What is the Best Way to Diagnose Possible Asthma Patients with Negative Bronchodilator Reversibility Tests?

Objective: The best method and strategy for the diagnosis of asthma remains unclear, especially in patients with negative bronchodilator reversibility test (BDRT). In our study, we aimed to investigate the diagnostic yield of peak expiratory flow (PEF) variability for this patient group. Methods: A total of 50 patients with suspected asthma, all with negative BDR test, were included in the study. Demographic information and symptoms were recorded and PEF variability was monitored for 2 weeks. Metacolinbronchial provocation test (mBPT) was performed. Asthma was diagnosed when PEF variability ≥20% and/or positive mBPT was observed. Results: 30 of 50 patients were diagnosed with asthma. After 1 month, 17 patients were evaluated for treatment outcomes. The sensitivity and specificity of PEF variability for different cut-off values (≥20%, >15% and >10%) were 61.5-83.3, 88.5-62.5 and 100-16.7, respectively. One of the most important findings of our study was the absence of variable airflow limitation or airway hyper reactivity in 39% patients with a previous diagnosis of asthma. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that a low baseline FEF25-75 value was an independent predictive factor for the diagnosis of asthma (p= 0.05). Conclusion: The most efficient diagnostic test for asthma is still unclear due to many factors. Our study is one of the few studies on this subject. Although current diagnostic recommendations generally recommend a PEF variability of 10% for the diagnosis of asthma, this threshold may not be appropriate for the BDR-negative patient group. Our results suggest using a threshold value of <15% for PEF variability when excluding asthma and ≥20% when confirming the diagnosis of asthma in patients with clinically suspected but unproven reversibility. Furthermore, FEF25-75 is considered to be an important diagnostic parameter that should be included in diagnostic recommendations for asthma.

Hypersensitivity reactions with first-line antituberculosis drugs and outcomes of rapid desensitizations.

Background: Data about drug hypersensitivity reactions with first-line antituberculosis drugs and their management is limited. Rapid drug desensitization seems to be an appropriate management. Objective: Evaluate the efficacy of the rapid desensitization protocols in patients who had a reaction phenotypically compatible with immediate-type drug hypersensitivity with first-line antituberculosis drugs and identify possible risk factors of breakthrough reactions during the protocols. Methods: This is a retrospective study of active tuberculosis patients who had a reaction phenotypically compatible with immediate-type drug hypersensitivity with first-line antituberculosis drugs and underwent desensitization with the drugs used during the reaction. Characteristics of drug hypersensitivity and breakthrough reactions, and outcomes of rapid desensitizations were recorded. Results: One hundred and seventy-nine patients were included in the study. Most of the initial reactions (n = 132, 73.7%) occurred within the first week of treatment and were mild (n = 146, 81.6%). A total of 690 desensitizations were performed. Desensitizations were successfully completed without any breakthrough reaction in 103 (57.5%) patients and in 29 of 36 (80.6%) patients after a breakthrough reaction. The overall success of desensitizations were found to be 95% (132 of 139 patients). Most of the breakthrough reactions (84%) were mild. Sixteen patients had breakthrough reactions with multiple drugs. Although pyrazinamide was the most common culprit of breakthrough reactions and had the lowest desensitization success, it had the highest rate of a single breakthrough reaction (p < 0.001). Timing of the initial reaction and concomitant breakthrough reaction with ethambutol were found to have increased the risk for breakthrough reaction caused by rifampicin (p = 0.017 and p = 0.010 respectively). Conclusion: The rapid desensitization protocols used in this study provide a successful and effective management of the patients with a reaction phenotypically compatible with immediate-type drug hypersensitivity with first-line antituberculosis drugs.

Characteristics of adverse reactions due to subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy applied between 2011-2021: Single center experience.

