RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Food allergies are common and are associated with substantial morbidity; the only approved treatment is oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy. METHODS: In this trial, we assessed whether omalizumab, a monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, would be effective and safe as monotherapy in patients with multiple food allergies. Persons 1 to 55 years of age who were allergic to peanuts and at least two other trial-specified foods (cashew, milk, egg, walnut, wheat, and hazelnut) were screened. Inclusion required a reaction to a food challenge of 100 mg or less of peanut protein and 300 mg or less of the two other foods. Participants were randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive omalizumab or placebo administered subcutaneously (with the dose based on weight and IgE levels) every 2 to 4 weeks for 16 to 20 weeks, after which the challenges were repeated. The primary end point was ingestion of peanut protein in a single dose of 600 mg or more without dose-limiting symptoms. The three key secondary end points were the consumption of cashew, of milk, and of egg in single doses of at least 1000 mg each without dose-limiting symptoms. The first 60 participants (59 of whom were children or adolescents) who completed this first stage were enrolled in a 24-week open-label extension. RESULTS: Of the 462 persons who were screened, 180 underwent randomization. The analysis population consisted of the 177 children and adolescents (1 to 17 years of age). A total of 79 of the 118 participants (67%) receiving omalizumab met the primary end-point criteria, as compared with 4 of the 59 participants (7%) receiving placebo (P<0.001). Results for the key secondary end points were consistent with those of the primary end point (cashew, 41% vs. 3%; milk, 66% vs. 10%; egg, 67% vs. 0%; P<0.001 for all comparisons). Safety end points did not differ between the groups, aside from more injection-site reactions in the omalizumab group. CONCLUSIONS: In persons as young as 1 year of age with multiple food allergies, omalizumab treatment for 16 weeks was superior to placebo in increasing the reaction threshold for peanut and other common food allergens. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03881696.).
Asunto(s)
Antialérgicos , Desensibilización Inmunológica , Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos , Omalizumab , Adolescente , Niño , Humanos , Lactante , Alérgenos/efectos adversos , Arachis/efectos adversos , Desensibilización Inmunológica/métodos , Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos/tratamiento farmacológico , Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos/inmunología , Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos/terapia , Omalizumab/efectos adversos , Omalizumab/uso terapéutico , Hipersensibilidad al Cacahuete/tratamiento farmacológico , Hipersensibilidad al Cacahuete/inmunología , Hipersensibilidad al Cacahuete/terapia , Antialérgicos/administración & dosificación , Antialérgicos/uso terapéutico , Preescolar , Adulto Joven , Adulto , Persona de Mediana EdadRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: No approved treatment for peanut allergy exists for children younger than 4 years of age, and the efficacy and safety of epicutaneous immunotherapy with a peanut patch in toddlers with peanut allergy are unknown. METHODS: We conducted this phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial involving children 1 to 3 years of age with peanut allergy confirmed by a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge. Patients who had an eliciting dose (the dose necessary to elicit an allergic reaction) of 300 mg or less of peanut protein were assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive epicutaneous immunotherapy delivered by means of a peanut patch (intervention group) or to receive placebo administered daily for 12 months. The primary end point was a treatment response as measured by the eliciting dose of peanut protein at 12 months. Safety was assessed according to the occurrence of adverse events during the use of the peanut patch or placebo. RESULTS: Of the 362 patients who underwent randomization, 84.8% completed the trial. The primary efficacy end point result was observed in 67.0% of children in the intervention group as compared with 33.5% of those in the placebo group (risk difference, 33.4 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 22.4 to 44.5; P<0.001). Adverse events that occurred during the use of the intervention or placebo, irrespective of relatedness, were observed in 100% of the patients in the intervention group and 99.2% in the placebo group. Serious adverse events occurred in 8.6% of the patients in the intervention group and 2.5% of those in the placebo group; anaphylaxis occurred in 7.8% and 3.4%, respectively. Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 0.4% of patients in the intervention group and none in the placebo group. Treatment-related anaphylaxis occurred in 1.6% in the intervention group and none in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving children 1 to 3 years of age with peanut allergy, epicutaneous immunotherapy for 12 months was superior to placebo in desensitizing children to peanuts and increasing the peanut dose that triggered allergic symptoms. (Funded by DBV Technologies; EPITOPE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03211247.).
