ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Approximately 10% of European children are classified as allergic to drugs. In the majority of these children, no allergy to ß-lactam antibiotics (BLA) can be found. In most cases, the exanthema is caused by the infection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The objective of this paper is to describe the causes and consequences of a misdiagnosis of drug allergy. We propose a method for establishing a correct diagnosis in the case of a history of a delayed reaction during treatment with a BLA. For this purpose, a proposal was discussed via e-mail communication, and consensus was reached among the members of the drug allergy working groups of the participating medical societies. RESULTS: The suspicion of a BLA allergy based on the medical history alone can have a negative impact on future antibiotic treatment. Exanthema associated with febrile infections not related to drug administration is a frequent finding in children. This makes it all the more important to be able to recommend a standardized procedure for clarification in children and adolescents with suspected hypersensitivity reactions. The medical history should be the basis on which to diagnose either a drug allergy or another possible differential diagnosis. A mild maculopapular exanthema (MPE) can be an expression of a drug allergy or a nonspecific viral exanthema. Uncomplicated MPE is not associated with significant systemic involvement, and there is no involvement of the mucous membranes or cutaneous blistering. Only a small number of children with uncomplicated MPE show positive skin tests and only ~ 7 - 16% of suspected BLA diagnoses can be confirmed by provocation tests. Thus, in children with uncomplicated MPE, drug provocation can be performed in an outpatient setting even without prior skin testing. This paper presents a 3-day outpatient direct provocation scheme for BLA delabeling in children with uncomplicated MPE. CONCLUSION: Many children and adolescents are unnecessarily denied treatment with BLA after an uncomplicated MPE while being treated with a BLA.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) poses significant challenges, especially in pediatric and adolescent patients, impacting physical, emotional, and social well-being. Recent biologic breakthroughs offer promise, however, data on safety and efficacy in this population remain limited. AREAS COVERED: This review examines current biologic treatments in pediatrics and adolescents with CSU and explores the rapidly emerging landscape. EXPERT OPINION: Despite omalizumab's approval for allergic asthma in children since 2009, its delayed approval for CSU raises questions. Ligelizumab, a next-generation anti-IgE mAb, showed effectiveness in adults but lacks pediatric studies. CT-P39, a biosimilar to omalizumab, demonstrates promise, yet adolescent-specific outcomes are undisclosed. Dupilumab's recent approval for atopic dermatitis in children from 6 months onwards signifies progress. Expert opinion underscores the scarcity of controlled trials in pediatric and adolescent CSU, emphasizing the need for comprehensive studies. Age-specific data and collaboration are crucial for addressing research gaps and expanding indications for pediatric CSU treatment. The recently validated UAS7 parameter in children marks a milestone for prospective clinical trials. Despite challenges, the biology therapy outlook for pediatric and adolescent CSU is promising. Importantly, studies indicate that pediatric CSU is at least as prevalent as in adults, highlighting the need for approved treatments in this population.
Subject(s)
Chronic Urticaria , Humans , Adolescent , Child , Chronic Urticaria/drug therapy , Chronic Urticaria/immunology , Biological Therapy/trends , Biological Therapy/methods , Biological Products/therapeutic use , Biological Products/adverse effectsABSTRACT
International guidelines for the treatment of chronic spontaneous urticaria support the updosing of second-generation antihistamines to four times of the approved dose when adequate symptom control cannot be achieved with the standard dosage. However, this recommendation is primarily based on expert opinions, and there is a lack of large, well-designed, double-blind clinical trials. Most the existing trials provide insufficient data, and due to the heterogeneity of the conducted trials on antihistamine effects (definition of control, design, quality, lack of an active comparator, no placebo arm, small sample size, outcomes) and their short duration, comparative analysis is challenging. However, it can be concluded that the use of modern second-generation antihistamines is both effective and safe based on the available data and our own long-term experiences in the specialized outpatient clinic of a university dermatology department, even though increased dosages (up to fourfold as per the current international guidelines) may be necessary for symptom control. Another therapeutic option for refractory symptoms in chronic spontaneous urticaria is subcutaneous administration of omalizumab at a dosage of 300â¯mg at 4week intervals as a very safe and effective treatment.
