RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Black and Latinx patients bear a disproportionate burden of asthma. Efforts to reduce the disproportionate morbidity have been mostly unsuccessful, and guideline recommendations have not been based on studies in these populations. METHODS: In this pragmatic, open-label trial, we randomly assigned Black and Latinx adults with moderate-to-severe asthma to use a patient-activated, reliever-triggered inhaled glucocorticoid strategy (beclomethasone dipropionate, 80 µg) plus usual care (intervention) or to continue usual care. Participants had one instructional visit followed by 15 monthly questionnaires. The primary end point was the annualized rate of severe asthma exacerbations. Secondary end points included monthly asthma control as measured with the Asthma Control Test (ACT; range, 5 [poor] to 25 [complete control]), quality of life as measured with the Asthma Symptom Utility Index (ASUI; range, 0 to 1, with lower scores indicating greater impairment), and participant-reported missed days of work, school, or usual activities. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: Of 1201 adults (603 Black and 598 Latinx), 600 were assigned to the intervention group and 601 to the usual-care group. The annualized rate of severe asthma exacerbations was 0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61 to 0.78) in the intervention group and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.73 to 0.92) in the usual-care group (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.999; P = 0.048). ACT scores increased by 3.4 points (95% CI, 3.1 to 3.6) in the intervention group and by 2.5 points (95% CI, 2.3 to 2.8) in the usual-care group (difference, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.5 to 1.2); ASUI scores increased by 0.12 points (95% CI, 0.11 to 0.13) and 0.08 points (95% CI, 0.07 to 0.09), respectively (difference, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.05). The annualized rate of missed days was 13.4 in the intervention group and 16.8 in the usual-care group (rate ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.95). Serious adverse events occurred in 12.2% of the participants, with an even distribution between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among Black and Latinx adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, provision of an inhaled glucocorticoid and one-time instruction on its use, added to usual care, led to a lower rate of severe asthma exacerbations. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute and others; PREPARE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02995733.).
Assuntos
Antiasmáticos , Asma , Beclometasona , Negro ou Afro-Americano , Glucocorticoides , Hispânico ou Latino , Administração por Inalação , Adulto , Antiasmáticos/administração & dosagem , Antiasmáticos/efeitos adversos , Antiasmáticos/uso terapêutico , Asma/tratamento farmacológico , Asma/etnologia , Beclometasona/administração & dosagem , Beclometasona/efeitos adversos , Beclometasona/uso terapêutico , Glucocorticoides/administração & dosagem , Glucocorticoides/efeitos adversos , Glucocorticoides/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Qualidade de Vida , Inquéritos e Questionários , Exacerbação dos SintomasRESUMO
The recent approval of omalizumab for the treatment of IgE-mediated food allergy is an important step forward for the millions of food allergy patients in the United States. Through the depletion of circulating IgE and the subsequent reduction of FcεR1 on key effector cells, patients increase their tolerance to food allergens. However, omalizumab does not permit patients to eat foods that they are allergic to with impunity. Rather, it protects them from most accidental exposures. In addition, omalizumab does not cure food allergy and has not demonstrated true immunomodulation. Thus, omalizumab might be a lifelong therapy for some patients. Furthermore, there are many important questions and issues surrounding the appropriate administration of omalizumab to treat food allergy, which we discuss. Managing treatment of patients with disease that falls outside the dosing range, assessing treatment response or nonresponse, addressing its appropriateness for patients older than 55, and determining whether immunotherapy plus omalizumab provides any advantage over omalizumab alone all need to be examined. Identifying appropriate patients for this therapy is critical given the cost of biologics. Indeed, not all food allergy patients are good candidates for this therapy. Also, when and how to stop omalizumab therapy in patients who may have outgrown their food allergy needs to be elucidated. Thus, although this therapy provides a good option for patients with food allergies, much information is needed to determine how best to use this therapy. Despite many unanswered questions and issues, we provide clinicians with some practical guidance on implementing this therapy in their patients.
