Oral immunotherapy in severe cow's milk allergic patients treated with omalizumab: Real life survey from a Spanish registry.

BACKGROUND: Oral immunotherapy is a frequent treatment for the management of food allergies, but adverse events (AE) are common. This study assessed the outcome of cow's milk oral immunotherapy (MOIT) in severe cow`s milk-allergic patients treated with omalizumab in a real-life setting. METHODS: OmaBASE was a national, multicenter, open, and observational registry that collected clinical, immunologic, and treatment from patients with food allergy receiving omalizumab. RESULTS: Data derived from 58 patients aged 10.3 years (IQR 6.3-13.2) and median milk-specific IgE 100 kUA /L at the start of omalizumab treatment. Most had experienced anaphylaxis by accidental exposures (70.7%) and had asthma (81.0%). Omalizumab in monotherapy induced tolerance to ≥6000 mg of cow's milk protein (CMP) to 34.8% of patients tested by oral food challenge. Omalizumab combined with MOIT conferred desensitization to ≥6000 mg of CMP to 83.0% of patients. Omalizumab withdrawal triggered more AE (P = .013) and anaphylaxis (P = .001) than no discontinuation. Anaphylaxis was observed in 36.4% of patients who discontinued omalizumab, and more in those with sudden (50.0%) rather than progressive (12.5%) discontinuation. At database closure, 40.5% of patients who had completed follow-up tolerated CMP without omalizumab (7.2% 1500-4500 mg; 33.3% ≥6000 mg). CONCLUSION: Milk oral immunotherapy initiated under omalizumab allows the desensitization of subjects with severe cow's milk allergy even after omalizumab discontinuation. However, discontinuation of omalizumab can lead to severe AE and should be carefully monitored.

Safety of Adrenaline Use in Anaphylaxis: A Multicentre Register.

BACKGROUND: The use of intramuscular adrenaline to treat anaphylaxis is suboptimal, despite being the first-line treatment recommended by national and international anaphylaxis guidelines. Fear of potentially severe side effects may be one of the underlying factors. The aim of this study was to assess the incidence and severity of adverse side effects after the use of adrenaline in anaphylaxis, as well as potential risk factors. METHODS: Observational study based on a multicenter online registry of cases of adrenaline administration for suspected anaphylaxis. RESULTS: 277 registered valid cases were included: 138 (51.49%) female, median age 29 years (12-47), and 6 children under 2 years with a median age of 9 months (1-21). Side effects occurred in 58 cases (21.64%), with tremors, palpitations, and anxiety being the most frequent. There was a significant association of developing side effects with older age, higher dose of adrenaline, or use of the intravenous route. Potentially severe adverse effects (high blood pressure, chest discomfort, or ECG alterations) occurred only in 8 cases (2.99%); in these cases, no differences were found according to age or adrenaline dose, but again, intravenous administration was associated with more severe adverse events. CONCLUSION: This study shows that side effects affect less than 1 in 5 patients who receive adrenaline for an anaphylactic reaction, and are usually mild and transient. Therefore, in an emergency situation such as anaphylaxis, restricting adrenaline administration due to potential adverse effects would, in general, not be justified.