Patient-centred digital biomarkers for allergic respiratory diseases and asthma: the ARIA-EAACI approach

Biomarkers for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of patients with rhinitis and/or asthma are urgently needed. Although some biologic biomarkers exist in specialist care for asthma, they cannot be largely used in primary care. There are no validated biomarkers in rhinitis or allergen immunotherapy (AIT) that can be used in clinical practice. The digital transformation of health and health care (including mHealth) places the patient at the centre of the health system and is likely to optimise the practice of allergy. ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma) and EAACI (European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology) developed a Task Force aimed at proposing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as digital biomarkers that can be easily used for different purposes in rhinitis and asthma. It first defined control digital biomarkers that should make a bridge between clinical practice, randomised controlled trials, observational real-life studies and allergen challenges. Using the MASK-air app as a model, a daily electronic combined symptom-medication score for allergic diseases (CSMS) or for asthma (e-DASTHMA), combined with a monthly control questionnaire, were embedded in a strategy similar to the diabetes approach for disease control. To mimic real-life, it secondly proposed quality-of-life digital biomarkers including daily EQ-5D visual analogue scales and the bi-weekly RhinAsthma Patient Perspective (RAAP). The potential implications for the management of allergic respiratory diseases were proposed.

Cutoff Values of MASK-air Patient-Reported Outcome Measures

BACKGROUND

In clinical and epidemiological studies, cutoffs of patient-reported outcome measures can be used to classify patients into groups of statistical and clinical relevance. However, visual analog scale (VAS) cutoffs in MASK-air have not been tested.

OBJECTIVE

To calculate cutoffs for VAS global, nasal, ocular, and asthma symptoms.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional study design of all MASK-air participants, we compared (1) approaches based on the percentiles (tertiles or quartiles) of VAS distributions and (2) data-driven approaches based on clusters of data from 2 comparators (VAS work and VAS sleep). We then performed sensitivity analyses for individual countries and for VAS levels corresponding to full allergy control. Finally, we tested the different approaches using MASK-air real-world cross-sectional and longitudinal data to assess the most relevant cutoffs.

RESULTS

We assessed 395,223 days from 23,201 MASK-air users with self-reported allergic rhinitis. The percentile-oriented approach resulted in lower cutoff values than the data-driven approach. We obtained consistent results in the data-driven approach. Following the latter, the proposed cutoff differentiating "controlled" and "partly-controlled" patients was similar to the cutoff value that had been arbitrarily used (20/100). However, a lower cutoff was obtained to differentiate between "partly-controlled" and "uncontrolled" patients (35 vs the arbitrarily-used value of 50/100).

CONCLUSIONS

Using a data-driven approach, we were able to define cutoff values for MASK-air VASs on allergy and asthma symptoms. This may allow for a better classification of patients with rhinitis and asthma according to different levels of control, supporting improved disease management.

Rhinitis associated with asthma is distinct from rhinitis alone: The ARIA-MeDALL hypothesis

Asthma, rhinitis and atopic dermatitis (AD) are interrelated clinical phenotypes that partly overlap in the human interactome. The concept of "one-airway-one-disease", coined over 20 years ago, is a simplistic approach of the links between upper- and lower-airway allergic diseases. With new data, it is time to reassess the concept. This article reviews (i) the clinical observations that led to Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA), (ii) new insights into polysensitisation and multimorbidity, (iii) advances in mHealth for novel phenotype definition, (iv) confirmation in canonical epidemiologic studies, (v) genomic findings, (vi) treatment approaches and (vii) novel concepts on the onset of rhinitis and multimorbidity. One recent concept, bringing together upper- and lower-airway allergic diseases with skin, gut and neuropsychiatric multimorbidities, is the "Epithelial Barrier Hypothesis". This review determined that the "one-airway-one-disease" concept does not always hold true and that several phenotypes of disease can be defined. These phenotypes include an extreme "allergic" (asthma) phenotype combining asthma, rhinitis and conjunctivitis. Rhinitis alone and rhinitis and asthma multimorbidity represent two distinct diseases with the following differences: (i) genomic and transcriptomic background (Toll-Like Receptors and IL-17 for rhinitis alone as a local disease; IL-33 and IL-5 for allergic and non-allergic multimorbidity as a systemic disease), (ii) allergen sensitisation patterns (mono- or pauci-sensitisation versus polysensitisation), (iii) severity of symptoms and (iv) treatment response. In conclusion, rhinitis alone (local disease) and rhinitis with asthma multimorbidity (systemic disease) should be considered as two distinct diseases, possibly modulated by the microbiome, and may be a model for understanding the epidemics of chronic and auto-immune diseases.

