A systematic review and expert Delphi Consensus recommendation on the use of vaccines in patients receiving dupilumab: A position paper of the American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology.

BACKGROUND: Dupilumab is a monoclonal antibody that targets the interleukin (IL)-4 receptor alpha subunit, thus blocking the effects of IL-4 and IL-13, and has shown efficacy in treating various conditions including asthma, atopic dermatitis, eosinophilic esophagitis, and others. Because of its immune modulatory effects, clinical trials that studied dupilumab did not allow patients to receive live vaccines during the clinical trials because of an abundance of caution, and thus package inserts recommend that patients who are being treated with dupilumab should avoid live vaccines. Because dupilumab is now approved for use in patients from 6 months of age for the treatment of atopic dermatitis, this reported contraindication is now posing a clinical dilemma for patients and clinicians. OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review of literature on the safety and efficacy of vaccinations in patients who are receiving dupilumab and to provide expert guidance on the use of vaccines in patients who are receiving dupilumab. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed, and an expert Delphi Panel was assembled. RESULTS: The available literature on patients who received vaccinations while using dupilumab overall suggests that live vaccines are safe and that the vaccine efficacy, in general, is not affected by dupilumab. The expert Delphi panel agreed that the use of vaccines in patients receiving dupilumab was likely safe and effective. CONCLUSION: Vaccines (including live vaccines) can be administered to patients receiving dupilumab in a shared decision-making capacity.

Yardstick for managing cough, part 1: In adults and adolescent patients older than 14 years of age.

Nationwide statistics in the United States and Australia reveal that cough of undifferentiated duration is the most common complaint for which patients of all ages seek medical care in the ambulatory setting. Management of chronic cough is one of the most common reasons for new patient visits to pulmonologists. Because symptomatic cough is such a common problem and so much has been learned about how to diagnose and treat cough of all durations but especially chronic cough, this 2-part yardstick has been written to review in a practical way the latest evidence-based guidelines most of which have been developed from recent high quality systematic reviews on how best to manage cough of all durations in adults, adolescents, and children. In this manuscript, part 1 of the 2-part series, we provide evidence-based, and expert opinion recommendations on the management of chronic cough in adult and adolescent patients (>14 years of age).

Yardstick for managing cough, part 2: In children.

Nationwide statistics in the United States and Australia reveal that cough of undifferentiated duration is the most common complaint for which patients of all ages seek medical care in the ambulatory setting. Management of chronic cough is one of the most common reasons for new patient visits to respiratory specialists. Because symptomatic cough is such a common problem and so much has been learned about how to diagnose and treat cough of all durations but especially chronic cough, this 2-part yardstick has been written to review in a practical way the evidence-based guidelines most of which have been developed from high-quality systematic reviews on how best to manage cough of all durations in adults, adolescents, and children. Chronic cough in children is often benign and self-limiting. Using established and validated protocols and specific pointers (clues in history, findings on examination) can aid the clinician in identifying causes when present and improve outcomes. In this manuscript, part 2 of the 2-part series, we provide evidence-based, expert opinion recommendations on the management of chronic cough in the pediatric patient (<14 years of age).

Open-inhaler versus single-inhaler triple therapy (long-acting muscarinic antagonist, inhaled corticosteroid, and long-acting ß2-agonist) in asthma patients: a narrative review.

OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence for the use of open-inhaler (inhaled corticosteroid [ICS] plus long-acting ß2-agonist [LABA] with separate add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonist [LAMA]) versus single-inhaler triple therapy (ICS/LABA/LAMA combination) and the merits of add-on LAMA to ICS/LABA in patients with uncontrolled asthma. DATA SOURCES: Original research articles were identified from PubMed using the search term "triple therapy asthma." Information was also retrieved from the ClinicalTrials.gov website. STUDY SELECTIONS: Articles detailing the use of add-on LAMA to ICS plus LABA (open-inhaler triple therapy), and closed triple therapy compared with ICS plus LABA dual therapy, addressing patient symptoms, exacerbations, and health-related quality of life. RESULTS: Open-inhaler triple therapy was associated with a significantly reduced incidence of hospitalizations and emergency department visits and a decrease in ICS dose, oral corticosteroids use, and antibiotics use. Exacerbations and acute respiratory events were also reduced. Single-inhaler triple therapy showed a greater improvement in lung function, asthma control, and health status and was noninferior to open-inhaler triple therapy for Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire scores. Single-inhaler triple therapy may also lead to improved therapy adherence. CONCLUSION: Add-on LAMA to ICS plus LABA (open- or single-inhaler triple therapy) improves the response in patients who remain symptomatic and provides a reasonable alternative to ICS dose escalation in treatment-refractory patients.

Single maintenance and reliever therapy in treatment of asthma exacerbations.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness and practicality of single maintenance and reliever therapy (SMART) in the treatment of asthma exacerbation. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Clinical Trial databases using the keywords SMART therapy, maintenance and reliever therapy, and budesonide and formoterol. STUDY SELECTIONS: Articles were selected based on their relevance and applicability to this topic. RESULTS: Multiple studies have evaluated the efficacy of SMART in reducing asthma exacerbations in comparison to standard inhaled corticosteroid maintenance and short-acting beta-agonist rescue therapy. Most of the randomized trials demonstrated a reduction in asthma exacerbation with open-label studies revealing similar effectiveness in reducing asthma exacerbation. Previously, concerns have been raised regarding the administration of increased doses of long-acting beta-agonist that may potentially mask symptoms and delay appropriate medical attention. However, studies have not demonstrated an increase in morbidity or mortality. The primary concern regarding many of these trials is that they have been sponsored by pharmaceutical companies. CONCLUSION: Although not all studies demonstrated the effectiveness of SMART, most revealed a substantial reduction in asthma exacerbation frequency and severity.

