Dupilumab efficacy and safety in Latin American patients with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthma: phase 3 LIBERTY ASTHMA QUEST study.

OBJECTIVE: While advances in asthma care have been made in Latin America, there is still a large unmet need in patients with uncontrolled asthma. This post hoc analysis of the QUEST study assessed safety and efficacy of dupilumab in the subgroup of patients enrolled in Latin American countries with a type 2 inflammatory asthma phenotype (blood eosinophils ≥ 150cells/µL or FeNO ≥25ppb). METHODS: LIBERTY ASTHMA QUEST (NCT02414854) was a phase 3, multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in patients with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthma. Eligible patients ≥ 12 years of age were randomized in a 2:2:1:1 ratio to receive 52 weeks of add-on subcutaneous dupilumab 200 or 300 mg every 2 weeks or matched-volume placebos. Pre-specified co-primary efficacy endpoints were the annualized rate of severe exacerbations during the treatment period and the change from baseline in pre-bronchodilator FEV1 at treatment week 12. Asthma control, changes in asthma biomarker levels, and dupilumab safety were also evaluated. RESULTS: 530 (27.9% of the overall QUEST population; dupilumab: 353, placebo: 177) Latin-American patients were recruited; 420 (79.2%) had a type 2 inflammatory asthma phenotype. Dupilumab vs placebo reduced the annualized rate of severe exacerbations by 52.7% (P < 0.001) and increased pre-bronchodilator FEV1 at week 12 by 0.15 L (P < 0.001), in the type 2 population. Safety was consistent with the known dupilumab safety profile. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with the results in the overall population, dupilumab reduced the risk of severe asthma exacerbations and improved lung function in Latin American patients with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthma and a type 2 phenotype.

Recomendaciones en el manejo y tratamiento del asma en la Argentina (REMA). Consenso Delphi modificado RAND/UCLA de la Asociación Argentina de Alergia e Inmunología Clínica y Asociación Argentina de Medicina Respiratoria / Recommendations for the Management and Treatment of Asthma in Argentina (RE.M.A). A RAND/UCLA modified Delphi Consensus Argentinian Association of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and Argentinian Association of Respiratory Medicine

El asma es una enfermedad crónica de la vía aérea prevalente en nuestro país, con frecuente mal control. Algunos especialistas de la Asociación de Alergia e Inmunología Clínica y la Asociación Argentina de Medicina Respiratoria han realizado recomendaciones sobre el manejo y tratamiento del asma mediante la metodología de consenso RAND/UCLA Delphi modificada sobre la base de la evidencia científica (GRADE). Este documento provee recomendaciones basadas en la opinión de especialistas y fundamentada en evidencia científica seleccionada en cuanto a la importancia de mejorar la adherencia al tratamiento y seguimiento a través de diferentes estrategias. Así mismo, provee recomendaciones actualizadas en aspectos críticos del tratamiento del asma leve al grave. Se recomienda, para mejorar la adherencia, el uso de planes personalizados de manejo (1 °C), uso de herramientas a través de teléfonos móviles (1B) y educación (1 °C). Con respecto a la inmunoterapia sublingual solo debe ser indicada a pacientes con asociación con rinitis alérgica, asociada a ácaros y síntomas de asma a pesar del tratamiento adecuado con FEV1 > 70 % (1B). Se recomienda fuertemente en el asma leve (escalón 2 GINA) el uso de broncodilatadores de acción rápida asociados a corticoides inhalados a demanda (1A). En asma grave, se recomienda el uso de la triple terapia inhalada con anticolinérgicos de acción prolongada, beta 2 de acción prolongada y corticoides inhaladas (1B). El uso de biológicos en asma grave está fuertemente indicado en fenotipo T2 con dupilumab (1A), T2 alérgico con omalizumab (1A) y en el T2 eosinofílico con benralizumab, o mepolizumab, con sus características distintivas (1A).

