Hypersensitivity Reaction of Tongue: Oral Adverse Effect of COVID-19 Vaccine: A Case Report

Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) has introduced the new normal in this 21st century. This viral has caused a great infection storm in the recent past affecting more than half of the world population. Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes various symptoms from mild to severe. Mortality rate has been reported to be low, mostly associated with pre-existing medical history. Literature also states that mortality was high among those with poor immune surveillance. Based on the duration of symptoms, it has been classified into long COVID-19 and short COVID-19 to combat the outcome of the disease many vaccines were invented worldwide by various pharmaceutical companies and they helped a lot in controlling the severity of the disease. The vaccines effectively reduced the incidence of long COVID-19 and serious symptoms, thereby, reducing the death rate. Although the vaccines were very effective in control of serious complications of the infection, few patients had certain adverse reactions to the vaccines of both types' whole virus and viral-vector based vaccine. In the present case report, authors would like to document the delayed hypersensitivity reaction in the tongue as a potential Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) postvaccination for SARS-CoV-2 infection in a 48-year-old female patient without any previous history of medical illness or drug allergy. The ADR was effectively controlled with systemic steroids and the symptoms were effectively controlled within a period of few months.

Lichen planus occuring after Coronavirus disease-2019: A case report

The novel Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), which emerged in December 2019 and caused an unexplained viral pneumonia, rapidly spread worldwide within a few months. A pandemic was declared by the World Health Organization in March 2020. Several cutaneous manifestations of the disease among patients with COVID-19 have been reported. Thus far, the most frequently reported cutaneous findings are morbiliform rash, urticarial lesions, purpuric lesions, oral vesicles, and pityriasis rosea. This report presents a case of lichen planus secondary to COVID-19 and its histopathological findings, which is rarely reported in the literature. Copyright © 2022 by Turkish Society of Dermatology and Venereology.

Case report of an antimelanoma differentiationassociated protein 5 antibody-associated amyopathic dermatomyositis

Autoantibodies against melanoma differentiation-associated protein 5 (MDA5) associated with dermatomyositis have recently been described in Asians with rapidly progressive respiratory disease. Here we report the case of a middle-aged white woman with anti-MDA5 antibody-associated amyopathic dermatomyositis with interstitial lung disease (ILD), which is stable with minimal immune suppression. A 55-year-old woman was referred to a virtual dermatology clinic during the COVID-19 pandemic suspected of having widespread eczema involving the chest, face, arm and hands on the background of atopy. On direct questioning, she admitted to having constitutional symptoms, exertional dyspnoea, joint pain and symptoms of proximal muscle weakness. On clinical suspicion of possible connective tissue disorder, she was urgently reviewed in the hospital, where she was found to have a photodistributed rash involving cutaneous ulceration and violaceous plaques. Hand examination showed mechanic's hand mimicking hand eczema, ragged nail cuticles and acute tenosynovitis in the left index finger. Her upper and lower limb muscle power was normal and respiratory examination revealed bi-basal fine end-expiratory crepitation. Her repeated biochemical, haematological and muscle enzymes remained normal. Skin biopsy taken from photosensitive rash over the wrist showed hypergranulosis, Civatte body formation, colloid bodies and dyskeratotic keratinocytes, in keeping with severe lichenoid eruption. Superficial dermis showed patchy red-cell extravasation, perivascular chronic infiltration, dermal oedema and serum on the surface, in keeping with ulceration secondary to severe inflammatory processes. There were no eosinophils and eccrine coils were free of inflammation, raising the suspicion of a drug eruption. Her antinuclear antibody and double-stranded DNA were repeatedly negative. Myositisspecific antibody panel was performed owing to a high clinical suspicion of photosensitive dermatoses, both clinically and histologically. Histology revealed positive anti-MDA5 antibodies;repeated positive testing confirmed this. Although lung function was normal, computed tomography revealed evidence of ILD. We made a diagnosis of anti-MDA5 antibodyassociated amyopathic dermatomyositis with ILD. Her malignancy screening was negative. The patient was started on lowdose prednisolone and hydroxychloroquine 200 mg twice daily, with topical steroid applications, which resulted in remarkable clinical improvement. Anti-MDA5 associated dermatomyositis has characteristic cutaneous lesions consisting of skin ulceration and tender palmar papules, mechanic's hands, inflammatory arthritis and rapidly progressive ILD, which is frequently fatal. Although our patient had ILD, she was relatively stable on minimal immunosuppression. It is important for clinicians to have an increased awareness of this disease as it could have a highly variable clinical presentation in the white population.

