Immune-mediated adverse reactions to vaccines

Clinical characteristics, management, diagnostic findings, and various etiologies of patients with Kounis syndrome. A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Kounis syndrome (KS) is defined by the association of acute coronary syndrome secondary to an anaphylactic reaction. KS is often underdiagnosed, and new etiologies have been proposed.

AIMS

To synthesize the available evidence on clinical profile, management, diagnosis, and etiologies in patients with KS.

METHODS

A search was conducted in the following databases: PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE and Web of Science from inception to March 19th, 2024. Case reports, case series, and observational studies were included. Letters to the editor, editorials, comments, notes, narrative reviews, and systematic reviews were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 190 studies were included (174 case reports, 13 case series, and 3 observational studies, 214 patients). A predominance of male gender was observed (69.63 %). Mean age was 54.4 ± 16.5 years. The most common comorbidities were hypertension (33.64 %), diabetes (16.82 %), and dyslipidemia (16.35 %). The most frequent clinical manifestations were chest pain (66.35 %) and difficulty breathing (34.11 %). Three variants of KS were identified: type I or allergic coronary vasospasm was the most frequent (43.46 %), and type III, the least common (8.88 %). The most frequent etiology was drug use (38.32 %), primarily antibiotics (42.68 %), followed by animal stings or bites (26.17 %). The calculated KS rate was 11.12 per 1000 people. The mortality rate was 7.47 %, and the majority had a favorable outcome (86.92 %) after management.

CONCLUSIONS

KS is a complex and underdiagnosed disease that should be considered as a differential diagnosis in acute coronary syndrome associated with an allergic reaction.

Immediate adverse events following immunization (AEFI) in drive-through COVID-19 vaccination campaign in Yogyakarta, Indonesia: A cross-sectional study

Background & objectives The COVID-19 pandemic has led to unprecedented global immunization efforts, with drive-through vaccination campaigns established to expedite and ensure safe coverage. However, research on immediate adverse events following immunization (AEFI) in these settings is limited. This study aims to evaluate the frequency and characteristics of immediate AEFI during drive-through COVID-19 vaccination campaigns in Yogyakarta, Indonesia, using the Sinovac/CoronaVac vaccine Methods This cross-sectional study utilized secondary data from the local vaccine registry managed by the Faculty of Medicine, Public Health, and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia, from July 27 to September 6, 2021. Participants included individuals aged over 11 yr without underlying medical conditions such as diabetes, hypertension, cancer, or asthma. Key characteristics recorded were age, gender, and AEFI. Results Out of 27,459 registrants, only 20,817 were eligible and received a dose. The median participant age was 20 yr (IQR 10); 47 per cent were male (9,712) and 53 per cent female (11,105). The highest vaccination day was September 6, 2021, with 3,883 doses (18%). Among the 79 participants who experienced AEFI [0.38%; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.30-0.47], the median age was 19 yr (IQR 8); 41 per cent were male (34) and 59 per cent female (48). Systemic adverse events (92%) were more common than local events (6.3%), with dizziness (77.2%) being most prevalent. Interpretation & conclusions The findings of this study suggest that immediate AEFI occurred rarely in the drive-through vaccination setting, indicating that this method appears safe and efficient for COVID-19 vaccinations, particularly in the context of immediate AEFI. Most adverse events were mild, underscoring the importance of preparedness and close monitoring in drive-through vaccination campaign sites to ensure patient safety and enhance vaccine confidence.

How a Novel Approach of Allergy Call Center Improved the Management of the Anti-COVID Vaccination Campaign in Piedmont: Italy

OBJECTIVE

The anti-COVID vaccination campaign has led to a significant increase in the demand for allergology consultations in patients considered at risk of reaction to anti-COVID-19 vaccines. This study aims to describe the experience of the vaccination campaign held in Piedmont (Italy) which developed a new service of Allergy Call Center (ACC) thus providing for the screening and management of allergy high-risk patients during pandemic.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective analysis was performed on all patients considered at high risk for the development of allergic reactions who were referred by the Immunology and Allergy Unit of Azienda Ospedaliera Ordine Mauriziano in Turin, Italy, between December 2020 and December 2022 and also on ACC consultations.

METHODS

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Piedmont Region instituted the ACC, active from May 10th, 2021 to December 31st 2022, to allow vaccinating doctors to require a telephonic consultation for patients who were considered at high risk for the development of allergic reactions. If further diagnostic evaluations were required, the ACC scheduled a visit with a Consultant of the Unit to better assess the clinical situation of the patient. Furthermore, patients referred by General Practitioners, Occupational Doctors and other consultants were also evaluated by the Unit when required.

RESULTS

During the operational period the ACC received a total of 15,865 calls and referred only 336 patients to the unit (27.4% of the total referrals), while General Practitioners referred 499 patients (40.8%), Occupational Doctors referred 61 patients (4.9%), and other consultants referred 326 patients (26.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Evaluation and management of a large volume of requests seemed to be facilitated by a proactive framework for screening patients at high risk for allergic reactions as the ones referred by our ACC. This approach led to a prominent decrease in allergological visits to our tertiary care Centre, reducing the waiting times and providing additional support for both patients and healthcare providers, thus allowing the vaccinations to be more easily handled.

2022 AAHA Canine Vaccination Guidelines (2024 Update)

Vaccination is a cornerstone of canine preventive healthcare and one of the most cost-effective ways of maintaining a dog's health, longevity, and quality of life. Canine vaccination also serves a public health function by forming a barrier against several zoonotic diseases affecting dogs and humans. Canine vaccines are broadly categorized as containing core and noncore immunizing antigens, with administration recommendations based on assessment of individual patient risk factors. The guidelines include a comprehensive table listing canine core and noncore vaccines and a recommended vaccination and revaccination schedule for each vaccine. The guidelines explain the relevance of different vaccine formulations, including those containing modified-live virus, inactivated, and recombinant immunizing agents. Factors that potentially affect vaccine efficacy are addressed, including the patient's prevaccination immune status and vaccine duration of immunity. Because animal shelters are one of the most challenging environments for prevention and control of infectious diseases, the guidelines also provide recommendations for vaccination of dogs presented at or housed in animal shelters, including the appropriate response to an infectious disease outbreak in the shelter setting. The guidelines explain how practitioners can interpret a patient's serological status, including maternally derived antibody titers, as indicators of immune status and suitability for vaccination. Other topics covered include factors associated with postvaccination adverse events, vaccine storage and handling to preserve product efficacy, interpreting product labeling to ensure proper vaccine use, and using client education and healthcare team training to raise awareness of the importance of vaccinations.

