A Core Outcome Set for Efficacy of Acute Treatment of Hereditary Angioedema.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials investigating drugs for the acute treatment of hereditary angioedema attacks have assessed many different outcomes. This heterogeneity limits the comparability of trial results and may lead to selective outcome reporting bias and a high burden on trial participants. OBJECTIVE: To achieve consensus on a core outcome set composed of key outcomes that ideally should be used in all clinical efficacy trials involving the acute treatment of hereditary angioedema attacks. METHODS: We conducted a Delphi consensus study involving all relevant parties: patients with hereditary angioedema, hereditary angioedema expert clinicians and clinical researchers, pharmaceutical companies, and regulatory bodies. Two Internet-based survey rounds were conducted. In round 1, panelists indicated the importance of individual outcomes used in clinical trials on a 9-point Likert scale. Based on these results, a core outcome set was developed and voted on by panelists in round 2. RESULTS: A total of 58 worldwide panelists completed both rounds. The first round demonstrated high importance scores and substantial agreement among the panelists. In the second round, a consensus of 90% or greater was achieved on a core outcome set consisting of five key outcomes: change in overall symptom severity at one predetermined time point between 15 minutes and 4 hours after treatment, time to end of progression of all symptoms, the need for rescue medication during the entire attack, impairment of daily activities, and treatment satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: This international study obtained a high level of consensus on a core outcome set for the acute treatment of hereditary angioedema attacks, consisting of five key outcomes.

The international WAO/EAACI guideline for the management of hereditary angioedema - The 2021 revision and update.

Hereditary Angioedema (HAE) is a rare and disabling disease for which early diagnosis and effective therapy are critical. This revision and update of the global WAO/EAACI guideline on the diagnosis and management of HAE provides up-to-date guidance for the management of HAE. For this update and revision of the guideline, an international panel of experts reviewed the existing evidence, developed 28 recommendations, and established consensus by an online DELPHI process. The goal of these recommendations and guideline is to help physicians and their patients in making rational decisions in the management of HAE with deficient C1-inhibitor (type 1) and HAE with dysfunctional C1-inhibitor (type 2), by providing guidance on common and important clinical issues, such as: 1) How should HAE be diagnosed? 2) When should HAE patients receive prophylactic on top of on-demand treatment and what treatments should be used? 3) What are the goals of treatment? 4) Should HAE management be different for special HAE patient groups such as children or pregnant/breast feeding women? 5) How should HAE patients monitor their disease activity, impact, and control? It is also the intention of this guideline to help establish global standards for the management of HAE and to encourage and facilitate the use of recommended diagnostics and therapies for all patients.

The international WAO/EAACI guideline for the management of hereditary angioedema-The 2021 revision and update.

Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare and disabling disease for which early diagnosis and effective therapy are critical. This revision and update of the global WAO/EAACI guideline on the diagnosis and management of HAE provides up-to-date guidance for the management of HAE. For this update and revision of the guideline, an international panel of experts reviewed the existing evidence, developed 28 recommendations, and established consensus by an online DELPHI process. The goal of these recommendations and guideline is to help physicians and their patients in making rational decisions in the management of HAE with deficient C1 inhibitor (type 1) and HAE with dysfunctional C1 inhibitor (type 2), by providing guidance on common and important clinical issues, such as: (1) How should HAE be diagnosed? (2) When should HAE patients receive prophylactic on top of on-demand treatment and what treatments should be used? (3) What are the goals of treatment? (4) Should HAE management be different for special HAE patient groups such as children or pregnant/breast-feeding women? and (5) How should HAE patients monitor their disease activity, impact, and control? It is also the intention of this guideline to help establish global standards for the management of HAE and to encourage and facilitate the use of recommended diagnostics and therapies for all patients.

A randomized trial of human C1 inhibitor prophylaxis in children with hereditary angioedema.

BACKGROUND: Patients with hereditary angioedema with C1 inhibitor deficiency or dysfunction have burdensome recurrent angioedema attacks. The safety, efficacy, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes of C1 inhibitor (C1-INH) prophylaxis (intravenously administered) in patients aged 6-11 years were investigated. METHODS: Eligible patients were enrolled in a randomized, single-blind, crossover, phase 3 trial. After a 12-week baseline observation period (BOP), patients received 500 or 1000 U C1-INH, twice weekly, for 12 weeks before crossing over to the alternate dose for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy end-point was the monthly normalized number of angioedema attacks (NNA). HRQoL was assessed using the EuroQoL 5-dimensional descriptive system youth version and visual analog scale (EQ-VAS). RESULTS: Twelve randomized patients had a median (range) age of 10.0 (7-11) years. Mean (SD) percentage reduction in monthly NNA from BOP was 71.1% (27.1%) with 500 U and 84.5% (20.0%) with 1000 U C1-INH. Mean (SD) within-patient difference (-0.4 [0.58]) for monthly NNA with both doses was significant (P = 0.035 [90% CI, -0.706 to -0.102]). Cumulative attack severity, cumulative daily severity, and number of acute attacks treated were reduced. No serious adverse events or discontinuations occurred. Mean EQ-VAS change from BOP to week 9 of treatment (500 U C1-INH, 10.4; 1000 U C1-INH, 21.6) was greater than the minimal important difference, indicating a meaningful HRQoL change. CONCLUSIONS: C1-INH prophylaxis was effective, safe, and well tolerated in children aged 6-11 years experiencing recurrent angioedema attacks. A post hoc analysis indicated a meaningful improvement in HRQoL with C1-INH. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02052141.