Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology-In Practice最新文献

A comprehensive definition of health includes the assessment of the patient's experience of a disease and its treatment. These patient experiences are best captured by standardized patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments. A PRO is reported directly by the patient (or caregiver) and provides the patient's perspective into how a disease and its treatment impacts their lives. PRO instruments are typically standardized, validated questionnaires with items that are scaled and can be combined to represent an underlying health-related construct such as physical, social and role functioning, psychological well-being, symptoms, pain, and quality of life. Over the past few decades PROs have become increasingly used in clinical trials as endpoints to better understand treatment benefits from the patient's perspective and in clinical practice to identify unmet needs of patients, health risk surveillance, and monitor outcomes of care. In this paper, we describe the process for developing standardized PRO instruments, from conceptual model development through instrument validation.

Understanding the risk factors leading to severe systemic sting reactions (SSR) is crucial for initiating venom immunotherapy (VIT) and for educating affected individuals and their families. Some of these risk factors are well-established, some are no longer considered risk factors, and some remain controversial. Well-established risk factors for severe SSR include clonal mast cell disease, high baseline serum tryptase, and advanced age. The absence of skin symptoms and the rapid onset of symptoms are indicators of severe SSR. Recent publications indicate that antihypertensive treatment and stings in the head and neck area are not risk factors for severe SSR. VIT is the only available treatment that can potentially prevent further anaphylactic reactions. Although rare and generally manageable, individuals undergoing VIT may experience systemic adverse events (sAE). More sAE are expected in patients undergoing bee VIT compared to vespid VIT. The role of elevated baseline serum tryptase as a risk factor for sAE remains debated, but if it is a factor, the risk is increased by only about 1.5-fold. Rapid up-dosing protocols, depending on the specific regimen, can also be associated with more sAE. Severe initial SSR, antihypertensive medication, high skin test reactivity, and high specific IgE levels are not risk factors for sAE.

Background: There is a scarcity of prospective studies investigating the relative roles of skin prick and intradermal testing, serum-specific Immunoglobulin E, and extended oral challenges in diagnosing children with reported beta-lactam allergies.

Objective: To determine the sensitivity and specificity of skin testing and serum-specific Immunoglobulin E in children with beta-lactam allergies, with immediate and non-immediate historic reactions.

Methods: Four hundred children with parent-reported beta-lactam allergies were recruited into an open-label prospective study. Detailed allergy histories were collected. Those with medically observed and documented histories of anaphylaxis, requiring epinephrine, or SCARs were excluded. In total, 380 children underwent all testing modalities and a direct provocation test. Each child was followed up for a minimum of three years.

Results: True allergy in children was uncommon, 8·3% reacted to the direct provocation challenge or the 5-day extended oral provocation challenge. Children reporting cephalosporin allergy or a reaction within one year were more likely to react to direct provocation testing. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of skin testing was 12·5%, 98·8% and 20·0% for direct challenge outcomes, 4·76%, 99·0% and 25·0% for extended challenge outcomes, and 6·9%, 99·0% and 40·0% for both challenges combined. Follow-up investigations revealed that 5·7% of children had a mild repeat reaction and 2·7% continued to avoid the culprit despite successful delabeling. The relabeling rate for children readmitted to hospital was 15% with the relabeing being unfounded.

Conclusion: Genuine beta-lactam allergies were rare, with over 90% of children effectively delabeled. Skin and serum-specific Immunoglobulin E testing did not aid the diagnosis of beta-lactam antibiotic allergy in children, regardless of medical history. Extended oral challenges proved valuable in confirming allergies and boosted parental confidence.

Reducing the burden of disease for patients and families requires being able to measure health status changes related to disease severity, control, and response to treatment over time. Patient-reported outcomes are patient perceptions of their health status. Such perceptions are critical to decision making. Some patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are extensive and often intended to be used only for detailed research assessments. Many PROMs, however, form critical components of valid, reliable, and responsive assessments in clinical research and routine clinical practice. The smallest score change in a PROM that would lead to different decision making by patients is called the minimally important difference. Using PROMs may also offer advantages over general questions or unvalidated tools. With the innovation of technology, the ability to chronicle disease symptoms using communication technology (mobile phone applications) has become increasingly available. Collection of real-world data in this capacity will be very useful for identifying more precise phenotypes/endotypes necessary for investigation of tailored therapies for chronic spontaneous and inducible urticaria, angioedema, and atopic dermatitis. Here, we provide an overview of PROMs that have been developed for the assessment of disease severity, control, and quality of life and that have been validated for the use of adults and children with these skin disorders.

Background: After introducing IL-1/IL-6 inhibitors, some patients with Still and Still-like disease developed unusual, often fatal, pulmonary disease. This complication was associated with scoring as DReSS (drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms) implicating these inhibitors, although DReSS can be difficult to recognize in the setting of systemic inflammatory disease.

Objective: To facilitate recognition of IL-1/IL-6 inhibitor-DReSS in systemic inflammatory illnesses (Still/Still-like) by looking at timing and reaction-associated features. We evaluated outcomes of stopping or not stopping IL-1/IL-6 inhibitors after DReSS reaction began.

Methods: In an international study collaborating primarily with pediatric specialists, we characterized features of 89 drug-reaction cases versus 773 drug-exposed controls and compared outcomes of 52 cases stopping IL-1/IL-6 inhibitors with 37 cases not stopping these drugs.

Results: Before the reaction began, drug-reaction cases and controls were clinically comparable, except for younger disease-onset age for reaction cases with preexisting cardiothoracic comorbidities. After the reaction began, increased rates of pulmonary complications and macrophage activation syndrome differentiated drug-reaction cases from drug-tolerant controls (P = 4.7 × 10^-35 and P = 1.1 × 10^-24, respectively). The initial DReSS feature was typically reported 2 to 8 weeks after initiating IL-1/IL-6 inhibition. In drug-reaction cases stopping versus not stopping IL-1/IL-6-inhibitor treatment, reaction-related features were indistinguishable, including pulmonary complication rates (75% [39 of 52] vs 76% [28 of 37]). Those stopping subsequently required fewer medications for treatment of systemic inflammation, had decreased rates of macrophage activation syndrome, and improved survival (P = .005, multivariate regression). Resolution of pulmonary complications occurred in 67% (26 of 39) of drug-reaction cases who stopped and in none who continued inhibitors.

Conclusions: In systemic inflammatory illnesses, recognition of IL-1/IL-6-inhibitor-associated reactions followed by avoidance of IL-1/IL-6 inhibitors significantly improved outcomes.