RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The benefits and harms of adding antileukotrienes to H1 antihistamines (AHs) for the management of urticaria (hives, itch, and/or angioedema) remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: We sought to systematically synthesize the treatment outcomes of antileukotrienes in combination with AHs versus AHs alone for acute and chronic urticaria. METHODS: As part of updating American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters urticaria guidelines, we searched Medline, Embase, Central, LILACS, WPRIM, IBECS, ICTRP, CBM, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang, US Food and Drug Administration, and European Medicines Agency databases from inception to December 18, 2023, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating antileukotrienes and AHs versus AHs alone in patients with urticaria. Paired reviewers independently screened citations, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random effects models pooled effect estimates for urticaria activity, itch, wheal, sleep, quality of life, and harms. The GRADE approach informed certainty of evidence ratings. The study was registered at the Open Science Framework (osf.io/h2bfx/). RESULTS: Thirty-four RCTs enrolled 3324 children and adults. Compared to AHs alone, the combination of a leukotriene receptor antagonist with AHs probably modestly reduces urticaria activity (mean difference, -5.04; 95% confidence interval, -6.36 to -3.71; 7-day urticaria activity score) with moderate certainty. We made similar findings for itch and wheal severity as well as quality of life. Adverse events were probably not different between groups (moderate certainty); however, no RCT reported on neuropsychiatric adverse events. CONCLUSION: Among patients with urticaria, adding leukotriene receptor antagonists to AHs probably modestly improves urticaria activity with little to no increase in overall adverse events. The added risk of neuropsychiatric adverse events in this population with leukotriene receptor antagonists is small and uncertain.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Topical corticosteroids are widely used as a treatment for itch and wheals (urticaria), but their benefits and harms are unclear. OBJECTIVE: To systematically synthesize the benefits and harms of topical corticosteroids for the treatment of urticaria. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL from database inception to March 23, 2024, for randomized trials comparing topical corticosteroids with placebo for patients with urticaria (either chronic spontaneous or inducible urticaria or acute urticaria elicited from skin/intradermal allergy testing). Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects meta-analyses addressed urticaria severity, itch severity (numeric rating scale; range 0-10; higher is worse), and adverse events. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach informed certainty of evidence ratings. PROSPERO registration: CRD42023455182. RESULTS: A total of 19 randomized controlled trials enrolled 379 participants with a median of mean age of 30.1 (range 21.1-44.0) years. Compared with placebo, topical corticosteroids may reduce wheal size (ratio of means 0.47, 95% CI 0.38-0.59; low certainty) and itch severity (mean difference -1.30, 95% CI -5.07 to 2.46; very low certainty). Topical corticosteroids result in little to no difference in overall adverse events (94 fewer patients per 1000, 95% credible intervals 172 fewer to 12 more; high certainty). CONCLUSION: Compared with placebo, topical corticosteroids may result in a reduction of wheal size and little to no difference in overall adverse events. Topical corticosteroids may reduce itch severity, but the evidence is very uncertain. Future large, randomized trials addressing the use of topical corticosteroids would further support optimal urticaria management.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: In the majority of patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria, most currently available therapies do not result in complete symptom control. Ligelizumab is a next-generation high-affinity humanized monoclonal anti-IgE antibody. Data are limited regarding the dose-response relationship of ligelizumab and the efficacy and safety of ligelizumab as compared with omalizumab and placebo in patients who have moderate-to-severe chronic spontaneous urticaria that is inadequately controlled with H1-antihistamines at approved or increased doses, alone or in combination with H2-antihistamines or leukotriene-receptor antagonists. METHODS: In a phase 2b dose-finding trial, we randomly assigned patients to receive ligelizumab at a dose of 24 mg, 72 mg, or 240 mg, omalizumab at a dose of 300 mg, or placebo, administered subcutaneously every 4 weeks for a period of 20 weeks, or a single 120-mg dose of ligelizumab. Disease symptoms of hives, itch, and angioedema were monitored by means of weekly activity scores. The main objective was to determine a dose-response relationship for the complete control of hives (indicated by a weekly hives-severity score of 0, on a scale from 0 to 21, with higher scores indicating greater severity); the primary end point of this response was assessed at week 12. Complete symptom control was indicated by a weekly urticaria activity score of 0 (on a scale from 0 to 42, with higher scores indicating greater severity). Safety was analyzed throughout the trial. RESULTS: A total of 382 patients underwent randomization. At week 12, a total of 30%, 51%, and 42% of the patients treated with 24 mg, 72 mg, and 240 mg, respectively, of ligelizumab had complete control of hives, as compared with 26% of the patients in the omalizumab group and no patients in the placebo group. A dose-response relationship was established. At week 12, a total of 30%, 44%, and 40% of the patients treated with 24 mg, 72 mg, and 240 mg, respectively, of ligelizumab had complete control of symptoms, as compared with 26% of the patients in the omalizumab group and no patients in the placebo group. In this small and short trial, no safety concerns regarding ligelizumab or omalizumab emerged. CONCLUSIONS: A higher percentage of patients had complete control of symptoms of chronic spontaneous urticaria with ligelizumab therapy of 72 mg or 240 mg than with omalizumab or placebo. (Funded by Novartis Pharma; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02477332.).
