Cost-Utility of Routine Testing in Chronic Urticaria/Angioedema: A Cohort Study

Clinical values of serum neuropeptide changes in patients with chronic urticaria complicated with allergic rhinitis

AIM

Neurogenic inflammation has been recognized as an important contributing factor in the pathogenesis of allergic rhinitis. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical values of substance P, vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP), and neuropeptide Y as biomarkers of disease severity and treatment outcomes of chronic urticaria complicated with allergic rhinitis.

METHODS

Our prospective study included 150 patients with chronic urticaria complicated with allergic rhinitis and 80 healthy control patients. Before treatment, the serum samples of all study subjects were collected and analyzed using enzyme-linked immunosorbent analysis. The intervention group received imipramine of 10 mg/day orally for 2 weeks, and the Symptom Score Reduction Index (SSRI) was used to analyze clinical outcomes, which were categorized as effectual and ineffectual.

RESULTS

Our data suggested that substance P, VIP, and neuropeptide Y were significantly correlated to each other. Lower levels of substance P, VIP, and neuropeptide Y were associated with better treatment outcomes. A good detection sensitivity (69.49%) and specificity (80.22%) could be achieved using a combination of these markers (area under curve = 0.85).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data indicates that substance P, VIP, and neuropeptide Y levels before treatment correlate strongly with the treatment outcomes of the patients, which could potentially serve as a decision support tool in clinical management of chronic urticaria complicated with allergic rhinitis.

The efficacy and safety of high-dose nonsedating antihistamines in chronic spontaneous urticaria: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Standard doses of second-generation H₁-antihistamines (sgAHs) as first-line treatment are not always effective in treating chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU), and hence an increase in the dose of sgAHs is recommended. However, literature evaluating the efficacy and safety of this treatment remains inconclusive, highlighting the need for a systematic review and meta-analysis. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of high-dose sgAHs compared with standard-dose sgAHs in treating CSU.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of double-blind, randomized controlled trials (RCT) utilizing multiple doses of sgAHs was performed by searching the electronic databases Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, Cochrane databases, and Web of Science. Bibliographies were also manually searched. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for assessing risk of bias was used to assess the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two reviewers screened studies, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias independently. The response rate, the number of adverse events, somnolence, and withdrawal due to adverse events were extracted from each article. The data were combined and analyzed to quantify the safety and efficacy of the treatment. RevMan (V5.3) software was used for data synthesis.

RESULTS

A total of 13 studies were identified, seven of which met the eligibility criteria for the meta-analysis. Our pooled meta-analyses showed that high-dose sgAHs was associated with a significantly higher response rate than standard-dose (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.26; P = 0.02). Conversely, high doses of sgAHs were associated with significantly higher somnolence rates than standard dose (RD 0.05, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.09; P = 0.02). There was no significant difference in adverse events or withdrawal due to adverse events between standard- and high-dose treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analyses showed that a high dose of sgAHs (up to two times the standard dose) might be more effective than a standard dose in CSU treatment. High-dose and standard-dose sgAHs showed similar adverse events, except for somnolence, where incidence was found to be dose-dependent in some studies. However, given the limited number of studies, our meta-analysis results should be interpreted with caution.

Value-Based, Cost-Effective Care: The Role of the Allergist-Immunologist

Asthma and allergic disease impact millions of patients and are associated with high costs. Up to 30% of all medical care involves wasted spending. Across the spectrum of care provided by the allergist-immunologist, there are opportunities to improve value and reduce medical waste. Several examples highlight this reality. Evidence suggests that most patients may receive cost-effective care in the management of chronic spontaneous urticaria without the need for laboratory testing. For patients with asthma, although a single maintenance and reliever therapy approach may be cost-effective, insurance-mandated therapy changes are not, and may harm patients. Biologics may be very effective in improving asthma control but are too expensive for this indication-as demonstrated by cost-effectiveness analyses and highlighted by the Institute of Clinical and Economic Review, which concluded that the value-based price for asthma biologics ranges between $6500 and 14,3000 per year. Early introduction may prevent food allergy, but screening before first introduction is neither necessary nor cost-effective, although early salvage food oral immunotherapy may result in improved quality of life and cost savings. Evidence does not support the presence of allergic disease as a risk factor for anaphylaxis to coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination, and risk-stratified vaccination approaches do not appear cost-effective. Allergen immunotherapy is a very cost-effective treatment option. The practice of allergy-immunology has continued to evolve in recent years and can provide a leading example of high-value practice.

Clinical review: The suggested management pathway for urticaria in primary care

Background

Urticaria is a common condition presenting both as acute and chronic disease within primary care. To those without specialist training it is poorly understood from the points of view of diagnosis and management. It causes a considerable disease burden to sufferers with marked impact on quality of life.