Assessment of three different dermoscopy imaging systems during a fast-track skin cancer clinic

Dermoscopy is a noninvasive diagnostic investigation based on magnification, illumination and obliteration of light scatter on the skin surface allowing better visualization of structures beneath the stratum corneum. We aimed to assess image quality of lesions evaluated at a skin cancer clinic using three different handheld dermatoscopes;the Heine Delta 20T (contact) with an iPad;the MoleScope II (noncontact) with a Samsung 7 smartphone;and the Dino-Lite Edge with direct download to a MacBook laptop (noncontact). The Heine Delta 20T and iPad is the current standard used. The MoleScope is a mobile smartphone-attachable dermatoscope. The Dino-Lite is a handheld digital microscope that connects directly to the computer via a USB port. The cost of the Heine Delta 20T is roughly 1100, the MoleScope II 260 and the Dino-Lite 600. Twenty-three lesions were imaged with each device;15 were pigmented. A total of 69 images were downloaded and transferred to Microsoft PowerPoint for review in random order. The images were scored by four consultant dermatologists, one general practitioner with a special interest and one associate specialist, blinded to the diagnoses. A score of 1-5 (poor- excellent) was attributed to each category: (i) detail/dermoscopic features;(ii) colour discrimination;(iii) magnification. Each assessor recorded whether - based on the image alone - they could make a diagnosis. The lesions were basal cell carcinoma (n = 6), seborrhoeic keratosis (n = 4), lichenoid keratosis (n = 1), benign naevi (n = 4), dysplastic naevi (n = 2), melanoma (n = 1), blue naevus (n = 1), sebaceous gland hyperplasia (n = 1), ruptured cyst (n = 1), pyogenic granuloma (n = 1) and dermatofibroma (n = 1). The mean score for each device and category was calculated as follows. (i) Heine: detail = 3.2, colour = 3 3, magnification = 3 2 (overall score = 3 2);46 2% felt able to make a diagnosis. (ii) MoleScope: detail = 2 5, colour = 2 7, magnification 2 5 (overall score = 2 6);43 5% felt able to make a diagnosis. (iii) Dino-Lite: detail = 3 2, colour = 3 2, magnification = 3 6 (overall score = 3 3);57 2% felt able to make a diagnosis. Analysis on a PC screen allowed greater magnification than is generally employed in clinic, which may have affected assessors. The Heine is not primarily designed for digital dermoscopy. It requires two operators for image capture, whereas the other systems require only one. The MoleScope remains the most 'mobile', whereas the Dino-Lite is attached to a laptop/PC. Both the MoleScope and Dino-Lite can be used as noncontact dermatoscopes, avoiding contact medium use. Considering the current COVID-19 pandemic, these devices are less time consuming, more convenient and easier to clean. Overall, the Dino-Lite produced the best images. Despite the MoleScope scoring lower, it was comparable for diagnostic ability. It is proposed that the MoleScope and Dino-Lite systems may be optimal for use in teledermatology to facilitate virtual clinics.

Clinico-Epidemiological Profile of Cutaneous Adverse Drug Reactions at Rural Tertiary Care Centre

