What have we learned about the allergenicity and adverse reactions associated with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccines: One year later

Outcomes of pediatric patients with suspected allergies to COVID-19 vaccines

Background

Adverse effects following immunizations (AEFIs) can contribute to vaccine hesitancy.

Objective

We evaluated clinical outcomes of AEFIs subsequent to administration of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine at 2 pediatric allergy centers.

Methods

Data on pediatric patients referred for COVID-19 AEFI concerns between March 2021 and October 2022 were reviewed. The collected data included patient demographics, clinical characteristics, outcomes of prior COVID-19 vaccination, recommendations after consultation, and outcomes of revaccination.

Results

The 163 patients were separated into 2 groups based on the absence (n = 89 [54.6%]) or presence (n = 74 [45.4%]) of prior COVID-19-related AEFIs. The most common reason for referral without a prior AEFI was another suspected drug allergy (n = 58 [35.6%]). All patients in this group were recommended for COVID-19 vaccination. Of the 163 patients, 82 (92.1%) proceeded with vaccination, with 77 of them (93.9%) tolerating vaccination. Most of those with a prior COVID-19-related AEFI had a delayed cutaneous reaction (n = 60 [37.0%]); 1 patient (0.6%) had suspected anaphylaxis. In this group, 6 (8.1%) were advised to postpone COVID-19 vaccination until their debilitating skin conditions had improved in response to further treatment, whereas 45 (77.6%) tolerated subsequent vaccination to the same or an alternate COVID-19 vaccine type. The most common AEFI on revaccination was urticaria (in 8 of 11 patients [72.7%]). AEFI on revaccination was significantly associated with a history of spontaneous urticaria or angioedema (relative risk = 3.6 [95% CI = 1.30-9.99]; P = .020) and urticaria following COVID-19 vaccination previously (relative risk = 4.12 [95% CI = 1.22-13.87]; P = .017).

Conclusions

Children with a history of urticaria or angioedema related or unrelated to prior COVID-19 vaccination were at higher risk of a COVID-19-related AEFI on revaccination, although most were able to complete the vaccination series under the management of our immunology/allergy service.

Vaccine hesitancy in patients presenting to a specialized allergy center: clinical relevant sensitizations, impact on mental health and vaccination rates

Introduction

The COVID vaccination program with new types of vaccinations and early reports of allergic reactions to vaccines led to vaccination hesitancy in patients with allergies. In this study, we aimed to characterize patients who present at an allergy center with specific questions regarding risk assessment to COVID vaccines in comparison to regular allergy center patients.

Methods

A total of 50 patient charts of patients with risk assessment for COVID vaccination (COV group) and 50 regular allergy center patients (ALL group) were assessed for documented allergies, comorbidities, total IgE, and tryptase levels and hospital anxiety and depression score (HADS). Skin prick testing (SPT) with additives of COVID vaccines [polyethylene glycol (PEG), polysorbate] were performed if indicated based on medical history.

Results

Patients who presented for examination prior to a possible COVID vaccination were mostly female (86%) and had more frequently reported allergic reactions to drugs in the past, but only in a minor group (28%) were the reactions qualified as anaphylaxis. The group COV patients scored significantly higher in the HADS for anxiety and depression than the regular group ALL patients. The same trend was observed when data were corrected for gender. It is worth noting that patients without any prior contact to COVID vaccines scored comparable regarding anxiety to patients with prior reaction to COVID vaccinations, but significantly higher in the depression score. In 19 patients (38%) who met the indications for SPT for the suspicious contents PEG and Polysorbate 80, the tests did not show a positive result. Furthermore, 84% of patients underwent the prick test, but only 15% of patients who received consultation alone agreed to vaccination at our center. No vaccination-related event was documented in these patients.

Discussion

In conclusion, vaccination hesitancy was frequently elicited by negative experiences with drugs and putative drug allergies. Female patients predominate in this patient group, and the anxiety and depression scores were significantly elevated. Allergological workup, including SPT, led to a high rate of subsequent vaccinations, whereas a discussion with the patients about risks and individualized advice for vaccination without testing only rarely resulted in documented vaccinations.

