Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Food and Drug Allergy.

A patient-reported outcome is directly reported by the patient without interpretation of the patient's response by anyone else. It refers to the patient's health (symptoms and feelings), quality of life, or functional status associated with health care or treatment. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are defined as the tools or instruments that are used to measure patient-reported outcomes. Health-related quality of life has been the most studied psychosocial PROM in food allergy, using validated questionnaires. In drug allergy, PROMs are useful in capturing patients' experiences of potential allergic reactions, including subjective symptoms such as headache, dizziness, or fatigue. Patient-reported outcome measures can also help differentiate true allergies from side effects or other nonallergic reactions and inform decisions about drug challenges and de-labeling strategies. Ensuring the chosen tool is validated for the specific allergy context is crucial for accurate data collection. Integrating patient-reported experiences alongside traditional methods can lead to more accurate assessments and personalized care.

Predicting Penicillin Allergy: A United States Multicenter Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Using the reaction history in logistic regression and machine learning (ML) models to predict penicillin allergy has been reported based on non-US data. OBJECTIVE: We developed ML positive penicillin allergy testing prediction models from multisite US data. METHODS: Retrospective data from 4 US-based hospitals were grouped into 4 datasets: enriched training (1:3 case-control matched cohort), enriched testing, nonenriched internal testing, and nonenriched external testing. ML algorithms were used for model development. We determined area under the curve (AUC) and applied the Shapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) framework to interpret risk drivers. RESULTS: Of 4777 patients (mean age 60 [standard deviation: 17] years; 68% women, 91% White, and 86% non-Hispanic) evaluated for penicillin allergy labels, 513 (11%) had positive penicillin allergy testing. Model input variables were frequently missing: immediate or delayed onset (71%), signs or symptoms (13%), and treatment (31%). The gradient-boosted model was the strongest model with an AUC of 0.67 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.57-0.77), which improved to 0.87 (95% CI: 0.73-1) when only cases with complete data were used. Top SHAP drivers for positive testing were reactions within the last year and reactions requiring medical attention; female sex and reaction of hives/urticaria were also positive drivers. CONCLUSIONS: An ML prediction model for positive penicillin allergy skin testing using US-based retrospective data did not achieve performance strong enough for acceptance and adoption. The optimal ML prediction model for positive penicillin allergy testing was driven by time since reaction, seek medical attention, female sex, and hives/urticaria.

Once-Daily Oral Berotralstat for Long-Term Prophylaxis of Hereditary Angioedema: The Open-Label Extension of the APeX-2 Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Berotralstat is a first-line, once-daily oral plasma kallikrein inhibitor approved for prophylaxis of hereditary angioedema (HAE) attacks in patients 12 years or older. OBJECTIVE: This analysis examined the safety and effectiveness of long-term prophylaxis with berotralstat. METHODS: APeX-2 was a phase 3, parallel-group, multicenter trial in patients with HAE caused by C1-inhibitor deficiency (NCT03485911). Part 1 was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled evaluation of 150 and 110 mg of berotralstat over 24 weeks. In part 2, berotralstat-treated patients continued the same treatment, and placebo-treated patients were re-randomized to 150 or 110 mg of berotralstat for 24 weeks. In part 3, all patients were treated with open-label berotralstat at 150 mg, which could be continued for up to an additional 4 years. In part 3, the primary endpoint was long-term safety and tolerability. Secondary endpoints included HAE attack rates and quality of life (QoL). RESULTS: Eighty-one patients entered part 3. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 82.7% of patients, with most being mild or moderate in severity. The most common TEAEs were nasopharyngitis, urinary tract infection, abdominal pain, arthralgia, coronavirus infection, and diarrhea. Drug-related TEAEs occurred in 14.8% of patients, but none were serious. For patients who completed 96 weeks of berotralstat treatment (n = 70), the mean (standard error) change in attack rate from baseline was -2.21 (0.20) attacks/mo. Clinically meaningful improvements in QoL were also observed, with the largest improvements in the functioning domain. CONCLUSION: Berotralstat was generally well tolerated, provided rapid and sustained reductions in HAE attacks and improved QoL over 96 weeks.

Drug allergy in older adults: A study from the United States Drug Allergy Registry.

