SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) vaccination in dermatology patients on immunomodulatory and biologic agents: Recommendations from the Australasian Medical Dermatology Group

Immunosuppressants in dermatology on vaccine immunogenicity: a prospective cohort study of pemphigus patients in the pandemic

Introduction

Both cellular and humoral responses are important for vaccine protection, but recommendations on immunosuppressants in dermatology are largely based on pre-pandemic experiences. This study aimed to investigate the impacts of immunosuppressants on humoral and cellular immunogenicity to COVID-19 vaccinations in pemphigus patients.

Methods

SARS-CoV-2-naïve pemphigus patients and age-, and sex-matched healthy controls were recruited from multiple tertiary medical centers during 2021-2023. Anti-spike protein-related T-cell responses, antibody titers, and high-parameter cell analysis of the peripheral blood were utilized to investigate the inhibitory effects of immunosuppressants, including rituximab and azathioprine.

Results

A total of 32 patients and 120 healthy controls were enrolled. COVID-19 vaccinations spaced at least six months after the last rituximab infusion did not cause a significant difference in anti-viral T-cell or antibody responses between rituximab-naïve and rituximab-treated patients. All pemphigus patients demonstrated improved antibody responses after the third vaccination and none of them suffered from severe COVID-19 illness. Intriguingly, we found that daily dosages of 100 mg or more of azathioprine were linked to significantly decreased anti-viral T-cell responses induced by the vaccination (mean of fold change [SD]; higher azathioprine dosage = 0.70 [0.61] folds vs. lower azathioprine dosage = 2.11 [1.03] folds; p = 0.044).

Conclusion

Except for a subset of patients with unrecovered B-cell deficiency, rituximab infusion with proper scheduling of vaccination preserved better anti-viral T-cell responses and did not lead to hindered antibody responses in pemphigus patients. All pemphigus patients benefited from receiving the third booster regardless of B-cell status.

Biologics in allergology and clinical immunology: Update on therapies for atopic diseases, urticaria, and angioedema and on safety aspects focusing on hypersensitivity reactions

The development of targeted therapies for atopic diseases, urticaria, and angioedema with biologics is progressing rapidly: New "targets" of clinical-therapeutic relevance have been identified, the corresponding targeted antibodies developed, tested in clinical trials, and approved for therapy. These include the anti-IgE antibody omalizumab (also effective and approved for the treatment of urticaria), the anti-IL-4/13 receptor-specific antibody dupilumab, the two anti-IL-13 antibodies lebrikizumab and tralokinumab, the anti-TSLP antibody tezepelumab, the two anti-IL-5 antibodies mepolizumab and reslizumab, and the anti-IL5 receptor-specific antibody benralizumab for the treatment of atopic diseases. For the treatment of hereditary angioedema, C1 inhibitor and the antibody lanadelumab (directed against kallikrein) have also long been approved as biologics in addition to low-molecular substances. Other therapeutic antibodies are in various stages of development. Furthermore, the range of indications for some very effective biologics has been successfully expanded to include additional diseases. In this context, the first results on biologic therapy of food allergy and eosinophilic esophagitis are interesting. Biologics that address different target structures are also increasingly being administered in combination, either simultaneously or sequentially, in order to achieve optimal efficacy. A developing area is the use of biologics in children and the observation of immunological and non-immunological side effects. In some cases, new unexpected side effects and hypersensitivity reactions have emerged, which in turn raise pathomechanistic questions, such as conjunctivitis with dupilumab therapy, which only appears to occur in the treatment of atopic dermatitis but not in the treatment of other atopic diseases. In dermatology, paradoxical reactions have been described under therapy with some biologics. And immune reactions of type alpha to epsilon to biologics (hypersensitivity reactions) continue to be a clinically relevant problem, whereby the selection of an alternative therapeutic agent is a challenge and the diagnostics that support this have not yet been sufficiently incorporated into routine work.

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.

Cutaneous adverse reactions associated with COVID-19 vaccines: Current evidence and potential immune mechanisms

As the number of vaccinated individuals has increased, there have been increasing reports of cutaneous hypersensitivity reactions. The main COVID-19 vaccines administered include messenger ribonucleic acid vaccines, non-replicating viral vector vaccines, inactivated whole-virus vaccines, and protein-based vaccines. These vaccines contain active components such as polyethylene glycol, polysorbate 80, aluminum, tromethamine, and disodium edetate dihydrate. Recent advances in understanding the coordination of inflammatory responses by specific subsets of lymphocytes have led to a new classification based on immune response patterns. We categorize these responses into four patterns: T helper (Th)1-, Th2-, Th17/22-, and Treg-polarized cutaneous inflammation after stimulation of COVID-19 vaccines. Although the association between COVID-19 vaccination and these cutaneous adverse reactions remains controversial, the occurrence of rare dermatoses and their short intervals suggest a possible relationship. Despite the potential adverse reactions, the administration of COVID-19 vaccines is crucial in the ongoing battle against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.