Subject(s)
Chronic Urticaria , Histamine H1 Antagonists, Non-Sedating , Urticaria , Humans , Chronic Disease , Urticaria/drug therapy , Omalizumab/therapeutic use , Histamine H1 Antagonists , Chronic Urticaria/drug therapy , Histamine H1 Antagonists, Non-Sedating/therapeutic use , Pruritus/drug therapy , Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Angioedema is a rare but potentially life-threatening adverse drug reaction in patients receiving angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis). Research suggests that susceptibility to ACEi-induced angioedema (ACEi-AE) involves both genetic and nongenetic risk factors. Genome- and exome-wide studies of ACEi-AE have identified the first genetic risk loci. However, understanding of the underlying pathophysiology remains limited. OBJECTIVE: We sought to identify further genetic factors of ACEi-AE to eventually gain a deeper understanding of its pathophysiology. METHODS: By combining data from 8 cohorts, a genome-wide association study meta-analysis was performed in more than 1000 European patients with ACEi-AE. Secondary bioinformatic analyses were conducted to fine-map associated loci, identify relevant genes and pathways, and assess the genetic overlap between ACEi-AE and other traits. Finally, an exploratory cross-ancestry analysis was performed to assess shared genetic factors in European and African-American patients with ACEi-AE. RESULTS: Three genome-wide significant risk loci were identified. One of these, located on chromosome 20q11.22, has not been implicated previously in ACEi-AE. Integrative secondary analyses highlighted previously reported genes (BDKRB2 [bradykinin receptor B2] and F5 [coagulation factor 5]) as well as biologically plausible novel candidate genes (PROCR [protein C receptor] and EDEM2 [endoplasmic reticulum degradation enhancing alpha-mannosidase like protein 2]). Lead variants at the risk loci were found with similar effect sizes and directions in an African-American cohort. CONCLUSIONS: The present results contributed to a deeper understanding of the pathophysiology of ACEi-AE by (1) providing further evidence for the involvement of bradykinin signaling and coagulation pathways and (2) suggesting, for the first time, the involvement of the fibrinolysis pathway in this adverse drug reaction. An exploratory cross-ancestry comparison implicated the relevance of the associated risk loci across diverse ancestries.
Subject(s)
Angioedema , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions , Humans , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/adverse effects , Genome-Wide Association Study , Angioedema/chemically induced , Angioedema/genetics , BradykininABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is a serious systemic reaction-data on fatal and near-fatal reactions are limited. OBJECTIVE: To better understand clinical patterns and risks factors of severe anaphylaxis by a deep analysis of data from fatal and near-fatal anaphylaxis. METHODS: Data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry on fatal/near-fatal anaphylactic reactions and national data on anaphylaxis fatalities were investigated. RESULTS: A total of 305 fatal/near-fatal reactions among children and adults including 35 fatalities from the European Anaphylaxis Registry were identified. The most frequent elicitors were drugs, insects, and food. Male patients (66%/60%) were more frequently affected. Male sex, higher age, concomitant mastocytosis, and cardiovascular disease were associated with a more severe outcome. With increasing reaction severity, skin symptoms were less frequently observed (45% of fatal reactions). In parallel, anaphylaxis mortality rates were studied. The data show that anaphylaxis mortality rates increased in Germany from 0.48 (2009) to 0.59 per 1,000,000 population per year (2020). This increase was apparent only in the female population. In this data set, drugs were the most frequent elicitor of anaphylaxis fatalities, and the rate for this increased over time. CONCLUSIONS: We identified not only elicitors but also individual factors to be associated with an increased risk of fatal anaphylaxis. Such patients should be recognized and managed with great caution. The increase in drug-induced fatalities points to the need for a better allergological care of patients suffering from drug hypersensitivity.
Subject(s)
Anaphylaxis , Adult , Child , Humans , Male , Female , Anaphylaxis/diagnosis , Risk Factors , Public Health , Germany/epidemiology , Registries , AllergensABSTRACT
A roundtable discussion on February 10, 2023 between the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI) and the Paul-Ehrlich-Institut (PEI) aimed to discuss in detail current aspects of allergen immunotherapy (AIT), its regulatory framework under the transitional provision of the Therapy Allergen Ordinance (TAO), and the consequences for the planned guideline work of the DGAKI, regulatory challenges in the approval of AIT products for children and adolescents as well as allergy diagnostics. The content and discussion points of this dialogue are summarized and are set in context with the current literature.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Chronic urticaria (CU), including chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) and chronic inducible urticaria (CIndU), is a prevalent, enduring, mast-cell driven condition that presents challenges in its management. There is a clear need for additional approved treatment options beyond H1 receptor antagonists and the anti-IgE monoclonal antibody (mAb), omalizumab. One of the latest therapeutic strategies targets KIT, which is considered the primary master regulator for mast cell-related disorders. AREAS COVERED: This review provides a status update on KIT inhibiting drugs in early clinical development for CU. EXPERT OPINION: Whereas multi-targeted tyrosine kinase KIT inhibitors carry the risk of off-target toxicities, initial data from anti-KIT mAbs indicate significant potential in CSU and CIndU. The prolonged depletion of mast cells over several weeks by barzolvolimab could effectively control urticarial symptoms. Regarding safety, based on theoretical considerations and the available preliminary results, it is already evident that there may be more side effects compared to omalizumab. However, long-term safety data beyond 12 weeks are still lacking. The outcome of ongoing or planned clinical trials with several anti-KIT mAbs will need to demonstrate benefits compared to anti-IgE in CU or whether one approach is better suited for specific urticaria endotypes.
