Switch from Omalizumab to Benralizumab in Allergic Patients with Severe Eosinophilic Asthma: A Real-Life Experience from Southern Italy.

BACKGROUND: The wide availability of monoclonal antibodies for the add-on therapy of severe asthma currently allows for the personalization of biologic treatment by selecting the most appropriate drug for each patient. However, subjects with overlapping allergic and eosinophilic phenotypes can be often eligible to more than one biologic, so that the first pharmacologic choice can be quite challenging for clinicians. Within such a context, the aim of our real-life investigation was to verify whether allergic patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, not adequately controlled by an initial biologic treatment with omalizumab, could experience better therapeutic results from a pharmacologic shift to benralizumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty allergic patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, unsuccessfully treated with omalizumab and then switched to benralizumab, were assessed for at least 1 year in order to detect eventual changes in disease exacerbations, symptom control, oral corticosteroid intake, lung function, and blood eosinophils. RESULTS: In comparison to the previous omalizumab therapy, after 1 year of treatment with benralizumab our patients experienced significant improvements in asthma exacerbation rate (p < 0.01), rescue medication need (p < 0.001), asthma control test (ACT) score (p < 0.05), forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) (p < 0.05), and blood eosinophil count (p < 0.0001). Furthermore, with respect to the end of omalizumab treatment, the score of sino-nasal outcome test-22 (SNOT-22) significantly decreased after therapy with benralizumab (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The results of this real-life study suggest that the pharmacologic shift from omalizumab to benralizumab can be a valuable therapeutic approach for allergic patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, not adequately controlled by anti-IgE treatment.

The Model for Early COvid-19 Recognition (MECOR) Score: A Proof-of-Concept for a Simple and Low-Cost Tool to Recognize a Possible Viral Etiology in Community-Acquired Pneumonia Patients during COVID-19 Outbreak.

This study aims to assess the peripheral blood cell count "signature" of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) to discriminate promptly between COronaVIrus Disease 19 (COVID-19) and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). We designed a retrospective case-control study, enrolling 525 patients (283 COVID-19 and 242 with CAP). All patients had a fever and at least one of the following signs: cough, chest pain, or dyspnea. We excluded patients treated with immunosuppressants, steroids, or affected by diseases known to modify blood cell count. COVID-19 patients showed a significant reduction in white blood cells (neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, eosinophils) and platelets. We studied these parameters univariately, combined the significant ones in a multivariate model (AUROC 0.86, Nagelkerke PSEUDO-R2 0.5, Hosmer-Lemeshow p-value 0.9) and examined its discriminative performance in an internally-randomized validation cohort (AUROC 0.84). The cut-off selected according to Youden's Index (-0.13) showed a sensitivity of 84% and a specificity of 72% in the training cohort, and a sensitivity of 88% and a specificity of 73% in the validation cohort. In addition, we determined the probability of having COVID-19 pneumonia for each Model for possible Early COvid-19 Recognition (MECOR) Score value. In conclusion, our model could provide a simple, rapid, and cheap tool for prompt COVID-19 diagnostic triage in patients with CAP. The actual effectiveness should be evaluated in further, prospective studies also involving COVID-19 patients with negative nasopharyngeal swabs.

Practical considerations for spirometry during the COVID-19 outbreak: Literature review and insights.

BACKGROUND: As the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is spreading worldwide, countries are dealing with different phases of the pandemic. Lately, scientific evidence has been growing about the measures for reopening respiratory outpatient services during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aim to summarize the key differences and similarities among recommendations by different national and international organizations. METHODS: We searched on Google and Pubmed for recently published National and International Recommendations/Guidelines/Position Papers from professional organizations and societies, offering a guidance to physicians on how to safely perform pulmonary function testing during COVID-19 pandemic. We also searched for spirometry manufacturers' operational indications. RESULTS: Indications on spirometry were released by the Chinese Task force, the American Thoracic Society, the European Respiratory Society, the Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand, the Société de Pneumologie de Langue Française, the Spanish Societies (Sociedad Espanola de Neumologia y Cirugia Toracica, Sociedad Espanola de Alergologia e Inmunologia Clinica, Asociacion de Especialistas en Enfermeria del trabajo, Asociacion de Enfermeria Comunitaria), the Sociedade Portuguesa de Pneumologia, the British Thoracic Society/Association for Respiratory Technology & Physiology, the Irish Thoracic Society, the Sociedad Uruguaya de Neumologia, the Italian Thoracic Society and the Italian Respiratory Society, Cleveland Clinic and Nebraska Medical Center. Detailed technical recommendations were found on manufacturers' websites. We found several similarities across available guidelines for safely resuming pulmonary function services, as well as differences in criteria for selecting eligible patients for which spirometry is deemed essential and advice which was not homogenous on room ventilation precautions. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows a synthesis of national/international guidelines allowing practicing physicians to adapt and shape the way to organize their outpatient services locally. There is generally good agreement on the importance of limiting pulmonary function testing to selected cases only. However, significant differences concerning the subsets of candidate patients, as well as on the management of adequate room ventilation, were observed.

Resumption of respiratory outpatient services in the COVID-19 era: Experience from Southern Italy.

COVID-19 pandemic turned the entire health-care system organization upside-down, suspending elective activities and outpatient services. In Italy, we are entering a second phase of the pandemic and several strategies have been developed to "re-open" the country, some businesses, and also health care outpatient activities. This manuscript describes the experience of a Southern Italy Respiratory Unit for safely resuming outpatient respiratory services and preventing COVID-19 transmission.