Does angioedema in patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria impact response to omalizumab?

The presence of angioedema, or deep skin swelling, in addition to hives (wheals) in patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) can complicate disease management. There is evidence that omalizumab is effective for patients with CSU with angioedema, but the time to a clinically meaningful response has not been assessed. This post hoc analysis examined data from the phase 3, randomized, double-blind ASTERIA I and ASTERIA II studies: patients with CSU with hives were grouped by presence (n = 216) or absence of angioedema (n = 265) at baseline. The time to minimally important difference (MID, change from baseline of ≥11 points) in weekly Urticaria Activity Score (UAS7) was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier analyses. Median time to MID for omalizumab 300 mg was similar in patients with and without angioedema. Median time to MID for omalizumab 150 mg was similar to 300 mg for patients without angioedema, and was longer for patients with angioedema. Therefore, the response to omalizumab for patients with CSU with angioedema was dose dependent. We recommend that the best approach for clinicians, in line with guidelines, would be initial administration of omalizumab 300 mg every 4 weeks for all patients. Clinical trials registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01287117 (registered 27 January 2011) and NCT01292473 (registered 7 February 2011).

Dupilumab Reduces Urticaria Activity, Itch, and Hives in Patients with Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria Regardless of Baseline Serum Immunoglobulin E Levels.

INTRODUCTION: In chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU), interleukin (IL)-4 and IL-13 may promote mast cell activation directly via IL-4 receptor expression, or indirectly via upregulated immunoglobulin E (IgE) production. Dupilumab significantly improved CSU signs and symptoms in the phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled LIBERTY-CSU CUPID Study A. This analysis explores the impact of dupilumab on CSU signs and symptoms and serum IgE levels in patients from LIBERTY-CSU CUPID Study A with serum total IgE above and below 100 IU/mL at baseline. METHODS: Patients with H1-antihistamine-refractory CSU received dupilumab (n = 70) or placebo (n = 68) for 24 weeks. Efficacy endpoints were change from baseline to weeks 12 and 24 in serum total IgE levels, Itch Severity Score over 7 days (ISS7), Urticaria Activity Score over 7 days (UAS7), and Hives Severity Score over 7 days (HSS7) in dupilumab- or placebo-treated patients with serum total IgE above and below 100 IU/mL at baseline. RESULTS: Dupilumab treatment significantly reduced median (interquartile range) IgE levels at week 12 [dupilumab: -31.9% (-41.9; -22.6); placebo: -6.3% (-21.3; 14.9)] and week 24 [dupilumab: -48.2% (-56.8; - 39.5); placebo: - 6.3% (-34.5; 14.8)]. Similar IgE reductions relative to baseline were observed in dupilumab-treated patients regardless of baseline IgE level. Dupilumab treatment improved ISS7, UAS7, and HSS7 over 12 and 24 weeks, regardless of baseline serum IgE level (interaction p ≥ 0.59 for all treatment by subgroup comparisons), with weak correlations (r < 0.2) observed between IgE level changes and ISS7, UAS7, and HSS7 outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Dupilumab significantly improved CSU signs and symptoms and reduced serum IgE, regardless of baseline IgE levels. In the current analysis, baseline total IgE had no predictive value as a dupilumab treatment response biomarker in CSU. Downregulation of IgE, a key mediator of mast cell activation and histamine release, may at least partially explain the effectiveness of dupilumab in reducing CSU signs and symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04180488.

Trends in anaphylaxis management during COVID-19.

