Search

Background The clinical and laboratory features of patients enrolled in the Severe Asthma Network in Italy (SANI) registry, a web-based observatory collecting demographic, clinical, functional and inflammatory data of patients with severe asthma were evaluated, with a special emphasis to chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP). Methods For each eligible patients the following information has been collected: demographic data, clinical features, asthma control in the previous month according to the GINA (Global INitiative for Asthma) Guidelines and standardized questionnaires, concomitant regular and on demand treatments and inflammatory markers. Results 695 patients with severe asthma enrolled in 66 SANI centers were analyzed. The prevalence of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis was 40.6%. Atopic dermatitis and bronchiectasis was significantly more frequent in patients with CRSwNP than in subjects without nasal polyposis; similarly, FeNO values are significantly higher in subject with CRSwNP than in patients without nasal polyposis. Finally, patients with CRSwNP had a significantly higher number of asthma exacerbations per year, more days on oral corticosteroids and were more likely to be OCS long term users. Conclusion OCS sparing is needed in patients with severe asthma, mainly in subjects with CRSwNP, adopting adequate strategies such as a better adherence to the treatment with inhaled therapy according to the GINA recommendations, the use of biologic agents and a multidisciplinary approach of the patient.

To the Editor Since the end of February 2020 Italy, first non- Asian Country, has reported an ever increasing number of COronaVIrus Disease 19 (COVID-19) patients, which has reached over 200,000 confirmed Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infected subjects and resulted in more than 34000 deaths (data updated to June 19th, 20201).Patients with asthma are potentially more severely affected by by SARS-CoV-2 infection 2 and it is well established that respiratory viral infections are associated with severe adverse outcomes in patients with asthma, including increased risk of asthma exacerbation episodes 3. Nonetheless, according to the epidemiological studies published so far, chronic pulmonary diseases are not amongst the most common clinical conditions in COVID-19 patients4About 5-10% of entire asthma population, are severe asthmatics5 and one would expect increased vulnerability to SARS-CoV-2 infection, but no data is so fare available ti confirm this hypothesis.We investigated the incidence of COVID-19, describing its clinical course, in the population of the Severe Asthma Network in Italy (SANI), one of the largest registry for severe asthma worldwide6, and in an additional Center (Azienda Ospedaliero Univeristaria di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy). All centers, have been contacted and inquired to report confirmed (i.e. patients with positive test result for the virus SARS-CoV-2 from analysis of nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab specimens) or highly suspect cases of COVID-19 (i.e. patients with symptoms, laboratory findings and lung imaging typical of COVID-19 but without access to nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab specimens because of clinical contingencies/emergency) among their cohorts of severe asthma. Demographic and clinical data of the entire cohort of severe asthmatics enrolled in the study and all reported cases of confirmed or suspect cases of COVID-19, have been obtained from the registry platform and collected from the additional Center. Additional data about COVID-19 symptoms, treatment and clinical course have been collected for all cases reported.Ethical issues and statistical analysis are reported in the online supplementary material.Twenty-six (1.73%) out of 1504 severe asthmatics had confirmed (11 out of 26) or highly suspect COVID-19 (15 out 26); eighteen (69.2%) were females and mean age was 56.2 ± 10 years. The geographical distribution of COVID-19 cases is presented in Figure 1.Nine (34.6%) infected patients experienced worsening of asthma during the COVID-19 symptomatic period; four of them needed a short course of oral corticosteroids for controlling asthma exacerbation symptoms.The most frequent COVID-19 symptoms reported were fever (100% of patients), malaise (84.6%), cough (80.8%), dyspnea (80.8%), headache (42.3%) and loss of smell (42.3%). Four patients (15.3%) have been hospitalized, one of which in intensive care unit; among hospitalized patients, two (7.7%) died for COVID-19 interstitial pneumonia. No deaths have been reported among the non-hospitalized patients.Severe asthmatics affected by COVID-19, had a significantly higher prevalence of non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) compared to non-infected severe asthma patients (15.4% vs 3.8%, p=0.002; odds ratio: 4.7). No difference was found in other comorbidities (including rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis with or without nasal polyps, bronchiectasis, obesity, gastroesophageal reflux, arterial hypertension, cardiovascular diseases).Twenty-one patients with COVID-19 were on biological treatments: 15 (71%) were on anti-IL-5 or anti-IL5R agents (Mepolizumab n= 13; Benralizumab n=2 - counting for the 2.9% of all severe asthmatics treated with anti-IL5 in our study population) and 6 (29%) were on anti IgE (Omalizumab - 1.3% of all severe asthmatics treated with omalizumab in our study population).Table I summarizes demographic and clinical characteristics of the 26 COVID-19 patients.In conclusion, in our large cohort of severe asthmatics, COVID-19 was infrequent, not supporting the concept of asthma as a particularly susceptible condition to SARS-COV2 infection 2. This is in line with the first published large epidemiological data on COVID-19 patients, in which asthma is under-reported as comorbidity4. The COVID-19 related mortality rate in our cohort of patients was 7.7%, lower than the COVID-19 mortality rate in the general population (14.5% in Italy 1). These findings suggest that severe asthmatics are not at high risk of the SARS-CoV-2 infection and of severe forms of COVID-19. There are potentially different reasons for this. Self-containment is the first, because of the awareness of virus infections acting as a trigger for exacerbations, and therefore they could have acted with greater caution, scrupulously respecting social distancing, lockdown and hygiene rules of prevention, and being more careful in regularly taking asthma medications.Another possible explanation stands in the intrinsic features of type-2 inflammation, that characterizes a great proportion of severe asthmatics. Respiratory allergies and controlled allergen exposures are associated with significant reduction in angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) expression 7, the cellular receptor for SARS-CoV-2. Interestingly, ACE2 and Transmembrane Serine Protease 2 (TMPRSS2) (another protein mediating SARS-CoV-2 cell entry) have been found highly expressed in asthmatics with concomitant NIDDM8, the only comorbidity that was more frequent reported in our COVID-19 severe asthmatics.The third possible explanation refers to the possibility that inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) might prevent or mitigate the development of Coronaviruses infections. By definition, patients with severe asthma are treated with high doses of ICS 5 and this may have had a protective effect for SARS-CoV-2 infection.Noteworthy, among the patients of our case-series of severe asthmatics with COVID-19, the proportion of those treated anti-IL5 biologics was higher (71%) compared to the number of patients treated with anti-IgE (29%). Although the number of cases is too small to draw any conclusion, it is tempting to speculate that different biological treatments can have specific and different impact on antiviral immune response. In addition we may speculate of the consequence of blood eosinophils reduction: eosinopenia has been reported in 52-90% of COVID-19 patients worldwide and it has been suggested as a risk factor for more severe COVID-19 9.In conclusion, in our large cohort of severe asthmatics only a small minority experienced symptoms consistent with COVID-19, and these patients had peculiar clinical features including high prevalence of NIDDM as comorbidity. Further real-life registry-based studies are needed to confirm our findings and to extend the evidence that severe asthmatics are at low risk of developing COVID-19.