Background: Cutaneous adverse drug reactions (CADRs), also known as toxidermia, are skin manifestations resulting from systemic drug administration and it constituted 10%-30% among all reported adverse drug reactions (ADRs). These reactions range from mild morbilliform drug rash to much more severe reactions. Material(s) and Method(s): A retrospective observational study was conducted at dermatology outpatient department of rural based tertiary care center for a duration of 03 years from August 2019 to July 2022, a total of 211 patients who had been clinically diagnosed or were suspected to have drug reactions were studied. Result(s): In this observation there was male preponderance (59.72%) and majority of patients were in their 3rd and 4th decade (40.28%) with maculopapular drug rash (33.17%) being most common clinical profile of CADRs, followed by urticaria (23.70%). Less frequently seen CADRs were acneiform eruptions (21), hair Loss (9), photodermatitis (9), generalised pruritus (7), erythroderma (2), pityriasis rosea (2), Stevens Johnson Syndrome-Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (SJS-TEN) (4), lichenoid drug eruptions (3), Vasculitis (1) and pustular drug eruption (1). The most common group of drugs causing CADRs were antibiotics (40.28%), followed by NSAIDs (28.43%). Conclusion(s): Cutaneous Adverse Drug Reactions (CADRs) are price we pay for the benefits of modern drug therapy;knowledge of these reactions is important for treating physician as prompt recognition and treatment can prove lifesaving.Copyright © 2022 Academic Medicine and Pharmacy

Lichen planus after COVID-19 infection and vaccination.

Lichen planus (LP) is an inflammatory disorder believed to result from CD8 + cytotoxic T-cell (CTL)-mediated autoimmune reactions against basal keratinocytes. We present a review of LP following COVID-19 infection and vaccination. Literature searches were conducted on PubMed and Google Scholar from 2019 to 7/2022. 36 articles were selected based on subject relevance, and references within articles were also screened. 39 cases of post-vaccination LP and 6 cases of post-infection LP were found among case reports and case series. 152 cases of post-vaccination LP and 12 cases of post-infection LP were found in retrospective and prospective studies. LP is a rare complication of COVID-19 infection and vaccination that may be mediated by overstimulation of T-cell responses and proinflammatory cytokine production. However, it does not represent a limitation against COVID-19 vaccination, and the benefits of vaccination considerably outweigh the risks.

COVID-19 Vaccine-Induced Lichenoid Eruptions-Clinical and Histopathologic Spectrum in a Case Series of Fifteen Patients with Review of the Literature.

Lichen planus is a distinctive mucocutaneous disease with well-established clinical and histopathologic criteria. Lichenoid eruptions closely resemble lichen planus and may sometimes be indistinguishable from it. Systemic agents previously associated have included medications, viral infections and vaccines. Sporadic case reports of lichen planus and lichenoid reactions associated with COVID-19 vaccines have recently emerged. Herein, we review the world literature (31 patients) and expand it with a case series of 15 patients who presented with vaccine-induced lichenoid eruption (V-ILE). The spectrum of clinical and histopathologic findings is discussed with emphasis on the subset whose lesions manifested in embryologic fusion lines termed lines of Blaschko. This rare Blaschkoid distribution appeared in seven of the 46 patients studied. Of interest, all seven were linked to the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. We believe that all lichenoid eruptions should be approached with a heightened index of suspicion and patients should be specifically questioned with regards to their vaccination history. When diagnosed early in its course, V-ILE is easily treated and resolves quickly in almost all patients with or without hyperpigmentation. Additional investigative studies regarding its immunopathology and inflammatory signaling pathways may offer insight into other Th1-driven autoimmune phenomena related to COVID-19 vaccination.

A CHALLENGING DIAGNOSIS OF CELLULAR NONSPECIFIC INTERSTITIAL PNEUMONIA (NSIP) WITH ORGANIZING PNEUMONIA IN A PATIENT WITH ANTI-JO 1 NEGATIVE DERMATOMYOSITIS