Assuntos
Antialérgicos , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar , Omalizumab , Humanos , Anafilaxia/tratamento farmacológico , Anafilaxia/imunologia , Análise Custo-Benefício , Aprovação de Drogas , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar/tratamento farmacológico , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar/imunologia , Acessibilidade aos Serviços de Saúde , Imunoglobulina E/imunologia , Imunoterapia , Omalizumab/administração & dosagem , Omalizumab/imunologia , Omalizumab/farmacologia , Omalizumab/uso terapêutico , Resultado do Tratamento , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Antialérgicos/administração & dosagem , Antialérgicos/imunologia , Antialérgicos/farmacologia , Antialérgicos/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by recurrent pruritic wheals (hives) and/or angioedema. Patients with CSU could remain symptomatic despite standard-of-care H1 antihistamines (H1-AH) or anti-IgE (omalizumab) treatment. Dupilumab blocks IL-4/IL-13 signaling and is approved for multiple type 2/atopic indications. OBJECTIVE: We conducted two phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trials comparing dupilumab with placebo in patients with symptomatic CSU despite H1-AH. METHODS: In LIBERTY-CSU CUPID Study A, patients were omalizumab-naive (n = 138, aged ≥6 years). In Study B, patients were omalizumab-intolerant/incomplete responders (n = 108, aged ≥12 years). The primary end point was either change from baseline over 7 days in the Urticaria Activity Score (UAS7) or Itch Severity Score (ISS7) at week 24, with the other as a key secondary end point, depending on regional regulatory requirements. Studies were pooled for safety assessment. RESULTS: In Study A, UAS7 and ISS7 improved with dupilumab versus placebo (difference -8.5 [95% CI, -13.2 to -3.9; P = .0003] and -4.2 [95% CI, -6.6 to -1.8; P = .0005]). In Study B, tested at α = 0.043 after interim analysis, UAS7 improved (difference -5.8 [95% CI, -11.4 to -0.3; P = .0390]), with a numerical trend in ISS7 (difference -2.9 [95% CI, -5.7 to -0.07; nominal P = .0449, not significant]). Pooled safety data were consistent between dupilumab and placebo and with the known dupilumab safety profile. CONCLUSIONS: Dupilumab reduced urticaria activity by reducing itch and hives severity in omalizumab-naive patients with CSU uncontrolled with H1-AH. Although the primary end point for Study B was not met, dupilumab effects were small in patients who were omalizumab-intolerant/incomplete responders.
Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados , Urticária Crônica , Humanos , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/uso terapêutico , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/efeitos adversos , Adulto , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Urticária Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Masculino , Método Duplo-Cego , Adolescente , Omalizumab/uso terapêutico , Omalizumab/efeitos adversos , Adulto Jovem , Resultado do Tratamento , Idoso , Criança , Prurido/tratamento farmacológico , Antialérgicos/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The symptoms of house dust mite (HDM)-induced allergic rhinitis (AR) vary with changes in exposure related to the weather or the domestic environment. In allergen immunotherapy (AIT) studies, a certain level of AR disease activity is necessary to demonstrate treatment efficacy; the latter can be underestimated if a substantial proportion of the patient population is weakly symptomatic. OBJECTIVE: To better estimate the real treatment effect of a HDM sublingual AIT (SLIT) tablet, we analysed the results of natural field studies in detail by applying a tertile approach. METHODS: We used data from three randomised, controlled trials (RCT) in a total of 2585 patients with AR treated with the 300 index of reactivity (IR) HDM SLIT-tablet or placebo. The study centres were grouped into tertiles according to the level of combined symptom and medication scores in patients in the placebo group. In each tertile, the difference between SLIT and placebo was assessed through an analysis of covariance. RESULTS: In the three RCTs, combined scores were found to be similar in the SLIT and placebo groups in the low tertiles. The treatment effect of the 300 IR HDM tablet increased in the medium and high tertiles, with notably significant differences versus placebo in the highest tertile and greater (ranging from -21% to -39%) than in the entire study population (-13% to -20%). The positive relationship between treatment efficacy and the combined score in each tertile was independent of the RCT and the score used. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Application of the tertile approach to AIT studies in a field in which many variables interact strongly might provide more accurate and meaningful measurements of efficacy and benefit for patients, better reflecting their real-life condition.
Assuntos
Antígenos de Dermatophagoides , Pyroglyphidae , Rinite Alérgica , Humanos , Animais , Pyroglyphidae/imunologia , Resultado do Tratamento , Feminino , Masculino , Rinite Alérgica/terapia , Rinite Alérgica/imunologia , Antígenos de Dermatophagoides/imunologia , Antígenos de Dermatophagoides/administração & dosagem , Imunoterapia Sublingual/métodos , Adulto , Dessensibilização Imunológica/métodos , Adolescente , Criança , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como AssuntoRESUMO
The importance of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is multifaceted, encompassing both clinical and quality-of-life improvements and cost-effectiveness in the long term. Key mechanisms of allergen tolerance induced by AIT include changes in memory type allergen-specific T- and B-cell responses towards a regulatory phenotype with decreased Type 2 responses, suppression of allergen-specific IgE and increased IgG1 and IgG4, decreased mast cell and eosinophil numbers in allergic tissues and increased activation thresholds. The potential of novel patient enrolment strategies for AIT is taking into account recent advances in biomarkers discoveries, molecular allergy diagnostics and mobile health applications contributing to a personalized approach enhancement that can increase AIT efficacy and compliance. Artificial intelligence can help manage and interpret complex and heterogeneous data, including big data from omics and non-omics research, potentially predict disease subtypes, identify biomarkers and monitor patient responses to AIT. Novel AIT preparations, such as synthetic compounds, innovative carrier systems and adjuvants, are also of great promise. Advances in clinical trial models, including adaptive, complex and hybrid designs as well as real-world evidence, allow more flexibility and cost reduction. The analyses of AIT cost-effectiveness show a clear long-term advantage compared to pharmacotherapy. Important research questions, such as defining clinical endpoints, biomarkers of patient selection and efficacy, mechanisms and the modulation of the placebo effect and alternatives to conventional field trials, including allergen exposure chamber studies are still to be elucidated. This review demonstrates that AIT is still in its growth phase and shows immense development prospects.
