Once-Daily Crisaborole Ointment, 2%, as a Long-Term Maintenance Treatment in Patients Aged ≥ 3 Months with Mild-to-Moderate Atopic Dermatitis: A 52-Week Clinical Study.

BACKGROUND: Topical treatments for atopic dermatitis (AD) used reactively often fail to achieve lasting disease control; many of these therapies are associated with safety concerns that limit long-term use. Crisaborole ointment, 2%, is a nonsteroidal phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor for the treatment of mild-to-moderate AD that has potential as a long-term maintenance therapy. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of crisaborole once daily (QD) compared to vehicle QD as a maintenance therapy to reduce the incidence of flares in patients with AD who previously responded to crisaborole twice daily (BID). METHODS: CrisADe CONTROL was a randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled, 52-week, phase III study of patients aged ≥ 3 months with mild-to-moderate AD involving ≥ 5% treatable body surface area. Eligible patients received crisaborole BID during an open-label run-in period of up to 8 weeks. Responders were randomly assigned in the double-blind maintenance period to receive either crisaborole QD or vehicle QD. Responders were defined as patients who achieved Investigator's Static Global Assessment (ISGA) success (ISGA score of 0 [clear] or 1 [almost clear] with a ≥ 2-grade improvement) and ≥ 50% improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index total score (EASI-50) from baseline. Patients who experienced a flare (ISGA score ≥ 2) during the double-blind maintenance period switched to crisaborole BID for up to 12 weeks. During this period, patients were assessed every 4 weeks; if the flare resolved (ISGA score ≤ 1), patients resumed their assigned treatment. The primary endpoint was flare-free maintenance until onset of the first flare. Key secondary endpoints were number of flare-free days, number of flares, and maintenance of pruritus response until onset of the first flare. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was also analyzed. RESULTS: Overall, 497 patients entered the open-label run-in period with crisaborole BID, of which 270 patients were randomized into the 52-week double-blind maintenance period of the study. Of the 270 patients, 135 were randomly assigned to the crisaborole QD group and 135 were randomly assigned to the vehicle QD group. Median time of flare-free maintenance was longer for patients who received crisaborole versus vehicle (111 vs 30 days, respectively; p = 0.0034). The mean number of flare-free days was higher for patients who received crisaborole versus vehicle (234.0 vs 199.4 days, respectively; p = 0.0346). The mean number of flares was lower for patients who received crisaborole versus vehicle (0.95 vs 1.36, respectively; p = 0.0042). No clear trend was observed in maintenance of pruritus response between crisaborole- and vehicle-treated patients. Crisaborole was well tolerated, with no new or unexpected safety findings when used as maintenance treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Crisaborole QD was effective and well tolerated for long-term maintenance treatment and flare reduction in adult and pediatric patients with mild-to-moderate AD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04040192, 31 July 2019.

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is an immuno-inflammatory skin disease that can last a long time. It causes skin lesions and intense itching. Topical AD treatments used reactively often fail to control the disease over a long period of time. Many are associated with safety concerns that limit long-term use. Crisaborole ointment is a nonsteroidal treatment for the skin and is used to treat mild-to-moderate AD. Previous studies showed that using crisaborole twice daily was effective and had few side effects in patients with mild-to-moderate AD. This study evaluated how effective and safe long-term treatment with once-daily crisaborole was compared with an ointment with no drug (vehicle). The study included patients aged ≥ 3 months with mild-to-moderate AD whose AD improved after previous treatment with twice-daily crisaborole. This study was designed to investigate how much crisaborole reduced the incidence of AD flares over 52 weeks in these patients.The study included 270 patients whose AD had improved after treatment with twice-daily crisaborole. Of these patients, 135 were randomly assigned to receive crisaborole once a day and 135 to receive vehicle once a day. Patients who received crisaborole had a significantly longer time before experiencing AD flares than those who received vehicle. Crisaborole was well tolerated, and no new or unexpected side effects were found when used as a once-daily maintenance treatment for 52 weeks. These results indicate that once-daily treatment with crisaborole could be a potential long-term maintenance treatment option in children and adults with mild-to-moderate AD.

Challenges in the management of hereditary angioedema in urban and rural settings: Results of a United States survey.

