A review of adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Mushtaq HA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8929726 | biostudies-literature | 2022
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
A review of adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines.
Mushtaq Hisham Ahmed HA Khedr Anwar A Koritala Thoyaja T Bartlett Brian N BN Jain Nitesh K NK Khan Syed Anjum SA
Le infezioni in medicina 20220301 1
The COVID-19 pandemic has led to unanticipated pressures on all aspects of human life. Multiple approaches to eliciting protective immunity must be rapidly evaluated. Numerous efforts have been made to develop an effective vaccine for this novel coronavirus, resulting in a race for vaccine development. To combat COVID-19, all nations must focus their efforts on widespread vaccination with an effective and safe vaccine. Globally, concerns about potential long-term adverse effects of vaccines have ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:The present SARS-CoV-2 induced COVID-19 pandemic is responsible for millions of deaths, illnesses, and economic loss worldwide. There are 21 COVID-19 vaccines from different platforms approved worldwide for emergency use until 13 August 2021. Later, BNT162b2 obtained full approval from the FDA. The efficacy of the leading vaccines such as BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, Gam-Covid-Vac, Ad26.COV2.S, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, and BBIBP-CorV, against SARS-CoV-2 documented as 95%, 94.1%, 91.6%, 67%, 70.4%, and 78.1%, respectively. Moreover, against the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, BNT162b2, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, and BBV152 showed 88%, 70%, and 65.2% efficacy, respectively. Apart from the common adverse effects such as fever, fatigue, headache, and pain in the injection site, Bell's palsy with BNT162b2, myocarditis and pericarditis with mRNA-1273, and thrombosis with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 have been reported though seemed not alarming. Furthermore, global production and distribution of vaccines should be ensured in an equal and justifiable way that the immunity and protection against the virus would be optimum and persistent.
| S-EPMC8806010 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Numerous vaccines are under clinical development and implementation for the prevention of severe course and lethal outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This systematic review aims to summarize and integrated the findings of studies regarding cutaneous side effects of COVID-19 vaccines. This systematic review conducted by searching the scientific databases of PubMed, Scopus, Science direct, and Web of knowledge from the beginning of the COVID-19 to May 10, 2021. Articles were reviewed and analyzed based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist. Seventeen studies on cutaneous side effects of COVID-19 vaccines were included after the screening of search results based on to the eligibility criteria. The results showed that the most common injection site reactions and delayed large local reactions, arising from all vaccine types, were redness/erythema (39%), followed by: itchiness (28%), urticarial rash (17%) on the neck, upper limbs, and trunk, morbilliform eruptions (6.5%), Pityriasis rosea (3%), swelling, and burning, and so forth. Most cutaneous reactions occurred in women (84%), and middle-aged people, after the first dose of vaccine, with the onset ranged from 1 to 21 days after vaccination. In addition, cutaneous reactions were generally self-limiting, and needed little or no therapeutic intervention, that were not regarded as a barrier to injecting a second dose. In conclusion, severe cutaneous side effects are very rare and approved vaccines have satisfactory safety profiles. Therefore, mild or moderate cutaneous reactions should not discourage people from vaccination. In certain groups such as patients with allergies and a history of local injection reactions, pre-vaccination counseling and assurance, also use of appropriate medications may be helpful. However, more studies are needed to investigate the side effect profile of all COVID-19 vaccines.
| S-EPMC9111405 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMisconceptions about adverse side effects are thought to influence public acceptance of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines negatively. To address such perceived disadvantages of vaccines, a novel machine learning (ML) approach was designed to generate personalized predictions of the most common adverse side effects following injection of six different COVID-19 vaccines based on personal and health-related characteristics.MethodsProspective data of adverse side effects following COVID-19 vaccination in 19943 participants from Iran and Switzerland was utilized. Six vaccines were studied: The AZD1222, Sputnik V, BBIBP-CorV, COVAXIN, BNT162b2, and the mRNA-1273 vaccine. The eight side effects were considered as the model output: fever, fatigue, headache, nausea, chills, joint pain, muscle pain, and injection site reactions. The total input parameters for the first and second dose predictions were 46 and 54 features, respectively, including age, gender, lifestyle variables, and medical history. The performances of multiple ML models were compared using Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (ROC-AUC).ResultsThe total number of people receiving the first dose of the AZD1222, Sputnik V, BBIBP-CorV, COVAXIN, BNT162b2, and mRNA-1273 were 6022, 7290, 5279, 802, 277, and 273, respectively. For the second dose, the numbers were 2851, 5587, 3841, 599, 242 and 228. The Logistic Regression model for predicting different side effects of the first dose achieved ROC-AUCs of 0.620-0.686, 0.685-0.716, 0.632-0.727, 0.527-0.598, 0.548-0.655, 0.545-0.712 for the AZD1222, Sputnik V, BBIBP-CorV, COVAXIN, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines, respectively. The second dose models yielded ROC-AUCs of 0.777-0.867, 0.795-0.848, 0.857-0.906, 0.788-0.875, 0.683-0.850, and 0.486-0.680, respectively.ConclusionsUsing a large cohort of recipients vaccinated with COVID-19 vaccines, a novel and personalized strategy was established to predict the occurrence of the most common adverse side effects with high accuracy. This technique can serve as a tool to inform COVID-19 vaccine selection and generate personalized factsheets to curb concerns about adverse side effects.
