Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

19 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Cutaneous Adverse Reactions to COVID-19 Vaccines: Insights from an Immuno-Dermatological Perspective.

ABSTRACT: (1) Background: Numerous vaccines are under preclinical and clinical development for prevention of severe course and lethal outcome of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In light of high efficacy rates and satisfactory safety profiles, some agents have already reached approval and are now distributed worldwide, with varying availability. Real-world data on cutaneous adverse drug reactions (ADRs) remain limited. (2) Methods: We performed a literature research concerning cutaneous ADRs to different COVID-19 vaccines, and incorporated our own experiences. (3) Results: Injection site reactions are the most frequent side effects arising from all vaccine types. Moreover, delayed cutaneous ADRs may occur after several days, either as a primary manifestation or as a flare of a pre-existing inflammatory dermatosis. Cutaneous ADRs may be divided according to their cytokine profile, based on the preponderance of specific T-cell subsets (i.e., Th1, Th2, Th17/22, Tregs). Specific cutaneous ADRs mimic immunogenic reactions to the natural infection with SARS-CoV-2, which is associated with an abundance of type I interferons. (4) Conclusions: Further studies are required in order to determine the best suitable vaccine type for individual groups of patients, including patients suffering from chronic inflammatory dermatoses.

SUBMITTER: Niebel D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8470727 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

Clinical and histopathological spectrum of delayed adverse cutaneous reactions following COVID-19 vaccination.

Project description:BackgroundAs more people become vaccinated against the SARS-CoV-2 virus, reports of delayed cutaneous hypersensitivity reactions are beginning to emerge.MethodsIn this IRB-approved retrospective case series, biopsy specimens of potential cutaneous adverse reactions from the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna mRNA vaccine were identified and reviewed. Clinical information was obtained through the requisition form, referring clinician, or medical chart review.ResultsTwelve cases were included. Histopathological features from two injection-site reactions showed a mixed-cell infiltrate with eosinophils and a spongiotic dermatitis with eosinophils. Three biopsy specimens came from generalized eruptions that showed interface changes consistent with an exanthematous drug reaction. Three biopsy specimens revealed a predominantly spongiotic pattern, consistent with eczematous dermatitis. Small-vessel vascular injury was seen in two specimens, which were diagnosed as urticarial vasculitis and leukocytoclastic vasculitis, respectively. There were two cases of new-onset bullous pemphigoid supported by histopathological examination and direct immunofluorescence studies. Eosinophils were seen in 10 cases.ConclusionsDermatopathologists should be aware of potential cutaneous adverse reactions to mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines. Histopathological patterns include mixed-cell infiltrates, epidermal spongiosis, and interface changes. Eosinophils are a common finding but are not always present. Direct immunofluorescence studies may be helpful for immune-mediated cutaneous presentations such as vasculitis or bullous pemphigoid.

| S-EPMC8444807 | biostudies-literature

Adverse reactions to the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in Japan.

Project description:IntroductionThe BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines are the main vaccines that have been used for mass vaccination in Japan. Information on adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines in the Japanese population is limited.MethodsWe conducted an online survey on self-reported adverse reactions in individuals who had received two doses of the BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccine. The incidence of adverse events after each dose of vaccine was investigated. Propensity score matching was used to compare the incidence of adverse reactions after the second dose of the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines.ResultsAfter the first and second doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine, and the first and second doses of the mRNA-1273 vaccine, 890, 853, 6401, and 3965 individuals, respectively, provided complete responses. Systemic reactions, including fever, fatigue, headache, muscle/joint pain, and nausea were significantly more common in females, individuals aged <50 years, and after the second dose. The incidence of injection site pain did not differ significantly according to the dose. The incidence of delayed injection site reactions after the first dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine was 3.9% and 0.8% among females and males, respectively, and 10.6% among females aged 40-69 years. Local and systemic reactions after the second dose, including fever, fatigue, headache, muscle/joint pain, nausea, and skin rash were more common in individuals who had received the mRNA-1273 vaccine.ConclusionsAdverse reactions were more frequently reported in females, younger individuals, and after the mRNA-1273 vaccine.

| S-EPMC8747950 | biostudies-literature

Local and Systemic Adverse Reactions to mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Comparing Two Vaccine Types and Occurrence of Previous COVID-19 Infection.

