Cardiovascular, neurological, and pulmonary events following vaccination with the BNT162b2, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, and Ad26.COV2.S vaccines: An analysis of European data.

The ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (ChA) (AstraZeneca) and Ad26.COV2.S (AD26) (Janssen) vaccines are virus-based coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines used worldwide. In spring 2021, venous blood clots and thrombocytopenia were described in some vaccine recipients. We evaluated the frequency of severe adverse events (SAEs) documented in the EudraVigilance European database in young adult (18-64 years old) and older (≥65 years old) vaccine recipients up to 23 June 2021 and related them to coagulation disorders and arterial, cardiac, and nervous system events. Comparison between the frequency of SAEs and SAE-related deaths in ChA and AD26 vs. BNT162b2 COVID-19 (BNT) (Pfizer/BioNTech) vaccine recipients demonstrated: 1) ChA and AD26 recipients than BNT recipients had higher frequencies of not only SAEs caused by venous blood clots and hemorrhage, but also thromboembolic disease and arterial events, including myocardial infarction and stroke; 2) a corresponding higher frequency of SAE-related deaths. The frequency was higher in both young adults and older adults. Comparison between the frequency of SAEs and SAE-related deaths in AD26 vs. ChA recipients demonstrated in AD26 recipients: 1) lower frequency of thrombocytopenia; 2) lower frequency of SAEs in young adult recipients; 3) higher frequency of SAEs in older recipients. Interestingly, most of the venous thrombotic SAEs associated with ChA and AD26 vaccines were not associated with thrombocytopenia, suggesting that TTS (thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome) is not the only type of thrombosis observed following virus-based vaccines. In conclusion, both virus-based COVID-19 vaccines show more SAEs than BNT, but the frequency of the SAE type in the different age groups differs, suggesting that the mechanisms responsible of SAEs overlap only partly.

Blood clots and bleeding events following BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine: An analysis of European data.

The involvement of viruses and SARS-CoV-2 in autoimmune diseases is well known. The recent demonstration that ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Covid-19 (AstraZeneca) vaccine (ChA) favors the production of anti-platelet factor 4 (anti-PF4) antibodies, blood clots, and thrombocytopenia raises the question of whether other anti-CoViD-19 vaccines favor the same patterns of events. We assessed the frequency of severe adverse events (SAEs) documented in the EudraVigilance European database up to April 16, 2021 related to thrombocytopenia, bleeding, and blood clots in recipients of ChA compared to that of recipients of the BNT162b2 Covid-19 (Pfizer/BioNTech) vaccine (BNT). ChA administration was associated with a much higher frequency of SAEs in each AE Reaction Group as compared with that elicited by BNT. When considering AEs caused by thrombocytopenia, bleeding and blood clots, we observed 33 and 151 SAEs/1 million doses in BNT and ChA recipients, respectively. When considering patients with AEs related to cerebral/splanchnic venous thrombosis, and/or thrombocytopenia, we documented 4 and 30 SAEs and 0.4 and 4.8 deaths/1 million doses for BNT and ChA recipients, respectively. The highest risk following ChA vaccination is in young people and, likely, women of reproductive age, as suggested by hypothesized scenarios. In conclusion, the immune reaction promoted by ChA vaccine may lead to not only thrombocytopenia and cerebral/splanchnic venous thrombosis but also other thrombotic and thromboembolic SAEs. These events are not favored by BNT vaccine. Our study may help in the evaluation of the benefit/risk profile of the ChA vaccine considering the epidemic curve present in a country.

Management of melanoma patients during COVID-19 pandemic in an Italian skin unit.

Due to the COVID-19 crisis, many scheduled medical and surgical activities have been suspended. This interruption to the healthcare system can negatively affect the diagnosis and management of melanoma. Neglecting melanoma throughout the outbreak may be associated with increased rates of mortality, morbidity, and healthcare expenses. We performed a retrospective review of all dermatological and surgical activity performed in our Melanoma Skin Unit between 23 February 2020 and 21 May 2020 and compared these data with those from the same period in 2019. During the lockdown period, we observed a decrease in dermatologic follow-up (DFU) (-30.2%) and in surgical follow-up (SFU) (-37%), and no modification of melanoma diagnosis (-3%). Finally, surgical excisions (SE) (+ 31.7%) increased, but sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) (-29%) and lymph node dissections(LND) (-64%) decreased compared to the same period in 2019. Our experience supports the continuation of surgical and diagnostic procedures in patients with melanoma during the COVID-19 pandemic. Surgical and follow-up procedures for the diagnosis and treatment of melanoma should not be postponed considering that the pandemic is lasting for an extended period.