Stabilization of activated mast cells by ORAI1 inhibitor suppresses peanut-induced anaphylaxis and acute diarrhea

Mast cell (MC) activation triggered by immunoglobulin E (IgE)-antigen crosslinking involves intracellular Ca2+ influx through the ORAI1 channel, which precedes granule exteriorization and de novo synthesis of mediators. Pharmacologically suppressing MCs via the inhibition of the ORAI1 Ca2+ channel may represent a potential strategy for preventing anaphylaxis. This study demonstrated that peanut-induced anaphylaxis in sensitized mice resulted in significant hypothermia and acute diarrhea. Utilizing the Mcpt5cre-DTA mouse model, we demonstrated that this anaphylactic response was mediated by IgE-antigen-induced MC activation. Prophylactic administration of MC suppressors was an effective means of preventing peanut-induced anaphylaxis. In addition, we observed the potent efficacy of an ORAI1 inhibitor in suppressing the FcεRI-mediated response of murine or human MCs, even when administered concurrently or post-allergen exposure. Mechanistically, the ORAI1 inhibitor was found to prevent the association of Synaptotagmin-2 with the SNARE complex. In an in vivo mouse model of peanut-induced anaphylaxis, the administration of the ORAI1 inhibitor after allergen challenge effectively suppressed allergic acute diarrhea and ameliorated anaphylaxis. Therefore, pharmacological intervention of ORAI1 channel inhibition in MCs represents a promising therapeutic avenue for the treatment of peanut-induced anaphylaxis and acute diarrhea in vivo.

Innovations in the treatment of anaphylaxis: A review of recent data

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The current standard of first-line emergency treatment of anaphylaxis is intramuscular (IM) epinephrine, mostly administered through epinephrine autoinjector (EAI) in the outpatient setting. However, undercarriage and underuse of EAIs are common, and delayed epinephrine use is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals have expressed a strong desire for small, needle-free devices and products that would offer improved carriage, ease of use, and more convenient, less invasive routes of epinephrine administration. Novel mechanisms of epinephrine administration are under investigation to help address several recognized EAI limitations. This review explores innovative nasal and oral products under investigation for the outpatient emergency treatment of anaphylaxis.

FINDINGS

Human studies of epinephrine administered through nasal epinephrine spray, a nasal powder spray, and a sublingual film have been conducted. Data from these studies indicate promising pharmacokinetic results comparable to those of the standard of outpatient emergency care (0.3-mg EAI) and syringe and needle IM epinephrine administration. Several products have shown maximum plasma concentration values higher than those of the 0.3-mg EAI and manual IM injection, although it remains unclear whether this has clinical relevancy in patient outcomes. Generally, these modalities show comparable time to maximum concentrations. Pharmacodynamic changes observed with these products are comparable to or more robust than those seen with EAI and manual IM injection.

SUMMARY

Given comparable or superior pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic results and safety of innovative epinephrine therapies to those of current standards of care, US Food and Drug Administration approval of these products may help address numerous barriers that EAIs present. The ease of use and carriage and favorable safety profiles of needle-free treatments may make them an attractive alternative to patients and caregivers, potentially addressing injection fears, needle-based safety risks, and other reasons for lack of or delayed use.

The Need for Required Stock Epinephrine in All Schools: A Work Group Report of the AAAAI Adverse Reactions to Foods Committee