Introduction: The aim of this study was to elucidate the incidence of local, large local and systemic reactions after subcutaneus immunotherapy (SCIT) injections in our clinic and to determine the characteristic features of these adverse reactions. Materials and Methods: A total of 6000 SCIT injections administered to 163 patients between January 2011 and December 2021 were retrospectively evaluated. The study population consisted of patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis who underwent SCIT due to pollen, house dust mite or cat allergy, or patients who underwent SCIT due to venom allergy. Demographic characteristics of the patients, diagnoses, allergen sensitivities, immunotherapy protocol applied, adverse reactions, and the characteristics of these reactions were recorded. Result: Totally, 163 patients with a mean age of 36.8 ± 12.7 years were enrolled in this research. Sex distribution was as follows: 55.2% (n= 90) were females. During the study, 218 allergic reactions were detected in 83 patients. The incidence of adverse reactions per injection was 3.6%. The probability of developing an adverse reaction in a patient during the entire subcutaneous immunotherapy was 53.9%. Of the adverse reactions that developed, 94 (43.1%, n= 47) were observed locally while 56 (25.7%, n= 40) were large local reactions, and 68 (31.2%, n= 30) were systemic. Incidence of adverse reactions per injection were 1.5%, 0.9%, and 1.1% for local reaction, large local reaction, and systemic reaction, respectively. Conclusions: The results of this analysis elaborated that subcutaneous immunotherapy is a safe and tolerable treatment modality. However, before initiating treatment, the benefits and risks should be evaluated. The risk of systemic reactions is quite low, but fatal anaphylaxis can occur, so physicians need to be aware of the potential risks.

Rapid drug desensitization to taxanes: a descriptive study from Turkey.

AIM: To present the characteristics of drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) among taxane recipients with non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC), and to describe the results of rapid drug desensitization (RDD). METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional study included 45 patients who were treated with taxane for NSCLC and were found to be hypersensitive to taxane. All patients were administered the standard 3-bag, 12-step RDD protocol following the development of DHR. RDD success was evaluated separately for each cycle, and successful RDD was defined as the completion of the cycle with application of 12 steps of the desensitization protocol and the absence of early and/or late reactions afterwards. RESULTS: Among 45 patients hypersensitive to taxane 43 (95.6%) successfully received taxane cycles with desensitization. Failed RDD occurred in only 2 (4.4%) patients. The total number of desensitization cycles was 183, of which 181 (98.9%) were successful. The mean age of patients with successful desensitization was 59.42 ± 10.48 years and 37 (86.0%) of them were male. CONCLUSION: RDD is a reliable procedure that enables effective administration and completion of first-line taxane treatments in taxane-sensitive patients.

Platin desensitizations in thoracic malignancies and risk factors for breakthrough reactions.

Although platin desensitization is a safe and effective alternative for patients with hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs), sometimes breakthrough reactions (BTRs) can be encountered. However, data about the risk factors for BTRs are limited. The aim of this study is to define the outcomes of desensitization, the characteristics of BTRs, and to identify the risk factors for BTRs with platins in thoracic malignancies. This is a retrospective report of patients with thoracic malignancies who underwent platin desensitization. Patients' demographics, initial HSR characteristics, skin test results, desensitization outcomes, and BTR characteristics were recorded. Thirty-three lung cancer and 14 malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) patients were included in the study. The culprit drug was cisplatin in 29 and was carboplatin in 18 patients. Skin test positivity was 43.5% with cisplatin, 50% with carboplatin, and it was found to be higher if the interval between the initial HSR and skin testing (ST) was ˃20 days (p = 0.027). One hundred and five desensitization courses were performed. Twenty-two patients had 33 BTRs. Skin test positivity was higher in the BTR-positive group (p = 0.025). BTRs (18.2%; n = 6) were more severe than initial HSR. In the case of epinephrine administration during initial HSR, epinephrine administration during the first BTR was found to be more (p = 0.036). The target dose was achieved in 92.4% of desensitization courses. The number of previous platin infusions ≥10 was found to be an independent risk factor for BTR development (p = 0.036 OR:17.641, 95% CI: 1.211-256.971). Identification of risk factors for BTR will guide appropriate management and desensitization approaches for platin HSRs.