Assuntos
Inteligência Artificial , Hipersensibilidade , Humanos , Dessensibilização Imunológica , Hipersensibilidade/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidade/terapia , Alérgenos , Biomarcadores , Imunoglobulina GRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Epinephrine is the first-line treatment for severe allergic reactions, and rapid treatment is associated with lower rates of hospitalization and death. Current treatment options (epinephrine auto-injectors and manual intramuscular injection) are considered cumbersome, and most patients/caregivers fail to use them, even during severe reactions. An intranasal epinephrine delivery device, neffy, has been designed to provide an additional option for patients/caregivers. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the comparative pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of neffy 2.0 mg, EpiPen 0.3 mg, and manual intramuscular injection 0.3 mg. METHODS: This was a phase 1, randomized, 6-treatment, 6-period, 2-part crossover study in 59 healthy subjects. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters following single and repeat doses of epinephrine were assessed before dosing and at various postdose intervals. RESULTS: The pharmacokinetic profile of neffy was bracketed by approved injection products, with a mean peak plasma level of 481 pg/mL, which fell between EpiPen (753 pg/mL) and epinephrine manual intramuscular injection (339 pg/mL). When dosed both once and twice, neffy resulted in more pronounced increases in pharmacodynamic parameters relative to EpiPen or manual injection. CONCLUSIONS: neffy's pharmacokinetic profile was bracketed by approved injection products, with pharmacodynamic responses that were comparable to or better than approved injection products. neffy is expected to be a safe and effective option, particularly for patients/caregivers who are reluctant to carry and use injection devices.
Assuntos
Anafilaxia , Humanos , Injeções Intramusculares , Anafilaxia/tratamento farmacológico , Estudos Cross-Over , Epinefrina , CuidadoresRESUMO
Chronic idiopathic/spontaneous urticaria (CIU/CSU) causes significant impairments in quality of life and is often unresponsive to antihistamines. Although the anti-IgE mAb omalizumab has been an important addition to the therapeutic armamentarium for the management of patients with CSU, there are still a significant percentage of patients who do not respond to the combination of antihistamines and omalizumab. As a result, additional treatments are needed. With the expanding knowledge of the pathogenesis of CSU and the role of mast cells, novel therapeutic agents targeting unique pathways important in CSU are in development. This review focuses on the rationale behind, and results of, novel therapies trialed in CSU.
Assuntos
Produtos Biológicos , Urticária Crônica , Humanos , Produtos Biológicos/uso terapêutico , Qualidade de Vida , Urticária Crônica/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
Asthma is classically described as having either a type 2 (T2) eosinophilic phenotype or a non-T2 neutrophilic phenotype. T2 asthma usually responds to classical bronchodilation therapy and corticosteroid treatment. Non-T2 neutrophilic asthma is often more severe. Patients with non-T2 asthma or late-onset T2 asthma show poor response to the currently available anti-inflammatory therapies. These therapeutic failures result in increased morbidity and cost associated with asthma and pose a major health care problem. Recent evidence suggests that some non-T2 asthma is associated with elevated TH17 cell immune responses. TH17 cells producing Il-17A and IL-17F are involved in the neutrophilic inflammation and airway remodeling processes in severe asthma and have been suggested to contribute to the development of subsets of corticosteroid-insensitive asthma. This review explores the pathologic role of TH17 cells in corticosteroid insensitivity of severe asthma and potential targets to treat this endotype of asthma.
