The Long Road of Long COVID: Specific Considerations for the Allergist/Immunologist.

Long COVID (coronavirus disease 2019) syndrome, also known as post-acute sequelae of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, is a new disorder that can develop after an acute infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The condition is characterized by multiorgan system involvement with a wide range of symptoms that can vary in severity from mild to debilitating. Some of the common symptoms associated with long COVID syndrome include cardiovascular issues such as heart palpitations and chest pain; thrombotic events (eg, blood clotting disorders); metabolic problems (eg, type 2 diabetes); dysautonomia; paroxysmal orthostatic tachycardia syndrome; myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome; reactivation of the Epstein-Barr virus; the presence of autoantibodies; chronic spontaneous urticaria (hives); and connective tissue diseases. Whereas long COVID syndrome can affect individuals from various backgrounds, certain populations may be at higher risk such as individuals of Hispanic and Latino heritage, as well as those with low socioeconomic status, although approximately one-third of affected patients have no known risk factors or preexisting conditions. Many survivors of COVID-19 struggle with multiple symptoms, increased disability, reduced function, and poor quality of life. Whereas vaccination has been the most significant intervention able to decrease the severity of acute SARS-Cov2 infection and curtail deaths, limited data are available related to its modulating effect on long COVID necessitating the need for further investigation. Furthermore, several inflammatory pathways have been proposed for the pathogenesis of long COVID that are the targets for ongoing clinical studies evaluating novel pharmacological agents. The purpose of the present report is to review the many factors associated with long COVID with a focus on those aspects that have relevance to the allergist-immunologist.

Surgical management of rhinosinusitis for the allergist-immunologist.

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a common chronic inflammatory disease characterized by inflammation of the sinus, with or without nasal passage inflammation, occurring for more than 12 weeks at a time. CRS has historically been classified in 2 categories: CRS without nasal polyps or CRS with nasal polyps (25%-30% of cases). The mainstay of treatment for CRS with or without nasal polyps is medical management, and options may include a combination of saline irrigation, nasal steroids, allergy medications, antibiotics, oral steroids, and treatment with targeted monoclonal antibodies. Unfortunately, up to 60% of patents report symptoms refractory to maximal medical therapy. As such, a combined approach of surgery and medical therapy may be offered. Endoscopic sinus surgery for CRS is approached in a stepwise fashion, ranging from the simplest technique, such as polyp removal, to more expanded approaches that open the paranasal sinuses and allow gravity-dependent drainage. This review article provides a review and in-depth explanation of various surgical approaches for CRS, including the indications, techniques, and respective outcomes for each one.

The third pandemic: The respiratory syncytial virus landscape and specific considerations for the allergist/immunologist.

Background: Since its initial identification in 1956, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) has been the second most common cause of mortality in infants <6 months of age and a major cause of morbidity and mortality associated with lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) in older adults (ages >60 years) worldwide. Of particular interest to the allergist/immunologist is a growing body of evidence that suggests an association between LRTI caused by RSV in infants with later-life development of asthma, wheezing, or impaired lung function in adults. Efforts to develop a RSV vaccine have been thwarted for >70 years by the occurrence of enhanced respiratory disease (ERD), an adverse RSV vaccine reaction, in the 1960s, in which more-severe illness occurred on natural infection after vaccination of infants who were RSV naive and with a formalin-inactivated RSV vaccine. Recent advances in knowledge of the structural biology of the RSV surface fusion glycoprotein, however, have revolutionized RSV vaccine development for preventive interventions and have offered, at last, the hope of an effective and safe vaccine for the prevention of RSV disease. Objective: The purpose of this report was to examine the current evidence that supports the epidemiology, disease manifestations, molecular biology, treatments, and new vaccine development of RSV vaccines. Results: The host-immune response to RSV infection is carried out by two distinct but overlapping universes of mucosal and systemic immune systems in which a balanced set of B- and T-cell responses are involved in protective immunity that includes the mucosal immune system in which immunoglobulin A (IgA) prevails and the systemic immune system in which IgG neutralizing antibody predominates. The key to developing an effective vaccine is now thought to be linked to the availability of a stabilized prefusion F protein in the immunizing vaccine, which can perform a dual function of a balanced mucosal and/or systemic immune response as well as an effective antibody specifically directed to critical epitopes on the requisite prefusion F protein. Conclusion: The unfortunate manifestation of RSV ERD that occurred in the 1960s has led to a better understanding of the structural biology of the RSV surface fusion glycoprotein and has provided a basis for the development of more effective and safer RSV vaccines and monoclonal antibody preparations for immunoprophylaxis of the dread effects of RSV disease. There are now a large number of clinical trials in progress that are evaluating these products, which include recombinant vector, subunit, particle-based, live-attenuated, chimeric, and nucleic acid vaccines; and monoclonal antibodies. This article gives an overview of the many aspects of RSV disease and development of virus (RSV) vaccines of particular interest to the allergist/immunologist.