A critical review of COVID-19 course and vaccination in dermatology patients on immunomodulatory/biologic therapy: recommendations should not differ between non-pregnant and pregnant individuals

COVID-19 can have detrimental effects on immunosuppressed patients. Here, we evaluate the evidence regarding continuing immunomodulatory/biologic (IMBI) therapy in pregnant dermatology patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Also, we discuss the risks of COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant dermatology patients on IMBI therapy. As indicated in this review, regarding continuing IMBI therapy in pregnant dermatology patients during the pandemic, there is no compelling reason for treating them differently than non-pregnant. The body of evidence indicates that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are safe during pregnancy. Studies on rheumatology patients, a group that overlaps significantly with the dermatology group, provided essential findings. IMBI in a non-pregnant rheumatology patient was not associated with COVID-19 mortality (except for rituximab), and vaccination of the rheumatology patient during pregnancy improved the obstetric outcomes compared to the unvaccinated patient. Based on this data, it can be stated that after weighing the benefit-risk profile of the available COVID-19 vaccines, the recommendation for the pregnant dermatology patient speaks in favor of the COVID-19 vaccination. COVID-19 vaccine recommendations in pregnant dermatology patients on IMBI should not differ from those for their non-pregnant counterparts.

Occurrence of erythema multiforme following COVID-19 vaccination: a review

The fast development of vaccines against the novel coronavirus disease is among the most critical steps taken to control this potentially fatal viral disease. Like other vaccines, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines can also cause unwanted reactions. Erythema multiforme (EM) is among the oral mucocutaneous side effects of COVID-19 vaccines. This study aimed to comprehensively review the reported cases of EM since the global onset of COVID-19 vaccination. Data from 31 relevant studies regarding the type and dose of COVID-19 vaccines administered, time of initiation of symptoms, age, and gender of patients, site of involvement, patients' medical history, and treatment options were extracted. In total, 90 patients were identified with EM as a side effect of COVID-19 vaccination across studies. EM had the highest frequency after receiving the first dose of mRNA vaccines in older individuals. The first symptoms of EM appeared in less than 3 days in 45% and after 3 days in 55% of patients. EM is not a common side effect of COVID-19 vaccination, and fear of its occurrence should not impede vaccination.

Management of Atopic Dermatitis During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Key Questions and Review of the Current Evidence

Since the outbreak of COVID-19, management of atopic dermatitis (AD) has been widely discussed. Key issues include the risk of COVID-19 infection and related outcomes in AD patients, the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccination in AD populations, and management of AD in the COVID-19 pandemic. Recent studies have shown that patients with AD have a slightly increased risk of COVID-19 infection but are not associated with a worse outcome than the non-AD population. COVID-19 vaccination is generally effective and safe in patients with AD. However, temporary discontinuation of certain systemic immunomodulatory agents after vaccination is suggested. During the pandemic, continuation of all immunomodulating agents is suggested, but these agents should be paused when patients with AD are infected with COVID-19 until recovery. Further studies are warranted to investigate the long-term interaction between AD and COVID-19 to aid clinical decisions during the pandemic.

Collapse

COVID vaccine recommendations in dermatologic patients on immunosuppressive agents: Lessons learned from pandemic

BACKGROUND

Since SARS-CoV2 vaccines were approved without enough long-term monitoring due to emergent situations, some issues have been raised about timing and protocol of receiving them by patients treated by different immunosuppressive agents.

AIM AND METHOD

Here, we present different aspects of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in such patients in the field of dermatology.

RESULT

In brief, SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is recommended in all dermatologic patients, regardless of their disorders and therapeutic regimens. Nevertheless, special considerations should be given to the immunosuppressive therapy and its association with vaccination timing due to the decreased immunogenicity of vaccines in this setting.

CONCLUSION

Novel biologic immunotherapies are advantageous over conventional systemic therapies not only in their safety and selective functions but also in this aspect that many of them do not affect vaccines immunogenicity.

