Allergy Asthma and Clinical Immunology最新文献

Angioedema can occur in the absence of urticaria and can be broadly divided into three main categories: mast cell-mediated (e.g., histamine), non-mast-cell-mediated (bradykinin-induced) and idiopathic angioedema. Non-mast-cell-mediated angioedema is largely driven by bradykinin. Bradykinin-induced angioedema can be hereditary, acquired or drug-induced, such as with angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. Although bradykinin-mediated angioedema can be self-limited, it can cause significant morbidity and laryngeal involvement may lead to fatal asphyxiation. The mainstays of management for angioedema are: (1) to avoid specific triggers (if possible and where known) and (2) treatment with medication (if indicated). For hereditary angioedema (HAE), there are specifically licensed treatments that can be used for the management of attacks, or for prophylaxis in order to prevent attacks. In this article, the authors will review the causes, diagnosis and management of angioedema.

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common, chronic skin disorder that can significantly impact the quality of life (QoL) of affected individuals as well as their families. Although the pathogenesis of the disorder is not yet completely understood, it appears to result from the complex interplay between defects in skin barrier function, environmental and infectious agents, and immune dysregulation. There are no diagnostic tests for AD; therefore, the diagnosis is based on specific clinical criteria that take into account the patient's history and clinical manifestations. Successful management of the disorder requires a multifaceted approach that involves education, optimal skin care practices, anti-inflammatory treatment with topical corticosteroids, topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCIs) and/or phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE-4) inhibitors, the management of pruritus, and the treatment of skin infections. Systemic immunosuppressive agents may also be used, but are generally reserved for severe flare-ups or more difficult-to-control disease. Newer systemic agents, such as Janus Kinase (JAK) inhibitors and biologics, have a more favourable safety and efficacy profile than the older, traditional systemic immunosuppressives. Topical corticosteroids are the first-line pharmacologic treatments for AD, and evidence suggests that these agents may also be beneficial for the prophylaxis of disease flare-ups. Although the prognosis for patients with AD is generally favourable, those patients with severe, widespread disease and concomitant atopic conditions, such as asthma and allergic rhinitis, are likely to experience poorer outcomes. Newer systemic agents have been approved which are greatly improving the QoL of these patients.

Anaphylaxis is an acute, potentially fatal systemic hypersensitivity reaction with varied mechanisms and clinical presentations. Although prompt recognition and treatment of anaphylaxis are imperative, both patients and healthcare professionals often fail to recognize and diagnose its early signs. Clinical manifestations vary widely, however, the most common signs are cutaneous symptoms, including urticaria and angioedema. Immediate intramuscular administration of epinephrine into the anterolateral thigh is first-line therapy, and is always safe even if the diagnosis is uncertain. The mainstays of long-term management include specialist assessment, allergen avoidance measures, and the provision of an epinephrine auto-injector with an individualized anaphylaxis emergency plan. This article provides an overview of the causes, clinical features, diagnosis, and acute as well as long-term management of anaphylaxis.

Urticaria (hives) is a common disorder that may be associated with angioedema (swelling that occurs beneath the skin). It is generally classified as acute or chronic, and chronic urticaria is further classified as spontaneous or inducible Second-generation, non-sedating histamine type 1 (H1)-receptor antihistamines represent the mainstay of therapy for both acute and chronic urticaria. Second-line treatment for uncontrolled chronic urticaria includes omalizumab (a monoclonal anti-immunoglobulin E [IgE] antibody). In this article, we review the causes, diagnosis and management of urticaria (with or without angioedema).

This position statement addresses the critical concerns and recommended practices surrounding the use of panel food testing for diagnosing food allergies. Food allergies are a significant public health concern, and the misdiagnosis of food allergies remains a prevalent concern, made worse by the ongoing use of panel food testing. The practice of screening patients for multiple food allergens, regardless of clinical relevance, is commonly referred to as "panel food testing." Fundamentally, a panel food test is not simply a single test; a panel food test is a series of several distinct tests for multiple foods, each with its own variable predictive value. These tests have not been adequately validated as screening tests and carry a considerable false positive rate. The resulting false diagnoses lead to unnecessary dietary restrictions, increased healthcare costs, and significant psychosocial distress for patients and their families.

