Biomarkers predicting the controller dose of omalizumab in patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials showed the efficacy of 300 mg/4 weeks of omalizumab (OMA) during 6 months in patients with severe chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU). Nevertheless, in real life, many patients require higher doses and/or longer treatment. This study assesses the real-life performance of OMA in severe CSU and identifies factors associated with the response. METHODS: CSU patients eligible for OMA were recruited prospectively. Clinical data and a blood test were collected before OMA initiation. Urticaria Activity Score 7 (UAS7) was calculated at baseline and every 3 months during OMA treatment. CSU control was defined as UAS7 <7 points. This work was partially sponsored by OMA manufacturer. RESULTS: Eighty-nine adults (19.1% males) with severe CSU were recruited. Median duration of CSU prior to OMA initiation was 2 years, and median severity by UAS7 at baseline was 24 points (range 10-42 points). OMA controlled 94.4% of patients, but 17.9% of responders required doses >300 mg/4 weeks. A blood basophil count >20 cells/µL (OR 13.33; 95% CI 3.32-52.63; p < .001) and the absence of hypothyroidism (OR 3.65; 95% CI 0.78-16.95; p = .099) were identified as predictive factors to achieve control with 300 mg/4 weeks. Twelve patients were able to stop OMA during the study (responders in remission, RR). RR had received OMA for a median of 29 months (12-53 months). Conversely, 32 patients had been on OMA for >29 months at the end of the study (active responders, AR). AR had received OMA for a median of 45 months (30-100 months). There were no significant differences in clinical or analytical factors between RR and AR patients. CONCLUSIONS: Low blood basophil count and the presence of hypothyroidism might serve as biomarkers for the controller dose of OMA in severe CSU patients.

Metabolic pathways in immune senescence and inflammaging: Novel therapeutic strategy for chronic inflammatory lung diseases. An EAACI position paper from the Task Force for Immunopharmacology.

The accumulation of senescent cells drives inflammaging and increases morbidity of chronic inflammatory lung diseases. Immune responses are built upon dynamic changes in cell metabolism that supply energy and substrates for cell proliferation, differentiation, and activation. Metabolic changes imposed by environmental stress and inflammation on immune cells and tissue microenvironment are thus chiefly involved in the pathophysiology of allergic and other immune-driven diseases. Altered cell metabolism is also a hallmark of cell senescence, a condition characterized by loss of proliferative activity in cells that remain metabolically active. Accelerated senescence can be triggered by acute or chronic stress and inflammatory responses. In contrast, replicative senescence occurs as part of the physiological aging process and has protective roles in cancer surveillance and wound healing. Importantly, cell senescence can also change or hamper response to diverse therapeutic treatments. Understanding the metabolic pathways of senescence in immune and structural cells is therefore critical to detect, prevent, or revert detrimental aspects of senescence-related immunopathology, by developing specific diagnostics and targeted therapies. In this paper, we review the main changes and metabolic alterations occurring in senescent immune cells (macrophages, B cells, T cells). Subsequently, we present the metabolic footprints described in translational studies in patients with chronic asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and review the ongoing preclinical studies and clinical trials of therapeutic approaches aiming at targeting metabolic pathways to antagonize pathological senescence. Because this is a recently emerging field in allergy and clinical immunology, a better understanding of the metabolic profile of the complex landscape of cell senescence is needed. The progress achieved so far is already providing opportunities for new therapies, as well as for strategies aimed at disease prevention and supporting healthy aging.

Organ-specific allergen challenges in airway allergy: Current utilities and future directions.

Atopy has been long used as the screening method for airway allergy. Nevertheless, aeroallergens can trigger respiratory symptoms not only in atopic patients (atopic respiratory allergy, ARA), but also in non-atopic subjects (local respiratory allergy, LRA). Moreover, ARA and LRA can coexist in the same patient, and this clinical scenario has been called dual respiratory allergy (DRA). When the clinical history cannot determine the relevance of sensitizations in ARA patients, nasal, conjunctival or bronchial allergen challenges (NAC, CAC, and BAC, respectively) should be conducted. Moreover, these tests are required to identify patients with LRA and DRA. The clarification of the allergic triggers of airway diseases has a profound impact on the management strategies the patients can be offered. Importantly, allergen immunotherapy (AIT) remains as the only disease-modifying intervention for ARA. Recent data indicate that AIT might have a similar effect on LRA patients. Nevertheless, AIT success relies largely on the correct phenotyping of allergic individuals, and NAC, CAC, and BAC are very helpful tools in this regard. In this review, we will summarize the main indications and methodology of CAC, NAC, and BAC. Importantly, the clinical implementation of these tests might translate into precision medicine approaches and better health outcomes for patients with airway allergy.

Allergen Immunotherapy for Local Respiratory Allergy.

