The impact of COVID-19 vaccine reactions on secondary vaccine hesitancy.

BACKGROUND: Primary and booster vaccinations are critical for mitigating COVID-19 transmission, morbidity, and mortality. Future booster vaccine campaigns rely on an increased understanding of vaccine hesitancy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate self-reported allergic and skin vaccine reactions as factors potentially associated with vaccine hesitancy in a nationwide vaccine allergy registry. METHODS: Responses to survey questions concerning COVID-19 vaccine perceptions, coded from free text by 2 independent reviewers. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine the association between changed negative perception and respondent demographics, vaccination history, and reaction characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 993 individuals (median of 46 years [IQR, 36-59], 88% female, 82% White) self-reported reactions to COVID-19 vaccination. Reactions included the following: delayed large local skin reaction (40%), hives/urticaria (32%), immediate large local skin reaction (3%), swelling (3%), anaphylaxis (2%), and other or unspecified (20%). Most respondents were initially unconcerned about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines (56%). After reactions, 401 of 993 (40%) report negative change in perception of vaccination, with more than half of these respondents (n = 211, 53%) citing their reasoning as a negative experience with adverse effects. Of 102 individuals asked about future vaccination, 79 (77%) indicated that they were unlikely or very unlikely to receive future COVID-19 vaccinations. Increased negative perception after reaction was associated with younger age, later COVID-19 vaccination dose number, and reaction type. CONCLUSION: Our findings reveal that an individual's experience with allergic or cutaneous adverse effects after COVID-19 vaccination affects attitudes and decision-making regarding future vaccination, even in initially non-hesitant individuals. Further investigation of secondary vaccine hesitancy is necessary for adapting public health messaging to this important population.

Penicillin allergy delabeling: Opportunities for implementation and dissemination.

Although existing as a safety measure to prevent iatrogenic harm, unconfirmed penicillin allergy labels have a negative impact on personal and public health. One downstream effect of unconfirmed penicillin allergy is the continued emergence and transmission of resistant bacteria and their associated health care costs. Recognizing the consequences of inaccurate penicillin allergy labels, professional and public health organizations have started promoting the adoption of proactive penicillin allergy evaluations, with the ultimate goal of removing the penicillin allergy label when the allergy is disproved, also known as penicillin allergy "delabeling." A penicillin allergy evaluation includes a comprehensive allergy history often followed by drug challenge, sometimes with preceding skin testing. Currently, penicillin allergy delabeling is largely carried out by allergy specialists in outpatient settings. Penicillin allergy delabeling is performed on inpatients, albeit rarely, often at the time of need, as a point-of-care procedure. Access to penicillin allergy evaluation services is limited. Recent studies demonstrate the feasibility of expanding penicillin allergy evaluations and delabeling to internists, pediatricians, emergency medicine physicians, infectious diseases specialists, and clinical pharmacists. However, reducing the impact of mislabeled penicillin allergy will require comprehensive efforts and new investments. In this review, we summarize the current practices of penicillin allergy delabeling and discuss expansion opportunities for penicillin allergy delabeling as quality improvement.

Humoral and cellular immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a prospective cohort study.

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), the most common leukemia worldwide, is associated with increased COVID-19 mortality. Previous studies suggest only a portion of vaccinated CLL patients develop severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike antibodies. Whether the elicited antibodies are functional and/or accompanied by functional T-cell responses is unknown. This prospective cohort study included patients with CLL who received SARS-CoV-2 and PCV13 vaccines (not concurrently). The primary cohort included adults with CLL off therapy. Coprimary outcomes were serologic response to SARS-CoV-2 (receptor binding domain [RBD] immunoassay) and PCV13 vaccines (23-serotype IgG assay). Characterization of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and their functional activity and assessment of functional T-cell responses was performed. Sixty percent (18/30) of patients demonstrated serologic responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, appearing more frequent among treatment-naïve patients (72%). Among treatment-naïve patients, an absolute lymphocyte count ≤24 000/µL was associated with serologic response (94% vs 14%; P < .001). On interferon-γ release assays, 80% (16/20) of patients had functional spike-specific T-cell responses, including 78% (7/9) with a negative RBD immunoassay, a group enriched for prior B-cell-depleting therapies. A bead-based multiplex immunoassay identified antibodies against wild-type and variant SARS-CoV-2 (α, ß, γ, and δ) in all tested patients and confirmed Fc-receptor binding and effector functions of these antibodies. Of 11 patients with negative RBD immunoassay after vaccination, 6 (55%) responded to an additional mRNA-based vaccine dose. The PCV13 serologic response rate was 29% (8/28). Our data demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 vaccination induces functional T-cell and antibody responses in patients with CLL and provides the framework for investigating the molecular mechanisms and clinical benefit of these responses. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT05007860.

Role of clinical history in beta-lactam hypersensitivity.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Understand how the clinical history has been used to risk stratify patients reporting a beta-lactam allergy, both in clinical care pathways and predictive models. RECENT FINDINGS: Drug allergy clinical care pathways have emerged as a safe and effective method of stratifying patients with a reported beta-lactam allergy into risk categories, with 'low-risk' patients able to proceed straight to direct challenges or test doses. These methods have streamlined antibiotic stewardship policies and penicillin allergy de-labeling. However, how to define 'low-risk' has been subject to much debate. New research has developed predictive models that utilize the clinical history to assess a patient's true risk of beta-lactam allergy. SUMMARY: The clinical history has long been an essential part of drug allergy evaluation and has proven invaluable within the past decade in the development of drug allergy clinical pathways. Evidence-based predictive models that use the clinical history to assess a patient's true risk of beta-lactam allergy offer tremendous promise, but differ in crucial areas such as the populations they study, the predictor variables they use, and the ultimate accuracy they attain. These models highlight key aspects of the drug allergy history and pave the way for future large-scale research.