Optimizing investigation of suspected allergy to polyethylene glycols

Can Labs Help With Vaccination? In Vitro Tests in Diagnosis of Allergy to COVID-19 Vaccines-A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Since the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic in 2019, vaccinations have proven to be a key strategy in disease prophylaxis. Although vaccines are safe from the perspective of the general population, hypersensitivity reactions have still been described, causing individuals to be reluctant in their vaccination decision. Since the description of first reports of COVID-19 vaccine allergy, many protocols of allergy work-up have been developed, including In Vitro and In Vivo tests. Although In Vivo tests were more accessible, many patients preferred In Vitro tests that would not involve contact with the allergen and be safe. This applied in particular to patients that had experienced a severe delayed hypersensitivity reaction in which In Vivo tests were highly limited and provocations were deemed high risk. Taking into account these circumstances, In Vitro tests might significantly enhance allergy work-up.

METHODS

National Center for Biotechnology Information (Pubmed) database was searched in May 2024 for articles on In Vitro diagnostic methods for COVID-19 vaccine allergy and hypersensitivity.

RESULTS

This article describes the In Vitro tests developed to date in the diagnosis of COVID-19 vaccine hypersensitivity: (1) analysis of specific IgE and IgG, (2) Basophil Activation Test, (3) Histamine Release Test, (4) IgM-dependent complement activation, (5) Lymphocyte Transformation Test, (6) Flow cytometry T-Cell markers, (7) Th1/Th2 cytokines concentration in cell culture.

CONCLUSIONS

The article highlights the tests' advantages, flaws and possible clinical applications.

Allergy to PEG (polyethylene glycol) - sensitivity of basophil activation test with COVID-19 mRNA-vaccine BNT162B2

Basophil activation test (BAT) with COVID-19 mRNA vaccine seems particularly suitable for detecting sensitization to polyethylene glycol (PEG) in patients with PEG allergy. It was the aim of this study to determine the cutoffs for BAT using BNT162B2 (Comirnaty®) in a larger group of PEG allergic patients and controls. 10 PEG allergic patients and 10 controls were studied. BAT was performed using anti-CCR3 for basophil identification and anti-CD63 to assess basophil activation. Incubations with BNT162B2 at four different concentrations were performed. Basophil activation was significantly higher in PEG allergic patients compared to controls at the higher concentrations used. ROC curves showed best results with a sensitivity of 60% and specificity of 100% with a cutoff of 5% CD63+ basophils at a concentration of 4.5 µg/ml. Controls showed no positive results. In our group of PEG allergic patients, a concentration of 4.5 µg/ml BNT162B2 with a cutoff of 5% CD63+ basophils was the most suitable condition for identifying patients with a sensitization to PEG. Allergological work-up of PEG allergic patients including BAT with PEGylated lipid nanoparticles might play a role in the future when these substances will be used for other vaccines and cancer immunotherapies.

Regulating Immune Responses Induced by PEGylated Messenger RNA-Lipid Nanoparticle Vaccine

Messenger RNA (mRNA)-based therapeutics have shown remarkable progress in the treatment and prevention of diseases. Lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) have shown great successes in delivering mRNAs. After an mRNA-LNP vaccine enters a cell via an endosome, mRNA is translated into an antigen, which can activate adaptive immunity. mRNAs can bind to various pattern recognition receptors (PRRs), including toll-like receptors (TLRs), and increase the production of inflammatory cytokines. This review summarizes mechanisms of innate immunity induced by mRNAs. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) has been employed as a component of the mRNA-LNP vaccine. PEGylated nanoparticles display enhanced stability by preventing aggregation of particles. However, PEGylation can cause adverse reactions, including blood clearance (ABC) of nanoparticles via complement activation and anaphylaxis. Mechanisms of PEG-induced ABC phenomenon and anaphylaxis are presented and discussed. There have been studies aimed at reducing immune responses associated with PEG to make safe and effective vaccines. Effects of modifying or replacing PEG in reducing immune responses associated with PEGylated nanoparticles are also discussed. Modifying mRNA can induce immune tolerance, which can prevent hypersensitivity reactions induced by PEGylated mRNA-LNP vaccines. Current progress of immune tolerance induction in association with mRNA-LNP is also summarized. This review might be helpful for developing safe and effective PEGylated mRNA-LNP vaccines.

Perioperative anaphylaxis associated with peripheral inserted central catheter: A retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Peripheral Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) is a commonly utilized medical device for long-term intravenous therapy in healthcare settings. However, there has been a notable increase in anaphylaxis associated with PICC catheterization, which should not be neglected.

AIMS

The purpose is to raise awareness about the occurrence of anaphylaxis or anaphylactoid reactions associated with PICC and to emphasize the need to explore effective methods to prevent this emergency event in the future.

METHOD

This retrospective observational study was conducted at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center between January 2021 and August 2023.

RESULTS

0.10% (13 out of 12,612) of cancer patients suffered from anaphylactic reactions during PICC catheterization. The duration time of anaphylaxis or anaphylactoid reactions was approximately 8 min, with a range of 5-10 min. The signs and symptoms combined with respiratory and cardiovascular system symptoms. Most patients were relieved spontaneously by oxygen inhalation and completed catheterization after their symptoms were alleviated.

CONCLUSION

The increasing incidence of anaphylaxis related to PICC catheterization necessitates greater awareness among healthcare providers. Further research is needed to identify the exact culprits during PICC insertion and develop effective strategies for preventing anaphylactic reactions.

