Dataset Information

Second-dose COVID-19 vaccines are well tolerated in patients with allergic reactions to the first dose - a single center experience.

ABSTRACT: COVID-19 vaccines contain additives such as Polyethylenglycol-2000 (PEG2000; mRNA vaccines) or Polysorbat 80 (vector vaccines), which have been described previously as culprits for anaphylactic events. This retrospective study included 46 individuals, who were referred to Comprehensive Allergy Center at the Department Dermatology and Venereology, Kepler University Hospital, Linz, Austria, with suspected allergic reactions to the first COVID-19 vaccine dose with either mRNA or vector-based vaccines. Patients underwent detailed anamnesis, clinical examination, and in most cases, skin prick testing using pure additive substances (PEG - different molecular weights, Polysorbate 80). Out of 46, 7 patients' reactions were classified as possibly anaphylactic and graded according to Ring & Messmer. Forty patients out of 46 were assessed with skin prick tests for potential allergens in COVID-19 vaccines. Only 1 patient showed an immediate positive prick test to PEG2000. Second-dose vaccination with mRNA or vector-based vaccines were tolerated well in all patients, including the individual with a positive skin prick test against PEG2000. The currently available COVID-19 vaccines have an overall low allergic potential and may be administered safely in patients with suspected allergic reactions to the first dose.

SUBMITTER: Puxkandl V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9120131 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThis study compared a rapid home-based up-dosing schedule for sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) drops containing tree pollen allergens with two previously established schedules. Furthermore, the clinical effect of the SLIT was investigated with respect to patients' first pollen season under treatment.MethodsIn this open-label, prospective, patient-preference, non-interventional study, local and systemic reactions were compared between three up-dosing groups using a SLIT formulation containing birch, alder, and hazel pollen extracts (ORALVAC® Compact Bäume). Clinical improvement after patients' first season under treatment was analysed using symptom scores, ARIA classification, symptom control, and the use of symptomatic medication and was compared with data from the previous, pre-treatment pollen season. As the real-life study design allowed no placebo group, the late-treated patients (co-seasonal) served as a control, and crowd-sourced symptom data from persons with hay fever were used from a free web-based online diary.ResultsIn 33 study centres in Germany and Austria, 164 patients were included. The treatment was well tolerated, without difference between the groups during the up-dosing phase. At the end of the assessment, 96.1% rated the tolerability of the treatment as good or very good. Local reactions were mostly mild in severity and no serious adverse events occurred. Symptom scores decreased from the 2016 pollen season to the 2017 pollen season. As for the ARIA classification, 79.0% of patients had persistent, moderate-to-severe rhinitis before treatment, but only 18.6% had the same classification after treatment. In all, 62.4% of patients achieved symptom control, and 34.3% of patients required no symptomatic medication after treatment. The rhinoconjunctivitis score was 34.4% lower for pre-seasonal treatment initiation than for the control group. Crowd-sourced symptom load indices showed that the 2016 season caused slightly more symptoms; however, it is assumed that this difference of 0.3-0.5 (score range 0-10) was of less clinical relevance.ConclusionThe treatment administered using the rapid home-based up-dosing schedule was safe and well tolerated. Symptom relief and reduction in medication use were observed during the first pollen season with SLIT.Trial registration numberNCT03097432 (clinicaltrials.gov).