Peanut allergy diagnosis: A 2020 practice parameter update, systematic review, and GRADE analysis.

Given the burden of disease and the consequences of a diagnosis of peanut allergy, it is important that peanut allergy be accurately diagnosed so that an appropriate treatment plan can be developed. However, a test that indicates there is peanut sensitization present (eg, a "positive" test) is not always associated with clinical reactivity. This practice parameter addresses the diagnosis of IgE-mediated peanut allergy, both in children and adults, as pertaining to 3 fundamental questions, and based on the systematic reviews and meta-analyses, makes recommendations for the clinician who is evaluating a patient for peanut allergy. These questions relate to when diagnostic tests should be completed, which diagnostic tests to utilize, and the utility (or lack thereof) of diagnostic testing to predict the severity of a future allergic reaction to peanut.

Rhinitis 2020: A practice parameter update.

This comprehensive practice parameter for allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) provides updated guidance on diagnosis, assessment, selection of monotherapy and combination pharmacologic options, and allergen immunotherapy for AR. Newer information about local AR is reviewed. Cough is emphasized as a common symptom in both AR and NAR. Food allergy testing is not recommended in the routine evaluation of rhinitis. Intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) remain the preferred monotherapy for persistent AR, but additional studies support the additive benefit of combination treatment with INCS and intranasal antihistamines in both AR and NAR. Either intranasal antihistamines or INCS may be offered as first-line monotherapy for NAR. Montelukast should only be used for AR if there has been an inadequate response or intolerance to alternative therapies. Depot parenteral corticosteroids are not recommended for treatment of AR due to potential risks. While intranasal decongestants generally should be limited to short-term use to prevent rebound congestion, in limited circumstances, patients receiving regimens that include an INCS may be offered, in addition, an intranasal decongestant for up to 4 weeks. Neither acupuncture nor herbal products have adequate studies to support their use for AR. Oral decongestants should be avoided during the first trimester of pregnancy. Recommendations for use of subcutaneous and sublingual tablet allergen immunotherapy in AR are provided. Algorithms based on a combination of evidence and expert opinion are provided to guide in the selection of pharmacologic options for intermittent and persistent AR and NAR.

From the Pages of Allergy Watch: February 2020.

A new Annals feature in 2018, "From the Pages of AllergyWatch" is devoted to publishing synopses of Allergy and Asthma literature relevant to a topic of emphasis. These unbiased synopses and comments by our Editors have been previously printed in the AllergyWatch bimonthly newsletter, and it is our hope that presenting carefully selected article summaries and comments in the Annals will serve as a valuable educational resource for practicing allergists.

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.

AllergyWatch.

The articles reviewed in this month's edition of From the Pages of Allergy Watch were selected to coincide with the food allergy theme. The first article investigates potential inflammatory markers in children who outgrow their food allergy. The article reviewed by Dr Khan investigates the usefulness of behavioral therapy intervention to help allay anxiety for parents of children with food allergy. The article reviewed by Dr Oppenheimer explores the immunologic mechanism associated with the development of tolerance in young children with cow's milk allergy. The last article reported accidental ingestions of foods that may or may not have been listed in the precautionary food label.

AllergyWatch.

A new Annals feature in 2018, "From the Pages of AllergyWatch" is devoted to publishing synopses of Allergy and Asthma literature relevant to a topic of emphasis. These unbiased synopses and comments by our Editors have been previously printed in the AllergyWatch bimonthly newsletter, and it is our hope that presenting carefully selected article summaries and comments in the Annals will serve as a valuable educational resource for practicing allergists. For this issue of 'From the Pages of Allergy Watch' articles are presented that coincide with the theme of this month's Annals. The first article addresses the impact of allergic rhinitis on work productivity in affected patients. The second article review data from a large number of children presenting to Canadian emergency departments with asthma exacerbations and the impact of certain viral pathogens. The last article reviewed investigates data showing that patients who 'run out' of asthma inhalers were more likely to present to the emergency room for their asthma care.

Cutaneous Allergy.

A new Annals feature in 2018, "From the Pages of AllergyWatch" is devoted to publishing synopses of Allergy and Asthma literature relevant to a topic of emphasis. These unbiased synopses and comments by our Editors have been previously printed in the AllergyWatch bimonthly newsletter, and it is our hope that presenting carefully selected article summaries and comments in the Annals will serve as a valuable educational resource for practicing allergists.

Asthma.

"From the Pages of AllergyWatch" is devoted to publishing synopses of Allergy and Asthma literature relevant to a topic of emphasis. These unbiased synopses and comments by our Editors have been previously printed in the AllergyWatch bimonthly newsletter, and it is our hope that presenting carefully selected article summaries and comments in the Annals will serve as a valuable educational resource for practicing allergists.