Allergy and asthma proceedings最新文献

Background: The main treatment of common variable immunodeficiency (CVID) is to maintain immunoglobulin G (IgG) levels within the target range. However, trough IgG levels differ among patients with similar body mass index (BMI) and those receiving the same dose of immunoglobulin replacement therapy (IGRT). A crucial factor that underlies these differences is the presence of extensive bronchiectasis, which is associated with the immunoglobulin salvage pathway. Objective: We compared trough IgG levels in patients with CVID and with and in those without bronchiectasis who had received the same dose of IGRT for 2 years to determine the association of IgG level with infection frequency. Method: This retrospective cohort study included 61 patients with CVID, of whom 21 had bronchiectasis. We reviewed the electronic records for demographic variables, baseline immunoglobulin levels, mean trough IgG levels over 2 years, efficacy levels (trough IgG level - baseline IgG level), the time interval from treatment initiation to achieving the target trough IgG level (700 mg/dL), and the number of infections. Results: The median age of the patients was 39 years (IQR, 27-51), and 29 were women (47.5%). There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of age, age at diagnosis, delay in diagnosis, sex, BMI, IGRT type (subcutaneous or intravenous), and baseline immunoglobulin levels. Trough IgG and efficacy levels were lower (P < 0.001 and P = 0.016, respectively), the time required to achieve the target IgG level was longer in patients with bronchiectasis than in those without bronchiectasis, and this time interval was significantly associated with the infection frequency. Trough IgG and albumin levels were correlated (p = 0.007), with minor differences between the groups (p = 0.04). Conclusion: Bronchiectasis was significantly associated with a longer time to achieve the target IgG levels. These long-term differences between the patients with and those without bronchiectasis have significant clinical implications.

Introduction: Hymenoptera venom immunotherapy (VIT) is the only therapy that protects patients with Hymenoptera venom allergy by preventing systemic reactions after a new sting. Various extracts for VIT are available and used. VIT administration consists of an induction phase and a maintenance phase. Depot preparations of Hymenoptera VIT extracts are typically used for cluster and conventional protocols, and the maintenance phase. Many patients with Hymenoptera allergy need to achieve tolerance quickly because of the high risk of re-sting and possible anaphylaxis. Objective: Our study aimed to show the safety and efficacy of an accelerated regimen with depot preparations on aluminum hydroxide by using relatively high starting doses in a heterogeneous group of patients. Methods: The research focused on a group of patients with a history of severe systemic reactions to Hymenoptera stings, with the necessity of swift immunization due to high occupational risks. Aluminum hydroxide depot extracts either of Vepula species or Apis mellifera extracts were used. Results: The induction protocol was started with the highest concentration of depot venom extract of 100,000 standard quality unit and was well tolerated by 19 of 20 patients. Onne patient presented with a mild systemic reaction during the accelerated induction schedule, which was promptly treated with intravenous steroids and intramuscular H1 antihistamine; when switched to a conventional induction protocol, he had a similar reaction but finally reached maintenance with an H1-antagonist premedication. Conclusion: If validated, the accelerated induction protocol by using depot aluminum adsorbed extracts with the highest concentration of venom from the beginning could offer a streamlined and accessible treatment modality for patients diagnosed with anaphylaxis from bee and wasp venoms in need of rapid desensitization.

Background: β-Lactam antibiotics are widely used with increased utilization in hospitalized patients. Of this population, as high as 10-20% report an allergy to β-lactam antibiotics but <5% are at risk of developing clinically significant immunoglobulin E- or T-lymphocyte-mediated reactions. Most of the time, these reported allergies are present during an illness with no previous inquiry of their validity, which makes investigation and possible removal of this allergy label a challenge. Methods: We report a 16-year-old boy who presented with 1 week of night sweats, chills, headaches, and fatigue, followed by 1 day of fever and right knee swelling and who was diagnosed with septic bursitis. Due to concern of a penicillin allergy label, the patient was started on a cefepime infusion. Five minutes into the infusion, the patient reported puffy eyes and itchy throat, followed by a witnessed cascading flat nonpruritic erythematous rash from head to shoulders. This rash went away in 3 minutes after stopping the infusion and the patient being given 50 mg of intravenous diphenhydramine and 10 mg of oral dexamethasone. He was subsequently diagnosed with a cefepime allergy. Results: Allergy/immunology was the speciality consulted, and, by using a screening questionnaire, the patient's reported penicillin allergy was determined to be low risk. Subsequent 1-step oral challenge was the key to providing the patient with the necessary antibiotic course to resolve his infection. Conclusion: Multiple reported antibiotic allergies lead to poor antibiotic stewardship that causes impactful health and financial burden on the patient and health-care system. It is thus important to have an evidence-based systematic approach to de-label penicillin antibiotic allergy labels to reduce these potential harms.

