design of the HELP study extension

Background Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is characterized by recurrent attacks of subcutaneous or submucosal edema. Attacks are unpredictable, debilitating, and have a significant impact on quality of life. Patients may be prescribed prophylactic therapy to prevent angioedema attacks. Current prophylactic treatments may be difficult to administer (i.e., intravenously), require frequent administrations or are not well tolerated, and breakthrough attacks may still occur frequently. Lanadelumab is a subcutaneously-administered monoclonal antibody inhibitor of plasma kallikrein in clinical development for prophylaxis of hereditary angioedema attacks. A Phase 1b study supported its efficacy in preventing attacks. A Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo- controlled, parallel-arm study has been completed and an open-label extension is currently ongoing. Methods/design The primary objective of the open-label extension is to evaluate the long-term safety of repeated subcutaneous administrations of lanadelumab in patients with type I/II HAE. Secondary objectives include evaluation of efficacy and time to first angioedema attack to determine outer bounds of the dosing interval. The study will also evaluate immunogenicity, pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, quality of life, characteristics of breakthrough attacks, ease of self-administration, and safety/efficacy in patients who switch to lanadelumab from another prophylactic therapy. The open-label extension will enroll patients who completed the double-blind study (“rollover patients”) and those who did not participate in the double-blind study (“non-rollover patients”), which includes patients who may or may not be currently using another prophylactic therapy. Rollover patients will receive a single 300 mg dose of lanadelumab on Day 0 and the second dose after the patient’s first confirmed angioedema attack. Thereafter, lanadelumab will be administered every 2 weeks. Non- rollover patients will receive 300 mg lanadelumab every 2 weeks regardless of the first attack. All patients will receive their last dose on Day 350 (maximum of 26 doses), and will then undergo a 4-week follow-up. Discussion Prevention of attacks can reduce the burden of illness associated with HAE. Prophylactic therapy requires extended, repeated dosing and the results of this study will provide important data on the long-term safety and efficacy of lanadelumab, a monoclonal antibody inhibitor of plasma kallikrein for subcutaneous administration for the treatment of HAE. Trial registration NCT0274159

Heterogeneity of magnitude, allergen immunodominance, and cytokine polarization of cockroach allergen-specific T cell responses in allergic sensitized children.

Background: Characterization of allergic responses to cockroach (CR), a common aeroallergen associated with asthma, has focused mainly on IgE reactivity, but little is known about T cell responses, particularly in children. We conducted a functional evaluation of CR allergen-specific T cell reactivity in a cohort of CR allergic children with asthma. Methods: Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were obtained from 71 children, with mild-to-moderate asthma who were enrolled in a CR immunotherapy (IT) clinical trial, prior to treatment initiation. PBMC were stimulated with peptide pools derived from 11 CR allergens, and CD4+ T cell responses assessed by intracellular cytokine staining. Results: Highly heterogeneous responses in T cell reactivity were observed among participants, both in terms of the magnitude of cytokine response and allergen immunodominance. Reactivity against Bla g 9 and Bla g 5 was most frequent. The phenotype of the T cell response was dominated by IL-4 production and a Th2 polarized profile in 54.9% of participants, but IFNγ production and Th1 polarization was observed in 25.3% of the participants. The numbers of regulatory CD4+ T cells were also highly variable and the magnitude of effector responses and Th2 polarization were positively correlated with serum IgE levels specific to a clinical CR extract. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that in children with mild-to-moderate asthma, CR-specific T cell responses display a wide range of magnitude, allergen dominance, and polarization. These results will enable examination of whether any of the variables measured are affected by IT and/or are predictive of clinical outcomes

An open-label study to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of lanadelumab for prevention of attacks in hereditary angioedema: design of the HELP study extension

Background: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is characterized by recurrent attacks of subcutaneous or submucosal edema. Attacks are unpredictable, debilitating, and have a significant impact on quality of life. Patients may be prescribed prophylactic therapy to prevent angioedema attacks. Current prophylactic treatments may be difficult to administer (i.e., intravenously), require frequent administrations or are not well tolerated, and breakthrough attacks may still occur frequently. Lanadelumab is a subcutaneously-administered monoclonal antibody inhibitor of plasma kallikrein in clinical development for prophylaxis of hereditary angioedema attacks. A Phase 1b study supported its efficacy in preventing attacks. A Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-arm study has been completed and an open-label extension is currently ongoing. Methods/design The primary objective of the open-label extension is to evaluate the long-term safety of repeated subcutaneous administrations of lanadelumab in patients with type I/II HAE. Secondary objectives include evaluation of efficacy and time to first angioedema attack to determine outer bounds of the dosing interval. The study will also evaluate immunogenicity, pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, quality of life, characteristics of breakthrough attacks, ease of self-administration, and safety/efficacy in patients who switch to lanadelumab from another prophylactic therapy. The open-label extension will enroll patients who completed the double-blind study (“rollover patients”) and those who did not participate in the double-blind study (“non-rollover patients”), which includes patients who may or may not be currently using another prophylactic therapy. Rollover patients will receive a single 300 mg dose of lanadelumab on Day 0 and the second dose after the patient’s first confirmed angioedema attack. Thereafter, lanadelumab will be administered every 2 weeks. Non-rollover patients will receive 300 mg lanadelumab every 2 weeks regardless of the first attack. All patients will receive their last dose on Day 350 (maximum of 26 doses), and will then undergo a 4-week follow-up. Discussion Prevention of attacks can reduce the burden of illness associated with HAE. Prophylactic therapy requires extended, repeated dosing and the results of this study will provide important data on the long-term safety and efficacy of lanadelumab, a monoclonal antibody inhibitor of plasma kallikrein for subcutaneous administration for the treatment of HAE. Trial registration NCT02741596 Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13601-017-0172-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Consensus on treatment goals in hereditary angioedema : a global Delphi initiative

