Systematic review of outcome measures in trials of pediatric anaphylaxis treatment

Development of neffy, an Epinephrine Nasal Spray, for Severe Allergic Reactions

Epinephrine autoinjectors (EAIs) are used for the treatment of severe allergic reactions in a community setting; however, their utility is limited by low prescription fulfillment rates, failure to carry, and failure to use due to fear of needles. Given that delayed administration of epinephrine is associated with increased morbidity/mortality, there has been a growing interest in developing needle-free, easy-to-use delivery devices. neffy (epinephrine nasal spray) consists of three Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved components: epinephrine, Intravail A3 (absorption enhancer), and a Unit Dose Spray (UDS). neffy's development pathway was established in conjunction with the FDA and the European Medicines Agency and included multiple clinical trials to evaluate pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic responses under a variety of conditions, such as self-administration and allergic and infectious rhinitis, as well as an animal anaphylaxis model of severe hypotension, where neffy demonstrated a pharmacokinetic profile that is within the range of approved injection products and a pharmacodynamic response that is as good or better than injections. The increased pulse rate (PR) and blood pressure (BP) observed even one minute following the administration of neffy confirm the activation of α and β adrenergic receptors, which are the key components of epinephrine's mechanism of action. The results suggest that neffy will provide a safe and effective needle-free option for the treatment of severe allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis.

A Clinical Practice Guideline for the Emergency Management of Anaphylaxis (2020)

Background: For anaphylaxis, a life-threatening allergic reaction, the incidence rate was presented to have increased from the beginning of the 21st century. Underdiagnosis and undertreatment of anaphylaxis are public health concerns. Objective: This guideline aimed to provide high-quality and evidence-based recommendations for the emergency management of anaphylaxis. Method: The panel of health professionals from fifteen medical areas selected twenty-five clinical questions and formulated the recommendations with the supervision of four methodologists. We collected evidence by conducting systematic literature retrieval and using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Results: This guideline made twenty-five recommendations that covered the diagnosis, preparation, emergency treatment, and post-emergency management of anaphylaxis. We recommended the use of a set of adapted diagnostic criteria from the American National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network (NIAID/FAAN), and developed a severity grading system that classified anaphylaxis into four grades. We recommended epinephrine as the first-line treatment, with specific doses and routes of administration for different severity of anaphylaxis or different conditions. Proper dosage is critical in the administration of epinephrine, and the monitor is important in the IV administration. Though there was only very low or low-quality evidence supported the use of glucocorticoids and H1 antagonists, we still weakly recommended them as second-line medications. We could not make a well-directed recommendation regarding premedication for preventing anaphylaxis since it is difficult to weigh the concerns and potential effects. Conclusion: For the emergency management of anaphylaxis we conclude that: • NIAID/FAAN diagnostic criteria and the four-tier grading system should be used for the diagnosis • Prompt and proper administration of epinephrine is critical.

The Epidemiology of Anaphylaxis

Anaphylaxis is a dramatic expression of systemic allergy. The lifetime prevalence of anaphylaxis is currently estimated at 0.05-2 % in the USA and ~3 % in Europe. Several population-specific studies have noted a rise in the incidence, particularly in the hospitalizations and ER visits due to anaphylaxis. The variable signs and symptoms that constitute the diagnostic criteria for anaphylaxis, the differences in diagnostic algorithms, and the limitations in the current coding systems have made summarizing epidemiologic data and comparing study results challenging. Nevertheless, across all studies, the most common triggers continue to be medications, food, and venom. Various risk factors for more severe reactions generally include older age, history of asthma, and having more comorbid diseases. Interesting seasonal, geographic, and latitude differences have been observed in anaphylaxis prevalence and incidence rates, suggesting a possible role of vitamin D and sun exposure in modifying anaphylaxis risk. While the incidence and prevalence of anaphylaxis appear to be increasing in certain populations, the overall fatality rate remains relatively low.

Epinephrine in Severe Allergic Reactions: The European Anaphylaxis Register

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend intramuscular administration of epinephrine as the first-line drug for the emergency treatment of severe allergic reactions (anaphylaxis), but no randomized trial evidence supports this consensus.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess anaphylaxis treatment practices over 10 years, covering several European regions, all allergen sources, and all age groups.

METHODS

The European Anaphylaxis Register tracks elicitors, symptoms, emergency treatment, diagnostic workups, and long-term counseling for anaphylaxis incidents through web-based data entry from tertiary allergy specialists, covering information from the emergency respondent, patient, tertiary referral, and laboratory/clinical test results.