Digitally-enabled, patient-centred care in rhinitis and asthma multimorbidity: The ARIA-MASK-air® approach

MASK-air^® , a validated mHealth app (Medical Device regulation Class IIa) has enabled large observational implementation studies in over 58,000 people with allergic rhinitis and/or asthma. It can help to address unmet patient needs in rhinitis and asthma care. MASK-air^® is a Good Practice of DG Santé on digitally-enabled, patient-centred care. It is also a candidate Good Practice of OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). MASK-air^® data has enabled novel phenotype discovery and characterisation, as well as novel insights into the management of allergic rhinitis. MASK-air^® data show that most rhinitis patients (i) are not adherent and do not follow guidelines, (ii) use as-needed treatment, (iii) do not take medication when they are well, (iv) increase their treatment based on symptoms and (v) do not use the recommended treatment. The data also show that control (symptoms, work productivity, educational performance) is not always improved by medications. A combined symptom-medication score (ARIA-EAACI-CSMS) has been validated for clinical practice and trials. The implications of the novel MASK-air^® results should lead to change management in rhinitis and asthma.

Cutoff Values of MASK-air Patient-Reported Outcome Measures

BACKGROUND

In clinical and epidemiological studies, cutoffs of patient-reported outcome measures can be used to classify patients into groups of statistical and clinical relevance. However, visual analog scale (VAS) cutoffs in MASK-air have not been tested.

OBJECTIVE

To calculate cutoffs for VAS global, nasal, ocular, and asthma symptoms.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional study design of all MASK-air participants, we compared (1) approaches based on the percentiles (tertiles or quartiles) of VAS distributions and (2) data-driven approaches based on clusters of data from 2 comparators (VAS work and VAS sleep). We then performed sensitivity analyses for individual countries and for VAS levels corresponding to full allergy control. Finally, we tested the different approaches using MASK-air real-world cross-sectional and longitudinal data to assess the most relevant cutoffs.

RESULTS

We assessed 395,223 days from 23,201 MASK-air users with self-reported allergic rhinitis. The percentile-oriented approach resulted in lower cutoff values than the data-driven approach. We obtained consistent results in the data-driven approach. Following the latter, the proposed cutoff differentiating "controlled" and "partly-controlled" patients was similar to the cutoff value that had been arbitrarily used (20/100). However, a lower cutoff was obtained to differentiate between "partly-controlled" and "uncontrolled" patients (35 vs the arbitrarily-used value of 50/100).

CONCLUSIONS

Using a data-driven approach, we were able to define cutoff values for MASK-air VASs on allergy and asthma symptoms. This may allow for a better classification of patients with rhinitis and asthma according to different levels of control, supporting improved disease management.

Consistent trajectories of rhinitis control and treatment in 16,177 weeks: The MASK ‐air® longitudinal study

INTRODUCTION

Data from mHealth apps can provide valuable information on rhinitis control and treatment patterns. However, in MASK-air®, these data have only been analyzed cross-sectionally, without considering the changes of symptoms over time. We analyzed data from MASK-air® longitudinally, clustering weeks according to reported rhinitis symptoms.

