Explore the vast range of titles available.

Attacks of hereditary angioedema (HAE) are unpredictable and, if affecting the upper airway, can be lethal. Icatibant is used for physician- or patient self-administered symptomatic treatment of HAE attacks in adults. Its mode of action includes disruption of the bradykinin pathway via blockade of the bradykinin B(2) receptor. Early treatment is believed to shorten attack duration and prevent severe outcomes; however, evidence to support these benefits is lacking. To examine the impact of timing of icatibant administration on the duration and resolution of HAE type I and II attacks. The Icatibant Outcome Survey is an international, prospective, observational study for patients treated with icatibant. Data on timings and outcomes of icatibant treatment for HAE attacks were collected between July 2009-February 2012. A mixed-model of repeated measures was performed for 426 attacks in 136 HAE type I and II patients. Attack duration was significantly shorter in patients treated <1 hour of attack onset compared with those treated ≥ 1 hour (6.1 hours versus 16.8 hours [p<0.001]). Similar significant effects were observed for <2 hours versus ≥ 2 hours (7.2 hours versus 20.2 hours [p<0.001]) and <5 hours versus ≥ 5 hours (8.0 hours versus 23.5 hours [p<0.001]). Treatment within 1 hour of attack onset also significantly reduced time to attack resolution (5.8 hours versus 8.8 hours [p<0.05]). Self-administrators were more likely to treat early and experience shorter attacks than those treated by a healthcare professional. Early blockade of the bradykinin B(2) receptor with icatibant, particularly within the first hour of attack onset, significantly reduced attack duration and time to attack resolution.

We performed a systematic search of databases from 1990 to 2013 to identify articles concerning the new onset of dermatomyositis/polymyositis (DM/PM) in patients treated with anti-TNF-α therapy. We retrieved 13 publications describing 20 patients where the new onset of DM/PM after anti-TNF-α therapy was recorded. 17 patients were affected by rheumatoid arthritis (RA), one by Crohn’s disease, one by ankylosing spondilytis, and one by seronegative arthritis. In 91% of the cases antinuclear autoantibodies were detected after the introduction of anti-TNF-α therapy. In 6 patients antisynthetase antibodies were detected and other clinical findings as interstitial lung disease (ILD) were recorded. Improvement of DM/PM after anti-TNF suspension (with the concomitant use of other immunosuppressors) was recorded in 94% of cases. The emergence of DM/PM and antisynthetase syndrome seem to be associated with the use of anti-TNF-α agents, especially in patients with chronic inflammatory diseases (mainly RA) with positive autoantibodies before therapy initiation. In particular, physicians should pay attention to patients affected by RA with positive antisynthetase antibodies and/or history of ILD. In those cases, the use of the TNF-α blocking agents may trigger the onset of PM/DM or antisynthetase syndrome or may aggravate/trigger the lung disease.

All angioedema (AE) presents with transient, localized swelling; however, the underlying causes, prognosis, and treatments vary significantly. Consequently, identifying a specific AE type is challenging. We aimed to apply a machine learning (ML) model to improve AE diagnosis. Random forest (RF) ML was used to create a prediction model for diagnosing correct AE types. Development comprised a literature search to establish AE's clinical characteristics, developing and translating questions in collaboration with 12 European AE centers, and selecting, testing, validating and optimizing the established ML model. Analysis included 342 specialist-diagnosed patients with one of six AE types. The final optimized RF model correctly identified AE types with true positive rates of up to 94% in hereditary AE due to C1 inhibitor deficiency (C1INH), with a Percentage Accuracy of 89·2% and a Kappa value of 81·8% across the six AE types, with a high agreement with the diagnoses made by experts. This is the first ever reported ML algorithm designed to pre-assess to aid AE diagnosis.