Assuntos
Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Asma/imunologia , Células Th17/imunologia , Asma/tratamento farmacológico , Diferenciação Celular , Humanos , Interleucina-17/antagonistas & inibidores , Interleucina-17/fisiologia , Interleucina-6/antagonistas & inibidores , Neutrófilos/imunologia , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Células Th17/citologia , Quinases Associadas a rho/antagonistas & inibidoresRESUMO
Patients with asthma who are suboptimally responsive to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting ß2-agonists (LABAs) are frequently exposed to oral corticosteroids and high-dose ICS, which can lead to significant side effects. Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) have demonstrated efficacy and safety in a subset of these patients. This review summarizes the results of key studies using LAMAs in patients with asthma aged 12 years or older. LAMA as an add-on treatment improved lung function and asthma control in patients with uncontrolled asthma across studies. The efficacy of LAMAs as an add-on to ICS was superior to that of placebo and ICS dose escalation and comparable with that of LABAs. LAMA plus ICS plus LABA provided modest improvements in bronchodilation and increased the time to first severe exacerbation versus ICS plus LABA. Single-inhaler triple therapy was associated with decreased health care resource utilization and improved cost-effectiveness versus multiple inhalers. LAMAs were generally well tolerated; asthma exacerbations, bronchitis, and nasopharyngitis were common adverse events with LAMA in combination with ICS alone or ICS plus LABA. Thus, the overall evidence presented in this review supports the use of add-on LAMA treatment as a reasonable option in patients with asthma uncontrolled with ICS plus LABA or ICS alone.
Assuntos
Asma , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica , Administração por Inalação , Corticosteroides , Agonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos beta 2/uso terapêutico , Asma/induzido quimicamente , Asma/tratamento farmacológico , Quimioterapia Combinada , Humanos , Antagonistas Muscarínicos/uso terapêutico , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) 2 terminates bronchoconstrictive Gαq signaling; murine RGS2 knockout demonstrate airway hyperresponsiveness. While RGS2 promoter variants rs2746071 and rs2746072 associate with a clinical mild asthma phenotype, their impact on human airway smooth muscle (HASM) contractility and asthma severity outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether reductions in RGS2 expression seen with these 2 RGS2 promoter variants augment HASM contractility and associate with an asthma severity phenotype. METHODS: We transfected HASM with a range of RGS2-specific small interfering RNA (siRNA) concentrations and determined RGS2 protein expression by Western blot analysis and intracellular calcium flux induced by histamine (a Gαq-coupled H1 receptor bronchoconstrictive agonist). We conducted regression-based genotype association analyses of RGS2 variants from 611 patients from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Severe Asthma Research Program 3. RESULTS: RGS2-specific siRNA caused dose-dependent increases in histamine-stimulated bronchoconstrictive intracellular calcium signaling (2-way ANOVA, P < .0001) with a concomitant decrease in RGS2 protein expression. RGS2-specific siRNA did not affect Gαq-independent ionomycin-induced intracellular calcium signaling (P = .42). The minor allele frequency of rs2746071 and rs2746072 was 0.46 and 0.28 among African American/non-Hispanic Black patients and was 0.28 and 0.27 among non-Hispanic White patients, among whom these single nucleotide polymorphisms were in stronger linkage disequilibrium (r2 = 0.97). Among non-Hispanic White patients, risk allele homozygotes for rs2746072 and rs2746071 each had nearly 2-fold greater asthma exacerbation rates relative to alternative genotypes with wild-type alleles (Padditive = 2.86 × 10-5/Precessive = 5.22 × 10-6 and Padditive = 3.46 × 10-6/Precessive = 6.74 × 10-7, respectively) at baseline, which was confirmed by prospective longitudinal exacerbation data. CONCLUSION: RGS2 promoter variation associates with a molecular and clinical phenotype characterized by enhanced bronchoconstrictive stimulation in vitro and higher asthma exacerbations rates in non-Hispanic White patients.
