No abstract

Conventional vaccines have been widely studied, along with their risk of causing allergic reactions. These generally consist of mild local reactions and only rarely severe anaphylaxis. Although all the current COVID-19 vaccines marketed in Europe have been shown to be safe overall in the general population, early post-marketing evidence has shown that mRNA-based vaccines using novel platforms (i.e., lipid nanoparticles) were associated with an increased risk of severe allergic reactions as compared to conventional vaccines. In this paper we performed an updated literature review on frequency, risk factors, and underlying mechanisms of COVID-19 vaccine-related allergies by searching MEDLINE and Google Scholar databases. We also conducted a qualitative search on VigiBase and EudraVigilance databases to identify reports of "Hypersensitivity" and "Anaphylactic reaction" potentially related to COVID-19 vaccines (Comirnaty, Spikevax, Vaxzevria and COVID-19 Janssen Vaccine), and in EudraVigilance to estimate the reporting rates of "Anaphylactic reaction" and "Anaphylactic shock" after COVID-19 vaccination in the European population. We also summarized the scientific societies' and regulatory agencies' recommendations for prevention and management of COVID-19 vaccine-related allergic reactions, especially in those with a history of allergy. Key PointsSerious allergic reactions observed after the receipt of an mRNA vaccine are rare.Reporting rate of serious allergic reactions for viral vector COVID-19 vaccines seems to be similar to that for COVID-19 mRNA vaccines.The underlying mechanism of COVID-19 vaccinerelated allergies have not yet been fully elucidated.A risk stratification assessment for the development of allergic reactions should be conducted before the receipt of a vaccine against COVID-19.Nicoletta Luxi and Alexia Giovanazzi have contributed equally to the paper as first authors.

The recent scientific research has provided clinicians with the tools for substantially upgrading the standard of care in the field of bronchial asthma. Nevertheless, satisfactory asthma control still remains an unmet need worldwide. Identifying the major determinants of poor control in different asthma severity levels represents the first step towards the improvement of the overall patients’ management. The present review aims to provide an overview of the main unmet needs in asthma control and of the potential tools for overcoming the issue. Implementing a personalized medicine approach is essential, not only in terms of pharmacological treatments, biologic drugs or sophisticated biomarkers. In fact, exploring the complex profile of each patient, from his inflammation phenotype to his preferences and expectations, may help in filling the gap between the big potential of currently available treatments and the overall unsatisfactory asthma control. Telemedicine and e-health technologies may provide a strategy to both optimize disease assessment on a regular basis and enhance patients’ empowerment in managing their asthma. Increasing patients’ awareness as well as the physicians’ knowledge about asthma phenotypes and treatment options besides corticosteroid probably represent the key and more difficult goals of all the players involved in asthma management at every level.

Background Asthma control and monitoring still represents a challenge worldwide. Although the international guidelines suggest the interplay between secondary and primary care services as an effective strategy to control the disease, community pharmacies’ are seldom involved in asthma control assessment. The present cross-sectional study aimed at providing a picture of the relationship between asthma severity and control in community pharmacies within the health district of the city of Verona (Veneto Region, North-Eastern Italy). Methods A call for participation was launched through the Pharmacists’ Association of Verona. Patients referring to the participating pharmacies with an anti-asthmatic drug medical prescription and an asthma exemption code were asked to complete the Asthma Control Test (ACT) and a brief questionnaire collecting information on their age, sex, smoking status, aerobic physical exercise and usual asthma therapy, which also defined asthma severity. A multinomial logistic regression model was fitted to investigate the risk of uncontrolled as well as poorly controlled vs. controlled asthma (base). Results were expressed as relative risk ratios (RRR) with 95% confidence interval (95%CI). Results Fifty-seven community pharmacies accepted to participate and 584 asthmatic patients (54% females; mean-age: 51 ± 19 years) were consecutively recruited from 1st January to 30th June 2018 (6 months). Based upon ACT score 50.5% patients had a controlled asthma, 22.3% a poorly controlled and 27.2% uncontrolled. A variable proportion of patients with uncontrolled asthma were observed for every level of severity, although more frequently with mild persistent form of asthma. Most patients (92%) self-reported regular compliance with therapy. At multinomial regression analysis, patients under regular asthma treatment course (RRR = 0.33; 95%CI: 0.15; 0.77) were less likely to have an ACT< 16 compared to those not taking medications regularly. Conclusions Overall, our findings highlighted an unsatisfactory asthma control in the general population, independently of the severity level of the disease. Community pharmacies could be a useful frontline interface between patients and the health care services, supporting an effective asthma management plan, from disease assessment and monitoring treatment compliance to referral of patients to specialist medical consultancies.

Background The observation of patients hospitalized for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) led us to note a lower prevalence of patients affected by chronic respiratory disease, in particular asthmatic patients, compared to the general population. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to evaluate the possible protective role of corticosteroid therapy in patients with chronic lung disease, regarding the risk of contracting severe COVID-19. Main body SARS-CoV-2 uses angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptors to enter the cells. Considering the high number of these receptors in patients affected by asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the evidence that these patients do not have a high risk of hospitalization for COVID-19 needs further study to understand what the possible protective “factors” are in these patients. In particular, the finding in some studies of reduced coronavirus replication in cell lines treated with steroids, molecules commonly used for treating chronic lung diseases, needs further attention. Short conclusion The hypothesis that corticosteroids, commonly used in treating airways diseases, might modify the severity of SARS-CoV-2 disease has become a key point and a possible predictive factor of a positive outcome of COVID-19 in patients treated everyday with these molecules.