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

Comprehensive insights into COVID-19 vaccine-associated multiple evanescent white dot syndrome (MEWDS): A systematic analysis of reported cases

Considering the widespread use of COVID-19 vaccines as a preventive measure against the spread of the virus, it's necessary to direct attention to the adverse effects associated with vaccines in a limited group of populations. Multiple evanescent white dot syndrome (MEWDS) following COVID-19 vaccination is a rare adverse reaction associated with COVID-19 vaccines. In this systematic review, we collected 19 articles with 27 patients up to November 1, 2023, summarizing the basic information, clinical manifestations, examinations, treatments, and recoveries of the 27 patients. The 27 enrolled patients (6 males, 21 females) had a median age of 34.1 years (15-71 years old) and were mainly from 5 regions: Asia (8), the Mediterranean region (8), North America (7), Oceania (3) and Brazil (1). Symptoms occurred post-first dose in 9 patients, post-second dose in 14 (1 with symptoms after both), post-third dose in 1, and both post-second and booster doses in 1, while details on 2 cases were not disclosed. Treatments included tapered oral steroids (6), topical steroids (3), tapered prednisone with antiviral drugs and vitamins (1), and valacyclovir and acetazolamide (1), while 16 received no treatment. All patients experienced symptom improvement, and nearly all patients ultimately recovered. Moreover, we summarized possible hypotheses concerning the mechanism of COVID-19 vaccine-associated MEWDS. The findings provide insights into the clinical aspects of COVID-19 vaccine-associated MEWDS. More attention should be given to patients with vaccine-associated MEWDS, and necessary treatment should be provided to patients experiencing a substantial decline in visual acuity to improve their quality of life.

Occupational anaphylaxis: A Position Paper of the German Society of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI)

BACKGROUND

Anaphylaxis is a systemic allergic reaction that is potentially life-threatening. Occupational anaphylaxis is an anaphylaxis that occurs in an occupational context. In this position paper, we propose diagnostic criteria for occupational anaphylaxis and provide an overview of the current state of knowledge in terms of prevalence, triggers, prevention, and management.

RESULTS

The most common triggers of occupational anaphylaxis include Hymenoptera venoms, followed by food and drugs. Chemicals, bites or contact with animals (mammals/snakes/insects) and natural rubber latex are far less common. Occupations at risk for occupational anaphylaxis are therefore beekeepers, outdoor workers, or those who handle food as well as healthcare workers. The route of contact, intensity, and frequency of exposure, type of allergen, and the simultaneous occurrence of co-factors determine the clinical manifestation. A detailed medical history is required to confirm the diagnosis of anaphylaxis and to identify the trigger. Both skin tests and the determination of specific IgE are recommended, but only very few commercially available and quality-tested allergens are available that can be examined using both test methods. Preventive measures are based on avoiding further exposure or, if necessary, replacing a working substance. A written emergency plan and the prescription of an adrenaline autoinjector as well as instructions for its use are mandatory. Allergen immunotherapy is recommended for systemic Hymenoptera venom allergy. Depending on the national healthcare systems, patients with occupational anaphylaxis must be reported to the accident insurance.

CONCLUSION

Occupational anaphylaxis is very rare. We recommend educational measures and generally standardized recording of occupational anaphylaxis for occupations with an increased risk of anaphylaxis.

Occupational anaphylaxis-Data from the anaphylaxis registry

BACKGROUND

Epidemiologic data on occupational anaphylaxis is scarce, and there is a need of more knowledge about work-related anaphylactic episodes.

METHODS

Based on the data of the Anaphylaxis Registry, we identified cases related to occupational exposure and analyzed the elicitors, demographics, severity of clinical reaction and management.

RESULTS

Since 2017, 5851 cases with an information about the occupational relation of the anaphylactic episode were registered whereby 225 (3.8%) were assigned to be caused by an occupational allergen. The vast majority of these occupational anaphylaxis cases were caused by insects (n = 186, 82.7%) followed by food (n = 27, 12.0%) and drugs (n = 8, 3.6%). Latex elicited occupational anaphylaxis in only two cases. Beekeepers, gardeners, farmers, and individuals working in professions associated with food handling, for example, employees in restaurants, bakery, pastry, and cooks were most frequently affected. The comparison of the occupational insect venom-induced anaphylaxis to a group of non-occupational insect anaphylaxis in adults (n = 1842) revealed a significant younger age in occupational anaphylaxis (46 vs. 53 years), a predominance of bee-induced cases (38% vs. 17%), and a higher rate of venom immunotherapy in a primary care setting (3.3% vs. 1.3%, p = .044). In the occupational- versus non-occupational adults with food-induced anaphylaxis atopic dermatitis as concomitant atopic disease was observed more frequently (n = 486; 20% vs. 10%), although this was not significant.

CONCLUSION

Our data demonstrate the impact of venom allergy in work-related anaphylaxis. Foods and drugs are less frequently elicitors, and latex-induced occupational anaphylaxis was rare. More data are needed to determine risk factors associated with occupational anaphylaxis.

The influence of novel coronavirus pneumonia on chronic disease management of asthma-a narrative review

Background and Objective

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has taken a huge global toll on all fronts, creating new challenges for the diagnosis and treatment of respiratory diseases. For chronic management of asthma, on the one hand, the presence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) may affect the asthma disease itself; on the other hand, in order to control the spread of the pandemic, forced isolation, mask-wearing and various disinfection measures also have an impact on the condition and medication of asthma patients. This article reviews the changes in chronic asthma management under the COVID-19 pandemic to provide reference for chronic disease management of asthma after the pandemic and for various public health emergencies in the future.

