A Review of International Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Management of Chronic Urticaria

Both spontaneous and inducible forms of chronic urticaria pose a significant economic burden and have an adverse effect on patients’ quality of life. The international guidelines and US practice parameters for the diagnosis and management of chronic urticaria both recommend performing a thorough patient history and physical examination, conducting limited routine laboratory testing, and taking a stepwise approach to treatment. These documents differ in several areas, such as the order of diagnostic procedures and the treatment for patients non-responsive to standard dose H1-antihistamines. Patients with chronic urticaria who visit a specialist have typically been treated with second-generation H1-antihistamines – the recommended first-line treatments. The advantages and disadvantages of each treatment option should be taken into consideration when selecting therapies beyond H1-antihistamines. Greater awareness of the international guidelines and US practice parameters will likely improve the quality of care for patients with chronic urticaria

Effect of fixed-dose subcutaneous reslizumab on asthma exacerbations in patients with severe uncontrolled asthma and corticosteroid sparing in patients with oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma : results from two phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials

BACKGROUND: Reslizumab 3 mg/kg administered intravenously is approved for the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma. We assessed the safety and efficacy of subcutaneous reslizumab 110 mg in two trials in patients with uncontrolled severe asthma and increased blood eosinophils. The aim was to establish whether subcutaneous reslizumab 110 mg can reduce exacerbation rates in these patients (study 1) or reduce maintenance oral corticosteroid dose in patients with corticosteroid-dependent asthma (study 2). METHODS: Both studies were randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 studies. Entry criteria for study 1 were uncontrolled severe asthma, two or more asthma exacerbations in the previous year, a blood eosinophil count of 300 cells per μL or more (including no more than 30% patients with an eosinophil count <400 cells/μL), and at least a medium dose of inhaled corticosteroids with one or more additional asthma controllers. Patients in study 2 had severe asthma, a blood eosinophil count of 300 cells per μL or more, daily maintenance oral corticosteroid (prednisone 5-40 mg, or equivalent), and high-dose inhaled corticosteroids plus another controller. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to subcutaneous reslizumab (110 mg) or placebo once every 4 weeks for 52 weeks in study 1 and 24 weeks in study 2. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. Primary efficacy outcomes were frequency of exacerbations during 52 weeks in study 1 and categorised percentage reduction in daily oral corticosteroid dose from baseline to weeks 20-24 in study 2. Primary efficacy analyses were by intention to treat, and safety analyses included all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. These studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02452190 (study 1) and NCT02501629 (study 2). FINDINGS: Between Aug 12, 2015, and Jan 31, 2018, 468 patients in study 1 were randomly assigned to placebo (n=232) or subcutaneous reslizumab (n=236), and 177 in study 2 to placebo (n=89) or subcutaneous reslizumab (n=88). In study 1, we found no significant difference in the exacerbation rate between reslizumab and placebo in the intention-to-treat population (rate ratio 0·79, 95% CI 0·56-1·12; p=0·19). Subcutaneous reslizumab reduced exacerbation frequency compared with placebo in the subgroup of patients with blood eosinophil counts of 400 cells per μL or more (0·64, 95% CI 0·43-0·95). Greater reductions in annual exacerbation risk (p=0·0035) and longer time to first exacerbation were observed for patients with higher trough serum reslizumab concentrations. In study 2, we found no difference between placebo and fixed-dose subcutaneous reslizumab in categorised percentage reduction in daily oral corticosteroid dose (odds ratio for a lower category of oral corticosteroid use in the reslizumab group vs the placebo group, 1·23, 95% CI 0·70-2·16; p=0·47). The frequency of adverse events and serious adverse events with reslizumab were similar to those with placebo in both studies. INTERPRETATION: Fixed-dose (110 mg) subcutaneous reslizumab was not effective in reducing exacerbation frequency in patients with uncontrolled asthma and increased blood eosinophils (≥300 cells/μL), or in reducing the daily maintenance oral corticosteroid dose in patients with oral corticosteroid-dependent severe eosinophilic asthma. Higher exposures than those observed with 110 mg subcutaneous reslizumab are required to achieve maximal efficacy. FUNDING: Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D

Contact dermatitis due to personal protective equipment use and hygiene practices during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review of case reports

Background: Prolonged use of personal protective equipment (PPE) may lead to contact dermatitis during the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic. This paper aims to identify the causative factors of contact dermatitis from PPE and hygiene practices.Methods: The search was conducted adhering to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. A Delphi process was employed to ensure that the aims of this study were met. PubMed and Web of Science databases were systematically searched through September 12, 2021, using search terms: Contact dermatitis, case report, covid-19. The findings were tabulated as author/year, gender, age, presentation, cause, dermatological diagnosis, testing modality, provided treatment, symptom resolution (time in days), prognosis, and follow-up.Results: The mean age of all individuals was 29.75 years, with 75% females. All cases presented with erythema, with 62.5% reporting pruritus and 37.5% reporting burning facial symptoms. Surgical masks and hand-hygiene products (37.5%) were the most commonly reported causative agent with 25% due to KN95/FFP type 2 use. Allergic contact dermatitis (50%) and irritant contact dermatitis (25%) were common diagnoses. Treatments included creams, emollients, and desloratadine, with restriction of irritant-causing factors. The prognosis was generally good among the cases, with 62.5% presenting complete resolution within a week and 12.5% showing moderate improvement at the fourth month after discontinuing use.Conclusion: This study finds pertinent links between PPE use and contact dermatitis during the COVID-19 pandemic. While many cases are bound to go underreported in literature, well-designed, large-scale studies in the future may help promote these associations in a more comprehensive manner