Assuntos
Asma , Proteínas RGS , Animais , Asma/genética , Asma/metabolismo , Histamina , Humanos , Camundongos , Polimorfismo de Nucleotídeo Único , Regiões Promotoras Genéticas , Estudos Prospectivos , Proteínas RGS/genética , Proteínas RGS/metabolismo , RNA Interferente PequenoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Effectiveness of asthma treatment, including biologics, may be different in patients with higher body mass index (BMI). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate response to omalizumab (dosed by serum immunoglobulin E level and weight) by BMI category. METHODS: Pooled data from 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of adults with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma were analyzed by BMI category (<25 kg/m2 [normal or underweight], n = 397; 25 to <30 kg/m2 [overweight], n = 330; ≥ 30 kg/m2 [obese], n = 268). Placebo-adjusted exacerbation rate reductions were evaluated by Poisson regression modeling. Changes from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 second, beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) dose, Total Asthma Symptom Score, and Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire were evaluated by analysis of covariance. RESULTS: Greater placebo-adjusted exacerbation rate reductions (95% confidence interval) were observed with increasing BMI (normal or underweight, -37.4% [-69.0% to 26.8%]; overweight, -52.7% [-78.4% to 3.7%]; obese, -71.9% [-86.9% to -39.5%]). There were no differences in forced expiratory volume in 1 second improvement between BMI categories at week 16 (normal or underweight, 76.2 [5.3-147.1] mL; overweight, 98.1 [13.9-182.4] mL; obese, 69.1 [-18.9 to 157.2] mL). No differences in BDP dose reduction (µg) were noted between BMI categories (normal or underweight, 23.0 [15.7-30.3]; overweight, 22.5 [13.5-31.5]; obese, 16.6 [5.8-27.3]). Fewer patients in the higher BMI categories eliminated BDP use. There were trends for smaller improvements with higher BMI in Total Asthma Symptom Score (normal/underweight, -0.52 [-0.82 to -0.22]; overweight, -0.50 [-0.80 to -0.20]; obese, -0.39 [-0.77 to 0.00]) and Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (normal or underweight, 0.34 [0.16-0.52]; overweight, 0.34 [0.13-0.55]; obese, 0.15 [-0.08 to 0.39]). CONCLUSION: Omalizumab provides benefit to patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma, regardless of BMI. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Studies 008/009 were conducted before clinical trial registration was required, and therefore clinical trial registration numbers are not available.
Assuntos
Antiasmáticos , Asma , Adulto , Antiasmáticos/farmacologia , Antiasmáticos/uso terapêutico , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/uso terapêutico , Beclometasona/farmacologia , Beclometasona/uso terapêutico , Índice de Massa Corporal , Método Duplo-Cego , Volume Expiratório Forçado , Humanos , Obesidade/tratamento farmacológico , Omalizumab/farmacologia , Omalizumab/uso terapêutico , Sobrepeso , Qualidade de Vida , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Magreza/tratamento farmacológico , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Clinical trials (PALISADE [ARC003], ARTEMIS [ARC010]) proving efficacy and safety of peanut (Arachis hypogaea) allergen powder-dnfp (PTAH) have used double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFCs) to screen for eligibility and to evaluate efficacy. In routine clinical practice, individuals with peanut allergy do not always undergo food challenges to confirm diagnosis or determine candidacy for treatment. OBJECTIVE: To describe PTAH safety and tolerability in participants selected by clinical history and peanut sensitization parameters not undergoing DBPCFCs during trials and to compare findings with previously published data. METHODS: RAMSES (ARC007) was a 6-month, phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in children aged 4 to 17 years with physician-confirmed peanut allergy. ARC011 was the subsequent 6-month follow-on maintenance PTAH study. The primary end point for RAMSES and ARC011 was the frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs). We descriptively compared baseline characteristics and safety outcomes from RAMSES and ARC011 to participants undergoing DBPCFCs in phase 3 PALISADE and ARTEMIS trials. RESULTS: In 506 patients randomized to study treatment, baseline characteristics appeared balanced among groups. Proportion of participants with at least 1 AE was 55% for PTAH vs 33.9% for placebo during initial dose escalation and 98.8% vs 94.0% during updosing, respectively. Most participants with AEs had mild or moderate events. The most common AEs were gastrointestinal. Comparisons to pooled PALISADE and ARTEMIS data revealed higher baseline median peanut-specific immunoglobulin E and skin prick test values for RAMSES participants. Safety outcomes during trial periods were comparable. CONCLUSION: Safety data from clinically selected children with peanut allergy receiving PTAH do not seem different from those in phase 3 trials requiring DBPCFC to enter trials.
Assuntos
Arachis , Hipersensibilidade a Amendoim , Criança , Humanos , Arachis/efeitos adversos , Dessensibilização Imunológica/efeitos adversos , Alérgenos , Testes Cutâneos , Método Duplo-Cego , Administração Oral , Fatores ImunológicosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis induced by house dust mites (HDMs) is a highly prevalent but often underdiagnosed and undertreated/untreated chronic disease. It often has a negative impact on sleep, work, leisure activities, and health-related quality of life. Allergen immunotherapy is a proven, safe treatment for respiratory allergies. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the efficacy and safety of a 300 index of reactivity (IR) sublingual tablet formulation of Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus:Dermatophagoides farinae 1:1 extract in adolescents (aged ≥12) and adults with moderate to severe HDM-induced allergic rhinitis. METHODS: In a phase III, international, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial, participants received approximately 12 months of treatment with placebo or the 300 IR tablet. The primary end point was the average total combined score during 4 weeks at the end of the treatment period. RESULTS: A total of 1607 participants were randomized, and 1476 (including 555 [37.6%] with concomitant mild controlled asthma at inclusion) comprised the full analysis set. Over the primary evaluation period, the least squares mean average total combined score in the 300 IR group (3.62) was significantly lower (P < .0001) than in the placebo group (4.35), with a relative least squares mean difference of -16.9% (95% CI, -24.0% to -9.2%). All prespecified secondary end points were consistently improved in the 300 IR group, relative to placebo. The 300 IR tablet was generally well tolerated. Treatment-related adverse events (mainly mild or moderate local reactions) were reported for 51.0% of the patients in the 300 IR group and 14.9% in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: The 300 IR sublingual HDM tablet is an effective, safe treatment for HDM-induced allergic rhinitis.
