Association between asthma status and prenatal antibiotic prescription fills among women in a Medicaid population.

OBJECTIVE: Pregnant women with asthma have increased frequency of respiratory viral infections and exacerbations. Because of these risks, women with asthma may be subject to increased surveillance during pregnancy and may, therefore, be at increased risk of antibiotic receipt. The objective of this study was to assess the relationship between maternal asthma and outpatient prenatal antibiotic prescription fills to inform antibiotic stewardship. METHODS: We included women who delivered a singleton, term, non-low birthweight, and otherwise healthy infant enrolled in the Tennessee Medicaid Program. Maternal asthma and prenatal antibiotic fills were ascertained from healthcare encounters and outpatient pharmacy claims. We examined the association between maternal asthma and prenatal antibiotic fills using modified Poisson regression. RESULTS: Our study population included 168354 pregnant women, 4% of whom had asthma. Women with asthma had an increased risk of filling at least one prenatal antibiotic prescription (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.25-1.28) and had an increased number of fills during pregnancy (aRR 1.54, 95% CI 1.51-1.57) compared to women without asthma. Among those who filled at least one antibiotic prescription, women with asthma had earlier first prenatal antibiotic prescription fill and increased likelihood of filling at least one course of broad-spectrum antibiotics during pregnancy (versus narrow-spectrum). CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women with asthma had more outpatient antibiotic prescription fills than pregnant women without asthma. These findings highlight that pregnant women with asthma disproportionately fill more antibiotic prescriptions during pregnancy, providing data that may inform antibiotic stewardship.

Validation of International Classification of Diseases criteria to identify severe influenza hospitalizations.

In this cohort study of hospitalized patients with linked medical record data, we developed International Classification of Diseases (ICD) criteria that accurately identified laboratory-confirmed, severe influenza hospitalizations (positive predictive value [PPV] 80%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 71-87%), which we validated through medical record documentation. These criteria identify patients with clinically important influenza illness outcomes to inform evaluation of preventive and therapeutic interventions and public health policy recommendations.

Food Allergy: Unproven diagnostics and therapeutics.

Food allergy or intolerance is often attributed by patients as the cause of many symptoms unknown to be directly related to food ingestion. For immunoglobulin E (IgE) mediated food allergy, diagnostic modalities are currently limited to the combination of clinical history, evidence of sensitization with food-specific IgE testing and skin-prick testing, and oral food challenge. Many patients find an appeal in the promise of identification of the etiology of their symptoms through alternative food allergy or intolerance diagnostic modalities. These patients may seek guidance from allergists or their general providers as to the legitimacy of these tests or interpretation of results. These tests include food-specific serum IgG or IgG4 testing, flow cytometry to measure the change in leukocyte volume after exposure to food, intradermal or sublingual provocation-neutralization, electrodermal testing, applied kinesiology, hair analysis, and iridology. In addition, there are some unconventional therapeutic modalities for adverse reactions to foods, including rotary diets. None of these have been supported by scientific evidence, and some even carry the risk of severe adverse reactions. It is important that we offer our patients evidence-based, accurate counseling of these unproven modalities by understanding their methods, their paucity of credible scientific support, and their associated risks.

The past, present, and future of monoclonal antibodies to IL-5 and eosinophilic asthma: a review.

Asthma is a heterogeneous syndrome that might be better described as a constellation of phenotypes or endotypes, each with distinct cellular and molecular mechanisms, rather than as a singular disease. One of these phenotypes is eosinophilic asthma. As the development of eosinophilic inflammation is categorically dependent on the biological activity of Interleukin (IL)-5, IL-5 antagonism became an obvious target for therapy in this phenotype. Early trials of monoclonal antibodies targeting the biological activity of IL-5, including reslizumab, mepolizumab, and benralizumab, were performed on asthmatics with no concern for evidence of eosinophilia. These trials were largely unsuccessful. However, during these trials, researchers recognized the need to quantify eosinophilia in asthma subjects in order to identify those asthmatics in whom these medications would be more likely to improve symptoms and lung function. Using biomarkers, such as sputum and blood eosinophilia, recent studies of these medications have shown improvements in blood and sputum eosinophilia, forced expiratory volume in 1 second, and quality of life assessments as well as reducing occurrences of exacerbations. Moving forward, better and less invasive biomarkers of eosinophilia are necessary to ensure that the correct patients are chosen to receive these medications to receive maximal benefit.