Optimizing Pharmacological and Immunological Properties of Therapeutic Proteins Through PEGylation: Investigating Key Parameters and Their Impact

Protein PEGylation represents a significant technological advancement in the development of protein-based therapeutics and is widely used to reduce immunogenicity, enhance pharmacokinetics, and/or improve stability. The improved pharmacokinetic profile of PEGylated proteins compared with the native protein results in sustained versus fluctuating plasma concentrations and carries the potential of less frequent administration. However, attachment of PEG to therapeutic proteins can alter their structural conformation, which exposes new epitopes to the immune system. The design of PEGylated proteins thus needs to balance the intended benefits with the potential risks associated with the immunogenicity of the PEG moiety itself or resulting from alterations in the conformation of the therapeutic protein. In recent years, advancements in protein PEGylation chemistry have offered the capability to target PEG attachment to specific amino acids to create more stable and bioactive therapies. The biophysical and biopharmaceutical features of PEGylated proteins can vary based on polymer size, shape, density, and conjugation site, and the immunogenicity of the conjugate can be further impacted by the properties of the therapeutic protein itself and the characteristics of the patient. It is important to note that not all patients will develop an immune response toward the PEG moiety, and not all immune responses are clinically meaningful. A comprehensive understanding of the factors that influence immunogenic responses to PEGylated proteins is important to optimize their therapeutic benefits. This article reviews the design and optimization of PEGylation strategies to enhance the clinical performance of protein-based therapeutics while minimizing immunogenic responses to the PEG moiety or PEGylated proteins.

Polyethylene glycol and immunology: aspects of allergic reactions and their mechanisms, as well as ways to prevent them in clinical practice

In modern medical practice, where polyethylene glycol is widely used as a component of various drugs, such as vaccines, chemotherapy drugs, and antibiotics, including vaccines, the issue of allergic reactions to this substance is becoming increasingly important. The purpose of this study is to review and systematise data on various aspects of allergic reactions to polyethylene glycol with the aim of better understanding their pathogenesis, clinical manifestations, diagnostic methods, and possible treatment approaches. The study analysed literature data in modern databases, such as MEDLINE, PubMed, and Scopus, on allergic reactions to polyethylene glycol, using the keywords: "PEG", "polyethylene glycol", "allergy", "side effect". The main aspects of allergy to this substance were highlighted, including mechanisms of development, diagnostic methods, and possible treatment strategies. The analysis found that allergic reactions to polyethylene glycol can manifest in a variety of ways, including anaphylaxis and systemic reactions. A possible role for the immune response has been identified, including the production of IgE and IgM antibodies, complement activation, and accelerated clearance in response to polyethylene glycol, in blood plasma. Data are also provided on how to diagnose an increased risk of an allergic reaction in patients who have previously received drugs with this type of drug transporter and in patients receiving high molecular weight types of polyethylene glycol. The results of this review contribute to a better understanding of allergic reactions to polyethylene glycol and provide information for the development of more effective diagnostic and treatment methods.

PEGylated liposomes for diagnosis of polyethylene glycol allergy

BACKGROUND

Polyethylene glycol (PEG) is a nonprotein polymer that is present in its native (unbound) form as an excipient in a range of products. It is increasingly being utilized clinically in the form of PEGylated liposomal medications and vaccines. PEG is the cause of anaphylaxis in a small percentage of drug reactions; however, diagnosis of PEG allergy is complicated by the variable and poor diagnostic performance of current skin testing protocols.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the diagnostic performance of PEGylated lipid medications as an alternative to currently described tests that use medications containing PEG excipients.

METHODS

Nine patients with a strong history of PEG allergy were evaluated by skin testing with a panel of PEG-containing medications and with a PEGylated lipid nanoparticle vaccine (BNT162b2). Reactivity of basophils to unbound and liposomal PEG was assessed ex vivo, and specificity of basophil responses to PEGylated liposomes was investigated with a competitive inhibition assay. More detailed information is provided in this article's Methods section in the Online Repository available at www.jacionline.org.

RESULTS

Despite compelling histories of anaphylaxis to PEG-containing medications, only 2 (22%) of 9 patients were skin test positive for purified PEG or their index reaction-indicated PEG-containing compound. Conversely, all 9 patients were skin test positive or basophil activation test positive to PEGylated liposomal BNT162b2 vaccine. Concordantly, PEGylated liposomal drugs (BNT162b2 vaccine and PEGylated liposomal doxorubicin), but not purified PEG2000, consistently induced basophil activation ex vivo in patients with PEG allergy but not in nonallergic controls. Basophil reactivity to PEGylated nanoparticles competitively inhibited by preincubation of basophils with native PEG2000.

CONCLUSION

Presentation of PEG on the surface of a lipid nanoparticle increases its in vivo and ex vivo allergenicity, and improves diagnosis of PEG allergy.

Engineering Low Volume Resuscitants for the Prehospital Care of Severe Hemorrhagic Shock

Globally, traumatic injury is a leading cause of suffering and death. The ability to curtail damage and ensure survival after major injury requires a time-sensitive response balancing organ perfusion, blood loss, and portability, underscoring the need for novel therapies for the prehospital environment. Currently, there are few options available for damage control resuscitation (DCR) of trauma victims. We hypothesize that synthetic polymers, which are tunable, portable, and stable under austere conditions, can be developed as effective injectable therapies for trauma medicine. In this work, we design injectable polymers for use as low volume resuscitants (LVRs). Using RAFT polymerization, we evaluate the effect of polymer size, architecture, and chemical composition upon both blood coagulation and resuscitation in a rat hemorrhagic shock model. Our therapy is evaluated against a clinically used colloid resuscitant, Hextend. We demonstrate that a radiant star poly(glycerol monomethacrylate) polymer did not interfere with coagulation while successfully correcting metabolic deficit and resuscitating animals from hemorrhagic shock to the desired mean arterial pressure range for DCR - correcting a 60 % total blood volume (TBV) loss when given at only 10 % TBV. This highly portable and non-coagulopathic resuscitant has profound potential for application in trauma medicine.

Polyethylene glycol hypersensitivity, patient outcomes in a 7-year retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Immediate IgE-mediated hypersensitivity reactions to polyethylene glycol (PEG) are rare. Our understanding of PEG hypersensitivity is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical characteristics and investigation outcomes of the largest cohort of patients with PEG allergy reported.

METHODS

A total of 44 patients investigated for suspected PEG allergy across 4 United Kingdom tertiary allergy centers between October 2013 and December 2020 were studied. Clinical characteristics, index reaction, and approaches to and outcomes of allergy investigations were analyzed.