Subject(s)
Anti-Allergic Agents , Chronic Urticaria , Urticaria , Humans , Omalizumab/adverse effects , Anti-Allergic Agents/adverse effects , Chronic Disease , Chronic Urticaria/drug therapy , Chronic Urticaria/chemically induced , Urticaria/drug therapy , Urticaria/chemically induced , Immunosuppressive Agents/therapeutic use , Chronic Inducible UrticariaABSTRACT
Hymenoptera venom (HV) is injected into the skin during a sting by Hymenoptera such as bees or wasps. Some components of HV are potential allergens and can cause large local and/or systemic allergic reactions (SAR) in sensitized individuals. During their lifetime, ~ 3% of the general population will develop SAR following a Hymenoptera sting. This guideline presents the diagnostic and therapeutic approach to SAR following Hymenoptera stings. Symptomatic therapy is usually required after a severe local reaction, but specific diagnosis or allergen immunotherapy (AIT) with HV (VIT) is not necessary. When taking a patient's medical history after SAR, clinicians should discuss possible risk factors for more frequent stings and more severe anaphylactic reactions. The most important risk factors for more severe SAR are mast cell disease and, especially in children, uncontrolled asthma. Therefore, if the SAR extends beyond the skin (according to the Ring and Messmer classification: grade > I), the baseline serum tryptase concentration shall be measured and the skin shall be examined for possible mastocytosis. The medical history should also include questions specific to asthma symptoms. To demonstrate sensitization to HV, allergists shall determine concentrations of specific IgE antibodies (sIgE) to bee and/or vespid venoms, their constituents and other venoms as appropriate. If the results are negative less than 2 weeks after the sting, the tests shall be repeated (at least 4 - 6 weeks after the sting). If only sIgE to the total venom extracts have been determined, if there is double sensitization, or if the results are implausible, allergists shall determine sIgE to the different venom components. Skin testing may be omitted if in-vitro methods have provided a definitive diagnosis. If neither laboratory diagnosis nor skin testing has led to conclusive results, additional cellular testing can be performed. Therapy for HV allergy includes prophylaxis of reexposure, patient self treatment measures (including use of rescue medication) in the event of re-stings, and VIT. Following a grade I SAR and in the absence of other risk factors for repeated sting exposure or more severe anaphylaxis, it is not necessary to prescribe an adrenaline auto-injector (AAI) or to administer VIT. Under certain conditions, VIT can be administered even in the presence of previous grade I anaphylaxis, e.g., if there are additional risk factors or if quality of life would be reduced without VIT. Physicians should be aware of the contraindications to VIT, although they can be overridden in justified individual cases after weighing benefits and risks. The use of ß-blockers and ACE inhibitors is not a contraindication to VIT. Patients should be informed about possible interactions. For VIT, the venom extract shall be used that, according to the patient's history and the results of the allergy diagnostics, was the trigger of the disease. If, in the case of double sensitization and an unclear history regarding the trigger, it is not possible to determine the culprit venom even with additional diagnostic procedures, VIT shall be performed with both venom extracts. The standard maintenance dose of VIT is 100 µg HV. In adult patients with bee venom allergy and an increased risk of sting exposure or particularly severe anaphylaxis, a maintenance dose of 200 µg can be considered from the start of VIT. Administration of a non-sedating H1-blocking antihistamine can be considered to reduce side effects. The maintenance dose should be given at 4-weekly intervals during the first year and, following the manufacturer's instructions, every 5 - 6 weeks from the second year, depending on the preparation used; if a depot preparation is used, the interval can be extended to 8 weeks from the third year onwards. If significant recurrent systemic reactions occur during VIT, clinicians shall identify and as possible eliminate co-factors that promote these reactions. If this is not possible or if there are no such co-factors, if prophylactic administration of an H1-blocking antihistamine is not effective, and if a higher dose of VIT has not led to tolerability of VIT, physicians should should consider additional treatment with an anti IgE antibody such as omalizumab as off lable use. For practical reasons, only a small number of patients are able to undergo sting challenge tests to check the success of the therapy, which requires in-hospital monitoring and emergency standby. To perform such a provocation test, patients must have tolerated VIT at the