RESUMO
Background: Patients with asthma (AS), atopic dermatitis (AD), allergic rhinitis (AR), eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), chronic urticaria (CU), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs-exacerbated respiratory disease (N-ERD), and certain phenotypes of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), among others, have a common underlying pathogenesis known as Type 2 inflammation (T2i). These diseases often coexist with other T2i conditions and have a substantial impact on the quality of life (QoL) of patients. However, limited data on patients' experiences, perspectives, and current management of T2i diseases have been published thus far. Aims: This survey, promoted by the patient-driven T2i Network Project, aimed at identifying the common drivers and challenges related to the QoL of patients with T2i diseases by putting the patient's perspective at the force and including it in the design of new care strategies. Methodology: An anonymous online survey was carried out through convenience sampling between May and June 2023. The survey was codesigned by members of different patient associations, healthcare professionals and healthcare quality experts, and implemented using EUSurvey and distributed through eight patient associations from Spain. The survey consisted of 29 questions related to the participant's sociodemographic features, a series of self-reported multiple choice or rating scale questions, including diagnosis, QoL measures, disease severity, healthcare resource utilization, and quality of care. Results: The survey included 404 participants, members from eight patient associations, the majority of whom had moderate-to-severe self-reported disease severity (93%) and one or more coexisting pathologies related to T2i (59%). Patients with more than one pathology had a significantly greater impact on QoL than those with only one pathology (p < .001). Participants with self-reported severe symptoms reported significantly worse QoL than those with mild-to-moderate severity (p < .001). More than half of the patients (56%) felt constantly bothered by the unpredictability of their illness caused by potential exposure to known or unknown disease triggers. The lack of coordination between specialists and primary care was also expressed as an area of dissatisfaction by participants, with 52% indicating a complete lack of coordination and 21% indicating an average coordination. Conclusion: This article reports the initial findings of a patient-led initiative, which highlights the common QoL challenges faced by individuals with type 2 inflammation-related diseases and emphasizes the importance of further clinical research to improve the management of this patient group. Considering the significant impact on QoL, a multidisciplinary approach integrated into new healthcare protocols has the potential to improve patient management and QoL, shorten the time to diagnosis and reduce healthcare resource utilization.
RESUMO
Purpose: The objective of this study was to develop and validate a questionnaire, through a Delphi consensus, to be used by allergists in their routine clinical practice to assess the preferences of patients starting allergen immunotherapy (AIT) treatment using an objective approach. Patients and Methods: A Delphi consensus-driven process was used. The scientific committee, composed of 15 allergists, led the study and participated in the preparation of the questionnaire. Two-hundred panelists from different Spanish regions were invited to complete a 16-item questionnaire on a nine-point Likert scale covering six topic blocks. Consensus was achieved if ≥66.6% of panelists reached agreement or disagreement. Results: Of the 200 experts invited to participate in the Delphi process, a total of 195 (97.5%) answered the questionnaire. The panel experts reached a consensus on "agreement" on a total of 12 of the 16 (75.0%) items, covering a total of six categories: (a) patient knowledge (2 questions), (b) barriers to patient adherence (3 questions), (c) patient behavior (4 questions), (d) future actions (3 questions), (e) treatment costs (2 questions), and (f) final patient preferences (2 questions). Conclusion: This Delphi consensus study validated a set of twelve recommended questions for patients objectively assessing their preferences and suitability for the most common AIT options available. The questionnaire intends to assist allergists in making an objective, unconditioned decision regarding the best AIT option for each patient, after informing them about the different routes.
RESUMO
Hymenoptera venom immunotherapy (HVI) is a long-term effective treatment to avoid new systemic reactions in patients with Hymenoptera allergy. The sting challenge test is considered the gold standard to confirm the tolerance. However, the use of this technique is not generalized in clinical practice, being the basophil activation test (BAT), which functionally explores allergen response, an alternative that does not entail any of the provocation risks associated with the sting challenge test. This study reviews the publications that used the BAT to follow up and evaluate the success of the HVI. Studies assessing the changes between a baseline BAT before the start and BATs performed between the starting and maintenance phases of the HVI were selected. Ten articles were found, comprising information from 167 patients, of which 29% used the sting challenge test. The studies concluded the importance of evaluating the responses with submaximal allergen concentrations, which reflect basophil sensitivity, to monitor the HVI using the BAT. It was also observed that changes in the maximum response (reactivity) could not reflect the clinical status of tolerance, particularly in the initial phases of HVI.
La inmunoterapia con veneno de himenópteros (IVH) es, a largo plazo, un tratamiento eficaz para evitar nuevas reacciones sistémicas en pacientes con alergia a este tipo de insectos. La prueba de repicadura controlada es el estudio de referencia para confirmar la tolerancia del individuo. Sin embargo, no se ha generalizado su indicación clínica, por lo que la prueba de activación de basófilos (TAB) resulta una buena alternativa, pues valora de manera funcional la respuesta al alérgeno y está exenta de los riesgos asociados con la provocación. En esta revisión se explora la utilidad de la TAB en el seguimiento y valoración del éxito de la IVH. Se seleccionaron estudios que evalúan los cambios entre una TAB basal y en otro momento de la fase de inicio o mantenimiento de la IVH. Se incluyeron 10 estudios con datos de 167 pacientes, de los que el 29% había tenido prueba de repicadura controlada. Para vigilar la eficacia de la IVH debe explorarse la respuesta del basófilo, con la determinación de las concentraciones submáximas del alérgeno, que reflejan la sensibilidad del basófilo. Los cambios en la respuesta máxima (reactividad) no pueden aportar información del estado de tolerancia, especialmente en las fases iniciales de la IVH.
