Search

Background: Higher asthma burden is more likely to be experienced by Black than White patients. In clinical research, underrepresentation of minority populations is observed., Objective: To estimate response to omalizumab in Black and White patients in North America with moderate to severe asthma., Methods: Data from placebo-controlled (EXTRA) and single-armed (PROSPERO) omalizumab studies were used for this post hoc analysis. We used a Poisson regression model to examine exacerbation rates. An analysis of covariance model was used to estimate placebo-corrected change in FEV 1 and Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) by racial group., Results: This analysis included 631 White and 176 Black patients from EXTRA and 567 White and 130 Black patients from PROSPERO. In EXTRA, placebo-corrected exacerbation rate reductions (relative rate change [95% confidence interval], 22.6% [2.0-38.9%] vs 22.0% [-18.0% to 48.4%]) and FEV 1 improvements were similar for White and Black patients. There was a trend toward greater AQLQ improvements for Black versus White patients (least squares mean treatment differences: 0.0 vs 0.3, 0.6 vs 0.4, and 0.6 vs 0.2 at weeks 16, 32, and 48, respectively) throughout the study. In PROSPERO, on-study exacerbation rates (0.76 [0.65-0.88] vs 0.77 [0.56-1.10]) and AQLQ improvements (least squares mean change from baseline: 1.2 vs 1.2 and 1.3 vs 1.2 at month 6 and end of study, respectively) were similar for White versus Black patients. A trend toward greater FEV 1 improvement was observed in White versus Black patients throughout the study., Conclusions: This analysis of EXTRA and PROSPERO suggests that Black and White patients with moderate to severe asthma experience similar improvements in exacerbations, FEV 1 , and AQLQ with omalizumab., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Anosmia and ageusia are symptoms commonly associated with COVID-19, but the relationship with disease severity, onset and recovery are unclear., Objective: To examine factors associated with anosmia and ageusia and the recovery from these symptoms in an ethnically diverse cohort., Methods: Individuals tested for SARS-CoV-2 between March and April 2020 were eligible for the study. Randomly selected participants answered a telephone questionnaire on COVID-19 symptoms with a focus on anosmia and ageusia. Additionally, relevant past medical history and data on the COVID-19 clinical course were obtained from electronic medical records. 486 patients were in the COVID-19 group and 103 were COVID-19-negative., Results: Patients who were younger were more likely to report anosmia and/or ageusia (odds ratio (OR) for anosmia per 1-year increase in age: 0·98, 95%CI:0-97-0·99, p  = 0·003; for ageusia: 0·98, 95%CI:0·97-0·99, p  = 0·005) as were patients with lower eosinophil counts (OR for anosmia per 0.1-K/μL increase in eosinophils: 0·02, 95%CI:0·001-0·46, p  = 0·01, for ageusia 0·10, 95%CI:0·01-0·97, p  = 0·047). Male gender was independently associated with a lower probability of ageusia (OR:0·56, 95%CI:0·38-0·82, p  = 0·003) and earlier sense of taste recovery (HR:1·44, 95%CI:1·05-1·98, p  = 0·02). Latinos showed earlier sense of taste recovery than white patients (HR:1·82, 95%CI:1·05-3·18, p  = 0·03)., Conclusion: Anosmia and ageusia were more common among younger patients and those with lower blood eosinophil counts. Ageusia was less commonly reported among men, and time to taste recovery was earlier among both men and Latinos.

Competing Interests: G.H. is on the advisory board for AstraZeneca and is a principal investigator at Genentech, Merck, and AstraZeneca. E.J. has a research grant from Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, Inc, and served on the advisory board for Sanofi/Regeneron, GSK, and Genentech/Novartis. In the previous 12 months, E.J. has served as a committee member on the National Board of Medical Education and the US Medical Licensing Examination Committee. The other authors have no funding or conflicts of interest to declare.