Epinephrine is the first line of treatment for anaphylaxis that can occur outside a medical setting in community environments such as schools. Patients with diagnosed IgE-mediated food allergy at risk of anaphylaxis are prescribed self-injectable epinephrine and given an individualized anaphylaxis action plan. As students, such patients/families provide their school with completed medication forms, a copy of their anaphylaxis plan, and additional student-specific epinephrine. However, students approved to self-carry prescribed self-injectable epinephrine may forget to do so or have other reasons for lacking prescribed epinephrine such as familial inability to fill the prescription due to cost or other access barriers. Undiagnosed students lacking prescribed epinephrine may also experience anaphylaxis at school. The presence of non-student-specific school stock epinephrine allows school nurses and other staff the ability to treat anaphylaxis onsite while awaiting Emergency Medical Services. Notably, not all states legally mandate K-12 schools to stock epinephrine. In states with laws only voluntarily allowing schools to stock epinephrine, it provides the ability to opt-out. Herein, we present a comprehensive review of barriers to school stock epinephrine, related improvement strategies, and workgroup recommendations supporting the need for mandated stock epinephrine in all schools in every state. Proposed solutions include ensuring legal immunity from liability for prescribers; advocacy for legislation to stabilize cost of self-injectable epinephrine; educational initiatives to schools promoting merits and safety of epinephrine and related anaphylaxis training; and partnerships between patient advocacy groups, medical and nursing organizations, public health departments and other health professionals to promote laws and district policies addressing need for stock epinephrine and school nurses to train and supervise school staff.

Evaluating the Food Allergy Passport: A Novel Food Allergy Clinical Support Tool

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of pediatric food allergy (FA) has increased in the past 2 decades. The previous literature suggests that FA presents burdens, both economically and psychosocially, to children and their caregivers, especially families in lower-income strata. Using data from a previously published needs assessment, the Food Allergy Management in Low-Income Youth study, the FA Passport and Workbook tools were developed to address identified needs.

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the utility of the FA Passport in helping families insured by Medicaid to manage FA better and improve quality of life.

METHODS

Families insured through Illinois Medicaid were recruited from two Chicago-based allergy clinics. Caregivers of children with FA completed a pretest evaluating knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and practices regarding FA management. A clinician guided caregivers through the FA Passport. The caregivers then completed a posttest immediately afterward and again 3 months later. Changes were evaluated from baseline responses and direct feedback was elicited about the tool.

RESULTS

The FA Passport successfully improved caregiver-reported confidence with epinephrine autoinjector use (from 69% to 93%), caregiver anaphylaxis recognition (from 66% to 73%), and reported quality of life, and it nearly doubled caregiver comfort regarding leaving the child in the care of others (from 40% to 75.7%). Caregivers rated the FA Passport tool as extremely helpful overall (9.4 out of 10).

CONCLUSIONS

The FA Passport is a novel FA clinical support tool that addresses barriers to proper FA management described in previous studies. It proved effective at improving caregiver comfort with regarding leaving the food-allergic children with other caregivers, increasing FA knowledge, and improving the quality of life in families affected by FA.

Standards for practical intravenous rapid drug desensitization & delabeling: A WAO committee statement

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) to intravenous drugs can be severe and might leave patients and doctors in a difficult position where an essential treatment or intervention has to be suspended. Even if virtually any intravenous medication can potentially trigger a life-threatening DHR, chemotherapeutics, biologics, and antibiotics are amongst the intravenous drugs most frequently involved in these reactions. Admittedly, suspending such treatments may negatively impact the survival outcomes or the quality of life of affected patients. Delabeling pathways and rapid drug desensitization (RDD) can help reactive patients stay on first-choice therapies instead of turning to less efficacious, less cost-effective, or more toxic alternatives. However, these are high-complexity and high-risk techniques, which usually need expert teams and allergy-specific techniques (skin testing, in vitro testing, drug provocation testing) to ensure safety, an accurate diagnosis, and personalized management. Unfortunately, there are significant inequalities within and among countries in access to allergy departments with the necessary expertise and resources to offer these techniques and tackle these DHRs optimally. The main objective of this consensus document is to create a great benefit for patients worldwide by aiding allergists to expand the scope of their practice and support them with evidence, data, and experience from leading groups from around the globe. This statement of the Drug Hypersensitivity Committee of the World Allergy Organization (WAO) aims to be a comprehensive practical guide on the technical aspects of implementing acute-onset intravenous hypersensitivity delabeling and RDD for a wide range of drugs. Thus, the manuscript does not only focus on clinical pathways. Instead, it also provides guidance on topics usually left unaddressed, namely, internal validation, continuous quality improvement, creating a healthy multidisciplinary environment, and redesigning care (including a specific supplemental section on a real-life example of how to design a dedicated space that can combine basic and complex diagnostic and therapeutic techniques in allergy).

