Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 1.305
Filter
1.
Pediatr Allergy Immunol ; 35(5): e14132, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38727626

ABSTRACT

Tree nut allergy is a lifelong and potentially life-threatening condition. The standard of care is strictly avoiding the culprit nut and treating accidental reactions symptomatically. To evaluate potential therapeutic options for desensitizing patients with IgE-mediated tree nut allergy, we systematically searched three bibliographic databases for studies published until January 2024. We looked for active treatments of IgE-mediated allergy to tree nuts (walnut, hazelnut, pistachio, cashew, almond, pecan, macadamia nut, and brazil nut). We focused on allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) using oral (OIT), sublingual (SLIT), epicutaneous (EPIT), or subcutaneous (SCIT) delivery, or other disease-modifying treatments. We found 19 studies that met our criteria: 3 studies investigated sublingual immunotherapy, 5 studied oral immunotherapy to a single tree nut, and 6 used multi-food oral immunotherapy with or without omalizumab. The remaining studies investigated the effectiveness of monoclonal antibodies or IgE-immunoadsorption in multi-food allergic patients, including patients with tree nut allergy. The heterogeneity of the studies prevented pooling and meta-analysis. Oral immunotherapy, single or multi-nut, with or without omalizumab, was the most studied approach and appears effective in conferring protection from accidental exposures. Omalizumab monotherapy is the only approved alternative management for reducing allergic reactions that may occur with accidental exposure.


Subject(s)
Desensitization, Immunologic , Immunoglobulin E , Nut Hypersensitivity , Humans , Nut Hypersensitivity/immunology , Nut Hypersensitivity/therapy , Immunoglobulin E/immunology , Desensitization, Immunologic/methods , Allergens/immunology , Nuts/immunology , Child , Omalizumab/therapeutic use
3.
BMJ Open ; 14(5): e083112, 2024 May 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38749694

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a frequent condition affecting approximately 2% of the population. Medical treatment consists long-term use of intranasal corticosteroids and short-term use of oral corticosteroids, in adjunct with saline solution rinses. Surgical management is proposed in patients who failed after medical treatment. In France, two biologics are reimbursed in case of severe uncontrolled CRSwNP despite medical treatment and endoscopic sinus surgery. Waiting for head-to-head biologics comparison, studies should report the efficacy and safety of biologics in large real-life cohorts. This study protocol describes the aims and methods of a prospective, observational, national, multicentric cohort of patients with CRSwNP treated with biologics. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The BIOlogics in severe nasal POlyposis SurvEy is a French multicentre prospective observational cohort study. The main aim is to assess the efficacy and tolerance of biologics in patients with CRSwNP, with or without association with other type 2 diseases, and to determine the strategies in case of uncontrolled disease under biologics. Patients over 18 years old requiring biologics for CRSwNP in accordance with its marketing approval in France (ie, severe nasal polyposis, with lack of control under nasal corticosteroid, systemic corticosteroids and surgery) are invited to participate. Collected data include topical history of surgical procedures and biologics, medication and use of systemic corticosteroids, visual analogical scales for specific symptoms, Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 questionnaire, nasal polyp score, asthma control test, Lund-Mackay score on CT scan and IgE concentration and eosinophilic count on blood sample. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05228041/DRI_2021/0030.


Subject(s)
Biological Products , Nasal Polyps , Rhinitis , Sinusitis , Humans , Nasal Polyps/drug therapy , Nasal Polyps/complications , Sinusitis/drug therapy , Chronic Disease , Rhinitis/drug therapy , Rhinitis/complications , Prospective Studies , Biological Products/therapeutic use , France , Observational Studies as Topic , Omalizumab/therapeutic use , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Rhinosinusitis
4.
Ter Arkh ; 95(12): 1112-1118, 2024 Jan 31.
Article in Russian | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38785050