Purpose of this review

The recent publication of the EAACI/GA²LEN/EuroGuiDerm/APAAACI Guideline for the Definition, Classification, Diagnosis and Management of Urticaria guideline prompted us to take this excellent resource and re‐configure its findings and recommendations to a non‐specialist audience with particular reference to the needs of the primary care team.

Efficacy and tolerability of the updosing of second-generation non-sedating H1 antihistamines in children with chronic spontaneous urticaria

BACKGROUND

Chronic urticaria (CU), daily wheals or angioedema that lasts more than 6 weeks, is a common skin disease; CU is classified as spontaneous (no specific eliciting factor involved) or inducible (specific eliciting factor involved). Recent EAACI guidelines for management of CSU recommend second-generation non-sedating H1 antihistamines (sgAH₁ s) as initial treatment in children (weight-adjusted) as in adults, followed by increased doses (up to 4 times) if the standard dose is not effective. The efficacy and tolerability of fourfold updosing in adults are known, but there is little documentation regarding updosing in the pediatric population. This retrospective study evaluates the efficacy and tolerability of the updosing of sgAH₁ s in children with CSU in a tertiary care pediatric hospital.

METHODS

The electronic charts of patients diagnosed with CSU and referred to the Allergy Unit of Meyer Children's University hospital were reviewed during a period of 4 years. For each patient, an examination of demographic characteristics, diagnostic workup, efficacy, and tolerability of the treatment was performed. Disease activity was monitored using UAS7.

RESULTS

Sixty-six cases of CSU were identified, and all of them were treated initially with a standard dose of sgAH₁ s, followed by increased doses up to fourfold when standard dosing was not effective. 44/66 patients (66.7%) treated with sgAH₁ s responded: 25 with a standard dose, 16 with a double, 2 with threefold dose, and 1 with fourfold dose. 12/66 (18.2%) patients began a therapy with omalizumab. As for the remaining patients, 10/66 (15.1%), they are still undergoing therapy with sgAH₁ s because of the relapse of the symptoms after the stepped-down dosage. Regarding tolerability, 9/66 (13.6%) patients treated with sgAH₁ s experienced side effects: three that required treatment change and six that did not.

CONCLUSION

Our data were consistent with the tolerability of updosing of sgAH₁ s in children with CSU, although the efficacy appears to be limited to double the standard dose.

The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice 2019 Highlights

This article provides highlights of the clinically impactful original studies and reviews published in The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice in 2019 on the subjects of anaphylaxis, asthma, dermatitis, drug allergy, food allergy, immunodeficiency, immunotherapy, rhinitis/sinusitis, and urticaria/angioedema/mast cell disorders. Within each topic, practical aspects of diagnosis and management are emphasized. Treatments discussed include lifestyle modifications, allergen avoidance therapy, positive and negative effects of pharmacologic therapy, and various forms of immunologic and desensitization management. We designed this review to help readers consolidate and use this extensive and practical knowledge for the benefit of their patients.

Optimizing Value in the Evaluation of Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) affects approximately 1% of the general population. The cost-effectiveness of routine laboratory testing for secondary causes of CSU has not been formally evaluated.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the cost-effectiveness of routine laboratory screening in adults with CSU.

METHODS

A Markov model using cohort analysis and microsimulations was created for adult patients aged 20 years, over a 10-year time horizon, randomized to receive screening laboratory testing or a no-testing approach. Laboratory results were derived from a previously published retrospective analysis of adult patients with CSU. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated at a willingness to pay threshold of $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in patients with untreated CSU, and patients treated with antihistamines, cyclosporine, or omalizumab.

RESULTS

Average laboratory costs per simulated patient with CSU were $573 (standard deviation [SD], $41), with only 0.16% (SD, 3.99%) of tests resulting in improved clinical outcomes. Testing costs per laboratory-associated positive outcome were $358,052 (no therapy), $357,576 (antihistamine therapy), $354,115 (cyclosporine), and $262,121 (omalizumab). Screening tests were not cost-effective, with ICERs of $856,905 (no therapy), $855,764 (antihistamine therapy), $847,483 (cyclosporine), and $627,318 (omalizumab). In the omalizumab-treated subgroup, testing could be cost-effective below $220 or if it resulted in a 0.73% rate of CSU resolution. From a simulated US population perspective, nation-wide screening costs could reach $941,750,741 to $1,833,501,483.

CONCLUSIONS

In CSU, the likelihood of clinical improvement from laboratory testing is very low, and testing is not cost-effective. These data support recommendations to not routinely perform laboratory testing in patients with CSU with otherwise normal histories and physical evaluations.