BACKGROUND: Older adults have an increased risk of adverse drug reactions and negative effects associated with alternative antibiotic use. Although the number of antibiotic allergies reported increases with age, the characteristics and outcomes of older adults receiving drug allergy assessment are unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess the characteristics and outcomes of drug allergy evaluations in older adults. METHODS: We considered patients aged above or equal to 65 years enrolled in the United States Drug Allergy Registry (USDAR), a US multisite prospective cohort (January 16, 2019 to February 28, 2022). Data were summarized using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Of 1678 USDAR participants from 5 sites, 406 older adults aged above or equal to 65 years (37% 65-69 years, 37% 70-74 years, 16% 75-79 years, and 10% ≥80 years) received 501 drug allergy assessments. USDAR older adults were primarily of female sex (69%), White (94%), and non-Hispanic (98%). Most USDAR older adults reported less than or equal to 1 infections per year (64%) and rated their general health as good, very good, or excellent (80%). Of 296 (59%) penicillin allergy assessments in USDAR older adults, 286 (97%) were disproved. Other drug allergy assessments included sulfonamide (n = 41, 88% disproved) and cephalosporin (n = 20, 95% disproved) antibiotics. All 41 drug allergy labels in USDAR participants aged above or equal to 80 years and all 80 penicillin allergy labels in USDAR men aged above or equal to 65 years were disproved. CONCLUSION: Older adults represented a quarter of USDAR participants but were neither racially nor ethnically diverse and were generally healthy without considerable antibiotic need. Most older adults presented for antibiotic allergy assessments, the vast majority of which were disproved. Drug allergy assessments may be underutilized in the older adults who are most vulnerable to the harms of unconfirmed antibiotic allergy labels.

United States Drug Allergy Registry (USDAR) grading scale for immediate drug reactions.

BACKGROUND: There is no accepted grading system classifying the severity of immediate reactions to drugs. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to present a proposed grading system developed through the consensus of drug allergy experts from the United States Drug Allergy Registry (USDAR) Consortium. METHODS: The USDAR investigators sought to develop a consensus severity grading system for immediate drug reactions that is applicable to clinical care and research. RESULTS: The USDAR grading scale scores severity levels on a scale of 0 to 4. A grade of no reaction (NR) is used for patients who undergo challenge without any symptoms or signs, and it would confirm a negative challenge result. A grade 0 reaction is indicative of primarily subjective complaints that are commonly seen with both historical drug reactions and during drug challenges, and it would suggest a low likelihood of a true drug allergic reaction. Grades 1 to 4 meet the criteria for a positive challenge result and may be considered indicative of a drug allergy. Grade 1 reactions are suggestive of a potential immediate drug reaction with mild symptoms. Grade 2 reactions are more likely to be immediate drug reactions of moderate severity. Grade 3 reactions have features suggestive of a severe allergic reaction, whereas grade 4 reactions are life-threatening reactions such as anaphylactic shock and fatal anaphylaxis. CONCLUSION: This proposed grading schema for immediate drug reactions improves on prior schemata by being developed specifically for immediate drug reactions and being easy to implement in clinical and research practice.

Updated guidance regarding the risk of allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines and recommended evaluation and management: A GRADE assessment and international consensus approach.

This guidance updates 2021 GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) recommendations regarding immediate allergic reactions following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and addresses revaccinating individuals with first-dose allergic reactions and allergy testing to determine revaccination outcomes. Recent meta-analyses assessed the incidence of severe allergic reactions to initial COVID-19 vaccination, risk of mRNA-COVID-19 revaccination after an initial reaction, and diagnostic accuracy of COVID-19 vaccine and vaccine excipient testing in predicting reactions. GRADE methods informed rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations. A modified Delphi panel consisting of experts in allergy, anaphylaxis, vaccinology, infectious diseases, emergency medicine, and primary care from Australia, Canada, Europe, Japan, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States formed the recommendations. We recommend vaccination for persons without COVID-19 vaccine excipient allergy and revaccination after a prior immediate allergic reaction. We suggest against >15-minute postvaccination observation. We recommend against mRNA vaccine or excipient skin testing to predict outcomes. We suggest revaccination of persons with an immediate allergic reaction to the mRNA vaccine or excipients be performed by a person with vaccine allergy expertise in a properly equipped setting. We suggest against premedication, split-dosing, or special precautions because of a comorbid allergic history.

Healthcare utilization of patients with hereditary angioedema treated with lanadelumab and subcutaneous C1-inhibitor concentrate.

Background: New hereditary angioedema (HAE) treatments have become available in recent years for the treatment of HAE due to C1-inhibitor (C1-INH) deficiency, including two subcutaneous (SC) options: a monoclonal antibody (lanadelumab) and a plasma-derived C1-INH concentrate (SC-C1-INH). Limited real-world data on these therapies have been reported. Objective: The objective was to describe new users of lanadelumab and SC-C1-INH, including demographics, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), costs, and treatment patterns before and after beginning treatment. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study that used an administrative claims data base. Two mutually exclusive cohorts of adult (ages ≥18 years) new users of lanadelumab or SC-C1-INH with ≥180 days of continuous use were identified. HCRU, costs, and treatment patterns were assessed in the 180-day period before the index date (new treatment use) and up to 365 days after the index date. HCRU and costs were calculated as annualized rates. Results: Forty-seven patients who used lanadelumab and 38 patients who used SC-C1-INH were identified. The most frequently used on-demand HAE treatments at baseline were the same for both cohorts: bradykinin B2 antagonists (48.9% of the patients on lanadelumab, 52.6% of the patients on SC-C1-INH) and C1-INHs (40.4% of the patients on lanadelumab, 57.9% of the patients on SC-C1-INH). More than 33% of the patients continued to fill on-demand medications after treatment initiation. Annualized angioedema-associated emergency department visits and hospitalizations decreased after initiation of treatment, from 1.8 to 0.6 for the patients on lanadelumab and from 1.3 to 0.5 for the patients on SC-C1-INH. Annualized total healthcare costs after treatment initiation in the database were $866,639 and $734,460 for the lanadelumab and SC-C1-INH cohorts, respectively. Pharmacy costs accounted for >95% of these total costs. Conclusion: Although HCRU decreased after the initiation of treatment, angioedema-associated emergency department visits and hospitalizations and on-demand treatment fills were not completely eliminated. This indicates ongoing disease and treatment burden despite use of modern HAE medicines.

A multicenter chart review of patient characteristics, treatment, and outcomes in hereditary angioedema: unmet need for more effective long-term prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare disease characterized by unpredictable, recurring subcutaneous or submucosal swelling. Without effective therapy, HAE can negatively impact patients' quality of life. Management of HAE includes on-demand treatment of attacks and short- and long-term prophylaxis (LTP) to prevent attacks. Newer therapies may be more tolerable and effective in managing HAE; however, therapies such as androgens are still widely used in some countries owing to their relative ease of access and adequate disease control for some patients. This study evaluated the characteristics, treatment patterns, clinical outcomes, and healthcare resource utilization of a multinational cohort of patients with HAE, with a focus on understanding reasons for recommending or discontinuing available therapies. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted at 12 centers in six countries and included data from patients with HAE type 1 or 2 who were ≥ 12 years of age at their first clinical visit. The relationship between LTP use and attack rates was evaluated using a multivariable Poisson regression model. Data were collected between March 2018 and July 2019. RESULTS: Data from 225 patients were collected (62.7% female, 86.2% White, 90.2% type 1); 64.4% of patients had their first HAE-related visit to the center prior to or during 2014. Treatment patterns varied between countries. Overall, 85.8% of patients were prescribed on-demand treatment and 53.8% were prescribed LTP, most commonly the androgen danazol (53.7% of patients who used LTP). Plasma-derived C1 inhibitor (Cinryze®) was used by 29.8% of patients for LTP. Patients who received LTP had a significantly lower rate of HAE attacks than patients who did not receive any LTP (incidence rate ratio (95% confidence interval) 0.90 (0.84-0.96)). Androgens were the most commonly discontinued therapy (51.3%), with low tolerability cited as the most frequent reason for discontinuation (50.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, findings from this study support the use of LTP in the prevention of HAE attacks; a lower rate of attacks was observed with LTP compared with no LTP. However, the type of LTP used varied between countries, with tolerability and accessibility to specific treatments playing important roles in management decision-making.

Hereditary Angioedema: A Review of the Current and Evolving Treatment Landscape.

Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare disease characterized by sudden and often unprovoked episodes of swelling that can be potentially life-threatening when it involves the upper airway. The treatment options for both acute episodes of HAE and LTP, used to minimize the frequency and severity of angioedema attacks, were limited historically to very few options, had considerable side effects, and/or had considerable burden of treatment. Fortunately, through the elucidation of the pathophysiology of HAE, the development of newer targeted therapies has been possible both for acute therapy and long-term prophylaxis and even more are on the horizon. Because of the rapid development of these therapies, it can be challenging for clinicians to keep abreast of newer and developing treatments for HAE. This review article will outline the current and potential future treatments for HAE. It will also highlight important considerations when treating special HAE patient populations including women and pediatric patients.

Long-term lanadelumab treatment improves health-related quality of life in patients with hereditary angioedema.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is associated with a substantial disease burden. Lanadelumab reduced the HAE attack rate during 132 weeks of follow-up in the HELP open-label extension (OLE) Study (NCT02741596). OBJECTIVE: To measure the impact of long-term lanadelumab treatment on patient-reported outcomes (PROs). METHODS: Rollover patients (completed the 26-week HELP study [NCT02586805]) and nonrollovers (newly enrolled) received lanadelumab 300 mg every 2 weeks. PROs (Angioedema Quality of Life Questionnaire [AE-QoL], Short Form Health Survey 12-item version 2, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment-General Health Questionnaire, and EQ-5D-5L questionnaire) were assessed at baseline (day 0 of HELP OLE) and various time points until the end-of-study visit. The Angioedema Control Test, Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication, and Global Impression of Treatment Response were administered starting at week 52. RESULTS: The mean (SD) change in AE-QoL total score from baseline to end-of-study for rollovers (n = 90) was -10.2 (17.9), exhibiting further improvement from HELP in health-related quality of life (HRQoL); 48.9% of rollovers achieved the previously defined 6-point minimal clinically important difference. Nonrollovers (n = 81) reported a change of -19.5 (21.3). Controlled disease (Angioedema Control Test total score ≥10) was reported by 90.2% of rollovers and 95.9% of nonrollovers at the end of the study. Excellent treatment response was reported by 78.7% of patients and 82.4% of investigators. Results from other PROs indicated a slight improvement in anxiety, a high level of satisfaction with treatment, and increased work productivityor activity. CONCLUSION: Clinically meaningful improvement in HRQoL was exhibited with long-term lanadelumab treatment, supporting the benefit of lanadelumab therapy associated with attack prevention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02586805 (HELP Study) and NCT02741596 (HELP open-label extension).

An investigational oral plasma kallikrein inhibitor for on-demand treatment of hereditary angioedema: a two-part, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend effective on-demand therapy for all individuals with hereditary angioedema. We aimed to assess the novel oral plasma kallikrein inhibitor, sebetralstat, which is in development, for on-demand treatment of hereditary angioedema attacks. METHODS: In this two-part phase 2 trial, individuals with type 1 or 2 hereditary angioedema aged 18 years or older were recruited from 25 sites, consisting of specialty outpatient centres, across nine countries in Europe and the USA. Individuals were eligible if they had experienced at least three hereditary angioedema attacks in the past 93 days, were not on prophylactic therapy, and had access to and the ability to self-administer conventional attack treatment. In part 1 of the trial, participants were given a single 600 mg open-label oral dose of sebetralstat to assess safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of the dose. Part 2 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-sequence, two-period (2 × 2) crossover trial; participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either sequence 1, in which they were given a single dose of 600 mg of sebetralstat to treat the first eligible attack and a second dose of placebo to treat the second eligible attack, or sequence 2, in which they were given placebo to treat the first eligible attack and then 600 mg of sebetralstat to treat the second eligible attack. Participants and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was time to use of conventional attack treatment within 12 h of study drug administration, which was assessed in all participants who were randomly assigned to treatment and who received study drug for two attacks during part 2 of the study. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, starting in part 1. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04208412, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between July 2, 2019, and Dec 8, 2020, 84 individuals were screened and 68 were enrolled in part 1 and received sebetralstat (mean age 38·3 years [SD 13·2], 37 [54%] were female, 31 [46%] were male, 68 [100%] were White). 42 (62%) of 68 participants completed pharmacokinetic assessments. Sebetralstat was rapidly absorbed, with a geometric mean plasma concentration of 501 ng/mL at 15 min. In a subset of participants (n=6), plasma samples obtained from 15 min to 4 h after study drug administration had near-complete protection from ex vivo stimulated generation of plasma kallikrein and cleavage of high-molecular-weight kininogen. In part 2, all 68 participants were randomly assigned to sequence 1 (n=34) or sequence 2 (n=34). 53 (78%) of 68 participants treated two attacks (25 [74%] in the sequence 1 group and 28 [82%] in the sequence 2 group). Time to use of conventional treatment within 12 h of study drug administration was significantly longer with sebetralstat versus placebo (at quartile 1: >12 h [95% CI 9·6 to >12] vs 8·0 h [3·8 to >12]; p=0·0010). There were no serious adverse events or adverse event-related discontinuations. INTERPRETATION: Oral administration of sebetralstat was well tolerated and led to rapid suppression of plasma kallikrein activity, resulting in increased time to use of conventional attack treatment and faster symptom relief versus placebo. Based on these results, a phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of two dose levels of sebetralstat in adolescent and adult participants with hereditary angioedema has been initiated (NCT05259917). FUNDING: KalVista Pharmaceuticals.