Background: Anaphylaxis is an acute, potentially life-threatening systemic hypersensitivity reaction that commonly occurs in the community setting and is best managed with epinephrine. Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of the coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) pandemic on trends in acute at-home anaphylactic events, including emergency room (ER) visits and treatment for anaphylaxis. Methods: We used data from 2 sources: survey data from the Food Allergy Research and Education Patient Registry and the electronic medical records of patients who presented to the Tampa General Hospital ER with a diagnosis of anaphylaxis. We collected data from events during the COVID-19 epidemic as well as before and after availability of the COVID-19 vaccine. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: A total of 190 Food Allergy Research and Education survey responses were completed. Of the 190 respondents, 63 reported that the COVID-19 pandemic changed how they responded to an allergic reaction. Of the 63 patients, 71% avoided seeking medical care outside the home, 30% used self-medication more quickly than usual, and 14% delayed their use of medication. Only 87 events (46%) were treated with epinephrine. From April 1, 2018, to March 31, 2022, a total of 4358 individuals presented to the Tampa General Hospital ER with an International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, diagnosis code of anaphylaxis or allergic reaction. Only 718 individuals received epinephrine in the ER. In all, 867 patients presented 1 year before March 1, 2020 (before availability of the COVID-19 vaccine), and 1833 patients presented 1 year after April 1, 2021 (after availability of the vaccine). Conclusions: According to the survey and ER data capture, only 16% of patients received epinephrine. After COVID-19 vaccine availability there were more ER visits for anaphylaxis among patients seen in a tertiary care teaching hospital.

Safety of 300IR house dust mite sublingual tablet from pooled clinical trial and post-marketing data.

Background: The 300IR house dust mite (HDM) sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablet is approved for treatment of HDM-induced allergic rhinitis (AR). To provide a comprehensive review of the 300IR HDM-SLIT tablet safety profile based on randomized controlled trial (RCT) pooled data and post-marketing (PM) pharmacovigilance data. Methods: Subjects (5-65 years) with confirmed HDM-AR with or without controlled asthma were treated with 300IR or placebo in 8 RCTs. Reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were pooled and analyzed descriptively in subsets of adults/adolescents and children. Adverse reactions (ADRs) collected from spontaneous reporting and PM studies through a pharmacovigilance system since the first marketing authorization were also analyzed. Results: Across RCTs, 1853 subjects were treated with the 300IR HDM-SLIT tablet and 1846 with placebo. In both subsets of adults/adolescents and children whichever their asthma status, treatment-related TEAEs of higher incidence in active groups vs placebo were mostly consistent with mild or moderate local application-site reactions. They were mainly reported on the first days of treatment and decreased over time. 4 severe laryngopharyngeal reactions (2 requiring adrenaline/epinephrine) and 1 moderate eczema considered serious rapidly resolved with medications; no anaphylaxis was reported. In PM settings, ADRs reported in more than 235,000 patients were in line with RCT findings. Severe systemic reactions occurred rarely; 12 anaphylactic reactions resolved safely (5 with adrenaline). No new safety signal was raised. Conclusion: Safety data from RCTs and more than 7 years of real-life experience confirmed the favorable safety profile of 300IR HDM-SLIT tablet in patients across different regions, regardless of age and asthma status. Clinical trial registrations: NCT00674700; Retrospectively registered 06 May 2008.NCT01199133; Retrospectively registered 09 September 2010.NCT01527188; Retrospectively registered 01 February 2012.NCT02443805; Registered 29 April 2015/EudraCT 2014-004223-46; Registered 16 September 2015.jRCT2080221872/JapicCTI-121917; Registered 01 August 2012.jRCT2080222929/JapicCTI-15298; Registered 04 August 2015.

Development of neffy, an Epinephrine Nasal Spray, for Severe Allergic Reactions.

Epinephrine autoinjectors (EAIs) are used for the treatment of severe allergic reactions in a community setting; however, their utility is limited by low prescription fulfillment rates, failure to carry, and failure to use due to fear of needles. Given that delayed administration of epinephrine is associated with increased morbidity/mortality, there has been a growing interest in developing needle-free, easy-to-use delivery devices. neffy (epinephrine nasal spray) consists of three Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved components: epinephrine, Intravail A3 (absorption enhancer), and a Unit Dose Spray (UDS). neffy's development pathway was established in conjunction with the FDA and the European Medicines Agency and included multiple clinical trials to evaluate pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic responses under a variety of conditions, such as self-administration and allergic and infectious rhinitis, as well as an animal anaphylaxis model of severe hypotension, where neffy demonstrated a pharmacokinetic profile that is within the range of approved injection products and a pharmacodynamic response that is as good or better than injections. The increased pulse rate (PR) and blood pressure (BP) observed even one minute following the administration of neffy confirm the activation of α and ß adrenergic receptors, which are the key components of epinephrine's mechanism of action. The results suggest that neffy will provide a safe and effective needle-free option for the treatment of severe allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis.

