Background: There is an urgent need to assess the levels of protection generated by natural infection or SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, especially in individuals professionally exposed. Measuring T-cell responses may complement antibody tests currently in use as correlates of protection. Our aim was to assess the feasibility of a validated assay of T-cell responses applicable to large number of samples. Methods: Twenty health-care-workers (HCW) were included. Antibody test to SARS-CoV-2 N and S-proteins in parallel with a commercially available whole-blood-interferon-gamma-release-assay (IGRA) to S-peptides and two detection methods, CLIA and ELISA were determined. Results: IGRA test detected T-cell responses in naturally exposed and vaccinated HCW already after first vaccination dose. The correlation by the two detection methods was very high (R>0.9) and sensitivity and specificity ranged between 100 and 86% and 100-73% respectively. Even though there was a very high concordance between antibody and the IGRA assay in the ability to detect immune response to SARS-CoV-2, there was a relatively low quantitative correlation. In the small group primed by natural infection, one vaccine dose was sufficient to reach immune response plateau. IGRA was positive in one, with Ig(S) antibody negative vaccinated immunosuppressed HCW illustrating another advantage of the IGRA-test. Conclusion: Whole-blood-IGRA-tests amenable to automation and constitutes a promising additional tool for measuring the state of the immune response to SARS-CoV-2; they are applicable to large number of samples and may become a valuable correlate of protection to COVID-19, particularly for

Introduction and objective Drugs are a frequent cause of severe anaphylactic reactions. Clinical epidemiology of drug-induced anaphylaxis (DIA) supports the identification of the most frequent eliciting drug groups, risk factors, symptoms and treatment procedures. Our aim was to analyze data to promote better recognition and long-term management of affected individuals. Methods Data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry (2007-2019) with 1,815 cases of drug-induced anaphylaxis were analyzed regarding demographics, elicitors, symptoms, comorbidities, and treatment. Results The most frequent eliciting groups of drugs were analgesics (41.27%) – with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) being the most common subgroup (65.42%) – antibiotics (33.17%), local anesthetics (7.38%) and radiocontrast media (5.18%). Adrenaline was used more often in patients with DIA (23.20%) than in anaphylaxis due to other causes (17.82%). The majority of events occurred in female patients (65.34%), although they were admitted to hospital (29.01%) or an intensive care unit (ICU) (9.61%) less often. Skin symptoms were most common (84.02%), while gastrointestinal symptoms were reported less frequently (30.25%). Compared to other anaphylactic reactions in the registry (food/insects) severe reactions occurred significantly more often in DIA (5.62% vs. 1.67%). Hospitalization (31.63%) and ICU admission rates (11.85%) were significantly higher in DIA than anaphylactic reactions to other elicitors (27.58% and 5.45%). Conclusions DIA affects middle aged females more frequently and is more severe in elderly males in the sample observed. Analgesics and antibiotics are the leading causes of DIA. Adrenaline was rarely administered to patients, even though it is recommended by guidelines.

Background: The practice of allergology varies widely between countries, and the costs and sales for the treatment of rhinitis differ depending on practices and health systems. To understand these differences and their implications, the rhinitis market was studied in some of the EU countries. Methods: We conducted a pharmaco-epidemiological database analysis to assess the medications that were prescribed for allergic rhinitis in the years 2016, 2017 and 2018. We used the IQVIA platforms for prescribed medicines (MIDAS® - Meaningful Integration of Data, Analytics and Services) and for OTC medicines (OTC International Market Tracking - OTCims). We selected the five most important markets in the EU (France, Germany, Italy, Poland and Spain). The UK was excluded due to a lack of data. Results: Intra-nasal decongestants were excluded from the analyses because they are not prescribed for allergic rhinitis. For both Standard Units (SU) and costs, France is leading the other countries. In terms of SU, the four other countries are similar. For costs, Poland is lower than the three others. However, medication use differs largely. For 2018, in SU, intra-nasal corticosteroid is the first treatment in Poland (70.0%), France (51.3%), Spain (51.1%) and Germany (50.3%) whereas the Italian market is dominated by systemic anti-histamines (41.4%) followed by intra-nasal corticosteroids (30.1%). Results of other years were similar. Discussion: There are major differences between countries in terms of rhino-conjunctivitis medication usage.