METHODS

We analyzed MASK-air® data, assessing the weeks for which patients had answered a rhinitis daily questionnaire on all 7 days. We firstly used k-means clustering algorithms for longitudinal data to define clusters of weeks according to the trajectories of reported daily rhinitis symptoms. Clustering was applied separately for weeks when medication was reported or not. We compared obtained clusters on symptoms and rhinitis medication patterns. We then used the latent class mixture model to assess the robustness of results.

RESULTS

We analyzed 113,239 days (16,177 complete weeks) from 2590 patients (mean age ± SD = 39.1 ± 13.7 years). The first clustering algorithm identified ten clusters among weeks with medication use: seven with low variability in rhinitis control during the week and three with highly-variable control. Clusters with poorly-controlled rhinitis displayed a higher frequency of rhinitis co-medication, a more frequent change of medication schemes and more pronounced seasonal patterns. Six clusters were identified in weeks when no rhinitis medication was used, displaying similar control patterns. The second clustering method provided similar results. Moreover, patients displayed consistent levels of rhinitis control, reporting several weeks with similar levels of control.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified 16 patterns of weekly rhinitis control. Co-medication and medication change schemes were common in uncontrolled weeks, reinforcing the hypothesis that patients treat themselves according to their symptoms.

The Allergic Rhinitis and Its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) Approach of Value-Added Medicines: As-Needed Treatment in Allergic Rhinitis

Drug repurposing is a major field of value-added medicine. It involves investigating and evaluating existing drugs for new therapeutic purposes that address unmet healthcare needs. Several unmet needs in allergic rhinitis could be improved by drug repurposing. This could be game-changing for disease management. Current medications for allergic rhinitis are centered on continuous long-term treatment, and medication registration is based on randomized controlled trials carried out for a minimum of 14 days with adherence of 70% or greater. A new way of treating allergic rhinitis is to propose as-needed treatment depending on symptoms, rather than classical continuous treatment. This rostrum will discuss existing clinical trials on as-needed treatment for allergic rhinitis and real-world data obtained by the mobile health app MASK-air, which focuses on digitally-enabled, patient-centered care pathways.

Comparison of rhinitis treatments using MASK-air® data and considering the minimal important difference

BACKGROUND

Different treatments exist for allergic rhinitis (AR), including pharmacotherapy and allergen immunotherapy (AIT), but they have not been compared using direct patient data (i.e., "real-world data"). We aimed to compare AR pharmacological treatments on (i) daily symptoms, (ii) frequency of use in co-medication, (iii) visual analogue scales (VASs) on allergy symptom control considering the minimal important difference (MID) and (iv) the effect of AIT.

METHODS

We assessed the MASK-air® app data (May 2015-December 2020) by users self-reporting AR (16-90 years). We compared eight AR medication schemes on reported VAS of allergy symptoms, clustering data by the patient and controlling for confounding factors. We compared (i) allergy symptoms between patients with and without AIT and (ii) different drug classes used in co-medication.

RESULTS

We analysed 269,837 days from 10,860 users. Most days (52.7%) involved medication use. Median VAS levels were significantly higher in co-medication than in monotherapy (including the fixed combination azelastine-fluticasone) schemes. In adjusted models, azelastine-fluticasone was associated with lower average VAS global allergy symptoms than all other medication schemes, while the contrary was observed for oral corticosteroids. AIT was associated with a decrease in allergy symptoms in some medication schemes. A difference larger than the MID compared to no treatment was observed for oral steroids. Azelastine-fluticasone was the drug class with the lowest chance of being used in co-medication (adjusted OR = 0.75; 95% CI = 0.71-0.80).

CONCLUSION

Median VAS levels were higher in co-medication than in monotherapy. Patients with more severe symptoms report a higher treatment, which is currently not reflected in guidelines.