BACKGROUND: Caring for patients with hereditary angioedema (HAE), especially rural patients, has challenges. OBJECTIVE: To confirm experiences of allergy and immunology health professionals in diagnosing and treating patients with HAE, including those living in rural settings. METHODS: An online survey of 2996 members of the American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology was conducted in April 13 to May 3, 2022. Eligible participants were association members (physician, fellow, or allied health professional members) currently practicing allergy or immunology, in the United States, seeing or treating at least 1 patient with HAE yearly. RESULTS: A total of 138 responders saw an average of 9 patients with HAE yearly; 12% of the patients resided in a rural area. They reported that 66% of their patients with HAE had type I, 15% type II, and 19% HAE C1nl-INH. Misdiagnosis was the top diagnostic challenge reported (82%). Inability to afford treatment was the top treatment challenge (76%). Other observations include the sentiment that patients with HAE with government insurance are at a disadvantage because it is not accepted by many specialists who treat HAE (64%) and that better payments for drugs from Medicaid and Medicare (57%) and better payments to providers from Medicaid and Medicare (49%) could better support the treatment of patients in rural settings. Responders expressed a preference for therapies administered at home (72%). Since the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, 86% of the respondents used telehealth for appointments occasionally. CONCLUSION: Our findings illustrate the challenge of diagnosing HAE, especially HAE C1nl-INH, and the economic challenges of treatment, which can be compounded for those living in rural areas. We provide a call to action for addressing several of these real challenges.

Considerations for transition from subcutaneous to oral prophylaxis in the treatment of hereditary angioedema.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare genetic disorder characterized by unpredictable localized episodes of edema, which is frequently managed with long-term prophylactic medications. Until recently, long-term prophylaxis has predominantly required regular intravenous or subcutaneous administration, however the recent approval of berotralstat (Orladeyo™) offers an orally administered prophylactic which may be associated with a lower burden of treatment compared to injectable options for some patients. CASE PRESENTATION: This report describes four participants in the APeX-S trial who transitioned from subcutaneously administered lanadelumab (Takhzyro®) to daily oral berotralstat for long-term HAE prophylaxis. Lanadelumab dosing continued after berotralstat commencement in all patients and was tapered before discontinuation in three of the four patients. No substantial increases in HAE attack rates were observed after the transition to berotralstat monotherapy. One patient experienced a treatment-related adverse event (dyspepsia), which was mild and self-resolving. CONCLUSIONS: All four patients described in this case series successfully transitioned from lanadelumab to berotralstat monotherapy for long-term prophylaxis without significant complications and without the use of a complex transition protocol. The decision to transition to berotralstat monotherapy and how the transition should be achieved was discussed between patient and physician, ensuring that the comfort and perspectives of the patients were considered during the treatment transition. This report highlights the importance of individualization of HAE management plans to address both the disease and treatment burdens of HAE, and thus to provide the best possible quality of life for each patient.

Long-term health-related quality of life in patients treated with subcutaneous C1-inhibitor replacement therapy for the prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks: findings from the COMPACT open-label extension study.

BACKGROUND: Long-term prophylaxis with subcutaneous C1-inhibitor (C1-INH[SC]; HAEGARDA, CSL Behring) in patients with hereditary angioedema (HAE) due to C1-INH deficiency (C1-INH-HAE) was evaluated in an open-label extension follow-up study to the international, double-blind, placebo-controlled COMPACT study. The current analysis evaluated patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data from 126 patients in the open-label extension study randomized to treatment with C1-INH(SC) 40 IU/kg (n = 63) or 60 IU/kg (n = 63) twice weekly for 52 weeks. HRQoL was evaluated at the beginning of the open-label study and at various time points using the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions Questionnaire (EQ-5D), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (WPAI), and the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication. The disease-specific Angioedema Quality of Life Questionnaire (AE-QoL) and HAE quality of life questionnaire (HAE-QoL) instruments were administered in a subset of patients. Statistical significance was determined by change-from-baseline 95% confidence intervals (CIs) excluding zero. No adjustment for multiplicity was done. RESULTS: Mean baseline EQ-5D scores (Health State Value, 0.90; Visual Analog Scale, 81.32) were slightly higher (better) than United States population norms (0.825, 80.0, respectively) and mean HADS anxiety (5.48) and depression (2.88) scores were within "normal" range (0-7). Yet, patients using C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg demonstrated significant improvement from baseline to end-of-study on the EQ-5D Health State Value (mean change [95% CI], 0.07 [0.01, 0.12] and Visual Analog Scale (7.45 [3.29, 11.62]). In the C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg group, there were significant improvements in the HADS anxiety scale (mean change [95% CI], - 1.23 [- 2.08, - 0.38]), HADS depression scale (- 0.95 [- 1.57, - 0.34]), and WPAI-assessed presenteeism (mean change [95% CI], - 23.33% [- 34.86, - 11.81]), work productivity loss (- 26.68% [- 39.92, - 13.44]), and activity impairment (- 16.14% [- 26.36, - 5.91]). Clinically important improvements were achieved in ≥ 25% of patients for all domains except WPAI-assessed absenteeism (which was very low at baseline). Mean AE-QoL total score by visit ranged from 13.39 to 17.89 (scale 0-100; lower scores = less impairment). Mean HAE-QoL global scores at each visit (115.7-122.3) were close to the maximum (best) possible score of 135. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term C1-INH(SC) replacement therapy in patients with C1-INH-HAE leads to significant and sustained improvements in multiple measures of HRQoL. Trial registration A Study to Evaluate the Long-term Clinical Safety and Efficacy of Subcutaneously Administered C1-esterase Inhibitor in the Prevention of Hereditary Angioedema, NCT02316353. Registered December 12, 2014, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02316353 .

