Efficacy and safety of ligelizumab in adults and adolescents with chronic spontaneous urticaria: results of two phase 3 randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) do not achieve complete control of their symptoms with current available treatments. In a dose-finding phase 2b study, ligelizumab improved urticaria symptoms in patients with H1-antihistamine (H1-AH) refractory CSU. Here, we report the efficacy and safety outcomes from two ligelizumab phase 3 studies. METHODS: PEARL-1 and PEARL-2 were identically designed randomised, double-blind, active-controlled and placebo-controlled parallel-group studies. Patients aged 12 years or older with moderate-to-severe H1-AH refractory CSU were recruited from 347 sites in 46 countries and randomly allocated in a 3:3:3:1 ratio via Interactive Response Technology to 72 mg ligelizumab, 120 mg ligelizumab, 300 mg omalizumab, or placebo, dosed every 4 weeks, for 52 weeks. Patients allocated to placebo received 120 mg ligelizumab from week 24. The primary endpoint was change-from-baseline (CFB) in weekly Urticaria Activity Score (UAS7) at week 12, and was analysed in all eligible adult patients according to the treatment assigned at random allocation. Safety was assessed throughout the study in all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. The studies were registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03580369 (PEARL-1) and NCT03580356 (PEARL-2). Both trials are now complete. FINDINGS: Between Oct 17, 2018, and Oct 26, 2021, 2057 adult patients were randomly allocated across both studies (72 mg ligelizumab n=614; 120 mg ligelizumab n=616; 300 mg omalizumab n=618, and placebo n=209). A total of 1480 (72%) of 2057 were female, and 577 (28%) of 2057 were male. Mean UAS7 at baseline across study groups ranged from 29·37 to 31·10. At week 12, estimated treatment differences in mean CFB-UAS7 were as follows: for 72 mg ligelizumab versus placebo, -8·0 (95% CI -10·6 to -5·4; PEARL-1), -10·0 (-12·6 to -7·4; PEARL-2); 72 mg ligelizumab versus omalizumab 0·7 (-1·2 to 2·5; PEARL-1), 0·4 (-1·4 to 2·2; PEARL-2); 120 mg ligelizumab versus placebo -8·0 (-10·5 to -5·4; PEARL-1), -11·1 (-13·7 to -8·5; PEARL-2); 120 mg ligelizumab versus omalizumab 0·7 (-1·1 to 2·5; PEARL-1), -0·7 (-2·5 to 1·1; PEARL-2). Both doses of ligelizumab were superior to placebo (p<0·0001), but not to omalizumab, in both studies. No new safety signals were identified for ligelizumab or omalizumab. INTERPRETATION: In the phase 3 PEARL studies, ligelizumab demonstrated superior efficacy versus placebo but not versus omalizumab. The safety profile of ligelizumab was consistent with previous studies. FUNDING: Novartis Pharma.

Definition, acronyms, nomenclature, and classification of angioedema (DANCE): AAAAI, ACAAI, ACARE, and APAAACI DANCE consensus.

BACKGROUND: Angioedema (AE) manifests with intermittent, localized, self-limiting swelling of the subcutaneous and/or submucosal tissue. AE is heterogeneous, can be hereditary or acquired, may occur only once or be recurrent, may exhibit wheals or not, and may be due to mast cell mediators, bradykinin, or other mechanisms. Several different taxonomic systems are currently used, making it difficult to compare the results of studies, develop multicenter collaboration, and harmonize AE treatment. OBJECTIVE: We developed a consensus on the definition, acronyms, nomenclature, and classification of AE (DANCE). METHODS: The initiative involved 91 experts from 35 countries and was endorsed by 53 scientific and medical societies, and patient organizations. A consensus was reached by online discussion and voting using the Delphi process over a period of 16 months (June 2021 to November 2022). RESULTS: The DANCE initiative resulted in an international consensus on the definition, classification, and terminology of AE. The new consensus classification features 5 types and endotypes of AE and a harmonized vocabulary of abbreviations/acronyms. CONCLUSION: The DANCE classification complements current clinical guidelines and expert consensus recommendations on the diagnostic assessment and treatment of AE. DANCE does not replace current clinical guidelines, and expert consensus algorithms and should not be misconstrued in a way that affects reimbursement of medicines prescribed by physicians using sound clinical judgment. We anticipate that this new AE taxonomy and nomenclature will harmonize and facilitate AE research and clinical studies, thereby improving patient care.

