Updated grading system for systemic allergic reactions: Joint Statement of the World Allergy Organization Anaphylaxis Committee and Allergen Immunotherapy Committee.

There is a lack of consensus over the description and severity assignment of allergic adverse reactions to immunotherapy, although there seems to be a consensus at least in terms of using the World Allergy Organization (WAO) grading systems to describe local adverse events for Sublingual Immunotherapy (SLIT) and Systemic Allergic Reactions (SARs) to Subcutaneous Immunotherapy (SCIT) amongst the major national/regional allergy societies. In this manuscript, we propose a modification of the previous WAO Grading system for SARs, which aligns with the newly-proposed Consortium for Food Allergy Research (CoFAR) Grading Scale for Systemic Allergic Reactions in Food Allergy (version 3.0). We hope this can facilitate a unified grading system appropriate to SARs due to allergen immunotherapy, independent of allergen and route of administration, and across clinical and research practice.

Global disparities in availability of epinephrine auto-injectors.

Background: Anaphylaxis is the most severe clinical presentation of acute systemic allergic reactions and can cause death. Given the prevalence of anaphylaxis within healthcare systems, it is a high priority public health issue. However, management of anaphylaxis - both acute and preventative - varies by region. Methods: The World Allergy Organization (WAO) Anaphylaxis Committee and the WAO Junior Members Steering Group undertook a global online survey to evaluate local practice in the diagnosis and management of anaphylaxis across regions. Results: Responses were received from WAO members in 66 countries. While intramuscular epinephrine (adrenaline) is first-line treatment for anaphylaxis, some countries continue to recommend alternative routes in contrast to guidelines. Epinephrine auto-injector (EAI) devices, prescribed to individuals at ongoing risk of anaphylaxis in the community setting, are only available in 60% of countries surveyed, mainly in high-income countries. Many countries in South America, Africa/Middle-East and Asian-Pacific regions do not have EAI available, or depend on individual importation. In countries where EAIs are commercially available, national policies regarding the availability of EAIs in public settings are limited to few countries (16%). There is no consensus regarding the time patients should be observed following emergency treatment of anaphylaxis. Conclusion: This survey provides a global snapshot view of the current management of anaphylaxis, and highlights key unmet needs including the global availability of epinephrine for self-injection as a key component of anaphylaxis management.

Effects of combination treatment with tezepelumab and allergen immunotherapy on nasal responses to allergen: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) has been shown to play a central role in the initiation and persistence of allergic responses. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated whether tezepelumab, a human monoclonal anti-TSLP antibody, improved the efficacy of subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT) and promoted the development of tolerance in patients with allergic rhinitis. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind parallel design trial in patients with cat allergy. A total of 121 patients were randomized to receive either intravenous tezepelumab plus subcutaneous cat SCIT, cat SCIT alone, tezepelumab alone, or placebo for 52 weeks, followed by 52 weeks of observation. Nasal allergen challenge (NAC), skin testing, and blood and nasal samples were obtained throughout the study. RESULTS: At week 52, the NAC-induced total nasal symptom scores (TNSS) (calculated as area under the curve [AUC0-1h] and as peak score [Peak0-1h] during the first hour after NAC) were significantly reduced in patients receiving tezepelumab/SCIT compared to SCIT alone. At week 104, one year after stopping treatment, the primary end point TNSS AUC0-1h was not significantly different in the tezepelumab/SCIT group compared to SCIT alone, while TNSS Peak0-1h was significantly lower in those receiving combination treatment versus SCIT. Transcriptomic analysis of nasal epithelial samples demonstrated that treatment with the combination of SCIT/tezepelumab, but neither monotherapy, caused persistent downregulation of a gene network related to type 2 inflammation that was associated with improvement in NAC responses. CONCLUSIONS: Inhibition of TSLP augments the efficacy of SCIT during therapy and may promote tolerance after a 1-year course of treatment. (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02237196).

COVID-19 vaccine-related presumed allergic reactions and second dose administration by using a two-step graded protocol.

Background: Acute allergic reactions to messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines are rare but may limit public health immunization efforts. Objectives: To characterize suspected allergic reactions to the first dose of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccine and to assess the safety and utility of a two-step graded-dose protocol for the second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine in patients with a history of low suspicion of anaphylaxis to their first dose. Methods: This was a retrospective evaluation of referrals to the allergy and immunology clinic for a presumed allergic reaction to the first dose of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) between December 17, 2020, and February 28, 2021. Recommendations for the second dose and outcomes were evaluated by trained board-certified allergists. Results: Seventy-seven patients presented with a Pfizer-BioNTech reaction (56 [72.7%]) or with a Moderna reaction (21 [27.3%]). Most patients (69.7%) had symptom onset within 4 hours. Most commonly reported symptoms were cutaneous (51.9%), cardiovascular (48.1%), and respiratory (33.8%) symptoms. Recommendations included to proceed with the single dose (70.1%), two-step graded dose (19.5%), or deferral (10.4%). Twelve of 15 patients completed the second dose with a graded-dose protocol. Of these patients, five reported at least one or more similar symptoms as experienced with their first dose. Conclusion: Of the patients with presumed allergic reactions to their first dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine, most were able to safely receive the second dose. For those with a low suspicion of anaphylaxis, the two-step graded protocol with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was well tolerated. A graded-dose protocol could be an effective strategy for second-dose vaccination in those who may otherwise defer the second dose.

