Latin American anaphylaxis registry

Background: Recent data about clinical features, triggers and management of anaphylaxis in Latin America is lacking. Objective: To provide updated and extended data on anaphylaxis in this region. Method: An online questionnaire was used, with 67 allergy units involved from 12 Latin-American countries and Spain. Among data recorded, demographic information, clinical features, severity, triggering agents, and treatment were received. Results: Eight hundred and seventeen anaphylactic reactions were recorded. No difference in severity, regardless of pre-existing allergy or asthma history was found. Drug induced anaphylaxis (DIA) was most frequent (40.6%), followed by food induced anaphylaxis (FIA) (32.9%) and venom induced anaphylaxis (VIA) (12%). FIA and VIA were more common in children-adolescents. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and beta-lactam antibiotics (BLA) were the most frequent drugs involved. Milk (61.1% of FIA) and egg (15.4% of FIA) in children, and shellfish (25.5% of FIA), fresh fruits (14.2% of FIA), and fish (11.3% of FIA) in adults were the most common FIA triggers. Fire ants were the most frequent insect triggers, and they induced more severe reactions than triggers of FIA and DIA (p < 0.0001). Epinephrine was used in 43.8% of anaphylaxis episodes. After Emergency Department treatment, epinephrine was prescribed to 13% of patients. Conclusions: Drugs (NSAIDs and BLA), foods (milk and egg in children and shellfish, fruits and fish in adults) and fire ants were the most common inducers of anaphylaxis. Epinephrine was used in less than half of the episodes emphasizing the urgent need to improve dissemination and implementation of anaphylaxis guidelines.Revisión por pare

Hypersensitivity Drug Reactions (HDR) In Latin America : Similarities and Differences Between Children and Adults

HDR are frequent motives for consultation in Allergology services. Possible etiologic factors and clinical presentation differences between Latin American children and adults have not been described yet.Facultad de Ciencias Médica

“Chronic urticaria and obstructive sleep apnea: Is there a significant association?”

Background Few studies have explored the association between obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and chronic urticaria (CU). Our study aims to fill this gap by determining the frequency of the risk categories for OSA and how they might correlate with the specific CU patient reported outcome measures urticaria activity score (UAS7), urticaria control test (UCT) and CU quality of life questionnaire (CU-Q2oL). Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study involving a cohort of 171 Latin American CU patients. Descriptive statistics were used to determine frequency and proportions for demographic and clinical variables, while a chi-squared test for association between STOP-Bang OSA questionnaire categories and both UAS7 and UCT categories was performed to analyze how such variables interact. To further assess the strength of the correlation a Cramer's V coefficient was reported. Finally, a Kendall-Tau b correlation coefficient was performed to measure the correlation between the STOP-Bang score and other independent continuous variables. Results The average STOP-Bang score was 2.5, with 24% and 21% of patients falling into the intermediate and high-risk category for moderate-to-severe OSA, respectively. There was a strong statistically significant association (Cramer's V = 0.263; p = .000) between UAS-7 categories and STOP-Bang risk categories. A similar pattern of strong significant association (Cramer's V = .269; p = .002) was observed between UCT categories and STOP-Bang risk categories. A weak positive correlation between the STOP-Bang score and the CU-Q2oL average score (τb = 0.188, p = .001) was identified. Overall, 72.5% patients reported limitations with respect to sleep in a varied degree according to the CU-Q2oL. Conclusions Our results suggest that a considerable proportion of patients with CU are at intermediate to high risk for OSA. Higher disease activity, poor CU control, and worse quality of life were all found to be associated with an increased risk. Additional studies are needed to determine the exact link between these conditions, and to determine whether screening and treatment for OSA might benefit patients with CU

Learnings from real-life experience of using omalizumab for chronic urticaria in Latin America

