COVID-19 vaccine allergy advice and guidance: The experience of a UK tertiary referral centre.

Objective: The objective was to review COVID-19 vaccine allergy advice and guidance requests received and assess the impact of advice outcome on vaccination outcome. Design: A retrospective analysis of requests for advice and guidance regarding COVID-19 vaccine allergy was completed using an electronic referral system from February 2021 to January 2022. Participants: A total of 1265 independent patient requests for advice were received from primary care. Full vaccination information was available on 1210 patients who were included in the analysis. Main outcome measures: We evaluated the specific outcome of request for advice (written advice versus allergy consultation), rate of vaccination, vaccination combinations, and tolerance of vaccination. Results: Of the 1210 patients included, 959 (79%) were female. Eight hundred and ninety-six (74%) requests were managed with written advice only and of these 675 (75%) patients went on to be vaccinated. Overall, 891 (74%) of the population were vaccinated with 2 or more doses.Two hundred and nineteen patient consultations were undertaken with 109 (50%) prior to the first vaccination. Forty-nine (45%) consultations prior to vaccination were undertaken due to a label of anaphylaxis to vaccination in the past. Vaccination was recommended for all patients, and 78 (72%) of these received a first dose. Eight of these patients (10%) had symptoms within 1 h of vaccine administration.One hundred and ten (50%) consultations were undertaken for adverse reactions post COVID-19 vaccination, with 84 (76%) concerning immediate symptoms. Thirty patients (27%) who had a consultation had had adrenaline administered post vaccination. One patient had biopsy confirmed Stevens Johnson Syndrome and was referred to Dermatology. All others due for further doses (107 patients) were recommended to have subsequent doses with 49 (45%) offered the same vaccine. Eighty-nine patients had a vaccine administered post adverse reaction and 79 (88%) tolerated the dose.Skin testing and challenge to polyethylene glycol were negative in the 8 patients tested. Conclusions: Over 1000 requests for advice and guidance were received during the review period, managed mainly with written advice. The overwhelming majority of requests for advice and consultations were for females, with equal distribution both pre- and post-COVID-19 vaccine administration. Vaccination was recommended in all but 1 patient (with biopsy confirmed Stevens Johnson Syndrome). Polyethylene glycol allergy was not confirmed in any patient, nor did any patient have confirmed anaphylaxis when the vaccine was administered under our supervision, suggesting that type 1 mediated hypersensitivity is uncommon even in this "high risk" population.

Outcomes following SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with primary and secondary immunodeficiency in the UK.

In March 2020, the United Kingdom Primary Immunodeficiency Network (UKPIN) established a registry of cases to collate the outcomes of individuals with PID and SID following SARS-CoV-2 infection and treatment. A total of 310 cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection in individuals with PID or SID have now been reported in the UK. The overall mortality within the cohort was 17.7% (n = 55/310). Individuals with CVID demonstrated an infection fatality rate (IFR) of 18.3% (n = 17/93), individuals with PID receiving IgRT had an IFR of 16.3% (n = 26/159) and individuals with SID, an IFR of 27.2% (n = 25/92). Individuals with PID and SID had higher inpatient mortality and died at a younger age than the general population. Increasing age, low pre-SARS-CoV-2 infection lymphocyte count and the presence of common co-morbidities increased the risk of mortality in PID. Access to specific COVID-19 treatments in this cohort was limited: only 22.9% (n = 33/144) of patients admitted to the hospital received dexamethasone, remdesivir, an anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody-based therapeutic (e.g. REGN-COV2 or convalescent plasma) or tocilizumab as a monotherapy or in combination. Dexamethasone, remdesivir, and anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody-based therapeutics appeared efficacious in PID and SID. Compared to the general population, individuals with PID or SID are at high risk of mortality following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Increasing age, low baseline lymphocyte count, and the presence of co-morbidities are additional risk factors for poor outcome in this cohort.

Estimating the COVID-19 epidemic trajectory and hospital capacity requirements in South West England: a mathematical modelling framework.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a regional model of COVID-19 dynamics for use in estimating the number of infections, deaths and required acute and intensive care (IC) beds using the South West England (SW) as an example case. DESIGN: Open-source age-structured variant of a susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered compartmental mathematical model. Latin hypercube sampling and maximum likelihood estimation were used to calibrate to cumulative cases and cumulative deaths. SETTING: SW at a time considered early in the pandemic, where National Health Service authorities required evidence to guide localised planning and support decision-making. PARTICIPANTS: Publicly available data on patients with COVID-19. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The expected numbers of infected cases, deaths due to COVID-19 infection, patient occupancy of acute and IC beds and the reproduction ('R') number over time. RESULTS: SW model projections indicate that, as of 11 May 2020 (when 'lockdown' measures were eased), 5793 (95% credible interval (CrI) 2003 to 12 051) individuals were still infectious (0.10% of the total SW population, 95% CrI 0.04% to 0.22%), and a total of 189 048 (95% CrI 141 580 to 277 955) had been infected with the virus (either asymptomatically or symptomatically), but recovered, which is 3.4% (95% CrI 2.5% to 5.0%) of the SW population. The total number of patients in acute and IC beds in the SW on 11 May 2020 was predicted to be 701 (95% CrI 169 to 1543) and 110 (95% CrI 8 to 464), respectively. The R value in SW was predicted to be 2.6 (95% CrI 2.0 to 3.2) prior to any interventions, with social distancing reducing this to 2.3 (95% CrI 1.8 to 2.9) and lockdown/school closures further reducing the R value to 0.6 (95% CrI 0.5 to 0.7). CONCLUSIONS: The developed model has proved a valuable asset for regional healthcare services. The model will be used further in the SW as the pandemic evolves, and-as open-source software-is portable to healthcare systems in other geographies.