Vaccines and allergy: Back to the right places

Hypersensitivity reactions represent one of the most common causes of hesitancy for adherence to national vaccination programs. The majority of hypersensitivity reactions after vaccination are mild, and anaphylaxis is reported to be rare, although it remains challenging to estimate the frequency attributed to each single vaccine, either because of the lower number of administered doses of less common vaccines, or the administration of simultaneous vaccine in most of the vaccination programs. Although literature remains scattered, international consensus guides clinicians in identifying patients who might need the administration of vaccines in protected environments due to demonstrated hypersensitivity to vaccine components or adjuvants. Here we provide the current guidance on hypersensitivity reactions to vaccines and on vaccination of children with allergy disorders.

Erythema Multiforme and Epidermal Necrolysis Following COVID-19 Vaccines: A Systematic Review

The outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic has raised urgent vaccine development to prevent viral transmission. Cutaneous adverse events such as erythema multiforme (EM), Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) have been observed following COVID-19 vaccination. In this systematic review, we aimed to investigate the clinical features and outcomes of EM/SJS/TEN following COVID-19 vaccination. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases up to July 3, 2022. We included studies reporting patients who developed EM, SJS, or TEN following COVID-19 vaccination. A total of 47 studies involving 90 patients with EM and 16 patients with SJS/TEN were reviewed and outlined. EM predominantly occurred after the messenger ribonucleic acid vaccines (70.4%), mostly after the first (47.5%) and second doses (42.4%), with delayed onsets ranging from 1 day to 30 days. SJS/TEN were observed following either the first (55.6%)- or second-dose (33.3%) vaccination, with onset times ranging from 6 hours to 14 weeks. Three EM cases and 1 SJS case showed recurrence upon reexposure to the same vaccines. No mortality was reported. Most patients exhibited improvement or resolution after treatment, with resolution times ranging from 6 days to 8 weeks. In conclusion, EM and epidermal necrolysis, including SJS and TEN, have emerged as potential cutaneous adverse events following COVID-19 vaccine administration. Further research is warranted to elucidate the pathogenesis and casual relationship between COVID-19 vaccines and EM/SJS/TEN.

Pharmacovigilance in Vaccines: Importance, Main Aspects, Perspectives, and Challenges-A Narrative Review

Pharmacovigilance plays a central role in safeguarding public health by continuously monitoring the safety of vaccines, being critical in a climate of vaccine hesitancy, where public trust is paramount. Pharmacovigilance strategies employed to gather information on adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) include pre-registration data, media reports, clinical trials, and societal reporting. Early detection of AEFIs during clinical trials is crucial for thorough safety analysis and preventing serious reactions once vaccines are deployed. This review highlights the importance of societal reporting, encompassing contributions from community members, healthcare workers, and pharmaceutical companies. Technological advancements such as quick response (QR) codes can facilitate prompt AEFI reporting. While vaccines are demonstrably safe, the possibility of adverse events necessitates continuous post-marketing surveillance. However, underreporting remains a challenge, underscoring the critical role of public engagement in pharmacovigilance. This narrative review comprehensively examines and synthesizes key aspects of virus vaccine pharmacovigilance, with special considerations for specific population groups. We explore applicable legislation, the spectrum of AEFIs associated with major vaccines, and the unique challenges and perspectives surrounding pharmacovigilance in this domain.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

A Rare Case of Toxic Myositis Associated with Influenza Vaccination

The influenza vaccine is one of the most commonly administered vaccines worldwide, with a high safety profile. However, rare cases of serious adverse events have been reported in the literature. We report a 77-year-old male who presented with progressive weakness in the lower extremities shortly after receiving the Influenza vaccine. He was diagnosed with myositis involving the paraspinal and bilateral lower extremity muscles. He received treatment with high-dose steroids and taper with full recovery of his muscle weakness. Although the exact causal mechanism between the vaccine and the patient's myositis could not be established, surveillance for such rare adverse events can provide data for future vaccine safety improvement. Due to well-known benefits of the Influenza vaccine that far exceed the potential adverse effects, we strongly encourage the readers to continue their vaccine practices as per CDC guidelines.

Analysis of COVID-19 Vaccine Adverse Drug Reactions Reported Among Sultan Qaboos University Hospital Staff

Objectives

This study aimed to report any suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) experienced by all vaccinated staff and students in a tertiary teaching hospital following COVID-19 vaccination.

Methods

This retrospective study was conducted during the COVID-19 vaccination campaign at Sultan Qaboos University and Hospital in Muscat, Oman, from August to September 2021. An online survey was generated and sent to all staff and students via email and text messages. An announcement was made on the hospital website with a link to the survey.

Results

A total of 8,421 individuals reported being vaccinated at least once with a total of 11,468 doses administered from January to July 2021; 8,014 staff and students received the Pfizer-Biotech vaccine while 3,454 staff and students received the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine. The survey received a total of 3,275 responses (response rate = 38.8%). Of these, 741 individuals (22.6%) experienced an ADR after vaccination and 67.2% (n = 498) were females (P <0.001). The majority of the ADRs reported were fever and chills (19.7%) followed by localised pain and swelling at the injection site (18.8%). Other ADRs such as hair loss (0.5%) were reported, and one staff/student reported a clot in the right leg. Among the responders, 27.0% considered their ADRs as mild while 25.0% considered them as severe.

Conclusions

In the study cohort, mild symptoms of COVID-19 vaccines were reported. Females experienced more ADRs compared to males. Long-term observation of ADRs to the vaccines and follow-up monitoring should be done on subjects to preclude any unwanted effects.

Safety and Tolerability of COVID-19 Vaccine in Mast Cell Disorders Real-Life Data from a Single Centre in Italy

Background In the past three years, COVID-19 has had a significant impact on the healthcare systems and people's safety worldwide. Mass vaccinations dramatically improved the health and economic damage caused by SARS-CoV-2. However, the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in patients at high risk of allergic reactions still has many unmet needs that should be clarified. Material and methods A retrospective, single-centre study was performed by collecting demographic and clinical data of patients with Mast Cell Disorders (MCDs) to evaluate the safety and tolerability of COVID-19 vaccinations. Moreover, any changes in the natural history of the underlying disease following the vaccine have been evaluated. Results This study included 66 patients affected with MCDs. Out of them, 52 (78.8%) received a COVID-19 vaccination and 41 (78.8%) completed the vaccination course. Premedication came first in 86.6% of our patients. A total of seven (4.5%) patients complained about an immediate reaction and two (1.3%) had a late reaction. Worsening of MCD history was observed in a single patient. Conclusions Despite the overall high risk of allergic reactions, our study did not reveal any increased risk for SARS-CoV-2 allergic reactions in MCD patients, thus supporting the recommendation in favour of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. However, due to the potentially increased rate of anaphylactic reactions, MCD patients should receive vaccine premedication and should be treated in a hospital setting after an allergological specialistic evaluation.

