A systematic review on mucocutaneous presentations after COVID-19 vaccination and expert recommendations about vaccination of important immune-mediated dermatologic disorders.

With dermatologic side effects being fairly prevalent following vaccination against COVID-19, and the multitude of studies aiming to report and analyze these adverse events, the need for an extensive investigation on previous studies seemed urgent, in order to provide a thorough body of information about these post-COVID-19 immunization mucocutaneous reactions. To achieve this goal, a comprehensive electronic search was performed through the international databases including Medline (PubMed), Scopus, Cochrane, Web of science, and Google scholar on July 12, 2021, and all articles regarding mucocutaneous manifestations and considerations after COVID-19 vaccine administration were retrieved using the following keywords: COVID-19 vaccine, dermatology considerations and mucocutaneous manifestations. A total of 917 records were retrieved and a final number of 180 articles were included in data extraction. Mild, moderate, severe and potentially life-threatening adverse events have been reported following immunization with COVID vaccines, through case reports, case series, observational studies, randomized clinical trials, and further recommendations and consensus position papers regarding vaccination. In this systematic review, we categorized these results in detail into five elaborate tables, making what we believe to be an extensively informative, unprecedented set of data on this topic. Based on our findings, in the viewpoint of the pros and cons of vaccination, mucocutaneous adverse events were mostly non-significant, self-limiting reactions, and for the more uncommon moderate to severe reactions, guidelines and consensus position papers could be of great importance to provide those at higher risks and those with specific worries of flare-ups or inefficient immunization, with sufficient recommendations to safely schedule their vaccine doses, or avoid vaccination if they have the discussed contra-indications.

Optimizing a Protocol to Assess Immune Responses after SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Kidney-Transplanted Patients: In Vivo DTH Cutaneous Test as the Initial Screening Method.

Previously, the delayed-type hypersensitivity (DTH) cutaneous test with the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 has been shown to be a simple in vivo method to measure T-cell functionality after natural infection and in vaccinated individuals. METHODS: Twenty-five kidney-transplanted recipients were immunized with two doses of the mRNA-based Pfizer-BioNTech COVID19 vaccine three weeks apart. Cell-immune response (CIR) was evaluated ten weeks later using an in vivo DTH skin test and in vitro with an interferon gamma release assay (IGRA). Humoral Immune Response (HIR) was determined by the measurement of specific IgG anti-S1 SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: Ten weeks after the second dose of the vaccine, 23 out of 25 transplanted patients had a positive DTH skin test, while in vitro CIR was considered positive in 20 patients. Unspecific stimulation was positive in all 25 patients, showing no T-cell defect. Seven out of twenty-five patients had a negative specific anti-spike IgG. CIR was positive in all immune-competent control patients. CONCLUSIONS: DTH is a useful, simple, and cheaper tool that can be used to assess cellular immune response, with an excellent correlation with the in vitro CIR. CIR assessment after vaccination in these immunocompromised patients is an excellent complement to HIR-based methods. This skin test could be used if classical in vitro methods cannot be applied.

A case of anti-GBM nephritis following centipede bites and COVID-19 vaccination.

A case of newly developed anti-glomerular basement membrane (GBM) glomerulonephritis (GN) following centipede bites and COVID-19 vaccination is presented. A 70-year-old woman presented for investigation of mild fever, generalized fatigue, and macroscopic hematuria with no past history of renal disease. One year earlier, she had been bitten by a centipede. Based on the governmental policy, she was given the first COVID-19 vaccination, and the second injection was planned 3 weeks later. Accidentally, she was again bitten by a centipede, and the injured site had swollen severely. Based on a physician's judgment, the interval between vaccinations was extended to 8 weeks. One week after the second vaccination, macroscopic hematuria occurred suddenly, coincident with mild fever. Her serum anti-GBM titer was above the upper limit. There was no pulmonary involvement. Renal pathology showed anti-GBM GN, and she was treated with corticosteroid pulse therapy followed by sequential plasmapheresis. She had advanced renal dysfunction, but was independent of dialysis therapy during the one month of the remission induction therapy phase, and she is being treated with immunosuppressant therapy. Both vaccination and animal bites skew towards Th1 immunity, a key mechanism involved in the development of necrotizing GN evoked by anti-GBM antibody. Though there is no direct evidence for causality linking centipede bites, vaccination, and anti-GBM GN, the risk of anti-GBM GN appears to be increased by excessively induced Th1 immunity.

The Beauty of Simplicity: Delayed-Type Hypersensitivity Reaction to Measure Cellular Immune Responses in RNA-SARS-Cov-2 Vaccinated Individuals.

BACKGROUND: Monitoring cellular immune responses elicited in vaccinated individuals is highly complicated. METHODS: 28 individuals participated during the vaccination process with 12 BNT162b2 mRNA (Pfizer) vaccine. Specific anti-RBD IgG using a classic ELISA was performed in days 10 and 20 (after one dose of the vaccine) and on day 35 (after two vaccine doses) in serum samples of all participants. In parallel, DTH (delayed-type hypersensitivity) Skin Test using S protein was performed before (11/28) and after two doses (28/28) of the vaccine. RESULTS: 6/28 individuals were considered positive for the specific anti-RBD IgG positive at day 10, whereas all 28 individuals were positive at day 20. Moreover, 28/28 individuals increased the OD ratios at day 36 (2 doses). DTH cutaneous test was performed on 11/28 participants at day 20 (1 dose) showing 8/11 a positive reaction at 12 h. DTH of all participants was performed on day 36 (2 doses), showing 28/28 positive reactions at 12 h. CONCLUSION: This report describes the first publication of the results obtained using an in vivo method, the classical DTH response to the Spike protein to assess T-cell immune responses in vaccinated individuals. This affordable and simple test would help to answer basic immunogenicity questions on large-scale population vaccine studies.

A novel application of delayed-type hipersensitivity reaction to measure cellular immune response in SARS-CoV-2 exposed individuals.

OBJECTIVE: To understand the anti-virus adaptive immune response occurring during SARS-Cov-2 infection is necessary to have methods to investigate cellular and humoral components. The goal of this study has been to investigate the utility of a specific spike-DTH test using a coronavirus recombinant protein in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: DTH studies were performed by intradermal injection of a commercial recombinant spike protein from SARS-CoV-2 along with conventional serology studies. RESULTS: Fifty-one COVID-19 patients were studied showing 84,3% of concordance with spike-DTH and anti-RBD-IgG. Spike-DTH was superior to identify seven more COVID-19 individuals. A high specificity was found with no positive spike DTH reactions in the non-sick individuals. The skin test also showed more stable results over time while specific anti-RBD-IgG decreased gradually. Clinical severity groups also showed a progressive gradient of larger positive spike-DTH. CONCLUSION: Specific spike DTH test seems to be an easy method to study cell immune response.

COVID-19: Is there a role for Western blots and skin testing for determining immunity and development of a vaccine?

Infection with the virus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) stimulates an immune response which can serve as a marker for current or past exposure to this pathogen, and possibly for resistance to re-infection. This response to COVID-19 can be monitored based on the production of antibodies, and thus, serologic tests have become available for diagnostic purposes. Despite progress in this area, concerns have been raised that too many of the commercially available serologic detection systems are not completely reliable. To address this issue, Western blots should be considered for confirming a positive or borderline-positive result from a screening test, such as an ELISA. An additional benefit of Western blots would be to identify antigens that could form the basis for developing a vaccine. Little is known about the cell-mediated immune response against COVID-19. One way to address this would be to use skin testing to measure the delayed-type hypersensitivity response in patients recovering from COVID-19.