Omics technologies in allergy and asthma research: An EAACI position paper

Allergic diseases and asthma are heterogenous chronic inflammatory conditions with several distinct complex endotypes. Both environmental and genetic factors can influence the development and progression of allergy. Complex pathogenetic pathways observed in allergic disorders present a challenge in patient management and successful targeted treatment strategies. The increasing availability of high-throughput omics technologies, such as genomics, epigenomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics allows studying biochemical systems and pathophysiological processes underlying allergic responses. Additionally, omics techniques present clinical applicability by functional identification and validation of biomarkers. Therefore, finding molecules or patterns characteristic for distinct immune-inflammatory endotypes, can subsequently influence its development, progression, and treatment. There is a great potential to further increase the effectiveness of single omics approaches by integrating them with other omics, and nonomics data. Systems biology aims to simultaneously and longitudinally understand multiple layers of a complex and multifactorial disease, such as allergy, or asthma by integrating several, separated data sets and generating a complete molecular profile of the condition. With the use of sophisticated biostatistics and machine learning techniques, these approaches provide in-depth insight into individual biological systems and will allow efficient and customized healthcare approaches, called precision medicine. In this EAACI Position Paper, the Task Force "Omics technologies in allergic research" broadly reviewed current advances and applicability of omics techniques in allergic diseases and asthma research, with a focus on methodology and data analysis, aiming to provide researchers (basic and clinical) with a desk reference in the field. The potential of omics strategies in understanding disease pathophysiology and key tools to reach unmet needs in allergy precision medicine, such as successful patients' stratification, accurate disease prognosis, and prediction of treatment efficacy and successful prevention measures are highlighted.

EAACI Biologicals Guidelines-Omalizumab for the treatment of chronic spontaneous urticaria in adults and in the paediatric population 12-17 years old

Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) imposes a significant burden on patients, families and healthcare systems. Management is difficult, due to disease heterogeneity and insufficient efficacy of classical drugs such as H₁ R-antihistamines. Better understanding of the mechanisms has enabled a stratified approach to the management of CSU, supporting the use of targeted treatment with omalizumab. However, many practical issues including selection of responders, the definition of response, strategies to enhance the responder rate, the duration of treatment and its regimen (in the clinic or home-based) and its cost-effectiveness still require further clarification. The EAACI Guidelines on the use of omalizumab in CSU follow the GRADE approach in formulating recommendations for each outcome. In addition, future therapeutic approaches and perspectives as well as research priorities are discussed.

Efficacy and safety of treatment with biologicals for severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: A systematic review for the EAACI guidelines

This systematic review evaluates the efficacy and safety of biologicals for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) compared with the standard of care. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for RCTs. Critical and important CRSwNP-related outcomes were considered. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. RCTs evaluated (dupilumab-2, omalizumab-4, mepolizumab-2, and reslizumab-1) included 1236 adults, with follow-up of 20-64 weeks. Dupilumab reduces the need for surgery (NFS) or oral corticosteroid (OCS) use (RR 0.28; 95% CI 0.20-0.39, moderate certainty) and improves with high certainty smell evaluated with UPSIT score (mean difference (MD) +10.54; 95% CI +9.24 to +11.84) and quality of life (QoL) evaluated with SNOT-22 (MD -19.14; 95% CI -22.80 to -15.47), with fewer treatment-related adverse events (TAEs) (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.89-1.02, moderate certainty). Omalizumab reduces NFS (RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.78-0.92, high certainty), decreases OCS use (RR 0.38; 95% CI 0.10-1.38, moderate certainty), and improves high certainty smell (MD +3.84; 95% CI +3.64 to +4.04) and QoL (MD -15.65; 95% CI -16.16 to -15.13), with increased TAE (RR 1.73; 95% CI 0.60-5.03, moderate certainty). There is low certainty for mepolizumab reducing NFS (RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.64-0.94) and improving QoL (MD -13.3; 95% CI -23.93 to -2.67) and smell (MD +0.7; 95% CI -0.48 to +1.88), with increased TAEs (RR 1.64; 95% CI 0.41-6.50). The evidence for reslizumab is very uncertain.