Assuntos
Antígenos de Dermatophagoides/imunologia , Rinite Alérgica/terapia , Imunoterapia Sublingual/métodos , Adolescente , Adulto , Animais , Método Duplo-Cego , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos , Feminino , Humanos , Cooperação Internacional , Masculino , Efeito Placebo , Pyroglyphidae , Qualidade de Vida , Rinite Alérgica/imunologia , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Adulto JovemRESUMO
Asthma is a major driver of health care costs across ages. Despite widely disseminated asthma-treatment guidelines and a growing variety of effective therapeutic options, most patients still experience symptoms and/or refractoriness to standard of care treatments. As a result, most patients undergo a further intensification of therapy to optimize symptom control with a subsequent increased risk of side effects. Raising awareness about the relevance of evaluating aeroallergen sensitizations in asthmatic patients is a key step in better informing clinical practice while new molecular tools, such as the component resolved diagnosis, may be of help in refining the relationship between sensitization and therapeutic recommendations. In addition, patient care should benefit from reliable, easy-to-measure and clinically accessible biomarkers that are able to predict outcome and disease monitoring. To attain a personalized asthma management and to guide adequate treatment decisions, it is of paramount importance to expand clinicians' knowledge about the tangled relationship between asthma and allergy from a molecular perspective. Our review explores the relevance of allergen testing along the asthma patient's journey, with a special focus on recurrent wheezing children. Here, we also discuss the unresolved issues regarding currently available biomarkers and summarize the evidence supporting the eosinophil-derived neurotoxin as promising biomarker.
Assuntos
Asma , Hipersensibilidade , Alérgenos , Asma/diagnóstico , Asma/terapia , Biomarcadores , Criança , Humanos , Hipersensibilidade/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidade/terapia , Sons RespiratóriosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Peanut allergy, for which there are no approved treatment options, affects patients who are at risk for unpredictable and occasionally life-threatening allergic reactions. METHODS: In a phase 3 trial, we screened participants 4 to 55 years of age with peanut allergy for allergic dose-limiting symptoms at a challenge dose of 100 mg or less of peanut protein (approximately one third of a peanut kernel) in a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge. Participants with an allergic response were randomly assigned, in a 3:1 ratio, to receive AR101 (a peanut-derived investigational biologic oral immunotherapy drug) or placebo in an escalating-dose program. Participants who completed the regimen (i.e., received 300 mg per day of the maintenance regimen for approximately 24 weeks) underwent a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge at trial exit. The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of participants 4 to 17 years of age who could ingest a challenge dose of 600 mg or more, without dose-limiting symptoms. RESULTS: Of the 551 participants who received AR101 or placebo, 496 were 4 to 17 years of age; of these, 250 of 372 participants (67.2%) who received active treatment, as compared with 5 of 124 participants (4.0%) who received placebo, were able to ingest a dose of 600 mg or more of peanut protein, without dose-limiting symptoms, at the exit food challenge (difference, 63.2 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 53.0 to 73.3; P<0.001). During the exit food challenge, the maximum severity of symptoms was moderate in 25% of the participants in the active-drug group and 59% of those in the placebo group and severe in 5% and 11%, respectively. Adverse events during the intervention period affected more than 95% of the participants 4 to 17 years of age. A total of 34.7% of the participants in the active-drug group had mild events, as compared with 50.0% of those in the placebo group; 59.7% and 44.4% of the participants, respectively, had events that were graded as moderate, and 4.3% and 0.8%, respectively, had events that were graded as severe. Efficacy was not shown in the participants 18 years of age or older. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 3 trial of oral immunotherapy in children and adolescents who were highly allergic to peanut, treatment with AR101 resulted in higher doses of peanut protein that could be ingested without dose-limiting symptoms and in lower symptom severity during peanut exposure at the exit food challenge than placebo. (Funded by Aimmune Therapeutics; PALISADE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02635776 .).
