Maternal, fetal and neonatal outcomes among pregnant women receiving COVID-19 vaccination: The preg-co-vax study.

Introduction: Although the European Medicines Agency (EMA) encourage coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination in pregnant women, the scientific evidence supporting the use of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy is still limited. Aim: We aimed to investigate adverse events following immunization (AEFI) with COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy. Methods: We retrieved Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSRs) related to the use of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy from the EudraVigilance database for the year 2021. We analyzed AEFI related to the mother and fetus/newborn. The reporting odds ratio (ROR) was computed to compare the reporting probability of spontaneous abortion between COVID-19 vaccines. Results: During the study period, among 1,315,315 ICSRs related to COVID-19 vaccines, we retrieved 3,252 (0.25%) reports related to the use in pregnancy. More than half (58.24%) of ICSRs were submitted by non-healthcare professionals. Although the majority (87.82%) of ICSRs concerned serious AEFI, their outcomes were mostly favorable. In this study, 85.0% of total ICSRs referred to pregnant women (n = 2,764), while 7.9% referred to fetuses/newborns (n = 258). We identified 16,569 AEFI. Moreover, 55.16% were AEFI not related to pregnancy (mostly headache, pyrexia, and fatigue), while 17.92% were pregnancy-, newborn-, or fetus-related AEFI. Among pregnancy-related AEFI, the most reported was spontaneous abortion. Messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines had a lower reporting probability of spontaneous abortion than viral vector-based vaccines (ROR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69-0.93). Moderna and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines had a higher reporting probability of spontaneous abortion (ROR 1.2, 95% CI 1.05-1.38 and ROR 1.26, 95% CI 1.08-1.47, respectively), while a lower reporting probability was found for Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine compared with all other COVID-19 vaccines (ROR 0.73, 95% CI 0.64-0.84). In addition, 5.8% of ICSRs reported a fatal outcome. Conclusions: No strong insight of unknown AEFI associated with COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant women was observed. Considering the high risk associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, our analysis suggests that the benefits of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy outweigh the possible risks. However, it is important to continue monitoring the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines in this subpopulation.

European Safety Analysis of mRNA and Viral Vector COVID-19 Vaccines on Glucose Metabolism Events.

Few data have been published on the effects of impaired glucose metabolism induced by COVID-19 vaccines. We decided to perform a study to describe Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSRs) of impaired glucose metabolism events reported in the European database (Eudravigilance, EV). ICSRs were retrieved from the online website of Eudravigilance. The reporting odds ratios (ROR) were computed to assess the reporting frequency for COVID-19 mRNA vaccines compared to COVID-19 viral vector-based vaccines. A total of 3917 ICSRs with a COVID-19 vaccine suspected were retrieved, with a total of 4275 impaired glucose metabolism events. Overall, the most reported events were related to "high glucose levels" (2012; 47.06%). The mRNA vaccines were associated with an increased reporting frequency of "type 1 diabetes mellitus" (ROR 1.86; 95% CI 1.33-2.60), "type 2 diabetes mellitus" (ROR 1.58; 95% CI 1.03-2.42), "high glucose levels" (ROR 1.16; 95% CI 1.06-1.27), "diabetes mellitus inadequate control" (ROR 1.63; 95% CI 1.25-2.11), and "hypoglycemia" (ROR 1.62; 95% CI 1.41-1.86) compared to viral vector-based vaccines. mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were associated with an increased reporting frequency of alterations of glucose homeostasis compared to viral-vector COVID-19 vaccines. Clinicians should be aware of these events to better manage glycemic perturbations. Larger nationwide studies are warranted to verify these findings.

COVID-19 vaccination in adults with congenital heart disease: Real-world data from an Italian tertiary centre.

