Mast Cells in Upper and Lower Airway Diseases: Sentinels in the Front Line

Mast cells (MCs) are fascinating cells of the innate immune system involved not only in allergic reaction but also in tissue homeostasis, response to infection, wound healing, protection against kidney injury, the effects of pollution and, in some circumstances, cancer. Indeed, exploring their role in respiratory allergic diseases would give us, perhaps, novel therapy targets. Based on this, there is currently a great demand for therapeutic regimens to enfeeble the damaging impact of MCs in these pathological conditions. Several strategies can accomplish this at different levels in response to MC activation, including targeting individual mediators released by MCs, blockade of receptors for MC-released compounds, inhibition of MC activation, limiting mast cell growth, or inducing mast cell apoptosis. The current work focuses on and summarizes the mast cells’ role in pathogenesis and as a personalized treatment target in allergic rhinitis and asthma; even these supposed treatments are still at the preclinical stage

Minimal clinically important difference for asthma endpoints: an expert consensus report

Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) can be defined as the smallest change or difference in an outcome measure that is perceived as beneficial and would lead to a change in the patient's medical management.The aim of the current expert consensus report is to provide a "state-of-the-art" review of the currently available literature evidence about MCID for end-points to monitor asthma control, in order to facilitate optimal disease management and identify unmet needs in the field to guide future research.A series of MCID cut-offs are currently available in literature and validated among populations of asthmatic patients, with most of the evidence focusing on outcomes as patient reported outcomes, lung function and exercise tolerance. On the contrary, only scant and partial data are available for inflammatory biomarkers. These clearly represent the most interesting target for future development in diagnosis and clinical management of asthma, particularly in view of the several biologic drugs in the pipeline, for which regulatory agencies will soon require personalised proof of efficacy and treatment response predictors

Major Allergen Content in Allergen Immunotherapy Products: The Limited Value of Numbers

The prevalence of allergic disorders has increased drastically over the last 50 years to the extent that they can be considered epidemic. At present, allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is the only therapy that targets the underlying cause of allergic disorders, and evidence of its superiority is based on data accumulated from clinical trials and observational studies demonstrating efficacy and safety. However, several aspects remain unresolved, such as harmonization and standardization of manufacturing and quantification procedures across manufacturers, homogeneous reporting of strength, and the establishment of international reference standards for many allergens. This article discusses issues related to the measurement of major allergen content in AIT extracts, raising the question of whether comparison of products from different manufacturers is an appropriate basis for selecting a specific AIT product. Allergen standardization in immunotherapy products is critical for ensuring quality and, thereby, safety and efficacy. However, lack of harmonization in manufacturing processes, allergen quantification (methodologies and references), national regulatory differences, clinical practice, and labeling shows that the comparison of AIT products based solely on major allergen amounts is not rational and, in fact, impossible. Moreover, when rating the information given for a specific product, it is necessary to take into account further inherent characteristics of products and their application in clinical practice, such as the state of extract modification, addition of adjuvant or adjuvant system, route of administration (sublingual/ subcutaneous), and cumulative dose as per posology (including the volume per administration). Finally, only convincing clinical data can serve as the basis for product-specific evaluation and cross-product comparability of individual products

Choosing wisely: practical considerations on treatment efficacy and safety of asthma in the elderly.

The prevalence of asthma in the most advanced ages is similar to that of younger ages. However, the concept that older individuals may suffer from allergic asthma has been largely denied in the past, and a common belief attributes to asthma the definition of "rare" disease. Indeed, asthma in the elderly is often underdiagnosed or diagnosed as COPD, thus leading to undertreatment of improper treatment. This is also due to the heterogeneity of clinical and functional presentations of geriatric asthma, including the partial loss of reversibility and the lower occurrence of the allergic component in this age range. The older asthmatic patients are also characterized the coexistence of comorbid conditions that, in conjunction with age-associated structural and functional changes of the lung, may contribute to complicate the management of asthma. The current review addresses the main issues related to the management of allergic asthma in the geriatric age. In particular, the paper aims at revising current pharmacological and non pharmacological treatments for allergic asthmatics of advanced ages, primarily focusing on their safety and efficacy, although most behaviors are an arbitrary extrapolation of what has been tested in young ages. In fact, age has always represented an exclusion criterion for eligibility to clinical trials. Experimental studies and real life observations specifically testing the efficacy and safety of therapeutic approaches in allergic asthma in the elderly are urgently needed