects of vaccine hesitancy, these oversights in clinical research on vaccines have implications for recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic and for wider public health.

Does a lack of vaccine side effects correlate with reduced BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine response among healthcare workers and nursing home residents?

BACKGROUND

The BNT162b2 SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination has mitigated the burden of COVID-19 among residents of long-term care facilities considerably, despite being excluded from the vaccine trials. Data on reactogenicity (vaccine side effects) in this population are limited.

AIMS

To assess reactogenicity among nursing home (NH) residents. To provide a plausible proxy for predicting vaccine response among this population.

METHODS

We enrolled and sampled NH residents and community-dwelling healthcare workers who received the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine, to assess local or systemic reactogenicity and antibody levels (immunogenicity).

RESULTS

NH residents reported reactions at a much lower frequency and lesser severity than the community-dwelling healthcare workers. These reactions were mild and transient with all subjects experiencing more local than systemic reactions. Based on our reactogenicity and immunogenicity data, we developed a linear regression model predicting log-transformed anti-spike, anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD), and neutralizing titers, with a dichotomous variable indicating the presence or absence of reported reactions which revealed a statistically significant effect, with estimated shifts in log-transformed titers ranging from 0.32 to 0.37 (all p < 0.01) indicating greater immunogenicity in subjects with one or more reported reactions of varying severity.

DISCUSSION

With a significantly lower incidence of post-vaccination reactions among NH residents as reported in this study, the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine appears to be well-tolerated among this vulnerable population. If validated in larger populations, absence of reactogenicity could help guide clinicians in prioritizing vaccine boosters.

CONCLUSIONS

Reactogenicity is significantly mild among nursing home residents and overall, subjects who reported post-vaccination reactions developed higher antibody titers.

The Effects of Heterologous Immunization with Prime-Boost COVID-19 Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has become the global challenge. Reaching global herd immunity will help end the COVID-19 pandemic. However, vaccine shortage and vaccine hesitancy are the obstacles to achieve global herd immunity against SARS-CoV-2. The current homologous vaccine regimen is experimentally switching to heterologous vaccination at several study sites. However, the reactogenicity of heterologous ChAdOx1-S and mRNA vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 is still unclear. We have conducted a systematic review to summarize the current findings on the safety and immunogenicity of this heterologous vaccination and elucidate their implications against SARS-CoV-2. This systematic review was conducted by the guidelines of PRISMA. Articles were searched from PubMed and other sources (MedRixv and Google scholar) starting from 1 January to 5 September 2021. The search term was heterologous ChAdOx1-S and BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccination. Our review found that participants with ChAdOx1/BNT162b2, ChAdOx1-S/mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2/ChAdOx1-S did not have the serious adverse events seen with homologous vaccination. Participants with the heterologous regimen (ChAdOx1/BNT162b2, ChAdOx1-S/mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2/ChAdOx1-S), compared with those with two doses of ChAdOx1-S, have shown a more robust immune responses against SARS-CoV-2, such as higher levels of responsive antibodies or increased numbers of spike-specific T-cells. Nevertheless, these immune responses were slightly diminished in the recipients of BNT162b2/ChAdOx1-S. Also, the safety study of heterologous ChAdOx1-S/mRNA vaccination was based on small populations. Further studies to enclose diverse categories, such as race/ethnicity or geography, may be necessary. Overall, the heterologous immunization with ChAdOX1-S and the mRNA vaccine may improve the vaccine shortage related slow pace of reaching herd immunity, especially using the heterologous immunization with ChAdOx1-S/BNT162b2.

Characteristics and outcomes of adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination

OBJECTIVES

BNT-162b2, mRNA-1273, and Ad26.COV2.S vaccines data regarding adverse events (AEs) are scarce. In this report, we aimed to describe fatal and non-fatal possible AEs after COVID-19 vaccine administration.

METHODS

An observational multicenter study investigating the causes of emergency department visits and hospital admissions within 10 days of COVID-19 vaccination. Patients who received first or second doses of COVID-19 vaccines and presented to the emergency department (ED), as well as those admitted to the hospitals or intensive care units (ICUs) were included. Causes of ED, hospital, and ICU admissions and discharges were collected based on the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) coding system.