Asthma is a common chronic airway disease in our country, although with high poor control. Some specialists of the Asociación de Alergia e Inmunología Clínica and Asociación Argentina de Medicina Respiratoria have made recommendations for management and treatment of asthma, using a RAND/UCLA modified Delphi consensus methodology, based on GRADE evidence. This document provides recommendations based on specialist opinions about different strategies to improve adherence. Besides, it provides recommendations about critical issues of mild to severe asthma treatment. It´s recommended to improve adherence, personalized control-based management plan (1 °C), mobile devices (1B) and education (1 °C). Sublingual immunotherapy must be prescribed only in patients with allergic rhinitis, mite associated, and persistent symptoms although appropriate treatment with FEV1 > 70 % (1B). Use of fast action bronchodilators associated with inhaled corticosteroids prn in mild asthma (GINA stage 2) has strong recommendation (1A). Use of triple inhaled therapy (long acting anticholinergics, long acting beta 2 agonists and inhaled corticosteroids) is recommended in severe asthma (1B). Biologics has strong recommendations severe asthma: in phenotype T2 with dupilumab (1A), in phenotype allergic T2 with omalizumab (1A) and phenotype eosinophilic T2 with benralizumab or mepolizumab with distinctive characteristic (1A).

Update on latex allergy: New insights into an old problem.

Despite the efforts made to mitigate the consequences of this disease, natural rubber latex allergy (NRLA) continues to be a global health problem and is still considered one of the main worries in the working environment in many countries throughout the world. Due to thousands of products containing latex, it is not surprising that the current statistics suggest that prevalence remains high among healthcare workers and susceptible patients. In developed countries, reduction in the prevalence of IgE-mediated allergy to latex proteins from gloves may lead to lax attention by health care personnel. On the other hand, this situation is different in developing countries where there is a lack of epidemiological data associated with a deficit in education and awareness of this issue. The aim of this review is to provide an update of the current knowledge and practical recommendations regarding NRLA by allergologists from different parts of the world with experience in this field.

Current situation of allergy education in Mexico and other parts of Latin America.

Allergic diseases are one of the most frequent chronic diseases in the world. It has been established that there is a worldwide epidemic of allergic diseases; therefore, the treatment of allergies should be acknowledged as a worldwide priority and the specialty of allergy should be considered an important field in medicine. Due to the fact that allergic diseases involve many organs, and Allergy and Clinical Immunology is one of the specialties in which physicians may be trained to treat patients of all ages, the subject in medical schools is not always taught as an individual specialty but often as part of another subject such as internal medicine or pediatrics. Certified allergists are an important contribution to health systems, providing the necessary care for patients who have allergic diseases. Undergraduate programs in many universities do not include allergy as a subject, contributing to a lack of knowledge regarding the correct management of allergic diseases. World Health Organization (WHO) recommends 1 allergist per 50,000 people; however, there is an uneven distribution of allergy and clinical immunology specialists. Most practitioners are localized mainly in larger cities and state capitals, while in other regions, specialists are still greatly needed. Support and training systems are required for allergy and clinical immunology specialists to promote continuing education and keep their clinical competence up to date, which will lead to better care for their patients. Increased exposure to the concepts of allergy and clinical immunology diagnosis and treatment in undergraduate education may also potentially lead to an increase in interest in the field of allergy and clinical immunology among physicians in training. This review will approach allergy education in Mexico and other parts of Latin America.

Allergy and coronavirus disease (COVID-19) international survey: Real-life data from the allergy community during the pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 outbreak brought an unprecedented challenge to the world. Knowledge in the field has been increasing exponentially and the main allergy societies have produced guidance documents for better management of allergic patients during this period. However, few publications so far have provided real-life data from the allergy community concerning allergy practice during the COVID-19 outbreak. Therefore, we proposed an international survey on the management of allergic patients during the current pandemic. METHODS: We performed an online survey undertaken to reach out the worldwide allergy community by e-mail and social media. The web-based questionnaire contained 24 questions covering demographic data from the participants, clinical practice during this period, and questions related to the new international classification and coding tools addressed for COVID-19. It was circulated for 8 weeks and had anonymous and volunteer context. RESULTS: Data are presented for 635 participants from 78 countries of all continents. Allergists with long-term professional experience were the main audience. As expected, we received many responses as "I have no data" or "I don't know" to the questions of the survey. However, most with more experience on managing allergic patients during the pandemic agreed that patients suffering from allergic or hypersensitivity conditions have no increased risk of contracting COVID-19 or developing SARS CoV-2. Also, participants mentioned that none of the allergy treatments (inhaled corticosteroids, allergen immunotherapy, biological agents) increased the risk of contracting COVID-19 infection including severe presentations. CONCLUSION: The data presented are a starting point in the process of getting feedback on all the recommendations provided by the allergy societies; it could also be the basis of new strategies to support health professionals while new COVID-19 specific treatments and vaccines are being explored. The information here presented intends to be helpful to the community but represents a course of action in a highly specific situation due to the state of emergency, and it should be helpful to health systems.