Background: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare, life-threatening genetic disorder characterized by recurrent episodes of subcutaneous or submucosal angioedema. The ultimate goals of treatment for HAE remain ill-defined. Objectives: The aim of this Delphi process was to define the goals of HAE treatment and to examine which factors should be considered when assessing disease control and normalization of the patient's life. Methods: The Delphi panel comprised 23 participants who were selected based on involvement with scientific research on HAE or coauthorship of the most recent update and revision of the World Allergy Organization/European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology guideline on HAE. The process comprised 3 rounds of voting. The final round aimed to aggregate the opinions of the expert panel and to achieve consensus. Results: Two direct consensus questions were posed in round 2, based on the responses received in round 1, and the panel agreed that the goals of treatment are to achieve total control of the disease and to normalize the patient's life. For the third round of voting, 21 statements were considered, with the participants reaching consensus on 18. It is clear from the wide-ranging consensus statements that the burdens of disease and treatment should be considered when assessing disease control and normalization of patients’ lives. Conclusions: The ultimate goal for HAE treatment is to achieve no angioedema attacks. The availability of improved treatments and disease management over the last decade now makes complete control of HAE a realistic possibility for most patients

Delays in hospital admissions in patients with fractures across 18 low-income and middle-income countries (INORMUS): a prospective observational study

© 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license Background: The Lancet Commission on Global Surgery established the Three Delays framework, categorising delays in accessing timely surgical care into delays in seeking care (First Delay), reaching care (Second Delay), and receiving care (Third Delay). Globally, knowledge gaps regarding delays for fracture care, and the lack of large prospective studies informed the rationale for our international observational study. We investigated delays in hospital admission as a surrogate for accessing timely fracture care and explored factors associated with delayed hospital admission. Methods: In this prospective observational substudy of the ongoing International Orthopaedic Multicenter Study in Fracture Care (INORMUS), we enrolled patients with fracture across 49 hospitals in 18 low-income and middle-income countries, categorised into the regions of China, Africa, India, south and east Asia, and Latin America. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had been admitted to a hospital within 3 months of sustaining an orthopaedic trauma. We collected demographic injury data and time to hospital admission. Our primary outcome was the number of patients with open and closed fractures who were delayed in their admission to a treating hospital. Delays for patients with open fractures were defined as being more than 2 h from the time of injury (in accordance with the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery) and for those with closed fractures as being a delay of more than 24 h. Secondary outcomes were reasons for delay for all patients with either open or closed fractures who were delayed for more than 24 h. We did logistic regression analyses to identify risk factors of delays of more than 2 h in patients with open fractures and delays of more than 24 h in patients with closed fractures. Logistic regressions were adjusted for region, age, employment, urban living, health insurance, interfacility referral, method of transportation, number of fractures, mechanism of injury, and fracture location. We further calculated adjusted relative risk (RR) from adjusted odds ratios, adjusted for the same variables. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02150980, and is ongoing. Findings: Between April 3, 2014, and May 10, 2019, we enrolled 31 255 patients with fractures, with a median age of 45 years (IQR 31–62), of whom 19 937 (63·8%) were men, and 14 524 (46·5%) had lower limb fractures, making them the most common fractures. Of 5256 patients with open fractures, 3778 (71·9%) were not admitted to hospital within 2 h. Of 25 999 patients with closed fractures, 7141 (27·5%) were delayed by more than 24 h. Of all regions, Latin America had the greatest proportions of patients with delays (173 [88·7%] of 195 patients with open fractures; 426 [44·7%] of 952 with closed fractures). Among patients delayed by more than 24 h, the most common reason for delays were interfacility referrals (3755 [47·7%] of 7875) and Third Delays (cumulatively interfacility referral and delay in emergency department: 3974 [50·5%]), while Second Delays (delays in reaching care) were the least common (423 [5·4%]). Compared with other methods of transportation (eg, walking, rickshaw), ambulances led to delay in transporting patients with open fractures to a treating hospital (adjusted RR 0·66, 99% CI 0·46–0·93). Compared with patients with closed lower limb fractures, patients with closed spine (adjusted RR 2·47, 99% CI 2·17–2·81) and pelvic (1·35, 1·10–1·66) fractures were most likely to have delays of more than 24 h before admission to hospital. Interpretation: In low-income and middle-income countries, timely hospital admission remains largely inaccessible, especially among patients with open fractures. Reducing hospital-based delays in receiving care, and, in particular, improving interfacility referral systems are the most substantial tools for reducing delays in admissions to hospital. Funding: National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, McMaster Surgical Associates, and Hamilton Health Sciences