Gastrointestinal reflux contributes to laryngopharyngeal symptoms that mimic anaphylaxis: COVID-19 vaccination experience

Background

The sensation of throat closure after vaccination is concerning for anaphylaxis and leads to vaccine hesitancy.

Objectives

We characterized patients who developed laryngopharyngeal symptoms (LPhS) after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination and assessed risk factors for these symptoms.

Methods

The study analyzed data from the COVID-19 vaccines adverse reactions registry (December 14, 2020, to June 13, 2022). Outcomes included the incidence of postvaccination LPhS and use of epinephrine. We identified and compared risk factors for COVID-19 postvaccination reactions between subjects with and without LPhS.

Results

A total of 158 subjects were enrolled onto the registry. LPhS were reported in 61 subjects (38.6%), of whom 52 (85.2%) received a subsequent dose. With initial vaccination, the use of epinephrine was higher in subjects with LPhS (20%) compared to those without (6%; P = .0094). Fifty-two subjects (85.2%) with LPhS received a subsequent COVID-19 vaccine dose with milder or no symptoms, and none needed treatment with epinephrine. Those with LPhS were more likely to have a history of drug allergies (P = .02), severe medication allergies (P = .03), gastroesophageal reflux disease (P = .018), and need for antireflux medications (P = .0085) compared to controls.

Conclusions

In our registry, postvaccination LPhS were common. LPhS can mimic anaphylaxis and lead to more frequent use of epinephrine. Gastroesophageal reflux disease was more frequent in these subjects. Patients with subjective throat closure sensation can safely receive subsequent vaccine doses with close observation and reassurance. LPhS are not unique to COVID-19 vaccines. Patient and provider education regarding the role of gastroesophageal reflux disease as a risk factor for LPhS with vaccination can improve vaccine uptake.

The Community Pharmacy as a Study Center for the Epidemiological Analysis of the Population Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2: Evaluation of Vaccine Safety and Pharmaceutical Service

We conducted a monocentric observational study aimed at evaluating the vaccine safety and the pharmaceutical service provided at a community pharmacy (C.PHARM) in the Puglia Region in the period from 29 December 2021 to 12 March 2022 using data from 550 patients of various ages and sexes and with concomitant diseases. We collected anamnestic data, the number of hospitalizations, and any post-vaccination adverse reactions. Interviews using the integrated EQ5 method were also performed to evaluate the quality of the service offered and any therapy preference. As expected, the vaccines were reactogenic after the first dose in the patients with mild-moderate reactions, with younger age and female gender as risk factors. Immune-allergic reactions of a moderate-severe degree were observed in adult females. In the elderly, the vaccination was well tolerated. Comirnaty® showed a favorable O.R. < 1 vs. other vaccines. No cardiovascular events or hospitalizations were observed up to May 2023. Regional data indicate that all treatments during May 2023 were correlated with the viremia. PaxlovidTM was prescribed in 3% of the patients in our center and in 1.46% in the region, and distributed/dispensed on behalf of third parties in accordance with a novel distribution/dispensation protocol of the C.PHARM that resulted in a safe vaccination center providing appropriate patient inclusion during vaccination.

An Update in COVID-19 Vaccine Reactions in 2023: Progress and Understanding

It has been 3 years since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was initially declared, and 2 years have passed since the first COVID-19 vaccines were introduced. Since then, 13.2 billion COVID-19 vaccine doses have been administered worldwide, largely with multiple doses of messenger RNA vaccines. Although mild local and systemic adverse effects after COVID-19 vaccination are common, serious adverse effects following immunization are rare, particularly when compared with the large number of vaccine doses administered. Immediate and delayed reactions are relatively common and present similarly to allergic and hypersensitivity reactions. Despite this, reactions generally do not commonly recur, cause sequelae, or contraindicate revaccination. In this Clinical Management Review, we provide an updated perspective of COVID-19 vaccine reactions, their spectrum and epidemiology, and recommended approaches to evaluation and management.