The next-generation DNA vaccine platforms and delivery systems: advances, challenges and prospects

Vaccines have proven effective in the treatment and prevention of numerous diseases. However, traditional attenuated and inactivated vaccines suffer from certain drawbacks such as complex preparation, limited efficacy, potential risks and others. These limitations restrict their widespread use, especially in the face of an increasingly diverse range of diseases. With the ongoing advancements in genetic engineering vaccines, DNA vaccines have emerged as a highly promising approach in the treatment of both genetic diseases and acquired diseases. While several DNA vaccines have demonstrated substantial success in animal models of diseases, certain challenges need to be addressed before application in human subjects. The primary obstacle lies in the absence of an optimal delivery system, which significantly hampers the immunogenicity of DNA vaccines. We conduct a comprehensive analysis of the current status and limitations of DNA vaccines by focusing on both viral and non-viral DNA delivery systems, as they play crucial roles in the exploration of novel DNA vaccines. We provide an evaluation of their strengths and weaknesses based on our critical assessment. Additionally, the review summarizes the most recent advancements and breakthroughs in pre-clinical and clinical studies, highlighting the need for further clinical trials in this rapidly evolving field.

Vaccinations in Selected Immune-Related Diseases Treated with Biological Drugs and JAK Inhibitors-Literature Review and Statement of Experts from Polish Dermatological Society

The growing use of biological drugs in immune-mediated chronic diseases has undoubtedly revolutionized their treatment. Yet, the topic of vaccinations in this group of patients still raises many concerns and implies many therapeutic problems that require discussion and standardization of management. The aim of this literature review is to present current knowledge regarding safety and efficacy of vaccinations in dermatological and rheumatological patients treated with biological drugs and JAK inhibitors. Additionally, this article provides recommendation from experts of the Polish Dermatological Society about proper use of vaccinations during therapy with biologics. Generally, all live attenuated vaccines are contraindicated during immunosuppressive/immunomodulatory therapy. If there is need, they should be administered long enough prior to the therapy or after cessation. Yet, inactivated vaccines mostly can be safely used, but the problem in this case is the effectiveness of the vaccination. Most studies report that the immune response in patients on biologics after administration of different inactivated vaccines is similar to or even better than in the control group. Thus, the importance of vaccination among patients on biologics must be emphasized to reduce omissions and the fear of possible side effects or insufficient post-vaccination response.

COVID-19 vaccine uptake and hesitancy in Chinese patients with asthma

OBJECTIVE

Both patients and physicians may be hesitant toward vaccination in patients with asthma, which may result in lower vaccine uptake. The aim of this work was to investigate the vaccination rate, the adverse reactions, as well as the factors associated with vaccine acceptance and hesitancy toward COVID-19 vaccination among asthmatic patients in Beijing.

METHODS

A multi-center, cross-sectional face-to-face survey was conducted in patients with asthma consecutively recruited from December 2021 to April 2022. The survey included asthma status, COVID-19 vaccine uptake and adverse reactions, and knowledge of and attitude toward COVID-19 vaccination.

RESULTS

A total of 261 patients were enrolled. The rate of COVID-19 vaccination during the study period was 73.6%, as compared to 87.64% in the general population in China. Patients who were currently working, had received other vaccines in the past, and had had no adverse reactions to other vaccines, showed a higher rate of COVID-19 vaccination. Patients believing that the vaccination of family members and colleagues had a positive impact on their decision to get vaccinated, were more likely to get the COVID-19 vaccines. The COVID-19 vaccination rate was lower in those with poorly monitored asthma and those using biologic therapies. The adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines in asthmatic patients were similar to those in the general population.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 vaccination rate in asthmatic patients was lower than the general population in China. Active measures should be taken to control asthma and increase vaccination rates in these patients.

New-onset aplastic anemia after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

Aplastic anemia (AA) is a rare autoimmune disease. Drugs, viruses, and radiation are among the most common etiologic factors, and most cases have immune pathophysiology. SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have been linked with rare side effects, including cases of acquired aplastic anemia. Here we review all the reported cases of new-onset AA after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, and discuss their clinical characteristics and management. 18 patients in these case reports had a median age of 58 years. The time from vaccination to onset of aplastic anemia ranged from 1 day to 7 months, with a median of 2.5 weeks. Seventeen patients were diagnosed with severe or very severe aplastic anemia post-vaccination and all patients received standard treatments for acquired aplastic anemia. Seventeen patients achieved a complete or partial response and only 1 patient died. Aplastic anemia can be considered a very rare SARS-CoV-2 vaccine-related adverse event, although a causative relationship has not been proven. Reporting cases of such uncommon post-vaccination events could help clinicians to consider aplastic anemia when pancytopenia is observed after vaccination. The benefits of SARS-Cov-2 vaccination are established, and reports of rare events serve only to increase awareness in daily clinical practice.

Toxicological Effects of Thimerosal and Aluminum in the Liver, Kidney, and Brain of Zebrafish (Danio rerio)

Vaccination programs in the first years of a child's life are effective and extremely important strategies for the successful eradication of diseases. However, as no intervention is without risks, the metal-based components of some vaccines, such as thimerosal (TMS), a preservative composed of ethylmercury, and aluminum (Al), have begun to generate distrust on the part of the population. Therefore, this study evaluated the effects of exposure to thimerosal and aluminum hydroxide (alone or in mixture) on Danio rerio (zebrafish) specimens. The fish were exposed to thimerosal and/or aluminum hydroxide intraperitoneally. The liver, kidney, and brain were removed for a biochemical biomarker analysis, histopathological analysis, and metal quantification. As a result, we observed changes in the activity of the analyzed enzymes (SOD, GST, GPx) in the kidney and brain of the zebrafish, a reduction in GSH levels in all analyzed tissues, and a reduction in MT levels in the kidney and liver as well as in the brain. Changes in AChE enzyme activity were observed. The biochemical results corroborate the changes observed in the lesion index and histomorphology sections. We emphasize the importance of joint research on these compounds to increase the population's safety against their possible toxic effects.