Oral once-daily berotralstat for the prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Berotralstat (BCX7353) is an oral, once-daily inhibitor of plasma kallikrein in development for the prophylaxis of hereditary angioedema (HAE) attacks. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to determine the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of berotralstat in patients with HAE over a 24-week treatment period (the phase 3 APeX-2 trial). METHODS: APeX-2 was a double-blind, parallel-group study that randomized patients at 40 sites in 11 countries 1:1:1 to receive once-daily berotralstat in a dose of 110 mg or 150 mg or placebo (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT03485911). Patients aged 12 years or older with HAE due to C1 inhibitor deficiency and at least 2 investigator-confirmed HAE attacks in the first 56 days of a prospective run-in period were eligible. The primary efficacy end point was the rate of investigator-confirmed HAE attacks during the 24-week treatment period. RESULTS: A total of 121 patients were randomized; 120 of them received at least 1 dose of the study drug (n = 41, 40, and 39 in the 110-mg dose of berotralstat, 150-mg of dose berotralstat, and placebo groups, respectively). Berotralstat demonstrated a significant reduction in attack rate at both 110 mg (1.65 attacks per month; P = .024) and 150 mg (1.31 attacks per month; P < .001) relative to placebo (2.35 attacks per month). The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events that occurred more with berotralstat than with placebo were abdominal pain, vomiting, diarrhea, and back pain. No drug-related serious treatment-emergent adverse events occurred. CONCLUSION: Both the 110-mg and 150-mg doses of berotralstat reduced HAE attack rates compared with placebo and were safe and generally well tolerated. The most favorable benefit-to-risk profile was observed at a dose of 150 mg per day.

Long-term prophylaxis therapy in patients with hereditary angioedema with C1 inhibitor deficiency.

OBJECTIVE: To review the criteria for long-term prophylaxis therapy in patients with hereditary angioedema due to C1 inhibitor deficiency (C1-INH-HAE), describe how these criteria have evolved over time, and anticipate how criteria may change in the future with the availability of new C1-INH-HAE treatment options. DATA SOURCES: Treatment guidelines, consensus statements, and expert reviews. STUDY SELECTIONS: Manuscripts that described long-term prophylaxis therapy in patients with C1-INH-HAE were selected. RESULTS: Historically, patients with C1-INH-HAE were considered to be candidates for long-term prophylaxis therapy if they had at least 1 attack per month, had at least 5 days of disability per month because of C1-INH-HAE, or did not sufficiently respond to on-demand treatment. More recently, guidelines and reviews state that thresholds of number of attacks or days of disability are arbitrary and that treatment plans should be individualized to the patient's needs. Furthermore, all patients should have a comprehensive management plan that is reviewed periodically and should have at least 2 doses of on-demand treatment available. Prophylaxis therapy should be discussed as a potential treatment option for each patient; however, the decision for its use will depend on the patient's individual needs and the course of their symptoms. CONCLUSION: The criteria for long-term prophylaxis therapy in C1-INH-HAE have changed with the recognition that treatments should be individualized to the patient's needs and with the availability of new medications that have more favorable benefit-risk profiles, are easier to use, and improve patients' quality of life.