planned maintenance dose. In the event of treatment failure while on treatment with an ACE inhibitor, physicians should consider discontinuing the ACE inhibitor. In the absence of tolerance induction, physicians shall increase the maintenance dose (200 µg to a maximum of 400 µg in adults, maximum of 200 µg HV in children). If increasing the maintenance dose does not provide adequate protection and there are risk factors for a severe anaphylactic reaction, physicians should consider a co-medication based on an anti-IgE antibody (omalizumab; off-label use) during the insect flight season. In patients without specific risk factors, VIT can be discontinued after 3 - 5 years if maintenance therapy has been tolerated without recurrent anaphylactic events. Prolonged or permanent VIT can be considered in patients with mastocytosis, a history of cardiovascular or respiratory arrest due to Hymenoptera sting (severity grade IV), or other specific constellations associated with an increased individual risk of recurrent and/or severe SAR (e.g., hereditary α-tryptasemia). In cases of strongly increased, unavoidable insect exposure, adults may receive VIT until the end of intense contact. The prescription of an AAI can be omitted in patients with a history of SAR grade I and II when the maintenance dose of VIT has been reached and tolerated, provided that there are no additional risk factors. The same holds true once the VIT has been terminated after the regular treatment period. Patients with a history of SAR grade ≥ III reaction, or grade II reaction combined with additional factors that increase the risk of non response or repeated severe sting reactions, should carry an emergency kit, including an AAI, during VIT and after regular termination of the VIT.
ABSTRACT
Not available.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Allergic medical care in Germany is organized on an interdisciplinary basis. An overview of the current care situation is necessary to manage and improve interdisciplinary cooperation. METHODS: Between January and February 2022, questionnaires were sent online and by mail to chief physicians of inpatient clinical departments to which most allergological diseases are assigned (dermatology, otorhinolaryngology [ENT], pulmonology, pediatrics, environmental/occupational medicine, gastroenterology; n = 899). RESULTS: The response rate was 52.1%. Allergology departments of dermatology, ENT and pulmonology were predominantly located in metropolitan areas (> 100,000 inhabitants), whereas responses of pediatric departments were mostly from smaller towns. 76.8% of the respondents reported existing interdisciplinary treatment plans with other specialties. Pediatric and pulmonology clinics stated disproportionately few interdisciplinary treatment concepts with dermatology and ENT clinics, especially in smaller cities with < 100,000 inhabitants. Diagnosis and therapy of allergic rhinitis were performed in particular by the departments of ENT, asthma mainly by the pulmonology departments. Care of other allergological diseases was most frequently reported by chief physicians of dermatology and pediatrics. CONCLUSIONS: In metropolitan areas, participating departments provide allergology care in a cooperative manner. A large spectrum of care is covered in cooperation with dermatological clinics. In more rural areas, cooperation is rarer; here, mainly pediatric departments provide allergological care, which may explain the more limited range of services compared to metropolitan areas.
Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care , Hospitals , Humans , Child , Surveys and Questionnaires , Germany/epidemiologyABSTRACT
Since more than a century ago, there has been awareness of the connection between viral infections and the onset and exacerbation of urticaria. Our knowledge about the role of viral infection and vaccination in acute and chronic urticaria improved as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic but it has also highlighted knowledge gaps. Viral infections, especially respiratory tract infections like COVID-19, can trigger the onset of acute urticaria (AU) and the exacerbation of chronic urticaria (CU). Less frequently, vaccination against viruses including SARS-CoV-2 can also lead to new onset urticaria as well as worsening of CU in minority. Here, with a particular focus on COVID-19, we review what is known about the role of viral infections and vaccinations as triggers and causes of acute and chronic urticaria. We also discuss possible mechanistic pathways and outline the unmet needs in our knowledge. Although the underlying mechanisms are not clearly understood, it is believed that viral signals, medications, and stress can activate skin mast cells (MCs). Further studies are needed to fully understand the relevance of viral infections and vaccinations in acute and chronic urticaria and to better clarify causal pathways.