Francesca Puggioni,1,2 Luisa Brussino,3 Giorgio Walter Canonica,1,2 Francesco Blasi,4,5 Pierluigi Paggiaro,6 Marco Caminati,7,8 Manuela Latorre,6 Enrico Heffler,1,2 Gianenrico Senna7,8 On behalf of the Severe Asthma Network in Italy (SANI) group1Personalized Medicine, Asthma and Allergy – Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCCS – Rozzano (MI), Milan, Italy; 2Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University – Pieve Emanuele (MI), Milan, Italy; 3Dipartimento di Scienze Mediche, SSDDU Allergologia e Immunologia Clinica, Università degli Studi di Torino, AO Ordine Mauriziano Umberto I – Torino, Torino, Italy; 4Department of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; 5Internal Medicine Department, Respiratory Unit and Adult Cystic Fibrosis Center, Fondazione IRCCS Cà Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico di Milano, Milan, Italy; 6Department of Surgery, Medicine, Molecular Biology and Critical Care, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy; 7Department of Medicine, University of Verona, Verona, Italy; 8Allergy Unit and Asthma Center, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Verona, ItalyCorrespondence: Enrico HefflerPersonalized Medicine, Asthma and Allergy, Istituto Clinico Humanitas, Milan, ItalyTel +39 0288247013Fax + 39 0282246484Email enrico.heffler@hunimed.euPurpose: Patients with uncontrolled asthma despite high doses of inhaled corticosteroid therapy plus another controller are defined as severe asthmatics. Tiotropium bromide respimat (TBR) is the only long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) approved for severe asthma. The aim of this study was to explore the frequency of severe asthmatics treated with TBR and characterize their clinical features in a real-life, registry-based setting.Materials and Methods: Baseline data from the Severe Asthma Network in Italy (SANI) registry have been analyzed to determine the use of TBR and other LAMA, and to compare clinical, functional and inflammatory features associated with the use of LAMA.Results: Among a total of 698 enrolled patients, 35.9% were treated with LAMA (23.3% TBR, 4.5% tiotropium bromide handihaler, 4.5% aclidinium, 3.4% glycopyrronium bromide 0.3% umeclidinium bromide). Age of asthma onset was higher in patients taking LAMA, whom, compared to others were more frequently former smokers. They also had a higher annual exacerbation rate, experienced worst asthma control, worst disease-related quality of life and poorer lung function. Bronchiectasis was more frequently found in LAMA users (25.9% vs 13.1%).Conclusion: TBR is still underused in severe asthma in a real-life setting, while a relevant proportion of patients are treated with other LAMA that are not approved for severe asthma treatment. Patients taking LAMA have features characteristic of even more severe asthma.Keywords: severe asthma, registry, long-acting muscarinic antagonists, real-ligfe