Differentiation of COVID-19 signs and symptoms from allergic rhinitis and common cold: An ARIA-EAACI-GA2 LEN consensus

Background

Although there are many asymptomatic patients, one of the problems of COVID‐19 is early recognition of the disease. COVID‐19 symptoms are polymorphic and may include upper respiratory symptoms. However, COVID‐19 symptoms may be mistaken with the common cold or allergic rhinitis. An ARIA‐EAACI study group attempted to differentiate upper respiratory symptoms between the three diseases.

Methods

A modified Delphi process was used. The ARIA members who were seeing COVID‐19 patients were asked to fill in a questionnaire on the upper airway symptoms of COVID‐19, common cold and allergic rhinitis.

Results

Among the 192 ARIA members who were invited to respond to the questionnaire, 89 responded and 87 questionnaires were analysed. The consensus was then reported. A two‐way ANOVA revealed significant differences in the symptom intensity between the three diseases (p < .001).

Conclusions

This modified Delphi approach enabled the differentiation of upper respiratory symptoms between COVID‐19, the common cold and allergic rhinitis. An electronic algorithm will be devised using the questionnaire.

Vaccines and allergic reactions: The past, the current COVID-19 pandemic, and future perspectives

Vaccines are essential public health tools with a favorable safety profile and prophylactic effectiveness that have historically played significant roles in reducing infectious disease burden in populations, when the majority of individuals are vaccinated. The COVID-19 vaccines are expected to have similar positive impacts on health across the globe. While serious allergic reactions to vaccines are rare, their underlying mechanisms and implications for clinical management should be considered to provide individuals with the safest care possible. In this review, we provide an overview of different types of allergic adverse reactions that can potentially occur after vaccination and individual vaccine components capable of causing the allergic adverse reactions. We present the incidence of allergic adverse reactions during clinical studies and through post-authorization and post-marketing surveillance and provide plausible causes of these reactions based on potential allergenic components present in several common vaccines. Additionally, we review implications for individual diagnosis and management and vaccine manufacturing overall. Finally, we suggest areas for future research.

Management of anaphylaxis due to COVID-19 vaccines in the elderly

Older adults, especially men and/or those with diabetes, hypertension, and/or obesity, are prone to severe COVID‐19. In some countries, older adults, particularly those residing in nursing homes, have been prioritized to receive COVID‐19 vaccines due to high risk of death. In very rare instances, the COVID‐19 vaccines can induce anaphylaxis, and the management of anaphylaxis in older people should be considered carefully. An ARIA‐EAACI‐EuGMS (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma, European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, and European Geriatric Medicine Society) Working Group has proposed some recommendations for older adults receiving the COVID‐19 vaccines. Anaphylaxis to COVID‐19 vaccines is extremely rare (from 1 per 100,000 to 5 per million injections). Symptoms are similar in younger and older adults but they tend to be more severe in the older patients. Adrenaline is the mainstay treatment and should be readily available. A flowchart is proposed to manage anaphylaxis in the older patients.

EAACI Biologicals Guidelines-dupilumab for children and adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis imposes a significant burden on patients, families and healthcare systems. Management is difficult, due to disease heterogeneity, co-morbidities, complexity in care pathways and differences between national or regional healthcare systems. Better understanding of the mechanisms has enabled a stratified approach to the management of atopic dermatitis, supporting the use of targeted treatments with biologicals. However, there are still many issues that require further clarification. These include the definition of response, strategies to enhance the responder rate, the duration of treatment and its regimen (in the clinic or home-based), its cost-effectiveness and long-term safety. The EAACI Guidelines on the use of dupilumab in atopic dermatitis follow the GRADE approach in formulating recommendations for each outcome and age group. In addition, future approaches and research priorities are discussed.

