Safety of omalizumab in chronic urticaria during pregnancy: a real-life study

BACKGROUND

Managing a pregnant patient with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is often challenging. Recent data have shown that most CSU treatments in pregnant patients are second-generation H1 antihistamines (sgAHs), while data on the safety of omalizumab are scant.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate, in a routine clinical practice setting, the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in patients with severe CSU refractory to sgAHs who either became pregnant during treatment or who started the drug during pregnancy.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of women aged ≥ 18 years who were pregnant, who received one or more doses of omalizumab at any time during their pregnancy or who were taking omalizumab at the time of, or in the 8 weeks before, conception.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine pregnant patients were evaluated: 23 (79%) conceived a child while taking omalizumab (group A), while 6 (21%) started omalizumab treatment during pregnancy (group B). Among patients in group A, we observed 23 births (21 liveborn singletons and 1 liveborn twin pair) and 1 miscarriage. Fifteen (65%) patients discontinued omalizumab after confirming their pregnancy, while eight (35%) were exposed to omalizumab during their entire pregnancy. In group B, omalizumab was introduced at a mean (SD) 10.83 (3.60) weeks' gestation and all patients were exposed to it until the end of pregnancy. In this group, there were seven liveborn infants (five singletons and one twin pair). No adverse events, pregnancy complications or congenital anomalies in newborns were recorded in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Omalizumab for CSU treatment before and during pregnancy does not appear to have negative effects on maternal or fetal outcomes.

An update on nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-induced urticaria

BACKGROUND

Hypersensitivity reactions to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (HR-NSAIDs) are common adverse events related to the widespread use of over-the-counter NSAIDs for the treatment of a variety of inflammatory conditions. Urticaria is the most commonly reported immediate cutaneous clinical sign of HR-NSAIDs, but it can be a manifestation of pathophysiologically different clinical entities that require different therapeutic strategies. The aim of this study is to ease the identification of the correct phenotype of HR-NSAIDs in patients reporting urticaria associated with the intake of NSAIDs and provide updated information about their diagnosis and management.

METHODS

The study is a narrative review conducted by collecting the most relevant and up-to-date data related to the classification, pathophysiology, severity, and prognosis of NSAID hypersensitivity reactions. PubMed and Embase scientific databases were used as search engines to select relevant articles.

RESULTS

Patients developing HR-NSAIDs can be divided into two categories: selective responders (SR), who develop reactions after the administration of a single specific NSAID due to an underlying IgE or T-cell mediated hypersensitivity mechanism, or cross-intolerant (CI), who develop reactions to more than one chemically unrelated NSAIDs due to abnormalities in the biochemical pathways related with prostaglandin metabolism, independently from an underlying immunological mechanism. Five major different categories of HR-NSAIDs have been identified: NSAIDs-exacerbated cutaneous disease (NECD), NSAIDs-induced urticaria/angioedema with/without respiratory and systemic symptoms of anaphylaxis (NIUAA), and NSAIDs-exacerbated respiratory disease (NERD), which are developed by CI patients, and single NSAIDs-induced urticaria, angioedema and/ or anaphylaxis (SNIUAA) and single NSAIDs-induced delayed hypersensitivity reactions (SNIDHR), which are developed by CI patients. In vivo and in vitro diagnostic tests have rarely been shown to be reliable in all these entities and therefore are not routinely used in clinical practice. The management in SR patients consists of strict avoidance of the culprit drug, while for cross-intolerance reactions oral tolerance tests with safe alternative drugs (e.g. weak COX-1 inhibitors or selective COX-2 inhibitors) can be performed.

CONCLUSION

HR-NSAIDs are being observed with increasing frequency, however, the pathogenesis behind some NSAIDS-associated clinical entities is still unclear. Diagnosis is mostly based on a thorough clinical history and confirmed by a drug challenge test. Clinical management is based on strict avoidance and use of alternative tolerated medications. Overall, all therapeutic decisions depend on the correct identification of the type of reaction the patient experienced.

Latex allergy - from discovery to component-resolved diagnosis

Latex allergy is a hypersensitivity response to natural rubber latex (NRL) proteins or rubber chemicals used in the manufacture of latex products. An accurate diagnosis is the first step in the effective management of individuals with latex allergy, especially in high-risk groups, such as healthcare workers and those affected by spina bifida. Diagnosis is based on the clinical history and an accurate allergological evaluation. In the case of type I IgE-mediated hypersensitivity re-actions, which can manifest urticaria, angioedema, rhinoconjunctivitis, asthma and anaphylaxis after latex exposure, skin prick tests or latex-specific IgE (sIgE) antibody detection using sero-logical assays can be performed to confirm sensitization. Instead, in the case of contact dermati-tis, a patch test can be applied to confirm the presence of a type IV T cell-mediated hypersensi-tivity reaction to rubber accelerators or additives. Basophils activation tests or challenge tests may be performed if there's an incongruity between the clinical history and the results of in vivo and in vitro tests. The aim of this review is to analyze the current state of the art of diagnostic techniques for latex allergy and algorithms employed in clinical practice and possible future de-velopments in this field.