| S-EPMC9800018 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionAdverse events associated with vaccine administration can manifest in the oral cavity and orofacial region. Hence, the aim of this study was to compare the orofacial adverse effects of two recently authorised COVID-19 vaccines, namely BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273.MethodsPublicly available data on BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines were accessed from the relevant regulatory authorities in the United States, Canada, European Union and United Kingdom. Both patient/recipient information and healthcare professional fact sheets for each of these drugs were manually searched to find their orofacial adverse effects.ResultsAdverse events affecting the orofacial region were reported for both vaccines. These were rare and included acute peripheral facial paralysis (Bell's palsy), facial swelling, and swelling of the lips, face or tongue associated with anaphylaxis. There was heterogeneity in the acknowledgement of vaccine-related adverse events in North America compared with Europe.ConclusionGlobally, there are inconsistencies in the description of adverse effects presenting in the orofacial region of the COVID-19 vaccines BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273. We believe that awareness of these orofacial manifestations will improve recognition, management and reporting of vaccine-related adverse effects.
| S-EPMC8013400 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10897819 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Abstract Background and Objectives Since publishing successful clinical trial results of mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) vaccines in December 2020, multiple reports have arisen about cardiovascular complications following the mRNA vaccination. This study provides an in‐depth account of various cardiovascular adverse events reported after the mRNA vaccines' first or second dose including pericarditis/myopericarditis, myocarditis, hypotension, hypertension, arrhythmia, cardiogenic shock, stroke, myocardial infarction/STEMI, intracranial hemorrhage, thrombosis (deep vein thrombosis, cerebral venous thrombosis, arterial or venous thrombotic events, portal vein thrombosis, coronary thrombosis, microvascular small bowel thrombosis), and pulmonary embolism. Methods A systematic review of original studies reporting confirmed cardiovascular manifestations post‐mRNA COVID‐19 vaccination was performed. Following the PRISMA guidelines, electronic databases (PubMed, PMC NCBI, and Cochrane Library) were searched until January 2022. Baseline characteristics of patients and disease outcomes were extracted from relevant studies. Results A total of 81 articles analyzed confirmed cardiovascular complications post‐COVID‐19 mRNA vaccines in 17,636 individuals and reported 284 deaths with any mRNA vaccine. Of 17,636 cardiovascular events with any mRNA vaccine, 17,192 were observed with the BNT162b2 (Pfizer−BioNTech) vaccine, 444 events with mRNA‐1273 (Moderna). Thrombosis was frequently reported with any mRNA vaccine (n = 13,936), followed by stroke (n = 758), myocarditis (n = 511), myocardial infarction (n = 377), pulmonary embolism (n = 301), and arrhythmia (n = 254). Stratifying the results by vaccine type showed that thrombosis (80.8%) was common in the BNT162b2 cohort, while stroke (39.9%) was common with mRNA‐1273 for any dose. The time between the vaccination dosage and the first symptom onset averaged 5.6 and 4.8 days with the mRNA‐1273 vaccine and BNT162b2, respectively. The mRNA‐1273 cohort reported 56 deaths compared to the 228 with BNT162b2, while the rest were discharged or transferred to the ICU. Conclusion Available literature includes more studies with the BNT162b2 vaccine than mRNA‐1273. Future studies must report mortality and adverse cardiovascular events by vaccine types. We aim to summarize the events of cardiac complications following the mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine, providing an in‐depth analysis of their occurrences, and their implications. The review includes 69 case reports/case series, 4 studies with data obtained from electronic medical records (hospital surveillance data, national database, VAERS/VigiBase), and 8 observational studies including prospective/retrospective cohort.