Background: Updated urticaria guidelines recommend that patients should be assessed for disease activity, severity, control, and quality of life at baseline and follow up. Regarding treatment, guidelines consider second generation antihistamines as the cornerstone in therapy for chronic urticaria (CU), while other drugs, such as omalizumab, are conceived as second-line alternatives. In regards to omalizumab, despite advances in the management of CU, there are still open questions about timing, dosing, and objective measures for clinical response. This study was designed to portray the use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in chronic urticaria management, as well as the effectiveness and treatment patterns of omalizumab in CU, as seen in a real-life setting in Latin America. Methods: This is a retrospective observational study, involving 72 Latin American patients with chronic urticaria treated with omalizumab. Patient reported outcomes and treatment patterns, response, quality of life improvement and discontinuation were analyzed. Results: From the 72 patients, 91.7% (n = 66) were assessed through PROs, where urticaria control test (UCT) was the most used (79.2%; n = 57). Overall, 80.0% (n = 44) responded to omalizumab at some point of the treatment. Omalizumab 300 mg was associated with earlier response compared to lower doses. Regardless of dosage, most patients assessed with CU-Q2oL improved quality of life (80.8%; n = 21). With respect to omalizumab discontinuation, 20.8% (n = 15) patients interrupted omalizumab before the 3rd month of treatment (p = .000). Conclusions: The present study highlights how the use of PROs and omalizumab in Latin America differ from guidelines’ recommendations and clinical trials. Even though most patients were initiated under omalizumab 300 mg, most of them finished with lower doses. Regardless of dosage, most patients responded to omalizumab and improved quality of life at some point during treatment. However, such features were seen earlier with omalizumab 300 mg. Regarding treatment discontinuation, one-fifth of patients interrupted omalizumab before the third month. Keywords: Chronic spontaneous urticaria, Patient-reported outcomes, Omalizumab, Quality of life, Latin Americ

Aeroallergen immunotherapy associated with reduced risk of severe COVID-19 in 1095 allergic patients

Introduction: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) brings along changes in the immune system, restoring dendritic cell function, reducing T2 inflammation and augmenting the regulatory cell activation. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections, interferes with the immune system causing immune suppression during the first phase and over-activation in more advanced disease. We decided to explore the interaction of both in a real-world observational trial. Methods: We registered COVID-19 outcomes in patients with allergic disorders in Latin America, treated with and without AIT. The registry was conducted during the first 1.3 years of the pandemic, with most of the data collected before COVID-19 vaccination was concluded in most countries. Data collection was anonymous via a web-based instrument. Ten countries participated. Results: 630/1095 (57.6%) of the included patients received AIT. Compared to patients without AIT, those treated with AIT had a reduced risk ratio (RR) for COVID-19 lower respiratory symptoms (RR 0.78, 95% CI: 0.6703–0.9024; p = 0.001662) and need for oxygen therapy (RR 0.65, 95% CI: 0.4217–0.9992; p = 0.048). In adherent patients on maintenance sublingual immunotherapy/subcutaneous immunotherapy (SLIT/SCIT) the RR reduction was larger [RR = 0.6136 (95% CI 0.4623–0.8143; p < 0.001) and RR: 0.3495 (95% CI 0.1822–0.6701; p < 0.005), respectively]. SLIT was slightly more effective (NS). We excluded age, comorbidities, level of health care attendance, and type of allergic disorder as confounders, although asthma was related to a higher frequency of severe disease. When analyzing patients with allergic asthma (n = 503) the RR reduction favoring AIT was more pronounced with 30% for lower respiratory symptoms or worse (RR 0.6914, 95% CI 0.5264 to 0.9081, p = 0.0087) and 51% for need of oxygen therapy or worse (RR 0.4868, 95% CI 0.2829–0.8376, p = 0.0082). Among severe allergic patients treated with biologics (n = 24) only 2/24 needed oxygen therapy. There were no critical cases among them. Conclusion: In our registry AIT was associated with reduced COVID-19 severity