Is SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination of Subjects with a Prior History of Allergies Dangerous? Experiences in the Veneto Region of Italy

Adverse events after SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations have caused alarm to some individuals with previously diagnosed allergies. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the risk of adverse reactions was actually higher in this subgroup. To this end, we carried out an observational descriptive analysis of vaccines administered in a "protected setting" in the Veneto region of Italy between December 2020 and December 2022. Reactions were classified using systemic organic classification (SOC), and their severity was assessed using the criteria of the Italian Drug Agency (AIFA). A total of 421 subjects were vaccinated with 1050 doses, 95.0% of which were administered without adverse events. In all, 53 subjects reported 87 SOC reactions (1.6 reactions/person), and 18.3% of these reactions were severe. One person was hospitalized, but all subjects enjoyed complete remission. Reporting rates were 9.0%, 3.1%, and 1.2% for first, second, and third doses, respectively. The most frequent reactions involved the respiratory system (2.3%), the cutaneous and subcutaneous systems (2.1%), and the nervous system (1.7%). Multivariate analyses (adjOR (95% CI)) revealed that the probability of experiencing at least one reaction significantly declined with increases in age [0.95 (0.94-0.97)] and in the number of doses received, i.e., 75% [0.25 (0.13-0.49)] for second doses and 88% [0.12 (0.04-0.39)] for third doses. These results indicated that vaccinations could be safely administered; few reactions were reported, and there were no permanent adverse outcomes

Preventing and fighting stigma: a lesson from the first Mpox in Veneto region of Northeast Italy—A case report

Since the 1970s, human monkeypox (Mpox) has been referred to as a zoonotic endemic disease of specific regions of Africa until early 2022, when a worldwide epidemic outbreak developed. There are many hypotheses on how Mpox could spread to non-endemic regions; the dominant theory is that it spread from the UK and Spain among men who have sex with men (MSM). Therefore, the first clinical case in the Veneto region (Northeast of Italy) was analyzed—which represented a typical case report of the ongoing outbreak—with lesions located mainly in the areas associated with sexual behaviors (genital and oral). This case report highlights the new challenges of Mpox, as it seems to differ from the previous classic manifestation. Indeed, although the patient achieved restitution ad integrum of lesions and complete recovery from the disease, it is deemed necessary to offer communication strategies to involve a heterogeneous audience based on different risks of exposure but without stigmatizing attitudes, avoiding the mistakes made with HIV. The need for broad public involvement is demonstrated by identifying Mpox even in “anomalous cases.” Stigma could be an obstacle in engaging patients in proper care and in getting honest answers while contact tracing, as happened in our patient's case; thus, WHO recently renamed monkeypox as Mpox. Abnormal outbreaks in non-endemic countries, with no causal links, must become a warning signal for governments and health policies to design national plans for managing unexpected outbreaks. For an effective public health response, health institutions must communicate effectively, focus on changes and prevention measures, and formulate a plan based on equity and inclusion of the most vulnerable groups