Increased incidence of adult-onset Still's disease in association with COVID-19 vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 infection.

BACKGROUND: Adult-onset Still's disease (AOSD) is a multi-system, auto-inflammatory disease characterized by fever, arthralgia, typical rash, leukocytosis, sore throat, and liver dysfunction, among other symptoms. Retrospective studies about the frequencies of AOSD have shown that this disease is very rare. However, there has been an increased scientific interest in the last 2 years, as numerous case studies on AOSD have been published. These case studies describe the occurrence of AOSD after SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: We analyzed the incidence of AOSD to examine a potential association between AOSD and SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or COVID-19 vaccination. The TriNetX dataset consists of 90 million patients. We found 8474 AOSD cases, which we analyzed regarding SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or vaccination status. We also analyzed the cohorts considering demographic data, lab values, co-diagnoses and treatment pathways. RESULTS: We divided the AOSD cases into four cohorts: primary cohort (AOSD), Cov cohort (AOSD + SARS-CoV-2 infection), Vac cohort (AOSD + COVID-19 vaccination) and Vac + Cov cohort (AOSD + COVID-19 vaccination + SARS-CoV-2 infection). For the primary cohort, we found an annual incidence of 0.35 per 100.000. We found an association between AOSD and SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or COVID-19 vaccination. According to the numerical analysis, the incidence of AOSD doubled for the Cov cohort and Vac cohort. Moreover, the incidence of AOSD was 4.82 times higher for Vac + Cov cohort. The lab values for inflammatory markers were increased. Co-diagnoses such as rash, sore throat, and fever appeared in all AOSD cohorts, with the highest occurrences in the AOSD + COVID-19 vaccination + SARS-CoV-2 infection cohort. We identified several lines of treatments, mainly in association with adrenal corticosteroids. CONCLUSIONS: This research supports the assumption of an association between AOSD and SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or COVID-19 vaccination. However, AOSD remains a rare disease and the usage of vaccines to fight the COVID-19 pandemic should not be questioned because of the increased incidence of AOSD.

Onset of Oral Lichenoid Lesions and Oral Lichen Planus Following COVID-19 Vaccination: A Retrospective Analysis of about 300,000 Vaccinated Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Onset of oral lichenoid lesions (OLL) or oral lichen planus (OLP) can be rare adverse reactions to vaccines. Recently, the first solitary cases were reported after COVID-19 vaccination. The aim of the present study was to assess if an increased frequency of OLL/OLP can be found after COVID-19 vaccination within a large real-world cohort. It was assumed that the incidence of OLL/OLP was significantly higher in subjects who received COVID-19 vaccine (cohort I) compared to individuals who were not vaccinated (cohort II). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Initial cohorts of 274,481 vaccinated and 9,429,892 not vaccinated patients were retrieved from the TriNetX database (TriNetX, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA), and matched for age, gender and the frequency of use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, beta blockers, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. RESULTS: After matching each cohort, we accounted for 217,863 patients. Among cohort I, 146 individuals had developed OLL/OLP within 6 days after COVID-19 vaccination (88 and 58 subjects had received mRNA- and adenovirus vector-based vaccines), whereas in cohort II, 59 patients were newly diagnosed with OLL/OLP within 6 days after having visited the clinic for any other reason. The risk of developing OLL/OLP was calculated as 0.067% vs. 0.027%, for cohorts I and II, whereby the risk difference was highly significant (p < 0.001; log-rank test). RR and OR were 2.475 (95% CI = 1.829; 3.348) and 2.476 (95% CI = 1.830; 3.350), respectively. DISCUSSION: The hypothesis was confirmed. Accordingly, the obtained results suggest that the onset of OLL/OLP is a rare adverse drug reaction to COVID-19 vaccines, especially to mRNA vaccines. Thus far, it remains unknown if specific components of the formulations cause a type IV hypersensitive reaction corresponding to OLL, or if the immune response post vaccination triggers a T cell-driven autoimmune reaction directed against the basal layer of keratinocytes of the oral mucosa in terms of OLP. Although OLL and OLP are both classified as premalignant lesions, spontaneous remission may be expected over time, at least in the case of OLL. Therefore, the presented findings should not place any limitation toward the use of COVID-19-vaccines in broad levels of the population.