ABSTRACT

This article presents the experience of successfully switching therapy from omalizumab 150 mg to benralizumab 30 mg/1 ml in a patient with a combined allergic and eosinophilic phenotype in the presence of hypersensitivity to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The effectiveness of biological therapy was evaluated when switching from omalizumab 150 mg subcutaneously at a dose of 600 mg for 36 weeks. Therapy for the drug benralizumab 30 mg/1 ml subcutaneously the first three injections monthly, the rest a month later for 52 weeks with bronchial asthma (BA), a severe uncontrolled course with a combined allergic and eosinophilic phenotype in the presence of hypersensitivity to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in a patient Ch., born in 2004. Switching therapy from omalizumab 150 mg to benralizumab 30 mg/1 ml allowed to achieve complete control of asthma symptoms (AST = 23 points), to achieve the absence of asthma exacerbations during 52 weeks, restore respiratory function to normal values, as well as improve the quality of life. The study reflects the good tolerability, high efficacy and safety of biological therapy when switching from one genetically engineered biological drug (GIBP) omalizumab 150 mg to another GIBP benralizumab 30 mg/1 ml in severe uncontrolled asthma with a combined allergic and eosinophilic phenotype in the presence of hypersensitivity to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Therapy with benralizumab 30 mg/1 ml in severe BA has demonstrated a more effective clinically significant improvement in the course of the disease, control of symptoms of the disease. Reduction of exacerbations, normalization of respiratory function indicators, complete control of the disease has been achieved. Consequently, the use of different biological molecules for the therapy of BA with a combined allergic and eosinophilic phenotype contributes to achieving disease control, improving the patient's quality of life and reducing the dose of oral glucocorticosteroids. The targeted biological drug benralizumab 30 mg/1 ml has a targeted effect on the key links in the pathogenesis of severe uncontrolled asthma with a combined allergic and eosinophilic phenotype in the presence of hypersensitivity to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and reduces the burden of severe disease.


Subject(s)
Anti-Asthmatic Agents , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Asthma , Omalizumab , Humans , Asthma/drug therapy , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Omalizumab/administration & dosage , Omalizumab/therapeutic use , Anti-Asthmatic Agents/administration & dosage , Anti-Asthmatic Agents/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome , Female , Drug Substitution/methods , Quality of Life
7.
Acta Dermatovenerol Alp Pannonica Adriat ; 33(2): actaapa.2024.12, 2024 05 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38741391

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: This study examined the remission probability and duration in chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) patients resistant to second-generation H1-antihistamines (sgAHs) undergoing omalizumab treatment. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study of 176 adult CSU patients exhibiting a significant pruritus component (≥ 8) of the weekly urticaria activity score (UAS7) despite four daily sgAH tablets and starting omalizumab treatment with 300 mg every 4 weeks. After excluding 13 nonresponders, we analyzed 163 omalizumab responders (mean age 51.8 years, 74.4% female). The intervals between applications were increased. Discontinuation was considered for patients that remained asymptomatic on a gradually reduced dosage (to 150 mg every 12 weeks) without sgAHs. RESULTS: Omalizumab discontinuation was possible in 25.8% (42/163). The duration of omalizumab treatment before remission ranged from 7 to 63 months. Twenty-one patients (50.0%) maintained complete remission until the end of the observation period (September 2021) for 8 to 68 months. Of the relapsed patients, 71.4% (15/21) effectively controlled CSU with sgAHs. Six patients (28.6%; 6/21) required omalizumab reintroduction after 6 to 40 months of remission, responding favorably. CONCLUSIONS: The study shows that a quarter of severe CSU patients achieve long-term remission. In addition, sgAHs effectively manage symptoms in a majority of relapsed cases, and those requiring omalizumab reintroduction respond favorably.


Subject(s)
Anti-Allergic Agents , Chronic Urticaria , Omalizumab , Humans , Omalizumab/therapeutic use , Female , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Chronic Urticaria/drug therapy , Adult , Anti-Allergic Agents/therapeutic use , Remission Induction , Treatment Outcome , Aged
8.
Skin Res Technol ; 30(5): e13749, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38776128

