Abstract
Background mRNA vaccines are a novel method of eliciting immunity, and play a significant role in the global fight against COVID-19. Anaphylactic reactions are a widespread concern driving vaccine hesitancy due to the serious and potentially fatal nature of anaphylaxis. A quantitative estimation of the risk of anaphylactic and ana-phylactoid reactions deriving from mRNA vaccines is of a significant public health importance.
Objective To estimate the relative Reporting Odds Ratio of anaphylactic and ana-phylactoid reactions following mRNA vaccination vis-a-vis other vaccinations.
Design Reporting case-control study.
Setting Persons reporting adverse events following vaccination to VAERS whose reports were received between 01 January 2000 and 02 July 2021, inclusive.
Patients Each case of anaphylaxis or anaphylactoid reaction was matched with 2.7 unique controls on average, by gender and age rounded to the nearest integer.
Measurements Overall and stratified Reporting Odds Ratios (ROR) were calculated. Stratified contingency tables were tested for homogeneity using the Breslow-Day procedure, and Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel statistics were calculated to test the hypothesis of a ROR of unity.
Results 2,665 cases of anaphylaxis or anaphylactoid reactions and 7,125 controls of non-anaphylactic/anaphylactoid reports were compared. The ROR of an anaphylactic or anaphylactoid reaction was 1.325 (95% CI: 1.212 – 1.448, p < 0.001). The matched set of cases and controls revealed an expected inhomogeneity by sex (with women slightly more likely to report anaphylactic presentations) and age band strata (with a bimodal distribution that reflects the common incidence of anaphylactic and allergic pathologies). No significant increase in the risk of anaphylactic adverse events was witnessed among persons who self-reported previous allergic reactions to vaccines. A slightly elevated ROR was observed with patients who reported a history of allergic reactions to NSAIDs and/or fluoroquinolone antibiotics. The precise meaning and relevance of this finding remains to be elucidated.
Limitations As a reporting study using data from VAERS, our analysis is subject tunder- and overreporting, the extent of each of which is not known with any degree of precision. Since the Emergency Use Authorizations for both mRNA vaccines mandate reporting of all serious adverse events, reporting bias is likely in favour of non-mRNA vaccines, where such reporting is not mandatory in adults. Consequently, this analysis may exaggerate the ROR of anaphylactic and anaphylactoid events associated with mRNA vaccines, which may in reality be significantly lower.
Conclusions mRNA vaccination is not associated with a statistically significant higher risk of reporting an anaphylactic adverse event to VAERS. Anaphylaxis is a serious but very rare complication of all immunisations. No significant increase in reporting odds was found in any age group or gender, nor in most cases of previously known allergic adverse events in relation to vaccines. This study contributes to the growing body of evidence proving the safety and tolerability of mRNA vaccines.
Competing Interest Statement
CvC is a consultant to a company that may be affected by the research reported in this paper. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.
Funding Statement
This research was funded by Starschema Inc. under its intramural research funding programme.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
As this is a purely retrospective study over publicly accessible data on VAERS, it is exempt from IRB approval. For this reason, no approval has been sought or obtained.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
VAERS reporting data is available from the CDC's website at https://vaers.hhs.gov. All code and scripts supporting this manuscript are deposited at https://github.com/chrisvoncsefalvay/covid-19-vaccine-anaphylaxis and are made available under the DOI 10.5281/zenodo.5112367.
https://vaers.hhs.gov/data.html
https://github.com/chrisvoncsefalvay/covid-19-vaccine-anaphylaxis