SESSION TITLE: Autoimmune Diffuse Lung Disease Case Posters SESSION TYPE: Case Report Posters PRESENTED ON: 10/19/2022 12:45 pm - 01:45 pm INTRODUCTION: Nonspecific interstitial pneumonia (NSIP) is an interstitial lung disease (ILD) that can be idiopathic or associated with connective tissue disorders (CTDs). The two subtypes of NSIP are cellular interstitial pneumonitis (CIP) and fibrotic, with CIP being less common. Subtypes can be distinguished through pathology and imaging. NSIP constitutes 14-36% of cases of idiopathic interstitial pneumonias. ILD-associated DM has a higher mortality, making diagnosis crucial. In specific, fibrotic NSIP has a high 10-year mortality rate, making differentiation relevant. CASE PRESENTATION: A 36-year-old female presented with fatigue and erythematous papular lesions on her face, palms, shoulder, and neck for one month. She also developed a fever and dry cough a week before. She denied recent travel or sick contacts. COVID-19 was negative. On exam, she was tachypneic and tachycardic with a maculopapular rash. A pulmonary exam revealed bilateral fine crackles. CXR showed dense left and mild right-sided patchy consolidations. Labs revealed elevated inflammatory markers (ESR-63, CRP-1.9, LDH-982). CPK was high - 517. CBC and procalcitonin were normal. CT showed extensive patchy and confluent areas of opacification of the left lower lobe, including a mass-like area measuring 3.3cm. Infectious workup was negative. Autoimmune testing ( Anti-Jo 1 Ab, ANA, etc) was negative. Bronchoscopic left lower lobe biopsy showed cellular interstitial inflammation composed of lymphocytes, plasma cells, rare eosinophils, and foci of intra-alveolar fibrinous exudates, suggestive of CIP and OP. She was treated successfully with corticosteroids and was discharged on prednisone. Repeat autoimmune antibody workup was negative. Skin biopsy showed a lichenoid lymphocytic infiltrate and necrotic keratinocytes consistent with dermatomyositis. Mycophenolate and rituximab were initiated;prednisone was tapered off. Follow-up chest CT showed cleared infiltrates with symptomatic improvement. DISCUSSION: CIP is an uncommon form of NSIP. On CT, bilateral ground-glass opacities are the most common feature. CIP is characterized histologically by interstitial thickening due to the presence of inflammatory cells and type-II pneumocyte hyperplasia with preserved lung architecture. Treatment is corticosteroids. The prognosis is excellent. ILD associated with DM is strongly associated with a positive Anti-Jo Ab, which was negative here making diagnosis challenging. She was diagnosed with dermatomyositis using histological findings from a skin biopsy. She responded to steroids at acute presentation and treatment was tailored once DM was diagnosed leading to complete recovery. CONCLUSIONS: ILD is not uncommon in CTD, however it is usually associated with a positive Anti-Jo 1 antibody. Our case is unique as the patient had negative Anti- Jo 1 Ab, however was found to have cellular NSIP with DM responding well to treatment following diagnosis. Reference #1: https://ard.bmj.com/content/63/3/297 Reference #2: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK518974/ Reference #3: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33916864/ DISCLOSURES: No relevant relationships by Nawal Ahmed No relevant relationships by TAIKCHAN LILDAR No relevant relationships by Namratha Shripad No relevant relationships by David Wisa

LESIONS MIMICKING KAPOSI SARCOMA IN A WOMAN LIVING WITH HIV FOLLOWING PFIZER-BIONTECH COVID- 19 VACCINATION

Introduction A spectrum of skin reactions following mRNA COVID vaccinations have been reported that can mimic dermatological manifestations of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infection. Case Description A 47-year-old Zimbabwean female living with HIV since 2011 (nadir CD4 366 cells/mm3) was seen in our HIV clinic with a widespread rash and raised, itchy lesions over her body measuring approximately 5-7mm which appeared three weeks after her first Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. There was no systemic involvement. Her CD4 count was 641 cells/mm3 (44%) with a fully suppressed viral load on antiretroviral therapy since June 2015 with no other pertinent medical history. There was no response to topical anti-fungal therapy but symptomatic relief with anti-pruritic and anti-histamine was noted. Treatment with oral erythromycin 500mg four times a day for two weeks decreased the size of the lesions and improved the rash. A punch biopsy of pale brown skin at this time was performed with appearances in keeping with those of a lichenoid pattern of inflammation. Our patient continues to improve with erythromycin.Topical or systemic corticosteroid therapy can be considered to further ameliorate her condition. Discussion Lichenoid drug eruptions are well recognized. Our case demonstrates such a reaction to the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccination which adds to cases described in the contemporary medical literature. It is vital to recognize this complication in our specialty as lesions may mimic lichen planus clinically and histologically and may be mistaken for dermatological manifestations associated with HIV, including Kaposi Sarcoma (KS) and bacillary angiomatosis, which can manifest regardless of immune status.