Background: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is traditionally subdivided into seasonal AR (SAR) and perennial AR (PAR) according to the type of allergen and the occurrence of symptoms during the year. There are currently no reports on the comparison of trait profiles for SAR and PAR during the allergen exposure. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to analyze the clinical characteristics of SAR and PAR during respective allergen exposure periods to provide valuable information for the development of treatment strategies. Methods: This study was performed between August 1, 2021, and January 31, 2022, in the Department of Allergy, Beijing Tongren Hospital. We continuously included diagnosed SAR and PAR outpatients who volunteered to participate in the survey. A questionnaire with regard to medical history, severity of symptoms, and diagnosis and treatment status was collected. Results: A total of 296 patients with SAR and 448 with PAR were finally recruited. Patients with SAR had more severe rhinorrhea compared with patients with PAR (p < 0.001), whereas there was no statistically significant difference in the severity of itching, sneezing, and congestion between the two entities (p ≥ 0.05). Both the gritty and watery eyes of patients with SAR were noticeably more severe than those of patients with PAR (P_{Total Ocular Symptom Score} [P_TOSS] < 0.001). AR symptom severity is mainly associated with the comorbid allergic conjunctivitis (odds ratio 1.94 [95% confidence interval, 1.21-3.09]). SAR patients and PAR patients show no statistically significant differences in terms of their frequency of visits, annual expenditure, and choice of medication treatment for AR (p > 0.05). The overall control under standard medication of both patients with PAR and those with SAR is not ideal, especially in SAR. Conclusion: The current cross-sectional study demonstrated that the patients with SAR exhibited more severe overall clinical symptoms than those with PAR, especially nasal rhinorrhea and gritty and watery eyes. Both of the two disease entities have poor control under standardized medication treatment, especially in SAR. Further multicenter longitudinal studies that involve larger and more diverse populations should be conducted to provide a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the condition.

Background: Concern of metal sensitization in pre- and postsurgical evaluation is growing, with the recent guidelines remaining the criterion standard for consideration of patch testing. Information remains scarce on surgical screening in the groups of patients who reported a history of metal sensitivity versus those with no reported history. Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the utility of patch testing in surgical candidates based on reported metal allergy history. The secondary objective was to evaluate the utility and outcomes in postsurgical patch testing. Methods: Nine hundred and thirty-one patient charts of patients with the diagnosis of "contact dermatitis" who underwent an evaluation at a single allergy clinic site between January 2013 and December 2022 were identified and reviewed as part of a retrospective chart review study. Patients were included in subgroups based on the time of patch testing and history of reported metal allergy. Results: In all, 67 patients underwent patch testing, 10 (14.9%) of whom were surgical candidates without a history of metal sensitivity, 31 (46.2%) of whom were surgical candidates with a history of metal sensitivity, and 26 (38.8%) of whom were postsurgical patients. Twenty-nine (43.3%) of patients had positive patch testing results, with only one (10%) in the presurgical group, 17 (54.8%) in the presurgical with a history of metal sensitivity, and 11 (42.3%) in the postsurgical group. Zero patients in our cohort without metal sensitivity who were undergoing the Nuss procedure had positive reactions on patch testing, whereas two of four (50%) with reported metal sensitivity who were undergoing the Nuss procedure had positive relevant metal reactions. Conclusion: Ambiguity in the utility of patch testing for surgical decision making remains, despite common utilization. Recent guidelines along with coordination of care among the surgeon, allergist, and patient remains the criterion standard of care.

Background: Asthma and allergic rhinitis are pathologically interlinked conditions. Despite skin testing (ST) being pivotal for evaluating allergic sensitization, U.S. data that date back to 1960s on ST reactivity patterns in subjects with asthma remain sparse. Objective: The purpose of this study was to elucidate seasonal, perennial ST responses, and their relationship with asthma severity, early versus late onset disease, and immunoglobulin E (IgE) levels. Methods: Five hundred patients with asthma were randomly selected from the National Jewish Health electronic medical record over a 3-year span. Demographic, clinical, and allergen ST reactivity data for a battery of seasonal and perennial allergens were procured, including total IgE levels, asthma onset, and severity, by using t-tests, χ² tests, and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), patterns of reactivity were assessed for overall, seasonal, and perennial allergens in relation to IgE levels, asthma onset, and severity. Results: Of the 500 patients, 398 were analyzed. 63.3% were women, 50.1% had adult-onset asthma, and 86.1% had rhinitis; 75.3% tested positive to one or more allergens, with men demonstrating higher overall (p = 0.039) and perennial (p = 0.035) sensitization. ST reactivity varied based on the presence of rhinitis for seasonal (p = 0.028) but not perennial (p = 0.733) allergens. Asthma severity was not significantly associated with ST reactivity (p > 0.10). ST positivity for perennial (p < 0.001) but not seasonal (p = 0.128) allergens was higher in childhood-onset asthma versus adult-onset asthma despite both groups having a large percentage of reactors. Elevated IgE levels correlated with ST reactivity (p < 0.01). Conclusion: Our study represents a unique comprehensive evaluation of ST reactivity in a U.S. asthma population, which is lacking in the literature, when factoring in asthma onset, severity, and IgE levels. Our findings underscore the importance of allergen sensitization in asthma, regardless of severity, concurrent rhinitis symptoms, or asthma onset, which challenge some of the prevailing assumptions about the relationship between allergen sensitization and asthma onset.