A Comparative Analysis of COVID-19 Vaccines Based on over 580,000 Cases from the Vaccination Adverse Event Reporting System.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic is being battled via the largest vaccination campaign in history, with more than eight billion doses administered thus far. Therefore, discussions about potentially adverse reactions, and broader safety concerns, are critical. The U.S. Vaccination Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) has recorded vaccination side effects for over 30 years. About 580,000 events have been filed for COVID-19 thus far, primarily for the Johnson & Johnson (New Jersey, USA), Pfizer/BioNTech (Mainz, Germany), and Moderna (Cambridge, USA) vaccines. METHODS: Using available databases, we evaluated these three vaccines in terms of the occurrence of four generally-noticed adverse reactions-namely, cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, Guillain-Barré syndrome (a severe paralytic neuropathy), myocarditis, and pericarditis. Our statistical analysis also included a calculation of odds ratios (ORs) based on total vaccination numbers, accounting for incidence rates in the general population. RESULTS: ORs for a number of adverse events and patient groups were (largely) increased, most notably for the occurrence of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis after vaccination with the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. The overall population OR of 10 increases to 12.5 when limited to women, and further yet (to 14.4) among women below age 50 yrs. In addition, elevated risks were found (i) for Guillain-Barré syndrome (OR of 11.6) and (ii) for myocarditis/pericarditis (ORs of 5.3/4.1, respectively) among young men (<25 yrs) vaccinated with the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: Any conclusions from such a retrospective, real-world data analysis must be drawn cautiously, and should be confirmed by prospective double-blinded clinical trials. In addition, we emphasize that the adverse events reported here are not specific side effects of COVID vaccines, and the significant, well-established benefits of COVID-19 vaccination outweigh the potential complications surveyed here.

Fever range whole body hyperthermia for re-irradiation of head and neck squamous cell carcinomas: Final results of a prospective study.

OBJECTIVES: Fever-range whole body hyperthermia (FRWBH) has been shown to improve tumor oxygenation in vivo. A prospective pilot study addressed the question if addition of FRWBH to re-irradiation is feasible in recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC) with unfavorable prognostic features. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study completed accrual with the recruitment of ten patients between April 2018 and March 2020. Re-irradiation was administered using volumetric arc hyperfractionated radiotherapy with bi-daily 1.2 Gray (Gy) single fractions and a total dose of 66 Gy to all macroscopic tumor lesions. Concomitant chemotherapy consisted mostly of cisplatin (7 patients). FRWBH was scheduled weekly during re-irradiation. The study was registered in the clinicaltrials.gov database (NCT03547388). RESULTS: Only five patients received all cycles of FRWBH. Poor patient compliance, active infections during treatment and study restrictions due to the Covid-19 pandemic were the main reasons for omitting FRWBH. No increase of acute toxicity was observed by FRWBH. Exploratory evaluation of outcome data suggests that FRWBH treatment according to protocol does not seem to have a detrimental effect on tumor control or survival and might even increase treatment efficacy. CONCLUSION: FRWBH is difficult to apply concomitant to re-irradiation in HNSCC. No excess toxicity was observed in patients receiving FRWBH and exploratory analyses suggest potential anti-tumor activity and decreased patient-reported depression scores after FRWBH.

Evidence for treatment with estradiol for women with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

BACKGROUND: Given that an individual's age and gender are strongly predictive of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes, do such factors imply anything about preferable therapeutic options? METHODS: An analysis of electronic health records for a large (68,466-case), international COVID-19 cohort, in 5-year age strata, revealed age-dependent sex differences. In particular, we surveyed the effects of systemic hormone administration in women. The primary outcome for estradiol therapy was death. Odds ratios (ORs) and Kaplan-Meier survival curves were analyzed for 37,086 COVID-19 women in two age groups: pre- (15-49 years) and peri-/post-menopausal (> 50 years). RESULTS: The incidence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is higher in women than men (by about + 15%) and, in contrast, the fatality rate is higher in men (about + 50%). Interestingly, the relationships between these quantities are linked to age: pre-adolescent girls and boys had the same risk of infection and fatality rate, while adult premenopausal women had a significantly higher risk of infection than men in the same 5-year age stratum (about 16,000 vs. 12,000 cases). This ratio changed again in peri- and postmenopausal women, with infection susceptibility converging with men. While fatality rates increased continuously with age for both sexes, at 50 years, there was a steeper increase for men. Thus far, these types of intricacies have been largely neglected. Because the hormone 17ß-estradiol influences expression of the human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) protein, which plays a role in SARS-CoV-2 cellular entry, propensity score matching was performed for the women's sub-cohort, comparing users vs. non-users of estradiol. This retrospective study of hormone therapy in female COVID-19 patients shows that the fatality risk for women > 50 years receiving estradiol therapy (user group) is reduced by more than 50%; the OR was 0.33, 95% CI [0.18, 0.62] and the hazard ratio (HR) was 0.29, 95% CI [0.11,0.76]. For younger, pre-menopausal women (15-49 years), the risk of COVID-19 fatality is the same irrespective of estradiol treatment, probably because of higher endogenous estradiol levels. CONCLUSIONS: As of this writing, still no effective drug treatment is available for COVID-19; since estradiol shows such a strong improvement regarding fatality in COVID-19, we suggest prospective studies on the potentially more broadly protective roles of this naturally occurring hormone.