Background: Comorbidities are common in asthma and may complicate treatment response., Objective: To examine response to omalizumab in patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma by asthma-related and allergic comorbidities., Methods: Patients aged 12 years or more from placebo-controlled 008/009 (n = 1071), EXTRA (n = 848), and INNOVATE (n = 419), and single-armed PROSPERO (n = 801) omalizumab studies were included. Poisson regression/analysis of covariance models were used to estimate adjusted exacerbation rates and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) change from baseline after omalizumab initiation for subgroups by number of comorbidities (0, 1 [008/009]; 0, 1, ≥2 [EXTRA and INNOVATE]; 0, 1, 2, ≥3 [PROSPERO]). Self-reported comorbidities included allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, recurrent acute sinusitis, nasal polyps, atopic and contact dermatitis, urticaria, food allergy, anaphylaxis, other allergies, gastroesophageal reflux disease, eosinophilic esophagitis, and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis., Results: In the EXTRA and INNOVATE studies, no consistent pattern was observed for placebo-corrected relative rate reduction in normalized asthma exacerbations among omalizumab-treated comorbidity subgroups. In PROSPERO, on-study exacerbation rates in the comorbidity subgroups were similar (0, 0.68; 1, 0.70; 2, 0.77; ≥3, 0.80). FEV1 improvements were observed throughout the study for omalizumab vs placebo for all comorbidity subgroups. There were no consistent differences in FEV1 improvements among comorbidity subgroups in 008/009, EXTRA, or INNOVATE. Similarly, no among-group differences were observed for FEV1 change from baseline at month 12 in PROSPERO (0, 0.05 L; 1, 0.08 L; 2, 0.00 L; ≥3, 0.04 L). The 95% confidence intervals overlapped substantially in all instances., Conclusion: In these analyses of placebo-controlled/single-armed studies, on-study exacerbation rates and FEV1 improvements with omalizumab treatment were similar irrespective of comorbidity burden., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers are as follows: EXTRA, NCT00314574 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00314574); INNOVATE, NCT00046748 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00046748); and PROSPERO, NCT01922037 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01922037)., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is a paucity of information on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes in asthmatics., Objective: To identify risk factors associated with admission and subsequent mortality among COVID-19-infected asthmatics., Methods: Adults at our institution with a positive polymerase chain reaction for COVID-19 between March 14 and April 27, 2020, were retrospectively identified. Comorbidities, laboratory results, and mortality rates during hospitalization were recorded., Results: In total, 737 of 951 (77.5%) asthma patients with COVID-19 were seen in the emergency department (ED), and 78.8% of these ED patients (581 of 737) were admitted. Individuals with previously measured mean absolute eosinophil counts (AEC) ≥150 cells/μL were less likely to be admitted (odds ratio [OR] = 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21-0.98, P = .04), whereas concomitant heart failure (CHF), chronic kidney disease (CKD), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were risk factors for admission. Hospitalized patients with asthma with peak hospital-measured AEC ≥150 cells/μL (n = 104) were less likely to die compared with those whose AEC remained <150 cells/μL (n = 213) (mortality rate 9.6% vs 25.8%; OR = 0.006, 95% CI: 0.0001-0.64, P = .03). This group had also higher preadmission mean AEC (237 ± 181 vs 163 ± 147 cells/μL, P = .001, OR = 2012, 95% CI: 27.3-14,816). The mortality rate in patients with asthma alone (no associated CHF, CKD, COPD, diabetes, or hypertension) was similar to that of patients without asthma or any of these comorbidities., Conclusions: In asthmatics, pre-existing eosinophilia (AEC ≥150 cells/μL) was protective from COVID-19-associated admission, and development of eosinophilia (AEC ≥150 cells/μL) during hospitalization was associated with decreased mortality. Preadmission AEC influenced the AEC trend during hospitalization. Having a Th2-asthma phenotype might be an important predictor for reduced COVID-19 morbidity and mortality that should be further explored in prospective and mechanistic studies., (Copyright © 2020 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can progress to a state of unregulated inflammation called cytokine storm syndrome (CSS). We describe formation and operation of a COVID-19 multidisciplinary consultation service that was allowed to individualize treatment for critically ill patients with COVID-19 during the pandemic., Methods: Institutional experts from different subspecialties formed a COVID-19 CSS task force at Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY. They agreed on a set of four clinical and six laboratory parameters that can help early identify COVID-19 CSS. We describe the formation and implementation of the COVID-19 task force. The case series description of the COVID-19 CSS consultation cohort highlights consultation volume, baseline characteristics, clinical and laboratory parameters, and how biologic treatments were allocated to these patients., Results: Between April 4,2020, and May 7,2020, the COVID-19 CSS task force was formed, consisting of adult and pediatric rheumatologists and allergy and immunology physicians. The task force evaluated a total of 288 patients, of whom 197 (68%) were male, the median (interquartile range [IQR]) age was 62 (51-70) years, 122 (42%) were Hispanic, and 88 (31%) were Black or African American. The common presenting symptoms in all referred patients were dyspnea (85%) and diarrhea (80%). Thirty-one patients who received biologic therapy were younger, with a median (IQR) age of 53 (32-63) years, as opposed to 62.5 (52-70) years in the nonbiologic group (P = 0.008). A higher proportion receiving biologics was in the critical care setting (26 [84%] vs 151 [59%]; P = 0.006)., Conclusion: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first multidisciplinary collaborative effort to provide individualized patient recommendations for evaluation and treatment of patients with COVID-19 who may have CSS. This working model helped to devise an approach that may have identified patients who were most likely to benefit from biologic therapy in the absence of evidence-based guidelines., (© 2021 The Authors. ACR Open Rheumatology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