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Omalizumab is the only licensed drug that serves as a third-line treatment for chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU). The optimum doses of omalizumab remain controversial. Therefore, this study aims to estimate the efficacy and safety of different doses of omalizumab in the treatment of CIU patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four databases were searched from the database's creation to April 8, 2023. Several keywords such as omalizumab and urticarias were used to retrieve related studies. The meta-analytical outcomes were analyzed in R 4.2.1 software and Stata 15.1 software. Cochrane risk-of-bias tool Ver. 2 was used to evaluate the risk of bias in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). RESULTS: In total, 2331 patients were included. Five indexes were employed to assess, including weekly Itch Severity Score (ISS7), weekly Hive Severity Score (HSS7), weekly Urticaria Activity Score (UAS7), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), and adverse events (AE). A 300 mg dose of omalizumab was the optimum dose to treat CIU, followed by the 150 mg dose. Furthermore, 600 mg of omalizumab only showed a significant difference from the placebo in HSS7. No significant statistical difference was observed in AE. Meta-regression analysis revealed that time, as a covariate, was statistically significant in the comparison of omalizumab 150 mg with placebo. CONCLUSION: 300 mg of omalizumab was the optimum dosage to treat CIU patients, with a 150 mg dose also exhibiting good efficacy. Further studies are required to explore the efficacy and safety of different doses of omalizumab in the treatment of CIU patients.


Subject(s)
Anti-Allergic Agents , Chronic Urticaria , Omalizumab , Omalizumab/adverse effects , Omalizumab/administration & dosage , Omalizumab/therapeutic use , Humans , Chronic Urticaria/drug therapy , Anti-Allergic Agents/administration & dosage , Anti-Allergic Agents/adverse effects , Anti-Allergic Agents/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome , Network Meta-Analysis , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Quality of Life , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug
9.
Arch Dermatol Res ; 316(6): 261, 2024 May 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38795119

ABSTRACT

While several studies have examined the role of T cells and related cytokines in the development of chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU), there is a limited amount of research focusing on the changes in cytokine levels during omalizumab treatment. The primary objective of this study was to investigate the inflammatory cytokine profile (including IL-4, IL-5, IL-10, IL-13, IL-17, IL-31, IL-33, and TNFα) among CSU patients undergoing to omalizumab treatment. Plasma levels of cytokines were measured using ELISA. Measurements were taken before CSU treatment, at the 3rd and 6th months of omalizumab treatment, and once in the control group. The severity of the patients' disease was assessed using the weekly Urticaria Activity Score(UAS7), and disease control was evaluated using the Urticaria Control Test(UCT). Thirty-one CSU patients and 56 age- and gender-matched healthy controls were included. Plasma levels of IL-4 and IL-33 were significantly lower in patients with CSU compared to healthy controls (p = 0.001; p = 0.038, respectively). During omalizumab treatment, IL-4 levels showed a significant increase in the 3rd month compared to baseline (p = 0.01), and IL-5 levels significantly decreased in the 6th month compared to both the 3rd month and baseline (6th month vs. baseline; p = 0.006, 6th month vs. 3rd month; p = 0.001). One potential mechanism of action for omalizumab may involve its regulatory effects on type 2 inflammatory cytokines in CSU patients. This finding partially explains the efficacy of anti-IL-4/13 treatments in chronic spontaneous urticaria. Further investigations on drugs targeting type 2 inflammatory cytokines in CSU are warranted.


Subject(s)
Anti-Allergic Agents , Chronic Urticaria , Cytokines , Omalizumab , Humans , Omalizumab/therapeutic use , Omalizumab/administration & dosage , Female , Male , Adult , Chronic Urticaria/drug therapy , Chronic Urticaria/blood , Chronic Urticaria/immunology , Middle Aged , Cytokines/blood , Anti-Allergic Agents/therapeutic use , Anti-Allergic Agents/administration & dosage , Severity of Illness Index , Treatment Outcome , Case-Control Studies , Young Adult
10.
Sci Rep ; 14(1): 10404, 2024 05 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38710930