Assuntos
Antialérgicos/administração & dosagem , Anticorpos Anti-Idiotípicos/administração & dosagem , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/administração & dosagem , Omalizumab/administração & dosagem , Urticária/tratamento farmacológico , Adulto , Idoso , Antialérgicos/efeitos adversos , Anticorpos Anti-Idiotípicos/efeitos adversos , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/efeitos adversos , Doença Crônica , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Método Duplo-Cego , Esquema de Medicação , Feminino , Humanos , Imunoglobulina E/sangue , Imunoglobulina E/imunologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Omalizumab/efeitos adversos , Gravidade do Paciente , Indução de Remissão , Urticária/imunologia , Adulto JovemRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Short courses of adjunctive systemic corticosteroids are commonly used to treat acute urticaria and chronic urticaria flares (both with and without mast cell-mediated angioedema), but their benefits and harms are unclear. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of treating acute urticaria or chronic urticaria flares with versus without systemic corticosteroids. METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang, and CBM databases from inception to July 8, 2023, for randomized controlled trials of treating urticaria with versus without systemic corticosteroids. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and appraised risk of bias with the Cochrane 2.0 tool. We performed random-effects meta-analyses of urticaria activity, itch severity, and adverse events. We assessed certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: We identified 12 randomized trials enrolling 944 patients. For patients with low or moderate probability (17.5%-64%) to improve with antihistamines alone, add-on systemic corticosteroids likely improve urticaria activity by a 14% to 15% absolute difference (odds ratio [OR], 2.17, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.43-3.31; number needed to treat [NNT], 7; moderate certainty). Among patients with a high chance (95.8%) for urticaria to improve with antihistamines alone, add-on systemic corticosteroids likely improved urticaria activity by a 2.2% absolute difference (NNT, 45; moderate certainty). Corticosteroids may improve itch severity (OR, 2.44; 95% CI: 0.87-6.83; risk difference, 9%; NNT, 11; low certainty). Systemic corticosteroids also likely increase adverse events (OR, 2.76; 95% CI: 1.00-7.62; risk difference, 15%; number needed to harm, 9; moderate certainty). CONCLUSIONS: Systemic corticosteroids for acute urticaria or chronic urticaria exacerbations likely improve urticaria, depending on antihistamine responsiveness, but also likely increase adverse effects in approximately 15% more.
Assuntos
Corticosteroides , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Urticária , Humanos , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Urticária/tratamento farmacológico , Resultado do Tratamento , Antagonistas dos Receptores Histamínicos/uso terapêutico , Urticária Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Quimioterapia CombinadaRESUMO
The appropriate use criteria process synthesizes evidence-based medicine, clinical practice experience, and expert judgment. The American Academy of Dermatology in collaboration with the American College of Mohs Surgery, the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery Association, and the American Society for Mohs Surgery has developed appropriate use criteria for 270 scenarios for which Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) is frequently considered based on tumor and patient characteristics. This document reflects the rating of appropriateness of MMS for each of these clinical scenarios by a ratings panel in a process based on the appropriateness method developed by the RAND Corp (Santa Monica, CA)/University of California-Los Angeles (RAND/UCLA). At the conclusion of the rating process, consensus was reached for all 270 (100%) scenarios by the Ratings Panel, with 200 (74.07%) deemed as appropriate, 24 (8.89%) as uncertain, and 46 (17.04%) as inappropriate. For the 69 basal cell carcinoma scenarios, 53 were deemed appropriate, 6 uncertain, and 10 inappropriate. For the 143 squamous cell carcinoma scenarios, 102 were deemed appropriate, 7 uncertain, and 34 inappropriate. For the 12 lentigo maligna and melanoma in situ scenarios, 10 were deemed appropriate, 2 uncertain, and 0 inappropriate. For the 46 rare cutaneous malignancies scenarios, 35 were deemed appropriate, 9 uncertain, and 2 inappropriate. These appropriate use criteria have the potential to impact health care delivery, reimbursement policy, and physician decision making on patient selection for MMS, and aim to optimize the use of MMS for scenarios in which the expected clinical benefit is anticipated to be the greatest. In addition, recognition of those scenarios rated as uncertain facilitates an understanding of areas that would benefit from further research. Each clinical scenario identified in this document is crafted for the average patient and not the exception. Thus, the ultimate decision regarding the appropriateness of MMS should be determined by the expertise and clinical experience of the physician.