Little is known about the characteristics and treatments of patients with severe asthma across Europe, but both are likely to vary. This is the first study in the European Respiratory Society Severe Heterogeneous Asthma Research collaboration, Patient-centred (SHARP) Clinical Research Collaboration and it is designed to explore these variations. Therefore, we aimed to compare characteristics of patients in European severe asthma registries and treatments before starting biologicals.This was a cross-sectional retrospective analysis of aggregated data from 11 national severe asthma registries that joined SHARP with established patient databases.Analysis of data from 3236 patients showed many differences in characteristics and lifestyle factors. Current smokers ranged from 0% (Poland and Sweden) to 9.5% (Belgium), mean body mass index ranged from 26.2 (Italy) to 30.6 kg·m−2 (the UK) and the largest difference in mean pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s % predicted was 20.9% (the Netherlands versus Hungary). Before starting biologicals patients were treated differently between countries: mean inhaled corticosteroid dose ranged from 700 to 1335 µg·day−1 between those from Slovenia versus Poland when starting anti-interleukin (IL)-5 antibody and from 772 to 1344 µg·day−1 in those starting anti-IgE (Slovenia versus Spain). Maintenance oral corticosteroid use ranged from 21.0% (Belgium) to 63.0% (Sweden) and from 9.1% (Denmark) to 56.1% (the UK) in patients starting anti-IL-5 and anti-IgE, respectively.The severe asthmatic population in Europe is heterogeneous and differs in both clinical characteristics and treatment, often appearing not to comply with the current European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society guidelines definition of severe asthma. Treatment regimens before starting biologicals were different from inclusion criteria in clinical trials and varied between countries.

Allergic Rhinitis (AR) is an IgE-mediated hypersensitivity disease caused by inhalation of an allergen to which the patients is sensitized. Etiopathogenesis of AR comprises a sensitization phase, an immediate phase and a late phase. In the sensitization phase, inhaled allergens are processed in peptides and come into contact with the nasal mucosa cells. Antigen-Presenting Cells (APCs), especially represented by Dendritic Cells (DCs), capture them through the interaction with their own MHC class II complexes and migrate to lymph nodes. Then, allergenic peptides are presented to naïve CD4+ T lymphocytes and a differentiation of T cells in Th2 subset takes place. After Th2 lymphocyte induction due to allergen exposure, the most relevant cytokines that are produced are represented by IL-3, IL-4, IL-5, IL-9, IL-10, and IL-13 that are able to promote IgE synthesis and mast cell proliferation. The allergen reaction, when allergen meets its specific IgEs on mast cells surface, causes an early inflammatory reaction determined by mast cells and basophils degranulation with release of preformed mediators from the intracellular granules, resulting in symptoms such as rhinorrhea, itching and sneezing. This phase is followed by a late phase characterized by the release of newly formed mediators, like leukotrienes, chemokines and adhesion molecules, and by the recruitment of eosinophils, neutrophils, macrophages, mast cells, lymphocytes B and T in the nasal mucosa. Such mechanism is responsible for continuing inflammation sustained by chemoattractants, cytokines and adhesion receptors that induce cellular infiltration of eosinophils, basophils, Th2 lymphocytes and mast cells and is clinically mirrored by the prevalence of nasal congestion over sneezing, itching and rhinorrhea.

As standard drug treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) is not completely satisfactory, allergen immunotherapy (AIT) represents the only current treatment with the potential to modify the natural history. House dust mite (HDM) allergy is very common. The aim of the current experience was to describe the clinical profile of HDM-allergic patients with AR who received AIT in a real world model, such as allergy clinics. Globally, 239 patients (126 adults and 113 children; 107 females and 132 males; mean age 21 years, age range 6–56 years) were evaluated. AIT was prescribed in 59 patients (24.7%), 44 adults (35%) and 15 children (13.3%). The current findings deriving from this real world multicentre study are consistent with previous investigations on HDM-AIT and define some clinical characteristics of the eligible candidate to this treatment. In fact, severity of ocular-nasal symptoms and over-use of symptomatic medications may typify the ideal candidate to HDM-AIT and SLIT was the preferred choice.

