Danny M. Cohn MD, PhD , Daniel F. Soteres MD, MPH , Timothy J. Craig DO , William R. Lumry MD , Markus Magerl MD , Marc A. Riedl MD , Paul K. Audhya MD, MBA , Marcus Maurer MD , Jonathan A. Bernstein MD
{"title":"Interplay between on-demand treatment trials for hereditary angioedema and treatment guidelines","authors":"Danny M. Cohn MD, PhD , Daniel F. Soteres MD, MPH , Timothy J. Craig DO , William R. Lumry MD , Markus Magerl MD , Marc A. Riedl MD , Paul K. Audhya MD, MBA , Marcus Maurer MD , Jonathan A. Bernstein MD","doi":"10.1016/j.jaci.2024.12.1079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Over the past 2 decades, guidelines for the on-demand treatment of hereditary angioedema attacks have undergone significant evolution. Early treatment guidelines, such as the Canadian 2003 International Consensus Algorithm, often gated on-demand treatment by attack location and/or severity. Pivotal trials for on-demand injectable treatments (plasma-derived C1 esterase inhibitor, icatibant, ecallantide [United States only], and recombinant human C1 esterase inhibitor), which were approved in the United States and the European Union between 2008 and 2014, were designed accordingly. Subsequent <em>post hoc</em> analyses of clinical trial data alongside real-world evidence led to a paradigm shift. In 2013, the US Hereditary Angioedema Association guidelines recommended that all attacks, irrespective of location or severity, be considered for treatment as early as possible after onset to minimize morbidity and mortality. This approach remains the cornerstone of current treatment guidelines and has shaped the design of recent clinical trials, such as those for the investigational agents, oral plasma kallikrein inhibitor sebetralstat and oral bradykinin B2 receptor antagonist deucrictibant. This narrative review discusses the evolution of on-demand treatment guidelines, the clinical trial and real-world data that prompted significant revisions, and the subsequent changes to trial designs introduced to facilitate guideline compliance.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":14936,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology","volume":"155 3","pages":"Pages 726-739"},"PeriodicalIF":11.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0091674924024126","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Over the past 2 decades, guidelines for the on-demand treatment of hereditary angioedema attacks have undergone significant evolution. Early treatment guidelines, such as the Canadian 2003 International Consensus Algorithm, often gated on-demand treatment by attack location and/or severity. Pivotal trials for on-demand injectable treatments (plasma-derived C1 esterase inhibitor, icatibant, ecallantide [United States only], and recombinant human C1 esterase inhibitor), which were approved in the United States and the European Union between 2008 and 2014, were designed accordingly. Subsequent post hoc analyses of clinical trial data alongside real-world evidence led to a paradigm shift. In 2013, the US Hereditary Angioedema Association guidelines recommended that all attacks, irrespective of location or severity, be considered for treatment as early as possible after onset to minimize morbidity and mortality. This approach remains the cornerstone of current treatment guidelines and has shaped the design of recent clinical trials, such as those for the investigational agents, oral plasma kallikrein inhibitor sebetralstat and oral bradykinin B2 receptor antagonist deucrictibant. This narrative review discusses the evolution of on-demand treatment guidelines, the clinical trial and real-world data that prompted significant revisions, and the subsequent changes to trial designs introduced to facilitate guideline compliance.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology is a prestigious publication that features groundbreaking research in the fields of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology. This influential journal publishes high-impact research papers that explore various topics, including asthma, food allergy, allergic rhinitis, atopic dermatitis, primary immune deficiencies, occupational and environmental allergy, and other allergic and immunologic diseases. The articles not only report on clinical trials and mechanistic studies but also provide insights into novel therapies, underlying mechanisms, and important discoveries that contribute to our understanding of these diseases. By sharing this valuable information, the journal aims to enhance the diagnosis and management of patients in the future.