ABSTRACT

To date, most studies to identify biomarkers associated with response to the anti-interleukin 5 agent, mepolizumab, and to the anti-immunoglobulin E agent, omalizumab have focused on clinically available biomarkers, such as the peripheral blood eosinophil counts (BEC) and total immunoglobulin E (IgE). However, these biomarkers often have low predictive accuracy, with many patients with eosinophilic or allergic asthma failing to demonstrate clinical response to mepolizumab or omalizumab respectively. In this study, we evaluated the association of baseline pre-biologic plasma levels of 26 cytokines and chemokines, including T-helper 1 (Th1)-, Th2-, Th17-related cytokines, and their ratios with subsequent clinical response to mepolizumab or omalizumab. We defined clinical response as a reduction in the baseline annual exacerbation rate by half or more over the one-year period following initiation of the biologic. Baseline levels of plasma IL-13 were differentially elevated in responders versus non-responders to mepolizumab and plasma CXCL10 levels were differentially elevated in responders to omalizumab. The ratio of IL-13/TNF-α had the best sensitivity and specificity in predicting response to mepolizumab and CXCL10/CCL17 to omalizumab, and these performed better as predictive biomarkers of response than BEC and IgE. Cytokines and chemokines associated with airway eosinophilia, allergic inflammation, or Th2 inflammation, such as IL-13 and CXCL10, may be better predictors of clinical response to mepolizumab and omalizumab, than IL-5 or IgE, the targets of mepolizumab and omalizumab.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Asthma , Chemokine CCL17 , Chemokine CXCL10 , Eosinophils , Immunoglobulin E , Interleukin-13 , Omalizumab , Humans , Asthma/drug therapy , Asthma/blood , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Omalizumab/therapeutic use , Immunoglobulin E/blood , Female , Male , Chemokine CCL17/blood , Adult , Middle Aged , Chemokine CXCL10/blood , Interleukin-13/blood , Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha/blood , Biomarkers/blood , Anti-Asthmatic Agents/therapeutic use , Leukocyte Count , Treatment Outcome
11.
Allergol Immunopathol (Madr) ; 52(3): 1-7, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38721949

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Many chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) patients have highly stressful life events and exhibit psychiatric comorbidities. Emotional stress can cause or exacerbate urticaria symptoms by causing mast cell degranulation via neuromediators. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the frequency of stressful life events and compare psychiatric comorbidities and serum neuromediator levels in patients with CSU who responded to omalizumab with healthy controls. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we included 42 patients with CSU who received at least 6 months of omalizumab treatment and a control group of 42 healthy controls. Stressful life events were evaluated with the Life Events Checklist for DSM-5 (LEC-5). The Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-42 (DASS-42) was used to evaluate depression, anxiety and stress levels. Serum nerve growth factor (NGF), calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and substance P (SP) levels were measured using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) technique. RESULTS: Twenty-six (62%) patients reported at least one stressful life event a median of 3.5 months before the onset of CSU. There were no significant differences in all three variables in the DASS subscales between the patient and control groups. Serum NGF levels were found to be significantly lower in patients with CSU (p <0.001), whereas CGRP levels were found to be significantly higher (p <0.001). There was no significant difference for SP. CONCLUSIONS: The psychological status of patients with CSU who benefited from omalizumab was similar to that of healthy controls. Omalizumab may affect stress-related neuromediator levels.


Subject(s)
Anti-Allergic Agents , Chronic Urticaria , Nerve Growth Factor , Omalizumab , Stress, Psychological , Humans , Omalizumab/therapeutic use , Female , Male , Adult , Chronic Urticaria/drug therapy , Chronic Urticaria/blood , Cross-Sectional Studies , Middle Aged , Stress, Psychological/drug therapy , Stress, Psychological/blood , Nerve Growth Factor/blood , Anti-Allergic Agents/therapeutic use , Substance P/blood , Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide , Comorbidity , Depression/drug therapy , Depression/blood , Depression/epidemiology , Mental Disorders/drug therapy , Mental Disorders/blood , Mental Disorders/epidemiology
12.
Medicina (Kaunas) ; 60(5)2024 Apr 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38792886