RESULTS

PEG hypersensitivity was confirmed in 42 of 44 cases. Macrogol laxatives were the most common index drugs reported (23%), followed by depo-medroxyprogesterone (19%), oral penicillin V (10%), and depo-methylprednisolone (10%). In general, 61% experienced grade III anaphylaxis. Intradermal testing (IDT) increased the diagnostic sensitivity from 51% to 85%. Five patients experienced systemic reactions during IDT. Of the 5 patients, 2 were skin prick test positive to a high molecular weight PEG. Three patients with negative skin test results had positive drug provocation test results. Seven patients with PEG allergy reported tolerance to H1-antihistamines containing PEG. Administration of messenger RNA COVID-19 or Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccines was tolerated in all 16 patients to whom they were administered.

CONCLUSION

PEG hypersensitivity is an uncommon cause of drug-induced anaphylaxis. Four index drugs accounted for two-thirds of the cases, and reactions to these drugs should prompt PEG hypersensitivity investigations. PEG IDT increases diagnostic yield. The role of skin prick test with higher molecular weight PEGs requires further attention. Further studies are required to understand PEG thresholds and PEG equivalent doses of various administration routes. COVID-19 vaccines were tolerated by all exposed.

Striving for Uniformity: A Review on Advances and Challenges To Achieve Uniform Polyethylene Glycol

Poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) is the polymer of choice in drug delivery systems due to its biocompatibility and hydrophilicity. For over 20 years, this polymer has been widely used in the drug delivery of small drugs, proteins, oligonucleotides, and liposomes, improving the stability and pharmacokinetics of many drugs. However, despite the extensive clinical experience with PEG, concerns have emerged related to its use. These include hypersensitivity, purity, and nonbiodegradability. Moreover, conventional PEG is a mixture of polymers that can complicate drug synthesis and purification leading to unwanted immunogenic reactions. Studies have shown that uniform PEGylated drugs may be more effective than conventional PEGylated drugs as they can overcome issues related to molecular heterogeneity and immunogenicity. This has led to significant research efforts to develop synthetic procedures to produce uniform PEGs (monodisperse PEGs). As a result, iterative step-by-step controlled synthesis methods have been created over time and have shown promising results. Nonetheless, these procedures have presented numerous challenges due to their iterative nature and the requirement for multiple purification steps, resulting in increased costs and time consumption. Despite these challenges, the synthetic procedures went through several improvements. This review summarizes and discusses recent advances in the synthesis of uniform PEGs and its derivatives with a focus on overall yields, scalability, and purity of the polymers. Additionally, the available characterization methods for assessing polymer monodispersity are discussed as well as uniform PEG applications, side effects, and possible alternative polymers that can overcome the drawbacks.

Knowledge mapping and global trends of drug hypersensitivity from 2013 to 2023: A bibliometric analysis

BACKGROUND

Drug hypersensitivity is a major global public health issue with a significant increase in prevalence in populations. Here, we provide a deep insight into the frontier hotspot and future direction in the field of drug hypersensitivity.

METHODS

A knowledge map is portrayed based on publications related to drug hypersensitivity from Web of Science Core Collection using CiteSpace. Co-occurrence relationships of countries, institutes, authors, journals, references, and keywords are constructed. According to the co-occurrence relationships, hotspots and future trends are overviewed.

RESULTS

The United States ranked first in the world and China with the second highest publications was the only developing country. Torres, Mayorga, and Blanca were highly productive authors. Harvard University was the institution with the most research publications. Keywords co-occurrence analysis suggested applications in emerging causes, potential mechanisms, and clinical diagnosis as the research hotspots and development frontiers.

CONCLUSION

Research on drug hypersensitivity is in a rapid development stage and an emerging trend in reports of anaphylaxis to polyethylene glycols is identified. Developing algorithms for understanding the standardization process of culprit drugs, clinical manifestations, and diagnostic methods will be the focus of future direction. In addition, a better understanding of the mechanisms to culprit drugs with immunological precise phenotypic definitions and high-throughput platforms is needed.

Severe cutaneous adverse reaction to drug excipient following brand-to-generic switch of levetiracetam

PURPOSE

Levetiracetam is an antiepileptic drug known for its high tolerability, and severe adverse drug reactions are rare. We report the case of a severe cutaneous adverse drug reaction in a patient who was switched from brand-name to generic levetiracetam.

SUMMARY

A 29-year-old woman undergoing contrast-enhanced computed tomography developed lesions over her trunk starting 6 hours after imaging. Although initially diagnosed as an allergy to the radiocontrast agent, the condition progressively worsened into toxic epidermal necrolysis-drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms overlap syndrome, despite adequate hydration and treatment. Investigation of the patient's medications revealed that she had been switched from brand-name to generic levetiracetam a week before the onset of symptoms. Levetiracetam was immediately discontinued, with the patient recovering after 2 weeks of intensive care. Adverse drug reaction analysis identified excipients in generic levetiracetam as the likely cause of the severe reaction.

CONCLUSION

This is the first reported case of severe cutaneous drug allergy after a brand-to-generic switch for levetiracetam. Brand-to-generic switches of medications can potentially cause severe allergic reactions due to differences in excipients.

Endotyping of IgE-Mediated Polyethylene Glycol and/or Polysorbate 80 Allergy

BACKGROUND

Polyethylene glycol (PEG) and polysorbate 80 (PS80) allergy preclude from SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. The mechanism(s) governing cross-reactivity and PEG molecular weight dependence remain unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate PEGylated lipid nanoparticle (LNP) vaccine (BNT162b2) tolerance and explore the mechanism of reactivity in PEG and/or PS80 allergic patients.

METHODS

PEG/PS80 dual- (n = 3), PEG mono- (n = 7), and PS80 mono-allergic patients (n = 2) were included. Tolerability of graded vaccine challenges was assessed. Basophil activation testing on whole blood (wb-BAT) or passively sensitized donor basophils (allo-BAT) was performed using PEG, PS80, BNT162b2, and PEGylated lipids (ALC-0159). Serum PEG-specific IgE was measured in patients (n = 10) and controls (n = 15).