Real-world outcomes in patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria receiving omalizumab: insights from a clinical practice survey.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a debilitating inflammatory skin condition, often impacting quality of life. International guidelines recommend omalizumab, an anti-immunoglobulin E antibody, for second-line treatment. Our objective was to understand patient characteristics associated with prescription of omalizumab, and assess real-world outcomes in patients with CSU treated with omalizumab. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Adelphi Real World CSU Disease Specific Programme, a cross-sectional survey with retrospective data collection (December 2020-October 2021) from physicians and patients with CSU in the United States. RESULTS: Data from allergists (n = 45), dermatologists (n = 51), and primary care physicians (PCPs; n = 20) were included. At the time of data collection, one-third of patients were receiving omalizumab (n = 220) and 67% were eligible for but not receiving omalizumab (n = 455). Using logistic regression, the odds of receiving omalizumab were higher in patients whose entire bodies were affected by hives [odds ratio (OR) = 2.551; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.502-4.333; p < 0.001] or with deteriorating/unstable prognoses at treatment initiation [OR = 2.219; 95% CI 1.031-4.777; p = 0.042], and lower in patients managed by PCPs [OR = 0.276; 95% CI 0.130-0.584; p < 0.001]. Estimates from an inverse probability weighted regression adjustment model indicated that patients receiving omalizumab had higher treatment satisfaction, improvements in itching, hives, angioedema, insomnia, and anxiety, and lower impact on work productivity, compared with patients not receiving omalizumab. CONCLUSION: Around two-thirds of patients with CSU considered eligible for omalizumab were not receiving the guideline-recommended therapy. Patients receiving omalizumab had better real-world outcomes compared with patients not receiving omalizumab. Ensuring patients receive the most appropriate treatment could benefit patients with CSU.

People with a skin rash known as chronic spontaneous urticaria (also called long-lasting hives) have itchy spots that last longer than 6 weeks. People with long-lasting hives may be treated with a medicine called omalizumab to help their itching. We asked doctors why they gave some people omalizumab. We found that only one out of every three people with long-lasting hives were given omalizumab. Doctors gave some people omalizumab because they had long-lasting hives on their whole body or their hives were getting worse. Other people received omalizumab because they were seeing a specialist doctor (allergist) instead of a primary care physician (also called a general practitioner). When compared with people who received other medicines, people being treated with omalizumab had reduced itching, less anxiety, and better well-being. These findings could help doctors choose the right medicine for people with long-lasting hives.

Advancements in biologic therapy in eosinophilic asthma.

INTRODUCTION: Asthma encompasses a spectrum of phenotypes often categorized into two groups- type 2 high (T2 high) and type 2 low (T2 low). T2 high includes atopic and eosinophilic presentations whereas T2 low is non-atopic, non-eosinophilic, and oft associated with neutrophilic inflammation. Eosinophilic asthma is often driven by IgE, IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13 and TSLP. This can lead to eosinophilic inflammatory response in the airways which in turn can be used as target for treatment. AREAS COVERED: The article will focus on biologic therapy that is currently being used in eosinophilic asthma management in mainly the adult population including clinical trials and co-morbidities that can be treated using the same biologics. A review on asthma biologics for pediatric population has been reviewed elsewhere. EXPERT OPINION: Biological therapy for asthma targeting the IgE, IL-4, IL-5, IL-13, and TSLP pathways are shown to have benefit for the treatment of eosinophilic asthma, as exemplified in real-world studies. When choosing the right biological agent factors such as phenotype, comorbidities, and cost-effectiveness of the biologic agent must be taken into consideration.