Asthma in the elderly: what we know and what we have yet to know

In the past, asthma was considered mainly as a childhood disease. However, asthma is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in the elderly nowadays. In addition, the burden of asthma is more significant in the elderly than in their younger counterparts, particularly with regard to mortality, hospitalization, medical costs or health-related quality of life. Nevertheless, asthma in the elderly is still been underdiagnosed and undertreated. Therefore, it is an imperative task to recognize our current challenges and to set future directions. This project aims to review the current literature and identify unmet needs in the fields of research and practice for asthma in the elderly. This will enable us to find new research directions, propose new therapeutic strategies, and ultimately improve outcomes for elderly people with asthma. There are data to suggest that asthma in older adults is phenotypically different from young patients, with potential impact on the diagnosis, assessment and management in this population. The diagnosis of AIE in older populations relies on the same clinical findings and diagnostic tests used in younger populations, but the interpretation of the clinical data is more difficult. The challenge today is to encourage new research in AIE but to use the existing knowledge we have to make the diagnosis of AIE, educate the patient, develop a therapeutic approach to control the disease, and ultimately provide a better quality of life to our elderly patients

The international WAO/EAACI guideline for the management of hereditary angioedema - The 2021 revision and update.

Hereditary Angioedema (HAE) is a rare and disabling disease for which early diagnosis and effective therapy are critical. This revision and update of the global WAO/EAACI guideline on the diagnosis and management of HAE provides up-to-date guidance for the management of HAE. For this update and revision of the guideline, an international panel of experts reviewed the existing evidence, developed 28 recommendations, and established consensus by an online DELPHI process. The goal of these recommendations and guideline is to help physicians and their patients in making rational decisions in the management of HAE with deficient C1-inhibitor (type 1) and HAE with dysfunctional C1-inhibitor (type 2), by providing guidance on common and important clinical issues, such as: 1) How should HAE be diagnosed? 2) When should HAE patients receive prophylactic on top of on-demand treatment and what treatments should be used? 3) What are the goals of treatment? 4) Should HAE management be different for special HAE patient groups such as children or pregnant/breast feeding women? 5) How should HAE patients monitor their disease activity, impact, and control? It is also the intention of this guideline to help establish global standards for the management of HAE and to encourage and facilitate the use of recommended diagnostics and therapies for all patients

The international WAO/EAACI guideline for the management of hereditary angioedema—The 2021 revision and update

Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare and disabling disease for which early diagnosis and effective therapy are critical. This revision and update of the global WAO/EAACI guideline on the diagnosis and management of HAE provides up-to-date guidance for the management of HAE. For this update and revision of the guideline, an international panel of experts reviewed the existing evidence, developed 28 recommendations, and established consensus by an online DELPHI process. The goal of these recommendations and guideline is to help physicians and their patients in making rational decisions in the management of HAE with deficient C1 inhibitor (type 1) and HAE with dysfunctional C1 inhibitor (type 2), by providing guidance on common and important clinical issues, such as: (1) How should HAE be diagnosed? (2) When should HAE patients receive prophylactic on top of on-demand treatment and what treatments should be used? (3) What are the goals of treatment? (4) Should HAE management be different for special HAE patient groups such as children or pregnant/breast-feeding women? and (5) How should HAE patients monitor their disease activity, impact, and control? It is also the intention of this guideline to help establish global standards for the management of HAE and to encourage and facilitate the use of recommended diagnostics and therapies for all patients

A united statement of the global chiropractic research community against the pseudoscientific claim that chiropractic care boosts immunity.

BACKGROUND: In the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, the International Chiropractors Association (ICA) posted reports claiming that chiropractic care can impact the immune system. These claims clash with recommendations from the World Health Organization and World Federation of Chiropractic. We discuss the scientific validity of the claims made in these ICA reports. MAIN BODY: We reviewed the two reports posted by the ICA on their website on March 20 and March 28, 2020. We explored the method used to develop the claim that chiropractic adjustments impact the immune system and discuss the scientific merit of that claim. We provide a response to the ICA reports and explain why this claim lacks scientific credibility and is dangerous to the public. More than 150 researchers from 11 countries reviewed and endorsed our response. CONCLUSION: In their reports, the ICA provided no valid clinical scientific evidence that chiropractic care can impact the immune system. We call on regulatory authorities and professional leaders to take robust political and regulatory action against those claiming that chiropractic adjustments have a clinical impact on the immune system