Assuntos
Alérgenos/administração & dosagem , Arachis/efeitos adversos , Produtos Biológicos/administração & dosagem , Dessensibilização Imunológica/métodos , Hipersensibilidade a Amendoim/terapia , Proteínas de Plantas/administração & dosagem , Administração Oral , Adolescente , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Alérgenos/efeitos adversos , Produtos Biológicos/efeitos adversos , Produtos Biológicos/imunologia , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Dessensibilização Imunológica/efeitos adversos , Relação Dose-Resposta Imunológica , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Gastroenteropatias/etiologia , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Proteínas de Plantas/efeitos adversos , Proteínas de Plantas/imunologia , Adulto JovemRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To summarize the therapeutic effects and safety of biologics either approved or in clinical development for asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, urticaria, nasal polyps, atopic dermatitis, and eosinophilic esophagitis. This review attempts to provide some guidance when choosing among agents. DATA SOURCES: Recently published articles obtained through PubMed database searches including research articles, review articles, and case reports. STUDY SELECTIONS: PubMed database searches were conducted using the following keywords: biologics, asthma, COPD, urticaria, atopic dermatitis, food allergy, nasal polyps, and eosinophilic esophagitis. RESULTS: The approval of omalizumab by the Food and Drug Administration in 2003 for patients with asthma paved the way for the development of multiple biologics for a variety of respiratory and allergic diseases. Agents approved by the Food and Drug Administration include mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab, and several more are in the late stages of clinical development. Owing to the overlap in the pathogenesis of respiratory and allergic diseases, many of these biologics target multiple respiratory and allergic diseases simultaneously. CONCLUSION: The numerous biologic options have made the selection of the best biologic for each patient a potential conundrum for clinicians. Adequate point of care biomarkers to facilitate personalized medical therapy are generally lacking. Furthermore, although clinically effective and generally safe, none of the biologics discussed in this review have induced long-standing disease remission. Nevertheless, these agents have given us the opportunity to treat the most severe patients and to better understand the biology of respiratory and allergic diseases. As knowledgeable physicians, we should embrace and be educated on these novel therapies and the pathways they target.
Assuntos
Antiasmáticos , Asma , Produtos Biológicos , Hipersensibilidade/tratamento farmacológico , Antiasmáticos/uso terapêutico , Asma/tratamento farmacológico , Produtos Biológicos/uso terapêutico , Dermatite Atópica/tratamento farmacológico , Esofagite Eosinofílica/tratamento farmacológico , Humanos , Pólipos Nasais/tratamento farmacológico , Urticária/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The anti-immunoglobulin E therapy, omalizumab, improves asthma control and reduces exacerbations in patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma. However, it has been suggested that omalizumab should be reserved for highly allergic patients with multiple allergen sensitivities or perennial-only sensitivities. OBJECTIVE: To examine impact of allergy burden, including number and type of allergen sensitivities, on omalizumab response in a real-world setting. METHODS: This post hoc analysis evaluated a subset of omalizumab-treated patients from the Prospective Observational Study to Evaluate Predictors of Clinical Effectiveness in Response to Omalizumab (NCT01922037) who had completed 13 allergen assessments (N=478). Patients were classified by allergen burden (nonsensitized, 1, 2-4, or ≥5 allergen sensitivities) and type of allergen (nonsensitized, seasonal, perennial, or both). Outcome measures included exacerbation rate vs previous year and improvements in lung function and Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ). RESULTS: Comparable adjusted exacerbation rates were observed after omalizumab initiation, regardless of number or type of allergen sensitizations (0.56-0.85/y). Improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1 second from baseline at months 6 (0.03-0.09 L) and 12 (-0.08 to 0.08 L) were also similar across subgroups. Least squares mean change in AQLQ from baseline at months 6 (1.0-1.2) and 12 (1.1-1.4) was comparable across patient subgroups, and similar percentages of patients achieved AQLQ minimal clinically important difference of at least a 0.5-point improvement at month 6 (71%-75%), which was maintained or improved to month 12 (71%-89%). In all analyses, 95% confidence intervals overlapped. CONCLUSION: Overall findings suggest that patients with allergic asthma achieved comparable improvements across distinct outcome measures after omalizumab therapy in a real-world setting, regardless of number and type of allergen sensitizations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01922037.