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

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

Inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidate immunization on non-human primate animal model: B-cell and T-cell responses immune evaluation

Background

SARS-CoV-2 vaccine was proven to be an effective and efficient measure for mitigating pandemic. COVID-19 infection and mortality subsided along with the increaseing COVID-19 vaccination coverage. Vaccine and health resource equity are predominant factors in COVID-19 pandemic management. Vaccine development for Indonesia, aims to ensure a sustainable pandemic control and steady national stability restoration. A decent vaccine must induce immunity against COVID-19 with minimum adverse reaction. Immunogenicity and ability to induce neutralizing antibody evaluation needs to be performed as part of the SARS-CoV-2 inactivated vaccine development from East Java, Indonesia isolate (Vaksin Merah Putih-INAVAC).

Objective

This research demonstrated INAVAC performance in inducing the production neutralizing antibody along with its effects on CD4+ and CD8+ cells response in Macaca fascicularis (non-human primate).

Methods

Two dosages of 3 μg and 5 μg were tested, compared to sham (NaCl 0.9%) in 10 Macaca fascicularis (2 injection intramuscular with 14 days interval). All animals were monitored daily for clinical signs. Nasopharyngeal samples were analyzed using qRT-PCR while the serum were tested using ELISA and neutralization assay, whereas PBMCs were flowcytrometrically analyzed to measure CD4+ and CD8+ population.

Results

It is observed that both vaccine doses could stimulate relatively similar immune response and neutralizing antibody (end GMT post challenge = 905,1), whereas higher CD8+ cells response were reported in the 5 μg group after the 3rd day post-challenge. The dose of vaccine that produce adequate immune cell stimulation with neutralizing antibody induction can be adopted to clinical study, as favorable result of these parameters could predict minimum adverse reaction from inflammation response with balanced immune response.

Conclusions

Therefore, it is concluded that Vaksin Merah Putih-INAVAC with 3 μg dose showed a favorable potential to be developed and tested as human vaccine.

Perioperative implications of patients with alpha gal allergies

Alpha Gal Syndrome (AGS) is an emerging immune response to mammalian products (MP) containing the oligosaccharide galactose-α-1,3 galactose (α-Gal) which includes meats and inactive ingredients in certain medications. This becomes clinically important in the perioperative realm as MPs are commonly found in the operating room, and pre- and post-operative settings, and can trigger responses as severe as anaphylaxis. In this review, authors discuss the epidemiology, diagnosis and treatment of AGS reactions. Additionally, strategies are explored in order to screen and prevent exposure to MP with a multidisciplinary approach. While this emerging allergy is still not fully understood, it is of paramount importance that all anesthesia providers recognize the implications of MP exposure in AGS patients and ultimately prevent harm in this highly vulnerable population.

Pearls for practice from the 2022 joint task force drug allergy practice parameter

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review updated recommendations in the 2022 Drug Allergy Practice Parameters for the evaluation and management of drug hypersensitivity reactions.

RECENT FINDINGS

Adverse drug reactions have become increasingly prominent with the advent of new and emerging pharmacologic therapies. Hypersensitivity reactions encompass a significant proportion of adverse drug reactions and negatively impact both the individual patient and overall health system. Reactions are heterogeneous in presentation and may be immediate (onset of symptoms ≤6 h) or delayed (onset of symptoms >6 h to months) after drug exposure. The 2022 Drug Allergy Practice Parameter provides consensus-based statements for evaluation of hypersensitivity reactions to antibiotics, NSAIDs, cancer chemotherapies, immune checkpoint inhibitors, biologics, and excipients. In general, the guideline highlights the importance of patient history in elucidating the phenotype and severity of the index reaction. Drug challenge remains the gold standard for diagnosis and is increasingly favored over skin testing in patients with nonsevere, nonanaphylactic drug reaction histories.

SUMMARY

The 2022 Drug Allergy Practice Parameter provides an updated framework for physicians to reference in clinical practice when managing patients with drug hypersensitivity reactions.

Future perspectives of emerging novel drug targets and immunotherapies to control drug addiction

Substance Use Disorder (SUD) is one of the major mental illnesses that is terrifically intensifying worldwide. It is becoming overwhelming due to limited options for treatment. The complexity of addiction disorders is the main impediment to understanding the pathophysiology of the illness. Hence, unveiling the complexity of the brain through basic research, identification of novel signaling pathways, the discovery of new drug targets, and advancement in cutting-edge technologies will help control this disorder. Additionally, there is a great hope of controlling the SUDs through immunotherapeutic measures like therapeutic antibodies and vaccines. Vaccines have played a cardinal role in eliminating many diseases like polio, measles, and smallpox. Further, vaccines have controlled many diseases like cholera, dengue, diphtheria, Haemophilus influenza type b (Hib), human papillomavirus, influenza, Japanese encephalitis, etc. Recently, COVID-19 was controlled in many countries by vaccination. Currently, continuous effort is done to develop vaccines against nicotine, cocaine, morphine, methamphetamine, and heroin. Antibody therapy against SUDs is another important area where serious attention is required. Antibodies have contributed substantially against many serious diseases like diphtheria, rabies, Crohn's disease, asthma, rheumatoid arthritis, and bladder cancer. Antibody therapy is gaining immense momentum due to its success rate in cancer treatment. Furthermore, enormous advancement has been made in antibody therapy due to the generation of high-efficiency humanized antibodies with a long half-life. The advantage of antibody therapy is its instant outcome. This article's main highlight is discussing the drug targets of SUDs and their associated mechanisms. Importantly, we have also discussed the scope of prophylactic measures to eliminate drug dependence.

Mouse models in COVID-19 research: analyzing the adaptive immune response

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 causing the COVID-19 pandemic, resulted in a major necessity for scientific countermeasures. Investigations revealing the exact mechanisms of the SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis provide the basis for the development of therapeutic measures and protective vaccines against COVID-19. Animal models are inevitable for infection and pre-clinical vaccination studies as well as therapeutic testing. A well-suited animal model, mimicking the pathology seen in human COVID-19 patients, is an important basis for these investigations. Several animal models were already used during SARS-CoV-2 studies with different clinical outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Here, we give an overview of different animal models used in SARS-CoV-2 infection studies with a focus on the mouse model. Mice provide a well-established animal model for laboratory use and several different mouse models have been generated and are being used in SARS-CoV-2 studies. Furthermore, the analysis of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells during infection and in vaccination studies in mice is highlighted.

