Bilastine safety in drivers who need antihistamines: new evidence from high-speed simulator driving test on allergic patients.

OBJECTIVE: Bilastine is a highly selective, non-sedating antihistamine, indicated for the symptomatic treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and urticaria. Available data suggest that bilastine interferes neither with driving ability nor with flying-related performance. However, no data are available on the effect of bilastine on the driving ability in extreme conditions. Here we analyzed the effect of 7 days treatment with 20 mg bilastine in patients with allergic rhinitis and/or chronic urticaria, on psychophysical performance assessed by the Formula One (F1) high-speed simulator-driving test. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study is a phase IV, interventional, prospective, mono-centric, single arm, open-label trial. Eighteen outpatients affected by allergic rhinitis and/or chronic urticaria, able to perform a preliminary driving test on F1 simulator were considered (V-1). First, the patients had a screening visit to assess their eligibility (V0). Visit 1 (V1), at the end of placebo before bilastine treatment and Visit 2 (V2), at the end of bilastine treatment. The primary variable parameter was the ability to maintain the vehicle in a central position at different speeds (50, 150, and 250 km/h). RESULTS: Bilastine had a good safety profile and was well tolerated in terms of adverse events, laboratory parameters and vital signs. Bilastine did not have any negative effect on the ability to maintain the requested path, a constant speed as well as on attention and reactivity levels, even in extreme driving conditions. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first done in patients with allergic rhinitis and/or chronic urticaria using a F1-high speed simulator-driving test evaluating subjects' performance under bilastine treatment.

Evaluation of a rapid and sensitive RT-qPCR assay for the detection of Ebola Virus.

BACKGROUND: The 2013-2016 Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreak showed a lack of diagnostic point-of-care methods. Currently, EBOV diagnosis relies on quantitative reverse-transcription-PCR (RT- qPCR), highly specific and sensitive, but requiring skilled personnel and well-equipped laboratories. In field settings, these factors and others, such as samples' time of collection and transportation, determine a prolonged turnaround-time to final results. In outbreak scenarios, a rapid and transportable method could eliminate issues of cohorting suspected and actual EVD patients for lack of diagnostic certainty. The aim of this study was the field evaluation of the new fast, easy-to-use and reliable RT-qPCR assay and platform for EBOV detection, developed in the framework of the EbolaMoDRAD project by CLONIT S.r.l. and STMicroelectronics S.r.l. STUDY DESIGN: We evaluated its performance during the outbreak and in further studies in the EVD laboratory at the Princess Christian Maternity Hospital (PCMH) in Freetown (Sierra Leone) run by Emergency NGO and the Italian National Institute for Infectious Diseases (INMI). The assay was tested on residual aliquots of clinical specimens from EBOV-positive or -negative patients (n=116, EVD prevalence 37%). RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Overall, the test was very easy-to-use and the instrument was robust and reliable in field-settings. The sensitivity of the assay was 100% and the specificity was 98.63% (95%CI: 96.34-100.92%). The positive and negative predictive values were 97.73 (95%CI:94.77-100.68%) and 100%, respectively. The high sensitivity and specificity of this new assay indicate that it is promising for laboratory diagnosis, especially in resource-limited settings.

EBOLA Ag K-SeT rapid test: field evaluation in Sierra Leone.

OBJECTIVES: Efficient interruption of Ebola virus disease (EVD) transmission chains critically depends on reliable and fast laboratory diagnosis. We evaluated the performance of the EBOLA Virus Antigen Detection K-SeT (EBOLA Ag K-SeT), a new rapid diagnostic antigen test in field settings. METHODS: The study was conducted in a field laboratory located in Freetown (Sierra Leone) by the Italian National Institute for Infectious Diseases 'L. Spallanzani' and the EMERGENCY Onlus NGO. The EBOLA Ag K-SeT was tested on 210 residual plasma samples (EVD prevalence 50%) from patients hospitalized at the EMERGENCY Ebola treatment center in Goderich (Freetown), comparing the results with quantitative real-time PCR. RESULTS: Overall, the sensitivity of EBOLA Ag K-SeT was 88.6% (95% confidence interval (CI), 82.5-94.7), and the corresponding specificity was 98.1% (95% CI, 95.5-100.7). The positive and negative predictive values were 97.9% (95% CI, 95.0-100.8) and 89.6% (95% CI, 84-95.2), respectively. The sensitivity strongly increased up to 98.7% (95% CI, 96.1-101.2) for those samples with high virus load (≥6.2 log RNA copies/mL). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that EBOLA Ag K-SeT could represent a new effective diagnostic tool for EVD, meeting a need for resource-poor settings and rapid diagnosis for individuals with suspected EVD.