RESULTS

Graded BNT162b2 challenge in dual- and PEG mono-allergic patients (n = 3/group) was well tolerated and induced anti-spike IgG seroconversion. PS80 mono-allergic patients (n = 2/2) tolerated single-dose BNT162b2 vaccination. Wb-BAT reactivity to PEG-containing antigens was observed in dual- (n = 3/3) and PEG mono- (n = 2/3), but absent in PS80 mono-allergic patients (n = 0/2). BNT162b2 elicited the highest in vitro reactivity. BNT162b2 reactivity was IgE mediated, complement independent, and inhibited in allo-BAT by preincubation with short PEG motifs, or detergent-induced LNP degradation. PEG-specific IgE was only detectable in dual-allergic (n = 3/3) and PEG mono-allergic (n = 1/6) serum.

CONCLUSION

PEG and PS80 cross-reactivity is determined by IgE recognizing short PEG motifs, whereas PS80 mono-allergy is PEG-independent. PS80 skin test positivity in PEG allergics was associated with a severe and persistent phenotype, higher serum PEG-specific IgE levels, and enhanced BAT reactivity. Spherical PEG exposure via LNP enhances BAT sensitivity through increased avidity. All PEG and/or PS80 excipient allergic patients can safely receive SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

Clinical Application of In Vitro Tests for COVID-19 Vaccine Delayed Hypersensitivity Diagnostics

Drug hypersensitivity reactions can be classified as immediate or delayed. While diagnostic options for immediate reactions are well developed and standardized, delayed reactions (in many cases type IV according to Gell and Coombs) are a challenge for allergy work-up. In recent years, some in vitro markers have been proposed and used for delayed reactions, such as contact dermatitis. Primary strategy: Avoidance is difficult to achieve, especially for COVID-19 vaccinations, when immunity against infection is extremely important. The aim of our study was to evaluate the application of in vitro delayed hypersensitivity tests in COVID-19 vaccines. Seven patients with a positive history of severe delayed drug allergy were enrolled. Vein blood was collected to stimulate cells with the tested vaccines (Comirnaty, Janssen, Spikevax) and excipients with the assessment of CD40L, CD69, IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-10, IFNgamma, TNFalfa, and intracellular markers: granulysin and INFgamma. In addition, basophile activation tests, patch tests, skin prick tests, and intradermal tests were performed with the tested vaccine. Finally, the decision was made to either administer a vaccine or resign. Two out of seven patients were considered positive for drug hypersensitivity in the in vitro test according to the high vaccine stimulation index measured with CD69 (6.91 and 12.18) and CD40L (5.38 and 15.91). All patch tests, BATs, and skin tests were negative. Serum interleukin measurements were inconclusive as the impact of the vaccine itself on the immunity system was high. Intracellular markers gave uncertain results due to the lack of stimulation on the positive control. CD69 and CD40L could be reliable in vitro markers for delayed hypersensitivity to COVID-19 vaccines. Patch tests, skin tests, BATs, and serum interleukins did not confirm their usefulness in our study.

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.

Hypersensitivity reactions to anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines: Basophil reactivity to excipients

Basophil activation test (BAT) can tackle multiple mechanisms underlying acute and delayed hypersensitivity to drugs and vaccines and might complement conventional allergy diagnostics but its role in anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine-related hypersensitivity is ill-defined. Therefore, 89 patients with possible hypersensitivity (56 % with delayed mucocutaneous manifestations) to anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines were tested with BAT for Macrogol 3350, DMG-PEG 2000, PEG 20000, polysorbate-80 and trometamol and compared to 156 subjects undergoing pre-vaccine BAT. A positive BAT was associated with delayed reaction onset (p = 0.010) and resolution (p = 0.011). BAT was more frequently positive to DMG-PEG 2000 than to other excipients in both groups (p < 0.001). DMG-PEG 2000 reactivity was less frequent in vaccine-naïve (6 %) than vaccinated subjects (35 %, p < 0.001) and associated with mRNA-1273 vaccination. DMG-PEG 2000 BAT might therefore have a diagnostic role in subjects with delayed hypersensitivity reactions. Natural immunity might be a key player in basophil activation.

Evaluation of pediatric patients with suspected polyethylene glycol and polysorbate allergy before mRNA SARS-CoV2 vaccination

mRNA vaccines, particularly, have been associated with an increased risk of allergic reactions and rarely anaphylaxis. Although rare, vaccine reactions can cause significant anxiety and fear in the population, leading to indecision and vaccine refusal. This study aimed to retrospectively evaluate the role of polyethylene glycol (PEG) sensitivity in vaccination decision-making in pediatric patients at high risk of allergy or with suspected allergic reactions to the first dose of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) vaccine. Seventeen enrolled patients were found to have decreased readiness to receive the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine after developing hypersensitivity to multiple and/or injectable drugs. Skin testing was performed. A basophil activation test with PEG-2000 and 4000 was performed on three patients who were ineligible for skin prick tests. Nine patients with negative tests received the vaccine without complications. One patient had urticarial angioedema despite negative tests. Three patients with positive tests did not agree to desensitization with the mRNA vaccine, and one of them was vaccinated with the inactivated COVID-19 vaccine. Four patients recurred despite negative tests. The general recommendation for patients describing severe reactions to drugs, foods, and allergens, such as toxins that do not contain the adjuvants of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, is to be routinely vaccinated with safety precautions. Excipients such as PEG and polysorbate-80 used in COVID-19 vaccines could be potential allergens, but this hypothesis is unclear. The predictive values of these adjuvants for skin testing and in vitro testing are controversial. Further research is needed on the hypersensitivity reactions of adjuvants, the predictive values of skin tests, and etiopathogenesis.

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.

Skin Testing and Basophil Activation Testing Is Useful for Assessing Immediate Reactions to Polyethylene Glycol-Containing Vaccines

BACKGROUND

The mechanism of immediate reactions to drugs or vaccines containing polyethylene glycol (PEG) and PEG derivatives is not fully elucidated. It is considered in many instances to be IgE-mediated. Diagnosis and management of PEG allergy is topical, as BNT162b and mRNA-1273 contain PEG (2[PEG-2000]-N), and ChAdOx1-S and NVX-CoV2373 contain polysorbate 80. mRNA vaccines contain PEG 2000, which encapsulates the mRNA to impair its degradation. This PEG MW is specific to mRNA vaccines and is not used in other drugs and vaccines. PEG 2000 allergy is not well studied, as higher PEG molecular weights are implicated in most of the PEG allergy published in the literature.