Current evidence of COVID-19 vaccination-related cardiovascular events

Currently, the world is recovering from the shock of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic; however, this situation is still fragile. Health authorities recommend administering COVID-19 vaccines as the safest and most reliable tool for eliminating COVID-19. Subsequent to the extensive administration of the COVID-19 vaccines, a series of cardiovascular adverse effects have been reported. This comprehensive review aimed to provide an update on the etiology, pathophysiology, clinical features, and management of the cardiovascular adverse events associated with COVID-19 vaccines, including myocarditis, pericarditis, thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome, myocardial infarction, cardiac arrhythmias, hypertension, and stress-induced cardiomyopathy. The benefits of COVID-19 vaccination far outweigh the reported adverse events. It would be clinically important to provide diagnostic scoring systems to differentiate COVID-19-related cardiovascular adverse events from other causes and develop therapeutic approaches for their management. Further evaluation of cardiovascular adverse events of the COVID-19 vaccines is crucial for implementing vaccination programs and developing safer and more reliable vaccines.

Increasing the COVID-19 immunization rate through allergy testing

BACKGROUND

Vaccination of the population is required to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. Allergy testing could reduce anxiety towards COVID-19 vaccination and thereby may increase vaccination rate, however, its effectiveness remains unclear.

METHODS

One hundred and thirty prospective real-life patients in need of but not daring to get vaccinated asked for allergy workup for COVID-19 vaccine hypersensitivity in 2021/2022. Characterization of patients, identification of anxieties, decrease of patient's anxiety levels, overall vaccination rate and adverse reactions after vaccination were assessed.

RESULTS

Tested patients were characterized by being female (91.5%) and having a high rate of previous allergies (e.g. to food 55.4%, drugs 54.6%, or previous vaccinations 50%) and dermatological disease (29.2%) but not always had medical contraindications for COVID-19 vaccination. Sixty one patients (49.6%) were highly concerned (4-6, Likert scale 0-6) about vaccination and 47 (37.6%) expressed resolving thoughts about vaccinaion anaphylaxis (3-6, Likert scale 0-6). However only 35 patients (28.5%) were scared of getting COVID-19 within 2 months (4-6, Likert scale 0-6) and only 11 (9%) patients had high expectations of getting COVID-19 (4-6, Likert scale 0-6). Allergy testing significantly (p < 0.01 to p < 0.05 respectively) reduced the median anxiety of allergic symptoms following vaccination: dyspnoea (4.2-3.1), to faint (3.7-2.7), long-term consequences (3.6-2.2), pruritus (3.4-2.6), skin rash (3.3-2.6) and death (3.2-2.6). After allergy testing, most patients (108/122, 88.5%) let themselves be vaccinated within 60 days. Revaccinated patients with previous symptoms experienced a reduction of symptoms (p < 0.05) upon revaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients not daring to get vaccinated have more anxiety towards vaccination than to acquire COVID-19. For those, allergy testing excludes vaccine allergy, and is a tool to increase vaccination willingness and thereby helps to combat vaccination hesitancy.

Allergic Reactions to Vaccines in Children: From Constituents to Specific Vaccines

Vaccination is an essential public health measure that helps to reduce the burden of infectious diseases in children. Although vaccines have an excellent safety record and the association of severe allergic reactions is rare, public concerns about vaccine safety can lead to incomplete vaccination coverage in children with or without allergies. Therefore, it is important to understand the mechanisms and implications of allergic reactions to vaccines and define strategies to manage them to provide the safest care for vaccine recipients. In this review, we provide an overview on the types of allergic reactions that can occur after vaccination, including those caused by various vaccine constituents. We also discuss the mechanisms underlying these allergic reactions and the recommended diagnosis and management strategies for children with a history of suspected allergic reactions to vaccines. An improved understanding of allergic reactions to vaccines can aid in the enhancement of the safety and effectiveness of vaccination.

The conundrum of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine-induced anaphylaxis

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

ATAK Complex (Adrenaline, Takotsubo, Anaphylaxis, and Kounis Hypersensitivity-Associated Coronary Syndrome) after COVID-19 Vaccination and Review of the Literature

Anaphylactic events triggered by mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are neither serious nor frequent. Kounis syndrome is described as the concomitant occurrence of acute coronary events and hypersensitivity reactions induced by vasospastic mediators after an allergic event. Kounis syndrome caused by vaccines is very rare. Up to now, only a few cases of allergic myocardial infarction after mRNA COVID-19 vaccine administration have been reported. Takotsubo cardiomyopathy is a syndrome characterized by transient wall movement abnormalities of the left ventricular apex, mid-ventricle, or other myocardial distribution, usually triggered by intense emotional or physical stress. Takotsubo cardiomyopathy after COVID-19 vaccine administration has been reported, usually with a delayed onset. A new entity characterized by the association of adrenaline administration, Takotsubo cardiomyopathy, anaphylaxis, and Kounis hypersensitivity was recently described: the ATAK complex. Here, we report a case of Takotsubo cardiomyopathy that occurred together with an anaphylactic reaction to an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine that required the use of adrenaline. The timing of the allergic reaction and the referenced clinical symptoms could not exclude the idea that Kounis syndrome occurred. Therefore, we can assume the patient presented the ATAK complex. We believe that highlighting on this ATAK complex will aid the application of proper diagnostic, preventive and therapeutic measures.

COVID-19 vaccines adverse events: potential molecular mechanisms

COVID-19 is an infectious disease caused by a single-stranded RNA (ssRNA) virus, known as SARS-CoV-2. The disease, since its first outbreak in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, has led to a global pandemic. The pharmaceutical industry has developed several vaccines, of different vector technologies, against the virus. Of note, among these vaccines, seven have been fully approved by WHO. However, despite the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination, some rare adverse effects have been reported and have been associated with the use of the vaccines developed against SARS-CoV-2, especially those based on mRNA and non-replicating viral vector technology. Rare adverse events reported include allergic and anaphylactic reactions, thrombosis and thrombocytopenia, myocarditis, Bell's palsy, transient myelitis, Guillen-Barre syndrome, recurrences of herpes-zoster, autoimmunity flares, epilepsy, and tachycardia. In this review, we discuss the potential molecular mechanisms leading to these rare adverse events of interest and we also attempt an association with the various vaccine components and platforms. A better understanding of the underlying mechanisms, according to which the vaccines cause side effects, in conjunction with the identification of the vaccine components and/or platforms that are responsible for these reactions, in terms of pharmacovigilance, could probably enable the improvement of future vaccines against COVID-19 and/or even other pathological conditions.

Allergic adverse events following immunization: Data from post-marketing surveillance in Apulia region (South of Italy)

Introduction

Among adverse events following immunization (AEFIs), allergic reactions elicit the most concern, as they are often unpredictable and can be life-threatening. Their estimates range from one in 1,000,000 to one in 50,000 vaccine doses. This report describes allergic events following immunization reported from 2020 to 2021 in Puglia, a region in the South-East of Italy with around 4 million inhabitants. Its main objective is to describe the allergic safety profile of currently employed vaccines.