ABSTRACT

Background and Objectives: The guidelines for chronic urticaria in children contain recommendations that are often based on adult studies. The diagnostic pathway has not been standardized and the effectiveness of anti-H1, omalizumab, montelukast, and systemic glucocorticoids is rarely reported in the pediatric population. There is a wide variation in the rate of remission of chronic urticaria between studies. The aim of this study is to enhance our understanding of pediatric chronic urticaria. Materials and Methods: This study enrolled 37 children with chronic urticaria aged from 0 to 18 years. Demographic parameters, medical history, clinical features, laboratory data and treatment information were collected. Children were treated with the recommended dosage of second-generation H1-antihistamines, which was increased by up to twofold. Omalizumab was added for refractory anti-H1 patients. A three-day course with systemic glucocorticoids was administered for severe exacerbations. Montelukast was administered to some children. Results: Wheals without angioedema were common. Chronic urticaria was spontaneous in 32 children (86.48%), inducible in 2 (5.41%), induced by a parasite in 1 and vasculitic in 2. Treatment of the potential causes of chronic urticaria was of no benefit, except for eradication of Dientamoeba fragilis. Chronic urticaria was resolved within three years in 45.9% of cases. Allergic diseases were present in nine children (24.32%) and autoimmune diseases were present in three (8.11%). All children were treated with anti-H1 at the licensed dose or at a higher dose. A partial or complete response to anti-H1 was observed in 29 (78.38%) patients. Montelukast showed no benefit. All children treated with omalizumab responded. Systemic glucocorticoids were successfully used to treat exacerbations. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that laboratory tests should not be routinely performed in children with chronic urticaria without clinical suspicion. However, comorbidities such as thyroid autoimmune disease and coeliac disease are suggested to be monitored over the chronic urticaria course. These clinical conditions could be diagnosed from the diagnostic framework of chronic urticaria. Increasing the dosage of anti-H1 and omalizumab was effective in children resistant to standard treatment but we still need further studies to generate a standard patient-centered treatment.


Subject(s)
Acetates , Chronic Urticaria , Cyclopropanes , Omalizumab , Quinolines , Sulfides , Humans , Child , Female , Male , Child, Preschool , Adolescent , Chronic Urticaria/drug therapy , Infant , Cyclopropanes/therapeutic use , Quinolines/therapeutic use , Quinolines/administration & dosage , Acetates/therapeutic use , Acetates/administration & dosage , Omalizumab/therapeutic use , Histamine H1 Antagonists/therapeutic use , Histamine H1 Antagonists/administration & dosage , Glucocorticoids/therapeutic use , Anti-Allergic Agents/therapeutic use , Anti-Allergic Agents/administration & dosage , Infant, Newborn , Chronic Disease , Urticaria/drug therapy
13.
Eur J Dermatol ; 34(1): 3-12, 2024 Feb 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38557452

ABSTRACT

Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a relatively common dermatological disorder characterized by sudden and unpredictable onset of pruritic wheals and/or angioedema, for more than six weeks. It is a mast cell-mediated histaminergic disorder, considerably worsening patients' quality of life. Current treatment options include anti-histamines, omalizumab and cyclosporine, in a step-wise algorithmic approach, aimed at complete symptom control. Patients do not respond uniformly to these therapeutic options due to phenotypic and endotypic heterogeneity, and often remain uncontrolled/poorly controlled. Recent research is focused on identifying certain biomarkers to predict therapeutic response and facilitate patient-targeted personalized treatment, for maximum benefit. The current article summarizes various biomarkers explored to date, and also elaborates their role in predicting therapeutic response to anti-histamines, omalizumab and cyclosporine, in CSU patients. High disease activity, elevated CRP/ESR and elevated D-dimer are the most important predictors of non/poor-response to antihistamines. Low and very low baseline IgE, elevated CRP/ESR, ASST+, BAT/BHRA+, basopenia, eosinopenia, and elevated D-dimer are predictors of poor and good response to omalizumab and cyclosporine, respectively. Additionally, normal or slightly elevated baseline IgE and FceR1 overexpression are predictors of a faster response with omalizumab. However, none of these predictors have so far been completely validated and are not yet recommended for routine use. Thus, large-scale prospective studies are needed to confirm these predictive biomarkers and identify new ones to achieve the goal of personalized medicine for CSU.


Subject(s)
Anti-Allergic Agents , Chronic Urticaria , Urticaria , Humans , Omalizumab/therapeutic use , Quality of Life , Chronic Disease , Chronic Urticaria/drug therapy , Urticaria/drug therapy , Urticaria/diagnosis , Histamine Antagonists/therapeutic use , Biomarkers , Cyclosporine/therapeutic use , Immunoglobulin E , Anti-Allergic Agents/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome
14.
Tuberk Toraks ; 72(1): 71-81, 2024 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38676596