Subject(s)
Angioedema , COVID-19 , Chronic Urticaria , Urticaria , Humans , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/complications , Angioedema/complications , Angioedema/drug therapy , Pandemics/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Urticaria/etiology , Chronic Urticaria/complications , Vaccination/adverse effectsABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Allergic diseases represent a broad spectrum of high-prevalence, chronic conditions that remain underdiagnosed and undertreated. The aims of this interdisciplinary, questionnaire-based, non-interventional study were to identify and analyze potential barriers to clinical allergological care in Germany. METHODS: All hospitals listed in the German hospital register involved in the treatment of allergological patients (n = 899) were invited to participate. The study yielded a response rate of 52.1% (n = 468). RESULTS: Overall, 88.5% of clinics agreed that allergological care in Germany needs improvement, especially in terms of reimbursement for diagnostics and therapy. More than 80% of participating clinics reported that the decreased availability of test substances and the time-intensity of allergological testing represent relevant barriers. For dermatology and pulmonology, the former is the strongest barrier, while for pediatric and ENT clinics, time-intensity is regarded as the strongest barrier. The availability of good therapy and appropriate guidelines present no barriers to allergological care. Regarding the use of digital healthcare concepts, a very large majority of clinics (n = 352; 91.4%) do not offer video consultations or the use of health applications in patient care. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, we have identified several structural barriers to allergological care in Germany. Reimbursement and the use of digital healthcare concepts in German clinics providing allergological care need improvement. Based on the results of this study, there is an urgent need for researchers and policymakers to further investigate and support allergology departments in their clinical work and in their implementation of digital healthcare concepts.
Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care , Hypersensitivity , Humans , Child , Germany/epidemiology , Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Hypersensitivity/epidemiology , Hypersensitivity/therapyABSTRACT
The lifetime prevalence of urticaria, a severe allergic disease, is almost 20%. It not only limits the quality of life of those affected, but also their general performance at work and in their daily activities. This publication is the first section of the Urticaria Guideline. It covers the classification and diagnosis of urticaria, taking into account the major advances in research into its causes, triggering factors and pathomechanisms. It also addresses strategies for the efficient diagnosis of the different subtypes of urticaria. This is crucial for individual, patient-oriented treatment, which is covered in the second part of the guideline, published separately. This German-language guideline was developed according to the criteria of the AWMF on the basis of the international English-language S3 guideline with special consideration of health system characteristics in the German-speaking countries. This first part of the guideline describes the classification of urticaria, distinguishing spontaneously occurring wheals (hives) and angioedema from forms of urticaria with inducible symptoms. Urticaria is defined as sudden onset of wheals, angioedema, or both, but is to be distinguished from conditions in which wheals occur as a short-term symptom, such as anaphylaxis. The diagnosis is based on (a limited number of) laboratory tests, but especially on medical history. In addition, validated instruments are available to measure the severity, activity and course of the disease.
Subject(s)
Anaphylaxis , Angioedema , Urticaria , Humans , Quality of Life , Urticaria/diagnosis , Urticaria/therapy , LanguageABSTRACT
This publication is the second part of the German-language S3 guideline on urticaria. It covers the management of urticaria and should be used together with Part 1 of the guideline on classification and diagnosis. This publication was prepared according to the criteria of the AWMF on the basis of the international English-language S3 guideline with special consideration of health system conditions in German-speaking countries. Chronic urticaria has a high impact on the quality of life and daily activities of patients. Therefore, if causal factors cannot be eliminated, effective symptomatic treatment is necessary. The recommended first-line treatment is to administer new generation, non-sedating H1 antihistamines. If the standard dose is not sufficiently effective, the dose should be increased up to fourfold. For patients who do not respond to this treatment, the second-line treatment in addition to antihistamines in the treatment algorithm is omalizumab and, if this treatment fails, ciclosporin. Other low-evidence therapeutic agents should only be used if all treatments in the treatment algorithm agreed upon by the guideline group fail. Both the benefit-risk profile and cost should be considered. Corticosteroids are not recommended for long-term treatment due to their inevitable severe side effects.
Subject(s)
Chronic Urticaria , Histamine H1 Antagonists, Non-Sedating , Urticaria , Humans , Quality of Life , Chronic Disease , Urticaria/drug therapy , Chronic Urticaria/diagnosis , Histamine H1 Antagonists, Non-Sedating/therapeutic useABSTRACT
Omalizumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting IgE, has been approved in 2014 for the treatment of H1 antihistamine-refractory chronic urticaria. Data on long-term effectiveness and predictive factors for treatment response are currently limited. In this monocentric, prospective, observational study, 112 patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) and 32 patients with chronic inducible urticaria (CIndU) were included. In addition to a rapid response, omalizumab also showed good effectiveness on both forms of chronic urticaria over 2 years. Low total IgE and elevated Yersinia IgA were identified as potential predictive markers for slower treatment responses in CSU. In conclusion, the present study highlights the efficacy of omalizumab for the treatment of chronic urticaria. With emerging new therapeutic options for chronic urticaria, further genetic as well as molecular markers are needed to establish patient-specific therapy selection.