Materials and methods

This is a retrospective observational study. The study period spanned from January 2020 to December 2021, and the whole Apulian population was included in the study. Information regarding AEFIs reported in Puglia during the study period was gathered from the Italian Drug Authority's pharmacovigilance database (National Pharmacovigilance Network, RNF). The overall number of vaccine doses administered was extrapolated by the Apulian online immunization database (GIAVA). Reporting rates were calculated as AEFIs reported during a certain time span/number of vaccine doses administered during the same period.

Results

10,834,913 vaccine doses were administered during the study period and 95 reports of allergic AEFIs were submitted to the RNF (reporting rate 0.88/100,000 doses). 27.4% of the reported events (26/95) were classified as serious (reporting rate 0.24/100,000 doses). 68 out of 95 (71.6%) adverse events were at least partially resolved by the time of reporting and none of them resulted in the subject's death.

Conclusions

Allergic reactions following vaccination were rare events, thus confirming the favourable risks/benefits ratio for currently marketed vaccines.

The prevalence of adverse reactions among individuals with three-dose COVID-19 vaccination

BACKGROUND

Considering the adverse reactions to vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), some people, particularly the elderly and those with underlying medical conditions, are hesitant to be vaccinated. This study aimed to explore the prevalence of adverse reactions and provide direct evidence of vaccine safety, mainly for the elderly and people with underlying medical conditions, to receive COVID-19 vaccination.

METHODS

From 1st March to 30th April 2022, we conducted an online survey of people who had completed three doses of COVID-19 vaccination by convenience sampling. Adverse reaction rates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. In addition, conditional logistic regression was used to compare the differences in adverse reactions among the elderly and those with underlying medical conditions with the general population.

RESULTS

A total of 3339 individuals were included in this study, of which 2335 (69.9%) were female, with an average age of 32.1 ± 11.4 years. The prevalence of adverse reactions after the first dose of inactivated vaccine was 24.6% (23.1-26.2%), 19.2% (17.8-20.7%) for the second dose, and 19.1% (17.7-20.6%) for the booster dose; among individuals using messenger RNA vaccines, the prevalence was 42.7% (32.3-53.6%) for the first dose, 47.2% (36.5-58.1%) for the second dose, and 46.1% (35.4-57.0%) for the booster dose. Compared with the general population, the prevalence of adverse events did not differ in individuals with underlying medical conditions and those aged 60 and above.

CONCLUSIONS

For individuals with underlying medical conditions and those aged 60 and above, the prevalence of adverse reactions is similar to that of the general population, which provides a scientific basis regarding vaccination safety for these populations.

Adverse Events of COVID-19 Vaccination among the Saudi Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesize the evidence on the adverse events (AEs) of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccinations in Saudi Arabia. A computerized search in MEDLINE via PubMed and OVID, Scopus, CENTRAL, and Web of Science was conducted using relevant keywords. The NIH tools were used for the quality assessment. A total of 14 studies (16 reports) were included. The pooled analysis showed that the incidence of AEs post-COVID-19 vaccination was 40.4% (95% CI:6.4% to 87%). Compared to the AstraZeneca vaccine, the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was associated with a lower risk ratio (RR) of wheezing (RR = 0.04), fever (RR = 0.32), chills (RR = 0.41), headache (RR = 0.47), dizziness (RR = 0.49), and joint pain (RR = 0.51). The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was associated with significantly higher RR of general allergic reactions (RR = 1.62), dyspnea (RR = 1.68), upper respiratory tract symptoms (RR = 1.71), and lymphadenopathy (RR = 8.32). The current evidence suggests that the incidence of AEs following COVID-19 vaccines is 40%; however, most of these AEs were mild and for a short time. The overall number of participants with AEs was higher in the Pfizer group compared to the AstraZeneca group; however, the AstraZeneca vaccine was associated with a higher RR of several AEs.

Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273) COVID-19 mRNA vaccines and hypersensitivity reactions

The SARS-CoV-2 Virus (COVID-19) is responsible for over 239 million cases and 4.8 million deaths globally (Data source WHO COVID-19 Dashboard accessed on October 14, 2021). It continues to surge and ravage countries, leaving healthcare systems in constant struggle and uncertainty. A variety of vaccines were developed to combat the spread of the COVID-19 Virus. Reports of possible allergic reactions with COVID-19 vaccines are a significant cause of public concern, especially among those with a known history of a severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis). Here we review articles relevant to COVID-19 vaccines and their excipients (especially PEG (Polyethylene glycol) and hypersensitivity reactions associated with COVID-19 vaccines (including clinical features, pathophysiology, special populations receiving COVID-19 vaccinations, potential diagnostic tests, and preventive measures that can be taken to minimize the risks of hypersensitivity reactions with COVID-19 vaccines).

Multiple cranial nerve palsies with small angle exotropia following COVID-19 mRNA vaccination in an adolescent: A case report

BACKGROUND

Several vaccines against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 have been approved and widely distributed, raising public concerns regarding the side effects of immunization, as the incidence of ease. Although many adverse events following the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine have been reported, neurological complications are relatively uncommon. Herein, we report a rare case of multiple cranial palsies following COVID-19 vaccination in an adolescent patient.

CASE SUMMARY

A previously healthy, 14-year-old Asian girl with facial palsy presented to the emergency department with inability to close the right eye or wrinkle right side of the forehead, and pain in the right cheek. She had received second dose of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech) 18 days before onset of symptoms. She was diagnosed with Bell’s palsy and prescribed a steroid (1 mg/kg/day methylprednisolone) based on symptoms and magnetic resonance imaging findings. However, the next day, all sense of taste was lost with inability to swallow solid food; the gag reflex was absent. Horizontal diplopia was also present. Due to worsening of her condition, she was given high-dose steroids (1 g/day methylprednisolone) for 3 days and then discharged with oral steroids. Improvement in the symptoms was noted 4 days post steroid treatment completion. At the most recent follow-up, her general condition was good with no symptoms except diplopia; ocular motility disturbances were noted. Hence, prism glasses were prescribed for diplopia relief.

CONCLUSION

Small-angle exotropia was observed in the facial, trigeminal, and glossopharyngeal nerve palsies, in our patient. The etiology of this adverse effect following vaccination was thought to be immunological.

PEG allergy - A COVID-19 pandemic-made problem? A German perspective

Background

Polyethylene glycol (PEG) has been used for decades, but only caused allergic reactions exceptionally. Introduction of PEG-containing COVID-19 vaccines might have fostered public interest beyond medical reasoning.