[2017 Brussels Agreement for Latin America: an initiative of the GARD and Slaai]. / El Acuerdo Bruselas 2017 para Latinoamérica: una iniciativa de la GARD y Slaai.

The Global Alliance against Chronic Respiratory Diseases (GARD) is a network of organizations coordinated by the World Health Organization. It is a voluntary alliance of national and international organizations, institutions and agencies with global scope that are committed with actions to improve access to prevention, care and essential medications. On its last annual meeting, celebrated in Brussels (Belgium) in September 2017, the need for actions and representation to be grouped by geographic regions was discussed. There are several successful programs regarding morbidity and mortality control of these diseases, and others that improve cost-benefit and quality of life. Thus, SLaai proposes to contribute to the diffusion and knowledge of chronic respiratory diseases magnitude and risk factors, to identify successful programs in Latin America in order for them to be replicated in the region and to generate strategic alliances for the strengthening of joint actions.

La Alianza Global contra las Enfermedades Respiratorias Crónicas es una red de organizaciones coordinadas por la Organización Mundial de la Salud. Es una coalición voluntaria de organizaciones, instituciones y organismos nacionales e internacionales con alcance mundial comprometidos con acciones para mejorar el acceso a la prevención, asistencia y medicamentos esenciales. Durante su última reunión anual, efectuada en Bruselas, Bélgica, en septiembre de 2017, emergió la necesidad de agrupar acciones y representación por regiones geográficas. Existen diferentes programas exitosos en el control de la morbimortalidad de estas enfermedades y otros que mejoran el costo-beneficio y la calidad de vida. Así, desde SLaai se propone contribuir a la difusión y conocimiento de la magnitud y factores de riesgo en enfermedades respiratorias crónicas, identificar programas exitosos de Latinoamérica para ser replicados en la región y generar convenios estratégicos para el fortalecimiento de acciones conjuntas.

Clinical characteristics and comorbidities of elderly asthmatics who attend allergy clinics.

BACKGROUND: To date, few studies have focused on the clinical and allergic characteristics of asthma in the elderly, defined as asthma in people aged 60 or over. Thus, we propose to identify and study the clinical and allergic characteristics and comorbidities of patients with asthma among the elderly. METHODS: A retrospective, observational, descriptive study was developed in five clinics and hospitals in Argentina. Allergy Physicians analyzed their patients' medical records in 2014 and included those adults over the age of 60, who had been diagnosed with asthma according to the GINA guidelines. Clinical and allergic characteristics were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 152 patients diagnosed with asthma, of whom 73% were women and 11% ex-smokers, were included in this study, with a mean age of 66 years. Only 10.5% of the participants had onset asthma past the age of 60. Regarding asthma severity, 74.3% were diagnosed with moderate persistent asthma, and 7.2% with severe persistent asthma. Eighty-four percent of the patients were treated with an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) along with a long-acting ß 2-adrenergic agent (LABA). More than half of the patients had two or more comorbidities simultaneously. Allergic comorbidities were the most frequent comorbidities, followed by arterial hypertension. Among allergic comorbidities, most patients presented allergies at the nasal level. There were no significant differences between the subpopulations of patients with late-onset asthma (LOA) and asthma with onset before the age of 60, i.e. early onset asthma (EOA) in most of their clinical characteristics. However, it was observed that EOA accounted for a higher percentage of patients with nasal allergies as compared to LOA (71% vs 46%, p <  0.05).It is worth mentioning that almost half of the patients with LOA had allergies at the nasal level. CONCLUSION: These results may provide a better understanding of the clinical characteristics of asthma in the elderly in Argentina, thus, enabling the development of future therapeutic strategies and a better quality of life for our elderly asthma patients.