Background: Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are the most common obstructive diseases. Based on the similarities, we aimed to evaluate sinonasal symptoms in patients with asthma or COPD, and compare the two diseases with regard to upper-airway involvement. Methods: Patients with asthma or with COPD who were followed up at Ankara University Immunology and Allergy or Chest Diseases Departments were included in the study. The participants went through pulmonary function tests, skin-prick tests, and disease severity assessment of either disease. Nasal endoscopic evaluations of all the patients were performed in the Department of Otorhinolaryngology. Lund-Mackay scoring was performed on the computed tomography of the paranasal sinus. Chronic rinosinusitis (CRS) diagnosis was made as recent guidelines. Results: A total of 112 subjects (number of women/men: n = 67/45; median age, 49 years [The range for IQR was 22 years]) were included in the study. Fifty-five patients had asthma, 33 had COPD, and 24 were healthy controls. Nasal symptoms were more frequent in the patients with asthma (patients with asthma, n = 52 [98%]; patients with COPD, n = 17 [52%]; controls, n = 9 [38%]) (p < 0.001). The median (IQR) 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) questionnaire score was higher in the patients with asthma (33 [20-50]) than in the patients with COPD (8 [1.5-18.7]) and the control group (3.5 [0-18.7]) (p < 0.01). Patients with asthma had significantly higher prevalence rates of rhinosinusitis than did those in the COPD and the control groups (36%, 15.6%, 8.3%, respectively; p < 0.01). The SNOT-22 optimal cutoff score was calculated as ≥11 to detect the score limit for CRS prediction with the best sensitivity and specificity. Conclusion: As a result, patients with both asthma and COPD may have upper-airway symptoms. CRS, was primarily seen in the patients with asthma. Accordingly, SNOT-22 scores were higher in the patients with asthma than in those in the COPD and the control groups. A referral to the Ear Nose Throat department for further evaluation with nasal endoscopy and computed tomography of the paranasal may be required in a subgroup of patients.

Background: A diagnosis of hereditary angioedema (HAE) with normal C1 esterase inhibitor (HAE-nl-C1-INH) can be challenging and pharmacologic management is not well defined. Objective: The objective was to discuss practical considerations in the clinical management of HAE-nl-C1-INH by using illustrative clinical vignettes to highlight and/or address select challenges. Methods: This was a narrative review. Results: Symptoms of HAE-nl-C1-INH overlap with HAE types I and II; the heterogeneity of presentation and symptom burden are diagnostic challenges. A patient history, with particular attention to whether urticaria or other symptoms of mast cell mediator release are present, is important because such symptoms would strongly suggest a mast cell-mediated pathway. A family history of angioedema is informative but a lack thereof does not rule out diagnosis. Expected laboratory findings would be normal for C4, C1-INH level and function, and Complement 1q; a genetic mutational analysis may be helpful, but current assays do not include all known mutations; most cases are categorized as unknown. To align with guideline-directed treatment approaches, the following stepwise approach is suggested for suspected HAE-nl-C1-INH: (1) thoroughly investigate the possibility of response to histaminergic and/or mast cell-targeting treatments; (2) if patients with normal C4, C1-INH level and/or function fail adequate trials with histamine/mast cell-directed therapy or have a mutation that suggests bradykinin pathway involvement, follow HAE type I and II treatment guidelines. Response to medications approved for HAE types I/II provides compelling support for a high clinical suspicion of HAE-nl-C1-INH. De-labeling an HAE-nl-C1-INH diagnosis may be appropriate if the initial diagnosis was made without adequate evaluation or if new information and/or testing indicates that the patient does not actually have HAE. Conclusion: Key unmet needs in HAE-nl-C1-INH include lack of confirmatory biomarker(s) for diagnosis and lack of prospective controlled clinical studies of pharmacologic products in this patient population.