Development of Dermatomyositis after Pfizer BioNTeh COVID-19 Vaccine: A Case Report.

INTRODUCTION: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to the fast development of vaccines, which is considered a medical advance in healthcare. With the extensive vaccination campaign performed worldwide, many adverse events following immunization (AEFI) were reported. Most of them were flu-like symptoms, mild and self-limiting. However, serious adverse events, such as dermatomyositis (DM), an idiopathic autoimmune connective tissue disease, have also been reported. CASE PRESENTATION: In this report, we describe a case of skin erythema, edema, and diffuse myalgia attributed at first to Pfizer BioNTeh, COVID-19 vaccination, given the temporal relationship and the absence of significant medical history. The causality assessment score was I1B2. However, after completing the etiological assessment, an invasive breast carcinoma was identified, and we retained the diagnosis of paraneoplastic DM. CONCLUSION: This study underlines the importance of completing the etiological assessment before attributing any adverse reaction to vaccination to maintain optimal patient care.

Erythema multiforme reactions following Pfizer/BioNTech (tozinameran) vaccination: two case-reports with positive rechallenge and review of the literature.

AIM: Pfizer/BioNTech (BNT162b2) is a COVID-19 vaccine with a reassuring safety profile. The main adverse reactions are mild local reactions. Cutaneous reactions are generally minor. The most common cutaneous reaction reported was a local injection-site reaction. CASE STUDY: Here we present 2 cases of erythema multiform (EM) following BNT162b2 vaccination with positive rechallenge. The 1st case was about a 51-year-old woman who developed 5 days after the 1st dose of the mRNA Pfizer/BioNTech (BNT162b2) a macular, erythematous, round-shaped lesions on the hands, knees and soles. She experienced a positive rechallenge one month later. In the 2nd case, a 55-year-old man presented 6 days following the 2nd shot of the mRNA Pfizer/BioNTech (BNT162b2), targetoid eruption on the upper and lower members. The patient reported that he had the same skin lesions in ankles and soles few days following the 1st shot of the same vaccine. CONCLUSION: Few cases of EM following COVID-19 vaccination were reported in the literature and positive rechallenge in only one case. Rechallenge was not performed in most cases. Our two cases are particular because of the positive rechallenge in both patients. This is the gold standard to confirm that the vaccine was the culprit agent in inducing EM.

Guillain-Barré syndrome after COVID-19 vaccines: A Tunisian case series.

As the COVID-19 vaccination campaign progresses worldwide, Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) vaccine-related cases have been reported. We carried out a retrospective, descriptive study of GBS patients following COVID-19 vaccine, submitted to the National Pharmacovigilance Center of Tunis during the period between March 2021 and May 2022. Our study aimed to identify epidemiological and clinical features of COVID-19 vaccine-associated GBS. We found 9 cases of GBS post COVID-19 vaccination; 5 of them were excluded due to the lack of information, whereas 4 cases were included in this study. Men represented 75% (3/4) of the cases. The most frequently reported vaccine type was ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (n = 2 reports [50%]), Ad26.COV2.S vaccine and BNT162b2 vaccine in 1. The mean time interval from vaccination to symptom onset was 15.3 days. Clinical manifestations were different: classical GBS in two cases and GBS with unilateral facial palsy in the other 2 cases. All patients were treated with a course of intravenous immunoglobulin for 5 days. Three patients reported clinical improvement while one case (25%) showed treatment-related fluctuations. Our observations suggest that COVID-19 vaccines may be associated with GBS. Continuous surveillance and further studies are warranted to assess the significance of the association.

DRESS Syndrome Associated with Liposomal Amphotericin-B in a Kidney Transplant Patient: A Case Report.

INTRODUCTION: Liposomal amphotericin B is a widely used broad-spectrum antifungal drug. It was developed to reduce nephrotoxicity and maximize the therapeutic utility of amphotericin B in the treatment of invasive fungal infections. Drug Rash with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS) syndrome is a severe drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome commonly associated with aromatic antiepileptic drugs. Liposomal amphotericin-B was associated with DRESS syndrome in only one case. CASE REPORT: We report an exceptional case of possible DRESS syndrome associated with liposomal amphotericin B in a 31-year-old male renal transplant recipient. Seventeen days after starting liposomal amphotericin B for visceral leishmaniosis, he developed a skin rash with elevated liver tests. Liposomal amphotericin B was then discontinued. A favourable outcome was slowly observed in one month. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: This case scored two (possible case) based on the criteria adopted by the European group RegiSCAR. The Naranjo score for liposomal amphotericin B was four (possible).