The Use of Contrast Agents in Interventional Pain Procedures: A Multispecialty and Multisociety Practice Advisory on Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis, Gadolinium Deposition in the Brain, Encephalopathy After Unintentional Intrathecal Gadolinium Injection, and Hypersensitivity Reactions.

This Practice Advisory presents a comprehensive and evidence-based set of position statements and recommendations for the use of contrast media in interventional pain procedures. The advisory was established by an international panel of experts under the auspices of 11 multinational and multispecialty organizations based on a comprehensive review of the literature up to December 31, 2019. The advisory discusses the risks of using gadolinium-based contrast agents. These include nephrogenic systemic fibrosis, gadolinium brain deposition/retention, and encephalopathy and death after an unintentional intrathecal gadolinium injection. The advisory provides recommendations on the selection of a specific gadolinium-based contrast agent in patients with renal insufficiency, those who had multiple gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging examinations, and in cases of paraspinal injections. Additionally, recommendations are made for patients who have a history of mild, moderate, or severe hypersensitivity reactions to contrast medium.

COVID-19 vaccine-associated anaphylaxis: A statement of the World Allergy Organization Anaphylaxis Committee.

Vaccines against COVID-19 (and its emerging variants) are an essential global intervention to control the current pandemic situation. Vaccines often cause adverse events; however, the vast majority of adverse events following immunization (AEFI) are a consequence of the vaccine stimulating a protective immune response, and not allergic in etiology. Anaphylaxis as an AEFI is uncommon, occurring at a rate of less than 1 per million doses for most vaccines. However, within the first days of initiating mass vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine BNT162b2, there were reports of anaphylaxis from the United Kingdom and United States. More recent data imply an incidence of anaphylaxis closer to 1:200,000 doses with respect to the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. In this position paper, we discuss the background to reactions to the current COVID-19 vaccines and relevant steps to mitigate against the risk of anaphylaxis as an AEFI. We propose a global surveillance strategy led by allergists in order to understand the potential risk and generate data to inform evidence-based guidance, and thus provide reassurance to public health bodies and members of the public.

A Proposal from the Montpellier World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Better Management and Prevention of Anaphylaxis.

Since the first description of anaphylaxis in 1902, its clinical importance as an emergency condition has been recognized worldwide. Anaphylaxis is a severe, potentially life-threatening systemic hypersensitivity reaction characterized by rapid onset and the potential to endanger life through respiratory or circulatory compromise. It is usually, although not always, associated with skin and mucosal changes. Although the academic/scientific communities have advocated to promote greater awareness and protocols for the management of anaphylaxis based on best evidence, there are few efforts documenting feedback as to the success of these efforts. In this article, we review the key unmet needs related to the diagnosis and management of anaphylaxis, and propose a public health initiative for prevention measures and a timetable action plan that intends to strengthen the collaboration among health professionals and especially primary care physicians dealing with anaphylaxis, which can encourage enhanced quality of care of patients with anaphylaxis. More than calling for a harmonized action for the best management of anaphylaxis to prevent undue morbidity and mortality, the Montpellier World Health Organization Collaborating Centre here proposes an action plan as a baseline for a global initiative against anaphylaxis. We strongly believe that these collaborative efforts are a strong public health and societal priority that is consistent with the overarching goals of providing optimal care of allergic patients and best practices of allergology.

World allergy organization anaphylaxis guidance 2020.

Anaphylaxis is the most severe clinical presentation of acute systemic allergic reactions. The occurrence of anaphylaxis has increased in recent years, and subsequently, there is a need to continue disseminating knowledge on the diagnosis and management, so every healthcare professional is prepared to deal with such emergencies. The rationale of this updated position document is the need to keep guidance aligned with the current state of the art of knowledge in anaphylaxis management. The World Allergy Organization (WAO) anaphylaxis guidelines were published in 2011, and the current guidance adopts their major indications, incorporating some novel changes. Intramuscular epinephrine (adrenaline) continues to be the first-line treatment for anaphylaxis. Nevertheless, its use remains suboptimal. After an anaphylaxis occurrence, patients should be referred to a specialist to assess the potential cause and to be educated on prevention of recurrences and self-management. The limited availability of epinephrine auto-injectors remains a major problem in many countries, as well as their affordability for some patients.

Prevalence and characterization of asthma in hospitalized and nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention advises that patients with moderate to severe asthma belong to a high-risk group that is susceptible to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the association between asthma and COVID-19 has not been well-established. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to determine the prevalence of asthma among patients with COVID-19 in a major US health system. We assessed the clinical characteristics and comorbidities in asthmatic and nonasthmatic patients with COVID-19. We also determined the risk of hospitalization associated with asthma and/or inhaled corticosteroid use. METHODS: Medical records of patients with COVID-19 were searched by a computer algorithm (March 1 to April 15, 2020), and chart review was used to validate the diagnosis of asthma and medications prescribed for asthma. All patients had PCR-confirmed COVID-19. Demographic and clinical features were characterized. Regression models were used to assess the associations between asthma and corticosteroid use and the risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization. RESULTS: Of 1526 patients identified with COVID-19, 220 (14%) were classified as having asthma. Asthma was not associated with an increased risk of hospitalization (relative risk, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.77-1.19) after adjusting for age, sex, and comorbidities. The ongoing use of inhaled corticosteroids did not increase the risk of hospitalization in a similar adjusted model (relative risk, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.90-2.15). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a substantial prevalence of asthma in our COVID-19 cohort, asthma was not associated with an increased risk of hospitalization. Similarly, the use of inhaled corticosteroids with or without systemic corticosteroids was not associated with COVID-19-related hospitalization.