Delayed allergic skin reactions to vaccines.

Background: Recent advances in vaccination against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic have brought allergists and dermatologists to the forefront because both immediate and delayed hypersensitivity reactions have been reported. Objective: This literature review focused on delayed reactions to vaccines, including possible causative agents and practical information on how to diagnose, evaluate with patch testing, and manage subsequent dose administration. Methods: Currently published reviews and case reports in PubMed, along with data on vaccines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention web site. Relevant case reports and reviews that focused on delayed reactions to vaccines were selected. Results: Most delayed hypersensitivity reactions to vaccines include cutaneous manifestations, which vary from local persistent pruritic nodules to systemic rashes. The onset is usually within a few days but can be delayed by weeks. Multiple excipients have been identified that have been implicated in delayed vaccine reactions, including thimerosal, formaldehyde, aluminum, antibiotics, and gelatin. Treatment with antihistamines, topical corticosteroids, or systemic corticosteroids alleviates symptoms in most patients. Such reactions are generally not contraindications to future vaccination. However, for more-severe reactions, patch testing for causative agents can be used to aid in diagnosis and approach further vaccination. Conclusion: Delayed-type hypersensitivity reactions to vaccines are not uncommon. If needed, patch testing can be used to confirm agents, including antibiotics, formaldehyde, thimerosal, and aluminum. In most cases, delayed cutaneous reactions are not contraindications to further vaccine administration.

Eosinophil Quantitated Urine Kinetic: A novel assay for assessment of eosinophilic esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic disease that requires long-term medical management and monitoring. The eosinophil count determined during esophageal biopsy remains the gold standard for diagnosis and monitoring of EoE. Although markers of eosinophil degranulation correlate with symptoms, eosinophil counts do not correlate. Development of a noninvasive, cost-effective biomarker of eosinophil activation for the evaluation of EoE is an unmet medical need. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a proof-of-concept study to evaluate the potential for measuring urinary 3-bromotyrosine (3-BT) levels in creatinine normalized urine for quantifying eosinophil degranulation in EoE disease. METHODS: A mass spectrometry-based method of measuring normalized 3-BT levels, the Eosinophil Quantitated Urine Kinetic (EoQUIK), was developed, and proof-of-concept evaluation was performed for patients with EoE (n = 27), atopic controls (n = 24), and nonatopic controls (n = 24). RESULTS: EoQUIK revealed that median normalized 3-BT levels were increased 93-fold in patients with EoE compared with nonatopic controls (P = .01) and increased 13-fold in patients with EoE compared with atopic controls (P = .01). Cutoff thresholds were selected for EoQUIK that yielded a specificity of 100% and a negative predictive value of 100% for nonatopic controls and a specificity of 79% and a negative predictive value of 90% for atopic controls. In a logistic regression model, a urine 3-BT level greater than 20 pg per 400 mg of creatinine increased the odds of a patient having EoE by 4.8 (95% confidence interval, 1.14-20.5; P = .03) when compared with atopic controls after controlling for race and sex. CONCLUSION: These data provide proof of concept that EoQUIK can potentially be a useful noninvasive clinical tool in the evaluation of possible EoE.