Background: Asthma is a chronic, heterogeneous disease characterized by airway inflammation. Asthma exacerbations significantly increase the disease burden, necessitating new therapeutic approaches. Emerging evidence suggests probiotics, through the gut-lung axis, may benefit asthma management by modulating immune responses and reducing inflammation.

Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis adhered to PRISMA guidelines and was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023480098). A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase was conducted up to March 2024. Inclusion criteria encompassed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating probiotic interventions in asthma patients. Statistical analysis was done using RevMan 5.3, with odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) calculated, and heterogeneity assessed using I² statistics.

Results: Twelve RCTs, comprising 1401 participants, met the inclusion criteria. The probiotic strains investigated included various Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium species. Meta-analysis revealed significant improvements in asthma control test scores (OR 1.18, 95% CI: 1.18-3.64, p = 0.0001) following probiotic supplementation. Probiotics also improved fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) in one study, but pooled FeNO and eosinophil data were not statistically significant (p = 0.46 and p = 0.29, respectively). One study observed fewer asthma exacerbations in the probiotic group (24/212) compared to placebo (67/210), with no difference in exacerbation duration.

Conclusion: Probiotic supplementation may be beneficial in improving asthma symptom control with no significant impact on lung function indices or eosinophil levels. Probiotics can be a potential adjunctive therapy in asthma management, particularly for asthma symptom control.

Background and methods: The Zéro allergie research clinic (Saguenay, Canada) is a clinical and research initiative in oral immunotherapy (OIT) for managing IgE-mediated food allergy (FA). A total of 183 children with FA and 27 non-allergic siblings were recruited to date in the Zéro allergie cohort (ZAC) to better understand biological mechanisms underlying FA and OIT prognosis. The primary aims are to (a) better understand the genetic, epigenetic, transcriptomic, metabolomic, and microbial diversity associated with FA; (b) establish the multi-omics and microbial diversity profiles of children following OIT to identify predictive prognosis biomarkers, (c) make OIT more accessible to the population of the Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean region, and (d) build a biobank of data and biological material.

Results: The ZAC constitutes a unique and rich biobank of biological samples (blood, buccal swabs, microbiota samples [intestinal, buccal, nasal, and cutaneous]) combined with clinical data and more than 75 phenotypic characteristics.

Conclusions: This represents an innovative interdisciplinary initiative by researchers, allergists, and paediatricians to make FA care accessible to a greater number of children with IgE-mediated FA. Ultimately, it will contribute to provide more accessible treatment options with greater chances of success through a better understanding of the biological nature of FA and OIT.

Background: Rasburicase, a recombinant urate oxidase enzyme, has potent efficacy in controlling uric acid and is widely used to prevent tumor lysis syndrome in high-risk patients owing to its low toxicity profile. However, it has been associated with a risk of anaphylaxis, especially on re-exposure, owing to its immunogenic potential.

Case presentation: A 71-year-old Japanese female diagnosed with diffuse large B cell lymphoma with a large tumor burden experienced anaphylactic shock leading to death upon initial administration of rasburicase. The pre-and postmortem examination revealed that the cause of death was a cascade of events starting with anaphylaxis-induced distributive shock leading to obstructive shock due to the collapse of the heart, which was compressed by the post-mediastinal tumor. This was further compounded by massive bleeding from the tumor and tension hemothorax, resulting in circulatory collapse.

Conclusions: Although extremely rare, rasburicase can cause fatal anaphylaxis, even on first exposure.