Hand-foot syndrome induced by chemotherapy drug: Case series study and literature review.

INTRODUCTION: Chemotherapy drugs can be responsible of several side effects such as hand-foot syndrome (HFS). This syndrome is also called "palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia" and "acral erythema." Without proper management, it can deteriorate the quality of life of a patient, leading to temporary or definitive stop of chemotherapy. AIM OF THIS STUDY: To identify the epidemiological and clinical characteristics of patients, the risk factors for occurrence and worsening of this syndrome, and the drugs most likely to be responsible of HFS. METHODS: Our study was retrospective, including 42 patients with HFS secondary to a chemotherapy drug. These cases were notified to the National Center of Pharmacovigilance over 7 years. The severity of HFS has been classified according to the NCI-CTCAE v4.0 classification. RESULTS: Our population was composed of 40 women and 2 men. The mean age was 51 years. Docetaxel was the main drug associated with this adverse effect. Hands were involved in all cases and were sometimes associated with other skin surfaces apart from feet. Erythema of the hands and/or feet was present in all patients; it was associated with edema in more than half of the cases. The distribution of different grades according to the NCI-CTCAE classification among the patients was almost equal: 28% Grade 1, 36% Grade 2, and 36% Grade 3. HFS occurred mainly after the first course of chemotherapy with a mean period of 3-4 days. The regression of HFS occurred more rapidly for Grade 1 and Grade 2 compared with Grade 3, especially when assisted by symptomatic treatment. The recurrence rate of HFS for those patients with decreased doses, spacing of cures, and/or symptomatic and prophylaxis treatment was 25%. CONCLUSION: An early detection of HFS, associated with preventive measures, enables patients to continue the chemotherapy.

Seizures after vaccines.

Immunization plays an important role in achieving global health goals. Thus, vaccination is one of the essential means of preventing infectious and viral diseases. The onset of adverse events following immunization (AEFI) is common and most of the time it is a mild effect. However, stimulating the immune system during critical periods of brain development can lead to neurological effects. Among the neurological effects, we were interested in this work by seizures appearing following vaccination.

Myocarditis following Coronavirus vaccination.

Introduction: Myocarditis is an adverse reaction discovered after the marketing of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines. Nevertheless, this effect is not mentioned as an adverse reaction in the summary of product characteristics of other types of vaccines against this disease. Objective: In this work, we aim to present the cases of myocarditis after vaccination against COVID-19 reported to the national Tunisian centre of pharmacovigilance. Method: We present the cases of myocarditis reported after the COVID-19 vaccination. All cases are diagnosed according to Brighton's case definition of myocarditis. The vaccines causality assessment was estimated by the French imputability updated method of Bégaud et al. Results: We included five patients. The sex ratio (M/F) was 4. The mean age was 30 years. All patients had no notable cardiovascular history and did not report any significant past medical history. The onset of symptoms was two days post-vaccination in three patients. The predominant reported symptoms are chest pain and dyspnea in the five cases. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) confirmed the myocarditis diagnosis in four patients (not performed for one patient).All cases were classified as definitive cases according to the Brighton case definition of myocarditis. No patient required hospitalization in a cardiac intensive care unit. All the patients recovered from acute myocarditis within a few days. Conclusion: Reported cases of myocarditis post-COVID-19 vaccination in our population are rare, not severe, and have a quick favorable outcome.

Skin Tests for the Exploration of Hypersensitivity Reactions Associated with Iodinated Contrast Media.

BACKGROUND: Iodinated contrast media (ICM) are responsible for multiple side effects, especially hypersensitivity reactions. These reactions can either be authentic allergies or non-allergic hypersensitivity reactions. Skin tests (prick and intradermal tests) are simple to perform and can be of great help, especially if the ICM needs to be re-used. The aim of the study was to assess the characteristics of the patients in whom skin tests were performed and the results of these tests. METHODS: This is a retrospective study from June 2014 to June 2019. All included patients had at least one episode of hypersensitivity reaction to ICM and underwent skin tests. RESULTS: We included 35 patients aged 18 to 85 years. The iopromide was the most implicated ICM. The reactions were mainly cutaneous (n=30) and immediate (n=27). The skin tests were negative, except for two patients. The re-use of ICM occurred in 11 patients: 9 with an ICM other than the one suspected and two patients with the same ICM. Among these patients, 5 did not have any premedication. Two of them had a second hypersensitivity reaction, the first with another ICM and the second with the same ICM. CONCLUSION: One of the main pillars of allergic exploration is ICM skin testing, not only to prevent a recurrence, but also to allow patients to benefit from ICM re-use, which are sometimes essential.