Effects of a 90-min educational intervention for patients with insect venom allergy: a prospective controlled pilot study

Background

Anaphylactic sting reactions need a prompt management. A structured educational intervention for patients with insect sting allergy has not been implemented so far. The purpose of this study was to analyze the effects of a structured 90-min educational intervention for patients with insect sting allergy.

Methods

Patients with an insect venom allergy were offered to participate in a structured 90-min group education (intervention group (IG)) or to attend a control group (CG). The patients’ subjective self-assurance in using the emergency medication, the willingness to always carry the emergency medication, the mental health status, absolute one-time willingness-to-pay (WTP) for complete cure, a disease knowledge assessment and a simulation test to examine the ability to manage an acute sting reaction were estimated at baseline (t0) and at follow-up (t1) as outcome parameters.

Results

55 patients participated in the IG (n = 25, 52.0% female, mean age 55.9 years) or the CG (n = 30, 56.7% female, mean age 52.0 years). Both arms showed a significant gain in self-assurance in using the emergency medication (IG: 6.1 at t0 vs. 8.6 at t1, p < 0.0001 and CG: 7.1 vs. 8.0, p = 0.0062) and ability to manage an acute sting reaction (IG: 6.7 vs. 11.4, p < 0.0001 and CG: 9.0 vs. 10.5, p = 0.0002) at t1. However, trained participants showed a significantly higher gain in the respective parameters. There were no significant changes regarding the remaining examined outcome parameters.

Conclusions

Patients who are willing to invest 90 min in a patient education intervention benefit significantly by an increased subjective and objective empowerment to manage an acute sting reaction.

The Ability to Use Epinephrine Autoinjector in Patients Who Receive Prescription Immediately after Anaphylaxis

BACKGROUND

Epinephrine autoinjector (EAI) is prescribed to prevent a fatal outcome in the case of a repeated anaphylactic reactions. We wanted to determine how adult patients who received their first prescription as part of an urgent treatment of an anaphylactic reaction or at their family physician were instructed on the use of EAI.

METHODS

Nurses assessing patients' knowledge asked the patient to demonstrate how to use the EAI training device. Patients who performed the critical steps correctly in 1 min were labelled as competent.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients (24% women, 46 ± 5 years) came for the allergy examination 116 ± 145 days after receiving a prescription for EAI. When prescribing, the doctor or nurse explained the instructions for the use of EAI to 63.4% patients, and 31.7 patients practiced the use of EAI using a training device. At the pharmacy, 22% received explanation and 7% also practiced using a training device. Fifty-four percent of patients were able to effectively administer EAI adrenaline within 1 min. Higher education level was associated with sufficient knowledge about the use of EAI (p = 0.026). At the time of the visit to the allergy specialist clinic, 61% of patients had EAI with them. The shelf life of EAI was known to 63% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The activities to increase the prescription rate of EAI immediately after treatment of anaphylactic episode are not sufficient to prevent severe outcome after the repeated episodes of anaphylaxis as nearly a half of patients are not able to use EAI correctly.

Factors contributing to underuse of epinephrine autoinjectors in pediatric patients with food allergy

BACKGROUND

Epinephrine autoinjectors (EAs) are the standard of care for severe food allergic reactions, although they are frequently underused or misused.

OBJECTIVE

To understand the factors associated with underuse of EA by caregivers of pediatric patients with food allergy.

METHODS

A survey was administered to 200 caregivers of pediatric patients with food allergies to assess most severe lifetime allergic reaction, EA education, and use and factors associated with incorrect use or underutilization.

