Hymenoptera Venom Allergy: Management of Children and Adults in Clinical Practice.

Hymenoptera venom allergy is an epidemiologically underestimated condition and a major cause of morbidity worldwide. Preventing future allergic reactions in patients who experience a systemic reaction is based on the correct management of the emergency followed by an accurate diagnosis, prescription of adrenaline autoinjectors, and, where indicated, specific venom immunotherapy. Some epidemiological studies highlight our poor knowledge of this disease and the frequent inadequacy of its management. Moreover, they emphasize the importance of such a life-saving treatment as specific immunotherapy. The availability of high-quality hymenoptera venom extracts for diagnostic and therapeutic use has dramatically improved the prognosis and quality of life of allergic patients. Subcutaneous venom immunotherapy is currently the most effective form of allergen-based immunotherapy, with a carry-over effect lasting up to several years after its interruption. This report on the management of hymenoptera venom-allergic children and adults was prepared by a panel of Italian experts. The main objective of this consensus document is to review the scientific evidence related to diagnosis, therapy, and management of patients allergic to hymenoptera venom. Thus, we can improve our knowledge of the disease and promote good clinical practices. The present document provides practical suggestions for correct diagnosis, prescription of emergency therapy and immunotherapy, and strategies for patient care.

Molecular diagnostics improves diagnosis and treatment of respiratory allergy and food allergy with economic optimization and cost saving.

BACKGROUND: Component resolved diagnosis (CRD) allows to precisely identify the sensitization to specific molecules of a given allergenic source, resulting in an important improvement in clinical management, particularly of polysensitized subjects. This will end in the correct prescription of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) for respiratory allergy and in adequate avoidance diets or prescription of self-injectable adrenaline in food allergy. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this multicenter, real life study is to evaluate the percentage change of the diagnostic-therapeutic choice in polysensitized patients with respiratory allergy and in patients with food allergy, after using CRD compared to a first level diagnosis, along with an economic analysis of the patient's overall management according to the two different approaches. METHODS: An overall number of 462 polysensitized patients, as suggested by skin prick tests (SPT), and with clinical symptoms related to a respiratory (275 pts) or food (187 pts) allergy, were recruited. All patients underwent CRD for specific IgE against food or inhalant recombinant molecules, which were chosen according to medical history and positivity to SPT. The first diagnostic-therapeutic hypothesis, based only on medical history and SPT, was recorded for each patient while the final diagnostic-therapeutic choice was based on the results from CRD. The rate of change of the diagnostic-therapeutic choice from the first hypothesis to the final choice was statistically evaluated. The economic impact of CRD on the overall management of the allergic patients was analyzed to evaluate whether the increase in the diagnostic costs would be compensated and eventually exceeded by savings coming from the improved diagnostic-therapeutic appropriateness. RESULTS: An approximate 50% change (k index 0.54) in the prescription of AIT for respiratory allergy as well as a change in the prescription of self-injectable adrenaline (k index 0.56) was measured; an overall saving of financial resources along with a higher diagnostic-therapeutic appropriateness was also detected. CONCLUSION: There is moderate agreement concerning prescription of AIT and self-injectable adrenaline before and after performing CRD: this highlights the usefulness of CRD, at least in polysensitized patients, in indicating the risk assessment and therefore the correct therapy of respiratory and food allergy, which results in a cost-saving approach.

Clinical approach on challenge and desensitization procedures with aspirin in patients with ischemic heart disease and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug hypersensitivity.