Double sensitization (DS) to bee and vespid venom is frequently observed in the diagnosis of hymenoptera venom allergy, but clinically relevant DS is rare. Therefore it is sophisticated to choose the relevant venom for specific immunotherapy and overtreatment with both venoms may occur. We aimed to compare currently available routine diagnostic tests as well as experimental tests to identify the most accurate diagnostic tool. 117 patients with a history of a bee or vespid allergy were included in the study. Initially, IgE determination by the ImmunoCAP, by the Immulite, and by the ADVIA Centaur, as well as the intradermal test (IDT) and the basophil activation test (BAT) were performed. In 72 CAP double positive patients, individual IgE patterns were determined by western blot inhibition and component resolved diagnosis (CRD) with rApi m 1, nVes v 1, and nVes v 5. Among 117 patients, DS was observed in 63.7% by the Immulite, in 61.5% by the CAP, in 47.9% by the IDT, in 20.5% by the ADVIA, and in 17.1% by the BAT. In CAP double positive patients, western blot inhibition revealed CCD-based DS in 50.8%, and the CRD showed 41.7% of patients with true DS. Generally, agreement between the tests was only fair and inconsistent results were common. BAT, CRD, and ADVIA showed a low rate of DS. However, the rate of DS is higher than expected by personal history, indicating that the matter of clinical relevance is still not solved even by novel tests. Furthermore, the lack of agreement between these tests makes it difficult to distinguish between bee and vespid venom allergy. At present, no routinely employed test can be regarded as gold standard to find the clinically relevant sensitization.

Treatment failure during venom immunotherapy (VIT) may be associated with a variety of risk factors. Our aim was to evaluate the association of baseline serum tryptase concentration (BTC) and of other parameters with the frequency of VIT failure during the maintenance phase. In this observational prospective multicenter study, we followed 357 patients with established honey bee or vespid venom allergy after the maintenance dose of VIT had been reached. In all patients, VIT effectiveness was either verified by sting challenge (n = 154) or patient self-reporting of the outcome of a field sting (n = 203). Data were collected on BTC, age, gender, preventive use of anti-allergic drugs (oral antihistamines and/or corticosteroids) right after a field sting, venom dose, antihypertensive medication, type of venom, side effects during VIT, severity of index sting reaction preceding VIT, and duration of VIT. Relative rates were calculated with generalized additive models. 22 patients (6.2%) developed generalized symptoms during sting challenge or after a field sting. A strong association between the frequency of VIT failure and BTC could be excluded. Due to wide confidence bands, however, weaker effects (odds ratios <3) of BTC were still possible, and were also suggested by a selective analysis of patients who had a sting challenge. The most important factor associated with VIT failure was a honey bee venom allergy. Preventive use of anti-allergic drugs may be associated with a higher protection rate. It is unlikely that an elevated BTC has a strong negative effect on the rate of treatment failures. The magnitude of the latter, however, may depend on the method of effectiveness assessment. Failure rate is higher in patients suffering from bee venom allergy.

Background: Intradermal tests (IDTs) are performed and interpreted differently in drug allergy centers making valid comparison of results difficult.Objective: To reduce method-related and intercenter variability of IDTs by the introduction of a standardized method.Materials and methods: In 11 centers of the European Network for Drug Allergy, IDTs were prospectively performed with saline and with amoxicillin (20 mg/ml) using (1) the local method and (2) the standardized European Network in Drug Allergy (ENDA) method (0.02 ml). The diameters of the initial injection wheal (Wi) for the different volumes and sites injected obtained from each center were analyzed.Results: The most reproducible method was to fill a syringe with test solution, then expel the excess fluid to obtain exactly 0.02 ml. The median Wi diameter with 0.02 ml injection using the standardized method was 5 mm [range 2–10 mm; interquartile range (IQR) 5–5 mm; n = 1,096] for saline and 5 mm (range 2–9 mm; IQR = 4.5–5 mm; n = 240) for amoxicillin. IDT injection sites did not affect the Wi diameter. Training improved precision and reduced the variability of Wi diameters.Conclusion: Using the standardized IDT method described in this multicenter study helped to reduce variability, enabling more reliable comparison of results between individuals and centers.

Background: Icatibant, a selective bradykinin B2 receptor antagonist for the treatment of acute hereditary angio-oedema (HAE) attacks in adults, can be administered by health care professionals (HCPs) or self-administered. This analysis compared characteristics and outcomes of acute HAE attacks treated with self-administered and HCP-administered icatibant in a real-world setting. Methods: The Icatibant Outcome Survey (Shire, Zug, Switzerland; NCT01034969) is an international observational study monitoring the safety and effectiveness of icatibant treatment. Descriptive retrospective analyses were performed (February 2008 to December 2012). Results: Icatibant was used in 652 attacks in 170 patients with HAE type I/II. Most icatibant injections were self-administered (431/652, 68.5%). The proportion of self-treated attacks increased over time (40.3% in 2009 vs. 89.7% in 2012). The median time to administration was significantly shorter in self- versus HCP-treated attacks (1.5 vs. 2.4 h; p = 0.016). Earlier treatment (<2 h after onset) was significantly associated with a shorter median time to resolution (2.5 vs. 5.0 h; p = 0.032) and attack duration (3.0 vs. 14.0 h; p < 0.0001), regardless of administration method. Patients self-administered icatibant for attacks of all severities; overall, 34.7% of severe and 30.2% of very severe attacks were HCP treated. Logistic regression analysis did not find use of long-term prophylaxis, attack location or gender to be predictive for self-administration. Conclusions: The proportion of HAE attacks treated with self-administered icatibant increased over time. Patients successfully self-administered icatibant for a wide variety of HAE attacks, demonstrating that icatibant is generally well tolerated and effective for self-administration. Self-administration of icatibant provides a complementary option to HCP administration, enabling optimization of patient care.