Objectives

To investigate the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on the public interest in PEG allergy in Germany and the published PEG allergy cases worldwide.

Methods

A retrospective longitudinal study was conducted to measure public interest in PEG allergy analyzing Google search volume in Germany from February 2018 to January 2022. Medically confirmed “PEG allergy” cases were analyzed by looking at the numbers of PubMed case reports and case series from 1977 until January 2022.

Results

Web results in Germany before COVID-19 show search volumes related to “PEG allergy/testing” was negligible, with 10 search queries per month. The pandemic led to a >200-fold increase from 250 queries 2 years before to 55 720 queries 2 years thereafter, reflecting tremendous public interest. Additionally, the maximum monthly search volume from before to during the pandemic increased immensely for “vaccination” (57-fold), “vaccination and adverse effects” (85-fold), “vaccination and allergy” (71-fold). In contrast, the increase of publication numbers for the search term “PEG allergy” was small from 2019 to 2021 (2.5-fold). Only a very low number of 211 cases with “PEG allergy” worldwide since 1977 could be identified.

Conclusion

PEG allergy became a topic of major public interest because of COVID-19 vaccination. Scientific publications have increased to a lesser extent, probably promoted by public awareness. Conversely, the overall number of cases published with PEG allergy remain very low. The current high demand for COVID-19 vaccination allergy testing is triggered by public interest instead of medical reasoning.

Allergy Workup in the Diagnosis of COVID-19 Vaccines-Induced Hypersensitivity Reactions and Its Impact on Vaccination

INTRODUCTION

Immediate and delayed hypersensitivity reactions (HSR) to COVID-19 vaccines are rare adverse events that need to be prevented, diagnosed, and managed in order to guarantee adherence to the vaccination campaign. The aims of our study were to stratify the risk of HSR to COVID-19 vaccines and propose alternative strategies to complete the vaccination.

METHODS

1,640 subjects were screened for vaccinal eligibility, according to national and international recommendations. Among them, we enrolled for allergy workup 152 subjects, 43 with HSR to COVID-19 vaccines and 109 at high risk of HSR to the first dose. In vivo skin tests with drugs and/or vaccines containing PEG/polysorbates were performed in all of them, using skin prick test and, when negative, intradermal tests. In a subgroup of patients resulted negative to the in vivo skin tests, the programmed dose of COVID-19 vaccine (Pfizer/BioNTech) was administered in graded doses regimen, and detection of neutralizing anti-spike antibodies was performed in these patients after 4 weeks from the vaccination, using the SPIA method.

RESULTS

Skin tests for PEG/polysorbates resulted positive in only 3% (5/152) of patients, including 2 with previous HSR to COVID-19 vaccines and 3 at high risk of HSR to the first dose. Among the 147 patients with negative skin tests, 97% (143/147) were eligible for vaccination and 87% (124/143) of them received safely the programmed COVID-19 vaccine dose. Administration of graded doses of Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine were well tolerated in 17 out of 18 patients evaluated; only 1 developed an HSR during the vaccination, less severe than the previous one, and all developed neutralizing anti-spike antibodies after 4 weeks with values comparable to those subjects who received the vaccine in unfractionated dose.

CONCLUSION

On the whole, the usefulness of the skin tests for PEG/polysorbates seems limited in the diagnosis of HSR to COVID-19 vaccines. Graded doses regimen (Pfizer/BioNTech) is a safe and effective alternative strategy to complete the vaccinal course.

mRNA-1273 but not BNT162b2 induces antibodies against polyethylene glycol (PEG) contained in mRNA-based vaccine formulations

Two messenger RNA (mRNA)-based vaccines are widely used globally to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Both vaccine formulations contain PEGylated lipids in their composition, in the form of polyethylene glycol [PEG] 2000 dimyristoyl glycerol for mRNA-1273, and 2 [(polyethylene glycol)-2000]-N,N-ditetradecylacetamide for BNT162b2. It is known that some PEGylated drugs and products for human use which contain PEG are capable of eliciting immune responses that lead to to detectable PEG-specific antibodies in serum. In this study, we determined if any of the components of mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2 formulations elicited PEG-specific antibody responses in serum by enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). We detected an increase in the reactivity to mRNA vaccine formulations in mRNA-1273 but not BNT162b2 vaccinees' sera in a prime-boost dependent manner. Furthermore, we observed the same pattern of reactivity against irrelevant lipid nanoparticles from an influenza virus mRNA formulation and found that the reactivity of such antibodies correlated well with antibody levels against high and low molecular weight PEG. Using sera from participants selected based on the vaccine-associated side effects experienced after vaccination, including delayed onset, injection site or severe allergic reactions, we found no obvious association between PEG antibodies and adverse reactions. Overall, our data shows a differential induction of anti-PEG antibodies by mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2. The clinical relevance of PEG reactive antibodies induced by administration of the mRNA-1273 vaccine, and the potential interaction of these antibodies with other PEGylated drugs remains to be explored.

Marijuana-induced toxic myocarditis: a case report and a review of the literature

Cannabis consumption has increased over the past decade, together with its application in the medical field.1 Therefore, close monitoring of the potential harm to public health caused by its use is required. Many of the related health implications of cannabis include cardiovascular diseases.2 In young adults with a history of cannabis use, higher frequency of admission for acute myocardial infarction, arrhythmia and stroke were described in a recent study.3 Although rare, cases of marijuana-induced toxic myocarditis have been reported in literature.4-11 This study examines a case of a young male patient with acute myocarditis following marijuana use.

Anaphylaxis and allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines: A narrative review of characteristics and potential obstacles on achieving herd immunity

Background and Aims

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a highly contagious infection, and new variants of its causative virus continue to emerge all around the world. Meanwhile, mass vaccination represents a highly effective measure to reduce the disease burden. Not only do vaccines immunize individuals, but they also protect the entire population through achieving herd immunity. They are composed of various ingredients, some of which may induce hypersensitivity reactions, namely anaphylaxis and cutaneous allergic reactions. This review aims to provide an explicit overview of the pathophysiology, suspected responsible components, and management of COVID-19 vaccine-induced allergic reactions, and their effect on acquiring herd immunity.

Methods

To perform this narrative review, a comprehensive literature search based on our selected terms was conducted in online databases of PubMed/Medline and Google Scholar for finding the relevant studies published from 2019 to 2022.

Results

COVID-19 vaccines introduce several advantages that outweigh their potential risks, such as allergic reactions. Allergic reactions are mainly attributed to polyethylene glycol and polysorbate excipients that can provoke IgE-mediated reactions and hypersensitivity reactions. These reactions should be managed properly to avoid having serious sequelae.