Improving Access to Therapy for Patients With Inborn Errors of Immunity: A Call to Action.

Breakthroughs in sequencing technology, targeted immunotherapy, and immune reconstituting treatment have increased the pool of patients with inborn errors of immunity, requiring expertise from clinical immunologists. A growing category of immunodeficiency, presenting as primary immune regulatory disorder and secondary immunodeficiency due to targeted immune therapy for cancer and autoimmunity, has added to the growing burden of patients needing access to immune-supportive therapy. The confluence of a growing population of patients needing a clinical immunologist, complex payer structures, and inadequate health care representation will exacerbate current problems with access to therapy. Patients, health care providers, researchers, public and private payers, and industry must come together to find solutions to improve access to therapy. In this article, we reviewed the major topics regarding access to therapy for patients with immunodeficiency.

Guia prático de urticária aguda / Practical guide to acute urticaria

A urticária aguda é uma causa frequente de consulta com alergistas, caracterizada por urticas e/ou angioedema. Embora autolimitada e benigna, pode causar desconforto significativo e raramente representar uma doença sistêmica grave ou reação alérgica com risco de vida. Nesta revisão, elaborada pelo Departamento Científico de Urticária da Associação Brasileira de Alergia e Imunologia, foram abordadas as principais questões referentes ao tema para auxiliar o médico especialista e generalista.

Acute urticaria is a frequent cause of consultations with allergists, being characterized by wheals and/or angioedema. Although self-limited and benign, it may cause significant discomfort and uncommonly represent a serious systemic disease or life-threatening allergic reaction. In this review prepared by the Urticaria Scientific Department of the Brazilian Association of Allergy and Immunology, the main questions about this topic are addressed to help specialists and general practitioners.

Conhecimentos e práticas sobre telemedicina entre alergistas e imunologistas brasileiros / Telemedicine knowledge and practices among Brazilian allergists and immunologists

Introdução: O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar as características das práticas de telemedicina (TM) entre médicos alergistas/ imunologistas (A/I) brasileiros e avaliar seu conhecimento sobre as recomendações regulatórias. Métodos: Uma pesquisa eletrônica autorreferida foi enviada por e-mail uma vez por semana entre agosto e outubro/2021 a 2.600 médicos A/I brasileiros. Resultados: 205 (7,9%) participantes preencheram os formulários. 143 (70,2%) médicos usaram TM em sua prática clínica, e 184 (89,9%) nunca o usaram antes da pandemia de COVID-19. Dentre os médicos, 192 (93,8%) utilizaram a TM para consultas de acompanhamento, 186 (91%) para verificação de exames complementares e 136 (66,7%) nas primeiras consultas. Cento e quarenta e três médicos A/I (70,2%) sentiram-se seguros em seu diagnóstico por meio da TM, e 7 (3,5%) responderam que não conseguiram encontrar um diagnóstico correto usando a TM. Os principais benefícios da TM relatados foram: maior acessibilidade, principalmente em áreas mais distantes 159 (77,6%), redução dos custos de deslocamento 158 (77,1%) e segurança quanto à transmissão do COVID-19 145 (71,2%). Por outro lado, algumas desvantagens da TM foram listadas pelos participantes: ausência de exame físico 183 (89,7%), relação médico-paciente fragilizada 59 (28,8%) e problemas de Internet 45 (22%). Em relação ao campo jurídico/ético, 105 (51,4%) dos especialistas aplicaram o termo de consentimento e 34 (16,7%) registraram a teleconsulta, ambas as etapas exigidas em uma consulta de TM, conforme recomendações regulatórias locais. Além disso, plataformas online inadequadas para TM, como aplicativos de mídia social e programas de reuniões online não específicos, foram relatadas como sendo usadas por 131 (64,1%) dos participantes. Oitenta (40%) não leram as declarações e recomendações oficiais que regulamentam a prática da TM no Brasil. Conclusões: Observouse um uso crescente de TM no Brasil, influenciado principalmente pela pandemia de COVID-19. Apesar de ser ferramenta útil na pandemia, com vantagens e desvantagens, há necessidade de conhecer as recomendações regulatórias.