RESULTS

A total of 164 surveys were completed; of which 118 (72%) of lifetime most severe reactions warranted EA use, but the EA was used in only 45 (38.1%). Reasons caregivers indicated for not administering the EA included the following: reactions did not seem severe enough; it was the patient's first allergic reaction; use of other medication; and fear of using EA.

CONCLUSION

Multiple factors contribute to underuse of EA in the treatment of severe allergic reactions. Results from this study highlight the need for continuous EA education in caregivers of and pediatric patients with food allergies, using a multipronged approach targeting clear symptom recognition and alleviation of fear of EA use.

Sex Differences in Adults with Insect Venom Allergy regarding Psychological Distress, Attitudes toward the Emergency Medication, and Factual Knowledge about the Disease

BACKGROUND

Hymenoptera venom allergy (HVA) has a prevalence of 3% in adults. Although patients have no ongoing symptoms, they often suffer from an impairment of their psychological well-being and quality of life.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to analyze sex-specific differences regarding the psychological burden caused by this allergy and handling of the emergency medication.

METHOD

Study participants filled out a questionnaire including sociodemographic and disease-specific characteristics, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score (HADS), and theoretical knowledge about the emergency medication set (EMS). Additionally, an objective structured clinical examination was used to assess practical knowledge and handling of the EMS.

RESULTS

Fifty-six patients were included (55.4% females). Female patients showed higher subjective anxiety levels due to HVA compared to men (mean 7.2 vs. 4.6, p = 0.0003). Furthermore, the HADS revealed that women had a significant higher anxiety level, especially after Mueller grade I-II anaphylactic reactions (mean 6.3 vs. 2.8, p = 0.0134). This was associated with a higher theoretical but not practical knowledge about their disease. On the other hand, males were less inclined to carry the emergency medication "always" or "almost always" (56 vs. 87.1%, p = 0.0015) but showed higher self-assurance in using it (mean 7.3 vs. 6.1, p = 0.0446).

CONCLUSIONS

This clinical study provides evidence for sex differences in coping with HVA. The results suggest that females should be monitored more closely for allergy-associated anxiety symptoms, while men need more encouragement to carry the emergency medication.

Intranasal epinephrine in dogs: Pharmacokinetic and heart rate effects

Epinephrine is the standard of care for the treatment of severe allergy and anaphylaxis. Epinephrine is most often administered through the intramuscular (IM) route via autoinjector. The current study aimed to evaluate an alternative method of epinephrine treatment through intranasal (IN) delivery in dogs. The pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters of maximum plasma concentration (Cmax ), time to reach maximum plasma concentration (Tmax ), and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 90 minutes (AUC0-90 ) were observed after IN epinephrine (2, 3, 4, 5, 10, and 20 mg) and IM epinephrine via autoinjector (0.15 and 0.3 mg) for 90 minutes. Heart rate effects were measured after IN (2 and 5 mg) and IM (0.15 and 0.3 mg) epinephrine administration. IN epinephrine (5 mg) demonstrated significantly greater plasma epinephrine concentration at 1 minute as compared with IM epinephrine (0.3 mg) (1.68 ± 0.65 ng/mL vs 0.21 ± 0.08 ng/mL, P = .03). There were no significant differences in Cmax , Tmax , and AUC0-90 between 2-mg IN and 0.15-mg IM epinephrine or between 5-mg IN and 0.3-mg IM epinephrine. IN epinephrine reduced heart rate increases, as compared to IM epinephrine. IN and IM epinephrine were both well-tolerated. Overall, IN epinephrine demonstrated advantages over IM epinephrine, including the rapid increase in plasma epinephrine and lack of increased heart rate over time.

Prevalence of Errors in Anaphylaxis in Kids (PEAK): A Multicenter Simulation-Based Study

BACKGROUND

Multi-institutional, international practice variation of pediatric anaphylaxis management by health care providers has not been reported.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize variability in epinephrine administration for pediatric anaphylaxis across institutions, including frequency and types of medication errors.