Conclusion

It is of great importance to immediately recognize and manage vaccine hypersensitivity reactions, especially anaphylaxis, to avoid allergic patients being excluded from the vaccination program, and more importantly, to stop the spreading of unfounded vaccine hesitancy leading to delayed herd immunity.

2022 AAHA Canine Vaccination Guidelines

These guidelines are an update and extension of previous AAHA peer-reviewed canine vaccination guidelines published in 2017. Vaccination is a cornerstone of canine preventive healthcare and one of the most cost-effective ways of maintaining a dog's health, longevity, and quality of life. Canine vaccination also serves a public health function by forming a barrier against several zoonotic diseases affecting dogs and humans. Canine vaccines are broadly categorized as containing core and noncore immunizing antigens, with administration recommendations based on assessment of individual patient risk factors. The guidelines include a comprehensive table listing canine core and noncore vaccines and a recommended vaccination and revaccination schedule for each vaccine. The guidelines explain the relevance of different vaccine formulations, including those containing modified-live virus, inactivated, and recombinant immunizing agents. Factors that potentially affect vaccine efficacy are addressed, including the patient's prevaccination immune status and vaccine duration of immunity. Because animal shelters are one of the most challenging environments for prevention and control of infectious diseases, the guidelines also provide recommendations for vaccination of dogs presented at or housed in animal shelters, including the appropriate response to an infectious disease outbreak in the shelter setting. The guidelines explain how practitioners can interpret a patient's serological status, including maternally derived antibody titers, as indicators of immune status and suitability for vaccination. Other topics covered include factors associated with postvaccination adverse events, vaccine storage and handling to preserve product efficacy, interpreting product labeling to ensure proper vaccine use, and using client education and healthcare team training to raise awareness of the importance of vaccinations.

Musculoskeletal Sequelae following COVID-19 mRNA Vaccination: A Case Report

Background

Case report

Conclusion

Adverse Events and Safety of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines: What's New and What's Next

Just over 1 year following rollout of the first vaccines for coronavirus disease 2019, 572 million doses have been administered in the United States. Compared with the number of vaccines administered, adverse effects such as anaphylaxis have been rare, and seemingly, the more serious the effect, the rarer the occurrence. Despite these adverse effects, there are few, if any, true contraindications to coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination and most individuals recover without further sequelae. This review provides guidance for the allergist/immunologist regarding appropriate next steps based on patient's known allergy history or adverse reaction after receipt of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine to assist in safe global immunization.

Delayed Skin Reactions to COVID-19 mRNA-1273 Vaccine: Case Report and Literature Review

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 mRNA vaccine was granted emergency use authorization (EUA) on December 18, 2020. Some patients experienced a transient, pruritic rash at the injection site, which was referred to as "COVID arm". It is considered a delayed-type hypersensitivity reaction and occurs mostly in individuals after vaccination with the Moderna vaccine but rarely with other mRNA vaccines.

CASE SUMMARY

A healthy 33-year-old woman with no history of disease or long-term medication presented with fever and rash on the left upper arm three days after her first vaccination with the mRNA-1273 vaccine (Moderna).

RESULTS

After treatment with antihistamines, all lesions gradually resolved over the following 4 to 5 days.

CONCLUSION

We report a case of "COVID arm": a localized erythematous rash surrounding the injection site that arose three days after the first dose of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine. Delayed injection site reactions occurred in approximately 0.8% of vaccinated people after the first dose and in approximately 0.2% after the second dose. The lesions persisted for several days and then resolved without treatment. Health care providers were not prepared to address these delayed local reactions to the mRNA-1273 vaccine. Given the scale-up of mass vaccination campaigns worldwide, these skin reactions may likely generate concerns among patients and requests for evaluation. Although these skin reactions have not been consistently recognized, guidance regarding the second dose of the vaccine has varied, and many patients have unnecessarily received antibiotic agents.

Computer-Aided Tools and Resources for Fungal Pathogens: An Application of Reverse Vaccinology for Mucormycosis

Increasing fungal infections in immunocompromised hosts are a growing concern for global public health. Along with treatments, preventive measures are required. The emergence of reverse vaccinology has opened avenues for using genomic and proteomic data from pathogens in the design of vaccines. In this work, we present a comprehensive collection of various computational tools and databases with potential to aid in vaccine development. The ongoing pandemic has directed attention toward the increasing number of mucormycosis infections in COVID-19 patients. As a case study, we developed a computational pipeline for assisting vaccine development for mucormycosis. We obtained 6 proteins from 29,447 sequences from UniProtKB as potential vaccine candidates against mucormycosis, fulfilling multiple criteria. These criteria included potential characteristics, namely adhesin properties, surface or extracellular localization, antigenicity, no similarity to any human proteins, nonallergenicity, stability in vitro, and expression in fungal cells. These six proteins were predicted to have B cell and T cell epitopes, proinflammatory inducing peptides, and orthologs in several mucormycosis-causing species. These data could aid in vaccine development against mucormycosis for at-risk individuals.

Clinical Characteristics of Patients with Myocarditis following COVID-19 mRNA Vaccination: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

COVID-19 mRNA vaccinations have recently been implicated in causing myocarditis. Therefore, the primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the clinical characteristics of patients with myocarditis following mRNA vaccination. The secondary aims were to report common imaging and laboratory findings, as well as treatment regimes, in these patients. A literature search was performed from December 2019 to June 2022. Eligible studies reported patients older than 18 years vaccinated with mRNA, a diagnosis of myocarditis, and subsequent outcomes. Pooled mean or proportion were analyzed using a random-effects model. Seventy-five unique studies (patient n = 188, 89.4% male, mean age 18-67 years) were included. Eighty-six patients had Moderna vaccines while one hundred and two patients had Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines. The most common presenting symptoms were chest pain (34.5%), fever (17.1%), myalgia (12.4%), and chills (12.1%). The most common radiologic findings were ST-related changes on an electrocardiogram (58.7%) and hypokinesia on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging or echocardiography (50.7%). Laboratory findings included elevated Troponin I levels (81.7%) and elevated C-reactive protein (71.5%). Seven patients were admitted to the intensive care unit. The most common treatment modality was non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs (36.6%) followed by colchicine (28.5%). This meta-analysis presents novel evidence to suggest possible myocarditis post mRNA vaccination in certain individuals, especially young male patients. Clinical practice must therefore take appropriate pre-cautionary measures when administrating COVID-19 mRNA vaccinations.