Asunto(s)
Anafilaxia , Desensibilización Inmunológica , Hipersensibilidad al Cacahuete , Preescolar , Humanos , Lactante , Alérgenos/efectos adversos , Anafilaxia/etiología , Arachis/efectos adversos , Desensibilización Inmunológica/efectos adversos , Desensibilización Inmunológica/métodos , Hipersensibilidad al Cacahuete/complicaciones , Hipersensibilidad al Cacahuete/terapia , Administración CutáneaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Reaction threshold and severity in food allergy are difficult to predict, and noninvasive predictors are lacking. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the relationships between pre-challenge levels of peanut (PN)-specific antibodies in saliva and reaction threshold, severity, and organ-specific symptoms during PN allergic reactions. METHODS: We measured PN-specific antibody levels in saliva collected from 127 children with suspected PN allergy before double-blind, placebo-controlled PN challenges in which reaction threshold, severity, and symptoms were rigorously characterized. Low threshold (LT) PN allergy was defined as reaction to <300 mg of PN protein cumulatively consumed. A consensus severity grading system was used to grade severity. We analyzed associations between antibody levels and reaction threshold, severity, and organ-specific symptoms. RESULTS: Among the 127 children, those with high pre-challenge saliva PN IgE had higher odds of LT PN allergy (odds ratio [OR] 3.9, 95% CI 1.6-9.5), while those with high saliva PN IgA:PN IgE ratio or PN IgG4:PN IgE ratio had lower odds of LT PN allergy (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.8; OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.9). Children with high pre-challenge saliva PN IgG4 had lower odds of severe PN reactions (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.9). Children with high saliva PN IgE had higher odds of respiratory symptoms (OR 8.0, 95% CI 2.2-26.8). Saliva PN IgE modestly correlated with serum PN IgE levels (Pearson r = 0.31, P = .0004). High and low saliva PN IgE levels further distinguished reaction threshold and severity in participants stratified by serum PN IgE, suggesting endotypes. CONCLUSIONS: Saliva PN antibodies could aid in noninvasive risk stratification of PN allergy threshold, severity, and organ-specific symptoms.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Reaction thresholds in peanut allergy are highly variable. Elucidating causal relationships between molecular and cellular processes associated with variable thresholds could point to therapeutic pathways for raising thresholds. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to characterize molecular and cellular systemic processes associated with reaction threshold in peanut allergy and causal relationships between them. METHODS: A total of 105 children aged 4 to 14 years with suspected peanut allergy underwent double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge to peanut. The cumulative peanut protein quantity eliciting allergic symptoms was considered the reaction threshold for each child. Peripheral blood samples collected at 0, 2, and 4 hours after challenge start were used for RNA sequencing, whole blood staining, and cytometry. Statistical and network analyses were performed to identify associations and causal mediation between the molecular and cellular profiles and peanut reaction threshold. RESULTS: Within the cohort (N = 105), 81 children (77%) experienced allergic reactions after ingesting varying quantities of peanut, ranging from 43 to 9043 mg of cumulative peanut protein. Peripheral blood expression of transcripts (eg, IGF1R [false discovery rate (FDR) = 5.4e-5] and PADI4 [FDR = 5.4e-5]) and neutrophil abundance (FDR = 9.5e-4) were associated with peanut threshold. Coexpression network analyses revealed that the threshold-associated transcripts were enriched in modules for FcγR-mediated phagocytosis (FDR = 3.2e-3) and Toll-like receptor (FDR = 1.4e-3) signaling. Bayesian network, key driver, and causal mediation analyses identified key drivers (AP5B1, KLHL21, VASP, TPD52L2, and IGF2R) within these modules that are involved in bidirectional causal mediation relationships with neutrophil abundance. CONCLUSION: Key driver transcripts in FcγR-mediated phagocytosis and Toll-like receptor signaling interact bidirectionally with neutrophils in peripheral blood and are associated with reaction threshold in peanut allergy.
Asunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad al Cacahuete , Humanos , Hipersensibilidad al Cacahuete/inmunología , Niño , Preescolar , Masculino , Femenino , Adolescente , Transcriptoma , Arachis/inmunología , Alérgenos/inmunología , Método Doble Ciego , Citometría de FlujoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Despite the promise of oral immunotherapy (OIT) to treat food allergies, this procedure is associated with potential risk. There is no current agreement about what elements should be included in the preparatory or consent process. OBJECTIVE: We developed consensus recommendations about the OIT process considerations and patient-specific factors that should be addressed before initiating OIT and developed a consensus OIT consent process and information form. METHODS: We convened a 36-member Preparing Patients for Oral Immunotherapy (PPOINT) panel of allergy experts to develop a consensus OIT patient preparation, informed consent process, and framework form. Consensus for themes and statements was reached using Delphi methodology, and the consent information form was developed. RESULTS: The expert panel reached consensus for 4 themes and 103 statements specific to OIT preparatory procedures, of which 76 statements reached consensus for inclusion specific to the following themes: general considerations for counseling patients about OIT; patient- and family-specific factors that should be addressed before initiating OIT and during OIT; indications for initiating OIT; and potential contraindications and precautions for OIT. The panel reached consensus on 9 OIT consent form themes: benefits, risks, outcomes, alternatives, risk mitigation, difficulties/challenges, discontinuation, office policies, and long-term management. From these themes, 219 statements were proposed, of which 189 reached consensus, and 71 were included on the consent information form. CONCLUSION: We developed consensus recommendations to prepare and counsel patients for safe and effective OIT in clinical practice with evidence-based risk mitigation. Adoption of these recommendations may help standardize clinical care and improve patient outcomes and quality of life.