Introduction: The aim of this study was to evaluate the characteristics of telemedicine (TM) practices among Brazilian allergists/immunologists (A/I) and to assess their knowledge of regulatory recommendations. Methods: A self-report electronic survey was sent by email once a week between August and October 2021 to 2,600 Brazilian A/I physicians. Results: A total of 205 (7.9%) participants completed the survey. TM was used in clinical practice by 143 (70.2%) physicians, and 184 (89.9%) had never used it before the COVID-19 pandemic. Among participants, 192 (93.8%) used TM for follow-up consultations, 186 (91%) for checking complementary exams, and 136 (66.7%) for first consultations. The number of A/I physicians (70.2%) that felt confident in their diagnosis using TM was 143, and 7 (3.5%) reported that they could not reach the correct diagnosis using TM. Participants reported that the main benefits of TM were greater accessibility, especially in more distant areas (159, 77.6%), reduced travel costs (158, 77.1%), and safety regarding the transmission of COVID-19 (145, 71.2%). Conversely, the lack of physical examination (183, 89.7%), poor doctor-patient relationship (59, 28.8%), and internet connection problems (45, 22%) were mentioned as disadvantages. Regarding legal/ethical aspects, 105 (51.4%) physicians reported applying a consent form and 34 (16.7%) reported making a record of the teleconsultation, both of which are required for TM consultations, according to local regulatory recommendations. The use of inappropriate online platforms for TM, such as social media applications and nonspecific online meeting programs, was reported by 131 (64.1%) participants. Eighty (40%) participants did not read the official statements and recommendations that regulate the practice of TM in Brazil. Conclusions: An increasing use of TM was observed in Brazil, mainly influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite being a useful tool in the pandemic, with advantages and disadvantages, physicians should have knowledge of regulatory recommendations.

[Hypersensitivity reactions to intravenous iron: an allergist' perspective]. / Réactions d'hypersensibilité au fer intraveineux : le point de vue de l'allergologue.

Intravenous iron infusions rarely result in severe hypersensitivity reactions. The primary suspected hypersensitivity mechanism is an abnormal complement activation by non-IgE antibodies to the carbohydrate moieties stabilizing iron formulations. A major risk factor for hypersensitivity reactions is related to the infusion speed. Fishbane-like reactions usually resolve after pausing the infusion, which can be resumed under medical surveillance and at a lower infusion rate. Yet, anaphylactic reactions require emergency first aid and subsequent strict avoidance of intravenous iron. Desensitization protocols can be implemented in selected cases and under strict medical surveillance to reduce the risks of severe reactions upon re-exposure.

L'administration de fer intraveineux (IV) peut rarement se compliquer de réactions d'hypersensibilités sévères, parfois fatales. Le mécanisme supposé est celui d'une activation anormale du complément, possiblement liée à des anticorps non-IgE (immunoglobuline E) dirigés contre les groupements carbohydrates qui stabilisent la formulation de fer. Un débit de perfusion trop rapide est un facteur important de réaction d'hypersensibilité. En effet, les réactions légères se résolvent généralement après mise en pause de la perfusion, qui peut ensuite être reprise à un débit réduit. Les réactions anaphylactiques nécessitent en revanche un traitement d'urgence et une éviction stricte. Le recours à un protocole de désensibilisation sous surveillance médicale étroite permet, dans certaines situations, de limiter le risque de réaction lors d'une réadministration de fer IV.

Positionspapier: Empfehlungen zur Anwendung von Mepolizumab bei chronischer Rhinosinusitis mit Polyposis nasi (CRSwNP) im deutschen Gesundheitssystem ­ Empfehlungen des Ärzteverbandes Deutscher Allergologen (AeDA) und der AGs Klinische Immunologie, Allergologie und Umweltmedizin und Rhinologie und Rhinochirurgie der Deutschen Gesellschaft für HNO-Heilkunde, Kopf- und Hals-Chirurgie (DGHNO-KHC).

