Daily Clinical Practice in the Management of Chronic Urticaria in Spain: Results of the UCREX Study. / [Artículo traducido] Práctica clínica diaria en el manejo de la urticaria crónica en España: resultados del estudio UCREX.

BACKGROUND: Chronic Urticaria (CU) is a debilitating disease whose treatment is mainly symptomatic. UCREX study aimed to identify CU patients' profile, disease management and quality-of-life (QoL) in daily clinical practice in Spain. METHODS: Observational, 12-months prospective, multicenter study, included de novo or established CU patients attending to dermatology/allergy consultations in 39 Spanish hospitals. MAIN VARIABLES: Urticaria Activity Score (UAS), UAS over 7 days (UAS7). Secondary variables: CU-QoL Questionnaire (CU-Q2oL), EuroQol-5 dimensions (EQ-5D), Medical Outcomes Study Sleep (MOS-Sleep) scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). RESULTS: 361 patients included. Of them, 176 (48.8%) considered for the main objective analysis. Mean age (SD) of 46.6 (14.2) years and 71.8% women. The year prior to inclusion, most patients (57.1%) were treated with non-sedating H1-antihistamines (NS-H1AH). At baseline, mean (SD) 3.6 (6.8) visits were registered to primary care. Mean (SD) UAS7 at baseline was 14.3 (11.0) and CU-Q2oL 24.1 (17.0) which tended to improve by 8.6 (9.7) and 13.9 (15.0), respectively, at 12-months. MOS-Sleep and EQ-5D remained steady during the study, except pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression which went from 58.7% and 49.6% to 29.6% and 26.9%, respectively. At baseline, HADS showed a mean (SD) anxiety of 8.7 (4.5) and depression 5.1 (4.4), decreasing to 7.0 (4.3) and 4.7 (4.3), respectively, at 12-months. CONCLUSIONS: Although most CU patients are treated with NS-H1AH, disease activity is still important, negatively affecting patients' QoL, work activity and healthcare resources use. An appropriate disease management could be the basis for symptoms control, QoL improvement and resources optimization.

Daily Clinical Practice in the Management of Chronic Urticaria in Spain: Results of the UCREX Study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic Urticaria (CU) is a debilitating disease whose treatment is mainly symptomatic. UCREX study aimed to identify CU patients' profile, disease management and quality-of-life (QoL) in daily clinical practice in Spain. METHODS: Observational, 12-months prospective, multicenter study, included de novo or established CU patients attending to dermatology/allergy consultations in 39 Spanish hospitals. MAIN VARIABLES: Urticaria Activity Score (UAS), UAS over 7 days (UAS7). Secondary variables: CU-QoL Questionnaire (CU-Q2oL), EuroQol-5 dimensions (EQ-5D), Medical Outcomes Study Sleep (MOS-Sleep) scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). RESULTS: 361 patients included. Of them, 176 (48.8%) considered for the main objective analysis. Mean age (SD) of 46.6 (14.2) years and 71.8% women. The year prior to inclusion, most patients (57.1%) were treated with non-sedating H1-antihistamines (NS-H1AH). At baseline, mean (SD) 3.6 (6.8) visits were registered to primary care. Mean (SD) UAS7 at baseline was 14.3 (11.0) and CU-Q2oL 24.1 (17.0) which tended to improve by 8.6 (9.7) and 13.9 (15.0), respectively, at 12-months. MOS-Sleep and EQ-5D remained steady during the study, except pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression which went from 58.7% and 49.6% to 29.6% and 26.9%, respectively. At baseline, HADS showed a mean (SD) anxiety of 8.7 (4.5) and depression 5.1 (4.4), decreasing to 7.0 (4.3) and 4.7 (4.3), respectively, at 12-months. CONCLUSIONS: Although most CU patients are treated with NS-H1AH, disease activity is still important, negatively affecting patients' QoL, work activity and healthcare resources use. An appropriate disease management could be the basis for symptoms control, QoL improvement and resources optimization.

