ABSTRACT
Asthma is a widespread disease affecting approximately 300-million people globally. This condition leads to significant morbidity, mortality, and economic strain worldwide. Recent clinical and laboratory research advancements have illuminated the immunological factors contributing to asthma. As of now, asthma is understood to be a heterogeneous disease. Personalized medicine involves categorizing asthma by its endotypes, linking observable characteristics to specific immunological mechanisms. Identifying these endotypic mechanisms is paramount in accurately profiling patients and tailoring therapeutic approaches using innovative biological agents targeting distinct immune pathways. This article presents a synopsis of the key immunological mechanisms implicated in the pathogenesis and manifestation of the disease's phenotypic traits and individualized treatments for severe asthma subtypes.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The International Study of Wheezing in Infants (EISL) is a cross-sectional, population-based study, based on ISAAC (http://www.isaac.auckland.ac.nz). It uses a validated questionnaire on early wheezing and risk/protective factors. OBJECTIVE: To apply the EISL questionnaire regarding wheezing events in 0- to 12-month-old infants with or without atopic background searching for risk factors in the tropics. METHODS: The population was toddlers coming in for a checkup or 12-months' vaccination in primary health care clinics of a tropical city. Apart from child factors (eg, daycare attendance), we evaluated home factors (eg, air conditioning, bathroom, carpet, >6 persons, pollution) and mothers' factors (eg, education level, employment, cellphone). Data analysis was descriptive and case-control, with as cases atopic (AW) or non-atopic (NAW) wheezing children vs healthy controls. Wheezing-associated factors were evaluated using multivariate analysis, adjusted for the relation of AW/NAW with factors that were significant in prior univariate analysis. RESULTS: The study included 999 toddlers. Any wheeze: 31.3%, recurrent wheeze (≥3 episodes): 12.1%. Major risk factors for AW (OR; 95%CI) included smoking (11.39; 2.36-54.99), common cold before 3 months of life (3.72; 2.59-5.36), mold (3.48; 2.28-5.30), kitchen indoors (2.40; 1.27-4.54), and pets (1.69; 1.09-2.62); breastfeeding was almost protective. For NAW, common cold and pets were risk factors, but cesarean section (0.44; 0.23-0.82), more than 1 sibling (0.33; 0.18-0.61), and breastfeeding for longer than 3 months (0.50; 0.28-0.91) were protective. CONCLUSION: Wheezing is a health care burden. We found potential new risk factors for AW, some possibly unique for tropical climates. We suggest testing several hypotheses: could early AW be reduced in the tropics by attacking mold growth? Enhancing cooking place ventilation? Keeping pets outside? Or by postponing daycare attendance until after 4 months of age and avoiding (passive) smoking during pregnancy?
Subject(s)
Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Respiratory Sounds/etiology , Tropical Climate , Case-Control Studies , Disease Susceptibility , Female , Humans , Male , Odds Ratio , Phenotype , Population Surveillance , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Adverse reaction to food has increased around the world in last years. Prevalence of food allergy raises between 2-4% in adults, and 6-8% in children. The clinical presentation is heterogeneous and varies from mild symptoms to anaphylactic reactions. Even the clinical history focused in the food is important; demonstration of allergen sensitization is mandatory. OBJECTIVE: To describe the profile of the patients with suspicion of food allergy and the regular clinical practice followed in Mexico. MATERIAL AND METHOD: An observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study was carried out from March 2013 to March 2014 using a convenience sample of allergic patients who were treated in the office, both private and public, of those physicians who seen food allergy patients. RESULTS: Clinical, epidemiological, diagnostic and therapeutic data were collected from 1,971 suspicious food allergic patients presenting for the first time in the departments of the researchers involved in the study. No difference was found in relation to gender. In relation to age, a bimodal distribution, with peaks at 2 and 35 years old, was found. A history of respiratory allergy was present in 75% of cases; 80% of patients had had any previous symptoms before seeking consultation and the most frequent clinical manifestations were cutaneous, 5% reported anaphylaxis. CONCLUSION: The foods involved in reactions change with age. The clinical presentation changes with the food, although the skin is the most frequently affected organ. Even if the suspicious were high, the confirmation with specific diagnostic tools is strongly recommended.
Antecedentes: las enfermedades alérgicas asociadas con alimentos se incrementan anualmente. Tienen una prevalencia de 2 a 4% en adultos y de 6 a 8% en niños. El cuadro clínico varía de síntomas leves hasta reacciones anafilácticas. El diagnóstico se basa en la historia clínica, pero debe demostrarse evidencia de sensibilización específica para el alergeno. Objetivo: conocer el perfil clínico-epidemiológico de los pacientes con sospecha de alergia alimentaria vistos en consultorios médicos (alergólogos y no alergólogos), así como la conducta diagnóstica y tratamiento habitual. Material y método: estudio observacional, transversal y descriptivo, efectuado en consultorios de médicos que atienden pacientes con alergia alimentaria en la República Mexicana durante un año natural de abril de 2013 a marzo de 2014, mediante un muestreo por conveniencia. Resultados: se realizaron 1,971 encuestas. No se encontró diferencia en relación con el género. En relación con la edad, se reportó una distribución bimodal, con picos a los 2 y 35 años de edad. Había antecedente de alergia respiratoria en 75% de los casos. El 80% de los pacientes tuvo algún síntoma antes de buscar atención y las manifestaciones clínicas más frecuentes afectaron la piel (57.1%). El 5% refirió haber padecido al menos un evento de anafilaxia. Conclusión: el tipo de alimento implicado cambia con la edad. La forma de manifestación clínica más frecuente fue la cutánea, pero varía con el tipo de alimento. Aun cuando la sospecha clínica sea alta, deben utilizarse métodos específicos que confirmen el diagnóstico.
