COVID-19, Severe Asthma and Omalizumab Therapy: A Case-Based Inquiry into Associations, Management, and the Possibility of a Better Outcome.

Recent developments in research have put forward claims on the protective effect of allergic diseases-especially allergic airway inflammation including allergic asthma-against the COVID-19 pandemic. This was first suggested by the underrepresentation of asthma patients in some cohorts and was later investigated by angiotensin-converting enzyme II (ACEII) receptor expression studies. Controversial data on this matter persists and continue to be a challenge for clinicians when it comes to managing allergic diseases during the pandemic. We present in this study a thorough review of related findings so far and our own experience with 2 severe asthma patients who presented with atypical symptoms. Interestingly, both patients were administered anti-IgE therapy prior to the initial positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) results for COVID-19 and showed no symptoms of severe respiratory disease during the infection unlike what we know from other viral respiratory illnesses. Stemming from that, we wanted to combine the perspectives of allergists and infectious disease specialists to address certain concerns in the management of allergic diseases, such as biologicals, in the light of current guidelines. We have also pointed out certain gaps in clinical and molecular level research, such as the lack of phenotypicalsubgroup analysis among ill asthma patients and the lack of data concerning the molecular effects of biologicals on viral infection.

Effect of High-Risk Obstructive Sleep Apnea on Clinical Outcomes in Adults with Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Clinical Trial.

Rationale: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is an ongoing pandemic, in which obesity, hypertension, and diabetes have been linked to poor outcomes. Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is associated with these conditions and may influence the prognosis of adults with COVID-19. Objectives: To determine the effect of OSA on clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Methods: The current prospective observational study was conducted in three hospitals in Istanbul, Turkey from March 10 to June 22, 2020. The participants were categorized as high-risk or low-risk OSA according to the Berlin questionnaire that was administered in the out-patient clinic, in hospital, or shortly after discharge from hospital blinded to the clinical outcomes. A modified high-risk (mHR)-OSA score based on the snoring patterns (intensity and/or frequency), breathing pauses, and morning/daytime sleepiness, without taking obesity and hypertension into account, were used in the regression models. Results: The primary outcome was the clinical improvement defined as a decline of two categories from admission on a 7-category ordinal scale that ranges from 1 (discharged with normal activity) to 7 (death) on Days 7, 14, 21, and 28, respectively. Secondary outcomes included clinical worsening (an increase of 1 category), need for hospitalization, supplemental oxygen, and intensive care. In total, 320 eligible patients (median [interquartile range] age, 53.2 [41.3-63.0] yr; 45.9% female) were enrolled. In all, 121 (37.8%) were categorized as known (n = 3) or high-risk OSA (n = 118). According to the modified scoring, 70 (21.9%) had mHR-OSA. Among 242 patients requiring hospitalization, clinical improvement within 2 weeks occurred in 75.4% of the mHR-OSA group compared with 88.4% of the modified low-risk-OSA group (P = 0.014). In multivariate regression analyses, mHR-OSA (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19-0.92) and male sex (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.17-0.86) predicted the delayed clinical improvement. In the entire study population (n = 320), including the nonhospitalized patients, mHR-OSA was associated with clinical worsening (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.00-2.39) and with the need for supplemental oxygen (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.06-3.59). Snoring patterns, especially louder snoring, significantly predicted delayed clinical improvement, worsening, need for hospitalization, supplemental oxygen, and intensive care. Conclusions: Adults with mHR-OSA in our COVID-19 cohort had poorer clinical outcomes than those with modified low-risk OSA independent of age, sex, and comorbidities. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04363333).

Bronchoscopy during the COVID-19 pandemic: A survey study.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the attitudes and behaviors of physicians performing bronchoscopy during the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: Between March 2020 and May 2020, a total of 153 physicians were included in the study. An invitation letter for the participation in the study with a structured questionnaire of 18 questions were sent to the mail groups twice with five-day intervals. Participation in the study was allowed, until the third day after the second mail was sent. RESULTS: All participants completed the questionnaire. According to the results, 33% of the physicians did not perform bronchoscopy and the majority of the physicians performed very few procedures during the outbreak, although the participants mostly worked at the tertiary hospitals (mean: 7.2±9.3). A total of 20% of the physicians performed bronchoscopy in potential or proven COVID-19 patients. Almost all of the physicians who participated in the survey reported the use of personal protective equipment such as masks and goggles during the procedure. During the pandemic, 9.7% of the physicians who performed bronchoscopy to potential or proven COVID-19 patients and 4.1% of the participants who did not perform bronchoscopy to any potential or proven COVID-19 patients were found to be infected with the virus (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Physicians who perform bronchoscopy during pandemic act in accordance with the recommendations of guidelines. Although there was no statistically significant difference between the SARS-CoV-2 transmission rates of the teams who performed and did not perform bronchoscopy in potential or proven COVID-19 patients in our study, the high rate of personal protective equipment utilization might have played a role in this result.

Change in Allergy Practice during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: International guidelines in asthma and allergy has been updated for COVID-19 pandemic and pandemic has caused dramatic changes in allergy and immunology services. However, it is not known whether specialty-specific recommendations for COVID-19 are followed by allergists. OBJECTIVES: By conducting this study, we aimed to determine the attitudes and experiences of adult/pediatric allergists on allergy management during COVID-19. METHOD: We used a 20-question survey to elicit data from allergists (residents and pediatric and adult allergists registered to the Turkish National Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology) across Turkey via e-mail. We analyzed the data statistically for frequency distributions and descriptive analysis. RESULTS: A total of 183 allergists participated in the survey. Telemedicine was used for management of asthma (73%), allergic rhinitis (53%), atopic dermatitis (51%), chronic urticaria/angioedema (59%), drug hypersensitivity (45%), food allergy (48%), venom allergy (30%), anaphylaxis (22%), and hereditary angioedema (28%). Thirty-one percent of the respondents discontinued subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Thirty-four percent of the physicians reported interruption of systemic steroid use in asthma patients, and 25% of the respondents discontinued biological therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Allergists in Turkey have been using telemedicine at a high rate during the COVID-19 pandemic for asthma and rhinitis. The continuation rate of SCIT was low while the discontinuation rate of biologicals and systemic steroid use in asthma was high in Turkey.Our study results and learning from the experiences of other countries and specialties may help to optimize allergy practice and compatibility with international guidelines.