In the era of novel coronavirus epidemics, vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been recognized as the most effective public health interventions to control the pandemic. An adverse event following immunization (AEFI) is defined as any untoward occurrence following immunization, and the majority of AEFIs are caused by protective immune responses stimulated by vaccines. Most of the reported AEFIs are not serious, and many are not immunologically mediated or even reproducible on re-exposure. However, uncommon severe allergic adverse reactions, such as anaphylaxis or other allergic reactions, can occur after vaccinations. Confirmed allergic reactions to vaccines may be caused by residual non-human protein, preservatives, or stabilizers in the vaccine formulation (also known as excipients). There are 2 main potential allergenic/immunogenic excipients in COVID-19 vaccines, polyethylene glycol (PEG) and polysorbate 80. PEG, also known as macrogol, is an ingredient in various laxatives and injectable formulations, such as depot steroids. Polysorbate 80 is present in various medical products, creams, ointments, lotions, and medication tablets. Contraindications to the administration of COVID-19 vaccines include a previous history of severe allergic reactions to the first dose of COVID-19 vaccine or proven hypersensitivity to a vaccine component, such as PEG or polysorbate 80. Anaphylaxis or other allergic reactions following immunization can cause fear and loss of confidence in the safety of vaccines among the public. A better understanding of these events is thought to help alleviate concerns about the current COVID-19 vaccines and provide reassurance to the general population by analyzing the exact incidence of anaphylaxis and potential risk factors. COVID-19 vaccine-associated anaphylaxis could be prevented and managed by risk stratification based on our local and global experience.

Skin barrier disruption and dermal inflammation are key phenotypes of atopic dermatitis (AD). Staphylococcus aureus secretes extracellular vesicles (EVs), which are involved in AD pathogenesis. Here, we evaluated the role of EVs-associated α-hemolysin derived from S. aureus in AD pathogenesis. α-hemolysin production from S. aureus was detected using western blot analyses. The cytotoxic activity of α-hemolysin on HaCaT keratinocytes was evaluated by measuring cell viability after treating cells with soluble and EVs-associated α-hemolysin. To determine the type of cell death, HaCaT keratinocytes were stained with annexin V and 7-AAD. The in vivo effects of α-hemolysin were evaluated by application of soluble and EV-associated α-hemolysin on the mouse skin. The present study showed that increased α-hemolysin was produced by S. aureus colonized on AD patients compared to healthy subjects. α-hemolysin production was also related to AD severity. In addition, EV-associated α-hemolysin was more cytotoxic to HaCaT keratinocytes than soluble α-hemolysin, and α-hemolysin-negative EVs did not induce keratinocyte death. EV-associated α-hemolysin induced necrosis, but soluble α-hemolysin induced apoptosis of keratinocytes. In vivo, skin barrier disruption and epidermal hyperplasia were induced by soluble and EV-associated α-hemolysin. However, AD-like dermal inflammation was only caused by EV-associated α-hemolysin. Moreover, neither skin barrier disruption nor AD-like skin inflammation was induced by α-hemolysin-negative EVs. Taken together, α-Hemolysin secreted from S. aureus, particularly the EV-associated form, induces both skin barrier disruption and AD-like skin inflammation, suggesting that EV-associated α-hemolysin is a novel diagnostic and therapeutic target for the control of AD.

PurposeThe microbial environment is an important factor that contributes to the pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis (AD). Recently, it was revealed that not only bacteria itself but also extracellular vesicles (EVs) secreted from bacteria affect the allergic inflammation process. However, almost all research carried out so far was related to local microorganisms, not the systemic microbial distribution. We aimed to compare the bacterial EV composition between AD patients and healthy subjects and to experimentally find out the beneficial effect of some bacterial EV compositionMethodsTwenty-seven AD patients and 6 healthy control subjects were enrolled. After urine and serum were obtained, EVs were prepared from samples. Metagenomic analysis of 16s ribosomal DNA extracted from the EVs was performed, and bacteria showing the greatest difference between controls and patients were identified. In vitro and in vivo therapeutic effects of significant bacterial EV were evaluated with keratinocytes and with Staphylococcus aureus-induced mouse AD models, respectively.ResultsThe proportions of Lactococcus, Leuconostoc and Lactobacillus EVs were significantly higher and those of Alicyclobacillus and Propionibacterium were lower in the control group than in the AD patient group. Therefore, lactic acid bacteria were considered to be important ones that contribute to the difference between the patient and control groups. In vitro, interleukin (IL)-6 from keratinocytes and macrophages decreased and cell viability was restored with Lactobacillus plantarum-derived EV treatment prior to S. aureus EV treatment. In S. aureus-induced mouse AD models, L. plantarum-derived EV administration reduced epidermal thickening and the IL-4 level.ConclusionsWe suggested the protective role of lactic acid bacteria in AD based on metagenomic analysis. Experimental findings further suggest that L. plantarum-derived EV could help prevent skin inflammation.

PurposeAlthough anaphylaxis is recognized as an important, life-threatening condition, data are limited regarding its triggers in different age groups. We aimed to identify anaphylaxis triggers by age in Korean children.MethodsWe performed a retrospective review of medical records for children diagnosed with anaphylaxis between 2009 and 2013 in 23 secondary or tertiary hospitals in South Korea.ResultsA total of 991 cases (mean age=5.89±5.24) were reported, with 63.9% involving patients younger than 6 years of age and 66% involving male children. Food was the most common anaphylaxis trigger (74.7%), followed by drugs and radiocontrast media (10.7%), idiopathic factors (9.2%), and exercise (3.6%). The most common food allergen was milk (28.4%), followed by egg white (13.6%), walnut (8.0%), wheat (7.2%), buckwheat (6.5%), and peanut (6.2%). Milk and seafood were the most common anaphylaxis triggers in young and older children, respectively. Drug-triggered anaphylaxis was observed more frequently with increasing age, with antibiotics (34.9%) and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (17.9%) being the most common causes.ConclusionsThe most common anaphylaxis trigger in Korean children was food. Data on these triggers show that their relative frequency may vary by age.

PurposeTo evaluate a therapeutic efficacy of probiotics mixture (probiotics) in the treatment of children with mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis (AD).MethodsRandomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel trial with a washout period of 2 weeks and an intervention period for 6 weeks, conducted from November 2010 to October 2011. One hundred children with mild to moderate AD (2-9 years old) were randomly allocated to the probiotics (Lactobacilluss casei, Lactobacillus rhamnosus, Lactobacillus plantarum, and Bifidobacterium lactis) or placebo groups. The assessment of efficacy was based on the change in eczema area severity index (EASI), visual analogue scale for pruritus (VASP), fecal cell counts of each strains (log10[cell counts/g stool]), and serum cytokine levels (Interleukin-4 [IL-4]; IL-10; Tumor necrosis factor alpha, [TNF-α]) in weeks 0 and 6.ResultsDemographics and baseline characteristics at the week 0 were not significantly different between the 2 groups. The significant increments in fecal-cell counts were observed in the probiotcs group at week 6 (P=0.00), while the cytokine levels between the 2 groups were not significantly different in week 6 (IL-4, P=0.50; IL-10, P=0.58; TNF-α, P=0.82). The probiotics significantly improved clinical severity after 6 weeks' intervention of probiotics; however, the placebo group also showed significant improvement (EASI; P=0.00, VASP; P=0.00).ConclusionsOur findings showed that probiotics successfully colonized in the intestine after 6 weeks' intervention; nevertheless, we could not find an additional therapeutic or immunomodulatory effects on the treatment of AD. Further long-term studies will be necessary to clarify the therapeutic efficacy of probiotics.