PURPOSE OF REVIESW: Local respiratory allergy (LRA) is an eosinophilic phenotype of chronic airway disease. Three entities have been described within the LRA spectrum: local allergic rhinitis (LAR) and local allergic asthma (LAA) in non-atopic patients, and dual allergic rhinitis (DAR) in atopic patients (coexistence of LAR and allergic rhinitis). In this article, we aim to review the current evidence on the therapeutic options for LRA. RECENT FINDINGS: No controlled study has assessed the effect of standard therapy (oral antihistamines, intranasal or inhaled corticosteroids, bronchodilators) in LRA subjects. Three randomized clinical trials and one observational study demonstrated that allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is able to control nasal and ocular symptoms, decrease the need for rescue medication, and improve quality of life in LAR individuals. Nasal or inhaled steroids can be expected to improve eosinophilic inflammation in LRA patients but cannot change the natural course of the disease. Moreover, the long-term and disease-modifying effects of AIT in LRA subjects need to be investigated.

Local allergic rhinitis: Implications for management.

A significant proportion of rhinitis patients without systemic IgE-sensitisation tested by skin prick test and serum allergen-specific IgE (sIgE) display nasal reactivity upon nasal allergen provocation test (NAPT). This disease phenotype has been termed local allergic rhinitis (LAR). LAR is an underdiagnosed entity affecting children and adults from different parts of the world, with moderate-to-severe symptoms, impairment of quality of life and rapid progression to symptom worsening. LAR is a stable phenotype and not merely an initial state of AR. Allergic rhinitis and LAR share many clinical features including a positive NAPT response, markers of type 2 nasal inflammation including sIgE in nasal secretions and a significant rate of asthma development. LAR should be considered as a differential diagnosis in those subjects of any age with symptoms suggestive of AR but no evidence of systemic atopy. Although LAR pathophysiology is partially unknown, in some patients sIgE can be demonstrated directly in the nasal secretions and/or indirectly via positive responses in basophil activation test (BAT). LAR can coexist with other rhinitis phenotypes, especially AR. The diagnosis currently relies on the positivity of NAPT to a single or multiple allergens. NAPT has high sensitivity, specificity and reproducibility, and it is considered the gold standard. BAT and the measurement of nasal sIgE can also contribute to LAR diagnosis. LAR patients benefit from the same therapeutic strategies than AR individuals, including the avoidance of allergen exposure and the pharmacotherapy. Moreover, several recent studies support the effectiveness and safety of allergen immunotherapy for LAR, which opens a window of treatment opportunity in these patients.

The roadmap for allergology in Europe: The subspecialty of allergology as "stop-over" on the way to a full specialty. An EAACI position statement.

The vision of European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) and the Union of European Medical Specialists Section and Board on allergology is to promote and to establish a full specialty of allergology in all European countries. In many European countries, a full specialty does not exist. In those countries, organ-based (sub)specialists or paediatricians and internists with an expertise in allergology may deliver allergy care. There are no generally accepted requirements for the training of subspecialists available. To fill the gap between the need and availability of experienced and accredited physicians who can deliver optimal care to the allergic patients, the EAACI Specialty Committee proposes the minimal requirements for training and certification of subspecialists in allergology. This paper describes the required theoretical knowledge, skills, competences and training facilities (staff and institution). The subspecialist as described in this paper should ideally show the necessary competence in providing good quality care to patients in an environment lacking those full specialists in allergology or tertiary care paediatric subspecialists in allergy.

Local allergic rhinitis is an independent rhinitis phenotype: The results of a 10-year follow-up study.

BACKGROUND: The knowledge about the natural history of local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is limited. One unmet question is to demonstrate whether LAR should be considered the first step in the development of allergic rhinitis (AR) or an independent phenotype. The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the natural history of a population with LAR, the potential conversion to AR with systemic atopy and the development of asthma during 10 years. METHODS: This is the second phase of a 10-year follow-up study of a cohort of 176 patients with LAR of recent onset and 115 age- and sex-matched healthy controls prospectively evaluated from 2005 to 2016. Clinical-demographic questionnaire, spirometry, skin prick test and specific IgE were evaluated yearly. Nasal allergen provocation tests (NAPT) with Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, Alternaria alternata, Olea europaea and grass pollen were performed at baseline, and after 5 and 10 years. RESULTS: After 10-year LAR, patients experienced a significant and clinically relevant worsening of the rhinitis, with increase in emergency assistance, development of asthma, loss of allergen tolerance and impairment of the quality of life. This worsening became significant after 5 years and progressed throughout 10 years. A similar rate of development of AR with systemic atopy was detected in patients and controls (9.7% vs 7.8%, log-rank P=.623). In 5 patients, conversion to systemic atopy occurred >10 years (3%). CONCLUSIONS: LAR is a well-differentiated clinical entity with a low rate of development of systemic atopy, a natural evolution towards worsening and a risk factor for suffering asthma.