Overprescription of short-acting ß2-agonists is associated with poor asthma symptom control: results from five Middle Eastern countries included in the SABINA International (III) study.

BACKGROUND: Although short-acting ß2-agonist (SABA) overuse is associated with poor treatment outcomes, data on SABA use in the Middle East are lacking. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this cross-sectional study in patients (aged ≥12 years) with asthma, data on disease characteristics and asthma treatments were collected from the Middle Eastern cohort of the SABA use IN Asthma (SABINA) III study. Patients were classified by investigator-defined asthma severity and practice type. Multivariable regression models analyzed the association between SABA prescriptions and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Of 1389 patients (mean age, 46.7 years; female, 69.5%), 85.7% had moderate-to-severe asthma and 88.7% were treated by specialists. Overall, 51.3% of patients experienced ≥1 severe asthma exacerbation in the previous 12 months, with 58.2% having partly controlled or uncontrolled asthma. Notably, 47.1% of patients were prescribed ≥3 SABA canisters (considered overprescription). SABA canisters were purchased over the counter by 15.3% of patients. Higher SABA prescriptions (vs 1-2 canisters), except 3-5 canisters, were associated with increased odds of uncontrolled asthma (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: SABA overprescription occurred in almost half of all patients in the Middle East, underscoring the need for healthcare providers and policymakers to adhere to the latest evidence-based recommendations to address this public health concern.

Asthma is a long-term disease that causes inflammation of the airways in the lungs and affects both adults and children. Despite effective medicines, asthma remains poorly controlled in many patients. Inhaled steroids with anti-inflammatory properties are the most effective controller medications for asthma. However, many patients rely on rescue or reliever medications, including short-acting ß₂-agonists (SABAs), as they provide immediate relief from symptoms. However, SABAs do not treat the underlying inflammation of asthma and their continued overuse may place patients at risk of asthma attacks and hospitalization. The SABA use IN Asthma study, known as SABINA, examined SABA prescriptions in patients with asthma in 24 countries across five continents. As part of this study, data were collected on prescriptions for asthma medications (including SABA prescriptions) and the purchase of SABA over-the-counter (OTC) at the pharmacy without a prescription from 1389 patients aged at least 12 years across five countries in the Middle East (United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Oman, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey). Nearly half of all patients were prescribed three or more SABA canisters in the previous 12 months, which is above that recommended by asthma treatment guidelines. SABA was also purchased OTC without a prescription by approximately 15% of patients, a majority of whom had already received a high number of SABA prescriptions. Prescription of six or more SABA canisters was associated with poor asthma control. Therefore, there is an urgent need for healthcare providers to follow the latest treatment guidelines for asthma to reduce SABA prescriptions.

Short-acting ß2-agonist prescription patterns in patients with asthma in Turkey: results from SABINA III.