RESULTS

We analyzed 10,184 anaphylaxis incidents. In total, 27.1% of patients treated by a health professional received epinephrine and, in total, 10.5% received a second dose. Successful administration was less frequent in German-speaking countries (minimum 19.6%) than in Greece, France, and Spain (maximum 66.7%). Over the last decade, epinephrine administration from a health professional almost doubled to reach 30.6% in 2015-2017, half of which was applied intramuscularly. A total of 14.7% of lay- or self-treated cases were treated with an autoinjector. Of those without treatment, 22.4% carried a device for administration. No change in successful administration by lay emergency respondents was found over the last 10 years. Of the reaction and patient characteristics analyzed, only clinical severity considerably influenced the likelihood of receiving epinephrine, with 66.9% of successful administrations in near-fatal (grade IV) reactions.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite clear recommendations, only a small proportion of anaphylaxis incidents are treated with epinephrine. We demonstrated a slight increase in treated patients when handled by professionals, but stagnation in lay- or self-treated anaphylaxis. The reaction circumstances, the respondent's professional background, and patient characteristics did not explain which reactions were treated.

Range and Heterogeneity of Outcomes in Randomized Trials of Pediatric Chronic Kidney Disease

OBJECTIVE

To determine the range and heterogeneity of outcomes reported in randomized controlled trials of interventions for children with chronic kidney disease (CKD).

STUDY DESIGN

The Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialized Register was searched to March 2016. Randomized trials involving children across all stages of CKD were selected. All outcome domains and measurements were extracted from included trials. The frequency and characteristics of the outcome domains and measures were evaluated.

RESULTS

From 205 trials included, 6158 different measurements of 100 different outcome domains were reported, with a median of 22 domains per trial (IQR 13-41). Overall, 52 domains (52%) were surrogate, 38 (38%) were clinical, and 10 (10%) were patient-reported. The 5 most commonly reported domains were blood pressure (76 [37%] trials), relapse/remission (70 [34%]), kidney function (66 [32%]), infection (61 [30%]), and height/pubertal development (51 [25%]). Mortality (14%), cardiovascular disease (4%), and quality of life (1%) were reported infrequently. The 2 most frequently reported outcomes, blood pressure and relapse/remission, had 56 and 81 different outcome measures, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The outcomes reported in clinical trials involving children with CKD are extremely heterogeneous and are most often surrogate outcomes, rather than clinical and patient-centered outcomes such as cardiovascular disease and quality of life. Efforts to ensure consistent reporting of outcomes that are important to patients and clinicians will improve the value of trials to guide clinical decision-making. In our study, non-English articles were excluded.

Anaphylaxis in Children: Experience of 485 Episodes in 1,272,482 Patient Attendances at a Tertiary Paediatric Emergency Department from 2007 to 2014

Introduction: Anaphylaxis is a predominantly childhood disease. Most of the literature on anaphylaxis has emerged from Western countries. This study aimed to describe the incidence, triggers and clinical presentation of anaphylaxis among children in Singapore, look for predictors for anaphylaxis with severe outcomes, and study the incidence of biphasic reactions. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed records of children presenting with anaphylaxis to our paediatric emergency department from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2014. Results: We identified 485 cases of anaphylaxis in 445 patients. Cutaneous symptoms (urticarial/angio-oedema) were the most common across all age groups (481 cases, 99%), followed by respiratory (412, 85%), gastrointestinal (118, 24%) and cardiovascular (35, 7.2%) symptoms. Central nervous system symptoms (drowsiness/ irritability) were rare across all age groups (11, 2.2%). Food was identified as the most common trigger across all age groups (45% to 63%). Seafood was the most common food trigger (57, 25%). A total of 420 (86.6%) children were treated with adrenaline, 451 (93%) received steroids and 411 (85%) received antihistamines. Sixty-three (13%) children fulfilled the criteria of severe anaphylaxis. There was no statistically significant association between severe anaphylaxis and the type of trigger (P = 0.851), nor an overall past history of atopy (P = 0.428). The only independent predictor for severe anaphylaxis was a previous drug allergy (P = 0.016). A very low prevalence of biphasic reactions (0.6% of study population) was noted in our study. Conclusion: We described the presentation and management of anaphylaxis in the Singapore population. A history of drug allergy is associated with severe presentation. Biphasic reactions are rare in our population.