METHODS

We performed a literature review on PEG allergy and sought to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of our protocol for assessment of PEG 2000 and polysorbate 80 reactions in an outpatient clinic setting. All patients referred to our drug allergy service between 1 July 2021 and 31 December 2021 with suspected immediate allergy to PEG or its derivatives were eligible for the study. Skin testing (ST) and basophil activation testing (BAT) were performed for all patients to multiple PEG molecular weights (MWs).

RESULTS

We reviewed twenty patients during the study period. Five patients were allergic. Fifteen patients had a masquerade of allergy and were enrolled as control patients. PEG 2000, polysorbate 80, BNT162b, and ChAdOx1-S had excellent performance characteristics on skin testing. BAT showed high specificity for all vaccines and PEG MWs.

DISCUSSION

In our small study, we found ST and BAT to add useful information, particularly for PEG 2000 allergy. Further study of our protocol in larger patient cohorts will provide more information on its performance characteristics and usefulness.

COVID-19 vaccine allergy advice and guidance: The experience of a UK tertiary referral centre

Objective

The objective was to review COVID-19 vaccine allergy advice and guidance requests received and assess the impact of advice outcome on vaccination outcome.

Design

A retrospective analysis of requests for advice and guidance regarding COVID-19 vaccine allergy was completed using an electronic referral system from February 2021 to January 2022.

Participants

A total of 1265 independent patient requests for advice were received from primary care. Full vaccination information was available on 1210 patients who were included in the analysis.

Main outcome measures

We evaluated the specific outcome of request for advice (written advice versus allergy consultation), rate of vaccination, vaccination combinations, and tolerance of vaccination.

Results

Of the 1210 patients included, 959 (79%) were female. Eight hundred and ninety-six (74%) requests were managed with written advice only and of these 675 (75%) patients went on to be vaccinated. Overall, 891 (74%) of the population were vaccinated with 2 or more doses.Two hundred and nineteen patient consultations were undertaken with 109 (50%) prior to the first vaccination. Forty-nine (45%) consultations prior to vaccination were undertaken due to a label of anaphylaxis to vaccination in the past. Vaccination was recommended for all patients, and 78 (72%) of these received a first dose. Eight of these patients (10%) had symptoms within 1 h of vaccine administration.One hundred and ten (50%) consultations were undertaken for adverse reactions post COVID-19 vaccination, with 84 (76%) concerning immediate symptoms. Thirty patients (27%) who had a consultation had had adrenaline administered post vaccination. One patient had biopsy confirmed Stevens Johnson Syndrome and was referred to Dermatology. All others due for further doses (107 patients) were recommended to have subsequent doses with 49 (45%) offered the same vaccine. Eighty-nine patients had a vaccine administered post adverse reaction and 79 (88%) tolerated the dose.Skin testing and challenge to polyethylene glycol were negative in the 8 patients tested.

Conclusions

Over 1000 requests for advice and guidance were received during the review period, managed mainly with written advice. The overwhelming majority of requests for advice and consultations were for females, with equal distribution both pre- and post-COVID-19 vaccine administration. Vaccination was recommended in all but 1 patient (with biopsy confirmed Stevens Johnson Syndrome). Polyethylene glycol allergy was not confirmed in any patient, nor did any patient have confirmed anaphylaxis when the vaccine was administered under our supervision, suggesting that type 1 mediated hypersensitivity is uncommon even in this "high risk" population.

Study of Excipients in Delayed Skin Reactions to mRNA Vaccines: Positive Delayed Intradermal Reactions to Polyethylene Glycol Provide New Insights for COVID-19 Arm

BACKGROUND

Skin local reactions to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines have been linked to the use of vaccine excipients. The aim of the study is to evaluate the role of skin testing excipients in delayed skin reactions due to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

METHODS

Skin testing among a group of healthcare workers with skin reactions due to mRNA vaccines was performed. Patch testing and intradermal testing (IDT) with polyethylene glycol (PEG)-400, PEG-2000, trometamol, and 1,2-dimyristoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine were performed. Healthcare workers without skin reactions to vaccines were used for skin testing as controls.

RESULTS

Thirty-one healthcare workers (from a total of 4315 vaccinated healthcare workers) experienced cutaneous adverse vaccine reactions. Skin testing was performed in sixteen of the healthcare workers (11 delayed large local reactions (DLLR) and 5 widespread reactions). Positive IDT for PEG-2000 1% in DLLR was seen in 10 (90.9%) patients, in comparison with one (16.6%) individual with a delayed widespread reaction. Delayed positive IDT reactions for PEG-2000 1% on day 2 were observed in three (27.3%) patients with DLLR. Patch testing of the excipients was negative. Among 10 controls, only one exhibited a transient positive IDT reaction to PEG-2000 1%.

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate and delayed reactions to IDT are frequently detected in patients with DLLR. The observation of positive delayed intradermal reactions to PEG disclosed only in patients with DLLR reinforces a possible role of PEG in the development of these reactions. Skin testing of other excipients is of little importance in clinical practice.

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.

Immediate hypersensitivity to COVID-19 vaccines: Focus on biological diagnosis

Soon after the release of the new anti-COVID mRNA vaccines, reports came in from the US and the UK of anaphylactic reactions. Fueled by the necessary caution toward these new vaccine platforms, these reports had a great impact and were largely commented upon in the scientific literature and global media. The current estimated frequency is of 5 cases per million doses. Very little biological data are presented in the literature to support the anaphylaxis diagnosis in these patients in addition to skin tests. Allergic reactions to vaccines are rare and mostly due to vaccine excipient. Therefore, the poly-ethylene-glycol (PEG) present in both mRNA formulation, and already known to be immunogenic, was soon suspected to be the potential culprit. Several hypersensitivity mechanisms to PEG or to other vaccine components can be suspected, even if the classical IgE-dependent anaphylaxis seems to be one of the most plausible candidates. In the early 2022, the international guidelines recommended to perform skin prick tests and basophil activation tests (BAT) in people experiencing allergic reaction to the first dose of COVID-19 vaccine or with a history of PEG allergy. The aim of this review is to discuss the main potential mechanisms of immediate allergy to COVID19 vaccines based on published data, together with the various techniques used to confirm or not sensitization to one component.