Microbiota and IL-33/31 Axis Linkage: Implications and Therapeutic Perspectives in Atopic Dermatitis and Psoriasis

Microbiome dysbiosis and cytokine alternations are key features of atopic dermatitis (AD) and psoriasis (PsO), two of the most prevalent and burdensome pruritic skin conditions worldwide. Interleukin (IL)-33 and IL-31 have been recognized to be major players who act synergistically in the pathogenesis and maintenance of different chronic inflammatory conditions and pruritic skin disorders, including AD and PsO, and their potential role as therapeutic targets is being thoroughly investigated. The bidirectional interplay between dysbiosis and immunological changes has been extensively studied, but there is still debate regarding which of these two factors is the actual causative culprit behind the aetiopathological process that ultimately leads to AD and PsO. We conducted a literature review on the Pubmed database assessing articles of immunology, dermatology, microbiology and allergology with the aim to strengthen the hypothesis that dysbiosis is at the origin of the IL-33/IL-31 dysregulation that contributes to the pathogenesis of AD and PsO. Finally, we discussed the therapeutic options currently in development for the treatment of these skin conditions targeting IL-31, IL-33 and/or the microbiome.

Gut Immunobiosis and Biomodulators

The human gastrointestinal (GI) tract hosts complex and dynamic populations of microorganisms (gut microbiota) in advantageous symbiosis with the host organism through sophisticated molecular cross-talk. The balance and diversification within microbial communities (eubiosis) are crucial for the immune and metabolic homeostasis of the host, as well as for inhibiting pathogen penetration. In contrast, compositional dysregulation of the microbiota (dysbiosis) is blamed for the determinism of numerous diseases. Although further advances in the so-called 'omics' disciplines are needed, dietary manipulation of the gut microbial ecosystem through biomodulators (prebiotics, probiotics, symbionts, and postbiotics) represents an intriguing target to stabilize and/or restore eubiosis. Recently, new approaches have been developed for the production of infant formulas supplemented with prebiotics (human milk oligosaccharides [HMOs], galacto-oligosaccharides [GOS], fructo-oligosaccharides [FOS]), probiotics, and postbiotics to obtain formulas that are nutritionally and biologically equivalent to human milk (closer to the reference).

Systemic drug-related intertriginous and flexural exanthema-like eruption after Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine

Systemic drug-related intertriginous and flexural exanthema (SDRIFE) is an adverse drug reaction which manifests as a symmetrical erythematous rash involving the skin folds after systemic drug exposure. A vast array of possible side effects associated with administration of different anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have been reported in literature since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, but only few times SDRIFE-like eruptions have been described in this context. We discuss here a case of SDRIFE-like eruption following the second dose of Oxford-Astrazeneca Vaxzevria vaccine.

Secondary prevention of latex allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The present review addresses the secondary prevention in healthcare worker, healthcare setting, and in patients outside the healthcare setting.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is sufficient knowledge of the broad aetiology of latex allergy for secondary preventive programmes to be widely adopted. Currently, avoidance of latex-containing surgical products is mandatory in the care of sensitized patients. They should also have a list of occult sources of natural rubber latex exposure and cross-reacting fruits. During all health-care procedures latex allergic patients should be treated in a 'latex-free' environment. Specific sublingual immunotherapy has been suggested as a suitable therapeutic option. It can be offered, in addition to symptomatic treatment, to selected patients, when avoidance measures are not feasible or effective. The use of omalizumab could also be extended as an adjunct to latex immunotherapy.

SUMMARY

Despite of the progress made in the secondary prevention of latex allergy, the disease still continues to be a global health problem.

Complementary Feeding and Iron Status: "The Unbearable Lightness of Being" Infants

The complementary feeding (CF) period that takes place between 6 and 24 months of age is of key importance for nutritional and developmental reasons during the transition from exclusively feeding on milk to family meals. In 2021, a multidisciplinary panel of experts from four Italian scientific pediatric societies elaborated a consensus document on CF, focusing in particular on healthy term infants. The aim was to provide healthcare providers with useful guidelines for clinical practice. Complementary feeding is also the time window when iron deficiency (ID) and iron deficiency anemia (IDA) are most prevalent. Thus, it is appropriate to address the problem of iron deficiency through nutritional interventions. Adequate iron intake during the first two years is critical since rapid growth in that period increases iron requirements per kilogram more than at any other developmental stage. Complementary foods should be introduced at around six months of age, taking into account infant iron status.

Breastfed and Formula-Fed Infants: Need of a Different Complementary Feeding Model?

Suboptimal nutrient quality/quantity during complementary feeding (CF) can impact negatively on infants’ healthy growth, even with adequate energy intake. CF must supplement at best human milk (HM) or formulas, which show nutritional differences. Considering this, a differentiated CF is probably advisable to correctly satisfy the different nutritional needs. To assess whether current needs at 6–24 months of age can still be met by one single CF scheme or different schemes are needed for breastfed vs. formula/cow’s milk (CM) fed infants, protein, iron and calcium intakes were assessed from daily menus using the same type and amount of solid food, leaving same amounts of HM and follow-up formula at 9 and again 18 months of age, when unmodified CM was added. Depending on the child’s age, calcium- and iron-fortified cereals or common retail foods were used. The single feeding scheme keeps protein intake low but higher than recommended, in HM-fed children while in formula/CM-fed ones, it achieves much higher protein intakes. Iron Population Recommended Intake (PRI) and calcium Adequate Intakes (AI) are met at the two ages only when a formula is used; otherwise, calcium-fortified cereals are needed. ESPGHAN statements on the futility of proposing different CF schemes according to the milk type fed do not allow to fully meet the nutritional recommendations issued by major Agencies/Organizations/Societies for all children of these age groups.