Allergic reaction to undeclared lupin in a chocolate

No disponible

Sequential combined therapy with omalizumab and rituximab: a new approach to severe atopic dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common chronic skin disease, and a significant percentage of AD patients have severe forms. Inflammation based on type 2 helper T cells (T(H)2), autoantibodies, and CD8+ T cells could play a relevant role in this disease. When the patient requires systemic immunosuppressors for disease control, side effects are frequent. We propose a sequential therapeutic strategy with 2 monoclonal antibodies, omalizumab (anti-immunoglobulin [Ig] E) and rituximab (anti-CD20), which might induce clinical benefit with few side effects in selected individuals with AD. METHODS: We report 6 cases of severe AD refractory to conventional therapy. The patients underwent sequential switch therapy with omalizumab and rituximab. Clinical response was assessed by means of the decrease in body surface affected. Immunological parameters and side effects were also monitored. RESULTS: Four patients received omalizumab before a high-dose cycle of rituximab. In the case of recurrences, either low-dose cycles of rituximab or omalizumab were administered. A long-term clinical benefit was observed in 3 out of 4 patients. Two patients first received high-dose rituximab followed by either low-dose rituximab or omalizumab, and one of them achieved a response at 17 months. No severe side effects were recorded. Serum IgE level and B-cell counts decreased with therapy, the latter returning to baseline levels 10 to 11 months after treatment. Specific antibody responses remained protective during the study. CONCLUSIONS: With our proposed switch therapy, 4 out of 6 patients achieved a dramatic clinical improvement. This novel strategy targets different arms of the immune response and might be a good alternative for patients with severe AD.

Sequential Combined Therapy With Omalizumab and Rituximab: A New Approach to Severe Atopic Dermatitis

Antecedentes: La dermatitis atópica (DA) es una enfermedad crónica de la piel. En un porcentaje elevado de pacientes con formas graves de DA, es probable que existan autoanticuerpos y linfocitos T CD8+ actuando junto con células Th2 en la fisiopatología. En los pacientes que requieren inmunosupresores sistémicos para controlar la enfermedad, los efectos adversos son frecuentes. En este trabajo proponemos la administración secuencial de dos terapias con anticuerpos monoclonales (omalizumab, anti-IgE y rituximab, anti-CD20) como estrategia terapéutica eficaz con un grado aceptable de efectos adversos. Métodos: Presentamos 6 pacientes con DA grave y recalcitrante a inmunosupresores convencionales que recibieron terapia secuencial con omalizumab (Xolair®)/Rituximab (MabThera®). La respuesta clínica se evaluó mediante la variación en la superficie corporal afectada. Se monitorizaron parámetros inmunológicos y efectos adversos. Resultados: Cuatro pacientes recibieron omalizumab seguido de un ciclo de alta dosis de rituximab (HR). En las siguientes recaídas se administró un ciclo de baja dosis de rituximab (LR) u omalizumab. Tres de los 4 pacientes consiguieron mejoría clínica prolongada. En 2 pacientes se administró primero HR seguido o bien por LR, o por omalizumab. Uno de ellos consiguió remisión durante 17 meses. No se registraron efectos adversos graves. La IgE y las células B séricas disminuyeron tras la terapia; estas últimas no recuperaron su nivel basal hasta 10-11 meses después. Las respuestas específicas de anticuerpos permanecieron en niveles protectores durante el estudio. Conclusiones: Con esta terapia, 4 de los 6 pacientes con DA grave consiguieron una mejoría significativa. Esta estrategia se dirige específicamente a varios mecanismos efectores del sistema inmunológico y podría ser una alternativa para un grupo seleccionado de pacientes con DA grave (AU)

Background: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common chronic skin disease, and a significant percentage of AD patients have severe forms. Inflammation based on type 2 helper T cells (TH2), autoantibodies, and CD8+ T cells could play a relevant role in this disease. When the patient requires systemic immunosuppressors for disease control, side effects are frequent. We propose a sequential therapeutic strategy with 2 monoclonal antibodies, omalizumab (anti-immunoglobulin [Ig] E) and rituximab (anti-CD20), which might induce clinical benefit with few side effects in selected individuals with AD. Methods: We report 6 cases of severe AD refractory to conventional therapy. The patients underwent sequential switch therapy with omalizumab and rituximab. Clinical response was assessed by means of the decrease in body surface affected. Immunological parameters and side effects were also monitored. Results: Four patients received omalizumab before a high-dose cycle of rituximab. In the case of recurrences, either low-dose cycles of rituximab or omalizumab were administered. A long-term clinical benefit was observed in 3 out of 4 patients. Two patients first received high-dose rituximab followed by either low-dose rituximab or omalizumab, and one of them achieved a response at 17 months. No severe side effects were recorded. Serum IgE level and B-cell counts decreased with therapy, the latter returning to baseline levels 10 to 11 months after treatment. Specific antibody responses remained protective during the study. Conclusions: With our proposed switch therapy, 4 out of 6 patients achieved a dramatic clinical improvement. This novel strategy targets different arms of the immune response and might be a good alternative for patients with severe AD (AU)