Project description:A combination of cytoreductive surgery, either primary (PCS) or interval (ICS), and chemotherapy with a platinum-paclitaxel regimen is the well-accepted treatment for advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), fallopian tube cancer (FTC), and primary peritoneal serous carcinoma (PPSC), but it is still uncertain whether a combination of dose-dense weekly paclitaxel and low-dose triweekly cisplatin is useful in the management of these patients. Therefore, we retrospectively evaluated the outcomes of women with advanced-stage EOC, FTC, and PPSC treated with PCS and subsequent dose-dense weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) and low-dose triweekly cisplatin (20 mg/m2). Between January 2011 and December 2017, 32 women with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIIC-IV EOC, FTC, or PPSC were enrolled. Optimal PCS was achieved in 63.5% of patients. The mean and median progression-free survival was 36.5 and 27.0 months, respectively (95% confidence interval (CI): 26.8-46.2 and 11.3-42.7 months, respectively). The mean overall survival was 56.0 months (95% CI: 43.9-68.1 months), and the median overall survival could not be obtained. The most common all-grade adverse events (AEs) were anemia (96.9%), neutropenia (50%), peripheral neuropathy (28.1%), nausea and vomiting (34.4%), and thrombocytopenia (15.6%). These AEs were predominantly grade 1/2, and only a few patients were complicated by grade 3/4 neutropenia (21.9%) and anemia (6.3%). A multivariate analysis indicated that only suboptimal PCS was significantly correlated with a worse prognosis, resulting in an 11.6-fold increase in the odds of disease progression. In conclusion, our data suggest that dose-dense weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) combined with low-dose triweekly cisplatin (20 mg/m2) is a potentially effective and highly tolerable front-line treatment in advanced EOC, FTC, and PPSC. Randomized trials comparing the outcome of this regimen to other standard therapies for FIGO stage IIIC-IV EOC, FTC, and PPSC are warranted.

Project description:IntroductionCOVID-19 vaccines were rapidly authorised, thus requiring intense post-marketing re-evaluation of their benefit-risk profile. A multi-national European collaboration was established with the aim to prospectively monitor safety of the COVID-19 vaccines through web-based survey of vaccinees.MethodsA prospective cohort event monitoring study was conducted with primary consented data collection in seven European countries. Through the web applications, participants received and completed baseline and up to six follow-up questionnaires on self-reported adverse reactions for at least 6 months following the first dose of COVID-19 vaccine (Netherlands, France, Belgium, UK, Italy) and baseline and up to ten follow-up questionnaires for one year in Germany and Croatia. Rates of adverse reactions have been described by type (solicited, non-solicited; serious/non-serious; and adverse events of special interest) and stratified by vaccine brand. We calculated the frequency of adverse reaction after dose 1 and prior to dose 2 among all vaccinees who completed at least one follow-up questionnaire.ResultsOverall, 117,791 participants were included and completed the first questionnaire in addition to the baseline: 88,196 (74.9%) from Germany, 27,588 (23.4%) from Netherlands, 984 (0.8%) from France, 570 (0.5%) from Italy, 326 (0.3%) from Croatia, 89 (0.1%) from the UK and 38 (0.03%) from Belgium. There were 89,377 (75.9%) respondents who had received AstraZeneca vaccines, 14,658 (12.4%) BioNTech/Pfizer, 11,266 (9.6%) Moderna and 2490 (2.1%) Janssen vaccines as a first dose. Median age category was 40-49 years for all vaccines except for Pfizer where median age was 70-79 years. Most vaccinees were female with a female-to-male ratio of 1.34, 1.96 and 2.50 for AstraZeneca, Moderna and Janssen, respectively. BioNtech/Pfizer had slightly more men with a ratio of 0.82. Fatigue and headache were the most commonly reported solicited systemic adverse reactions and injection-site pain was the most common solicited local reaction. The rates of adverse events of special interest (AESIs) were 0.1-0.2% across all vaccine brands.ConclusionThis large-scale prospective study of COVID-19 vaccine recipients showed, for all the studied vaccines, a high frequency of systemic reactions, related to the immunogenic response, and local reactions at the injection site, while serious reactions or AESIs were uncommon, consistent with those reported on product labels. This study demonstrated the feasibility of setting up and conducting cohort event monitoring across multiple European countries to collect safety data on novel vaccines that are rolled out at scale in populations which may not have been included in pivotal trials.

Dataset Information

Second-dose COVID-19 vaccines are well tolerated in patients with allergic reactions to the first dose - a single center experience.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets