Childhood asthma outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: Findings from the PeARL multi-national cohort.

ImportanceImportance: The interplay between COVID-19 pandemic and asthma in children is still unclear. ObjectiveWe evaluated the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on childhood asthma outcomes. DesignThe PeARL multinational cohort included children with asthma and non-asthmatic controls recruited during the COVID-19 pandemic and compared current disease activity with data available from the previous year. SettingPediatric outpatient clinics. ParticipantsThe study included 1,054 children with asthma and 505 non-asthmatic controls, aged between 4-18 years, from 25 pediatric departments, from 15 countries globally. ExposuresCOVID-19 pandemic first wave, starting from the date of the first fatality in the respective country. Main outcomes and measuresWe assessed the pandemics impact on the frequency of respiratory infections, emergency presentations and hospital admissions in asthmatic versus non-asthmatic participants, controlling for confounding factors including the pandemics duration and the frequency of such acute events during 2019. Using paired analyses, we evaluated the impact of the pandemic on the annualized frequency of asthma attacks and the previously mentioned acute events, asthma control, and pulmonary function in children with asthma, compared to their baseline disease activity, during the preceding year. ResultsDuring the pandemic, children with asthma experienced fewer upper respiratory tract infections, episodes of pyrexia, emergency visits, hospital admissions, asthma attacks and hospitalizations due to asthma, in comparison to the preceding year. Sixty-six percent of asthmatic children had improved asthma control while in 33% the improvement exceeded the minimally clinically important difference. Pre-bronchodilatation FEV1 and peak expiratory flow rate were also improved during the pandemic. When compared to non-asthmatic controls, children with asthma were not found to be at increased risk of LRTIs, episodes of pyrexia, emergency visits or hospitalizations during the pandemic. However, an increased risk of URTIs emerged. Conclusions and relevanceChildhood asthma outcomes, including control, were improved during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, probably because of reduced exposure to asthma triggers and increased treatment adherence. The decreased frequency of acute episodes does not support the notion that childhood asthma may be a risk factor for COVID-19. Furthermore, the potential for improving childhood asthma outcomes through environmental control becomes apparent. Key PointsO_ST_ABSQuestionC_ST_ABSWhat was the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on childhood asthma outcomes? FindingsDuring the first wave of the pandemic, children with asthma have experienced improved outcomes, as evidenced by fewer asthma attachks, hospitalizations, improved scores in validated asthma control measures and improved pulmonary function. MeaningThis is the first study to show a positive impact of COVID-19 pandemic on childhood asthma activity. This is probably the result of reduced exposure to asthma triggers and increased treatment adherence. The decreased frequency of acute episodes does not support the hypothesis that childhood asthma may be a risk factor for COVID-19.

Cow's milk oral immunotherapy in real life: 8-year long-term follow-up study

BACKGROUND: Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has been recognized as a promising treatment for severe and long-lasting cow's milk (CM) allergy. Once maintenance has been achieved, patients should maintain daily intake of CM to ensure desensitization. Clinical experience concerning long-term follow-up is scarce. OBJECTIVE: The authors aimed to assess long-term efficacy and safety of a maintenance phase of OIT in real life. METHODS: Prospective study of all children and adolescents, who underwent CM-OIT and were subsequently followed at our allergy center on maintenance dose (200 mL daily) for at least 36 months after reaching the maintenance phase (from 2009 to 2016). RESULTS: Forty-two patients were enrolled: 60% male, 36% with history of anaphylaxis and 57% with asthma. The median time of follow-up was 69 months (range, 39–105 months) and the median age at the last clinical evaluation was 13 years (range, 6–23 years). Regarding adherence to the protocol: 92% are on free diet (at least 200 mL of CM daily; 7-g protein); 14% had transient interruptions and 7% definitely withdrawn with loss of tolerance. During maintenance, 45% developed mild to severe allergic reactions, and 7% had more than 3 episodes. A positive correlation between the occurrence of allergic reactions and history of anaphylaxis (p < 0.001) was found. The coexistence of asthma was risk factor for the occurrence of allergic reactions during maintenance. CONCLUSION: This real-life study supports long-term efficacy and safety of CM-OIT. Despite daily intake, 41% had symptoms at some moment during the complete follow-up period; a total of 33 symptomatic days in patients with mean follow-up time of 67.5 months. Clinical tolerance depends on daily intake. The protective effect reached can be lost after CM withdrawal. History of anaphylaxis was a risk factor for the occurrence of allergic reactions during the maintenance phase.

Ultrarush schedule of subcutaneous immunotherapy with modified allergen extracts is safe in paediatric age

BACKGROUND: Traditional subcutaneous immunotherapy up dosing with allergenic extracts has been shown to be associated with frequent adverse reactions. In recent studies it has been demonstrated that using modified extracts, namely allergoids, it is a safe and effective procedure particularly on accelerated schedules. However data assessing its safety in paediatric age is scarce. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety profile in paediatric population of using modified allergen extracts, in an ultrarush schedule, to reach the maintenance dose in the first day. METHODS: We included children undergoing treatment with subcutaneous immunotherapy during a five-year period, using modified aeroallergen extracts, depigmented, polymerized with glutaraldehyde and adsorbed on aluminium hydroxide using an ultrarush induction phase. The type of adverse reactions during the ultrarush protocol was recorded. RESULTS: We studied 100 paediatric patients (57 males) with a mean age of 11.6 years (5 to 18 years; standard deviation, 3.3), all with moderate to severe persistent rhinitis, with or without allergic conjunctivitis, asthma and atopic eczema, sensitized to mites and/or pollens. All reached the maintenance dose of 0.5 mL in the first day, except 1 child. During the ultrarush protocol the total number of injections was 199. There were 21 local adverse reactions in 11 patients, 11 immediate and 10 delayed; from those, had clinical relevance 1 immediate and 4 delayed. Systemic reactions were recorded in 2 cases, both immediate and mild. CONCLUSION: The ultrarush protocol, without premedication, was a safe alternative to be used in paediatric age during the induction phase of subcutaneous immunotherapy using allergoid depigmented extracts.