Skin-centered strategies in food allergy prevention.

While the early introduction of food allergens in the infant diet has been shown to be effective at preventing the development of food allergy (FA), its implementation in real life has been associated with various challenges. Interventions aimed at correcting skin barrier dysfunction have been explored in recent decades as a distinct or complementary mean to prevent allergic sensitization through the skin and subsequent development of FA. Studies assessing the application of emollient from birth have yielded conflicting results, and meta-analyses have demonstrated either no effect or only a slight positive effect on FA prevention. However, a careful review of the clinical trials reveals that different emollients were used, which may have explained some of the discrepancies between study results. Emollient application protocols also varied widely between studies. While firm conclusions cannot be drawn with regard to their overall efficacy at preventing FA, the available data provide valuable insight into the characteristics that could be associated with a more effective intervention. Namely, successful trials tended to use emollients with an acidic pH of 5.5, applied over the entire body, and combined with topical corticosteroids in affected areas. Consensus on the optimal strategy to restore skin barrier function could help improve the homogeneity and clinical relevance of future trials on this topic. In the meantime, clinicians should avoid products associated with worse outcomes.

Preparing Patients for Oral Immunotherapy (PPOINT): International Delphi consensus for procedural preparation and consent.

BACKGROUND: Despite the promise of oral immunotherapy (OIT) to treat food allergies, this procedure is associated with potential risk. There is no current agreement about what elements should be included in the preparatory or consent process. OBJECTIVE: We developed consensus recommendations about the OIT process considerations and patient-specific factors that should be addressed before initiating OIT and developed a consensus OIT consent process and information form. METHODS: We convened a 36-member Preparing Patients for Oral Immunotherapy (PPOINT) panel of allergy experts to develop a consensus OIT patient preparation, informed consent process, and framework form. Consensus for themes and statements was reached using Delphi methodology, and the consent information form was developed. RESULTS: The expert panel reached consensus for 4 themes and 103 statements specific to OIT preparatory procedures, of which 76 statements reached consensus for inclusion specific to the following themes: general considerations for counseling patients about OIT; patient- and family-specific factors that should be addressed before initiating OIT and during OIT; indications for initiating OIT; and potential contraindications and precautions for OIT. The panel reached consensus on 9 OIT consent form themes: benefits, risks, outcomes, alternatives, risk mitigation, difficulties/challenges, discontinuation, office policies, and long-term management. From these themes, 219 statements were proposed, of which 189 reached consensus, and 71 were included on the consent information form. CONCLUSION: We developed consensus recommendations to prepare and counsel patients for safe and effective OIT in clinical practice with evidence-based risk mitigation. Adoption of these recommendations may help standardize clinical care and improve patient outcomes and quality of life.

Age-Related Food Aversion and Anxiety Represent Primary Patient Barriers to Food Oral Immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Although oral immunotherapy (OIT) for food allergy is a reasonable treatment option, barriers to this procedure's implementation have not been extensively evaluated from a patient perspective. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the barriers patients face during OIT administration, including anxiety and taste aversion, and the role of health care professionals, especially dietitians. METHODS: A survey in Canada and the United States involved families currently enrolled in food OIT programs. RESULTS: Of responses from 379 participants, fear of reaction was the most common barrier to OIT initiation, with 45.6% reporting it being a "very significant" barrier with other fears reported. However, taste aversion represented the prominent obstacle to continuation. Taste aversion was associated with a slower buildup (P = .02) and a reduction in dose (P = .002). Taste aversion was a strongly age-dependent barrier for initiation (P < .001) and continuation (P < .002), with older children over 6 years of age reporting it as a very significant barrier (P < .001). Boredom was reported as a concern for specific allergens such as peanut, egg, sesame, and hazelnuts (P < .05), emphasizing the need for diverse food options. Notably, 59.9% of respondents mixed OIT foods with sweet items. Despite these dietary concerns, dietitians were underutilized, with only 9.5% of respondents having seen a dietitian and the majority finding dietitian support helpful with greater certainty about the exact dose (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Taste aversion and anxiety represent primary patient-related barriers to OIT. Taste aversion was highly age dependent, with older patients being more affected. Dietitians and psychology support were underutilized, representing a critical target to improve adherence and OIT success.