| S-EPMC10022421 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has shaken the world since early 2020 and its health, social, economic, and societal negative impacts at the global scale have been catastrophic. Since the early days of the pandemic, development of safe and effective vaccines was judged to be the best possible tool to minimize the effects of this pandemic. Drastic public health measures were put into place to stop the spread of the virus, with the hope that vaccines would be available soon. Thanks to the extraordinary commitments of many organizations and individuals from around the globe and the collaborative effort of many international scientists, vaccines against COVID-19 received regulatory approval for emergency human use in many jurisdictions in less than a year after the identification of the viral sequence. Several of these vaccines have been in use for some time; however, the pandemic is still ongoing and likely to persist for the foreseeable future. This is due to many reasons including reduced compliance with public health restrictions, limited vaccine manufacturing/distribution capacity, high rates of vaccine hesitancy, and the emergence of new variants with the capacity to spread more easily and to evade current vaccines. Here we discuss the discovery and availability of COVID-19 vaccines and evolving issues around mass vaccination programs.
| S-EPMC8779282 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The last generation of Coronavirus named COVID-19 is responsible for the recent worldwide outbreak. Concerning the widespread and quick predominance, there is a critical requirement for designing appropriate vaccines to surmount this grave problem. Correspondingly, in this revision, COVID-19 vaccines (which are being developed until March 29th, 2021) are classified into specific and non-specific categories. Specific vaccines comprise genetic-based vaccines (mRNA, DNA), vector-based, protein/recombinant protein vaccines, inactivated viruses, live-attenuated vaccines, and novel strategies including microneedle arrays (MNAs), and nanoparticles vaccines. Moreover, specific vaccines such as BCG, MRR, and a few other vaccines are considered Non-specific. What is more, according to the significance of Bioinformatic sciences in the cutting-edge vaccine design and rapid outbreak of COVID-19, herein, Bioinformatic principles including reverse vaccinology, epitopes prediction/selection and, their further applications in the design of vaccines are discussed. Last but not least, safety, challenges, advantages, and future prospects of COVID-19 vaccines are highlighted.
| S-EPMC9420219 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundVaccination is a key intervention to prevent COVID-19. Many vaccines are administered globally, yet there is not much evidence regarding their safety and adverse effects. Iran also faces this challenge, especially as data regarding the Sputnik V vaccine is sparse. Therefore, the aim of this study is to determine the adverse effects of the most commonly used vaccines in Iran.MethodsUsing a retrospective cohort study design, 6600 subjects aged 18 years or older who had received two doses of any of the three COVID-19 vaccines (Sinopharm, AstraZeneca, and Sputnik V) were selected using a random sampling method between March and August 2021. Subjects were asked about any adverse effects of the vaccines by trained interviewers via telephone interview. Vaccine-related adverse effects in individuals during the first 72 h and subsequently following both doses of the vaccines were determined. The demographic variables, type of administered vaccine, adverse effects, and history of the previous infection with COVID-19 were collected. Descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation) and analytical statistics (Chi-squared and Wilcoxon tests) were performed at a 95% significance level using STATA software version 15 (STATA Corp, College Station, TX, USA).ResultsFrom 6600 participants, 4775 responded (response rate = 72.3%). Of the participants, 1460 (30.6%) received the AstraZeneca vaccine, 1564 (32.8%) received the Sinopharm vaccine and 1751 (36.7%) received the Sputnik V vaccine. 2653 participants (55.56%) reported adverse effects after the first dose and 1704 (35.7%) after the second dose. Sputnik V caused the most adverse effects with 1449 (82.7%) vaccine recipients reporting symptoms after the first or second dose, compared with 1030 (70.5%) for AstraZeneca and only 585 (37.4%) for the Sinopharm vaccine. The most common adverse effects after the first dose were fatigue (28.37%), chill/fever (26.86%), and skeletal pain (22.38%). These three adverse effects were the same for the second dose, although their prevalence was lower.ConclusionsIn this study, we demonstrate that the Sputnik V vaccine has the highest rate of adverse effects, followed by the AstraZeneca and Sinopharm vaccines. COVID-19 vaccines used in Iran are safe and there were no reports of serious adverse effects.
| S-EPMC9116064 | biostudies-literature
Project description:(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.
| S-EPMC8470727 | biostudies-literature