Asunto(s)
Consenso , Técnica Delphi , Desensibilización Inmunológica , Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos , Consentimiento Informado , Humanos , Desensibilización Inmunológica/métodos , Administración Oral , Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos/terapia , Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos/inmunologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In the ongoing, randomised, double-blind phase 3 TOPAZ-1 study, durvalumab, a PD-L1 inhibitor, plus gemcitabine and cisplatin was associated with significant improvements in overall survival compared with placebo, gemcitabine, and cisplatin in people with advanced biliary tract cancer at the pre-planned intermin analysis. In this paper, we present patient-reported outcomes from TOPAZ-1. METHODS: In TOPAZ-1 (NCT03875235), participants aged 18 years or older with previously untreated, unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic biliary tract cancer with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 and one or more measurable lesions per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST; version 1.1) were randomly assigned (1:1) to the durvalumab group or the placebo group using a computer-generated randomisation scheme. Participants received 1500 mg durvalumab or matched placebo intravenously every 3 weeks (on day 1 of the cycle) for up to eight cycles in combination with 1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine and 25 mg/m2 cisplatin intravenously on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks for up to eight cycles. Thereafter, participants received either durvalumab (1500 mg) or placebo monotherapy intravenously every 4 weeks until disease progression or other discontinuation criteria were met. Randomisation was stratified by disease status (initially unresectable vs recurrent) and primary tumour location (intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma vs extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma vs gallbladder cancer). Patient-reported outcomes were assessed as a secondary outcome in all participants who completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer's 30-item Quality of Life of Cancer Patients questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and the 21-item Cholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer Quality of Life Module (QLQ-BIL21). We calculated time to deterioration-ie, time from randomisation to an absolute decrease of at least 10 points in a patient-reported outcome that was confirmed at a subsequent visit or the date of death (by any cause) in the absence of deterioration-and adjusted mean change from baseline in patient-reported outcomes. FINDINGS: Between April 16, 2019, and Dec 11, 2020, 685 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned, 341 to the durvalumab group and 344 to the placebo group. Overall, 345 (50%) of participants were male and 340 (50%) were female. Data for the QLQ-C30 were available for 318 participants in the durvalumab group and 328 in the placebo group (median follow-up 9·9 months [IQR 6·7 to 14·1]). Data for the QLQ-BIL21 were available for 305 participants in the durvalumab group and 322 in the placebo group (median follow-up 10·2 months [IQR 6·7 to 14·3]). The proportions of participants in both groups who completed questionnaires were high and baseline scores were mostly similar across treatment groups. For global health status or quality of life, functioning, and symptoms, we noted no difference in time to deterioration or adjusted mean changes from baseline were observed between groups. Median time to deterioration of global health status or quality of life was 7·4 months (95% CI 5·6 to 8·9) in the durvalumab group and 6·7 months (5·6 to 7·9) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·87 [95% CI 0·69 to 1·12]). The adjusted mean change from baseline was 1·23 (95% CI -0·71 to 3·16) in the durvalumab group and 0·35 (-1·63 to 2·32) in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: The addition of durvalumab to gemcitabine and cisplatin did not have a detrimental effect on patient-reported outcomes. These results suggest that durvalumab, gemcitabine, and cisplatin is a tolerable treatment regimen in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.
Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Neoplasias del Sistema Biliar , Cisplatino , Desoxicitidina , Gemcitabina , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Humanos , Cisplatino/administración & dosificación , Método Doble Ciego , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Masculino , Femenino , Neoplasias del Sistema Biliar/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias del Sistema Biliar/patología , Neoplasias del Sistema Biliar/mortalidad , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Desoxicitidina/administración & dosificación , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anticuerpos Monoclonales/administración & dosificación , Anciano , Adulto , Calidad de VidaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To characterize the awareness of, adherence to, and barriers to the 2017 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) peanut allergy prevention guidelines among the pediatrics health care workforce STUDY DESIGN: Pediatricians, family physicians, advanced practice providers (APPs), and dermatologists who provide care for infants were solicited for a population-based online survey, administered from June 6, 2022, through July 3, 2022. The survey collected information about NIAID guideline awareness, implementation, and barriers as well as concerns related to the guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 250 pediatricians, 250 family physicians, 504 advanced practice practitioners (APPs), and 253 dermatologists met inclusion criteria. Self-reported guideline awareness was significantly higher for pediatricians (76%) compared with dermatologists (58%), family physicians (52%), and APPs (45%) (P < .05). Among participants who were aware of the guidelines, most reported using part or all of the guidelines in their clinical practices. Reported practice patterns for peanut introduction in 6-month-old infants were variable and did not always align with guidelines, particularly for infants with mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis. CONCLUSIONS: Although pediatricians have the highest self-reported level of NIAID guideline awareness, awareness was suboptimal irrespective of provider type. Education for all pediatric clinicians is urgently needed to promote evidence-based peanut allergy prevention practices.
RESUMEN
Food allergy management has greatly evolved over the last several years, moving from passive approaches such as strict food allergen avoidance, to more active treatments, including regulatory approval of the first specifically indicated immunotherapy product (for peanut) in 2020. In 2024, a second therapy, omalizumab, received regulatory approval for the treatment of one or more IgE-mediated food allergies, providing clinicians with multiple treatment options to offer patients and families. With this expanded armamentarium of food allergy treatment options, the practicing clinician requires detailed knowledge of benefits and risks of omalizumab, how omalizumab fits into the management landscape, and how to utilize shared decision-making to optimize therapy. This yardstick aims to provide the clinician with a review of data leading to omalizumab's food allergy indication, and an evidence-based expert opinion approach regarding how best to utilize this and other therapies available to optimize patient management.
RESUMEN
This practice parameter update focuses on 7 areas in which there are new evidence and new recommendations. Diagnostic criteria for anaphylaxis have been revised, and patterns of anaphylaxis are defined. Measurement of serum tryptase is important for diagnosis of anaphylaxis and to identify underlying mast cell disorders. In infants and toddlers, age-specific symptoms may differ from older children and adults, patient age is not correlated with reaction severity, and anaphylaxis is unlikely to be the initial reaction to an allergen on first exposure. Different community settings for anaphylaxis require specific measures for prevention and treatment of anaphylaxis. Optimal prescribing and use of epinephrine autoinjector devices require specific counseling and training of patients and caregivers, including when and how to administer the epinephrine autoinjector and whether and when to call 911. If epinephrine is used promptly, immediate activation of emergency medical services may not be required if the patient experiences a prompt, complete, and durable response. For most medical indications, the risk of stopping or changing beta-blocker or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor medication may exceed the risk of more severe anaphylaxis if the medication is continued, especially in patients with insect sting anaphylaxis. Evaluation for mastocytosis, including a bone marrow biopsy, should be considered for adult patients with severe insect sting anaphylaxis or recurrent idiopathic anaphylaxis. After perioperative anaphylaxis, repeat anesthesia may proceed in the context of shared decision-making and based on the history and results of diagnostic evaluation with skin tests or in vitro tests when available, and supervised challenge when necessary.
Asunto(s)
Anafilaxia , Mordeduras y Picaduras de Insectos , Mastocitosis , Adulto , Humanos , Niño , Adolescente , Anafilaxia/diagnóstico , Anafilaxia/tratamiento farmacológico , Anafilaxia/prevención & control , Mordeduras y Picaduras de Insectos/tratamiento farmacológico , Epinefrina/uso terapéutico , Mastocitosis/diagnóstico , AlérgenosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Guidance addressing atopic dermatitis (AD) management, last issued in 2012 by the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology/American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Joint Task Force, requires updating as a result of new treatments and improved guideline and evidence synthesis methodology. OBJECTIVE: To produce evidence-based guidelines that support patients, clinicians, and other decision-makers in the optimal treatment of AD. METHODS: A multidisciplinary guideline panel consisting of patients and caregivers, AD experts (dermatology and allergy/immunology), primary care practitioners (family medicine, pediatrics, internal medicine), and allied health professionals (psychology, pharmacy, nursing) convened, prioritized equity, diversity, and inclusiveness, and implemented management strategies to minimize influence of conflicts of interest. The Evidence in Allergy Group supported guideline development by performing systematic evidence reviews, facilitating guideline processes, and holding focus groups with patient and family partners. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach informed rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations. Evidence-to-decision frameworks, subjected to public comment, translated evidence to recommendations using trustworthy guideline principles. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 25 recommendations to gain and maintain control of AD for patients with mild, moderate, and severe AD. The eAppendix provides practical information and implementation considerations in 1-2 page patient-friendly handouts. CONCLUSION: These evidence-based recommendations address optimal use of (1) topical treatments (barrier moisturization devices, corticosteroids, calcineurin inhibitors, PDE4 inhibitors [crisaborole], topical JAK inhibitors, occlusive [wet wrap] therapy, adjunctive antimicrobials, application frequency, maintenance therapy), (2) dilute bleach baths, (3) dietary avoidance/elimination, (4) allergen immunotherapy, and (5) systemic treatments (biologics/monoclonal antibodies, small molecule immunosuppressants [cyclosporine, methotrexate, azathioprine, mycophenolate, JAK inhibitors], and systemic corticosteroids) and UV phototherapy (light therapy).