Impact of Exacerbation History on Dupilumab Efficacy in Children with Uncontrolled Moderate-to-Severe Asthma: LIBERTY ASTHMA VOYAGE Study.

Purpose: Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody, blocks the shared receptor component for interleukins-4/-13, key and central drivers of type 2 inflammation in multiple diseases. This post hoc analysis of the Phase 3 LIBERTY ASTHMA VOYAGE study (NCT02948959) evaluated the efficacy of dupilumab in children aged 6 to 11 years with moderate-to-severe asthma with a type 2 inflammatory phenotype (blood eosinophil count ≥150 cells/µL or fractional exhaled nitric oxide [FeNO] ≥20 ppb) and a history of 1, 2, or ≥3 prior exacerbations. The impact of baseline type 2 biomarker levels on the efficacy of dupilumab in this population was also investigated. Patients and Methods: Patients were stratified by the number of exacerbations in the prior year (1, 2, or ≥3) and level of FeNO or blood eosinophil count at baseline. Endpoints included rate of severe exacerbations, percentage of non-exacerbators, and change from baseline in both lung function parameters (pre- and post-bronchodilator [BD] percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s (ppFEV1) and ppFEV1/forced vital capacity [FVC] ratio) and Asthma Control Questionnaire 7 Interviewer-Administered (ACQ-7-IA) score. Results: A total of 350 patients were included in this analysis. Across patients with 1, 2, or ≥3 prior exacerbations and different levels of type 2 biomarkers, dupilumab reduced the risk of severe asthma exacerbations vs placebo by 53.0-96.0% and improved both pre-BD ppFEV1 and pre-BD FEV1/FVC ratio at Week 52. Dupilumab led to significant reductions in ACQ-7-IA scores in all groups of patients by Week 52. Conclusion: In children with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthma with a type 2 phenotype, dupilumab consistently reduced the risk of asthma exacerbations, improved lung function, and reduced ACQ-7-IA scores, regardless of exacerbation history.

Quality of life and cost-effectiveness of convalescent plasma compared to standard care for hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the CONCOR-1 trial.

BACKGROUND: The CONvalescent Plasma for Hospitalized Adults With COVID-19 Respiratory Illness (CONCOR-1) trial was a multicenter randomized controlled trial assessing convalescent plasma in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of convalescent plasma and its impact on quality-of-life to provide insight into its potential as an alternative treatment in resource-constrained settings. METHODS: Individual patient data on health outcomes and resource utilization from the CONCOR-1 trial were used to conduct the analysis from the Canadian public payer's perspective with a time horizon of 30 days post-randomization. Baseline and 30-day EQ-5D-5L were measured to calculate quality-adjusted survival. All costs are presented in 2021 Canadian dollars. The base case assessed the EQ-5D-5L scores of hospitalized inpatients reporting at both timepoints, and a utility score of 0 was assigned for patients who died within 30 days. Costs for all patients enrolled were used. The sensitivity analysis utilizes EQ-5D-5L scores from the same population but only uses costs from this population. RESULTS: 940 patients were randomized: 627 received CCP and 313 received standard care. The total costs were $28,716 (standard deviation, $25,380) and $24,258 ($22,939) for the convalescent plasma and standard care arms respectively. EQ-5D-5L scores were 0.61 in both arms (p = .85) at baseline. At 30 days, EQ-5D-5L scores were 0.63 and 0.64 for patients in the convalescent plasma and standard care arms, respectively (p = .46). The incremental cost was $4458 and the incremental quality-adjusted life day was -0.078. DISCUSSION: Convalescent plasma was less effective and more costly than standard care in treating hospitalized COVID-19.

