Buffalo's milk allergy: Role of sensitization to caprine β‐casein

International audienc

SARS-CoV-2 Pneumonia in Hospitalized Asthmatic Patients Did Not Induce Severe Exacerbation

International audienceBackground: Viral infections are known to exacerbate asthma in adults. Previous studies have found few patients with asthma among severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pneumonia cases. However, the relationship between SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe asthma exacerbation is not known.Objective: To assess the frequency of asthma exacerbation in patients with asthma hospitalized for SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia and compare symptoms and laboratory and radiological findings in patients with and without asthma with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia.Methods: We included 106 patients between March 4 and April 6, 2020, who were hospitalized in the Chest Diseases Department of Strasbourg University Hospital; 23 had asthma. To assess the patients' asthma status, 3 periods were defined: the last month before the onset of COVID-19 symptoms (p1), prehospitalization (p2), and during hospitalization (p3). Severe asthma exacerbations were defined according to Global INitiative for Asthma guidelines during p1 and p2. During p3, we defined severe asthma deterioration as the onset of breathlessness and wheezing requiring systemic corticosteroids and inhaled β2 agonist.Results: We found no significant difference between patients with and without asthma in terms of severity (length of stay, maximal oxygen flow needed, noninvasive ventilation requirement, and intensive care unit transfer); 52.2% of the patients with asthma had Global INitiative for Asthma step 1 asthma. One patient had a severe exacerbation during p1, 2 patients during p2, and 5 patients were treated with systemic corticosteroids and inhaled β2 agonist during p3.Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that patients with asthma appeared not to be at risk for severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. Moreover, SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia did not induce severe asthma exacerbation

CT Imaging Assessment of Response to Treatment in Allergic Bronchopulmonary Aspergillosis in Adults With Bronchial Asthma

International audienceBackgroundOne of the major challenges in managing allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA) remains consistent and reproducible assessment of response to treatment.Research questionWhat are the most relevant changes in computed tomography (CT-scan) parameters over time for assessing response to treatment?Study Design and MethodsIn this ancillary study of a randomized clinical trial (NEBULAMB), asthmatic patients with available CT-scan and without exacerbation during a 4-month ABPA exacerbation treatment period (corticosteroids and itraconazole) were included. Changed CT-scan parameters were assessed by systematic analyses of CT-scan findings at initiation (M0) and end of treatment (M4). CT-scans were assessed by two radiologists blinded to the clinical data. Radiological parameters were determined by selecting those showing significant changes over time. Improvement of at least one, without worsening of the others, defined the radiological response. Agreement between radiological changes, clinical and immunologic responses was likewise investigated.ResultsAmong the 139 originally randomized patients, 132 were included. We identified 5 CT-scan parameters showing significant changes at M4: mucoid impaction extent, mucoid impaction density, centrilobular micronodules, consolidation/ground-glass opacities and bronchial wall thickening (P<0.05). These changes were only weakly associated with one another, except for mucoid impaction extent and density. No agreement was observed between clinical or immunologic and radiological responses, assessed as an overall response, or considering each of the parameters (Cohen’s κ, -0.01 to 0.24).InterpretationChanges in extent and density of mucoid impactions, centrilobular micronodules, consolidation/ground-glass opacities and thickening of the bronchial walls were found to be the most relevant CT-scan parameters to assess radiological response to treatment. A clinical, immunologic and radiological multidimensional approach should be adopted to assess outcomes, probably with a composite definition of response to treatment