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.

Successful mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination and Colonoscopy After Oral Desensitization in a Patient With Polyethylene Glycol Allergy

Anaphylaxis to polyethylene glycol (PEG) is rare and mainly occurs with the use of laxatives containing PEG. Recently, an increasing number of PEG allergies have been reported, particularly those related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines. mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, such as the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccines, contain PEG2000 as an excipient and are contraindicated when allergy to a vaccine component exist. We report a 55-year-old woman's history as a case of successful mRNA COVID-19 vaccination and colonoscopy after oral desensitization to PEG in a patient with PEG allergy who required both COVID-19 vaccination and colon evaluation. Allergy to PEG was diagnosed based on clinical history, skin test results, and basophil histamine release testing. Oral desensitization effectively suppressed histamine release from basophils in response to PEG stimulation, suggesting that oral desensitization using PEG-based laxatives may be an effective treatment option for patients with allergy to the substance.

Allergic reactions to the coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine (ARCOV) study: The McGill University Health Centre experience

BACKGROUND

Messenger RNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines have been associated with allergic reactions. A history of anaphylaxis has been suggested as a risk factor for such reactions. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) has been proposed as a possible culprit allergen.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate possible PEG or polysorbate allergy among patients reporting prior reactions to COVID-19 vaccines or PEG and to report their subsequent tolerance of COVID-19 vaccines.

METHODS

From January 1, 2021, to October 31, 2021, adult patients referred to the McGill University Health Centre allergy clinics who were considered at risk of anaphylaxis were prospectively recruited. The entry criteria were any documented history of reaction to a COVID-19 vaccine or reported allergy to PEG or polysorbate. Evaluated patients underwent skin prick testing (SPT) with PEG and polysorbate. After SPT, placebo-controlled vaccine challenges were carried out.

RESULTS

Of the 44 patients recruited, 40 (90.1%) had reacted to the first vaccine dose, with 18 (45%) of them had anaphylactic reaction. All patients underwent SPT and 5 (11.3%) had a positive test result. A total of 39 patients (88.6%) underwent COVID-19 vaccine challenge at the allergy clinic. Most tolerated the vaccine, with 18 (40.1%) received a single full dose, 20 (45.4%) 2 split doses, and 6 (13.6%) a graded dosing protocol. Of the 40 patients who reacted to the first dose, 2 had immediate nonsevere allergic reactions to the second dose.

CONCLUSION

In this cohort of patients with a history of anaphylaxis and increased risk of allergic reactions to the COVID-19 vaccines, after allergist evaluation, including negative PEG skin testing result, the vaccine was safely administered without any serious adverse events.

New Challenges in Drug Allergy: the Resurgence of Excipients

Purpose of Review

Allergy to excipients is a cause of multidrug allergy and if it is not taken into account, it can lead to unexpected severe reactions. If an excipient allergy is suspected, an accurate examination followed by algorithms is very important for a correct diagnosis and to give patients detailed information in order to avoid future reactions.

Recent Findings

In recent times, due to allergy COVID vaccine reactions, interest in excipients as polyethylene glycol derivatives (PEGs) has increased as a possible cause of drug and vaccine hypersensivity. In addition to PEGs many other excipients as gelatin, alpha-gal, protamine, benzalkonium chloride, and benzyl alcohol have been described as a cause of allergy to drugs and vaccines. For most excipients, the dilutions used for skin testing (ST) are not standardized and proper algorithms to reach a diagnosis are not available.

Summary

The purpose of this article is to review the excipients that may produce inmediate hypersensitivity drugs and vaccine reactions and update diagnostic procedures to reach an accurate diagnosis. We highlight the in vivo and in vitro diagnostic tests used in published reports and detail the dilution used for each excipient to perform ST in order to confirm this vital pathology and to prevent new reactions.

COVID vaccination can be completed in subjects with a history of allergic reactions to the vaccines or their components - experience from a specialist clinic in South Australia

The development of vaccines against SARS-CoV2 has been a key public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, since their introduction there have been reports of anaphylactic reactions in vaccinees with history of allergy. We developed an allergy testing protocol allowing vaccination with available COVID-19 vaccines in Australia. Patients referred to a state-wide COVID-19 vaccine allergy clinic between March and August 2021 with a history of allergy underwent skin prick testing and intradermal testing to both available vaccine formulations (BNT162b2, ChAdOx1-S), excipients (polyethylene glycol, polysorbate 80), excipient-containing medications, and controls. Where available, basophil activation testing was conducted. 53 patients underwent testing for possible excipient allergy (n = 19), previous non-COVID vaccine reaction (n = 13), or previous reaction to dose 1 of COVID-19 vaccine (n = 21). Patients were predominantly female (n = 43, 81%), aged 18-83 (median 54) years. 44 patients tested negative and 42 of these received at least their first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. 9 patients tested positive to excipients or excipient-containing medication only (n = 3), or vaccines (n = 6). 5 patients were positive to just BNT162b2, 3/5 have been vaccinated with ChAdOx1-S. 1 who was skin test positive to both vaccines, but negative BAT to ChAdOx1-S was successfully vaccinated with ChAdOx1-S. Even in a high-risk population, most patients can be vaccinated with available COVID-19 vaccines. This paper reports local experiences using a combined allergy testing protocol with skin testing and BAT during the pandemic. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Management of suspected and confirmed COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine hypersensitivity

BACKGROUND

Systemic allergic reactions to vaccines are very rare. In this study we assessed the management and outcome of suspected SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hypersensitivity.