Jares E, Jarvis D, Jassem E, Jenko K, Jiméneracruz Uscanga RD, Johnston SL, Joos G, Jošt M, Julge K, Jung K, Just J, Jutel M, Kaidashev I, Kalayci O, Kalyoncu F, Kapsali J, Kardas P, Karjalainen J, Kasala CA, Katotomichelakis M, Kavaliukaite L, Kazi BS, Keil T, Keith P, Khaitov M, Khaltaev N, Kim Y, Kirenga B, Kleine‐Tebbe J, Klimek L, Koffi N’Goran B, Kompoti E, Kopač P, Koppelman G, KorenJeverica A, Koskinen S, Košnik M, Kostov KV, Kowalski ML, Kralimarkova T, Kramer Vrščaj K, Kraxner H, Kreft S, Kritikos V, Kudlay D, Kuitunen M, Kull I, Kuna P, Kupczyk M, Kvedariene V, Kyriakakou M, Lalek N, Landi M, Lane S, Larenas‐Linnemann D, Lau S, Laune D, Lavrut J, Le L, Lenzenhuber M, Lessa M, Levin M, Li J, Lieberman P, Liotta G, Lipworth B, Liu X, Lobo R, Lodrup Carlsen KC, Lombardi C, Louis R, Loukidis S, Lourenço O, Luna Pech JA, Madjar B, Maggi E, Magnan A, Mahboub B, Mair A, Mais Y, Maitland van der Zee A, Makela M, Makris M, Malling H, Mandajieva M, Manning P, Manousakis M, Maragoudakis P, Marseglia G, Marshall G, Reza Masjedi M, Máspero JF, Matta Campos JJ, Maurer M, Mavale‐Manuel S, Meço C, Melén E, Melioli G, Melo‐Gomes E, Meltzer EO, Menditto E, Menzies‐Gow A, Merk H, Michel J, Micheli Y, Miculinic N, Midão L, Mihaltan F, Mikos N, Milanese M, Milenkovic B, Mitsias D, Moalla B, Moda G, Mogica Martínez MD, Mohammad Y, Moin M, Molimard M, Momas I, Mommers M, Monaco A, Montefort S, Mora D, Morais‐Almeida M, Mösges R, Mostafa B, Mullol J, Münter L, Muraro A, Murray R, Musarra A, Mustakov T, Naclerio R, Nadeau KC, Nadif R, Nakonechna A, Namazova‐Baranova L, Navarro‐Locsin G, Neffen H, Nekam K, Neou A, Nettis E, Neuberger D, Nicod L, Nicola S, Niederberger‐Leppin V, Niedoszytko M, Nieto A, Novellino E, Nunes E, Nyembue D, O’Hehir R, Odjakova C, Ohta K, Okamoto Y, Okubo K, Oliver B, Onorato GL, Pia Orru M, Ouédraogo S, Ouoba K, Paggiaro PL, Pagkalos A, Pajno G, Pala G, Palaniappan S, Pali‐Schöll I, Palkonen S, Palmer S, Panaitescu Bunu C, Panzner P, Papadopoulos NG, Papanikolaou V, Papi A, Paralchev B, Paraskevopoulos G, Park H, Passalacqua G, Patella V, Pavord I, Pawankar R, Pedersen S, Peleve S, Pellegino S, Pereira A, Pérez T, Perna A, Peroni D, Pfaar O, Pham‐Thi N, Pigearias B, Pin I, Piskou K, Pitsios C, Plavec D, Poethig D, Pohl W, Poplas Susic A, Popov TA, Portejoie F, Potter P, Poulsen L, Prados‐Torres A, Prarros F, Price D, Prokopakis E, Puggioni