Vaccine Side Effects Following COVID-19 Vaccination Among the Residents of the UAE-An Observational Study.

COVID-19 vaccines have proven to be very safe in the clinical trials, however, there is less evidence comparing the safety of these vaccines in real-world settings. Therefore, we aim to investigate the nature and severity of the adverse effects reported and the differences based on the type of vaccine received. A survey was conducted among 1,878 adult (≥18 years) COVID-19 vaccine recipients through online survey platforms and telephonic interviews during March to September 2021. The factors potentially associated with the reported side effects like age, gender, ethnicity, comorbidities, and previous COVID-19 infection were analyzed based on the type of vaccine received. Differences in adverse events and the severity were compared between inactivated and mRNA vaccine recipients. The major adverse effects reported by the COVID-19 vaccine recipients were pain at the site of injection, fatigue and drowsiness, and headache followed by joint/muscle pain. The adverse effects were more common among recipients of mRNA Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine than among recipients of inactive Sinopharm vaccine with the odds ratio of 1.39 (95% CI 1.14-1.68). The average number of adverse effects reported between individuals who had received Sinopharm and Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines was 1.61 ± 2.08 and 2.20 ± 2.58, respectively, and the difference was statistically significant (p <0.001). Severe adverse effects after COVID-19 vaccinations were rare and 95% of the adverse effects reported after either an inactivated or mRNA vaccine were mild requiring no or home-based treatment. The study found that individuals less than 55 years of age, female gender, with history of one or more comorbid conditions, who had received mRNA Pfizer- BioNTech vaccine, and with history of COVID-19 infections are at higher odds of developing an adverse effect post COVID-19 vaccination compared to the others.

Therapeutic role of immunomodulators during the COVID-19 pandemic- a narrative review.

The emergency state caused by COVID-19 saw the use of immunomodulators despite the absence of robust research. To date, the results of relatively few randomized controlled trials have been published, and methodological approaches are riddled with bias and heterogeneity. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, convalescent plasma and the JAK inhibitor baricitinib have gained Emergency Use Authorizations and tentative recommendations for their use in clinical practice alone or in combination with other therapies. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies are predominating the management of non-hospitalized patients, while the inpatient setting is seeing the use of convalescent plasma, baricitinib, tofacitinib, tocilizumab, sarilumab, and corticosteroids, as applicable. Available clinical data also suggest the potential clinical benefit of the early administration of blood-derived products (e.g. convalescent plasma, non-SARS-CoV-2-specific immunoglobins) and the blockade of factors implicated in the hyperinflammatory state of severe COVID-19 (Interleukin 1 and 6; Janus Kinase). Immune therapies seem to have a protective effect and using immunomodulators alone or in combination with viral replication inhibitors and other treatment modalities might prevent progression into severe COVID-19 disease, cytokine storm and death. Future trials should address existing gaps and reshape the landscape of COVID-19 management.

Accessibility to biologics and its impact on disease activity and quality of life in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in Kuwait.

OBJECTIVE: Biologics are indicated in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in case of persistent high disease activity despite conventional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (cDMARDs) or patients with contraindications to cDMARDs or poor prognostic factors. The purpose of this study was to compare the prescription rates of biologics in Kuwaiti and non-Kuwaiti patients and to assess whether this had an impact on disease activity and quality of life in RA patients. METHODS: Data were extracted from the Kuwait Registry for Rheumatic Diseases. Adult patients who satisfied the ACR classification criteria for RA from four major hospitals in Kuwait were evaluated from February 2013 through May 2018. The treatment agents, disease activity, and quality of life of Kuwaiti patients were compared with non-Kuwaiti patients. RESULTS: A total of 1651 RA patients were included; 806 (48.8%) were Kuwaiti patients. Among Kuwaiti patients, 62.5% were on biologic drugs in comparison with 14% of non-Kuwaiti patients. In comparison with non-Kuwaiti patients, Kuwaiti patients had significantly lower numbers of swollen joints (p < 0.001) and disease activity score-28 scores (p = 0.02) and less steroid use (p < 0.001) yet a significantly higher health assessment questionnaire-disability index (p < 0.001). Regression analysis showed that DAS-28 scores were significantly associated with the treatment type (p < 0.001) and that nationality was significantly predictive of the treatment type (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In the setting of easy accessibility to treatment for Kuwaiti patients, biologics were prescribed by rheumatologists at a higher rate than for non-Kuwaitis. This may explain the lower disease activity and the lower rate of steroid use in Kuwaiti patients than non-Kuwaitis. KEY POINTS: • Significant discrepancies in the rates of prescribing biologic therapies between KP and NKP in Kuwait were observed. • Several treatment outcomes were significantly better in the KP group than in the NKP group even after adjustment of confounding factors. • The poor access to biologic therapies was suggested to limit the effectiveness of RA treatments in the NKP group.