Drug Allergy Practice Parameter Updates to Incorporate Into Your Clinical Practice.

The drug allergy practice parameter was developed to provide guidance on the diagnosis and management of drug hypersensitivity reactions. It was last updated in 2010. With the growth of research and evidence-based data since then, experts came together to update the practice parameter with a focus on sections that the work group deemed to have significant changes (or were not addressed) in the previous practice parameter. This review is a focused update on aspects of the practice parameter deemed to have the greatest impact on clinical practice and includes significant updates on diagnosis of antibiotic allergy including penicillin, cephalosporin, sulfonamide, fluoroquinolone, and macrolide allergies. Other topics include the evolution in our management approach to patients with aspirin/nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug allergy, diagnostic testing for delayed drug hypersensitivity and allergy to chemotherapeutics and biologics, and the key consensus-based statements for clinical practice. Specifically, the updated practice parameter helps allergists understand the place of 1- or 2-step drug challenges that are valuable tools often without the need for skin testing in many clinical situations. A proactive approach to delabeling penicillin allergy as well as unnecessary avoidance of safe antibiotic alternatives for patients with proven penicillin allergy is emphasized. New guidance is provided on management of patients with different phenotypes of aspirin and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug hypersensitivity reactions. Approaches to delayed drug hypersensitivity and use of delayed intradermal and patch testing for specific phenotypes are reviewed. Lastly, practical approaches to management of patients with reactions to chemotherapeutics and biologics are discussed.

Clinical Phenotypes of Immediate First-Dose Reactions to mRNA COVID-19: A Multicenter Latent Class Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although immediate potentially allergic reactions have been reported after dose 1 of mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines, comprehensively defined subtypes have not been clearly distinguished. OBJECTIVE: To define distinct clinical phenotypes of immediate reactions after dose 1 of mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, and to assess the relation of clinical phenotype to mRNA COVID-19 vaccine second dose tolerance. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients with 1 or more potentially allergic symptoms or signs within 4 hours of receiving dose 1 of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine and assessed by allergy/immunology specialists from 5 U.S. academic medical centers (January-June 2021). We used latent class analysis-an unbiased, machine-learning modeling method-to define novel clinical phenotypes. We assessed demographic, clinical, and reaction characteristics associated with phenotype membership. Using log-binomial regression, we assessed the relation between phenotype membership and second dose tolerance, defined as either no symptoms or mild, self-limited symptoms resolving with antihistamines alone. A sensitivity analysis considered second dose tolerance as objective signs only. RESULTS: We identified 265 patients with dose-1 immediate reactions with 3 phenotype clusters: (1) Limited or Predominantly Cutaneous, (2) Sensory, and (3) Systemic. A total of 223 patients (84%) received a second dose and 200 (90%) tolerated their second dose. Sensory cluster (all patients had the symptom of numbness or tingling) was associated with a higher likelihood of second dose intolerance, but this finding did not persist when accounting for objective signs. CONCLUSIONS: Three novel clinical phenotypes of immediate-onset reactions after dose 1 of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were identified using latent class analysis: (1) Limited or Predominantly Cutaneous, (2) Sensory, and (3) Systemic. Whereas these clinical phenotypes may indicate differential mechanistic etiologies or associations with subsequent dose tolerance, most individuals proceeding to their second dose tolerated it.