A systematic review on mucocutaneous presentations after COVID-19 vaccination and expert recommendations about vaccination of important immune-mediated dermatologic disorders

With dermatologic side effects being fairly prevalent following vaccination against COVID-19, and the multitude of studies aiming to report and analyze these adverse events, the need for an extensive investigation on previous studies seemed urgent, in order to provide a thorough body of information about these post-COVID-19 immunization mucocutaneous reactions. To achieve this goal, a comprehensive electronic search was performed through the international databases including Medline (PubMed), Scopus, Cochrane, Web of science, and Google scholar on July 12, 2021, and all articles regarding mucocutaneous manifestations and considerations after COVID-19 vaccine administration were retrieved using the following keywords: COVID-19 vaccine, dermatology considerations and mucocutaneous manifestations. A total of 917 records were retrieved and a final number of 180 articles were included in data extraction. Mild, moderate, severe and potentially life-threatening adverse events have been reported following immunization with COVID vaccines, through case reports, case series, observational studies, randomized clinical trials, and further recommendations and consensus position papers regarding vaccination. In this systematic review, we categorized these results in detail into five elaborate tables, making what we believe to be an extensively informative, unprecedented set of data on this topic. Based on our findings, in the viewpoint of the pros and cons of vaccination, mucocutaneous adverse events were mostly non-significant, self-limiting reactions, and for the more uncommon moderate to severe reactions, guidelines and consensus position papers could be of great importance to provide those at higher risks and those with specific worries of flare-ups or inefficient immunization, with sufficient recommendations to safely schedule their vaccine doses, or avoid vaccination if they have the discussed contra-indications.

A comparative analysis on the safety and efficacy of Covaxin versus other vaccines against COVID-19: a review

Since the identification of the genomic sequence of SARS-CoV-2, an unprecedented effort is being made until this date for the development of a safe and effective vaccine by pharma companies and laboratories worldwide. To attain herd immunity and quite possibly recover from this pandemic, which has claimed the life of about 4.23 million people, an exceptional effort has been made by the scientific community for the development of a vaccine. Various vaccines have been developed based on different platforms and each of them seems to possess its own merits and demerits based on its safety, immunogenicity, the durability of immunity, dosing schedule, technological platform, and ease of manufacture and transport. Based on these parameters this review aims to critically assess the efficacy of Covaxin and compare it with other vaccines in the WHO EUL list and perform a comparative analysis of COVID-19 vaccines which are in phase 3 and phase 4 of clinical trials. This will help us determine where COVAXIN stands against other vaccines and vaccine candidates based on these parameters which will ultimately help us determine the best vaccine that could potentially eradicate the COVID-19 pandemic.

Biologics for Psoriasis During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a new form of acute infectious respiratory syndrome first reported in 2019, has rapidly spread worldwide and has been recognized as a pandemic by the WHO. It raised widespread concern about the treatment of psoriasis in this COVID-19 pandemic era, especially on the biologics use for patients with psoriasis. This review will summarize key information that is currently known about the relationship between psoriasis, biological treatments, and COVID-19, and vaccination-related issues. We also provide references for dermatologists and patients when they need to make clinical decisions. Currently, there is no consensus on whether biological agents increase the risk of coronavirus infection; however, current research shows that biological agents have no adverse effects on the prognosis of patients with COVID-19 with psoriasis. In short, it is not recommended to stop biological treatment in patients with psoriasis to prevent the infection risk, and for those patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, the decision to pause biologic therapy should be considered on a case-by-case basis, and individual risk and benefit should be taken into account. Vaccine immunization against SARS-CoV-2 is strictly recommendable in patients with psoriasis without discontinuation of their biologics but evaluating the risk-benefit ratio of maintaining biologics before vaccination is mandatory at the moment.

COVID-19 vaccines: What dermatologists should know?

As COVID-19 vaccination has started worldwide to control this pandemic, dermatologists may face various challenges with these new vaccines. In this manuscript, we review different types of available COVID-19 vaccines and their various production platforms. Vaccination considerations in patients with skin diseases, especially those using immunomodulatory drugs will be presented. Finally, adverse cutaneous reactions of COVID-19 vaccines will be reviewed.

Clinical Dermatology and COVID-19 Pandemic: Narrative Review

The coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has radical repercussions on every aspect of medical science, including dermatology. The magnitude of the impact on clinical dermatology cannot be overemphasized. Dermatologists have been forced to modify and reconsider the way they consult patients. Teledermatology has come up in a big way, with most of the clinicians resorting to technology and software-based consultations. Management of different dermatological conditions like papulosquamous disorders, vesiculobullous disorders, malignancies, etc., needs to be modified as per the different recommendations proposed by expert panels. This review is an attempt to highlight the impact of this destructive pandemic on various aspects of clinical dermatology.

Recommendations for COVID vaccination for dermatological patients on immunosuppressive/immunomodulatory therapy (IADVL Academy)

Significant proportion of patients with dermatological disorders are on immunosuppressive or immunomodulatory therapy predisposing them to risk of acquisition of COVID-19 infection. However, the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination among these patients is a matter of concern due to lack of adequate evidence for their protective effect owing to the drug induced immunosuppressed state. Hence, we from the IADVL academy have framed the recommendations to be followed for COVID-19 vaccination among dermatological patients on immunosuppressive therapy based on available related literature.