RAST, Inmunoblot, Inmunocap e ISAC en alergia alimentaria

Después del descubrimiento de la IgE, los avances tecnológicos han proporcionado nuevas herramientas de laboratorio para la cuantificación de anticuerpos IgE específicos de alérgenos en suero y en la superficie de basófilos-mastocitos. Las pruebas in vitro ofrecen numerosas ventajas: cuantificación precisa, falta de interferencia de fármacos, seguridad y almacenamiento a largo plazo de las muestras. Los inmunoensayos cuantitativos para anticuerpos IgE pueden ser un complemento de las pruebas cutáneas. El reactivo de alergeno en fase sólida (alergosorbente) o líquida es el componente principal del ensayo que confiere especificidad a la prueba de anticuerpos IgE. Es el reactivo más complejo y altamente variable en los ensayos de anticuerpos IgE. La elección de utilizar recombinantes de diagnóstico en una única plataforma en lugar de múltiples se realiza caso por caso (considerando el historial previo y el perfil clínico) y de manera dependiente de los alérgenos. Aunque la mayor parte de las alergias alimentarias se limitan a una pequeña cantidad de posibles desencadenantes, estos alimentos son muy complejos al momento de evaluar su potencial alergénico. La posibilidad de fraccionar el alérgeno y entender algunos de sus componentes como potencialmente importantes para definir el riesgo de reacción clínica, reactividad cruzada o persistencia de la alergia, abrió una nueva era en el campo de la alergia, denominada alergia molecular. La identificación del componente alergénico responsable de las reacciones supone una herramienta importante para confirmar la información y gravedad de los síntomas, historia natural de la enfermedad, posibilidad de reactividad cruzada y clínica (marcadores de alergia).

Beliefs and preferences regarding biological treatments for severe asthma

Background: Severe asthma is a serious condition with a significant burden on patients' morbidity, mortality, and quality of life. Some biological therapies targeting the IgE and interleukin-5 (IL5) mediated pathways are now available. Due to the lack of direct comparison studies, the choice of which medication to use varies. We aimed to explore the beliefs and practices in the use of biological therapies in severe asthma, hypothesizing that differences will occur depending on the prescribers’ specialty and experience. Methods: We conducted an online survey composed of 35 questions in English. The survey was circulated via the INterasma Scientific Network (INESNET) platform as well as through social media. Responses from allergists and pulmonologists, both those with experience of prescribing omalizumab with (OMA/IL5) and without (OMA) experience with anti-IL5 drugs, were compared. Results: Two hundred eighty-five (285) valid questionnaires from 37 countries were analyzed. Seventy-on percent (71%) of respondents prescribed biologics instead of oral glucocorticoids and believed that their side effects are inferior to those of Prednisone 5 mg daily. Agreement with ATS/ERS guidelines for identifying severe asthma patients was less than 50%. Specifically, significant differences were found comparing responses between allergists and pulmonologists (Chi-square test, p < 0.05) and between OMA/IL5 and OMA groups (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Uncertainties and inconsistencies regarding the use of biological medications have been shown. The accuracy of prescribers to correctly identify asthma severity, according to guidelines criteria, is quite poor. Although a substantial majority of prescribers believe that biological drugs are safer than low dose long-term treatment with oral steroids, and that they must be used instead of oral steroids, every effort should be made to further increase awareness. Efficacy as disease modifiers, biomarkers for selecting responsive patients, timing for outcomes evaluation, and checks need to be addressed by further research. Practices and beliefs regarding the use of asthma biologics differ between the prescriber's specialty and experience; however, the latter seems more significant in determining beliefs and behavior. Tailored educational measures are needed to ensure research results are better integrated in daily practice

Early weight gain and the development of asthma and atopy in children

Purpose of reviewTo provide perspective to the most recent evidence regarding the association between early weight gain in infancy and the development of asthma and atopy during childhood, and highlight the potential mechanisms involved.Recent findingsRecently, several birth cohort studies involving more than 25000 children have found a consistent association between early weight gain in the first 2 years of life and incident asthma during school age. Methodology differs substantially between the studies and complicates the establishment of definite conclusions. Specific mechanisms for this association have been proposed, including impairment in lung development and elevated levels of growth factors and cytokines associated with airway inflammation and remodeling. A limited number of studies indicate that early weight gain in infancy is also associated with recurrent wheezing during preschool age but not with the development of atopy.SummaryA consistent association between early weight gain in infancy and incident asthma during school age has been observed in several cohort studies. the identification of this modifiable risk factor for the development of asthma opens the possibility of preventive intervention. Additional studies are necessary to clarify the involved mechanisms and some pending questions, such as the influence of early weight gain in asthma phenotypes and severity.Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, BrazilUniv Fed Parana, BR-80060000 Curitiba, Parana, BrazilABC Med Sch, Santo Andre, BrazilWashington Univ, Sch Med, St Louis, MO USASt Louis Childrens Hosp, St Louis, MO 63178 USAUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, BrazilWeb of Scienc

Test for Respiratory and Asthma Control in Kids (TRACK): validation of the Portuguese version

Abstract Background TRACK (Test for Respiratory and Asthma Control in Kids) questionnaire is an instrument developed and validated in English to evaluate the control of respiratory symptoms in children under 5 years of age. Objective To validate the Portuguese version of the TRACK questionnaire. Methods The validation was done in an observational, prospective and multicenter evaluation (six centers in Brazil) in children with recurrent respiratory symptoms. Children were classified according to symptoms, GINA criteria and medical evaluation. Parents and doctors rated child respiratory symptom control in the last month (VAS). Approval from the Institutional Review Board was obtained in each centre, and written informed consent was obtained from parents. Results Data from 299 children were obtained at baseline, and 195 at follow-up. The median score of the TRACK questionnaire was 65 and Cronbach’s α was 0.70. TRACK scores showed significant correlation with the medical and family opinions about symptom control (r: 0.74 and r: 0.61). TRACK scores were significantly lower in children who had used systemic steroids (median [IQR]: 45 [30–65] vs 75 [55–80]; p < 0.001) and had an emergency visit in the last month (45 [35–60] vs 70 [55–80]; p < 0.001). TRACK scores were also significantly different when children were separated by the medical opinion, GINA criteria and symptoms. Comparison of different respiratory symptom control cut-off points showed that the cut-off of 80 points had the highest area under ROC curve (0.800). Conclusion We have demonstrated that the Portuguese version of the TRACK questionnaire has satisfactory reliability (internal consistency), adequate criterion validity (compared against GINA levels of control) and constructive validity (compared against respiratory symptoms and medical opinion), showing that it can be a useful tool to discriminate among children with different levels of respiratory symptom control. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03290222