Assuntos
Antiasmáticos/uso terapêutico , Anticorpos Anti-Idiotípicos/uso terapêutico , Asma/tratamento farmacológico , Omalizumab/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Feminino , Volume Expiratório Forçado/efeitos dos fármacos , Humanos , Imunoglobulina E/metabolismo , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Qualidade de VidaRESUMO
With novel therapies in development, there is an opportunity to consider asthma remission as a treatment goal. In this Rostrum, we present a generalized framework for clinical and complete remission in asthma, on and off treatment, developed on the basis of medical literature and expert consensus. A modified Delphi survey approach was used to ascertain expert consensus on core components of asthma remission as a treatment target. Phase 1 identified other chronic inflammatory diseases with remission definitions. Phase 2 evaluated components of those definitions as well as published definitions of spontaneous asthma remission. Phase 3 evaluated a remission framework created using consensus findings. Clinical remission comprised 12 or more months with (1) absence of significant symptoms by validated instrument, (2) lung function optimization/stabilization, (3) patient/provider agreement regarding remission, and (4) no use of systemic corticosteroids. Complete remission was defined as clinical remission plus objective resolution of asthma-related inflammation and, if appropriate, negative bronchial hyperresponsiveness. Remission off treatment required no asthma treatment for 12 or more months. The proposed framework is a first step toward developing asthma remission as a treatment target and should be refined through future research, patient input, and clinical study.
Assuntos
Antiasmáticos/uso terapêutico , Asma/prevenção & controle , Consenso , Técnica Delphi , Objetivos , Humanos , Indução de RemissãoRESUMO
Food allergy is a major health problem affecting 5% to 10% of the population in developed nations, including an estimated 32 million Americans. Despite the large number of patients suffering from food allergies, up until the end of January 2020, no treatment for food allergies had been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. The only options were avoidance of food allergen triggers and acute management of allergic reactions. A considerable body of data exists supporting oral immunotherapy (OIT) as a promising, novel treatment option, including that for the now Food and Drug Administration-approved peanut OIT product Palforzia (Aimmune Therapeutics, Brisbane, Calif). However, data for long-term quality-of-life improvement with OIT varies, depending on the measures used for analysis. Like many therapies, OIT is not without potential harms, and burdens, and the evaluation of patient-specific risk-benefit ratio of food OIT produces challenges for clinicians and patients alike, with many unanswered questions. Food Allergy Research & Education organized the Oral Immunotherapy for Food Allergy Summit on November 6, 2019, modeled after the PRACTALL sessions between the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology to address these critical issues. Health care providers, patient representatives, researchers, regulators, and food allergy advocates came together to discuss OIT and identify areas of common ground as well as gaps in existing research and areas of uncertainty and disagreement. The purpose of this article was to summarize that discussion and facilitate collaboration among clinicians and patients to help them make better-informed decisions about offering and accepting OIT, respectively, as a therapeutic option.
Assuntos
Dessensibilização Imunológica/métodos , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar/imunologia , Administração Oral , Animais , Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Dessensibilização Imunológica/tendências , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar/epidemiologia , Humanos , Educação de Pacientes como Assunto , Estados Unidos , United States Food and Drug AdministrationRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Underuse of guideline-recommended inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) controller therapy is a risk factor for greater asthma burden. ICS concomitantly used with rescue inhalers (Patient-Activated Reliever-Triggered ICS ['PARTICS']) reduced asthma exacerbations in efficacy trials, but whether PARTICS is effective in pragmatic trials is unknown. OBJECTIVE: We conducted this pilot to determine the feasibility of executing a large-scale pragmatic PARTICS trial and to improve study protocols. METHODS: Four sites recruited 33 Hispanic or black adults with persistent asthma, randomized them approximately 3:1 to intervention or usual care, and followed them for 12 weeks. All participants received asthma guideline-based educational videos; intervention participants received video-based instructions on implementing PARTICS plus usual medications. The study involved 1 randomization visit and monthly questionnaires. Timely questionnaire responses (±2 weeks) were monitored. Participants underwent qualitative phone interviews to assess self-reported adherence to PARTICS and understand barriers to completing study procedures. RESULTS: Timely questionnaire response rates were 61%, 64%, and 70% at 4, 8, and 12 weeks, respectively. Self-reported adherence to PARTICS was 76% (95% confidence interval [CI], 58%-94% [n = 21]), 88% (95%CI, 72%-100% [n = 16]), and 62% (95%CI, 36%-88% [n = 13]) at weeks 1, 6, and 12, respectively. Barriers to completing study procedures included difficulties with questionnaire access, remembering to use ICS and rescue inhalers together, and obtaining refills. Only 22% of participants recognized their short-acting bronchodilator as "reliever" or "rescue." CONCLUSION: Recruitment was feasible within the allocated period. Adherence to PARTICS was incomplete, questionnaire completion was suboptimal, and common rescue inhaler nomenclature usage was limited. We have modified the full study protocol to attempt to improve adherence to PARTICS and minimize barriers to study procedures. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: pilot study for 'PeRson EmPowered Asthma Relief' (PREPARE, NCT02995733).