COVID vaccine cutaneous reactions: a case series of six patients

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, over 89 million doses of coronavirus vaccines have been administered so far in the UK. An increasing number of mucocutaneous reactions are being seen as a result of the vaccines. These reactions can vary, from pruritus to urticaria and angio-oedema (Robinson LB, Fu X, Hashimoto D et al. Incidence of cutaneous reactions after messenger RNA COVID-19 vaccines. JAMA Dermatol 2021;157: 1000-2). Its recognition is important, as a small proportion of patients can develop potentially life-threatening conditions. Furthermore, initial reactions can have consequences on subsequent vaccine doses. We carried out a retrospective review of patients referred to our dermatology service over a 4-month period (June-October 2021) and identified those with suspected mucocutaneous reactions secondary to COVID-19 vaccines. Six patients were identified, three woman and three men, with a mean age of 56 years. Mucocutaneous reactions seen included: extensive parapsoriasis, widespread blistering rash, urticaria, angio-oedema, lichenoid papular eruption and erythema multiforme. Three reactions occurred after the Pfizer vaccine, two after the AstraZeneca and one was not specified. Two patients were advised not to have further doses. The incidence of cutaneous reactions to the COVID-19 vaccines is estimated to be 4% (McMahon DE, Amerson E, Rosenbach M et al. Cutaneous reactions reported after Moderna and Pfizer COVID-19 vaccination: a registry-based study of 414 cases. J Am Acad Dermatol 2021;85: 46-55). It is important to increase awareness and knowledge of these reactions, to allow appropriate management, and informed discussion regarding the safety of further doses.

Lichen planus occuring after Coronavirus disease-2019: A case report

The novel Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), which emerged in December 2019 and caused an unexplained viral pneumonia, rapidly spread worldwide within a few months. A pandemic was declared by the World Health Organization in March 2020. Several cutaneous manifestations of the disease among patients with COVID-19 have been reported. Thus far, the most frequently reported cutaneous findings are morbiliform rash, urticarial lesions, purpuric lesions, oral vesicles, and pityriasis rosea. This report presents a case of lichen planus secondary to COVID-19 and its histopathological findings, which is rarely reported in the literature.

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.

Drug-induced lichenoid exanthema by a vaccine against COVID-19 (Vaxzevria).

A 66-year-old white female presented with a generalized, erythematous, and itchy eruption for 3 days after. She reported having fever on the first day of eruption, complaints of asthenia, and anorexia with no other systemic symptoms. She received her first dose of Vaxzevria (AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK) against COVID-19 three weeks prior. The eruption started on the right arm at the vaccine injection site and then spread progressively throughout the entire body. We noticed multiform erythema- like patches with three or four concentric circles with different shades of redness. Anatomopathological analysis indicated a lichenoid histological pattern compatible with adverse event of vaccine. Degressive general corticotherapy was prescribed with an improvement of the symptomatology and complete healing in ten days. Physicians should be aware if this rare adverse event. Drug-induced lichenoid exanthema is considered a non-severe reaction and does not contraindicate the readministration of essential drugs. In this case, the patient refused the second injection of Vaxzevria.

Lichenoid cutaneous skin eruption and associated systemic inflammatory response following Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA COVID-19 vaccine administration.

The global effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have driven unprecedented rapid development and mass deployment of vaccinations against the novel coronavirus. However, the short- and long-term adverse reactions following COVID-19 vaccinations are still under investigation as insufficient time has passed to fully explore these. The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA vaccine has thus far shown a favourable safety profile in phase I-III studies. Although infrequent cases of generalized cutaneous reactions and systemic inflammatory response have been reported following other mRNA vaccines, these have not been reported following the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. We report a case of generalized lichenoid skin eruptions and systemic inflammatory response occurring together following the first dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. Our case report adds to an accumulating body of literature connecting autoimmunity with the pathophysiology of the novel coronavirus disease.