Coronavirus disease 2019 in patients with inborn errors of immunity: An international study.

BACKGROUND: There is uncertainty about the impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in individuals with rare inborn errors of immunity (IEI), a population at risk of developing severe coronavirus disease 2019. This is relevant not only for these patients but also for the general population, because studies of IEIs can unveil key requirements for host defense. OBJECTIVE: We sought to describe the presentation, manifestations, and outcome of SARS-CoV-2 infection in IEI to inform physicians and enhance understanding of host defense against SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: An invitation to participate in a retrospective study was distributed globally to scientific, medical, and patient societies involved in the care and advocacy for patients with IEI. RESULTS: We gathered information on 94 patients with IEI with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Their median age was 25 to 34 years. Fifty-three patients (56%) suffered from primary antibody deficiency, 9 (9.6%) had immune dysregulation syndrome, 6 (6.4%) a phagocyte defect, 7 (7.4%) an autoinflammatory disorder, 14 (15%) a combined immunodeficiency, 3 (3%) an innate immune defect, and 2 (2%) bone marrow failure. Ten were asymptomatic, 25 were treated as outpatients, 28 required admission without intensive care or ventilation, 13 required noninvasive ventilation or oxygen administration, 18 were admitted to intensive care units, 12 required invasive ventilation, and 3 required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Nine patients (7 adults and 2 children) died. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that (1) more than 30% of patients with IEI had mild coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and (2) risk factors predisposing to severe disease/mortality in the general population also seemed to affect patients with IEI, including more younger patients. Further studies will identify pathways that are associated with increased risk of severe disease and are nonredundant or redundant for protection against SARS-CoV-2.

Encephalomyelitis with Retinopathy in Common Variable Immunodeficiency (CVID).

Common variable immunodeficiency is the most common primary immunodeficiency and rarely causes neurological manifestations since the introduction of IVIg, but here, the authors present a case of a 31-year-old Afro-Caribbean man who after short non-adherence to his immunoglobulins, develops encephalomyelitis with retinopathy. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first case presented with retinal photographs, OCT, CT, MRI and brain biopsies.

British Lung Foundation/United Kingdom Primary Immunodeficiency Network Consensus Statement on the Definition, Diagnosis, and Management of Granulomatous-Lymphocytic Interstitial Lung Disease in Common Variable Immunodeficiency Disorders.

A proportion of people living with common variable immunodeficiency disorders develop granulomatous-lymphocytic interstitial lung disease (GLILD). We aimed to develop a consensus statement on the definition, diagnosis, and management of GLILD. All UK specialist centers were contacted and relevant physicians were invited to take part in a 3-round online Delphi process. Responses were graded as Strongly Agree, Tend to Agree, Neither Agree nor Disagree, Tend to Disagree, and Strongly Disagree, scored +1, +0.5, 0, -0.5, and -1, respectively. Agreement was defined as greater than or equal to 80% consensus. Scores are reported as mean ± SD. There was 100% agreement (score, 0.92 ± 0.19) for the following definition: "GLILD is a distinct clinico-radio-pathological ILD occurring in patients with [common variable immunodeficiency disorders], associated with a lymphocytic infiltrate and/or granuloma in the lung, and in whom other conditions have been considered and where possible excluded." There was consensus that the workup of suspected GLILD requires chest computed tomography (CT) (0.98 ± 0.01), lung function tests (eg, gas transfer, 0.94 ± 0.17), bronchoscopy to exclude infection (0.63 ± 0.50), and lung biopsy (0.58 ± 0.40). There was no consensus on whether expectant management following optimization of immunoglobulin therapy was acceptable: 67% agreed, 25% disagreed, score 0.38 ± 0.59; 90% agreed that when treatment was required, first-line treatment should be with corticosteroids alone (score, 0.55 ± 0.51).

Variably severe systemic allergic reactions after consuming foods with unlabelled lupin flour: a case series.

INTRODUCTION: Lupin allergy remains a significant cause of food-induced allergic reactivity and anaphylaxis. Previous work suggests a strong association with legume allergy and peanut allergy in particular. Both doctors and the public have little awareness of lupin as an allergen. CASE PRESENTATION: Case 1 was a 41-year-old Caucasian woman without previous atopy who developed facial swelling, widespread urticaria with asthma and hypotension within minutes of eating a quiche. Her lupin allergy was confirmed by both blood and skin tests. Her lupin sensitivity was so severe that even the miniscule amount of lupin allergen in the skin testing reagent produced a mild reaction.Case 2 was a 42-year-old mildly atopic Caucasian woman with three episodes of worsening urticaria and asthma symptoms over 6 years occurring after the consumption of foods containing lupin flour. Blood and skin tests were positive for lupin allergy.Case 3 was a 38-year-old Caucasian woman with known oral allergy syndrome who had two reactions associated with urticaria and vomiting after consuming foods containing lupin flour. Skin testing confirmed significant responses to a lupin flour extract and to one of the foods inducing her reaction.Case 4 was a 54-year-old mildly atopic Caucasian woman with a 7 year history of three to four episodes each year of unpredictable oral tingling followed by urticaria after consuming a variety of foods. The most recent episode had been associated with vomiting. She had developed oral tingling with lentil and chickpeas over the previous year. Skin and blood tests confirmed lupin allergy with associated sensitivity to several legumes. CONCLUSIONS: Lupin allergy can occur for the first time in adults without previous atopy or legume sensitivity. Although asymptomatic sensitisation is frequent, clinical reactivity can vary in severity from severe anaphylaxis to urticaria and vomiting. Lupin allergy may be confirmed by skin and specific immunoglobulin E estimation. Even skin testing can cause symptoms in some highly sensitive individuals. The diagnosis of lupin allergy in adults may be difficult because it is frequently included as an undeclared ingredient. Better food labelling and medical awareness of lupin as a cause of serious allergic reactions is suggested.