BACKGROUND: Over-reliance on short-acting ß2-agonists (SABAs) is associated with poor asthma outcomes. However, the extent of SABA use in Turkey is unclear owing to a lack of comprehensive healthcare databases. Here, we describe the demographics, disease characteristics and treatment patterns from the Turkish cohort of the SABA use IN Asthma (SABINA) III study. METHODS: This observational, cross-sectional study included patients aged ≥ 12 years with asthma from 24 centres across Turkey. Data on sociodemographics, disease characteristics and asthma treatments were collected using electronic case report forms. Patients were classified by investigator-defined asthma severity (guided by the 2017 Global Initiative for Asthma [GINA]) and practice type (primary/specialist care). The primary objective was to describe SABA prescription patterns in the 12 months prior to the study visit. RESULTS: Overall, 579 patients were included (mean age [standard deviation; SD]: 47.4 [16.1] years; 74.3% female), all of whom were treated by specialists. Most patients had moderate-to-severe asthma (82.7%, GINA steps 3-5), were overweight or obese (70.5%), had high school or university/post-graduate education (51.8%) and reported fully reimbursed healthcare (97.1%). The mean (SD) asthma duration was 12.0 (9.9) years. Asthma was partly controlled/uncontrolled in 56.3% of patients, and 46.5% experienced ≥ 1 severe exacerbation in the preceding 12 months. Overall, 23.9% of patients were prescribed ≥ 3 SABA canisters in the previous 12 months (considered over-prescription); 42.9% received no SABA prescriptions. As few patients had mild asthma, only 5.7% were prescribed SABA monotherapy. Therefore, most patients (61.5%) were prescribed SABA in addition to maintenance therapy, with 42.8% receiving ≥ 3 SABA canisters in the previous 12 months. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), ICS + a long-acting ß-agonist fixed-dose combination and oral corticosteroids were prescribed to 14.5%, 88.3% and 28.5% of all patients, respectively. Additionally, 10.2% of patients purchased SABA over the counter, of whom 27.1% purchased ≥ 3 canisters in the preceding 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Despite all patients being treated by specialists and most receiving fully reimbursed healthcare, nearly a quarter of patients received prescriptions for ≥ 3 SABA canisters in the previous 12 months. This highlights a public health concern and emphasizes the need to align clinical practices with the latest evidence-based recommendations.

Expert Opinion on Practice Patterns in Mild Asthma After the GINA 2019 Updates: A Major Shift in Treatment Paradigms from a Long-Standing SABA-Only Approach to a Risk Reduction-Based Strategy with the Use of Symptom-Driven (As-Needed) Low-Dose ICS/LABA.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This expert opinion, prepared by a panel of chest disease specialists, aims to review the current knowledge on practice patterns in real-life management of mild asthma and to address the relevant updates in asthma treatment by The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) to guide clinicians for the best clinical practice in applying these new treatment paradigms. RECENT FINDINGS: On the basis of the emerging body of evidence suggesting the non-safety of short-acting ß2-agonists (SABA)-only therapy and comparable efficacy of the as-needed inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)-formoterol combinations with maintenance ICS regimens, GINA recently released their updated Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention Guide (2019). The new GINA 2019 recommendations no longer support the SABA-only therapy in mild asthma but instead includes new off-label recommendations such as symptom-driven (as-needed) low-dose ICS-formoterol and "low dose ICS taken whenever SABA is taken." The GINA 2019 asthma treatment recommendations include a major shift from long-standing approach of clinical practice regarding the use of symptom-driven SABA treatment alone in the management of mild asthma. This expert opinion supports the transition from a long-standing SABA-only approach to a risk reduction-based strategy, with the use of symptom-driven (as-needed) low-dose ICS/LABA in mild asthma patients, particularly in those with poor adherence to controller medications. The thoughtful and comprehensive approach of clinicians to these strategies is important, given that the exact far-reaching impact of this major change in management of mild asthma in the real-world settings will only be clarified over time.

Challenges and recommendations for the management of asthma in the Middle East and Africa.

Clinical presentation of asthma is variable, and its diagnosis can be a major challenge in routine health-care practice, especially in low-and-middle-income countries. The aim of asthma management is to achieve optimal asthma control and to reduce the risk of asthma exacerbations and mortality. In the Middle East and in Africa (MEA), several patient- and physician-related factors lead to misdiagnosis and suboptimal management of asthma. A panel of experts comprising of specialists as well as general health-care professionals met to identify challenges and provide recommendations for the management of asthma in MEA. The major challenges identified for diagnosis of asthma were lack of adequate knowledge about the disease, lack of specialized diagnostic facilities, limited access to spirometry, and social stigma associated with asthma. The prime challenges for management of asthma in MEA were identified as overreliance on short-acting ß-agonists (SABAs), underprescription of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), nonadherence to prescribed medications, and inadequate insurance coverage for its treatment. The experts endorsed adapting the Global Initiative for Asthma guidelines at country and regional levels for effective management of asthma and to alleviate the overuse of SABAs as reliever medications. Stringent control over SABA use, discouraging over-the-counter availability of SABA, and using as-needed low-dose ICS and formoterol as rescue medications in mild cases were suggested to reduce the overreliance on SABAs. Encouraging SABA alone-free clinical practice in both outpatient and emergency department settings is also imperative. We present the recommendations for the management of asthma along with proposed regional adaptations of international guidelines for MEA.