A practical guide for implementing omalizumab therapy for food allergy.

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.

The mental health burden of food allergies: Insights from patients and their caregivers from the Food Allergy Research & Education (FARE) Patient Registry.

Background: Food allergies impose a large psychosocial burden, including mental, emotional, and social aspects, on both patients and their caregivers. Patients, caregivers, and their families often experience anxiety, isolation, and fear around food allergies. Objective: To assess the real-world mental health burden of food allergies, using the Food Allergy Research & Education (FARE) Patient Registry (NCT04653324). Methods: Self-reported data from patients with food allergies, and their caregivers, were analyzed from the FARE Food Allergy History and Mental Health Concerns surveys. Odds ratios were also calculated as a measure of association between patient food allergy characteristics and the likelihood of having mental health concerns or a formal mental health diagnosis. Results: The FARE Patient Registry included 1680 patients/caregivers. Anxiety (54%) and panic (32%) were the most common emotions that patients reported as a result of eating the food that produced an allergic reaction. About two-thirds of patients reported mental health concerns related to food allergies (62%), including anxiety after an allergic reaction, anxiety about living with food allergies, and concerns about food avoidance. Caregivers also experienced fear for the safety of their children, and often sought mental health care to cope with worry related to caring for patients with food allergies. The likelihood of having food allergy-related mental health concerns was increased for patients experiencing more than 1 reaction per year (OR 1.68-1.90) and was lowered for patients having a formal mental health diagnosis (OR 0.43). Caregivers filling out the FARE survey for pediatric patients (OR 4.03) and experiencing food allergy-related mental health concerns (OR 2.36) were both significant predictors for having a formal mental health diagnosis. Conclusion: Our study highlights a continuing unmet need for mental health screening and support as part of the management of patients with food allergies.

Efficacy of 300 IR house dust mite immunotherapy as a function of disease activity: Tertile analysis in clinical trials.

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.

Dupilumab in patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (LIBERTY-CSU CUPID): Two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials.

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.

Dupilumab Reduces Exacerbations Independent of Changes in Biomarkers in Moderate-to-Severe Asthma.

BACKGROUND: Changes from baseline in fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) and blood eosinophil count (Eos) may be related to efficacy outcomes in dupilumab-treated patients with moderate-to-severe asthma. OBJECTIVE: This post hoc analysis investigated biomarker changes in placebo- and dupilumab-treated patients with uncontrolled moderate-to-severe asthma enrolled in QUEST (NCT02414854). METHODS: Spline analyses of annualized severe exacerbation rate (AER) and change from baseline in pre-bronchodilator (BD) forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) at week 52 were performed as a function of the fold change in FeNO at week 52 and the maximum fold change in Eos over weeks 0-12 (also change from baseline in pre-BD FEV1 at week 12). RESULTS: The combined placebo and dupilumab groups comprised 638 and 1264 patients, respectively. FeNO levels declined rapidly by week 2 and then gradually to week 52 in patients treated with dupilumab versus placebo; Eos, after initially increasing with dupilumab, declined slightly from baseline in both treatment groups. AER during QUEST showed no significant association with the change in biomarkers in either treatment group. The change from baseline in pre-BD FEV1 at week 52 was inversely associated with the fold change in FeNO in both groups, with a significant difference between the dupilumab and placebo curves (P = .014), and was positively associated with the fold change in Eos in both groups (P = .022). CONCLUSIONS: Relative changes in FeNO and Eos were not associated with AER, regardless of treatment arm. However, changes in both biomarkers showed a predictive value for lung function improvement; for FeNO, this was specific to the dupilumab treatment arm.

Real-world association between systemic corticosteroid exposure and complications in US patients with severe asthma.

