Effect of Covid-19 on nasal allergies: A study from hilly regions of Himachal Pradesh

Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) designated SARS-CoV-2 infection as coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19).Due to the government implication of Covid-19 specific guideline of using mask, there could be a significant decrease in the allergic rhinitis. Objective(s): Present study aims to analyze the changes in the trends of nasal allergies from hilly regions of Himachal Pradesh following Covid-19 pandemic. Method(s): The prospective data obtained from January 2022 to November 2022 was compared from the retrospective data available between January 2019 to November 2019. Prospectively, a total of 596 patients were included in the study. All these patients underwent Skin prick tests for common allergens. All these patients also underwent testing for total IgE levels in biochemistry lab of the hospital by chemiluminescence method.The results were compared with retrospective dataof 728 age sex match patients. Result(s): A significant difference in the allergen sensitivity was observed. The number of patients who were sensitized during Covid was comparatively less than those during Pre covid period.Dust mite, Cockroach, Peanut and Wheat revealed a non-significant odds ratio indicating that they were not true predictors for sensitization and non-sensitization. Whereas Grass pollen, Mould mix and Pine mix revealed a significant odds ratio. Usage of mask found to have an impact on improvement in symptoms. Majority of the patients who did not use mask had no improvement in symptoms. Majority of the patients had high IgE levels in pre covid period whereas it was normal for majority of them during covid. Conclusion(s): In our study, allergic rhinitis incidence decreased throughout the pandemic period. After pandemic, there was a noticeably decreased level of sensitivity to grass pollen, mould, and pine mix. Use of face masks lead to significant decrease in symptoms of allergic rhinitis.Copyright © 2022, Anka Publishers. All rights reserved.

Aeroallergen sensitization in school-age children with allergic rhinitis: What has changed during the COVID-19 pandemic?

BACKGROUND: Pandemic period may affect aeroallergen sensitization. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to investigate changes in allergen sensitivities of skin prick test (SPT) in patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) during pandemic and to evaluate relationship with disease severity. METHODS: In all, 164 AR patients with or without asthma, aged 6-17 years, who have undergone SPTs prior to the pandemic and after October 1, 2021 (18th month of the pandemic), were evaluated retrospectively. The wheal size of allergens in performed SPTs during and prior to the pandemic were compared. Detected changes in allergen sensitivities via SPT results were compared with changes in the disease severity parameters (AR severity, asthma severity, and the number of asthma exacerbations per year), frequency of upper respiratory tract infections and antibiotic use, laboratory parameters, demographic characteristics, and visual analogue scores (VAS). RESULTS: House dust mites (HDMs), cat, pollen, Artemisia, and Cupressus sensitization increased in AR patients during the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. HDM, mold, and pollen wheal diameters increased in SPTs. Proportion of polysensitization increased during the pandemic, compared to pre-pandemic period (9.1% vs 3%; P < 0.001), and number of non-sensitized patients decreased during the pandemic period compared to the pre-pandemic period (7.9% vs 22.6%; P < 0.001). An increase in HDM sensitivity in SPTs was correlated with VAS for nasal blockage, and an increase in cat sensitivity was correlated with VAS for all nasal symptoms. CONCLUSION: We believe that inhalant allergen sensitization might have been affected by the lifestyle changes of patients during the pandemic. Hence, it is important to evaluate patients for allergen sensitization, especially patients with moderate/severe AR, to revise disease control measurements.

COVID-19 vaccine provocation test outcome in high-risk allergic patients: A retrospective study from a tertiary hospital in Indonesia.

Background: High COVID-19 vaccine coverage is essential. Patients who are considered high risk for hypersensitivity reactions and have had an allergic reaction to the COVID-19 vaccine are usually referred to an allergist for assessment of vaccination. Administration of a vaccine graded challenge (also known as a provocation test) is an option that can be considered in this population. This primary objective of this study is to describe the outcome of the COVID-19 vaccine provocation test and to understand the predicting factors associated with hypersensitivity reaction after the provocation test as the secondary objective. Methods: Adult patients with a history of hypersensitivity reaction to the first COVID-19 vaccine and high-allergic patients who underwent COVID-19 vaccine provocation test up until May 2022 were included. A protocol using skin prick test (SPT), intradermal test (IDT), followed by graded challenge was developed for the determined vaccine used. Results: A total of 232 patients were included in the analysis. Twenty-eight had hypersensitivity to their first COVID-19 vaccine dose and 204 were high risk for allergic reaction. Hypersensitivity reactions occurred in 20 patients (8.6%, 95% CI: 5-12.2%), consisting of 4 reactions after SPT, 9 after IDT, 7 during or after titrated challenge. Half of the reactions were mild; however, 3 patients developed severe reactions. Patients with history of anaphylaxis were more likely to experience hypersensitivity reaction after provocation test (aRR = 2.79, 95% CI: 1.05-7.42). Conclusion: Provocation test in COVID-19 vaccination has a high success rate in patients with a history of hypersensitivity to the first COVID-19 vaccine and in high allergic patients. History of anaphylaxis is associated with hypersensitivity reaction after a COVID-19 vaccine provocation test.