A patient preference study that evaluated fluticasone furoate and mometasone furoate nasal sprays for allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroid nasal sprays are the mainstay of treatment for allergic rhinitis. These sprays have sensory attributes such as scent and/or odor, taste and aftertaste, and run down the throat and/or the nose, which, when unpleasant, can affect patient preference for, and compliance with, treatment. OBJECTIVE: This study examined patient preference for fluticasone furoate nasal spray (FFNS) or mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) based on their sensory attributes after administration in patients with allergic rhinitis. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, cross-over study. Patient preferences were determined by using three questionnaires (Overall Preference, Immediate Attributes, and Delayed Attributes). RESULTS: Overall, 56% of patients stated a preference for FFNS versus 32% for MFNS (p < 0.001); the remaining 12% stated no preference. More patients stated a preference for FFNS versus MFNS for the attributes of "less drip down the throat" (p < 0.001), "less run out of the nose" (p < 0.05), "more soothing" (p < 0.05), and "less irritating" (p < 0.001). More patients responded in favor of FFNS versus MFNS for the immediate attributes, "run down the throat" (p < 0.001), and "run out of the nose" (p < 0.001), and, in the delayed attributes, "run down the throat" (p < 0.001), "run out of the nose" (p < 0.01), "presence of aftertaste" (p < 0.01), and "no nasal irritation" (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients with allergic rhinitis preferred FFNS versus MFNS overall and based on a number of individual attributes, including "less drip down the throat," "less run out of the nose," and "less irritating." Greater preference may improve patient adherence and thereby improve symptom management of the patient's allergic rhinitis.

Asthma in the elderly: what we know and what we have yet to know.

In the past, asthma was considered mainly as a childhood disease. However, asthma is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in the elderly nowadays. In addition, the burden of asthma is more significant in the elderly than in their younger counterparts, particularly with regard to mortality, hospitalization, medical costs or health-related quality of life. Nevertheless, asthma in the elderly is still been underdiagnosed and undertreated. Therefore, it is an imperative task to recognize our current challenges and to set future directions. This project aims to review the current literature and identify unmet needs in the fields of research and practice for asthma in the elderly. This will enable us to find new research directions, propose new therapeutic strategies, and ultimately improve outcomes for elderly people with asthma. There are data to suggest that asthma in older adults is phenotypically different from young patients, with potential impact on the diagnosis, assessment and management in this population. The diagnosis of AIE in older populations relies on the same clinical findings and diagnostic tests used in younger populations, but the interpretation of the clinical data is more difficult. The challenge today is to encourage new research in AIE but to use the existing knowledge we have to make the diagnosis of AIE, educate the patient, develop a therapeutic approach to control the disease, and ultimately provide a better quality of life to our elderly patients.

[ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma). Achievements in 10 years and future needs in Latin America]. / ARIA (Rinitis Alérgica y su Impacto en Asma). Logros en 10 años y necesidades futuras en América Latina.

Allergic rhinitis and asthma represent global problems of public health affecting all age groups; asthma and allergic rhinitis frequently coexist in the same patients. In Latin American prevalence of allergic rhinitis, although variable, is very high. Allergic rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) started during a workshop of the World Health Organization performed in 1999 and was published in 2001. ARIA proposed a new classification of allergic rhinitis in intermittent or persistent and mild or moderate-severe. This approach of classification reflects more nearly the impact of allergic rhinitis in patients. In its review of 2010 ARIA developed guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of allergic rhinitis and of clinical practices for management of comorbidities of allergic rhinitis and asthma based on GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Development and Evaluation). ARIA has been spread and implemented in more than 50 countries. In Latin American an intense activity has been developed to spread these recommendations in almost all the countries of the region and it is important to record the obtained goals in the diffusion and implementation of ARIA, as well as to identify the unsatisfied needs from the clinical, research and implementation points of view. Final objective is to reinforce the priority that allergy and asthma should have, especially in children, in the programs of public health, as they have been prioritized in European Union in 2011.