METHODS

A prospective, observational, study using a standardized in situ simulated anaphylaxis scenario was performed across 28 health care institutions in 6 countries. The on-duty health care team was called for a child (patient simulator) in anaphylaxis. Real medications and supplies were obtained from their actual locations. Demographic data about team members, institutional protocols for anaphylaxis, timing of epinephrine delivery, medication errors, and systems safety issues discovered during the simulation were collected.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven in situ simulations were performed. Anaphylaxis guidelines existed in 41% (15 of 37) of institutions. Teams used a cognitive aid for medication dosing 41% (15 of 37) of the time and 32% (12 of 37) for preparation. Epinephrine autoinjectors were not available in 54% (20 of 37) of institutions and were used in only 14% (5 of 37) of simulations. Median time to epinephrine administration was 95 seconds (interquartile range, 77-252) for epinephrine autoinjector and 263 seconds (interquartile range, 146-407.5) for manually prepared epinephrine (P = .12). At least 1 medication error occurred in 68% (25 of 37) of simulations. Nursing experience with epinephrine administration for anaphylaxis was associated with fewer preparation (P = .04) and administration (P = .01) errors. Latent safety threats were reported by 30% (11 of 37) of institutions, and more than half of these (6 of 11) involved a cognitive aid.

CONCLUSIONS

A multicenter, international study of simulated pediatric anaphylaxis reveals (1) variation in management between institutions in the use of protocols, cognitive aids, and medication formularies, (2) frequent errors involving epinephrine, and (3) latent safety threats related to cognitive aids among multiple sites.

Improving adrenaline autoinjector adherence: A psychologically informed training for healthcare professionals

BACKGROUND

Clinicians draw on instructional approaches when training patients with anaphylaxis to use adrenaline autoinjectors, but patient use is poor. Psychological barriers to these behaviours exist but are not considered routinely when training patients to use autoinjectors. Health Psychology principles suggest exploring these factors with patients could improve their autoinjector use.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of a 90-minute workshop training clinicians in strategies and techniques for exploring and responding to psychological barriers to autoinjector use with patients. Attendees' knowledge, confidence and likelihood of using the strategies were expected to improve.

METHODS

Impact was evaluated using a longitudinal mixed-method design. Twenty-nine clinicians (general and specialist nurses, general practitioners, and pharmacists) supporting patients with anaphylaxis in UK hospitals and general practice attended. Self-rated knowledge, confidence, and likelihood of using the strategies taught were evaluated online 1 week before, 1 to 3, and 6 to 8 weeks after the workshop. Clinicians were invited for telephone interview after attending to explore qualitatively the workshop impact.

RESULTS

χ2 analyses were significant in most cases (P < .05), with sustained (6-8 weeks) improvements in knowledge, confidence, and likelihood of using the strategies taught. Thematic analysis of interview data showed the workshop enhanced attendees' knowledge of the care pathway, understanding of patient's experience of anaphylaxis as psychological not purely physical, and altered their communication with this and other patient groups. However, interviewees perceived lack of time and organisational factors as barriers to using the strategies and techniques taught in clinical contexts.

CONCLUSION

Training clinicians in psychologically informed strategies produce sustained improvements in their confidence and knowledge around patient autoinjector education, and their likelihood of using strategies in clinical practice.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Exploring psychological barriers should be part of training patients with anaphylaxis in autoinjector use.

Underuse of Epinephrine for Pediatric Anaphylaxis Victims in the Emergency Department: A Population-based Study

Purpose

Epinephrine is a key drug for treating anaphylaxis; however, its underuse is still a significant issue worldwide. The objective of this study was to compare epinephrine use between pediatric and adult patients who were treated with anaphylaxis in the emergency department (ED).

Methods

The data were retrieved from the National Sample Cohort of South Korea, which contains claim data from the National Health Insurance Service. We included patients who visited the ED with a discharge code of anaphylaxis between 2004 and 2013. We assessed prescription information of epinephrine, antihistamine and systemic steroid, previous medical history and discharge disposition from the ED. The study population was categorized based on age at the visit.