Varying Doses of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy With Viaskin Milk vs Placebo in Children With Cow's Milk Allergy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: No approved treatment exists for allergen-specific immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated cow's milk allergy (CMA), a common childhood food allergy. Objective: To assess dose, efficacy, and safety of epicutaneous immunotherapy with Viaskin milk in children with IgE-mediated CMA. Design, Setting, and Participants: A phase 1/2, 2-part, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled dose-ranging clinical trial in children aged 2 to 17 years with IgE-mediated CMA was conducted between November 2014 through December 2017. It took place at 17 trial sites in the US and Canada. Current CMA was confirmed by double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge at study entry. Part A assessed the short-term safety of 150 µg, 300 µg, or 500 µg of Viaskin milk; part B evaluated the efficacy and safety of the 3 doses vs placebo over 12 months of treatment. Of the 308 screened participants with physician-diagnosed CMA, 198 met eligibility criteria (including an eliciting dose 300 mg or less) and were randomized. Intervention: Safety of Viaskin milk (150-µg, 300-µg, or 500-µg doses) was evaluated over a 3-week period (part A). In part B, 180 additional participants were randomized to receive Viaskin milk at doses of 150 µg, 300 µg, or 500 µg or placebo (1:1:1:1) for 12 months. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of treatment responders, defined as a 10-fold or more increase in the cumulative reactive dose of cow's milk protein (reaching at least 144 mg) or a cumulative reactive dose of cow's milk protein at 1444 mg or more at the month 12 double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge. Results: A total of 95.5% of the randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 8 [4.17] years; 124 of 198 were male [62.6%]) completed treatment. The highest response rate was observed in participants who received Viaskin milk at the 300-µg dose with 24 of 49 responders (49.0%) overall vs 16 of 53 responders (30.2%) in the placebo group (odds ratio, 2.19; 95% CI, 0.91-5.41; P = .09), highest in the 2 to 11 years age group (22 of 38 [57.9%] vs 13 of 40 [32.5%]; P = .04). Most treatment-emergent adverse events were mild or moderate application-site reactions. One participant in the 500-µg Viaskin milk dose group experienced treatment-related anaphylaxis. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, 12 months of daily epicutaneous immunotherapy with a dose of Viaskin milk at 300 µg was associated with a statistically significant treatment response in 2- to 11-year-old children with IgE-mediated CMA. Treatment-related anaphylaxis and treatment-related discontinuation rates were low. Further research is needed to explore Viaskin milk as a viable treatment option for children with IgE-mediated CMA. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02223182.

Plasma Human Immunodeficiency Virus 1 Soluble Glycoprotein 120 Association With Correlates of Immune Dysfunction and Inflammation in Antiretroviral Therapy-Treated Individuals With Undetectable Viremia.

BACKGROUND: Chronic inflammation persists in some people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) during antiretroviral therapy and is associated with premature aging. The glycoprotein 120 (gp120) subunit of HIV-1 envelope sheds and can be detected in plasma, showing immunomodulatory properties even in the absence of detectable viremia. We evaluated whether plasma soluble gp120 (sgp120) and a family of gp120-specific anti-cluster A antibodies, linked to CD4 depletion in vitro, contribute to chronic inflammation, immune dysfunction, and subclinical cardiovascular disease in participants of the Canadian HIV and Aging Cohort Study with undetectable viremia. METHODS: Cross-sectional assessment of sgp120 and anti-cluster A antibodies was performed in 386 individuals from the cohort. Their association with proinflammatory cytokines and subclinical coronary artery disease was assessed using linear regression models. RESULTS: High levels of sgp120 and anti-cluster A antibodies were inversely correlated with CD4+ T cell count and CD4/CD8 ratio. The presence of sgp120 was associated with increased levels of interleukin 6. In participants with detectable atherosclerotic plaque and detectable sgp120, anti-cluster A antibodies and their combination with sgp120 levels correlated positively with the total volume of atherosclerotic plaques. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that sgp120 may act as a pan toxin causing immune dysfunction and sustained inflammation in a subset of people living with HIV, contributing to the development of premature comorbid conditions.

Efficacy and safety of peanut epicutaneous immunotherapy in patients with atopic comorbidities.