Project description:The aim of this study was to assess adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines, comparing the BNT162b2 or the mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines and the presence and seriousness of a previous COVID-19 infection. We conducted a cross-sectional online survey of vaccinated healthcare workers at a tertiary hospital in Barcelona (Spain). Thirty-eight percent of vaccine recipients responded to the questionnaire. We compared the prevalence of adverse reactions by vaccine type and history of COVID-19 infections. A total of 2373 respondents had received the BNT162b2 vaccine, and 506 the mRNA-1273 vaccine. The prevalence of at least one adverse reaction with doses 1 and 2 was 41% and 70%, respectively, in the BNT162b2 group, and 60% and 92% in the mRNA-1273 group (p < 0.001). The BNT162b2 group reported less prevalence of all adverse reactions. Need for medical leave was significantly more frequent among the mRNA-1273 group (12% versus 4.6% p < 0.001). Interestingly, respondents with a history of allergies or chronic illnesses did not report more adverse reactions. The frequency of adverse reactions with dose 2 was 96% (95% CI 88-100%) for those with a history of COVID-19 related hospitalization, and 86% (95% CI 83-89%) for those with mild or moderate symptomatic COVID-19, significantly higher than for participants with no history of COVID-19 infections (67%, 95% CI 65-69%). Our results could help inform vaccine recipients of the probability of their having adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines.

| S-EPMC8707814 | biostudies-literature

COVID-19: Insights into Potential Vaccines.

Project description:People around the world ushered in the new year 2021 with a fear of COVID-19, as family members have lost their loved ones to the disease. Millions of people have been infected, and the livelihood of many has been jeopardized due to the pandemic. Pharmaceutical companies are racing against time to develop an effective vaccine to protect against COVID-19. Researchers have developed various types of candidate vaccines with the release of the genetic sequence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in January. These include inactivated viral vaccines, protein subunit vaccines, mRNA vaccines, and recombinant viral vector vaccines. To date, several vaccines have been authorized for emergency use and they have been administered in countries across the globe. Meanwhile, there are also vaccine candidates in Phase III clinical trials awaiting results and approval from authorities. These candidates have shown positive results in the previous stages of the trials, whereby they could induce an immune response with minimal side effects in the participants. This review aims to discuss the different vaccine platforms and the clinical trials of the candidate vaccines.

| S-EPMC8001762 | biostudies-literature

Acute Allergic Reactions to mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines.

Project description: Not available

| S-EPMC7941251 | biostudies-literature

Epidemiology of cutaneous adverse drug reactions.

Project description:Epidemiologic investigation of cutaneous adverse drug reactions (cADRs) is important in order to evaluate their impact on dermatology and health care in general as well as their burden on affected patients. Few epidemiologic studies have been performed on frequent non-life-threatening cADR, including reactions of both delayed and immediate hypersensitivity, such as maculopapular exanthema (MPE), fixed drug eruption, and urticaria. Concerning rare but life-threatening severe cutaneous adverse reactions, e.g., toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP), and drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), several epidemiologic studies have been performed to date, some of which are still ongoing. Such studies enable the calculation of reliable incidence rates and demographic data, and also allow researchers to perform risk estimation for drugs. The spectrum of drugs causing cADR differs substantially when separating the various clinical conditions. Whereas antibiotics are by far the most frequent inducers of milder cADRs, like MPE, they have a much lower risk of inducing SJS/TEN, for which "high-risk" drugs are anti-infective sulfonamides, allopurinol, certain anti-epileptic drugs, nevirapine, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) of the oxicam-type. In contrast, AGEP is predominantly caused by the antibiotics pristinamycin and aminopenicillins, followed by quinolones, (hydroxy-)chloroquine, and sulfonamides. DRESS can be induced by a number of drugs known to cause SJS/TEN, such as certain antiepileptics and allopurinol, but also other medications (e.g., minocyclin).

| S-EPMC6039997 | biostudies-other

Are the Allergic Reactions of COVID-19 Vaccines Caused by mRNA Constructs or Nanocarriers? Immunological Insights.