Health-Related Quality of Life with Subcutaneous C1-Inhibitor for Prevention of Attacks of Hereditary Angioedema.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema with C1-inhibitor deficiency (C1-INH-HAE) impairs health-related quality of life (HRQoL). OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess HRQoL outcomes in patients self-administering subcutaneous C1-INH (C1-INH[SC]; HAEGARDA) for routine prevention of HAE attacks. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of data from the placebo-controlled, crossover phase III COMPACT study (Clinical Studies for Optimal Management of Preventing Angioedema with Low-Volume Subcutaneous C1-Inhibitor Replacement Therapy). Ninety patients with C1-INH-HAE were randomized to 1 of 4 treatment sequences: C1-INH(SC) 40 or 60 IU/kg twice weekly for 16 weeks, preceded or followed by 16 weeks of twice weekly placebo injections. All HAE attacks were treated with open-label on-demand treatment as necessary. HRQoL assessments at week 14 (last visit) included the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions Questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (WPAI), and the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM). RESULTS: Compared with placebo (on-demand treatment alone), treatment with twice weekly C1-INH(SC) (both doses combined) was associated with better EQ-5D visual analog scale general health, less HADS anxiety, less WPAI presenteeism, work productivity loss, and activity impairment, and greater TSQM effectiveness and overall treatment satisfaction. More patients self-reported a "good/excellent" response during routine prevention with C1-INH(SC) compared with on-demand only (placebo prophylaxis) management. For each HRQoL measure, a greater proportion of patients had a clinically meaningful improvement during C1-INH(SC) treatment compared with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with frequent HAE attacks, a treatment strategy of routine prevention with self-administered twice weekly C1-INH(SC) had a greater impact on improving multiple HAE-related HRQoL impairments, most notably anxiety and work productivity, compared with on-demand treatment alone (placebo prophylaxis).

Prevention of Hereditary Angioedema Attacks with a Subcutaneous C1 Inhibitor.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema is a disabling, potentially fatal condition caused by deficiency (type I) or dysfunction (type II) of the C1 inhibitor protein. In a phase 2 trial, the use of CSL830, a nanofiltered C1 inhibitor preparation that is suitable for subcutaneous injection, resulted in functional levels of C1 inhibitor activity that would be expected to provide effective prophylaxis of attacks. METHODS: We conducted an international, prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging, phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of self-administered subcutaneous CSL830 in patients with type I or type II hereditary angioedema who had had four or more attacks in a consecutive 2-month period within 3 months before screening. We randomly assigned the patients to one of four treatment sequences in a crossover design, each involving two 16-week treatment periods: either 40 IU or 60 IU of CSL830 per kilogram of body weight twice weekly followed by placebo, or vice versa. The primary efficacy end point was the number of attacks of angioedema. Secondary efficacy end points were the proportion of patients who had a response (≥50% reduction in the number of attacks with CSL830 as compared with placebo) and the number of times that rescue medication was used. RESULTS: Of the 90 patients who underwent randomization, 79 completed the trial. Both doses of CSL830, as compared with placebo, reduced the rate of attacks of hereditary angioedema (mean difference with 40 IU, -2.42 attacks per month; 95% confidence interval [CI], -3.38 to -1.46; and mean difference with 60 IU, -3.51 attacks per month; 95% CI, -4.21 to -2.81; P<0.001 for both comparisons). Response rates were 76% (95% CI, 62 to 87) in the 40-IU group and 90% (95% CI, 77 to 96) in the 60-IU group. The need for rescue medication was reduced from 5.55 uses per month in the placebo group to 1.13 uses per month in the 40-IU group and from 3.89 uses in the placebo group to 0.32 uses per month in the 60-IU group. Adverse events (most commonly mild and transient local site reactions) occurred in similar proportions of patients who received CSL830 and those who received placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with hereditary angioedema, the prophylactic use of a subcutaneous C1 inhibitor twice weekly significantly reduced the frequency of acute attacks. (Funded by CSL Behring; COMPACT EudraCT number, 2013-000916-10 , and ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01912456 .).

Escalating doses of C1 esterase inhibitor (CINRYZE) for prophylaxis in patients with hereditary angioedema.