Background: Immigrants represent a good epidemiological model to evaluate the relative influence of environmental and inherited factors on the development of allergy. Several studies on allergy in adults have been published, but few data in children are available. We aimed to investigate the differences, between Italian and immigrant children, in clinical characteristics of respiratory allergy. Methods: This was a multicentre cross-sectional study involving children born in Italy from Italian parents and children born either in Italy or abroad from immigrants. Children referred firstly for allergic respiratory disease (rhinitis/asthma), with an ascertained clinical diagnosis and IgE sensitization to inhalants, were included. Demographic features, comorbidities, severity of disease, and sensitization profile were compared between Italians and immigrants, separating also those born in Italy from immigrant parents and those born abroad. Results: One hundred and sixty-five immigrant allergic children were enrolled (100 male, mean age 8.3 yr), 128 of whose had both parents immigrated. Italian children were 237 (156 male, mean age 8.4 yr). The Italian and immigrant children were similar, apart from pet's ownership and family size. There was no difference in the severity of rhinitis/asthma between the groups, whereas significant differences were found in the pattern of sensitization: immigrant children were more frequently sensitized to house dust mites (73.3% vs. 51%, respectively; p = 0.002) and less to grass (41.8% vs. 57.8%; p = 0.002); this was retained also in monosensitized children. Immigrant children born in Italy (n = 105) had a lower prevalence of rhinitis vs. Italians (68.3% vs. 87.6%, respectively, p = 0.003) and of sensitization to grass (28.3% vs. 49.5%, respectively, p = 0.008). No difference was found among macro-regions of origin and demographic or clinical features. Conclusions: Immigrant children born either in Italy or abroad did not show significant differences in the clinical pattern of the respiratory allergic disease when compared to children born from Italian parents. © 2014 John Wiley & Sons A/S.

Background Respiratory allergy is influenced and determined by genetic and environmental factors. Migration is a good model to indirectly evaluate the possible influence of environment. Objective To assess the clinical characteristics of respiratory allergy in immigrants to Italy, in comparison with the Italian population. Methods The clinical/demographic data of those immigrants stably living in Italy and referred for the first time to allergy services for respiratory allergy were collected in a multicenter survey. All the patients underwent a standard diagnostic workup. A matched Italian population was also examined. Results Six hundred ninety-eight immigrants and 859 Italians had at least one positive skin test and were analyzed. Most of the patients were referred to the allergy units by their general practitioners. In those patients, the demographic characteristics were not different, except for family size. Immigrants had less family history of atopy. Only 16% had a clinical history of allergy before migration. The time elapsed between migration and onset of symptoms was 5.3 ± 3.1 years, with a minimum of 0.5 and a maximum of 7 years. A higher rate of monosensitization was seen among immigrants, and the severity of their asthma/rhinitis was greater than in Italians. No difference was seen in the pattern of sensitizations. Conclusion In this population of immigrants, environmental factors play a relevant role in the onset of respiratory allergies.

To cite this article: Baiardini I, Braido F, Bindslev-Jensen C, Bousquet PJ, Brzoza Z, Canonica GW, Compalati E, Fiocchi A, Fokkens W, Gerth van Wijk R, Giménez-Arnau A, Godse K, Grattan C, Grob JJ, La Grutta S, Kalogeromitros D, Kocatürk E, Lombardi C, Mota-Pinto A, Ridolo E, Saini SS, Sanchez-Borges M, Senna GE, Terreehorst I, Todo Bom A, Toubi E, Bousquet J, Zuberbier T, Maurer M. Recommendations for assessing patient-reported outcomes and health-related quality of life in patients with urticaria: a GA(2) LEN taskforce position paper. Allergy 2011; 66: 840-844. ABSTRACT: The aim of this Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA(2) LEN) consensus report is to provide recommendations and suggestions for assessing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) including health-related quality of life in patients with urticaria. We recommend that PROs should be used both in clinical trials and routine practice for the evaluation of urticaria patients. We suggest that PROs should be considered as the primary outcome of future clinical trials. Two validated and disease-specific instruments for assessing PROs are available, the urticaria activity score (for symptoms) and the chronic urticaria questionnaire on quality of life CU-Q(2) oL. This latter tool, CU-Q(2) oL, is available in many languages and should be preferred, where available, over more generic instruments for assessing urticaria-specific effects on quality of life. CU-Q(2) oL is only suited for the investigation of patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria. Similar instruments for other forms of urticaria have yet to be developed and validated. Also, tools for assessing other chronic spontaneous urticaria PROs besides quality of life and symptoms are needed