BACKGROUND: Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a multifactorial inflammatory disease of the paranasal sinus mucosa with eosinophilic inflammation as the most common endotype. The anti-IL5 antibody mepolizumab was approved for the treatment of severe CRSwNP in the EU in November 2021. METHODS: A literature search was performed to analyze the immunology of CRSwNP and determine the available evidence by searching Medline, Pubmed, and the German national and international trial and guideline registries and the Cochrane Library. Human studies published in the period up to and including 12/2021 that investigated the effect of mepolizumab in CRSwNP were considered. RESULTS: Based on the international literature and previous experience, recommendations for the use of mepolizumab in CRSwNP in the German health care system are given by an expert panel on the basis of a documentation form. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding about the immunological basis of CRSwNP opens new non-surgical therapeutic approaches with biologics for patients with severe courses. Mepolizumab is approved since November 2021 for add-on therapy with intranasal corticosteroids for the treatment of adult patients with severe CRSwNP who cannot be adequately controlled with systemic corticosteroids and/or surgical intervention.

A especialidade de Alergia e Imunologia Clínica no Brasil: como começamos a segunda década do século XXI? / The specialty of Allergy and Clinical Immunology in Brazil: how do we start the second decade of the 21st century?

Introdução: É necessário conhecer a situação de alergistas/ imunologistas nos diferentes cenários de atuação, identificando perfis e eventuais dificuldades. O conhecimento destes dados poderá servir de subsídio para fomentar a implementação de políticas que garantam a integralidade na atenção à saúde do paciente com doenças alérgicas e erros inatos da imunidade (EII). Objetivo: Verificar o perfil dos especialistas em Alergia e Imunologia no Brasil, em relação ao local de atuação, acesso a exames, terapias e o impacto da pandemia COVID-19 sobre o seu exercício profissional. Métodos: Estudo descritivo-exploratório, com dados coletados por inquérito on-line, utilizando-se a ferramenta Google Forms. Todos os associados adimplentes da ASBAI foram convidados a participar. O questionário abordou aspectos sociodemográficos e profissionais. As informações foram analisadas no programa SPSS versão 20.0. Resultados: Quatrocentos e sessenta associados responderam ao questionário. Observou-se predomínio de mulheres (73%), com mediana de idade de 47 anos. A maioria dos participantes atua no setor privado (95%), e 47% no setor público. Aproximadamente 80% dos que atendem no setor público referiram ter acesso a algum exame diagnóstico para doenças alérgicas e EII. Apenas 35% dos especialistas do sistema público têm acesso a imunoterapia alérgeno específica, contra 96% dos que atuam no setor privado. Já aos medicamentos imunobiológicos, 53% e 72% dos especialistas que atuam no serviço público e privado, respectivamente, referiram acesso. Mais de 60% dos associados participantes da pesquisa tiveram redução no número de consultas em pelo menos 50%, e 56% tem realizado atendimento por teleconsulta durante a pandemia de COVID-19. Conclusão: Os associados da ASBAI têm incorporado na sua prática clínica os avanços na terapia das doenças imunoalérgicas, mas vários métodos diagnósticos ainda são pouco acessíveis. A presença do especialista em Alergia e Imunologia no SUS, também precisa ser ampliada. A pandemia do coronavírus trouxe a discussão da telemedicina como um método de atendimento clínico em nossa especialidade.