Successful desensitization under antihistamine suppression in a case with urticaria due to osimertinib.

INTRODUCTION: Osimertinib is an approved therapy for patients with a Thr790met (T790M) mutation diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that progresses during epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) therapy. However, in 7-13% of patients, drug-related side effects lead to discontinuation of osimertinib treatment. In such cases, osimertinib desensitization is a treatment option that can be considered. CASE REPORT: A 59-year-old female patient, who was followed up with the diagnosis of stage 4 NSCLC, was consulted to the allergy clinic because of urticaria. The patient developed urticaria plaques 20 h after the third dose of osimertinib tablet. MANAGEMENT & OUTCOME: With the diagnosis of osimertinib-induced urticaria, desensitization was planned for the patient. Treatment was started with a dose of 0.1 mg/day osimertinib. The procedure was completed in approximately 50 days, and a dose of 80 mg/day was reached with antihistamine suppression. DISCUSSION: Here, a successful osimertinib desensitization in a patient with a history of osimertinib-related type 1 allergic reaction is reported. Osimertinib desensitization is a treatment option that should be considered in cases where treatment has to be ceased due to drug-related side effects.

[Mycobacterium abscessus infection management: Macrolide and quinolone desensitization]. / Mycobacterium abscessus enfeksiyonu yönetimi: Makrolid ve kinolon desensitizasyonu.

Antibiotic hypersensitivity reactions can lead to marked morbidity, mortality and inadequate treatment options. Mycobacterium abscessus infection is a difficult management system for clinicians since it most commonly involves the lungs, progresses if untreated, and the organism is resistant to many antibiotics, as well as the agents used in treatment can cause undesirable side effects. Although macrolides are one of the most reliable antibiotic groups in terms of allergic reactions, early type hypersensitivity reactions against macrolides, one of the main antibiotics used in the treatment of Mycobacterium abscessus lung disease, may make the treatment management of the disease difficult. Due to the rapid increase in the use of quinolone in recent years, the frequency of developing allergic reactions with these agents also increases. In cases where antibiotic hypersensitivity is detected, the use of the responsible agent should be avoided, but desensitization may be necessary in cases without different treatment options. In this study, it was aimed to present a case of successful desensitization with clarithromycin and moxifloxacin in a patient who was diagnosed with Mycobacterium abscessus lung disease and developed anaphylaxis with clarithromycin and moxifloxacin after treatment was initiated.

COVID-19 in patients with severe asthma using biological agents.

As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, case reports have been published where patients with severe asthma using biological agents survived with a mild course of illness and encouraged the continuation of biological therapies in patients with severe asthma. However, contrary to previous information, a more severe course of COVID-19 has recently been reported in severe asthmatics using biological therapy compared to the general population. To evaluate the COVID-19 rate and disease severity in severe asthmatics using biological agents. A retrospective study was conducted in patients with severe asthma treated with biological agents. Data concerning whether the subjects had contracted COVID-19 and the severity of the disease were evaluated. Eihgty-four severe asthmatics using biological agents (omalizumab or mepolizumab) aged 48.3 ± 10.6 years (mean ± standard deviation) with female/male ratio: 53 (63.1%)/31 (36.9%) were included in the study. Among participants 13 (15.5%) had contracted COVID-19. The course of COVID-19 was mild in five (38.5%) and moderate in eight patients (61.5%), while none of the patients had a severe course of COVID-19. Mechanical ventilation or intensive care follow-up was not required in any of the six patients (46.2%) who were treated as inpatients. All participants survived COVID-19 in full recovery and no deaths occurred in the cases. A higher rate of COVID-19 was found in patients with severe asthma using biologics compared to those reported in previous reports. However, all patients with COVID-19 have a mild to moderate disease course.