Background: Co-occurring atopic conditions are common in children with peanut allergy. As such, it is important to examine the safety and efficacy of epicutaneous immunotherapy with Viaskin Peanut 250 µg patch (VP250) in peanut-allergic children with these conditions. Objective: We sought to compare efficacy and safety of VP250 versus placebo in peanut-allergic children with/without ongoing atopic conditions at baseline, including asthma, atopic dermatitis/eczema, or concomitant food allergy. Methods: A subgroup analysis of peanut-allergic children aged 4 to 11 years enrolled in PEPITES (12 months) and REALISE (6 months) randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials was conducted. The efficacy outcome measure was the difference in prespecified responder rate between placebo and VP250 groups at month 12 based on eliciting dose of peanut protein using double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge in PEPITES. Safety profiles were evaluated by baseline concomitant disease subgroup in all randomized subjects who received 1 or more dose of the study drug in PEPITES and REALISE pooled data. Results: Responder rates were significantly (P < .05, all comparisons) greater with VP250 compared with placebo treatment regardless of whether subjects had other atopic conditions. Safety and tolerability profiles were generally similar across subgroups, with no new safety concerns detected. A trend for both higher responder rates and rates of local reactions was observed in subjects with baseline atopic dermatitis versus those without. In subjects with concomitant food allergy at baseline, higher rates of treatment-emergent adverse events, but not study discontinuations or overall rates of anaphylaxis, were observed. Conclusions: The results support the safety and efficacy of VP250 for treating peanut-allergic children with or without concomitant atopic conditions.

Plasmatic HIV-1 soluble gp120 is associated with immune dysfunction and inflammation in ART-treated individuals with undetectable viremia.

Background: Chronic inflammation persists in some people living with HIV (PLWH), even during antiretroviral therapy (ART) and is associated with premature aging. The gp120 subunit of the HIV-1 envelope glycoprotein can shed from viral and cellular membranes and can be detected in plasma and tissues, showing immunomodulatory properties even in the absence of detectable viremia. We evaluated whether plasmatic soluble gp120 (sgp120) and a family of gp120-specific anti-cluster A antibodies, which were previously linked to CD4 depletion in vitro , could contribute to chronic inflammation, immune dysfunction, and sub-clinical cardiovascular disease in participants of the Canadian HIV and Aging cohort (CHACS) with undetectable viremia. Methods: Cross-sectional assessment of plasmatic sgp120 and anti-cluster A antibodies was performed in 386 individuals from CHACS. Their association with pro-inflammatory cytokines, as well as subclinical coronary artery disease measured by computed tomography coronary angiography was assessed using linear regression models. Results: In individuals with high levels of sgp120, anti-cluster A antibodies inversely correlated with CD4 count (p=0.042) and CD4:CD8 ratio (p=0.004). The presence of sgp120 was associated with increased plasma levels of IL-6. In participants with detectable atherosclerotic plaque and detectable sgp120, sgp120 levels, anti-cluster A antibodies and their combination correlated positively with the total volume of atherosclerotic plaques (p=0.01, 0.018 and 0.006, respectively). Conclusion: Soluble gp120 may act as a pan toxin causing immune dysfunction and sustained inflammation in a subset of PLWH, contributing to the development of premature comorbidities. Whether drugs targeting sgp120 could mitigate HIV-associated comorbidities in PLWH with suppressed viremia warrants further studies. Key points: Soluble gp120 is detected in the plasma of people living with HIV-1 with undetectable viremia. The presence of soluble gp120 and anti-cluster A antibodies is associated with immune dysfunction, chronic inflammation, and sub-clinical cardiovascular disease.

Abatacept to induce remission of peanut allergy during oral immunotherapy (ATARI): protocol for a phase 2a randomized controlled trial.