Daily Clinical Practice in the Management of Chronic Urticaria in Spain: Results of the UCREX Study / Práctica clínica diaria en el manejo de la urticaria crónica en España: resultados del estudio UCREX

Background: Chronic Urticaria (CU) is a debilitating disease whose treatment is mainly symptomatic. UCREX study aimed to identify CU patients’ profile, disease management and quality-of-life (QoL) in daily clinical practice in Spain. Methods: Observational, 12-months prospective, multicenter study, included de novo or established CU patients attending to dermatology/allergy consultations in 39 Spanish hospitals. Main variables: Urticaria Activity Score (UAS), UAS over 7 days (UAS7). Secondary variables: CU-QoL Questionnaire (CU-Q2oL), EuroQol-5 dimensions (EQ-5D), Medical Outcomes Study Sleep (MOS-Sleep) scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Results: 361 patients included. Of them, 176 (48.8%) considered for the main objective analysis. Mean age (SD) of 46.6 (14.2) years and 71.8% women. The year prior to inclusion, most patients (57.1%) were treated with non-sedating H1-antihistamines (NS-H1AH). At baseline, mean (SD) 3.6 (6.8) visits were registered to primary care. Mean (SD) UAS7 at baseline was 14.3 (11.0) and CU-Q2oL 24.1 (17.0) which tended to improve by 8.6 (9.7) and 13.9 (15.0), respectively, at 12-months. MOS-Sleep and EQ-5D remained steady during the study, except pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression which went from 58.7% and 49.6% to 29.6% and 26.9%, respectively. At baseline, HADS showed a mean (SD) anxiety of 8.7 (4.5) and depression 5.1 (4.4), decreasing to 7.0 (4.3) and 4.7 (4.3), respectively, at 12-months. Conclusions: Although most CU patients are treated with NS-H1AH, disease activity is still important, negatively affecting patients’ QoL, work activity and healthcare resources use. An appropriate disease management could be the basis for symptoms control, QoL improvement and resources optimization

Antecedentes: La urticaria crónica (UC) es una enfermedad debilitante cuyo tratamiento es principalmente sintomático. El estudio UCREX tuvo como objetivo identificar el perfil de los pacientes con UC, el manejo de la enfermedad y la calidad de vida (CdV) en la práctica clínica diaria en España. Métodos: Estudio observacional, prospectivo, multicéntrico de 12 meses, que incluyó pacientes con UC de novo o establecida que acudieron a la consulta de dermatología/alergología de 39 hospitales españoles. Las variables principales fueron: el Urticaria Activity Score (UAS) y el UAS por siete días (UAS7). Las variables secundarias fueron: el cuestionario de CdV de urticaria crónica (CU-Q2oL), el EuroQol-5 Dimensiones (EQ-5D), la escala Medical Outcomes Study Sleep (MOS-Sleep) y la escala hospitalaria de ansiedad y depresión (HADS). Resultados: Se incluyeron 361 pacientes, de los cuales 176 (48,8%) formaron parte del análisis del objetivo principal. La edad media (DE) fue de 46,6 (14,2) años y el 71,8% eran del sexo femenino. El año anterior al periodo de inclusión de los pacientes, la mayoría de ellos (57,1%) se habían tratado con antihistamínicos H1 no sedantes (AHNS-H1). En la basal, se registró una media (DE) de 3,6 (6,8) de visitas a atención primaria. La media (DE) del UAS7 en la basal fue de 14,3 (11,0) y del CU-Q2oL 24,1 (17,0), observándose una tendencia en la mejoría en 8,6 (9,7) y 13,9 (15,0), respectivamente, a los 12 meses. El MOS-Sleep y el EQ-5D se mantuvieron estables durante el estudio, excepto por el dolor/malestar y la ansiedad/depresión que pasaron de 58,7 y 49,6% a 29,6 y 26,9%, respectivamente. En situación basal, el HADS mostró una ansiedad media (DE) de 8,7 (4,5) y una depresión de 5,1 (4,4), disminuyendo respectivamente a 7,0 (4,3) y 4,7 (4,3) a los 12 meses. Conclusiones: Aunque la mayoría de los pacientes son tratados con AHNS-H1, la actividad de la enfermedad sigue siendo importante, afectando negativamente a su CdV (AU)

[Artículo traducido] Práctica clínica diaria en el manejo de la urticaria crónica en España: resultados del estudio UCREX / Daily Clinical Practice in the Management of Chronic Urticaria in Spain: Results of the UCREX Study