F, Puig‐Domenech E, Puy R, Rabe K, Raciborski F, Ramos J, Recto MT, Reda SM, Regateiro FS, Reider N, Reitsma S, Repka‐Ramirez S, Ridolo E, Rimmer J, Rivero Yeverino D, Angelo Rizzo J, Robalo‐Cordeiro C, Roberts G, Roche N, Rodríguez González M, Rodríguez Zagal E, Rolla G, Rolland C, Roller‐Wirnsberger R, Roman Rodriguez M, Romano A, Romantowski J, Rombaux P, Romualdez J, Rosado‐Pinto J, Rosario N, Rosenwasser L, Rossi O, Rottem M, Rouadi P, Rovina N, Rozman Sinur I, Ruiz M, Ruiz Segura LT, Ryan D, Sagara H, Sakai D, Sakurai D, Saleh W, Salimaki J, Samitas K, Samolinski B, Sánchez Coronel MG, Sanchez‐Borges M, Sanchez‐Lopez J, Sarafoleanu C, Sarquis Serpa F, Sastre‐Dominguez J, Savi E, Sawaf B, Scadding GK, Scheire S, Schmid‐Grendelmeier P, Schuhl JF, Schunemann H, Schvalbová M, Schwarze J, Scichilone N, Senna G, Sepúlveda C, Serrano E, Shields M, Shishkov V, Siafakas N, Simeonov A, FER Simons E, Carlos Sisul J, Sitkauskiene B, Skrindo I, SokličKošak T, Solé D, Sooronbaev T, Soto‐Martinez M, Soto‐Quiros M, Sousa Pinto B, Sova M, Soyka M, Specjalski K, Spranger O, Stamataki S, Stefanaki L, Stellato C, Stelmach R, Strandberg T, Stute P, Subramaniam A, Suppli Ulrik C, Sutherland M, Sylvestre S, Syrigou A, Taborda Barata L, Takovska N, Tan R, Tan F, Tan V, Ping Tang I, Taniguchi M, Tannert L, Tantilipikorn P, Tattersall J, Tesi F, Thijs C, Thomas M, To T, Todo‐Bom A, Togias A, Tomazic P, Tomic‐Spiric V, Toppila‐Salmi S, Toskala E, Triggiani M, Triller N, Triller K, Tsiligianni I, Uberti M, Ulmeanu R, Urbancic J, Urrutia Pereira M, Vachova M, Valdés F, Valenta R, Valentin Rostan M, Valero A, Valiulis A, Vallianatou M, Valovirta E, Van Eerd M, Van Ganse E, Hage M, Vandenplas O, Vasankari T, Vassileva D, Velasco Munoz C, Ventura MT, Vera‐Munoz C, Vicheva D, Vichyanond P, Vidgren P, Viegi G, Vogelmeier C, Von Hertzen L, Vontetsianos T, Vourdas D, Tran Thien Quan V, Wagenmann M, Walker S, Wallace D, Wang DY, Waserman S, Wickman M, Williams S, Williams D, Wilson N, Wong G, Woo K, Wright J, Wroczynski P, Xepapadaki P, Yakovliev P, Yamaguchi M, Yan K, Yeow Yap Y, Yawn B, Yiallouros P, Yorgancioglu A, Yoshihara S, Young I, Yusuf OB, Zaidi A, Zaitoun F, Zar H, Zedda M, Zernotti ME, Zhang L, Zhong N, Zidarn M, Zubrinich C. Cabbage and fermented vegetables: From death rate heterogeneity in countries to candidates for mitigation strategies of severe COVID-19

