Consensus Statements on the Approach to COVID-19 Vaccine Allergy Safety in Hong Kong

Background: Mass coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination to achieve herd immunity is an effective means to mitigate the current COVID-19 pandemic. Reports of COVID-19 vaccine-associated allergic reactions and lack of clear local guidance are contributing factors leading to a low vaccine acceptance rate in the community. A task force of experts from the Hong Kong Institute of Allergy (HKIA) has been formed to address current needs.

Objective: To formulate a set of consensus statements (CS) on COVID-19 vaccine allergy safety (VAS) in Hong Kong.

Methods: A nominated task force of experts managing patients with drug and vaccine allergies in Hong Kong formulated the CS by the Delphi method. An agreement was a priori defined as ≥80% consensus.

Results: A total of 11 statements met the criteria for consensus with good overall agreement among task force members, including seven statements on pre-vaccination recommendations and four statements on vaccination and post-vaccination guidance. Individuals with a history of suspected allergic reaction to prior COVID-19 vaccination should not receive further COVID-19 vaccination, and other groups at risk of COVID-19 vaccine-associated allergic reactions have been identified. The importance of pre-vaccination and post-vaccination assessment by frontline healthcare workers and evaluation by allergists are highlighted.

Conclusion: The CS provides pragmatic and timely guidance for local frontline healthcare providers on decisions regarding COVID-19 VAS.

Hong Kong Anaphylaxis Consortium Consensus Statements on prescription of adrenaline autoinjectors in the acute care setting

Background

Adrenaline autoinjectors (AAInj) facilitates early administration of adrenaline and remains the first-line treatment for anaphylaxis. However, only a minority of anaphylaxis survivors in Hong Kong are prescribed AAInj and formal guidance do not exist. International anaphylaxis guidelines have been largely based on Western studies, which may not be as relevant for non-Western populations.

Objective

To formulate a set of consensus statements on the prescription of AAInj in Hong Kong.

Methods

Consensus statements were formulated by the Hong Kong Anaphylaxis Consortium by the Delphi method. Agreement was defined as greater than or equal to 80% consensus. Subgroup analysis was performed to investigate differences between allergy and emergency medicine physicians.

Results

A total of 7 statements met criteria for consensus with good overall agreement between allergy and emergency medicine physicians. AAInj should be used as first-line treatment and prescribed for all patients at risk of anaphylaxis. This should be prescribed prior to discharge from the Accident and Emergency Department together with an immediate referral to an allergy center. The decision for prescribing AAInj should be based on the severity of previous reactions; including objective signs of respiratory involvement, objective signs of cardiovascular involvement and multiorgan involvement (regardless of severity). Patient demographics and comorbidities, specifically history of asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, should also be considered. Patients deemed eligible for AAInj should be offered avoidance advice and prescribed one AAInj while awaiting review by allergists. AAInj technique should be demonstrated by a healthcare professional or instruction video, and a return demonstration by the patient is required. The patient should also be counseled that the decision on the continued need of AAInj prescription in the long-term should be reviewed by an allergist.

Conclusion

Consensus statements support the prescription of AAInj by front-line physicians with subsequent allergist review when treating patients at risk of anaphylaxis in Hong Kong.

DNA immunization using a secreted cell wall antigen Mp1p is protective against Penicillium marneffei infection

None of the vaccines used in dimorphic fungal infections utilized the mucosal route for immunization, whereas only one utilized a secreted protein as antigen, despite knowing that infections caused by dimorphic fungi are usually acquired through inhalation. In this study, we investigated the usefulness of Mp1p (a secreted cell wall antigen encoded by MP1)-based vaccines for generation of protective immune responses against Penicillium marneffei infection using a mouse model, and compared the relative effectiveness of intramuscular MP1 DNA vaccine, oral mucosal MP1 DNA vaccine delivered by live-attenuated Salmonella typhimurium, and intraperitoneal recombinant Mp1p protein vaccine. The serum IgM level of the Mp1p protein vaccine group at day 7 and the serum IgG levels of the Mp1p protein vaccine group at days 7 and 21 were significantly higher than those of the other groups (P<0.0001). The serum IgG level of the MP1 DNA vaccine group was significantly higher than that of the corresponding control group and oral mucosal MP1 DNA vaccine group (one dose) at day 21 (P<0.0001 and <0.05, respectively). The groups of mice immunized with intramuscular MP1 DNA vaccine, oral mucosal MP1 DNA vaccine, and intraperitoneal Mp1p protein vaccine showed significantly higher Mp1p-specific lymphocyte proliferation index (LPI) than the control groups. The interferon-gamma (IF-gamma) levels of supernatant of splenic cell cultures obtained from mice after intramuscular MP1 DNA vaccine, mucosal MP1 DNA vaccine (three doses), or intraperitoneal Mp1p protein vaccine administration were higher than that which occurred after mucosal MP1 DNA vaccine (one dose) administration or those of controls. Interleukin-4 (IL-4) was not detectable in the supernatant of splenic cell cultures obtained from all groups of mice. The percentage survival of the mice immunized with intramuscular MP1 DNA vaccine, oral mucosal MP1 DNA vaccine (three doses), oral mucosal MP1 DNA vaccine (one dose), intraperitoneal recombinant Mp1p protein, oral live-attenuated S. typhimurium control, and intramuscular pJW4303 DNA control at day 60 after wild type P. marneffei challenge were 100, 60, 40, 40, 40, and 0%, respectively. The survival of mice in the MP1 DNA vaccine group was significantly better than those of the oral mucosal MP1 DNA vaccine (three doses) group (P<0.05), oral mucosal MP1 DNA vaccine (one dose) group (P<0.005), recombinant Mp1p protein group (P<0.005), S. typhimurium aroA strain group (P<0.05), and pJW4303 group (P<0.00001). Although, the mechanism by which intramuscular MP1 DNA vaccine offered the best protection against P. marneffei infection remains to be elucidated, the present observation prompted further clinical trials on the use of MP1 DNA immunization on asymptomatic human immunodeficiency virus carriers in P. marneffei endemic areas.