Introduction: It is necessary to know the situation of allergists/ immunologists in different scenarios of action, identifying profiles and possible difficulties. The knowledge of these data can serve as a subsidy to promote the implementation of policies that ensure comprehensive health care for patients with allergic diseases and inborn errors of immunity (IEI). Objective: To verify the profile of specialists in Allergy and Immunology in Brazil, concerning the place of work, access to tests, therapies, and the impact of the pandemic on their professional practice. Methods: Descriptive-exploratory study, with data collected through an online survey, using the Google Forms tool. All compliant ASBAI members were invited to participate. The questionnaire addressed sociodemographic and professional aspects. The information was analyzed using SPSS version 20.0. Results: Four hundred and sixty associates answered the questionnaire. Women were predominant (73%), and the median age was 47 years. Most participants work in the private sector (95%) and 47% in the public sector. Approximately 80% of those who work in the public sector reported having access to some diagnostic tests for allergic diseases and IEI. Only 35% of specialists in the public system have access to specific allergen immunotherapy, against 96% of those working in the private sector. As for immunobiological drugs, 53% and 72% of specialists working in the public and private service, respectively, reported access. More than 60% of the members participating in the survey had a reduction in the number of consultations by at least 50% and 56% have been assisted by teleconsultation during the Covid19 pandemic. Conclusion: ASBAI associates have incorporated advances in the therapy of immune allergic diseases into their clinical practice, but several diagnostic methods are still inaccessible. The presence of specialists in Allergy and Immunology in the Unified Health System (Sistema Único de Saúde - SUS) also needs to be expanded. The coronavirus pandemic brought the discussion of telemedicine as a method of clinical care practice in our specialty.

A Challenge for Allergologist: Application of Allergy Diagnostic Methods in Mast Cell Disorders.

Primary and secondary mast cell activation syndromes (MCAS) can occur in patients with mastocytosis. During the past few years our knowledge about the pathogenesis and disease-triggering mechanisms in MCAS and mastocytosis have increased substantially. Whereas mastocytosis is characterized by an accumulation of neoplastic (clonal) mast cells (MC) in various organ systems, MCAS is defined by a massive and systemic activation of these cells. Mast cells are crucial effector cells in allergic diseases, thus their elevated number and activation can cause severe anaphylactic reactions and MCAS in patients with mastocytosis. However, these cells may also degranulate spontaneously or degranulate in response to non-allergic triggers leading to clinical symptoms. In mastocytosis patients, such symptoms may lead to the diagnosis of a primary MCAS. The diagnosis of a concomitant allergy in mastocytosis patients is challenging. In these patients, a mixed form (primary and secondary) of MCAS may be diagnosed. These patients may also suffer from life-threatening anaphylactic reactions when exposed to allergens. In these cases, the possibility of severe side effects of in vivo provocations can sometimes also limit diagnostic evaluations. In the current article, we discuss the diagnosis and management of patients suffering from mastocytosis and concomitant MCAS, with special emphasis on novel diagnostic tests and management, including allergen microarrays, recombinant allergen analysis, basophil activation tests, optimal prophylaxis, and specific therapies.

CME suggestions for pediatricians, allergists, and dermatologists, directed by an online survey on urticaria knowledge.

BACKGROUND: The Mexican Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of urticaria have been published. Just before their launch, physicians' knowledge was explored relating to key issues of the guidelines. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the opinion of medical specialists concerning urticaria management. METHODS: A SurveyMonkey® survey was sent out to board-certified physicians of three medical specialties treating urticaria. Replies were analyzed per specialty against the evidence-based recommendations. RESULTS: Sixty-five allergists (ALLERG), 24 dermatologists (DERM), and 120 pediatricians (PED) sent their replies. As for diagnosis: ALERG 42% and PED 76% believe cutaneous mastocytosis, urticarial vasculitis, and hereditary angioedema are forms of urticaria, versus DERM 29% (P < 0.005). Most of the specialties find that the clinical history and physical examination are enough to diagnose acute urticaria, except DERM 45% (P < 0.01). DERM 45% believe laboratory-tests are necessary, as opposed to <15% ALLERG-PED (P < 0.005). However, PED 69% did not know that the most frequent cause of acute urticaria in children is infections, versus ALLERG-DERM 30% (P < 0.005). Many erroneously do laboratory testing in physical urticaria and ALLERG 51%, DERM 59%, and PED 37% do extensive laboratory testing in chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU); many more PED 59% take Immunoglobulin G (IgG) against foods (P < 0.005). More than half of non-allergists do not know about autologous serum testing nor autoimmunity (P < 0.05). As for treatment, there were a few major gaps: when CSU was controlled, >75% prescribed antihistamines pro re nata, and >85% gave first-generation antiH1 for insomnia. Finally, >40% of DERM did not know that cyclosporine A, omalizumab, or other immunosuppressants could be used in recalcitrant cases. CONCLUSION: Specialty-specific continuous medical education might enhance urticaria management.