Large differences in COVID‐19 death rates exist between countries and between regions of the same country. Some very low death rate countries such as Eastern Asia, Central Europe, or the Balkans have a common feature of eating large quantities of fermented foods. Although biases exist when examining ecological studies, fermented vegetables or cabbage have been associated with low death rates in European countries. SARS‐CoV‐2 binds to its receptor, the angiotensin‐converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). As a result of SARS‐CoV‐2 binding, ACE2 downregulation enhances the angiotensin II receptor type 1 (AT₁R) axis associated with oxidative stress. This leads to insulin resistance as well as lung and endothelial damage, two severe outcomes of COVID‐19. The nuclear factor (erythroid‐derived 2)‐like 2 (Nrf2) is the most potent antioxidant in humans and can block in particular the AT₁R axis. Cabbage contains precursors of sulforaphane, the most active natural activator of Nrf2. Fermented vegetables contain many lactobacilli, which are also potent Nrf2 activators. Three examples are: kimchi in Korea, westernized foods, and the slum paradox. It is proposed that fermented cabbage is a proof‐of‐concept of dietary manipulations that may enhance Nrf2‐associated antioxidant effects, helpful in mitigating COVID‐19 severity.

Efficacy and safety of dupilumab for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: A systematic review for the EAACI biologicals guidelines

This systematic review evaluates the efficacy, safety and economic impact of dupilumab compared to standard of care for uncontrolled moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD). Pubmed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched for RCTs and health economic evaluations. Critical and important AD-related outcomes were considered. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. Seven RCTs including 1845 subjects >12 years treated with dupilumab 16 to 52 weeks were evaluated. For adults, there is high certainty that dupilumab decreases SCORAD (MD -30,72; 95% CI -34,65% to -26,79%) and EASI-75 (RR 3.09; 95% CI 2.45 to 3.89), pruritus (RR 2.96; 95% CI 2.37 to 3.70), rescue medication (RR 3.46; 95% CI 2.79 to 4.30), sleep disturbance (MD -7.29; 95% CI -8.23 to -6.35) and anxiety/depression (MD -3.08; 95% CI -4.41 to -1.75) and improves quality of life (MD -4.80; 95% CI -5.55 to -4.06). The efficacy for adolescents is similar. Dupilumab-related adverse events (AEs) slightly increase (low certainty). The evidence for dupilumab-related serious AE is uncertain. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ranged from 28 500 £ (low certainty) to 124 541 US$ (moderate certainty). More data on long-term safety are needed both for children and for adults, together with more efficacy data in the paediatric population. Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42020153645).

EAACI Biologicals Guidelines-Recommendations for severe asthma

Severe asthma imposes a significant burden on patients, families and healthcare systems. Management is difficult, due to disease heterogeneity, co-morbidities, complexity in care pathways and differences between national or regional healthcare systems. Better understanding of the mechanisms has enabled a stratified approach to the management of severe asthma, supporting the use of targeted treatments with biologicals. However, there are still many issues that require further clarification. These include selection of a certain biological (as they all target overlapping disease phenotypes), the definition of response, strategies to enhance the responder rate, the duration of treatment and its regimen (in the clinic or home-based) and its cost-effectiveness. The EAACI Guidelines on the use of biologicals in severe asthma follow the GRADE approach in formulating recommendations for each biological and each outcome. In addition, a management algorithm for the use of biologicals in the clinic is proposed, together with future approaches and research priorities.

Efficacy and safety of treatment with omalizumab for chronic spontaneous urticaria: A systematic review for the EAACI Biologicals Guidelines

This systematic review evaluates the efficacy and safety of omalizumab for chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU). PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for RCTs. Critical and important CSU-related outcomes were considered. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. Ten RCTs including 1620 subjects aged 12 to 75 years old treated with omalizumab for 16 to 40 weeks were evaluated. Omalizumab 150 mg does not result in clinically meaningful improvement (high certainty) of the urticaria activity score (UAS)7 (mean difference (MD) -5; 95%CI -7.75 to -2.25), and the itch severity score (ISS)7 (MD -2.15; 95% CI -3.2 to -1.1) does not increase (moderate certainty) quality of life (QoL) (Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI); MD -2.01; 95%CI -3.22 to -0.81) and decreases (moderate certainty) rescue medication use (MD -1.68; 95%CI -2.95 to -0.4). Omalizumab 300 mg results in clinically meaningful improvements (moderate certainty) of the UAS7 (MD -11.05; 95%CI -12.87 to -9.24), the ISS7 (MD -4.45; 95%CI -5.39 to -3.51), and QoL (high certainty) (DLQI; MD -4.03; 95% CI -5.56 to -2.5) and decreases (moderate certainty) rescue medication use (MD -2.04; 95%CI -3.19 to -0.88) and drug-related serious AEs (RR 0.77; 95%CI 0.20 to 2.91).