Clinician's perspective regarding medication adherence in patients with obstructive lung diseases and the impact of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: Failure to achieve high levels of medication adherence in obstructive lung diseases is a major cause of uncontrolled disease. The purpose of this study is to reveal clinicians' opinions on the level of patient adherence and the change in adherence during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A questionnaire containing multiple-choice questions about treatment adherence in patients with obstructive lung diseases was voluntarily applied to doctors working in a tertiary hospital for chest diseases. RESULTS: Eighty-one doctors (mean age, 37.2 years [standard deviation, 9.7 years]; 57 (70.4%) women) answered the questionnaires. Almost all clinicians participating in the study reported that they always or frequently asked patients if they adhered to treatment. Most clinicians think that in 20-50% of patients with asthma and less than 20% of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, a decrease in medication adherence appears in the first year of treatment. Most clinicians think the main reason for patients with obstructive lung diseases not adhering is patients' reluctance to be treated regularly. Regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients' drug adherence, 43.2% of clinicians observed that adherence increased after the start of the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to medication is not at the desired levels in patients with obstructive lung diseases. However, when faced with a serious health threat, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, patients realize the severity of their illness and begin using their treatments more regularly.

Real-life adherence to subcutaneous immunotherapy: What has changed in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) must be continued for 3 years, to achieve a long-term modifying effect. Adherence is a key to ensure effectiveness. The objective of this study was, first of all, to evaluate the adherence with subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and to identify the main causes of SCIT withdrawal in real-life practice in our clinic. Secondly, we also aimed to investigate to what extent the COVID-19 pandemic altered our SCIT receiving patients' treatment adherence behaviors and the factors that affected their decisions. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of the medical records of patients ages ≥18 years, who had started SCIT in January 2014 or later until September 2020 in our department for the diagnosis of allergic rhinitis, allergic asthma or venom allergy, were included in the study. Adherence was determined as the accomplishment of 3 years of SCIT. RESULTS: A total of 124 patients (72 female [58.1%]; median age, 35 [19-77] years) were included. The adherence rate to SCIT in our tertiary center's real-life setting was 56.25% with a follow-up duration of 3 years before COVID-19 pandemic. Dose modification, defined as reducing patient's planned SCIT dose due to a systemic allergic/large local reaction or missed injection, and its frequency, which is the number of dose adjustments done throughout the SCIT, was found to be the only factor related to nonadherence. But with the pandemic only in 6 months, among 63 patients receiving SCIT, 15 patients (23.81%) dropped out, and the most common reason was fear of being infected with COVID-19 virus during receiving SCIT in hospital (93.33%). The only independent predictor of drop-out during the COVID-19 pandemic was short duration of AIT (p = 0.012). When we compare the dropped-out cases before and after the start of pandemic, AIT duration was significantly shorter in pandemic period (p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Adherence rate to SCIT in our real-world setting study was 56.25% before the COVID-19 pandemic. Our results indicated that patients requiring dose modification were more prone to be non-adherent. Approximately one quarter of patients dropped-out with the start of pandemic, almost all due to fear of being infected during receiving SCIT in hospital. Since short SCIT follow-up time was found to be the only risk factor for drop-out during the COVID-19 pandemic, we believe that patients who are in the early phases of their treatment should be observed more closely and their concerns should be answered by their doctors.

Identification of Risk Factors and Cross-Reactivity of Local Anesthetics Hypersensitivity: Analysis of 14-Years' Experience.