BACKGROUND: Nanofiltered C1 inhibitor (human) is approved in the United States for routine prophylaxis of angioedema attacks in patients with hereditary angioedema, a rare disease caused by a deficiency of functional C1 inhibitor. OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety of escalating doses of nanofiltered C1 inhibitor (human) in patients who were not adequately controlled on the indicated dose (1000 U every 3 or 4 days). METHODS: Eligible patients had >1 attack/month over the 3 months before the trial. Doses were escalated to 1500 U every 3 or 4 days for 12 weeks, at which point, the patients were evaluated. If treatment was successful (≤1 attack/mo) or at the investigator's discretion, the patients entered a 3-month follow-up period. The patients with an average of >1 attack/month were eligible for further escalation to 2000 U and then 2500 U. RESULTS: Twenty patients started at 1500 U; 13 were escalated to 2000 U, and 12 were escalated to 2500 U. Eighteen patients reported adverse events. Two patients reported 4 serious adverse events (cerebral cystic hygroma, laryngeal angioedema attack, anemia, and bile duct stone) that were considered by investigators to be unrelated to treatment. Notably, there were no systemic thrombotic events or discontinuations due to adverse events. Fourteen patients were treated successfully (70%), continued to the follow-up period at the investigator's discretion, or experienced a reduction in attacks of >1.0/month. CONCLUSIONS: Dose escalation of nanofiltered C1 inhibitor (human) up to 2500 U was well tolerated and reduced attack frequency in the majority of patients.

HAE update: determining optimal patient specific therapy.

Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare autosomal dominant disease caused by deficient or dysfunctional C1 inhibitor (C1 INH). HAE patients experience recurrent episodes of angioedema affecting the extremities, face, genitalia or submucosal edema in the abdomen or upper airway. Laryngeal attacks can be fatal. The determination of optimal therapy should be based on individualization of patient history and preferences. The parameters include attack frequency, location, severity and burden of illness on quality of life. Patients with HAE need medications for acute attacks; some also require prophylaxis. This is an overview of HAE treatments currently available in the US and how to individualize therapy for patients based on their circumstances. A literature search was performed for HAE and therapeutic modalities currently available. HAE guidelines and randomized, controlled clinical trials were evaluated. There are several options for acute and prophylactic treatment of HAE that have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration. Acute treatments include C1 INH, a replacement therapy; ecallantide, a kallikrein inhibitor; and icatibant, a bradykinin-2 receptor antagonist. Prophylactic treatments include attenuated androgens and C1 INH. These options have been proven safe and effective in clinical trials. Optimal therapy is based on the individual patients need regarding on-demand therapy and/or prophylactic therapy, short-term or long-term. Patients with HAE have individual requirements, based on the nature and frequency of past attacks, occupation, proximity to trained medical personnel, and patient preference. These factors should be used to create a patient-centered approach to management of HAE.

Current options for prophylactic treatment of hereditary angioedema in the United States: patient-based considerations.

Hereditary angioedema (HAE) results from mutations in the C1-esterase inhibitor (C1 INH) gene that decrease production of C1 INH or render it dysfunctional. HAE is characterized by recurrent, unpredictable, bradykinin-mediated edema of the extremities, face, genitalia, trunk, gastrointestinal tract, or upper airway. Attacks causing laryngeal edema can be fatal. Patients with HAE need medications for acute attacks; some also require prophylaxis. Management requires consideration of the patient's disease burden and effect on the patient's quality of life. This review examines an individualized approach to identifying HAE patients who may benefit from prophylaxis. A literature search was performed for HAE and prophylaxis. HAE guidelines, case reports, safety studies, and randomized, controlled clinical prophylaxis trials were selected. Authors provided cases demonstrating individualized prophylaxis. U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved options for prophylaxis of HAE include attenuated androgens and nanofiltered C1 INH (C1 INH-nf). In other countries, pasteurized C1 INH and purified C1 INH are also available. Alternative therapies include fresh frozen plasma for preprocedural prophylaxis and antifibrinolytics for long-term prophylaxis. Attenuated androgens reduce attack frequency in many patients. Adverse effects include weight gain, virilization, increased hair growth, hypercholesterolemia, depression, and liver adenomas. C1 INH-nf reduces frequency of attacks and is well tolerated. Each patient with HAE has unique needs, based on the nature and frequency of past attacks, proximity to a medical center, occupation, and the patient's wishes. These factors should be used to create a patient-centered approach to management of HAE.