Asunto(s)
Asma , Dermatitis Atópica , Eccema , Hipersensibilidad , Inhibidores de las Cinasas Janus , Niño , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Dermatitis Atópica/tratamiento farmacológico , National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine, U.S., Health and Medicine Division , Corticoesteroides , InmunosupresoresRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados , Vacunas , Humanos , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/uso terapéutico , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Consenso , Técnica Delphi , Dermatitis Atópica/tratamiento farmacológico , Vacunación/efectos adversos , Vacunas/efectos adversos , Vacunas/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This narrative review explores food allergy prevalence and natural history stratified by life stages, especially in context of evolving knowledge over the last few decades. RECENT FINDINGS: The prevalence of food allergy remains highest in early childhood with common food triggers being cow's milk, soy, hen's egg, wheat, peanut, tree nuts, sesame, fish, and shellfish. This correlates with certain risk factors especially pertinent in the postnatal period which appear to predispose an individual to developing a food allergy. Some allergies (such as milk and egg) were previously thought to be easily outgrown in early life; however, recent studies suggest increasing rates of persistence of these allergies into young adulthood; the reason behind this is unknown. Despite this, there is also evidence demonstrating that food allergies can be outgrown in adolescents and adults. An understanding of the paradigm shifts in the natural history of food allergy allows clinicians to provide updated, age-appropriate, and tailored advice for patients on the management and prognosis of food allergy.
Asunto(s)
Pollos , Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos , Niño , Adolescente , Adulto , Bovinos , Humanos , Preescolar , Femenino , Animales , Adulto Joven , Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos/epidemiología , Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos/etiología , Factores de Riesgo , Alérgenos/efectos adversos , LecheRESUMEN
Thromboembolic diseases including arterial and venous thrombosis are common causes of morbidity and mortality globally. Thrombosis frequently recurs and can also complicate many inflammatory conditions through the process of 'thrombo-inflammation,' as evidenced during the COVID-19 pandemic. Current candidate biomarkers for thrombosis prediction, such as D-dimer, have poor predictive efficacy. This limits our capacity to tailor anticoagulation duration individually and may expose lower risk individuals to undue bleeding risk. Global coagulation assays, such as the Overall Haemostatic Potential (OHP) assay, that investigate fibrin generation and fibrinolysis, may provide a more accurate and functional assessment of hypercoagulability. We present a review of fibrin's critical role as a central modulator of thrombotic risk. The results of our studies demonstrating the OHP assay as a predictive biomarker in venous thromboembolism, chronic renal disease, diabetes mellitus, post-thrombotic syndrome, and COVID-19 are discussed. As a comprehensive and global measurement of fibrin generation and fibrinolytic capacity, the OHP assay may be a valuable addition to future multi-modal predictive tools in thrombosis.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Hemostasis , Trombosis , Humanos , COVID-19/sangre , COVID-19/complicaciones , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Trombosis/sangre , Trombosis/diagnóstico , Hemostasis/fisiología , Tromboinflamación/sangre , Tromboinflamación/diagnóstico , Biomarcadores/sangre , Trombosis de la Vena/sangre , Trombosis de la Vena/diagnóstico , Pruebas de Coagulación Sanguínea/métodos , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Fibrinólisis , SARS-CoV-2RESUMEN
These evidence-based guidelines support patients, clinicians, and other stakeholders in decisions about the use of intranasal corticosteroids (INCS), biologics, and aspirin therapy after desensitization (ATAD) for the management of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP). It is important to note that the current evidence on surgery for CRSwNP was not assessed for this guideline nor were management options other than INCS, biologics, and ATAD. The Allergy-Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to include the views of multiple stakeholders and to minimize potential biases. Systematic reviews for each management option informed the guideline. The guideline panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to inform and develop recommendations. The guideline panel reached consensus on the following statements: (1) In people with CRSwNP, the guideline panel suggests INCS rather than no INCS (conditional recommendation, low certainty of evidence). (2) In people with CRSwNP, the guideline panel suggests biologics rather than no biologics (conditional recommendation, moderate certainty of evidence). (3) In people with aspirin (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug)-exacerbated respiratory disease, the guideline panel suggests ATAD rather than no ATAD (conditional recommendation, moderate certainty of evidence). The conditions for each recommendation are discussed in the guideline.