Methods

Online searching of literature was performed. The National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), PubMed, Google Scholar, and EMBASE were searched.

Key Content and Findings

COVID-19 has had a huge impact on the world, and has also brought new challenges to the diagnosis and treatment of asthma and chronic disease management. On the one hand, the existence of the 2019 novel coronavirus directly affects the asthma disease itself, on the other hand, due to the particularity of the asthma disease itself, different levels of isolation and controls can cause patients with different degrees of medical difficulties; in addition, the application of various disinfectants in the environment also increases the risk of acute attacks of asthma patients, as well as mask-wearing, vaccination, anxiety about the disease, panic, etc., all of which have posed various degrees of impact on the condition and psychology of asthma patients.

Conclusions

The pandemic of COVID-19 has brought many difficulties to the chronic disease management of asthma, and has had a certain impact on the disease control of asthma patients. In the era with overflowing information, internet hospital is the current trend, and there is a long way to go for effectively penetrating medical resources virtually via the internet into chronic disease management of asthma.

[Reasons for allergology consultations prior to COVID-19 vaccination and their outcomes : Two-year experience of an allergy center in North Rhine-Westphalia]

BACKGROUND

To counteract the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, several severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines have been licensed since December 2020. Shortly after the start of the vaccination campaigns, occasional allergic reactions related to vaccines were described, thus, leading to concerns in many patients with a history of allergies. The aim of this work was to evaluate which anamnestic events represented a reason for an allergology work-up before COVID-19 vaccination. Furthermore, the results of the allergology diagnostics are described.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective data analysis of all patients who presented at the Center for Dermatology, Allergology and Dermatosurgery of the Helios University Hospital Wuppertal during the years 2021 and 2022 for allergology work-up prior to COVID-19 vaccination. Demographic data, allergological history, reason for the consultation in the clinic and results of allergology diagnostic tests including reactions after vaccination were included.

RESULTS

A total of 93 patients presented for allergology work-up with COVID-19 vaccines. In about half of the cases, the reasons for the presentation to the clinic were doubts and concerns about allergic reactions and side effects. In all, 26.9% (25/93) of the presented patients had not previously received a COVID-19 vaccine yet and 23.7% (22/93) of patients developed non-allergic reactions after prior COVID-19 vaccine (e.g., headache, chills, fever, malaise). Of the patients, 46.2% (43/93) were successfully vaccinated in the clinic due to a complex allergological history, while the remaining 53.8% (50/93) were subjected to outpatient vaccination in the vaccination practice. Only one patient with known chronic spontaneous urticaria developed a mild angioedema of the lips a few hours after vaccination; however, we do not consider this episode an allergic reaction to the vaccine due to the time delay.

CONCLUSION

Allergic reactions after COVID-19 vaccines are rare, but many patients with a positive medical history of allergies are concerned about allergic reactions after COVID-19 vaccination. Thus, public work by practicing allergologists is important during vaccination campaigns to meet the concerns and fears of the population, especially of patients with allergies in their medical history.

Vaccine confidence among those living with allergy during the COVID pandemic (ACCORD): A scoping review

Background

Reports of allergic reactions to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines, coupled with an "infodemic" of misinformation, carry the potential to undermine confidence in the COVID-19 vaccines. However, no attempts have been made to comprehensively synthesize the literature on how allergic disease and fear of allergic reactions to the vaccines contribute to hesitancy.

Objectives

Our aim was to review the academic and gray literature on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and allergic reactions.

Methods

We searched 4 databases (CINAHL, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and Embase) using a search strategy developed by content and methodologic experts. No restrictions were applied regarding COVID-19 vaccine type, country of study, or patient age. Eligible articles were restricted to 10 languages.

Results

Of the 1385 unique records retrieved from our search, 60 articles (4.3%) were included. Allergic reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine were rare but slightly more common in individuals with a history of allergic disease. A fifth of the studies (13 of 60 [22%]) discussed vaccine hesitancy due to possibility of an allergic reaction. Additionally, the present review identified research on details of vaccine-related anaphylaxis (eg, a mean and median [excluding clinical trial data] of 12.4 and 5 cases per million doses, respectively) and allergic reactions (eg, a mean and median [excluding clinical trial data] of 489 and 528 cases per million doses, respectively).

Conclusion

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among individuals living with allergy and among those with no history of allergic disease may be affected by fear of an allergic reaction. Despite the low incidence of allergic reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine, fear of such reactions is one of the most commonly cited concerns reported in the literature.

From Immunogen to COVID-19 vaccines: Prospects for the post-pandemic era

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected millions of people and posed an unprecedented burden on healthcare systems and economies worldwide since the outbreak of the COVID-19. A considerable number of nations have investigated COVID-19 and proposed a series of prevention and treatment strategies thus far. The pandemic prevention strategies implemented in China have suggested that the spread of COVID-19 can be effectively reduced by restricting large-scale gathering, developing community-scale nucleic acid testing, and conducting epidemiological investigations, whereas sporadic cases have always been identified in numerous places. Currently, there is still no decisive therapy for COVID-19 or related complications. The development of COVID-19 vaccines has raised the hope for mitigating this pandemic based on the intercross immunity induced by COVID-19. Thus far, several types of COVID-19 vaccines have been developed and released to into financial markets. From the perspective of vaccine use in globe, COVID-19 vaccines are beneficial to mitigate the pandemic, whereas the relative adverse events have been reported progressively. This is a review about the development, challenges and prospects of COVID-19 vaccines, and it can provide more insights into all aspects of the vaccines.

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.