Background: Peanut allergy is a common food allergy with potentially life-threatening implications. Early oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy (P-EOIT) has been shown to be effective and safe in research and specialty clinic settings. Provision of P-EOIT in primary care would make it available to more patients. We sought to assess the safety of P-EOIT in a primary care setting by documenting the rates of peanut-related allergic reactions leading to emergency department (ED) visits and use of epinephrine. We also examined adherence by assessing the percentage of patients reaching maintenance phase and continuing ingestion after one year of P-EOIT.

Methods: This retrospective study included all patients aged less than 36 months who started P-EOIT at a primary care allergy clinic in New Brunswick, Canada, from 2016 to 2020. The population included patients who (1) had a history of an allergic reaction to peanuts with a positive skin prick test or positive peanut specific IgE level (ps-IgE) or (2) no history of ingestion and a baseline ps-IgE ≥5 kU/L. Patients had biweekly clinic visits with graded increases in peanut protein up to a maintenance dose of 300 mg of peanut protein daily. A blinded retrospective review of paper charts and electronic medical records was conducted along with phone interviews regarding ED visits and epinephrine use.

Results: All 69 consented patients reached maintenance dose over a median of 29 weeks, and 66 patients (95.7%) were still regularly consuming peanut protein after 1 year of maintenance. One patient had a peanut ingestion-related ED visit requiring epinephrine during the escalation phase of peanut protein dosing (1.4%). During the first year of maintenance phase, no patients had peanut ingestion-related ED visits nor required epinephrine.

Conclusion: Early oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy in a primary care setting appears to be safe and our findings suggest that it does not lead to an increased burden of emergency department visits. Our population had high adherence rates, with the majority achieving maintenance dose and staying on this dose for one year.

Background: Patients with asthma with an eosinophilic phenotype may be eligible for additional treatment options to improve disease control; however, the prevalence and frequency of eosinophil testing is unknown. This study assessed blood eosinophil count testing prevalence in patients with asthma by exacerbation frequency and healthcare provider (HCP) type.

Methods: This was a retrospective, longitudinal, real-world study (GSK ID: 214470) utilizing the Merative Explorys^® Universe electronic health records database. Eligible patients had ≥ 2 asthma diagnostic codes (January 2016-December 2018) (Index date: first asthma diagnosis). Outcomes included patient demographics and clinical characteristics (12 months pre-index [baseline]), and prevalence of blood eosinophil count testing, stratified by exacerbation frequency (infrequent exacerbations [< 2]) or frequent exacerbations [≥ 2] or primary HCP (Allergist/Pulmonologist, a primary care physician [PCP] or other HCP) during the 12 months post-index (follow-up).

Results: Of 400,254 patients included (mean age: 51.2 years; 70.8% female), the most common provider type at baseline was a PCP (76.8%). A higher proportion of patients with frequent exacerbations had blood eosinophil count tests at baseline (55.4-69.5%) and follow-up (67.9-75.1%), compared with patients with infrequent exacerbations (55.5-63.7%, 62.4-67.3%). Significantly more patients in the Allergist/Pulmonologist subgroup had ≥ 1 blood eosinophil count test result compared with patients in the PCP subgroup at both baseline (59.9% vs. 50.7%; p < 0.001) and follow-up (59.0% vs. 56.2%; p < 0.001). In the total population, the mean (SD) number of tests ordered was 3.4 (5.3) and 4.1 (6.4) during the baseline and follow-up periods, respectively. A greater mean number of tests were ordered for patients with frequent exacerbations, most apparently in the Allergist/Pulmonologist subgroup during baseline and follow-up (7.4 vs. 4.9). For patients with frequent exacerbations and blood eosinophil count test results, the mean (SD) number of tests ranged from 3.1 (4.6) to 5.8 (8.3) at baseline and 5.1 (8.5) to 7.4 (10.6) during follow-up.

Conclusions: The prevalence of blood eosinophil count testing in patients with asthma remains suboptimal. Routine blood eosinophil count testing should be considered by HCPs for patients with asthma to increase identification of the eosinophilic asthma phenotype, which may inform the decision to advance to targeted biologic therapy.