Asunto(s)
Productos Biológicos , Pólipos Nasales , Rinitis , Sinusitis , Humanos , Sinusitis/tratamiento farmacológico , Corticoesteroides/uso terapéutico , Administración Intranasal , Pólipos Nasales/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedad Crónica , Productos Biológicos/uso terapéutico , Aspirina/uso terapéutico , Rinitis/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
Continuing insight into the molecular mechanisms of atopic disorders has enabled the development of biologics to precisely target these diseases. Food allergy (FA) and eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGIDs) are driven by similar inflammatory molecular mechanisms and exist along the same atopic disease spectrum. Therefore, many of the same biologics are being investigated to target key drivers of mechanisms shared across the disease states. The enormous potential of biologics for the treatment of FA and EGIDs is highlighted by the significant increases in the number of ongoing clinical trials (more than 30) evaluating their use in these disease states, as well as by the recent US Food and Drug Administration approval of dupilumab for the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis. Here we discuss past and current research into the use of biologics in FA and EGIDs and their potential role in improving treatment options in the future, with the need to have biologics widely clinically available.
Asunto(s)
Productos Biológicos , Enteritis , Esofagitis Eosinofílica , Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos , Estados Unidos , Humanos , NiñoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD, eczema) is driven by a combination of skin barrier defects, immune dysregulation, and extrinsic stimuli such as allergens, irritants, and microbes. The role of environmental allergens (aeroallergens) in triggering AD remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: We systematically synthesized evidence regarding the benefits and harms of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) for AD. METHODS: As part of the 2022 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology/American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD Guideline update, we searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, LILACS, Global Resource for Eczema Trials, and Web of Science databases from inception to December 2021 for randomized controlled trials comparing subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT), sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), and/or no AIT (placebo or standard care) for guideline panel-defined patient-important outcomes: AD severity, itch, AD-related quality of life (QoL), flares, and adverse events. Raters independently screened, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias in duplicate. We synthesized intervention effects using frequentist and Bayesian random-effects models. The GRADE approach determined the quality of evidence. RESULTS: Twenty-three randomized controlled trials including 1957 adult and pediatric patients sensitized primarily to house dust mite showed that add-on SCIT and SLIT have similar relative and absolute effects and likely result in important improvements in AD severity, defined as a 50% reduction in SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (risk ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.53 [1.31-1.78]; 26% vs 40%, absolute difference 14%) and QoL, defined as an improvement in Dermatology Life Quality Index by 4 points or more (risk ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.44 [1.03-2.01]; 39% vs 56%, absolute difference 17%; both outcomes moderate certainty). Both routes of AIT increased adverse events (risk ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.61 [1.44-1.79]; 66% with SCIT vs 41% with placebo; 13% with SLIT vs 8% with placebo; high certainty). AIT's effect on sleep disturbance and eczema flares was very uncertain. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were consistent with the main findings. CONCLUSIONS: SCIT and SLIT to aeroallergens, particularly house dust mite, can similarly and importantly improve AD severity and QoL. SCIT increases adverse effects more than SLIT. These findings support a multidisciplinary and shared decision-making approach to optimally managing AD.
