ArticleThe World Allergy Organization journal2025
Evaluating vaccination dosing strategies for SARS-CoV-2 in patients at high-risk for allergic reactions: Insights from vaccination campaign.
Article in The World Allergy Organization journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comment on "Evaluating vaccination dosing strategies for SARS-CoV-2 in patients at high-risk for allergic reactions: Insights from vaccination campaign".The World Allergy Organization journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic significantly increased the demand for allergy consultations to evaluate the risk of hypersensitivity reactions in patients either before receiving their first dose of an anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (Group 1) or following suspected allergic reactions after vaccination (Group 2). Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients referred to the Immunology and Allergy Unit of the Azienda Ospedaliera Ordine Mauriziano in Turin, Italy, between December 2020 and December 2022. Risk assessment was performed according to Italian and European guidelines, and allergy skin tests were administered when necessary. Patient data were cross-referenced with the SIRVA platform (Regional Vaccination Management Information System) to assess vaccine eligibility, administration, and outcomes. Results: A total of 1222 patients were evaluated (mean age: 52 years; female-to-male ratio 4:1). In Group 1 (n = 914), 137 patients (15%) underwent skin testing, of whom 15 (1.6%) tested positive. Vaccination was recommended for 899 patients (98%), though 184 (20%) did not proceed. Among those vaccinated, 679 (74%) received additional doses, with 48% receiving a third and 11% a fourth dose. In Group 2 (n = 308), 104 patients (33%) underwent skin testing, with 9 (8%) testing positive. Vaccination without restrictions was recommended for 299 patients (97%), but 45 patients (15%) did not proceed. Among the remaining, 262 (85%) received a second dose, 183 (59%) a third, and 29 (9%) a fourth dose. Overall, 1198 patients (98%) had no specific contraindications to vaccination. Only 5 patients (0.4%) were completely exempted from vaccination due to confirmed sensitivity to both polyethylene glycol (PEG) and polysorbate 80 (PS80). An alternative vaccine was recommended for 19 patients; 16 of them proceeded with vaccination and tolerated it without adverse effects. Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate that the majority of high-risk allergic patients can safely receive anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines following allergological evaluation. The rate of confirmed excipient allergy was very low, and vaccine adherence was comparable to the general population. This is, to our knowledge, the first study to longitudinally assess the number and types of vaccine doses administered to high-risk allergic individuals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.