Context: While oral immunotherapy (OIT) has been shown to promote the remission of mild peanut allergy in young children, there is still an unmet need for a disease-modifying intervention for older patients and those with severe diseases. In mice models, abatacept, a cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4) immunoglobulin fusion protein, has been shown to promote immune tolerance to food when used as an adjuvant to allergen immunotherapy. The goal of this study is to explore the potential efficacy of abatacept in promoting immune tolerance to food allergens during OIT in humans. Methods: In this phase 2a proof-of-concept study (NCT04872218), 14 peanut-allergic participants aged from 14 to 55 years will be randomized at a 1:1 ratio to abatacept vs. placebo for the first 24 weeks of a peanut OIT treatment (target maintenance dose of 300 mg peanut protein). The primary outcome will be the suppression of the OIT-induced surge in peanut-specific IgE/total IgE at 24 weeks, relative to the baseline. Sustained unresponsiveness will be assessed as a secondary outcome starting at 36 weeks by observing incremental periods of peanut avoidance followed by oral food challenges. Discussion: This is the first study assessing the use of abatacept as an adjuvant to allergen immunotherapy in humans. As observed in preclinical studies, the ability of abatacept to modulate the peanut-specific immune response during OIT will serve as a proxy outcome for the development of clinical tolerance, given the small sample size. The study will also test a new patient-oriented approach to sustained tolerance testing in randomized controlled trials.

Updated guidance regarding the risk of allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines and recommended evaluation and management: A GRADE assessment and international consensus approach.

This guidance updates 2021 GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) recommendations regarding immediate allergic reactions following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and addresses revaccinating individuals with first-dose allergic reactions and allergy testing to determine revaccination outcomes. Recent meta-analyses assessed the incidence of severe allergic reactions to initial COVID-19 vaccination, risk of mRNA-COVID-19 revaccination after an initial reaction, and diagnostic accuracy of COVID-19 vaccine and vaccine excipient testing in predicting reactions. GRADE methods informed rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations. A modified Delphi panel consisting of experts in allergy, anaphylaxis, vaccinology, infectious diseases, emergency medicine, and primary care from Australia, Canada, Europe, Japan, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States formed the recommendations. We recommend vaccination for persons without COVID-19 vaccine excipient allergy and revaccination after a prior immediate allergic reaction. We suggest against >15-minute postvaccination observation. We recommend against mRNA vaccine or excipient skin testing to predict outcomes. We suggest revaccination of persons with an immediate allergic reaction to the mRNA vaccine or excipients be performed by a person with vaccine allergy expertise in a properly equipped setting. We suggest against premedication, split-dosing, or special precautions because of a comorbid allergic history.

Phase 3 Trial of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy in Toddlers with Peanut Allergy.

BACKGROUND: No approved treatment for peanut allergy exists for children younger than 4 years of age, and the efficacy and safety of epicutaneous immunotherapy with a peanut patch in toddlers with peanut allergy are unknown. METHODS: We conducted this phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial involving children 1 to 3 years of age with peanut allergy confirmed by a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge. Patients who had an eliciting dose (the dose necessary to elicit an allergic reaction) of 300 mg or less of peanut protein were assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive epicutaneous immunotherapy delivered by means of a peanut patch (intervention group) or to receive placebo administered daily for 12 months. The primary end point was a treatment response as measured by the eliciting dose of peanut protein at 12 months. Safety was assessed according to the occurrence of adverse events during the use of the peanut patch or placebo. RESULTS: Of the 362 patients who underwent randomization, 84.8% completed the trial. The primary efficacy end point result was observed in 67.0% of children in the intervention group as compared with 33.5% of those in the placebo group (risk difference, 33.4 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 22.4 to 44.5; P<0.001). Adverse events that occurred during the use of the intervention or placebo, irrespective of relatedness, were observed in 100% of the patients in the intervention group and 99.2% in the placebo group. Serious adverse events occurred in 8.6% of the patients in the intervention group and 2.5% of those in the placebo group; anaphylaxis occurred in 7.8% and 3.4%, respectively. Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 0.4% of patients in the intervention group and none in the placebo group. Treatment-related anaphylaxis occurred in 1.6% in the intervention group and none in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving children 1 to 3 years of age with peanut allergy, epicutaneous immunotherapy for 12 months was superior to placebo in desensitizing children to peanuts and increasing the peanut dose that triggered allergic symptoms. (Funded by DBV Technologies; EPITOPE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03211247.).