Project description:The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has recently authorized the two messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 for emergency use against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causing the COVID-19 coronavirus disease. BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines were developed by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna, respectively, in 2020. The United Kingdom, Bahrain, Canada, Mexico, United States, Singapore, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and European Union began their vaccination programs with the BNT162b2 vaccine, while the United States and Canada also started the mRNA-1273 vaccination program in mid December 2020. On 28th December 2020, studies reported severe allergic reactions in people who received the BNT162b2, and few people who received the mRNA-1273 vaccine. Authors of the letter thus attempt to explore possible causes of anaphylaxis following COVID-19 vaccination.

| S-EPMC8140554 | biostudies-literature

Adverse reactions following COVID-19 vaccination: An Ecuadorian experience.

Project description:BackgroundLimited large-scale studies have been conducted to investigate the adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccine in Latin America, particularly among the healthcare worker (HCW) population in Ecuador. The objective of this study was to assess a cohort of Ecuadorian healthcare workers for adverse reactions following vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.MethodsWe conducted an observational cross-sectional study to assess the potential adverse reactions to the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine among a sample of healthcare workers (HCWs) in the city of Guayaquil, Ecuador, from March to May 2021.ResultsThe sample comprised 1291 patients, with a mean age of 39.3 years (SD, 13.5). In general, 79% (N = 1020) of participants presented an adverse effect of any type at first dose, while 75.1% (N = 969) did so at the second dose. Pain at the puncture site was the most common adverse effect overall after either the first (68.4%) and second (55.6%) dose. Regarding anaphylaxis, no participant developed the condition after the first dose, and only 0.2% (N = 2) developing it at the second dose. No fatalities were reported.ConclusionOur findings suggest that adverse reactions following COVID-19 vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine are relatively common, albeit often mild and self-limited. Consistent with the literature there were few cases of anaphylaxis, and no deaths that could be attributed to the inoculation with the vaccine. We hope our findings can help to reassure the public that benefits of vaccination highly outweigh the risks and contribute to the effort of reducing vaccine hesitancy among those who are concerned about the safety and potential side effects.

| S-EPMC8598282 | biostudies-literature

Cutaneous Adverse Drug Reactions in Dogs Treated with Antiepileptic Drugs.

Project description:Epilepsy is one of the most common neurologic disorders in dogs and life-long treatment with antiepileptic drugs (AED) is frequently required. Adverse events of AED targeting the skin are only rarely reported in veterinary medicine and the true incidence and spectrum of cutaneous reactions in epileptic dogs remains unknown. In this study, we hypothesized that cutaneous reactions commonly occur in epileptic dogs and are related to AED treatment. A retrospective case review of 185 dogs treated for epilepsy identified 20.0% with simultaneous appearance of dermatologic signs. In a subsequent prospective case investigation (n?=?137), we identified newly appearing or distinct worsening of skin lesions following initiation of AED therapy in 10.9% of dogs treated for epilepsy (95% CI 6.8-17.7%). Cutaneous lesions were classified as probably drug-induced in 40.0% of these cases. Patch testing and intradermal testing were further investigated as potential diagnostic methods to confirm AED hypersensitivity. They were of high specificity but sensitivity and positive predictive value appeared inappropriate to recommend their routine use in clinical practice.

| S-EPMC4830846 | biostudies-literature

Rapid development of analytical methods for evaluating pandemic vaccines: a COVID-19 perspective.

Project description:Vaccines are key in charting a path out of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, development of new vaccines is highly dependent on availability of analytical methods for their design and evaluation. This paper highlights the challenges presented in having to rapidly develop vaccine analytical tools during an ongoing pandemic, including the need to address progressive virus mutation and adaptation which can render initial assays unreliable or redundant. It also discusses the potential of new computational modeling techniques to model and analyze key viral proteins and their attributes to assist vaccine production and assay design. It then reviews the current range of analytical tools available for COVID-19 vaccine application, ranging from in vitro assays for immunogen characterization to assays to measure vaccine responses in vivo. Finally, it provides a future perspective for COVID-19 vaccine analytical tools and attempts to predict how the field might evolve over the next 5-10 years.

| S-EPMC8516068 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data