COVID vaccination can be performed in patients with a history of allergic reactions to the vaccines or their components: experience from a specialist clinic in South Australia.

BACKGROUND: The development of vaccines against SARS-CoV2 has been a key public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, since their introduction, there have been reports of anaphylactic reactions to vaccines in individuals with history of allergic reactions to other vaccines, excipients or to COVID vaccines. AIM: A dedicated adult COVID vaccine allergy clinic with a standardised allergy testing protocol was set up to investigate safety and suitability of available COVID vaccines in Australia. METHODS: Patients referred to a state-wide COVID-19 vaccine allergy clinic between March and August 2021 with a history of allergy underwent skin-prick testing and intradermal testing to both available vaccine formulations (BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1-S), excipients (polyethylene glycol and polysorbate 80), excipient-containing medications and controls. Basophil activation testing was conducted in few subjects with convincing history of immediate type reactions. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients underwent testing for possible excipient allergy (n = 19), previous non-COVID vaccine reaction (n = 13) or previous reaction to dose 1 of COVID-19 vaccine (n = 21). Patients were predominantly female (n = 43, 81%), aged 18-83 (median 54) years. Forty-four patients tested negative and 42 of these received at least their first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Nine patients tested positive to excipients or excipient-containing medication only (n = 3), or vaccines (n = 6). Five patients were positive to just BNT162b2, 3/5 have been vaccinated with ChAdOx1-S. One who was skin test positive to both vaccines, but negative BAT to ChAdOx1-S was successfully vaccinated with ChAdOx1-S. CONCLUSION: Even in a high-risk population, most patients can be vaccinated with available COVID-19 vaccines. This paper reports local experiences using a combined allergy testing protocol with skin testing and BAT during the pandemic.

Characteristics of hand eczema in final-year apprentice nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Apprentice nurses are considered at high risk to developing occupational skin diseases. OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the frequency and origin of hand eczema, and work-related risk factors in apprentice nurses. METHODS: The study involved 240 final-year apprentice nurses (females 75%, median age 19 years) from vocational schools in Zagreb, Croatia. The study was performed in 2020/2021 and included a questionnaire and clinical examination by means of the Osnabrück Hand Eczema Severity Index (OHSI). Skin prick test (SPT) with natural rubber latex (NRL) allergen, and patch test with the basic series of allergens, and disinfectants, were performed in 42 apprentice nurses with hand eczema that lasted more than 3 months. RESULTS: Clinically observed and self-reported hand eczema were found in 49% and 46% of apprentice nurses, respectively. Those with observed changes were older and reported more days per month spent on practical work than those with healthy skin (P = .001). Median OHSI was 4 (interquartile range 2-6). There were no positive SPTs to latex, and 11 (26%) apprentice nurses had positive patch test reactions to one or more tested allergens, mostly nickel. CONCLUSIONS: Hand eczema was common in final-year apprentice nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic. It was mostly of irritative origin, associated with the duration of practical training, confirming cumulative effect of hazards on skin barrier.

Optimizing investigation of suspected allergy to polyethylene glycols.

BACKGROUND: Polyethylene glycols (PEGs) are polymers of varying molecular weight (MW) used widely as excipients in drugs and other products, including the mRNA vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019. Allergy to PEGs is rare. Skin testing and graded challenge carries a high risk of inducing systemic reactions. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated skin prick test (SPT) results and in vitro reactivity over time to different MW PEGs and assessed cross-sensitization patterns in PEG allergy. METHODS: Ten patients with previously diagnosed PEG allergy underwent SPT twice with PEGs 26 months apart. Lower MW (PEG 300, 3000, 6000) were tested, followed by PEG 20,000, in stepwise, increasing concentrations. Cross-sensitization to polysorbate 80 and poloxamer 407 was assessed. SPT was performed in 16 healthy controls. In vitro basophil histamine release (HR) test and passive sensitization HR test were performed in patients and controls. RESULTS: Patients previously testing positive on SPT to PEG 3000 and/or 6000 also tested positive to PEG 20,000. Patients with a longer interval since diagnosis tested negative to lower MW PEGs and positive mainly to higher concentrations of PEG 20,000. Three patients developed systemic urticaria during SPT. Eight patients showed cross-sensitization to poloxamer 407 and 3 to polysorbate 80. All controls tested negative. In vitro tests showed limited usefulness. CONCLUSIONS: Skin test reactivity to PEG can decrease over time, but titrated SPT with increasing concentrations of PEG 20,000 can be diagnostic when lower MW PEGs test negative. To avoid systemic reactions, stepwise SPT is mandatory.