The role of biologics in pediatric food allergy and eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders.

Continuing insight into the molecular mechanisms of atopic disorders has enabled the development of biologics to precisely target these diseases. Food allergy (FA) and eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGIDs) are driven by similar inflammatory molecular mechanisms and exist along the same atopic disease spectrum. Therefore, many of the same biologics are being investigated to target key drivers of mechanisms shared across the disease states. The enormous potential of biologics for the treatment of FA and EGIDs is highlighted by the significant increases in the number of ongoing clinical trials (more than 30) evaluating their use in these disease states, as well as by the recent US Food and Drug Administration approval of dupilumab for the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis. Here we discuss past and current research into the use of biologics in FA and EGIDs and their potential role in improving treatment options in the future, with the need to have biologics widely clinically available.

WAO consensus on DEfinition of Food Allergy SEverity (DEFASE).

Background: While several scoring systems for the severity of anaphylactic reactions have been developed, there is a lack of consensus on definition and categorisation of severity of food allergy disease as a whole. Aim: To develop an international consensus on the severity of food allergy (DEfinition of Food Allergy Severity, DEFASE) scoring system, to be used globally. Methods Phase 1: We conducted a mixed-method systematic review (SR) of 11 databases for published and unpublished literature on severity of food allergy management and set up a panel of international experts. Phase 2: Based on our findings in Phase 1, we drafted statements for a two-round modified electronic Delphi (e-Delphi) survey. A purposefully selected multidisciplinary international expert panel on food allergy (n = 60) was identified and sent a structured questionnaire, including a set of statements on different domains of food allergy severity related to symptoms, health-related quality of life, and economic impact. Participants were asked to score their agreement on each statement on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree". Median scores and percentage agreements were calculated. Consensus was defined a priori as being achieved if 70% or more of panel members rated a statement as "strongly agree" to "agree" after the second round. Based on feedback, 2 additional online voting rounds were conducted. Results: We received responses from 92% of Delphi panel members in round 1 and 85% in round 2. Consensus was achieved on the overall score and in all of the 5 specific key domains as essential components of the DEFASE score. Conclusions: The DEFASE score is the first comprehensive grading of food allergy severity that considers not only the severity of a single reaction, but the whole disease spectrum. An international consensus has been achieved regarding a scoring system for food allergy disease. It offers an evaluation grid, which may help to rate the severity of food allergy. Phase 3 will involve validating the scoring system in research settings, and implementing it in clinical practice.

Vaccine confidence among those living with allergy during the COVID pandemic (ACCORD): A scoping review.

Background: Reports of allergic reactions to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines, coupled with an "infodemic" of misinformation, carry the potential to undermine confidence in the COVID-19 vaccines. However, no attempts have been made to comprehensively synthesize the literature on how allergic disease and fear of allergic reactions to the vaccines contribute to hesitancy. Objectives: Our aim was to review the academic and gray literature on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and allergic reactions. Methods: We searched 4 databases (CINAHL, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and Embase) using a search strategy developed by content and methodologic experts. No restrictions were applied regarding COVID-19 vaccine type, country of study, or patient age. Eligible articles were restricted to 10 languages. Results: Of the 1385 unique records retrieved from our search, 60 articles (4.3%) were included. Allergic reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine were rare but slightly more common in individuals with a history of allergic disease. A fifth of the studies (13 of 60 [22%]) discussed vaccine hesitancy due to possibility of an allergic reaction. Additionally, the present review identified research on details of vaccine-related anaphylaxis (eg, a mean and median [excluding clinical trial data] of 12.4 and 5 cases per million doses, respectively) and allergic reactions (eg, a mean and median [excluding clinical trial data] of 489 and 528 cases per million doses, respectively). Conclusion: COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among individuals living with allergy and among those with no history of allergic disease may be affected by fear of an allergic reaction. Despite the low incidence of allergic reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine, fear of such reactions is one of the most commonly cited concerns reported in the literature.