BACKGROUND: Systemic corticosteroid (SCS) use remains widespread among patients with severe asthma, despite associated complications. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the association between cumulative SCS exposure and SCS-related complications in severe asthma. METHODS: This retrospective, longitudinal study used claims data from the Optum Clinformatics Data Mart database (GSK ID: 214469). Eligible patients (≥ 12 years old) had an asthma diagnosis and were divided into two cohorts: SCS use and non/burst-SCS use. Patients in the SCS use cohort had a claim for a daily prednisone-equivalent dose ≥ 5 mg SCS following ≥ 6 months of continuous SCS use; those in the non/burst-SCS cohort had no evidence of continuous SCS use and had a non-SCS controller/rescue medication initiation claim. For each cohort, the date of the qualifying claim was the index date. SCS users were further stratified by SCS use during each quarter of follow-up: low (≤ 6 mg/day), medium (> 6-12 mg/day), high (> 12 mg/day), and continuous high (≥ 20 mg/day for 90 days). SCS-related complications were evaluated in the quarter following SCS exposure. The adjusted odds ratios (OR) of experiencing SCS-related complications during follow-up in each of the SCS use groups versus the non/burst SCS cohort were calculated using generalized estimating equations models. RESULTS: SCS and non/burst-SCS use cohorts included 7473 and 89,281 patients (mean follow-up: 24.6 and 24.2 months), respectively. Compared with the non/burst-SCS use cohort, medium, high, and continuous high SCS use was associated with greater odds of any SCS-related complication (adjusted OR [95% confidence interval]: 1.30 [1.21, 1.39], 1.49 [1.35, 1.64] and 1.63 [1.40, 1.89], respectively) including increased acute gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, and immune system-related complications, and chronic cardiovascular, metabolic/endocrine, central nervous system, bone-/muscle-related, ophthalmologic, and hematologic/oncologic complications. Low-dose SCS use was also associated with significantly increased odds of acute gastrointestinal and immune system-related complications, and chronic bone-/muscle-related and hematologic/oncologic complications versus the non/burst-SCS use cohort. CONCLUSION: SCS use, even at low doses, is associated with increased risk of SCS-related complications among patients with severe asthma.

The clinical burden of food allergies: Insights from the Food Allergy Research & Education (FARE) Patient Registry.

Background: Food allergies are serious and potentially life-threatening, and often place a large burden on patients and their caregivers, including impacts on quality of life. Objective: To assess the real-world patient burden of food allergies, using self-reported data available from the Food Allergy Research & Education (FARE) Patient Registry (NCT04653324). Methods: The FARE Patient Registry is voluntary and captures real-world experiences of adults and pediatric patients in the United States, and their caregivers, through a series of surveys assessing patient health and experiences with food allergies. Self-reported data were descriptively analyzed. Results: The FARE study cohort included 5587 patients with food allergies; 82% had multiple food allergies and 62% were aged <18 years. About half of the patients were first diagnosed by an allergist/immunologist (53%), most commonly with a skin prick test (71%) or a serum immunoglobulin E test (62%). This analysis found that food allergies (most commonly peanut [66%], tree nuts [61%], egg [43%], and milk [37%]) impart a large clinical burden on patients, many of whom experience food-related allergic reactions and comorbidities. Many patients experienced >1 food-related allergic reaction per year (42%), with 46% experiencing food-induced anaphylaxis. Half of all food-related allergic reactions occurred at home. Accidental exposures to food allergens were experienced by 77% of patients. The most common allergic comorbidities reported by patients with food allergies were atopic dermatitis (48%), asthma (46%), and allergic rhinitis (39%). The clinical burden of food allergies were found to be greater in patients with multiple food allergies, and different for adults versus pediatric patients. Conclusion: This is the first study to assess patient experience and disease burden information from patients contributing to the FARE Patient Registry, thus providing a unique insight into the lives of patients in the United States with food allergies. These insights may assist clinicians and other public health stakeholders in the management of patients with food allergies.