La rinitis alérgica y el asma representan problemas globales de salud pública que afectan a todos los grupos etarios; el asma y la rinitis alérgica frecuentemente coexisten en los mismos pacientes. En América Latina la prevalencia de rinitis alérgica, aunque variable, es muy elevada. La iniciativa Rinitis Alérgica y su Impacto en Asma (globalmente conocida como ARIA, de su nombre en inglés Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma) comenzó durante un taller de la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) realizado en 1999 que se publicó en el año 2001. ARIA propuso una nueva clasificación de rinitis alérgica en intermitente o persistente y leve o moderada-severa. Este esquema de clasificación refleja más estrechamente el impacto de la rinitis alérgica en los pacientes. En su revisión de 2010, la guía ARIA desarrolló pautas para el diagnóstico y tratamiento de la rinitis alérgica y de prácticas clínicas para el manejo de las comorbilidades de la rinitis alérgica y el asma basadas en GRADE (Gradación de Recomendaciones, Desarrollo y Evaluación). ARIA se ha diseminado e implantado en más de 50 países. En América Latina se ha desarrollado una intensa actividad para diseminar estas recomendaciones en casi todos los países de la región y es importante llevar un registro de los logros obtenidos en la difusión e implantación de ARIA, además de identificar las necesidades insatisfechas desde el punto de vista clínico, de la investigación y de la implantación. El objetivo final es reforzar la prioridad que deben tener la alergia y el asma ­especialmente en niños­ en los programas de Salud Pública, tal como los priorizó la Unión Europea en 2011.

The role of antileukotriene therapy in seasonal allergic rhinitis: a systematic review of randomized trials.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of oral leukotriene receptor antagonists as monotherapy or combined with other drugs in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. DATA SOURCES: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health), and Cochrane databases; review articles; and references of included trials. STUDY SELECTION: Published (1966-2005) randomized controlled trials with nasal and eye symptoms and quality-of-life scores as primary outcomes. RESULTS: Seventeen studies including 6,231 adults with seasonal allergic rhinitis were selected. Oral leukotriene antagonists significantly reduced daytime nasal symptoms (standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.33 to -0.16), nighttime nasal symptoms (SMD, -0.23; 95% CI, -0.30 to -0.16), and eye symptoms and significantly improved quality of life compared with placebo. There were no significant differences between oral leukotriene antagonists and oral histamine H1 antagonists on nasal and eye symptoms and quality-of-life overall score. We also found that leukotriene receptor antagonists were inferior to intranasal corticosteroids for decreasing daytime (SMD, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.56) and nighttime nasal symptoms. The combination of leukotriene receptor antagonists plus histamine H1 antagonists produced greater relief of eye symptoms compared with histamine H1 antagonists alone. Finally, intranasal corticosteroids significantly reduced nasal congestion compared with leukotriene receptor antagonists plus histamine H1 antagonists. CONCLUSIONS: Leukotriene receptor antagonists were better than placebo, equivalent to oral histamine H1 antagonists, and inferior to intranasal corticosteroids for treating seasonal allergic rhinitis. Alternatively, leukotriene receptor antagonists plus histamine H1 antagonists were more effective than histamine H1 antagonists alone but inferior to intranasal corticosteroids.

Intranasal corticosteroids versus topical H1 receptor antagonists for the treatment of allergic rhinitis: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic review of randomized, controlled trials to determine whether intranasal corticosteroids offered an advantage over topical antihistamines in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. DATA SOURCES: We searched for studies using MEDLINE, Embase, Cinahi, and Cochrane databases, pharmaceutical companies, and references of included trials. STUDY SELECTION: Criteria for considering trials included: 1) published randomized controlled trials; 2) single- or double-blind studies; and 3) presence of one of the following clinical outcomes: nasal symptoms, eye symptoms, global symptoms evaluation of quality of life and side effects. RESULTS: Nine studies including 648 subjects (mean age 30.4 years, range 13 to 73) with allergic rhinitis were selected. Intranasal corticosteroids produced significantly greater reduction of total nasal symptoms (standardized mean difference -0.36, 95% confidence interval -0.57 to -0.14), sneezing (-0.41, -0.57 to -0.24), rhinorrhea (-0.47, -0.64 to -0.29), itching (-0.38, -0.56 to -0.19), and nasal blockage (-0.86, -1.07 to -0.64) than did topical antihistamines. There was no significant difference between treatments for ocular symptoms (-0.07, -0.27 to 0.12). The effects on sneezing, rhinorrhea, itching, and ocular symptoms were significantly heterogeneous between studies. Other outcomes (total nasal symptom score and nasal blockage) were homogeneous between studies. Subgroup and sensitivity analysis suggested that most of the heterogeneity of outcomes could be explained on the basis of the methodologic quality of studies. CONCLUSIONS: Intranasal corticosteroids produced greater relief of nasal symptoms than did topical antihistamines (topical H1 receptor antagonists). However, there was no difference in the relief of the ocular symptoms.