Idiopathic Anaphylaxis: a Perplexing Diagnostic Challenge for Allergists.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of this systematic review is to present the proposed theories of pathogenesis for idiopathic anaphylaxis (IA), to discuss its classification, its diagnostic approach, and management. RECENT FINDINGS: IA represents a major diagnostic challenge and is diagnosed when excluding the possible identifiable triggers of anaphylaxis. The current research, however, revealed that certain conditions including mastocytosis, mast cell activation syndromes, and hereditary alpha tryptasemia can masquerade and overlap with its symptomatology. Also, newly identified galactose-alpha-1,3-galactose mammalian red meat allergy has recently been recognized as underlying cause of anaphylaxis in some cases that were previously considered as IA. IA comprises a heterogenous group of conditions where, in some cases, inherently dysfunctional mast cells play a role in pathogenesis. The standard trigger avoidance strategies are ineffective, and episodes are unpredictable. Therefore, prompt recognition and treatment as well as prophylaxis are critical. The patients should always carry an epinephrine autoinjector.

Immunoglobulin G4-Related Disease: What an Allergist Should Know.

Immunoglobulin G4-related disease (IgG4-RD) is a fibroinflammatory disorder that begins in 1 or more organs as inflammatory tumors that progress toward fibrosis. It is often accompanied by elevated serum IgG4. IgG4-RD was first described in 2003 as a new concept encompassing a number of immunoallergic diseases that had previously been considered unrelated. IgG4-RD mainly affects middleaged and older men. It consists of upregulation and expansion of CD4+ cytotoxic T lymphocytes, oligoclonal plasmablasts, and other inflammatory cells that infiltrate affected tissues and induce inflammation, organ dysfunction, and fibrosis. Symptoms depend on the location, severity, and extent of the disease. Virtually any organ can be affected, including the pancreas, salivary glands, lacrimal glands, thyroid gland, retro-orbital tissue, lymph nodes, retroperitoneum, mediastinum, lung, kidney, aorta, serosal surfaces, and meninges. Patients with widespread disease may present general symptoms. At least 30%-40% of patients are atopic or display atopic traits such as eosinophilia and elevated serum IgE levels. Additional laboratory features include increased serum IgG4 concentrations, increased blood IgG4-plasmablasts, hypergammaglobulinemia, and hypocomplementemia. Diagnosis of IgG4-RD is based on a clinicopathological correlation. Lymphoplasmacytic infiltrate with abundant IgG4-positive plasma cells, storiform-type fibrosis, obliterative phlebitis, and tissue eosinophilia are the pathological hallmarks. Therapy for IgG4-RD is based primarily on corticosteroids but may include additional immunomodulatory drugs and monoclonal antibodies such as rituximab. In individuals with allergic features, IgG4-RD should be suspected when a history of unexplained swelling is observed in 1 or more organs, particularly if they respond to corticosteroids and the patients are men in the sixth decade of life and beyond.

Pediatric recurrent fever and autoinflammation from the perspective of an allergist/immunologist.

Autoinflammatory diseases are monogenic and polygenic disorders due to dysregulation of the innate immune system. The inherited conditions have been clustered with primary immunodeficiencies in the latest practice parameters; however, these diseases have unique clinical presentations, genetics, and available therapies. Given the presentation of fevers, rashes, and mucosal symptoms observed in many of these syndromes, patients are likely to present to an allergist/immunologist. Although there has been attention in the literature to diagnosis and treatment of rare, genetically defined autoinflammatory disorders, physicians are challenged by increasing numbers of patients with intermittent or periodic fevers who face unnecessary morbidities due to a lack of a diagnosis. The broad differential of diseases presenting with fever includes autoinflammatory syndromes, infections associated with immunodeficiency and/or allergies complicated by infection, and less commonly, autoimmune disorders or malignancy. To address this challenge, we review the history of the medical approach to fever, current diagnostic paradigms, and controversies in management. We describe the spectrum of disorders referred to a recurrent fever disorders clinic established in an Allergy/Immunology division at a tertiary pediatric care center. Finally, we provide practical recommendations including historical features and initial laboratory investigations that can help clinicians appropriately manage these patients.

