The real life experience goes on: update after 4 years on the first cohort treated with lanadelumab at our center.

Introduction: Lanadelumab is a first-line long-term prophylaxis (LTP) in hereditary angioedema (HAE). Real-life data on its long-term efficacy and safety are limited. It is unknown whether patients using lanadelumab need short-term prophylaxis (STP). Objectives: To provide 4-year follow-up data for our first 34 patients treating with lanadelumab. Methods: Patients were assessed for their current injection interval, attacks, treatment satisfaction, disease control (AECT), quality of life impairment (AE-QoL), events that can induce attacks, and the use of STP since the start of their treatment with lanadelumab. Results: Of 34 patients who started lanadelumab treatment, 32 were still using it after 4 years, with a median injection interval of 33 (range 14-90) days. HAE patients (n=28) reported longer intervals, i.e. 35 (14-90) days, than patients with angioedema due to acquired C1 inhibitor deficiency (n=4, 23 (14-31) days). With their current injection intervals, used for a mean duration of 29 ± 17 months, patients reported a yearly attack rate of 0.3 ± 0.1. More than 70% of patients were attack-free since starting their current injection interval. All patients reported well-controlled disease, i.e. ≥10 points in the AECT; 21 patients had complete control (16 points). AE-QoL scores improved further compared to our initial report, most prominently in the fears/shame domain (-6 points). Treatment satisfaction was very high. No angioedema occurred after 146 of 147 potentially attack-inducing medical procedures without STP. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate the long-term efficacy and safety of lanadelumab in real-life and question the need for STP in patients who use effective LTP.

Urticaria exacerbations and adverse reactions in patients with chronic urticaria receiving COVID-19 vaccination: Results of the UCARE COVAC-CU study.

BACKGROUND: Concern about disease exacerbations and fear of reactions after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccinations are common in chronic urticaria (CU) patients and may lead to vaccine hesitancy. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the frequency and risk factors of CU exacerbation and adverse reactions in CU patients after COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: COVAC-CU is an international multicenter study of Urticaria Centers of Reference and Excellence (UCAREs) that retrospectively evaluated the effects of COVID-19 vaccination in CU patients aged ≥18 years and vaccinated with ≥1 dose of any COVID-19 vaccine. We evaluated CU exacerbations and severe allergic reactions as well as other adverse events associated with COVID-19 vaccinations and their association with various CU parameters. RESULTS: Across 2769 COVID-19-vaccinated CU patients, most (90%) received at least 2 COVID-19 vaccine doses, and most patients received CU treatment and had well-controlled disease. The rate of COVID-19 vaccination-induced CU exacerbation was 9%. Of 223 patients with CU exacerbation after the first dose, 53.4% experienced recurrence of CU exacerbation after the second dose. CU exacerbation most often started <48 hours after vaccination (59.2%), lasted for a few weeks or less (70%), and was treated mainly with antihistamines (70.3%). Factors that increased the risk for COVID-19 vaccination-induced CU exacerbation included female sex, disease duration shorter than 24 months, having chronic spontaneous versus inducible urticaria, receipt of adenovirus viral vector vaccine, having nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug/aspirin intolerance, and having concerns about getting vaccinated; receiving omalizumab treatment and Latino/Hispanic ethnicity lowered the risk. First-dose vaccine-related adverse effects, most commonly local reactions, fever, fatigue, and muscle pain, were reported by 43.5% of CU patients. Seven patients reported severe allergic reactions. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccination leads to disease exacerbation in only a small number of CU patients and is generally well tolerated.

Mast cells, cortistatin, and its receptor, MRGPRX2, are linked to the pathogenesis of chronic prurigo.

BACKGROUND: Chronic prurigo (CPG) is characterized by intensive itch and interactions among nerves, neuropeptides, and mast cells (MCs). The role of some neuropeptides such as cortistatin (CST) and its receptor, Mas-related G protein-coupled receptor X2 (MRGPRX2), in CPG remains poorly investigated. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated first whether CST activates human skin MCs, and second whether CST and MRGPRX2 are expressed in the skin of CPG patients, and by which cells. METHODS: Skin prick tests and microdialysis with CST were performed in 6 and 1 healthy volunteers, respectively. Degranulation of human skin MCs was assessed using ß-hexosaminidase and histamine release assays. Skin samples from 10 patients with CPG and 10 control subjects were stained for CST, MCs, and MRGPRX2 (protein and mRNA) using immunohistochemistry, immunofluorescence, and/or in situ hybridization. Flow cytometry was used to assess CST in human skin MCs. MRGPRX2 levels were measured in serum by ELISA. RESULTS: CST induced concentration-dependent degranulation of human skin MCs in vivo and ex vivo. Skin lesions of CPG patients exhibited markedly higher numbers of CST-expressing cells, CST-expressing MCs, MRGPRX2-expressing cells, and MRGPRX2 mRNA-expressing cells than nonlesional skin. MCs were the main MRGPRX2 mRNA-expressing cells in the lesions of most CPG patients (70%). Stimulation of human skin MCs with anti-IgE led to a release of CST. The number of MRGPRX2-expressing cells correlated with disease severity (r = 0.649, P = .04). MRGPRX2 serum levels in CPG patients correlated with disease severity (r = 0.704, P = .023) and quality-of-life impairment (r = 0.687, P = .028). CONCLUSIONS: CST and MRGPRX2 may contribute to the pathogenesis of CPG and should be evaluated in further studies as potential biomarkers and novel therapeutic targets.