Current medical management of hereditary angioedema: results from a large survey of US physicians.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a potentially life-threatening condition that affects approximately 1 in 50,000 persons. There are no known surveys of US physicians' knowledge and experience regarding the epidemiology, diagnosis, and management of HAE. OBJECTIVE: This survey of physicians treating patients with HAE assessed physician characteristics, diagnostic and treatment practices, factors that influence physician and patient treatment choices, and physician awareness of new therapies. METHODS: From October 2009 to February 2010, physicians (N = 172) voluntarily completed an online survey developed by physician-investigators. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Most physicians (73.8%) managed 5 patients or fewer in diverse practice settings. Laboratory testing was considered most important in establishing a diagnosis. Fresh frozen plasma and C1 esterase inhibitors were the most frequently administered treatments for acute events; nearly 50% of respondents prescribed C1 esterase inhibitor for acute attacks. More than 80% of respondents prescribed androgens for long-term prophylaxis. Approximately half of respondents were aware of, and likely to use, new therapies for HAE. Other than efficacy, adverse effects were the most important factor that influenced physicians' treatment recommendations, whereas physicians perceived that patients were most influenced by adverse effects and cost. CONCLUSIONS: Wide variability exists in the treatment of patients with HAE. Many patients experience acute attacks that require emergency care or hospitalization. Androgens and fresh frozen plasma are frequently used despite recent availability of effective condition-specific agents, and many physicians are only somewhat aware of medications newly approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. Because the survey was completed shortly after approval of additional HAE therapies by the US Food and Drug Administration, these data will be useful for tracking changes in HAE treatment over time.

Hereditary angioedema caused by c1-esterase inhibitor deficiency: a literature-based analysis and clinical commentary on prophylaxis treatment strategies.

Hereditary angioedema (HAE) caused by C1-esterase inhibitor deficiency is an autosomal-dominant disease resulting from a mutation in the C1-inhibitor gene. HAE is characterized by recurrent attacks of intense, massive, localized subcutaneous edema involving the extremities, genitalia, face, or trunk, or submucosal edema of upper airway or bowels. These symptoms may be disabling, have a dramatic impact on quality of life, and can be life-threatening when affecting the upper airways. Because the manifestations and severity of HAE are highly variable and unpredictable, patients need individualized care to reduce the burden of HAE on daily life. Although effective therapy for the treatment of HAE attacks has been available in many countries for more than 30 years, until recently, there were no agents approved in the United States to treat HAE acutely. Therefore, prophylactic therapy is an integral part of HAE treatment in the United States and for selected patients worldwide. Routine long-term prophylaxis with either attenuated androgens or C1-esterase inhibitor has been shown to reduce the frequency and severity of HAE attacks. Therapy with attenuated androgens, a mainstay of treatment in the past, has been marked by concern about potential adverse effects. C1-esterase inhibitor works directly on the complement and contact plasma cascades to reduce bradykinin release, which is the primary pathologic mechanism in HAE. Different approaches to long-term prophylactic therapy can be used to successfully manage HAE when tailored to meet the needs of the individual patient.

When is prophylaxis for hereditary angioedema necessary?

OBJECTIVE: To determine when newer agents, such as C1 esterase inhibitor protein (C1-INH), should be considered as prophylaxis to decrease hereditary angioedema (HAE) attacks as an alternative to androgens, which have significant adverse events. DATA SOURCES: A literature review (PubMed, Google, and Ovid), guideline review, expert panel meeting, and group discussion were performed to decide when prophylaxis is indicated. STUDY SELECTION: Articles addressing HAE therapy published in the peer-reviewed literature were selected. RESULTS: The retrieved studies demonstrate that C1-INH is effective and that the half-life makes it attractive for prophylactic use. The short half-lives of ecallantide, icatibant, and recombinant human C1-INH limit their use as prophylactic agents. Patients with severe anxiety, more than 1 attack per month, rapid progression of attacks, limited access to health care, more than 10 days lost from work or school per year, previous laryngeal swelling, more than 3 emergency department visits per year, more than 1 hospitalization per year, previous intubation, previous intensive care unit care, significant compromise in quality of life, or narcotic dependency should be considered for androgen or C1-INH prophylaxis therapy. CONCLUSION: Patients with HAE with frequent attacks, severe attacks, past laryngeal attacks, excessive loss of work or school, significant anxiety, and poor quality of life should be considered for C1-INH prophylaxis, especially those who fail, are intolerant of, have adverse reactions to, or are not candidates for androgen therapy.