Antecedentes: La urticaria crónica (UC) es una enfermedad debilitante cuyo tratamiento es principalmente sintomático. El estudio UCREX tuvo como objetivo identificar el perfil de los pacientes con UC, el manejo de la enfermedad y la calidad de vida (CdV) en la práctica clínica diaria en España. Métodos: Estudio observacional, prospectivo, multicéntrico de 12 meses, que incluyó pacientes con UC de novo o establecida que acudieron a la consulta de dermatología/alergología de 39 hospitales españoles. Las variables principales fueron: el Urticaria Activity Score (UAS) y el UAS por siete días (UAS7). Las variables secundarias fueron: el cuestionario de CdV de urticaria crónica (CU-Q2oL), el EuroQol-5 Dimensiones (EQ-5D), la escala Medical Outcomes Study Sleep (MOS-Sleep) y la escala hospitalaria de ansiedad y depresión (HADS). Resultados: Se incluyeron 361 pacientes, de los cuales 176 (48,8%) formaron parte del análisis del objetivo principal. La edad media (DE) fue de 46,6 (14,2) años y el 71,8% eran del sexo femenino. El año anterior al periodo de inclusión de los pacientes, la mayoría de ellos (57,1%) se habían tratado con antihistamínicos H1 no sedantes (AHNS-H1). En la basal, se registró una media (DE) de 3,6 (6,8) de visitas a atención primaria. La media (DE) del UAS7 en la basal fue de 14,3 (11,0) y del CU-Q2oL 24,1 (17,0), observándose una tendencia en la mejoría en 8,6 (9,7) y 13,9 (15,0), respectivamente, a los 12 meses. El MOS-Sleep y el EQ-5D se mantuvieron estables durante el estudio, excepto por el dolor/malestar y la ansiedad/depresión que pasaron de 58,7 y 49,6% a 29,6 y 26,9%, respectivamente. En situación basal, el HADS mostró una ansiedad media (DE) de 8,7 (4,5) y una depresión de 5,1 (4,4), disminuyendo respectivamente a 7,0 (4,3) y 4,7 (4,3) a los 12 meses. Conclusiones: Aunque la mayoría de los pacientes son tratados con AHNS-H1 (AU)

Background: Chronic Urticaria (CU) is a debilitating disease whose treatment is mainly symptomatic. UCREX study aimed to identify CU patients’ profile, disease management and quality-of-life (QoL) in daily clinical practice in Spain. Methods: Observational, 12-months prospective, multicenter study, included de novo or established CU patients attending to dermatology/allergy consultations in 39 Spanish hospitals. Main variables: Urticaria Activity Score (UAS), UAS over 7 days (UAS7). Secondary variables: CU-QoL Questionnaire (CU-Q2oL), EuroQol-5 dimensions (EQ-5D), Medical Outcomes Study Sleep (MOS-Sleep) scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Results: 361 patients included. Of them, 176 (48.8%) considered for the main objective analysis. Mean age (SD) of 46.6 (14.2) years and 71.8% women. The year prior to inclusion, most patients (57.1%) were treated with non-sedating H1-antihistamines (NS-H1AH). At baseline, mean (SD) 3.6 (6.8) visits were registered to primary care. Mean (SD) UAS7 at baseline was 14.3 (11.0) and CU-Q2oL 24.1 (17.0) which tended to improve by 8.6 (9.7) and 13.9 (15.0), respectively, at 12-months. MOS-Sleep and EQ-5D remained steady during the study, except pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression which went from 58.7% and 49.6% to 29.6% and 26.9%, respectively. At baseline, HADS showed a mean (SD) anxiety of 8.7 (4.5) and depression 5.1 (4.4), decreasing to 7.0 (4.3) and 4.7 (4.3), respectively, at 12-months. Conclusions: Although most CU patients are treated with NS-H1AH, disease activity is still important, negatively affecting patients’ QoL, work activity and healthcare resources use. An appropriate disease management could be the basis for symptoms control, QoL improvement and resources optimization