Urticaria exacerbations and adverse reactions in patients with chronic urticaria receiving COVID-19 vaccination: Results of the UCARE COVAC-CU study.

BACKGROUND: Concern about disease exacerbations and fear of reactions after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccinations are common in chronic urticaria (CU) patients and may lead to vaccine hesitancy. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the frequency and risk factors of CU exacerbation and adverse reactions in CU patients after COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: COVAC-CU is an international multicenter study of Urticaria Centers of Reference and Excellence (UCAREs) that retrospectively evaluated the effects of COVID-19 vaccination in CU patients aged ≥18 years and vaccinated with ≥1 dose of any COVID-19 vaccine. We evaluated CU exacerbations and severe allergic reactions as well as other adverse events associated with COVID-19 vaccinations and their association with various CU parameters. RESULTS: Across 2769 COVID-19-vaccinated CU patients, most (90%) received at least 2 COVID-19 vaccine doses, and most patients received CU treatment and had well-controlled disease. The rate of COVID-19 vaccination-induced CU exacerbation was 9%. Of 223 patients with CU exacerbation after the first dose, 53.4% experienced recurrence of CU exacerbation after the second dose. CU exacerbation most often started <48 hours after vaccination (59.2%), lasted for a few weeks or less (70%), and was treated mainly with antihistamines (70.3%). Factors that increased the risk for COVID-19 vaccination-induced CU exacerbation included female sex, disease duration shorter than 24 months, having chronic spontaneous versus inducible urticaria, receipt of adenovirus viral vector vaccine, having nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug/aspirin intolerance, and having concerns about getting vaccinated; receiving omalizumab treatment and Latino/Hispanic ethnicity lowered the risk. First-dose vaccine-related adverse effects, most commonly local reactions, fever, fatigue, and muscle pain, were reported by 43.5% of CU patients. Seven patients reported severe allergic reactions. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccination leads to disease exacerbation in only a small number of CU patients and is generally well tolerated.

Different phenotypes of drug-induced anaphylaxis-Data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry.

BACKGROUND: Drugs are a frequent cause of severe anaphylactic reactions. Here, we analyze a large dataset on drug induced anaphylaxis regarding elicitors, risk factors, symptoms, and treatment. METHODS: Data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry (2007-2019) with 1815 reported cases of drug-induced anaphylaxis were studied accordingly. RESULTS: Drugs are the third most frequent cause of anaphylaxis reported in the Anaphylaxis Registry. Among the eliciting groups of drugs analgesics and antibiotics were far most often reported. Female and senior patients were more frequently affected, while the number of children with DIA was low. DIA patients had symptoms affecting the skin and mucous membranes (n = 1525, 84.02%), the respiratory (n = 1300, 71.63%), the cardiovascular (n = 1251, 68.93%) and the gastrointestinal system (n = 549, 30.25%). Drugs caused significant more severe reactions, occurred more often in medical facilities and led to increased hospitalization rates in comparison to food and insect venom induced anaphylaxis. Adrenaline was used more often in patients with DIA than in anaphylaxis due to other causes. Patients with skin symptoms received more antihistamines and corticosteroids in the acute treatment, while gastrointestinal symptoms led to less adrenaline use. CONCLUSION: The study contributes to a better understanding of DIA, with a large number of cases from Europe supporting previous data, e.g., analgesics and antibiotics being the most frequent culprits for DIA. Female gender and higher age are relevant risk factors and despite clear recommendations, the emergency treatment of DIA is not administered according to the guidelines.

Treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with chronic urticaria during pregnancy: Results of PREG-CU, a UCARE study.