Assuntos
Dermatologia/normas , Melanoma/cirurgia , Cirurgia de Mohs/normas , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Neoplasias Cutâneas/cirurgia , Carcinoma in Situ/cirurgia , Carcinoma Basocelular/cirurgia , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/cirurgia , Humanos , Sarda Melanótica de Hutchinson/cirurgiaRESUMO
The appropriate use criteria process synthesizes evidence-based medicine, clinical practice experience, and expert judgment. The American Academy of Dermatology in collaboration with the American College of Mohs Surgery, the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery Association, and the American Society for Mohs Surgery has developed appropriate use criteria for 270 scenarios for which Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) is frequently considered based on tumor and patient characteristics. This document reflects the rating of appropriateness of MMS for each of these clinical scenarios by a ratings panel in a process based on the appropriateness method developed by the RAND Corp (Santa Monica, CA)/University of California-Los Angeles (RAND/UCLA). At the conclusion of the rating process, consensus was reached for all 270 (100%) scenarios by the Ratings Panel, with 200 (74.07%) deemed as appropriate, 24 (8.89%) as uncertain, and 46 (17.04%) as inappropriate. For the 69 basal cell carcinoma scenarios, 53 were deemed appropriate, 6 uncertain, and 10 inappropriate. For the 143 squamous cell carcinoma scenarios, 102 were deemed appropriate, 7 uncertain, and 34 inappropriate. For the 12 lentigo maligna and melanoma in situ scenarios, 10 were deemed appropriate, 2 uncertain, and 0 inappropriate. For the 46 rare cutaneous malignancies scenarios, 35 were deemed appropriate, 9 uncertain, and 2 inappropriate. These appropriate use criteria have the potential to impact health care delivery, reimbursement policy, and physician decision making on patient selection for MMS, and aim to optimize the use of MMS for scenarios in which the expected clinical benefit is anticipated to be the greatest. In addition, recognition of those scenarios rated as uncertain facilitates an understanding of areas that would benefit from further research. Each clinical scenario identified in this document is crafted for the average patient and not the exception. Thus, the ultimate decision regarding the appropriateness of MMS should be determined by the expertise and clinical experience of the physician.
Assuntos
Carcinoma Basocelular/cirurgia , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/cirurgia , Melanoma/cirurgia , Cirurgia de Mohs/normas , Neoplasias Cutâneas/cirurgia , HumanosRESUMO
The authors wish to make the following corrections to this paper [...].
RESUMO
Enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli (EHEC), a pathogenic subset of Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC), is an important cause of hemorrhagic colitis and hemolytic-uremic syndrome (HUS), and a rare cause of urinary tract infections (UTIs) with associated HUS. EHEC strains attach intimately to intestinal epithelium with formation of actin pedestals (attaching-effacing (A/E) lesions); however, the mechanism of EHEC attachment to the uroepithelium is unknown. We conducted a retrospective study on archived urinary bladder specimens from gnotobiotic piglets that naturally developed cystitis associated with EHEC O157:H7 infection following oral inoculation and fecal shedding. Paraffin-embedded bladder tissues from three piglets with cystitis and immunohistochemical evidence of EHEC O157:H7 adherence to the uroepithelium were processed for and examined by transmission electron microscopy. EHEC O157:H7 bacteria were found in one of three piglets, intimately attached to pedestals on the apical surfaces of the superficial urothelium (umbrella cells). Cystitis was significantly associated with the length of survival of the piglets post-inoculation (p = 0.0339; estimated odds ratio = 2.6652). This is the first report of E. coli causing A/E-like lesions in the uroepithelium, and also evidence of the utility of the gnotobiotic piglet as a model for studies of the pathogenesis of EHEC UTIs.
RESUMO
Escherichia coli O157:H7 causes life-threatening outbreaks of diarrhea, hemorrhagic colitis, and hemolytic-uremic syndrome in humans and significant economic loss in agriculture and could be a potential agent of bioterrorism. Although the prevalence of E. coli O157:H7 in cattle and other species with which humans have frequent contact is high, human infections are relatively uncommon, despite a low infectious dose. A plausible explanation for the low disease incidence is the possibility that not all strains are virulent in humans. If there are substantial differences in virulence among strains in nature, then human disease may select for high virulence. We used a gnotobiotic piglet model to investigate the virulence of isolates from healthy cattle and from humans in disease outbreaks and to determine the correlation between production of Shiga toxin 1 (Stx1) and Stx2 and virulence. Overall, E. coli O157:H7 strains isolated from healthy cattle were less virulent in gnotobiotic piglets than strains isolated from humans during disease outbreaks. The amount of Stx2 produced by E. coli O157:H7 strains correlated with strain virulence as measured by a reduction in piglet survival and signs of central nervous system disease due to brain infarction. The amount of Stx1 produced in culture was not correlated with the length of time of piglet survival or with signs of central nervous system disease. We suggest that disease outbreaks select for producers of high levels of Stx2 among E. coli O157:H7 strains shed by animals and further suggest that Stx1 expression is unlikely to be significant in human outbreaks.