RESULTS

Between December 2020 and March 2021, 1842 patients visited the ED within 10 days of COVID-19 vaccine administration. The mean age was 70.3 years. Overall, 1221 patients presented after the first dose of the vaccine and 653 after the second dose. Trauma (14.9%), hypertensive emergency/urgency (7.8%), generalized pain and arthralgia (5.7%), and chest pain (4.4%) were the most common causes of presentation to the ED. Of all ED presentations, mortality rate was at 2.2% (41 patients) with a median follow-up time of 68.0 days, versus 2.6% in unvaccinated ED patients. Postvaccination acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (46.3%), septic shock (24.4%), and cardiogenic shock (12.2%) were the most common causes of death.

CONCLUSION

Although reported AEs are not necessarily caused by the vaccination, this study provides further information about possible AEs after COVID-19 immunization, especially those requiring hospital admission. This study also supports prior data that serious AEs post vaccination are much lower than primary COVID-19 infections. Further studies are needed to investigate causalities between vaccines and reported AEs across all age groups.

A focused review on technologies, mechanisms, safety, and efficacy of available COVID-19 vaccines

>20 months has been passed since the detection of the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection named COVID-19 from Wuhan city of China. This novel coronavirus spread rapidly around the world and became a pandemic. Although different therapeutic options have been considered and approved for the management of COVID-19 infection in different stages of the disease, challenges in pharmacotherapy especially in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 and with underlying diseases have still remained. Prevention of infection through public vaccination would be the only efficient strategy to control the morbidity and mortality caused by COVID-19. To date, several COVID-19 vaccines using different platforms including nucleic acid-based vaccines, adenovirus-based vaccines, protein-based vaccines, and inactivated vaccines have been introduced among which many have received approval for prevention against COVID-19. In this comprehensive review, available COVID-19 vaccines have been discussed. The mechanisms, safety, efficacy, dosage, dosing intervals, possible adverse reactions, storage, and coverage of these four different vaccine platforms against SARS-CoV-2 variants have been discussed in detail and summarized in tabular format for ease of comparison and conclusion. Although each COVID-19 vaccine has various advantages and disadvantages over the others, accessibility and affordability of approved vaccines by the official health organizations, especially in developing countries, would be essential to terminate this pandemic. The main limitation of this study was the lack of access to the clinical data on available COVID-19 vaccines developed in Eastern countries since the data on their efficacy, safety, and adverse reactions were limited.

Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine Tolerance in Allergic versus Non-Allergic Individuals

Individuals with a history of allergy are potentially at risk of suffering from adverse effects after COVID-19 vaccination. We sought to assess the tolerance towards the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine in allergic patients. To address this issue, we used a questionnaire conducted on-line in a group of medical professionals who were vaccinated with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. A total of 1808 respondents, out of whom 1707 received two doses of the vaccine, returned the questionnaire. Local reactions after injection were more frequent in allergic individuals after both doses (swelling p = 0.0003). Systemic adverse events (AE-SYS) occurred more often after the second than the first dose in both groups (allergic persons: 77.29% vs. 41.06%); vomiting and arthralgia occurred more often in allergic subjects (p = 0.0009). AE-SYS in allergic individuals lasted longer than in non-allergic ones after the first (p = 0.01) and the second dose (p = 0.0009). Allergic reactions after vaccination were reported more frequently in allergic subjects: after the first dose (p = 0.00001) and after the second dose (p = 0.001). Rhinitis was the most frequent symptom observed more often in allergic patients. No severe allergic reactions occurred during the full cycle of vaccination. Although the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine is tolerated worse by allergic than non-allergic individuals, the occurring adverse symptoms are mild and do not preclude a successful completion of the vaccination cycle. The presence of symptoms suggestive of allergy does not constitute a condition of increased risk of developing clinically significant adverse events following Pfizer COVID-19 vaccination.