Clinical use of biologics for asthma treatment by allergy specialists: A questionnaire survey.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is a heterogeneous disease with emerging phenotypes and endotypes. At present, 5 distinct biologics are Food and Drug Administration-approved as an add-on therapy for difficult-to-control type 2-high asthma. Because allergy specialists manage a spectrum of diseases for which biologics may be appropriate, it is important to understand their prescribing patterns. OBJECTIVE: To elucidate the allergist's use of biologics in the treatment of asthma, including barriers, preferences, indications for prescribing, measures to determine effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness. METHODS: A survey was performed among allergists using a semistructured 10-item self-administered web-based questionnaire and the responses were analyzed using one-way frequencies and multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: The response rate was approximately 9%. Omalizumab was the most prescribed biologic for asthma (98%), and "uncontrolled asthma despite adherence to controller medication" was the most common reason. The common selection criteria among the biologics included elevated peripheral eosinophil count, asthma with nasal polyps, and asthma type (type 1; type 2; nonallergic). A decreased exacerbation frequency was the best standard to determine the efficacy among biologics. Benralizumab was considered the most cost-effective. CONCLUSION: This study represents one of the largest surveys among allergy specialists regarding the real-world use of asthma biologics. It seems that there has been reasonably good dissemination and application of current guidelines among allergists based on prescribing patterns. However, their responses reflect the need for the continued modification of asthma guidelines that incorporate novel biologics and other pathway-specific agents into step therapy. As clinical phenotypes and predictive biomarkers develop, allergy specialists will be better prepared to practice precision medicine that optimizes the use of asthma biologics.

O consultório de Alergologia em tempos de pandemia / The allergology practice in times of pandemic

A humanidade está experimentando a pandemia global da COVID- 19 causada por um vírus altamente infecioso, o SARS-CoV-2. Medidas para frear a sua propagação mudaram repentinamente a vida de milhões de pessoas no mundo e nós, médicos alergologistas, tivemos que nos adaptar a este novo cenário. Manterse atualizado, continuar atendendo os pacientes, orientar os mesmos e seus familiares e, ao mesmo tempo, adotar medidas para prevenir um eventual contágio durante o atendimento, são grandes desafios. Graças aos meios de informação confiáveis, às organizações de saúde e às sociedades médicas especializadas, como a ASBAI, estamos enfrentando esta crise de saúde pública com bom senso, criatividade e conhecimento.

Humanity is experiencing a global pandemic of COVID-19 caused by a highly infectious virus, SARS-CoV-2. Measures to stop it from spreading have suddenly changed the lives of millions of people around the world, and we, allergists, have had to adapt to this new setting. Keeping up to date, continuing to assist patients, guiding them and their families, and, at the same time, taking measures to prevent possible contagion during care are major challenges. Thanks to reliable means of information, health organizations, and specialized medical societies, such as ASBAI, we are facing this public health crisis with judgment, creativity, and knowledge.

Electronic cigarettes: How confident and effective are allergists, pulmonologists, and primary care physicians in their practice behavior?

Background: There has been a striking increase in electronic cigarette (EC) use in the United States. The beliefs and practices toward ECs among physicians are unknown. Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate EC practice patterns among allergists, pulmonologists, and primary care physicians. Methods: An anonymous survey was sent to physicians. The survey contained 32 questions and addressed issues related to demographics, cessation counseling behaviors, personal use, and knowledge and beliefs about ECs. Statistical analysis was performed by using analysis of variance, the Pearson χ² test, Fisher exact test, and logistic regression. Results: A total of 291 physicians completed the survey (222 primary care physicians, 33 pulmonologists, and 36 allergists) for a response rate of 46%. The allergists asked about tobacco cigarette use as frequently as did the pulmonologists and more than the primary care physicians (p < 0.001), but they rarely asked about EC use. The pulmonologists scored highest on self-reported knowledge on ECs, although all the groups answered <40% of the questions correctly. The allergists did not feel as comfortable about providing EC cessation counseling as did the pulmonologists and primary care physicians (p < 0.001). All three groups were equally unlikely to recommend ECs as a cessation tool for tobacco cigarette users. Conclusion: Allergists lacked knowledge and confidence in providing education and cessation counseling for EC users. As the number of patients who use these products continues to increase, there is an urgent need for all physicians to be comfortable and knowledgeable with counseling about ECs.