Results

A total of 175 pediatric and 1,605 adult patients with anaphylaxis were identified. Only 42 (24%) of the pediatric patients were treated with epinephrine, while 592 (36.9%) of the adult patients were treated with epinephrine (P = 0.001). Furthermore, the pediatric patients were less likely to be treated with systemic steroid than the adult patients (6.9% vs. 12.3%, P = 0.047). The odds ratios for the administration of epinephrine relative to the baseline in the 19-65 age group were 0.34 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15–0.67), 0.56 (95% CI, 0.28–1.03) and 0.79 (95% CI, 0.45–1.33) in the < 7, 7–12 and 13–18 age groups, respectively.

Conclusions

The pediatric patients with anaphylaxis experienced a lower rate of epinephrine injection use than the adult patients and the injection use decreased as age decreased.

Disease Burden, Psychological Well-Being and Attitudes regarding the Set of Emergency Medication in Adults with Insect Venom Allergy

BACKGROUND

Insect venom allergy is common and greatly impairs patients' quality of life. Additionally, low compliance with carrying emergency medication is reported. The aim of our study was to analyze the disease burden, levels of anxiety and depression, and to evaluate attitudes towards the set of emergency medication in affected patients.

METHODS

Between April 2016 and January 2017, patients ≥18 years visiting our department because of an insect venom allergy were asked to complete a paper-based questionnaire. The questionnaire assessed willingness to pay (WTP), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), subjective anxiety levels, willingness to carry the set of emergency medication, self-assurance in using it, compliance with carrying it, and reasons for not always carrying it.

RESULTS

55 patients (81.8% wasp allergy) were included. On average, WTP for a complete cure was EUR 1,727 (median: 500). Using the HADS, 14.5% showed definite anxiety disorders while 5.5% had significant depression disorders. Most patients stated to carry the emergency medication "always" (25.5%) or "almost always" (47.3%). "Forgetfulness" (36.4%) was reported as the main reason for not always carrying the medication, followed by "too big" (18.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

In our patient cohort, insect venom allergy was associated with a moderate disease burden and a good compliance with carrying the emergency medication. However, several of our participants demonstrated borderline or significant anxiety and/or depression disorders. In this regard, this study highlights the necessity to regularly ask the patient about the psychological well-being to identify patients needing psychological support.

Decreasing Prescribing Errors During Pediatric Emergencies: A Randomized Simulation Trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether a clinical aid providing precalculated medication doses decreases prescribing errors among residents during pediatric simulated cardiopulmonary arrest and anaphylaxis.

METHODS

A crossover randomized trial was conducted in a tertiary care hospital simulation center with residents rotating in the pediatric emergency department. The intervention was a reference book providing weight-based precalculated doses. The control group used a card providing milligram-per-kilogram doses. The primary outcome was the presence of a prescribing error, defined as a dose varying by ≥20% from the recommended dose or by incorrect route. Residents were involved in 2 sets of paired scenarios and were their own control group. Primary analysis was the difference in mean prescribing error proportions between both groups.

RESULTS

Forty residents prescribed 1507 medications or defibrillations during 160 scenarios. The numbers of prescribing errors per 100 bolus medications or defibrillations were 5.1 (39 out of 762) and 7.5 (56 out of 745) for the intervention and control, respectively, a difference of 2.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.1 to 5.0). However, the intervention was highly associated with lower risk of 10-fold error for bolus medications (odds ratio 0.27; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.70). For medications administered by infusion, prescribing errors occurred in 3 out of 76 (4%) scenarios in the intervention group and 13 out of 76 (22.4%) in the control group, a difference of 13% (95% CI, 3 to 23).

CONCLUSIONS

A clinical aid providing precalculated medication doses was not associated with a decrease in overall prescribing error rates but was highly associated with a lower risk of 10-fold error for bolus medications and for medications administered by continuous infusion.