Background: real-world data on COVID-19 vaccine safety, immunogenicity and acceptance in adults with congenital heart disease (ACHD) are lacking. Methods: ACHD patients who were offered COVID-19 vaccination from January to June 2021 were included. Data on adverse events, on patients' attitude towards vaccination and antispike IgG titre were retrospectively collected. A group of healthy individuals with similar age and sex undergoing vaccination was included for comparison. Results: 208 patients followed in a single ACHD tertiary centre (33.3 [26-45] years, 54% male) received COVID-19 vaccine, 65% vaccinated at our institution: 199 (96%) received Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 vaccine, 4 (2%) Moderna-1273 and 5 (2%) AstraZeneca-ChAdOx1. Median follow-up after vaccination was 79 [57-96] days. No major adverse event was reported and the incidence of minor events was not different between ACHD patients and the control group. One patient was diagnosed with acute pericarditis. There were two deaths unrelated to the vaccine during follow-up. Three (1.5%) vaccinated patients tested positive for COVID-19. Antispike IgG titre, available in 159 (76%) patients, was 1334 [600-3401] BAU/ml, not significantly different from the control group (p=0.2). One patient with Fontan failure was seronegative. Advanced physiological stage was associated with lower antibody response, independently from previous viral exposure (p<0.0001). Fourteen percent refused COVID-19 vaccination at our institution. However, 50% of vaccinated patients declared to have been influenced by the discussion with the ACHD cardiologist and 66% of those vaccinated in situ reported that undergoing COVID-19 vaccination at the ACHD centre made them feel safer. Conclusion: COVID-19 vaccines appear safe in ACHD with satisfactory immunogenicity. However, the most vulnerable patients showed lower antibody response. ACHD team may play a key role in vaccine acceptance.

The Role of Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System in the Heart and Lung: Focus on COVID-19.

The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) firstly considered as a cardiovascular circulating hormonal system, it is now accepted as a local tissue system that works synergistically or independently with the circulating one. Evidence states that tissue RAAS locally generates mediators with regulatory homeostatic functions, thus contributing, at some extent, to organ dysfunction or disease. Specifically, RAAS can be divided into the traditional RAAS pathway (or classic RAAS) mediated by angiotensin II (AII), and the non-classic RAAS pathway mediated by angiotensin 1-7. Both pathways operate in the heart and lung. In the heart, the classic RAAS plays a role in both hemodynamics and tissue remodeling associated with cardiomyocyte and endothelial dysfunction, leading to progressive functional impairment. Moreover, the local classic RAAS may predispose the onset of atrial fibrillation through different biological mechanisms involving inflammation, accumulation of epicardial adipose tissue, and electrical cardiac remodeling. In the lung, the classic RAAS regulates cell proliferation, immune-inflammatory response, hypoxia, and angiogenesis, contributing to lung injury and different pulmonary diseases (including COVID-19). Instead, the local non-classic RAAS counteracts the classic RAAS effects exerting a protective action on both heart and lung. Moreover, the non-classic RAAS, through the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), mediates the entry of the etiological agent of COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) into cells. This may cause a reduction in ACE2 and an imbalance between angiotensins in favor of AII that may be responsible for the lung and heart damage. Drugs blocking the classic RAAS (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers) are well known to exert a cardiovascular benefit. They are recently under evaluation for COVID-19 for their ability to block AII-induced lung injury altogether with drugs stimulating the non-classic RAAS. Herein, we discuss the available evidence on the role of RAAS in the heart and lung, summarizing all clinical data related to the use of drugs acting either by blocking the classic RAAS or stimulating the non-classic RAAS.

SARS-Cov-2 infection: Response of human immune system and possible implications for the rapid test and treatment.

The new coronavirus outbreak is an ongoing pandemic that is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The new coronavirus SARS-Cov-2 belongs to the subfamily of ß-coronaviruses and shares 79.5% of the genetic sequence of SARS-CoV, the causative agent of the epidemic that started in 2002 and ended in 2004. Considering the clinical impact of the new outbreak, it is highly important to study the potential responses of the human immune system during the SARS-CoV-2 infection as well as the role of virus-specific T cells and by B-lymphocytes. Moreover, specific data on the production of IgG and IgM is crucial to allow the rapid identification of the infection. In this paper we also described the importance of sensitive and specific rapid test for SARS-CoV-2. Indeed, this test represents an important immunological tool aimed at identifying the precise phase of the infection in order to undertake a more appropriate pharmacological treatment. Lastly, we provided an overview of pharmacological treatments aimed to reduce inflammatory processes underlying the infection and the need for the discovery of a new vaccine against SARS-CoV-2.