Search

Monoclonal antibodies targeting interleukin (IL)-5 pathways have revolutionized the treatment expectations for eosinophilic-associated conditions, particularly in patients with respiratory involvement. Mepolizumab (IL-5 antagonist monoclonal antibody), benralizumab (IL-5 receptor blocker monoclonal antibody), and reslizumab (IL-5 antagonist monoclonal antibody) have collectively contributed to the overall improvement of the disease burden in various conditions. Eosinophilic asthma currently boasts the most robust evidence across all age groups: all three biologics are approved for adults (aged ≥18 years); mepolizumab is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) also in children (aged ≥ 6 years), while bernalizumab was recently approved by the FDA for patients aged ≥6 years in the USA. In chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, subcutaneous mepolizumab is the only anti-IL-5 therapy approved so far and can be used in adult patients (aged ≥18 years). For eosinophilic esophagitis, conflicting evidence surrounds both mepolizumab, reslizumab, and benralizumab, leading to non-approval of these agents by the FDA/EMA. Recently, mepolizumab was approved for eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis patients aged ≥6 years or older and for hypereosinophilic syndrome adult patients. A phase III trial proving noninferiority of benralizumab versus mepolizumab in eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis has been recently published, while evidence on reslizumab is scant. Overall, current evidence on anti-IL-5 biologics for eosinophilic-associated disorders is mostly focused on adults, whereas data for individuals aged under 18 years and over 65 years are scarce, resulting in a lack of evidence, particularly regarding efficacy, for the use of anti-IL-5 agents in these specific patient populations. This review addresses high-quality evidence from randomized controlled trials and real-world post-marketing studies regarding the use of anti-IL-5 therapies for eosinophilic-associated disorders across all age groups, spanning childhood, adulthood, and older age. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The psychological effects from the COVID-19 pandemic and response are poorly understood.Objective: To understand the effects of the pandemic and response on anxiety and health utility in a nationally representative sample of US adults.Design: A de-identified, cross-sectional survey was administered at the end of April 2020. Probability weights were assigned using estimates from the 2018 American Community Survey and Integrated Public Use Microdata Series Estimates.Participants: US adults 18-85 years of age with landline, texting-enabled cellphone, or internet access.Intervention: Seven split-half survey blocks of 30 questions, assessing demographics, COVID-19-related health attitudes, and standardized measures of generalized self-efficacy, anxiety, depression, personality, and generic health utility.Main Measures: State/Trait anxiety scores, EQ-5D-3L Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score, and demographic predictors of these scores.Key Results: Among 4855 respondents, 56.7% checked COVID-19-related news several times daily, and 84.4% at least once daily. Only 65.7% desired SARS-CoV-2 vaccination for themselves, and 70.1% for their child. Mean state anxiety (S-anxiety) score was significantly higher than mean trait anxiety (T-anxiety) score (44.9, 95%CI 43.5-46.3 vs. 41.6, 95%CI 38.7-44.5; p = 0.03), with both scores significantly higher than previously published norms. In an adjusted regression model, less frequent news viewing was associated with significantly lower S-anxiety score. Mean EQ-5D-3L VAS score for the population was significantly lower vs. established US normative data (71.4 CI 67.4-75.5, std. error 2 vs. societal mean 80, std. error 0.1; p < 0.001). EQ-5D-3L VAS score was bimodal (highest with hourly and no viewing) and significantly reduced with less media viewership in an adjusted model.Conclusions: Among a nationally representative sample, there were higher S-anxiety and lower EQ-5D-3L VAS scores compared to non-pandemic normative data, indicative of a potential detrimental acute effect of the pandemic. More frequent daily media viewership was significantly associated with higher S-anxiety but also predictive of higher health utility, as measured by EQ-5D-3L VAS scores. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several factors including ethnicity are known to influence 25(OH)D levels. The purpose of our study was to assess 25(OH)D levels among 1374 pediatric subjects of different ethnicity and to determine the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency and insufficiency among different ethnic groups. The prevalence of 25(OH)D ≤20 ng/ml was 44.2, 65.2, 69.2, 54.0, and 44.8 % among Caucasians, Africans, North Africans, Indians, and others, respectively ( P < 0.001). The median of 25(OH)D was 21.0 ng/ml (IQR = 14.0-29.6 ng/ml) for the cohort. Season of blood sampling, age, ethnicity, gestational age, birth weight, and z-score BMI were associated with 25(OH)D levels. Caucasians had higher median 25(OH)D levels than sub-Saharan Africans ( P < 0.001), North Africans ( P < 0.001), and Indians ( P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the median 25(OH)D levels between ethnic groups among infants, whereas for children older than 1 year we found significant differences in 25(OH)D levels in the different ethnic groups, compared to Caucasians. Conclusion: Ethnicity was correlated with 25(OH)D levels among children older than 1 year. We found a high prevalence of vitamin D deficiency and insufficiency after the first year of life, and this was more remarkable in non-Caucasian children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]