Background The specificity of extract‐based pollen allergy diagnosis is decreased due to cross‐reactivity via cross‐reactive carbohydrate determinants (CCDs) or panallergens such as profilins or polcalcins. This study aimed to explore the prevalence of sensitization to seasonal extracts, CCDs, profilin and polcalcin and investigate the sensitivity and specificity of seasonal molecular allergy diagnosis (MAD) using commercially available test methods. Methods 2948 patients were screened for specific immunoglobulin E to ash, birch, mugwort, ragweed and timothy grass pollen extracts and grouped according to the number of positive tests (1–5). 100 patients from each group and a control group were randomly selected to calculate the prevalence of CCD and panallergen sensitization. With 742 patients, sensitivity and specificity of MAD (Alt a 1, Fra/Ole e 1, Bet v 1, Phl p 1, Art v 1, and Amb a 1) was determined. Results 1627 patients (55.2%) were positive to at least one, and 1002 patients (34.0%) were positive to multiple of the five pollen allergens investigated; 18.5% of the pollen‐sensitized patients had sensitization to CCDs or panallergens. Specifically, sensitization to CCDs, profilins, and polcalcins was observed in 8.7%, 10.9%, and 2.9% of these patients, respectively. The sensitivity of MAD was high, with sensitivities between 96.2% and 100% using ImmunoCAP and 91.5% and 100% using ALEX2. Specificity was 100% for both assays. Conclusions Due to cross‐reactivity, about one‐fifth of pollen‐sensitized patients is at risk of misdiagnosis. However, MAD is sensitive, specific and helps to avoid misdiagnosis and select primary allergen sources for immunotherapy.

The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the change over time in age at first symptoms, age at diagnosis, and delay in diagnosis using data from the Icatibant Outcome Survey (IOS). Patients with a diagnosis of C1-INH-HAE who were born before the year 1990 and who were diagnosed before they reached 25 years of age were included in the analysis. Both age at diagnosis and delay in diagnosis of C1-INH-HAE appear to decline with later decade of birth, despite wide variation across the countries assessed, suggesting that improved disease awareness causes increased rates of earlier diagnosis over time. Our findings demonstrate that some patients are still experiencing long delays to diagnosis, indicating an ongoing need for improved disease awareness.

Specific immunotherapy is a well-established treatment for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis; conventional regimens are lengthy, however, reducing convenience and cost-effectiveness. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of an ultrashort course (four doses) of the immunotherapy Grass Modified Allergen Tyrosine Adsorbate (Allergy Therapeutics, Worthing, U.K.) monophosphoryl lipid A (MATA MPL). Subjects were randomized to receive four injections of either Grass MATA MPL (n = 514; 300-2000 standardized units/injection) or placebo (n = 514) before the grass pollen season. They used electronic diaries to record allergy symptoms and medication use during the pollen season. The primary end point was the difference between the mean combined symptom and medication scores in the Grass MATA MPL and placebo groups during the 4 local peak pollen weeks. The injection course was completed by 95.3 and 97.7% of the Grass MATA MPL and placebo groups, respectively, and was well tolerated. Grass MATA MPL treatment afforded a 13.6% benefit over placebo in the 4 peak pollen weeks (p = 0.0038). The benefit in subjects with 28 complete diary entries during the 4 peak pollen weeks was 24.3% (p = 0.0031). Significant benefits over placebo were observed in subjects with severe symptoms (16.6%; p = 0.0023), in those who had a history of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis for up to 35 years (up to 31%; p = 0.0059) and at sites with a higher burden of disease (31%; p < 0.0001). The ultrashort course of Grass MATA MPL was well tolerated and provided a significant benefit over placebo in relieving allergy symptoms.Corrected Version posted November 2011