BACKGROUND: Although chronic urticaria (CU) is a common and primarily affects females, there is little data on how pregnancy interacts with the disease. OBJECTIVE: To analyse the treatment use by CU patients before, during and after pregnancy as well as outcomes of pregnancy. METHODS: PREG-CU is an international, multicentre study of the Urticaria Centers of Reference and Excellence network. Data were collected via a 47-item-questionnaire completed by CU patients who became pregnant during their disease course. RESULTS: Questionnaires from 288 CU patients from 13 countries were analysed. During pregnancy, most patients (60%) used urticaria medication including standard-dose second generation H1-antihistamines (35.1%), first generation H1-antihistamines (7.6%), high-dose second-generation H1-antihistamines (5.6%) and omalizumab (5.6%). The preterm birth rate was 10.2%; rates were similar between patients who did and did not receive treatment during pregnancy (11.6% vs. 8.7%, respectively). Emergency referrals for CU and twin birth were risk factors for preterm birth. The caesarean delivery rate was 51.3%. More than 90% of new-borns were healthy at birth. There was no link between any patient or disease characteristics or treatments and medical problems at birth. CONCLUSION: Most CU patients used treatment during pregnancy especially second-generation antihistamines which seem to be safe during pregnancy regardless of the trimester. The rates of preterm births and medical problems of new-borns in CU patients were similar to population norms and not linked to treatment used during pregnancy. Emergency referrals for CU increased the risk of preterm birth and emphasize the importance of sufficient treatment to keep urticaria under control during pregnancy.

Risk factors for systemic reactions in typical cold urticaria: Results from the COLD-CE study.

BACKGROUND: Cold urticaria (ColdU), that is, the occurrence of wheals or angioedema in response to cold exposure, is classified into typical and atypical forms. The diagnosis of typical ColdU relies on whealing in response to local cold stimulation testing (CST). It can also manifest with cold-induced anaphylaxis (ColdA). We aimed to determine risk factors for ColdA in typical ColdU. METHODS: An international, cross-sectional study COLD-CE was carried out at 32 urticaria centers of reference and excellence (UCAREs). Detailed history was taken and CST with an ice cube and/or TempTest® performed. ColdA was defined as an acute cold-induced involvement of the skin and/or visible mucosal tissue and at least one of: cardiovascular manifestations, difficulty breathing, or gastrointestinal symptoms. RESULTS: Of 551 ColdU patients, 75% (n = 412) had a positive CST and ColdA occurred in 37% (n = 151) of the latter. Cold-induced generalized wheals, angioedema, acral swelling, oropharyngeal/laryngeal symptoms, and itch of earlobes were identified as signs/symptoms of severe disease. ColdA was most commonly provoked by complete cold water immersion and ColdA caused by cold air was more common in countries with a warmer climate. Ten percent (n = 40) of typical ColdU patients had a concomitant chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU). They had a lower frequency of ColdA than those without CSU (4% vs. 39%, p = .003). We identified the following risk factors for cardiovascular manifestations: previous systemic reaction to a Hymenoptera sting, angioedema, oropharyngeal/laryngeal symptoms, and itchy earlobes. CONCLUSION: ColdA is common in typical ColdU. High-risk patients require education about their condition and how to use an adrenaline autoinjector.

The international EAACI/GA²LEN/EuroGuiDerm/APAAACI guideline for the definition, classification, diagnosis, and management of urticaria.

This update and revision of the international guideline for urticaria was developed following the methods recommended by Cochrane and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group. It is a joint initiative of the Dermatology Section of the European Academy of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA²LEN) and its Urticaria and Angioedema Centers of Reference and Excellence (UCAREs and ACAREs), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF; EuroGuiDerm), and the Asia Pacific Association of Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology with the participation of 64 delegates of 50 national and international societies and from 31 countries. The consensus conference was held on 3 December 2020. This guideline was acknowledged and accepted by the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS). Urticaria is a frequent, mast cell-driven disease that presents with wheals, angioedema, or both. The lifetime prevalence for acute urticaria is approximately 20%. Chronic spontaneous or inducible urticaria is disabling, impairs quality of life, and affects performance at work and school. This updated version of the international guideline for urticaria covers the definition and classification of urticaria and outlines expert-guided and evidence-based diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for the different subtypes of urticaria.