Asunto(s)
Asma , Dermatitis Atópica , Eccema , Hipersensibilidad , Inmunoterapia Sublingual , Adulto , Animales , Humanos , Niño , Dermatitis Atópica/tratamiento farmacológico , Calidad de Vida , Teorema de Bayes , Desensibilización Inmunológica/efectos adversos , Pyroglyphidae , Hipersensibilidad/etiología , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Alérgenos/uso terapéutico , Inmunoterapia Sublingual/efectos adversos , Dermatophagoides pteronyssinusRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common skin condition with multiple topical treatment options, but uncertain comparative effects. OBJECTIVE: We sought to systematically synthesize the benefits and harms of AD prescription topical treatments. METHODS: For the 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, LILACS, ICTRP, and GREAT databases to September 5, 2022, for randomized trials addressing AD topical treatments. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects network meta-analyses addressed AD severity, itch, sleep, AD-related quality of life, flares, and harms. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach informed certainty of evidence ratings. We classified topical corticosteroids (TCS) using 7 groups-group 1 being most potent. This review is registered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/q5m6s). RESULTS: The 219 included trials (43,123 patients) evaluated 68 interventions. With high-certainty evidence, pimecrolimus improved 6 of 7 outcomes-among the best for 2; high-dose tacrolimus (0.1%) improved 5-among the best for 2; low-dose tacrolimus (0.03%) improved 5-among the best for 1. With moderate- to high-certainty evidence, group 5 TCS improved 6-among the best for 3; group 4 TCS and delgocitinib improved 4-among the best for 2; ruxolitinib improved 4-among the best for 1; group 1 TCS improved 3-among the best for 2. These interventions did not increase harm. Crisaborole and difamilast were intermediately effective, but with uncertain harm. Topical antibiotics alone or in combination may be among the least effective. To maintain AD control, group 5 TCS were among the most effective, followed by tacrolimus and pimecrolimus. CONCLUSIONS: For individuals with AD, pimecrolimus, tacrolimus, and moderate-potency TCS are among the most effective in improving and maintaining multiple AD outcomes. Topical antibiotics may be among the least effective.
Asunto(s)
Asma , Dermatitis Atópica , Fármacos Dermatológicos , Eccema , Humanos , Dermatitis Atópica/tratamiento farmacológico , Tacrolimus/uso terapéutico , Metaanálisis en Red , Calidad de Vida , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Fármacos Dermatológicos/uso terapéutico , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Antibacterianos/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is an inflammatory skin condition with multiple systemic treatments and uncertainty regarding their comparative impact on AD outcomes. OBJECTIVE: We sought to systematically synthesize the benefits and harms of AD systemic treatments. METHODS: For the 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and GREAT databases from inception to November 29, 2022, for randomized trials addressing systemic treatments and phototherapy for AD. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects network meta-analyses addressed AD severity, itch, sleep, AD-related quality of life, flares, and harms. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach informed certainty of evidence ratings. This review is registered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/e5sna). RESULTS: The 149 included trials (28,686 patients with moderate-to-severe AD) evaluated 75 interventions. With high-certainty evidence, high-dose upadacitinib was among the most effective for 5 of 6 patient-important outcomes; high-dose abrocitinib and low-dose upadacitinib were among the most effective for 2 outcomes. These Janus kinase inhibitors were among the most harmful in increasing adverse events. With high-certainty evidence, dupilumab, lebrikizumab, and tralokinumab were of intermediate effectiveness and among the safest, modestly increasing conjunctivitis. Low-dose baricitinib was among the least effective. Efficacy and safety of azathioprine, oral corticosteroids, cyclosporine, methotrexate, mycophenolate, phototherapy, and many novel agents are less certain. CONCLUSIONS: Among individuals with moderate-to-severe AD, high-certainty evidence demonstrates that high-dose upadacitinib is among the most effective in addressing multiple patient-important outcomes, but also is among the most harmful. High-dose abrocitinib and low-dose upadacitinib are effective, but also among the most harmful. Dupilumab, lebrikizumab, and tralokinumab are of intermediate effectiveness and have favorable safety.
Asunto(s)
Asma , Dermatitis Atópica , Eccema , Humanos , Dermatitis Atópica/tratamiento farmacológico , Metaanálisis en Red , Calidad de Vida , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Hypertension-induced tunica media thickening (TMT) is the most important fundamental for the subsequent complications like stroke and cardiovascular diseases. Pathogenically, TMT originates from both vascular smooth muscle cells (VSMCs) hypertrophy due to synthesizing more amount of intracellular contractile proteins and excess secretion of extracellular matrix. However, what key molecules are involved in the pathogenesis of TMT is unknown. We hypothesize that formin homology 2 domain-containing protein 1 (FHOD1), an amply expressed mediator for assembly of thin actin filament in VSMCs, is a key regulator for the pathogenesis of TMT. In this study, we found that FHOD1 expression and its phosphorylation/activation were both upregulated in the arteries of three kinds of hypertensive rats. Ang-II induced actin filament formation and hypertrophy through activation and upregulation of FHOD1 in VSMCs. Active FHOD1-mediated actin filament assembly and secretions of collagen-1α/collagen-3α played crucial roles in Ang-II-induced VSMCs hypertrophy in vitro and hypertensive TMT in vivo. Proteomics demonstrated that activated FL-FHOD1 or its C-terminal diaphanous-autoregulatory domain significantly upregulated RNF213 (ring finger protein 213), a 591-kDa cytosolic E3 ubiquitin ligase with its loss-of-functional mutations being a susceptibility gene for Moyamoya disease which has prominent tunica media thinning in both intracranial and systemic arteries. Mechanistically, activated FHOD1 upregulated its downstream effector RNF213 independently of its classical pathway of decreasing G-actin/F-actin ratio, transcription, and translation, but dependently on its C-terminus-mediated stabilization of RNF213 protein. FHOD1-RNF213 signaling dramatically promoted collagen-1α/collagen-3α syntheses in VSMCs. Our results discovered a novel signaling axis of FHOD1-RNF213-collagen-1α/collagen-3α and its key role in the pathogenesis of hypertensive TMT.