PURPOSE: Local anesthetics (LA) are widely used and adverse drug reactions (ADR) occur in 2.5-10%, but hypersensitivity reactions are rare (ranging between 0% and 4.3%). Risk is so overestimated causing too many allergy clinic referrals. There are limited and also conflicting results over the management of LA allergy. We aimed to find out who should be referred to an allergy clinic for a LA allergy testing, to define the subjects with an increased risk of LA allergy and to assess the need for testing for identifying alternative LA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients referred to our clinic for diagnostic workup of LA hypersensitivity from 2006 to 2020. RESULTS: In our cohort of 398 patients, tests were positive in 14 (3.52%) of them. Personal history of ADR with LA was the only independent risk factor for positive test (RR=4.007, p=0.033). Presence of generalized cutaneous symptoms and hypotension during past reaction were independent predictors of positive test (RR=9.043, p=0.021 and RR=10.445, p=0.038, respectively). The negative predictive value of intradermal test at dilution of 1:100 for immediate-type reaction was high (97.56%). Also, we demonstrated cross-reactivity within the amide-group LAs and co-occurrence of immediate- and delayed-type reactions. CONCLUSION: Only patients with an LA-induced ADR should be referred to an allergy clinic. History of generalized cutaneous symptoms and/or hypotension during the reaction may define subjects with an increased risk of LA allergy. A stepwise test procedure may start with skin tests especially for these patients with increased risk factors. In presence of LA allergy, alternative LA should always be confirmed by performing a challenge test.

COVID-19 in a patient with severe asthma using mepolizumab.

Background: There is a lack of information about the course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with severe asthma who were treated with biologics. Some reports indicated that treatment with benralizumab, dupilumab, and omalizumab in patients with severe asthma was not associated with significant adverse effects during COVID-19. Methods: Asthma itself or the biologic agents used to treat asthma can have a positive effect on the course of COVID-19. There seem not to be any cases that specifically reported the use of mepolizumab in a patient who was infected with COVID. Results: We reported of a 55-year-old woman with a diagnosis of severe asthma for; 3 years and who was being treated with mepolizumab, with no evidence of loss of asthma control, at the time of contracting COVID-19 and who had been followed up in the allergy clinic. In addition, there are no data on mepolizumab therapy in patients with elevated liver enzyme levels. Conclusion: With this case, we also reported that no adverse effects were observed during mepolizumab treatment in a patient with elevated liver enzyme levels.

Obstructive sleep apnea is a determinant of asthma control independent of smoking, reflux, and rhinitis.

Background: Asthma control is defined as to what extent manifestations of asthma can be observed in a patient or have been reduced or removed by treatment. Regular use of asthma treatments, correct inhaler technique, adequate information provided about the patient's diseases and medicines, and patient-clinician collaboration aid asthma control. Asthma shares risk factors and links in the pathogenesis with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), and OSA may aggravate asthma symptoms. Objective: To assess the risk of OSA for asthma control. Methods: The study was carried out in subjects with asthma who were followed up at specific time points and who used asthma medication regularly and with an appropriate inhaler technique. An asthma control test and a questionnaire were used to determine the asthma control levels and OSA risk of the subjects. Results: With regard to the questionnaire scoring, 77 of 137 subjects with asthma had a low OSA risk and 60 had a high OSA risk. The proportion of the subjects with a high OSA risk (p < 0.001) and were smokers (p = 0.020) were significantly higher in the subjects with uncontrolled asthma than in those with controlled asthma. Logistic regression analysis showed that the variables that affect asthma control status were the risk of OSA and obesity. The subjects with a low OSA risk were more likely to have controlled asthma than those with a high OSA risk (odds ratio 7.896 [95% confidence interval, 2.902-21.487]; p < 0.001). Conclusion: In the subjects with asthma and who adhered to therapy and used inhalers with the correct technique, a high risk of OSA was associated with poor control of their asthma. This association was independent of other factors, including rhinitis, gastroesophageal reflux, and smoking.

Programmed death ligand-1 expression levels, clinicopathologic features, and survival in surgically resected sarcomatoid lung carcinoma.