Urticaria and angioedema in children and adolescents: diagnostic challenge.

Urticaria diagnosis may be challenging in children since it can be triggered or related to numerous conditions. In this paper, we reviewed the main aspects regarding the diagnosis of urticaria in the pediatric population. Acute urticaria is often due to viral infections. However, other culprits, including foods, insect stings, drugs, contrast media, vaccination, latex, and medical diseases, may account for acute patterns. Laboratory tests and confirmatory allergy tests should be individualized and guided by history. Chronic urticaria (CU) is defined when hives and/or angioedema last for more than 6 weeks. The most common type of chronic urticaria in children is chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU). Chronic inducible urticaria (CindU) is less common but is important to diagnose in order to manage appropriately and reduce the risk of severe reactions. Inducible forms in children are often diagnosed with specific provocation tests similar to the tests used in adults. Given that chronic urticaria could rarely be a presentation of vasculitis, systemic-onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis, or auto-inflammatory syndromes, it is important to rule out these conditions. It is crucial to differentiate cases of chronic urticaria from mastocytosis and Bradykinin-mediated angioedema, given that treatment may differ. The management of chronic urticaria in children has improved over the last decade because of the development of both clear management guidelines and new effective drugs. It is crucial to increase awareness for appropriate diagnosis and new available treatment to improve the management of chronic urticaria in children.

Desensitization to drugs in children.

Better knowledge and understanding about drug desensitization is required in the pediatric population, since there is little literature available about it and the most pediatric desensitization protocols have been adapted from adult instructions.Aiming to soften this issue and foster the future studies, this article presents a recent review about mechanisms of desensitization, diagnostic tools, and up to date management of drug hypersensitivity reactions in children. Bringing up an overview of pediatric hypersensitivity reactions to chemotherapy, biologic agents, antibiotics, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and vaccines.

Effects of pregnancy on chronic urticaria: Results of the PREG-CU UCARE study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic urticaria (CU) predominantly affects women, and sex hormones can modulate disease activity in female CU patients. As of now, the impact of pregnancy on CU is largely unknown. AIM: To analyze the course and features of CU during and after pregnancy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PREG-CU is an international, multicenter study of the Urticaria Centers of Reference and Excellence (UCARE) network. Data were collected via a 47-item questionnaire completed by CU patients, who became pregnant within the last 3 years. RESULTS: A total of 288 pregnancies of 288 CU patients from 13 countries were analyzed (mean age at pregnancy: 32.1 ± 6.1 years, duration of CU: 84.9 ± 74.5 months; CSU 66.9%, CSU + CIndU 20.3%, CIndU 12.8%).During pregnancy, 51.1% of patients rated their CU as improved, 28.9% as worse, and 20.0% as unchanged.CU exacerbations most commonly occurred exclusively during the third trimester (in 34 of 124 patients; 27.6%) or the first (28 of 124; 22.8%). The risk factors for worsening of CU during pregnancy were having mild disease and no angioedema before pregnancy, not taking treatment before pregnancy, CIndU, CU worsening during a previous pregnancy, treatment during pregnancy, and stress as a driver of exacerbations. After giving birth, urticaria disease activity remained unchanged in 43.8% of CU patients, whereas 37.4% and 18.1% experienced worsening and improvement, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the complex impact of pregnancy on the course of CU and help to better counsel patients who want to become pregnant and to manage CU during pregnancy.