METHODS

Totally, 334 individuals underwent an allergy work up regarding SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (group A: 115 individuals suspected to be at increased risk for vaccine-related reactions before vaccination and group B: 219 patients with reactions after COVID vaccination). The large majority of the SPT/IDT with the vaccines were negative; however, we identified in 14.1% (n = 47) a possible sensitization to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and/or its ingredients defined as one positive skin test. Of the 219 individuals (group B) who experienced symptoms suspicious for a hypersensitivity reaction after vaccination, 214 were reported after the first vaccination with a mRNA vaccine (157 mRNA (Comirnaty®, 38 Spikevax®) and 18 with a vector vaccine (Vaxzevria®), 5 cases were after the second vaccination.

RESULTS

The symptom profile in group B was as follows: skin symptoms occurred in 115 cases (n = 59 angioedema, n = 50 generalized urticaria and n = 23 erythema/flush. Seventy individuals had cardiovascular, 53 respiratory and 17 gastrointestinal symptoms. Of the overall 334 individuals, 78 patients tolerated (re)-vaccination (out of skin test positive/negative 7/19 from group A and 17/35 from group B).

CONCLUSION

Proven IgE-mediated hypersensitivity to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines is extremely rare and not increased in comparison with reported hypersensitivity to other vaccines. The value of skin tests is unclear and nonspecific reactions, in particular when intradermal testing is applied, should be considered.

Oncologist counseling practice and COVID-19 vaccination outcomes for patients with history of PEG-asparaginase hypersensitivity

Vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is an effective strategy to prevent serious coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and is important for oncology patients. mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines are contraindicated in those with a history of severe or immediate allergy to any vaccine component, including polyethylene glycol (PEG)2000. Patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoma receive asparaginase conjugated to PEG5000 (PEG-ASNase) and those with PEG-ASNase-associated hypersensitivity may be unnecessarily excluded from receiving mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. We, therefore, surveyed oncologists on COVID-19 vaccine counseling practice and vaccination outcomes in COVID-19 vaccination-eligible patients and show safe receipt of mRNA vaccines despite PEG-ASNase hypersensitivity.

The form of PEG matters: PEG conjugated with lipids and not PEG alone could be the specific form involved in allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines

The excipient polyethylene glycol (PEG) contained in the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 has been pointed out as one of the possible triggers of the hypersensitivity reactions that have been described since the beginning of the vaccine campaigns for COVID-19 protection.¹ However, PEG is not present in the mRNA vaccines in an isolated form but in conjugation with lipid-nanoparticles (LNPs), which are spherical vesicles constituted by ionizable lipids, thanks to a process called PEGylation, which could potentially alter the immunogenic properties of PEG. PEG coats the surface of the LNPs reducing opsonization, aggregation, and improving mRNA delivery to the target cells.

Intradermal Testing With COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Predicts Tolerance

Background

The newly developed mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines can provoke anaphylaxis, possibly induced by polyethylene glycol (PEG) contained in the vaccine. The management of persons with a history of PEG allergy or with a suspected allergic reaction after the first dose remains to be defined.

Methods

In this real-life study, we defined two cohorts of individuals: one pre-vaccination including 187 individuals with high-risk profiles for developing anaphylaxis and a second post-vaccination including 87 individuals with suspected allergic reactions after the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine. Upon negative skin test with an mRNA vaccine, a two-step (10–90%) vaccination protocol was performed. Positive skin tests were confirmed with the basophil activation test (BAT).

Results

Among 604,267 doses of vaccine, 87 suspected allergic reactions (5 after the booster) were reported to our division for further investigations: 18/87 (21%) were consistent with anaphylaxis, 78/87 (90%) were female, and 47/87 (54%) received the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine. Vaccine skin tests were negative in 96% and 76% of the pre- and post-vaccination cohorts, respectively. A two-step vaccination was tolerated in 232/236 (98%) of individuals with negative tests. Four individuals experienced isolated asthmatic reactions during the two-step challenge. Vaccine-positive skin tests were consistently confirmed by BAT; CD63 and CD203c expression was selectively inhibited with ibrutinib, suggesting an IgE-dependent mechanism.

Conclusion

Sensitization to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines can be detected with intradermal testing. Significantly more individuals were sensitized to mRNA vaccines in the post-vaccination cohort. A two-step 10–90%-vaccination protocol can be safely administered upon negative skin testing.

Protocol of safe vaccination against COVID-19 in patients with high risk of allergic reactions

Background

Sars-CoV-2 infections are hazardous, especially to the elderly and patients with comorbidities. With no efficient treatment available, newly developed vaccines are the only way to change the course of the pandemic. However, reports of allergic reactions resulted in some patients and practicing physicians being concerned about the safety of vaccine administration, particularly in people with severe anaphylactic reactions to multiple or unknown factors in their medical history.This study aimed to develop an allergic work-up protocol based on skin prick tests (SPT), intradermal testing (IDT) and intramuscular provocations, and desensitisation which may contribute to diagnosis and management of anti-COVID-19 vaccine allergy.

Methods

Two hundred and eighty-five patients were enrolled. Two hundred and five of them entered the study based on severe anaphylactic reaction to unknown or multiple factors in their medical history which disqualified them for standard treatment. Another 80 patients were enrolled after developing an allergic reaction to the first dose of one such vaccine. In all subjects, SPT and IDT were performed. Serum tryptase was assessed in 79 patients randomly chosen from the study group.

Results

Two hundred and seventy-seven patients with negative tests were given a vaccine without complications. Seven patients had positive skin tests. In two cases, tests confirmed Comirnaty allergy, while the other five confirmed solely skin sensitisation with no exposure prior to the study. Six patients with positive tests received titrated challenge using desensitisation protocol with a reasonable tolerance. One patient did not consent to desensitisation and one patient resigned despite negative tests. Overall, 283 (99%) patients were vaccinated using this newly developed protocol. Patients with adverse reactions to the first dose of the vaccine before the study had a significantly lower basal serum tryptase concentration (p = 0.001).