AIM: To determine the programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression rates in sarcomatoid lung carcinomas and to compare clinicopathologic features and survival rates of PD-L1-positive and negative patients. METHODS: PD-L1 expression was evaluated in 65 surgically resected sarcomatoid carcinomas. The clinicopathologic features of cases with PD-L1-positive and negative tumors were compared. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed. Multiple Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was performed to determine independent predictors of overall survival. RESULTS: PD-L1 antibody positivity was found in 72.3% of surgically resected sarcomatoid lung carcinomas. Regarding histopathologic subtypes, PD-L1 expression was positive in 80.4% of pleomorphic carcinomas, 62.5% of spindle- and/or giant-cell carcinomas, and 16.7% of carcinosarcomas. Pleural invasion was observed in 68.1% of PD-L1-positive cases and 27.8% of PD-L1-negative cases (P = 0.008). No difference in survival was found between PD-L1-positive and -negative tumors. The only factor significantly associated with poor survival was the pathological stage of the tumor. CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals a high rate of PD-L1 positivity in a large number of sarcomatoid lung carcinoma cases with pleomorphic carcinoma, spindle- and/or giant-cell carcinoma, and carcinosarcoma subtypes. The only significantly different clinicopathologic feature in PD-L1-positive cases is pleural invasion. PD-L1 positivity is not a significant predictor of survival in sarcomatoid lung carcinomas.

Rare atopy in COVID-19 patients or COVID-19 famine in atopic patients?

BACKGROUND: There are conflicting results in the literature regarding the frequency of allergic diseases in COVID-19 patients. The effect of having an allergic disease on COVID-19 disease severity has been little studied. PURPOSE: In this study, we tried to determine the frequency of allergic diseases in COVID-19 patients and the effect of having an allergic disease on COVID-19 disease severity. DESIGN/METHOD: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted in patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in a state hospital in Istanbul, Turkey. Patients were contacted by phone and those who approved to participate in the study were questioned about their sociodemographic characteristics, body mass index, smoking history, and about their atopic status. Rate of atopic diseases among mild and severe COVID-19 patients and risk estimates for mild disease in atopic and non-atopic COVID-19 patients were calculated. RESULTS: Study population consisted of 235 adults with COVID-19 (mean age, 45.3 years [standard deviation, 15.0 years]; 139 [59.1%] male). Among study population, 16 (6.8%) subjects had one of the three atopic symptoms, which were wheezing, rhinitis, or eczema. Among the subjects with atopic status, four (1.7%) subjects had wheezing, eight (3.4%) had rhinitis, and four (1.7%) had eczema within the last 12 months. Although atopic status is associated with 3.1 times higher odds for mild disease, being atopic or not being atopic was not found to be associated with COVID-19 severity (P = .054). CONCLUSION: The information that atopic diseases are less common in COVID-19 patients may guide clinical risk classification.

Clinician's perspective regarding medication adherence in patients with obstructive lung diseases and the impact of COVID-19

SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: Failure to achieve high levels of medication adherence in obstructive lung diseases is a major cause of uncontrolled disease. The purpose of this study is to reveal clinicians' opinions on the level of patient adherence and the change in adherence during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A questionnaire containing multiple-choice questions about treatment adherence in patients with obstructive lung diseases was voluntarily applied to doctors working in a tertiary hospital for chest diseases. RESULTS: Eighty-one doctors (mean age, 37.2 years [standard deviation, 9.7 years]; 57 (70.4%) women) answered the questionnaires. Almost all clinicians participating in the study reported that they always or frequently asked patients if they adhered to treatment. Most clinicians think that in 20-50% of patients with asthma and less than 20% of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, a decrease in medication adherence appears in the first year of treatment. Most clinicians think the main reason for patients with obstructive lung diseases not adhering is patients' reluctance to be treated regularly. Regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients' drug adherence, 43.2% of clinicians observed that adherence increased after the start of the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to medication is not at the desired levels in patients with obstructive lung diseases. However, when faced with a serious health threat, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, patients realize the severity of their illness and begin using their treatments more regularly.