The global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management and course of chronic urticaria.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically disrupts health care around the globe. The impact of the pandemic on chronic urticaria (CU) and its management are largely unknown. AIM: To understand how CU patients are affected by the COVID-19 pandemic; how specialists alter CU patient management; and the course of CU in patients with COVID-19. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our cross-sectional, international, questionnaire-based, multicenter UCARE COVID-CU study assessed the impact of the pandemic on patient consultations, remote treatment, changes in medications, and clinical consequences. RESULTS: The COVID-19 pandemic severely impairs CU patient care, with less than 50% of the weekly numbers of patients treated as compared to before the pandemic. Reduced patient referrals and clinic hours were the major reasons. Almost half of responding UCARE physicians were involved in COVID-19 patient care, which negatively impacted on the care of urticaria patients. The rate of face-to-face consultations decreased by 62%, from 90% to less than half, whereas the rate of remote consultations increased by more than 600%, from one in 10 to more than two thirds. Cyclosporine and systemic corticosteroids, but not antihistamines or omalizumab, are used less during the pandemic. CU does not affect the course of COVID-19, but COVID-19 results in CU exacerbation in one of three patients, with higher rates in patients with severe COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic brings major changes and challenges for CU patients and their physicians. The long-term consequences of these changes, especially the increased use of remote consultations, require careful evaluation.

The Challenges in the Follow-Up and Treatment of Brazilian Children with Hereditary Angioedema.

INTRODUCTION: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) with C1 inhibitor (C1-INH) deficiency is a rare autosomal dominant disease. Although the first symptoms can appear in childhood, the diagnosis's delay has a strong impact on the patient's quality of life. We analyzed clinical and laboratory characteristics and the drug therapy of pediatric patients with HAE in Brazil. METHODS: Medical records from 18 reference centers of HAE patients under 18 years of age were evaluated after confirmed diagnosis was performed by quantitative and/or functional C1-INH. RESULTS: A total of 95 participants (51 M:44 F; mean age: 7 years old) out of 17 centers were included; 15 asymptomatic cases were identified through family history and genetic screening. Angioedema attacks affected the extremities (73.5%), gastrointestinal tract (57%), face (50%), lips (42.5%), eyelids (23.7%), genitals (23.7%), upper airways (10%), and tongue (6.3%). Family history was present in 84% of patients, and the mean delay in the diagnosis was 3.9 years. Long-term prophylaxis (51/80) was performed with tranexamic acid (39/80) and androgens (13/80); and short-term prophylaxis (9/80) was performed with tranexamic acid (6/80) and danazol (3/80). On-demand therapy (35/80) was prescribed: icatibant in 7/35, fresh frozen plasma in 16/35, C1-INH plasma-derived in 11/35, and tranexamic acid in 12/35 patients. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study on HAE pediatric patients in Latin America. Clinical manifestations were similar to adults. Drugs such as androgens and tranexamic acid were indicated off-label, probably due to restricted access to specific drugs. Educational programs should address pediatricians to reduce late diagnosis and tailored child therapy.

Update on Omalizumab for Urticaria: What's New in the Literature from Mechanisms to Clinic.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Since omalizumab has been approved for urticaria, numerous randomized and real-life observational trials have been published. We reviewed the period January 2017-February 2018. RECENT FINDINGS: Omalizumab is effective for the control of urticaria recalcitrant to antihistamines in different populations globally. The ratio of total serum IgE 4-week/baseline ≥2 can predict response with a high likelihood. In observational real-life trials, doses have been adjusted on an individual basis: in some populations, up to two-thirds of the patients can be controlled with 150 mg/month; however, others are still not controlled with 300 mg/month. In these, 150 mg bimonthly could be tried, before up-dosing to 450 mg/month. On the long run (up to 3 years) omalizumab kept its efficacy. In many patients, dosing intervals could be augmented (6-8 weeks, some even more). After a 12-month treatment, about 20% showed long-term remission without relapse. Some biomarkers are being detected. Adjusting omalizumab doses in urticaria patients could enhance efficacy (shortening dosing interval and/or augmenting dose) and save costs (after 12 months: extending dosing interval and/or reducing dose).

