RESUMO
Introduction: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) brings along changes in the immune system, restoring dendritic cell function, reducing T2 inflammation and augmenting the regulatory cell activation. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections, interferes with the immune system causing immune suppression during the first phase and over-activation in more advanced disease. We decided to explore the interaction of both in a real-world observational trial. Methods: We registered COVID-19 outcomes in patients with allergic disorders in Latin America, treated with and without AIT. The registry was conducted during the first 1.3 years of the pandemic, with most of the data collected before COVID-19 vaccination was concluded in most countries. Data collection was anonymous via a web-based instrument. Ten countries participated. Results: 630/1095 (57.6%) of the included patients received AIT. Compared to patients without AIT, those treated with AIT had a reduced risk ratio (RR) for COVID-19 lower respiratory symptoms (RR 0.78, 95% CI: 0.6703-0.9024; p = 0.001662) and need for oxygen therapy (RR 0.65, 95% CI: 0.4217-0.9992; p = 0.048). In adherent patients on maintenance sublingual immunotherapy/subcutaneous immunotherapy (SLIT/SCIT) the RR reduction was larger [RR = 0.6136 (95% CI 0.4623-0.8143; p < 0.001) and RR: 0.3495 (95% CI 0.1822-0.6701; p < 0.005), respectively]. SLIT was slightly more effective (NS). We excluded age, comorbidities, level of health care attendance, and type of allergic disorder as confounders, although asthma was related to a higher frequency of severe disease. When analyzing patients with allergic asthma (n = 503) the RR reduction favoring AIT was more pronounced with 30% for lower respiratory symptoms or worse (RR 0.6914, 95% CI 0.5264 to 0.9081, p = 0.0087) and 51% for need of oxygen therapy or worse (RR 0.4868, 95% CI 0.2829-0.8376, p = 0.0082). Among severe allergic patients treated with biologics (n = 24) only 2/24 needed oxygen therapy. There were no critical cases among them. Conclusion: In our registry AIT was associated with reduced COVID-19 severity.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Two different allergic rhinitis (AR) symptom phenotype classifications exist. Treatment recommendations are based on intermittent-persistent (INT-PER) cataloging, but clinical trials still use the former seasonal AR-perennial AR (SAR-PAR) classification. This study was designed to describe how INT-PER, mild-moderate/severe and SAR-PAR of patients seen by allergists are distributed over the different climate zones in a (sub)tropical country and how these phenotypes relate to allergen sensitization patterns. METHODS: Six climate zones throughout Mexico were determined, based on National Geographic Institute (Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía) data. Subsequent AR patients (2-68 years old) underwent a blinded, standardized skin-prick test and filled out a validated questionnaire phenotyping AR. RESULTS: Five hundred twenty-nine subjects participated in this study. In the tropical zone with 87% house-dust mite sensitization, INT (80.9%; p < 0.001) and PAR (91%; p = 0.04) were more frequent than in the subtropics. In the central high-pollen areas, there was less moderate/severe AR (65.5%; p < 0.005). Frequency of comorbid asthma showed a clear north-south gradient, from 25% in the dry north to 59% in the tropics (p < 0.005). No differences exist in AR cataloging among patients with different sensitization patterns, with two minor exceptions (more PER in tree sensitized and more PAR in mold positives; p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In a (sub)tropical country the SAR-PAR classification seems of limited value and bears poor relation with the INT-PER classification. INT is more frequent in the tropical zone. Because PER has been shown to relate to AR severity, clinical trials should select patients based on INT-PER combined with the severity cataloging because these make for a better treatment guide than SAR-PAR.