Risk Factors in Severe Anaphylaxis: Which Matters the Most, Food or Cofactors?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The prevalence of anaphylactic shock, the most severe manifestation of anaphylaxis, remains unknown. Risk factors and biomarkers have not been fully identified. Objective: To identify risk factors in patients who experience anaphylactic shock. METHODS: Using lipid transfer protein (LTP) allergy as a model, we compared the characteristics of patients who developed anaphylaxis and anaphylactic shock. We recorded demographics, pollen sensitization, foods ingested up to 2 hours before onset of the reaction, and the presence of cofactors. Culprit foods were identified through a compatible clinical history and positive allergology work-up (skin prick test and/or sIgE). RESULTS: We evaluated 150 reactions in 55 patients with anaphylaxis (134 reactions) and 12 with anaphylactic shock (16 reactions). Patients in the anaphylaxis group experienced twice as many reactions (mean [SD], 2.4 [2.5] for anaphylaxis vs 1.3 [1.5] for anaphylactic shock; P<.02). No relationship was found between any food group and severity of the reaction. The most frequent food involved in both groups of patients was the combination of several plant-derived foods (plant food mix), followed by peach and nuts. Indeed, in the reactions caused by plant food mix, the presence of a cofactor was observed more often than in other food groups. On the other hand, cofactors were not present in peach- and nut-related reactions. Exercise was the most frequent cofactor in all groups. CONCLUSION: In our series, the severity of the reactions was not determined by the kind of food or presence of a cofactor. Anaphylactic shock seems to be an infrequent presentation that may be associated with other individual-related factors requiring further evaluation.

Risk Factors in Severe Anaphylaxis: Which Matters the Most, Food or Cofactors?

Background: The prevalence of anaphylactic shock, the most severe manifestation of anaphylaxis, remains unknown. Risk factors and biomarkers have not been fully identified. Objective: To identify risk factors in patients who experience anaphylactic shock. Methods: Using lipid transfer protein (LTP) allergy as a model, we compared the characteristics of patients who developed anaphylaxis and anaphylactic shock. We recorded demographics, pollen sensitization, foods ingested up to 2 hours before onset of the reaction, and the presence of cofactors. Culprit foods were identified through a compatible clinical history and positive allergology work-up (skin prick test and/or sIgE). Results: We evaluated 150 reactions in 55 patients with anaphylaxis (134 reactions) and 12 with anaphylactic shock (16 reactions). Patients in the anaphylaxis group experienced twice as many reactions (mean [SD], 2.4 [2.5] for anaphylaxis vs 1.3 [1.5] for anaphylactic shock; P<.02). No relationship was found between any food group and severity of the reaction. The most frequent food involved in both groups of patients was the combination of several plant-derived foods (plant food mix), followed by peach and nuts. Indeed, in the reactions caused by plant food mix, the presence of a cofactor was observed more often than in other food groups. On the other hand, cofactors were not present in peach- and nut-related reactions. Exercise was the most frequent cofactor in all groups. Conclusion: In our series, the severity of the reactions was not determined by the kind of food or presence of a cofactor. Anaphylactic shock seems to be an infrequent presentation that may be associated with other individual-related factors requiring further evaluation (AU)

Antecedentes: La prevalencia del shock anafiláctico sigue siendo desconocida. Aún no se han identificado completamente factores de riesgo ni biomarcadores. Objetivo: Identificar factores de riesgo de shock anafiláctico. Método: Utilizando la alergia a proteína de transferencia de lípidos (LTP) como modelo, se han comparado características de pacientes que han presentado una anafilaxia (An) y pacientes que han desarrollado un shock anafiláctico (SAn). Se recopilaron datos demográficos, sensibilización a pólenes, alimentos ingeridos hasta 2 horas antes del inicio de la reacción y la presencia o no de cofactores. El alimento implicado se identificó mediante historia clínica compatible y estudio alergológico positivo (prick test y/o IgE). Resultados: Se evaluaron un total de 150 reacciones; 55 pacientes del grupo An sufrieron 134 reacciones, y 12 pacientes del grupo SAn sufrieron 16 reacciones. El grupo An experimentó el doble de reacciones por paciente (media [DS] 2,4 [2,5] en An vs 1,3 [1,5] en SAn, p<0,02). No se observó relación entre el tipo de alimento y la gravedad de la reacción. El alimento implicado con más frecuencia en ambos grupos fue la combinación de varios vegetales (“mix de vegetales”), seguido por el melocotón y frutos secos. No hubo cofactores implicados en las reacciones con melocotón ni con frutos secos. En ambos grupos el eje rcicio fue el cofactor involucrado con más frecuencia.Conclusión: En nuestra serie, el alimento y la presencia de cofactor no determinan la gravedad de una reacción. Los shocks anafilácticos parecen ser una presentación infrecuente y podrían estar relacionados con factores individuales que precisarán una evaluación más extensa (AU)

Therapeutic Strategy According to Differences in Response to Omalizumab in Patients With Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria.

Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a heterogeneous condition that can severely impact quality of life. Consequently, rapid disease control is essential. First-line treatment of the symptoms of CSU is the licensed dose of second-generation H1 antihistamines. For second-line treatment, this dose may be increased by up to 4 times. In patients who fail to respond to higher doses of H1 antihistamines, omalizumab for up to 24 weeks is recommended to achieve disease control. After this 24-week period, the patient's response to omalizumab should be assessed in order to identify refractory patients. Optimal management of refractory patients has not been established. Therefore, the aim of the present consensus document, which was drafted by allergists and dermatologists with specific expertise in treating urticaria, was to define specific patient profiles based on differences in their response to omalizumab. We also developed a treatment algorithm based on the specific response profile. After a comprehensive literature review, a group meeting was held to discuss issues related to the therapeutic management of patients with CSU that had not been addressed in previous studies. The experts considered both the available evidence and their own clinical experience with omalizumab. We believe that implementation of the proposed algorithm will optimize management of CSU patients who are refractory to antihistamines, reduce disease-related costs, and improve quality of life.

Therapeutic strategy according to differences in response to omalizumab in patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria

Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a heterogeneous condition that can severely impact quality of life. Consequently, rapid disease control is essential. First-line treatment of the symptoms of CSU is the licensed dose of second-generation H1 antihistamines. For second-line treatment, this dose may be increased by up to 4 times. In patients who fail to respond to higher doses of H1 antihistamines, omalizumab for up to 24 weeks is recommended to achieve disease control. After this 24-week period, the patient's response to omalizumab should be assessed in order to identify refractory patients. Optimal management of refractory patients has not been established. Therefore, the aim of the present consensus document, which was drafted by allergists and dermatologists with specific expertise in treating urticaria, was to define specific patient profiles based on differences in their response to omalizumab. We also developed a treatment algorithm based on the specific response profile. After a comprehensive literature review, a group meeting was held to discuss issues related to the therapeutic management of patients with CSU that had not been addressed in previous studies. The experts considered both the available evidence and their own clinical experience with omalizumab. We believe that implementation of the proposed algorithm will optimize management of CSU patients who are refractory to antihistamines, reduce disease-related costs, and improve quality of life

La urticaria crónica espontánea (UCE) es una afección heterogénea que puede afectar gravemente la calidad de vida, por lo que el control rápido de la enfermedad es esencial. El tratamiento sintomático de primera línea de CSU es la dosis autorizada de antihistamínicos H1 de segunda generación. Para el tratamiento de segunda línea, esta dosis se puede aumentar hasta cuatro veces. En pacientes que no responden a estas dosis más altas de antihistamínicos H1, se recomienda el tratamiento con omalizumab (hasta 24 semanas) para lograr el control de la enfermedad. Después de este período de 24 semanas, se debe definir el perfil de respuesta del paciente a omalizumab para identificar a los pacientes refractarios. El enfoque de manejo óptimo para pacientes refractarios no ha sido establecido. En este contexto, el objetivo del presente estudio de consenso de expertos que involucró a un grupo de especialistas (alergólogos y dermatólogos) con experiencia específica en el tratamiento de la urticaria fue definir perfiles de pacientes específicos en función de sus diferentes respuestas a omalizumab. Otro objetivo fue desarrollar un algoritmo de tratamiento basado en el perfil de respuesta específico. Primero, se realizó una revisión exhaustiva de la literatura. Luego, se llevó a cabo una reunión grupal para discutir todos los temas relacionados con el manejo terapéutico de estos pacientes que no se habían abordado en ningún estudio previo. En todos los casos, los expertos consideraron tanto la evidencia disponible como su propia experiencia clínica con omalizumab. Creemos que la implementación de este algoritmo propuesto ayudará a optimizar la gestión de los pacientes con CSU que son refractarios al tratamiento con antihistamínicos, reduciendo los costos relacionados con la enfermedad y mejorando la calidad de vida de los pacientes

Non-allergenic immunotherapy

No disponible

Anafilaxia de contacto por adhesivo dental / Tooth adhesive-contact anaphylaxis

No disponible