Omalizumab in Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria: A Brazilian Real-Life Experience.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines on chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) suggest a treatment based on a 3-step approach that aims at total symptom control, starting with H1-antihistamines. However, a significant number of patients present an antihistamine-resistant urticaria that must be treated with an alternative third-line therapy such as omalizumab. METHODS: Patients with a history of CSU who did not respond to treatment with high doses of modern antihistamines were treated with 150 or 300 mg of omalizumab every 4 weeks. The response to treatment was recorded as complete (CR), partial (PR) or no response. A dose adjustment was proposed according to response. RESULTS: We treated 47 CSU patients with omalizumab (40 females), of whom 39.5% had evidence of autoimmunity. The average number of treatments was 11.4 (range 2-87). All patients had been refractory to high-dose modern antihistamines. A CR was seen in 84.6% of patients who started with 300 mg and in 60% of those who started with 150 mg. Only 1 patient had no response to both the 150- and 300-mg doses. In 6 of the PR patients with 150 mg, a higher dose of 300 mg was proposed and 4 had a CR. Four patients discontinued the treatment. No severe adverse events were reported in the patients who finished the study. DISCUSSION: Although good results were seen in both groups, CR rates were higher in those under a high-dose initial treatment. Our data strongly suggest that the therapy should be individualized.

Multinational experience with hypersensitivity drug reactions in Latin America.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiologic drug allergy data from Latin America are scarce, and there are no studies on specific procedures focusing on this topic in Latin America. OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical characteristics and management of hypersensitivity drug reactions in different Latin American countries. METHODS: An European Network of Drug Allergy questionnaire survey was implemented in 22 allergy units in 11 Latin American countries to report on consecutive patients who presented with a suspected hypersensitivity drug reaction. Each unit used its own protocols to investigate patients. RESULTS: Included were 868 hypersensitivity drug reactions in 862 patients (71% of adults and elderly patients were women and 51% of children were girls, P = .0001). Children presented with less severe reactions than adults and elderly patients (P < .0001). Urticaria and angioedema accounted for the most frequent clinical presentations (71%), whereas anaphylaxis was present in 27.3% of cases. There were no deaths reported. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (52.3%), ß-lactam antibiotics (13.8%), and other antibiotics (10.1%) were the drugs used most frequently. Skin prick tests (16.7%) and provocation tests (34.2%) were the study procedures most commonly used. A large proportion of patients were treated in the emergency department (62%) with antihistamines (68%) and/or corticosteroids (53%). Only 22.8% of patients presenting with anaphylaxis received epinephrine. CONCLUSION: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and antibiotics were the drugs used in at least 75% of patients. More than half the reactions were treated in the emergency department, whereas epinephrine was administered in fewer than 25% of patients with anaphylaxis. Dissemination of guidelines for anaphylaxis among primary and emergency department physicians should be encouraged.

A global perspective on stepping down chronic spontaneous urticaria treatment: Results of the Urticaria Centers of Reference and Excellence SDown-CSU study.

BACKGROUND: Although there have been significant advances in the treatment of chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) in recent years, there remains a lack of clear guidance on when and how to step down treatment in responders. This study aims to investigate stepping down approaches of different steps of CSU treatment from a global perspective. METHODS: "Stepping down chronic spontaneous urticaria treatment" (SDown-CSU) is an international, multicenter, observational, cross-sectional, survey-based study of the Urticaria Centers of Reference and Excellence (UCARE) network. The questionnaire included 48 questions completed by physicians in the UCARE network. RESULTS: Surveys completed by 103 physicians from 81 UCAREs and 34 countries were analyzed. Seventy-eight percent of the participants responded that they had a national urticaria management guideline written by their professional societies and 28% responded that they had to operate under a regulatory guideline proposed by central health funding organizations. Seventy-two and 58.7% of these national recommendations do not contain any detailed information on when and/or how CSU treatment should be discontinued. There was a lack of detailed information on antihistamines and cyclosporine in particular. A predefined maximum duration was generally not applicable to omalizumab and cyclosporine (81% and 82%, respectively). Nearly all UCAREs step down omalizumab within 6 months from the first controlled status and 42% discontinue cyclosporine after 6 months regardless of the control status. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from the SDown-CSU study clearly highlight a global need for guidance on the process of stepping down treatment in CSU. Additionally, the study offers a step-down algorithm applicable to all stages of CSU treatment.