Updated guidance regarding the risk of allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines and recommended evaluation and management: A GRADE assessment and international consensus approach

This guidance updates 2021 GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) recommendations regarding immediate allergic reactions following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and addresses revaccinating individuals with first-dose allergic reactions and allergy testing to determine revaccination outcomes. Recent meta-analyses assessed the incidence of severe allergic reactions to initial COVID-19 vaccination, risk of mRNA-COVID-19 revaccination after an initial reaction, and diagnostic accuracy of COVID-19 vaccine and vaccine excipient testing in predicting reactions. GRADE methods informed rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations. A modified Delphi panel consisting of experts in allergy, anaphylaxis, vaccinology, infectious diseases, emergency medicine, and primary care from Australia, Canada, Europe, Japan, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States formed the recommendations. We recommend vaccination for persons without COVID-19 vaccine excipient allergy and revaccination after a prior immediate allergic reaction. We suggest against >15-minute postvaccination observation. We recommend against mRNA vaccine or excipient skin testing to predict outcomes. We suggest revaccination of persons with an immediate allergic reaction to the mRNA vaccine or excipients be performed by a person with vaccine allergy expertise in a properly equipped setting. We suggest against premedication, split-dosing, or special precautions because of a comorbid allergic history.

Studying how administration route and dose regulates antibody generation against LNPs for mRNA delivery with single-particle resolution

Following the recent approval of both siRNA- and mRNA-based therapeutics, nucleic acid therapies are considered a game changer in medicine. Their envisioned widespread use for many therapeutic applications with an array of cellular target sites means that various administration routes will be employed. Concerns exist regarding adverse reactions against the lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) used for mRNA delivery, as PEG coatings on nanoparticles can induce severe antibody-mediated immune reactions, potentially being boosted by the inherently immunogenic nucleic acid cargo. While exhaustive information is available on how physicochemical features of nanoparticles affects immunogenicity, it remains unexplored how the fundamental choice of administration route regulates anti-particle immunity. Here, we directly compared antibody generation against PEGylated mRNA-carrying LNPs administered by the intravenous, intramuscular, or subcutaneous route, using a novel sophisticated assay capable of measuring antibody binding to authentic LNP surfaces with single-particle resolution. Intramuscular injections in mice were found to generate overall low and dose-independent levels of anti-LNP antibodies, while both intravenous and subcutaneous LNP injections generated substantial and highly dose-dependent levels. These findings demonstrate that before LNP-based mRNA medicines can be safely applied to new therapeutic applications, it will be crucial to carefully consider the choice of administration route.

Immune-Mediated Organ-Specific Reactions to COVID-19 Vaccines: A Retrospective Descriptive Study

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 caused the global COVID-19 pandemic and public health crisis, and it led to the rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines, which can cause rare and typically mild hypersensitivity reactions (HRs). Delayed HRs to COVID-19 vaccines have been reported, and the excipients polyethylene glycol (PEG)2000 and polysorbate 80 (P80) are the suspected culprits. Skin patch tests do not help in diagnosing delayed reactions. We aimed to perform lymphocyte transformation tests (LTT) with PEG2000 and P80 in 23 patients with suspected delayed HRs. Neurological reactions (n = 10) and myopericarditis reactions (n = 6) were the most frequent complications. Seventy-eight percent (18/23) of the study patients were admitted to a hospital ward, and the median time to discharge was 5.5 (IQR, 3-8) days. Some 73.9% of the patients returned to baseline condition after 25 (IQR, 3-80) days. LTT was positive in 8/23 patients (5/10 neurological reactions, 2/4 hepatitis reactions and 1/2 rheumatologic reactions). All myopericarditis cases had a negative LTT. These preliminary results indicate that LTT with PEGs and polysorbates is a useful tool for identifying excipients as causal agents in HRs to COVID-19 vaccines and can play an important role in risk stratification in patients with HRs.

mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine Anaphylaxis: Epidemiology, Risk Factors, and Evaluation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The COVID-19 vaccines have proved essential in our defense against the COVID-19 pandemic. However, concerns regarding allergic reactions to the vaccines persist to this day. Herein, we review the data regarding the frequency of allergic reactions to the COVID-19 vaccines, the epidemiology, and the management of patients reporting vaccine allergic reactions.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although initial reports emphasized a high risk of anaphylaxis to the COVID-19 vaccines, more recent data demonstrate similar rates of anaphylaxis to the COVID-19 vaccines as to other vaccines. Alternative explanations for increased rates of apparent allergic reactions are discussed, including the role for stress-related and nocebo responses. COVID-19 vaccines and mRNA vaccine technology are overwhelmingly safe and well-tolerated by most patients. Careful history and case review will enable the discerning physician to safely vaccinate most patients. Rare patients with objective signs and symptoms of anaphylaxis may be candidates for alternatives to vaccination including monoclonal antibodies.

COVID-19 vaccine provocation test outcome in high-risk allergic patients: A retrospective study from a tertiary hospital in Indonesia

Background

High COVID-19 vaccine coverage is essential. Patients who are considered high risk for hypersensitivity reactions and have had an allergic reaction to the COVID-19 vaccine are usually referred to an allergist for assessment of vaccination. Administration of a vaccine graded challenge (also known as a provocation test) is an option that can be considered in this population. This primary objective of this study is to describe the outcome of the COVID-19 vaccine provocation test and to understand the predicting factors associated with hypersensitivity reaction after the provocation test as the secondary objective.

Methods

Adult patients with a history of hypersensitivity reaction to the first COVID-19 vaccine and high-allergic patients who underwent COVID-19 vaccine provocation test up until May 2022 were included. A protocol using skin prick test (SPT), intradermal test (IDT), followed by graded challenge was developed for the determined vaccine used.

Results

A total of 232 patients were included in the analysis. Twenty-eight had hypersensitivity to their first COVID-19 vaccine dose and 204 were high risk for allergic reaction. Hypersensitivity reactions occurred in 20 patients (8.6%, 95% CI: 5-12.2%), consisting of 4 reactions after SPT, 9 after IDT, 7 during or after titrated challenge. Half of the reactions were mild; however, 3 patients developed severe reactions. Patients with history of anaphylaxis were more likely to experience hypersensitivity reaction after provocation test (aRR = 2.79, 95% CI: 1.05-7.42).

Conclusion

Provocation test in COVID-19 vaccination has a high success rate in patients with a history of hypersensitivity to the first COVID-19 vaccine and in high allergic patients. History of anaphylaxis is associated with hypersensitivity reaction after a COVID-19 vaccine provocation test.

COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients with Chronic Liver Disease

Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 has become a central public health issue, primarily for vulnerable populations such as individuals with Chronic Liver Disease (CLD). Increased COVID-19-related mortality and disease severity has been noted in this subgroup of patients. Severe COVID-19 tends to further deregulate liver function in patients with chronic liver failure or cirrhosis and even reactivate hepatitis in people living with HBV or HCV. In addition, impaired hepatic function leads to several limitations in possible therapeutic interventions. Chronic hepatic dysregulation, along with the underlying cirrhosis-associated immune dysfunction (CAID), leads to a decreased immune response to vaccination that, in turn, may result in reduced efficacy rates and lowered lasting protection. According to current guidelines, timely vaccination and frequent booster shot administration are deemed necessary in this context. Vaccination-related adverse events are mostly mild in nature and similar to those reported in the general population, whereas the incidence of liver injury following vaccination is relatively rare. We aimed to review available evidence and recommendations associated with COVID-19 vaccination in patients with chronic liver disease, and provide insight to current issues and future directions.