Conclusion

Skin tests with anti-COVID-19 vaccines are a useful tool in the vaccination protocol. This protocol enables safe immunisation of high-allergy-risk patients even in cases of positive skin tests.

Anaphylaxis to Excipients in Current Clinical Practice: Evaluation and Management

Excipients are the inactive ingredients in a drug or product that help to stabilize, preserve, or enhance the pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of the active ingredients. Excipient allergy is rare and hence often missed or misdiagnosed due to lack of awareness of the need to carefully review all drug ingredients. For the patient, excipient allergy can be frightening and potentially disruptive to health care delivery. This narrative review provides a clinically oriented, international, collaborative perspective on excipient allergy testing, management of future health care safety, limitations in our testing modalities, and barriers to optimal care.

Do basophil activation tests help elucidate allergic reactions to the ingredients in COVID-19 vaccines?

The worldwide use of COVID-19 vaccines has shown that immediate allergic reactions to the ingredients are rare but should be clarified by means of an allergological work-up. This review aims to highlight the current state of knowledge and possible pathogenesis based on the literature published to date. In addition to recording a detailed history and performing skin tests, cellular tests (basophil activation or basophil histamine release test) by using the vaccines or modified compounds containing polyethylene glycol (PEG), rather than unmodified PEGs, have proven to be particularly helpful. Negative results with vaccines seem to indicate tolerance. Details of the performance of these cellular tests with different vaccines, PEGs of different molecular weights, other ingredients of the vaccines, as well as other PEGylated drugs, and the results in the context of COVID-19 vaccination of various working groups worldwide are summarized.

Successful Desensitization to mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine in a Case Series of Patients With a History of Anaphylaxis to the First Vaccine Dose

Background

Coronavirus disease 2109 (COVID-19) vaccines have recently been approved to curb the global pandemic. The risk of allergic reactions to the vaccine polyethylene glycol (PEG) component has raised significant public concern. Desensitization is suggested in cases of vaccine related hypersensitivity reactions. After comprehensive literature review on the topic, our aim was to establish a safe and effective desensitization protocol for patients with suspected or confirmed immediate type hypersensitivity reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine.

Methods

Participants were referred to the McGill University Health Center (MUHC) Allergy-Immunology department for clinical evaluation following a reported reaction to their first dose of Moderna® mRNA-1273 or Pfizer-BioNTech® BNT162b2 vaccines. They underwent skin prick testing (SPT) with higher and lower molecular weight (MW) PEG and polysorbate 80, as per published protocols. Their second dose was administered following a desensitization protocol consisting of multiple dose-administration steps followed by a 60-min observation period.

Results

Among a cohort of 142 patients with an increased risk for allergic reactions to the COVID-19 vaccines, six individuals were selected to undergo desensitization. All were female with allergic background including chronic spontaneous urticaria, anaphylaxis to medications, and/or vaccines. The main symptom after their first dose was difficulty swallowing with lightheadedness or immediate urticaria, angioedema, and/or dizziness. Two patients had positive skin testing. One patient was on chronic antihistamines which resulted in an inconclusive PEG skin test and the skin testing was negative for the three other patients. During the desensitization, two patients reported cutaneous symptoms of an immediate reaction and were managed with antihistamines. One of these patients also complained of ear pressure and had a drop in her systolic blood pressure, treated with intravenous fluids.

Conclusion

This study suggests that some individuals with an immediate-type hypersensitivity reaction to their first dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine may safely receive their second dose using a desensitization protocol. The success of this desensitization protocol is a step forward in the fight against COVID-19, allowing more individuals to be immunized.

Allergy to polyethylene glycol and polysorbates in a patient cohort: Diagnostic work-up and decision points for vaccination during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic focus has been on polyethylene glycol (PEG) and polysorbate as these excipients are constituents in the first vaccines and possible elicitors of allergic reactions to the vaccines. We aimed to evaluate the possibility of vaccinating patients with PEG and/or polysorbate allergy against COVID-19.

METHODS

Twenty-five patients with a history of an allergic reaction to drugs, vaccines and mouth hygiene products containing PEG or polysorbate and sensitization (skin test or in vitro test) or a positive challenge were included. We re-evaluated 19 of 21 patients diagnosed before 2021 and four new patients by skin prick tests (SPT) and Basophil Histamine Release (BaHR) for PEGs, polysorbates and approved COVID-19 vaccines as well as measurement of specific IgE (PEG 2000, 10,000). Patients were offered vaccination based on decision points from the primary diagnosis and re-evaluation.

RESULTS

Most common primary elicitors were depot-steroids and laxatives. Most patients had experienced more than one reaction. SPT was superior to BaHR test although many SPTs became negative over time. After careful re-evaluation three patients were successfully vaccinated with the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. Three were vaccinated before referral. Eleven were offered the Johnson-Johnson vaccine; four were vaccinated successfully, seven abstained. Six patients could not be vaccinated with PEG or polysorbate containing vaccines.

CONCLUSION

Hypersensitivity to excipients in COVID-19 vaccines constitutes a risk to patients with allergy to PEG or polysorbates. After diagnostic evaluation, a safe COVID-19 vaccine could be offered to most patients, the remainders will await new vaccines containing different excipients.

Advances in clinical outcomes: what we have learned during the COVID-19 pandemic

Our understanding of risk factors and interventions influencing outcomes from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has continued to evolve, revealing advances emerging from hypotheses formed at the start of the pandemic. Epidemiologic studies have shown that asthma control, rather than a diagnosis of asthma, is a determinant of COVID-19 severity. Clinical outcomes in patients with primary immunodeficiencies, even in those with impaired cellular immunity, are variable. IL-6 has emerged as a reliable biomarker of COVID-19 severity, and large clinical trials have shown the potential for improving outcomes through inhibition of IL-6 signaling in some patients. Studies of genetic risk factors for severe COVID-19 have also revealed the importance of interferon homeostasis in the defense against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Because COVID-19 vaccines constitute the primary tool for ending this pandemic, strategies have been developed to address potential allergic and immune-mediated reactions. Here, we discuss advances in our understanding of COVID-19 risk factors and outcomes within the context of allergic and immunologic mechanisms.