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Recurrences occur when corticosteroid therapy is discontinued or reduced during the treatment of chronic eosinophilic pneumonia (CEP). The probability of recurrence is once in 50% of patients and twice or more in 25%. In such instances, new treatment options are deemed necessary. This study aims to assess the efficacy of omalizumab treatment as a steroid-sparing drug in patients with CEP. Materials and Methods: The clinical features of patients treated with omalizumab for recurrent CEP were evaluated retrospectively before and after treatment. All data from patients and diagnoses were reviewed. The effects of treatment on recurrence rate, oral corticosteroid (OCS) use and lung functions, peripheral eosinophil values, and symptom scores were evaluated. Radiological regression was also evaluated. Result: In the final analysis, we included ten patients with a median follow-up of 22 months after initiation of omalizumab. During this follow-up period, the results were associated with a significant reduction in the number of asthma attacks per year, the number of CEP relapses, the rate of hospitalization, the amount of corticosteroids consumed daily, and the total corticosteroid dose. In addition, improvement was observed in the symptom scores and lung functions of the patients. Systemic steroids were completely discontinued in two patients receiving omalizumab treatment. In other patients, the mean steroid dose was reduced by 77.2 percent in the first year of omalizumab treatment and 82 percent in the second year, respectively. Nevertheless, there was no elevation in peripheral eosinophil count, and radiological regression was observed. Conclusions: Omalizumab can be an effective treatment for CEP and can be used as a steroid-sparing agent.


Subject(s)
Omalizumab , Pulmonary Eosinophilia , Humans , Omalizumab/therapeutic use , Male , Female , Pulmonary Eosinophilia/drug therapy , Retrospective Studies , Middle Aged , Adult , Treatment Outcome , Chronic Disease , Anti-Asthmatic Agents/therapeutic use , Recurrence , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/therapeutic use , Aged
17.
Rev Mal Respir ; 41(5): 372-381, 2024 May.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38653607

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Asthma is a pathology that remains severe and is inadequately controlled in 4% of patients. Identification of multiple pathophysiological mechanisms has led to the development of biomedicines, of which there are currently five available in France, with a safety profile that appears favorable but remains uncertain due to a lack of real-life experience with these new molecules. STATE OF KNOWLEDGE: Although relatively benign, the adverse effects of biologics are diverse. Headache, joint pain, skin reactions at the injection site, fever and asthenia are commonly observed during the different treatments. Ophthalmological complications seem restricted to dupilumab, with numerous cases of keratitis and conjunctivitis in patients with atopic dermatitis. Several respiratory complications have also been observed, essentially consisting in pharyngitis and other upper respiratory infections. Hypereosinophilia may occur, mainly with dupilumab, requiring investigation of systemic repercussions or vasculitis. Allergic reactions are uncommon but require careful monitoring during initial injections. CONCLUSION: Biologics for severe asthma are recent drugs with a favorable safety profile, but with little real-life experience, justifying increased vigilance by prescribing physicians.


Subject(s)
Anti-Asthmatic Agents , Asthma , Biological Products , Humans , Asthma/drug therapy , Asthma/epidemiology , Biological Products/adverse effects , Anti-Asthmatic Agents/adverse effects , Anti-Asthmatic Agents/therapeutic use , Severity of Illness Index , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Omalizumab/adverse effects , Omalizumab/therapeutic use , France/epidemiology
20.
Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol ; 24(3): 114-121, 2024 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38567842

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim is to update the information currently available for the use of biologics in severe asthma in children, in order to facilitate their prescription as far as possible. RECENT FINDINGS: The appearance of biologics for the treatment of severe asthma has meant a revolutionary change in the therapeutic approach to this disease. Currently, five biologics have been approved for severe asthma in children and/or adolescents by the regulatory agencies: omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab, dupilumab and tezepelumab. But despite their positive results in terms of efficacy, there are still relevant points of debate that should induce caution when selecting the most appropriate biologic in a child with severe asthma. Indeed, safety is essential and, for several of the existing treatments, the availability of medium-term to long-term data in this regard is scarce. SUMMARY: The use of biologics can facilitate the therapeutic paradigm shift from pleiotropic treatments to personalized medicine. However, the choice of the most appropriate biologics remains a pending issue. On the other hand, to the extent that several of the biologics have been available for a relatively short time, the most robust evidence in terms of efficacy and safety in children is that of omalizumab.


Subject(s)
Anti-Asthmatic Agents , Asthma , Biological Products , Humans , Asthma/drug therapy , Child , Anti-Asthmatic Agents/therapeutic use , Biological Products/therapeutic use , Adolescent , Omalizumab/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Precision Medicine/methods
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...