Asunto(s)
Actinas , Hipertensión , Animales , Ratas , Actinas/metabolismo , Hipertensión/etiología , Hipertrofia , Transducción de Señal/fisiología , Factores de Transcripción , Túnica Media/metabolismoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: For young children with peanut allergy, dietary avoidance is the current standard of care. We aimed to assess whether peanut oral immunotherapy can induce desensitisation (an increased allergic reaction threshold while on therapy) or remission (a state of non-responsiveness after discontinuation of immunotherapy) in this population. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in five US academic medical centres. Eligible participants were children aged 12 to younger than 48 months who were reactive to 500 mg or less of peanut protein during a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC). Participants were randomly assigned by use of a computer, in a 2:1 allocation ratio, to receive peanut oral immunotherapy or placebo for 134 weeks (2000 mg peanut protein per day) followed by 26 weeks of avoidance, with participants and study staff and investigators masked to group treatment assignment. The primary outcome was desensitisation at the end of treatment (week 134), and remission after avoidance (week 160), as the key secondary outcome, were assessed by DBPCFC to 5000 mg in the intention-to-treat population. Safety and immunological parameters were assessed in the same population. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03345160. FINDINGS: Between Aug 13, 2013, and Oct 1, 2015, 146 children, with a median age of 39·3 months (IQR 30·8-44·7), were randomly assigned to receive peanut oral immunotherapy (96 participants) or placebo (50 participants). At week 134, 68 (71%, 95% CI 61-80) of 96 participants who received peanut oral immunotherapy compared with one (2%, 0·05-11) of 50 who received placebo met the primary outcome of desensitisation (risk difference [RD] 69%, 95% CI 59-79; p<0·0001). The median cumulative tolerated dose during the week 134 DBPCFC was 5005 mg (IQR 3755-5005) for peanut oral immunotherapy versus 5 mg (0-105) for placebo (p<0·0001). After avoidance, 20 (21%, 95% CI 13-30) of 96 participants receiving peanut oral immunotherapy compared with one (2%, 0·05-11) of 50 receiving placebo met remission criteria (RD 19%, 95% CI 10-28; p=0·0021). The median cumulative tolerated dose during the week 160 DBPCFC was 755 mg (IQR 0-2755) for peanut oral immunotherapy and 0 mg (0-55) for placebo (p<0·0001). A significant proportion of participants receiving peanut oral immunotherapy who passed the 5000 mg DBPCFC at week 134 could no longer tolerate 5000 mg at week 160 (p<0·001). The participant receiving placebo who was desensitised at week 134 also achieved remission at week 160. Compared with placebo, peanut oral immunotherapy decreased peanut-specific and Ara h2-specific IgE, skin prick test, and basophil activation, and increased peanut-specific and Ara h2-specific IgG4 at weeks 134 and 160. By use of multivariable regression analysis of participants receiving peanut oral immunotherapy, younger age and lower baseline peanut-specific IgE was predictive of remission. Most participants (98% with peanut oral immunotherapy vs 80% with placebo) had at least one oral immunotherapy dosing reaction, predominantly mild to moderate and occurring more frequently in participants receiving peanut oral immunotherapy. 35 oral immunotherapy dosing events with moderate symptoms were treated with epinephrine in 21 participants receiving peanut oral immunotherapy. INTERPRETATION: In children with a peanut allergy, initiation of peanut oral immunotherapy before age 4 years was associated with an increase in both desensitisation and remission. Development of remission correlated with immunological biomarkers. The outcomes suggest a window of opportunity at a young age for intervention to induce remission of peanut allergy. FUNDING: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, Immune Tolerance Network.