BACKGROUND: Hypersensitivity to acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) constitutes a serious problem for subjects with coronary artery disease. In such subjects, physicians have to choose the more appropriate procedure between challenge and desensitization. As the literature on this issue is sparse, this study aimed to establish in these subjects clinical criteria for eligibility for an ASA challenge and/or desensitization. METHODS: Collection and analysis of data on ASA challenges and desensitizations from 10 allergy centers, as well as consensus among the related physicians and an expert panel. RESULTS: Altogether, 310 subjects were assessed; 217 had histories of urticaria/angioedema, 50 of anaphylaxis, 26 of nonimmediate cutaneous eruptions, and 17 of bronchospasm related to ASA/nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) intake. Specifically, 119 subjects had index reactions to ASA doses lower than 300 mg. Of the 310 subjects, 138 had an acute coronary syndrome (ACS), 101 of whom underwent desensitizations, whereas 172 suffered from a chronic ischemic heart disease (CIHD), 126 of whom underwent challenges. Overall, 163 subjects underwent challenges and 147 subjects underwent desensitizations; 86 of the latter had index reactions to ASA doses of 300 mg or less. Ten subjects reacted to challenges, seven at doses up to 500 mg, three at a cumulative dose of 110 mg. The desensitization failure rate was 1.4%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stable CIHD and histories of nonsevere hypersensitivity reactions to ASA/NSAIDs, an ASA challenge is advisable. Patients with an ACS and histories of hypersensitivity reactions to ASA, especially following doses lower than 100 mg, should directly undergo desensitization.

A prospective Italian survey on the safety of subcutaneous immunotherapy for respiratory allergy.

BACKGROUND: Subcutaneous immunotherapy is effective for the treatment of respiratory allergy, and it is largely used in Italy, but no systematic safety assessment has been carried out so far. OBJECTIVE: To assess prospectively the safety of injection immunotherapy in a multicentre, real-life survey. METHODS: Eleven Italian allergy departments recorded the clinical characteristics of systemic reactions (SRs) due to immunotherapy. Vaccines were prescribed according to guidelines; only standardized depot extracts were used. SRs were graded according to the EAACI recommendations, and were classified as immediate or delayed. RESULTS: One thousand seven hundred and thirty-eight patients (847 males, age range 5-71) received immunotherapy from eight different manufacturers, for a total of 2038 courses (300 patients received two extracts). A total of 60 785 injections were given over a mean immunotherapy duration of 3 years. Overall, 95 reactions were observed in 57 patients (3.28%), corresponding to 4.7% of the courses and 1.56/1000 injections. Twenty-five patients experienced more than one adverse event. There were 34 grade 2, 60 grade 3 and one grade 4 reactions and no fatality. SRs occurred more frequently in patients with asthma than in patients with rhinitis alone (4.1% vs. 1.1%), and were equally distributed between the build-up and the maintenance phase. Ragweed and grass extracts caused significantly more side effects than other allergens. CONCLUSION: In this large prospective study, the rate of SRs was low, thus confirming that injection immunotherapy has an acceptable risk/benefit ratio when prescribed and carried out according to recommendations.

Asthma control in elderly asthmatics. An Italian observational study.

BACKGROUND: The exponential increase of individuals aged >64 yrs is expected to impact the burden of asthma. We aimed to explore the level of asthma control in elderly subjects, and factors influencing it. METHODS: A multicenter observational study was performed on consecutive patients >64 years old with a documented physician-diagnosis of asthma. Sixteen Italian centers were involved in this 6-month project. FINDINGS: A total of 350 patients were enrolled in the study. More than one-third of elderly asthmatic patients, despite receiving GINA step 3-4 antiasthmatic therapy, had an Asthma Control Test score ≤19, with a quarter experiencing at least one severe asthma exacerbation in the previous year. Twenty-nine percent of patients (n = 101) were classified as having Asthma-COPD Overlap Syndrome (ACOS) due to the presence of chronic bronchitis and/or CO lung diffusion impairment. This subgroup of patients had lower mean Asthma Control Test scores and more exacerbations compared to the asthmatic patients (18 ± 4 compared to 20 ± 4, p < 0.01, and 43% compared to 18%, p < 0.01, respectively). Modified Medical Research Council dyspnea mMRC scores and airway obstruction, assessed on the basis of a FEV(1)/FVC ratio below the lower limit of normal, were more severe in ACOS than in asthma, without any difference in responses to salbutamol. In a multivariate analysis, the mMRC dyspnea score, FEV(1)% of predicted and the coexistence of COPD were the only variables to enter the model. INTERPRETATION: Our results highlight the need to specifically evaluate the coexistence of features of COPD in elderly asthmatics, a factor that worsens asthma control.