Background: Aspirin desensitization followed by daily aspirin provides therapeutic benefits to patients with aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD). It is not well understood how eicosanoid levels change during aspirin treatment., Objective: To investigate associations between clinical outcomes of aspirin treatment and plasma eicosanoid levels in patients with AERD., Methods: Thirty-nine patients with AERD were offered aspirin treatment (650 mg twice daily) for 4 weeks. Respiratory parameters and plasma levels of multiple eicosanoids were recorded at baseline and after 4 weeks of aspirin therapy using the Asthma Control Test and Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire. Respiratory function was evaluated using the FEV 1 and nasal inspiratory peak flow., Results: After aspirin treatment, respiratory symptoms improved in 16 patients, worsened in 12 patients, and did not change in 4 patients. Seven patients were unable to complete the desensitization protocol. Patients with symptom improvement had higher baseline plasma 15-hydroxyeicosatetraenoic acid (15-HETE) levels than did patients with symptom worsening: 7006 pg/mL (interquartile range, 6056-8688 pg/mL) versus 4800 pg/mL (interquartile range, 4238-5575 pg/mL), P = .0005. Baseline 15-HETE plasma levels positively correlated with the change in Asthma Control Test score (r = 0.61; P = .001) and in FEV 1 after 4 weeks of aspirin treatment (r = 0.49; P = .01). It inversely correlated with Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire score (r = -0.58; P = .002). Black and Latino patients were more likely to have symptom worsening on aspirin or fail to complete the initial desensitization than white, non-Latino patients (P = .02)., Conclusions: In patients with AERD, low baseline 15-HETE plasma levels and black or Latino ethnicity are associated with worsening of respiratory symptoms during aspirin treatment., (Copyright © 2016 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. All rights reserved.)

Background: Allergists commonly perform intradermal skin testing (IDST) after negative skin-prick testing (SPT) to comprehensively diagnose environmental allergic sensitization. However, with the availability of modern methods to detect serum-specific immunoglobulin E (ssIgE), it is unclear if ssIgE testing could substitute for IDST., Objective: To determine the efficacy of ssIgE testing and IDST when added to SPT in diagnosing environmental allergic sensitizations., Methods: SPT, IDST, and ssIgE testing to nine common environmental allergens were analyzed in 75 patients with oculonasal symptoms who presented to our allergy clinics in the Bronx, New York, between January 2014 and May 2015., Results: A total of 651 SPT and 499 ssIgE tests were independently performed and revealed 162 (25%) and 127 (25%) sensitizations, respectively. When SPT results were negative, IDST results revealed 108 of 452 additional sensitizations (24%). In contrast, when SPT results were negative, ssIgE test results only revealed 9% additional sensitizations. When both SPT and IDST results were negative, ssIgE testing only detected 3% of additional sensitizations, and ssIgE levels were typically low in these cases (median, 1.25 kU/L; range, 0.357-4.47 kU/L). When both SPT and ssIgE test results were negative, IDST results detected 15% additional sensitizations., Conclusion: IDST detected more additional environmental sensitizations compared with ssIgE testing. IDST, therefore, may be useful when the SPT and/or ssIgE testing results were negative, but the exposure history indicated relevant allergic sensitization. Serology added only a little more information if both SPT and IDST results were negative but may be useful in combination with SPT if IDST cannot be performed.

Introduction: Asthma prevalence is reportedly higher among U.S.-born relative to foreign-born Hispanics/Latinos. Little is known about rates of asthma onset before and after relocation to the U.S. in Latinos. Asthma rates were examined by U.S. residence and country/territory of origin., Methods: In 2015-2016, age at first onset of asthma symptoms was analyzed, defined retrospectively from a cross-sectional survey in 2008-2011, in relation to birthplace and U.S. residence among 15,573 U.S.-dwelling participants (aged 18-76 years) in the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos., Results: Cumulative incidence of asthma through age 30 years ranged from 7.9% among Mexican background individuals to 29.4% among those of Puerto Rican background. Among those born outside the U.S. mainland, the adjusted hazard for asthma was 1.52-fold higher (95% CI=1.25, 1.85) after relocation versus before relocation to the U.S. mainland, with heterogeneity in this association by Hispanic/Latino background (p-interaction<0.0001). Among foreign-born Dominicans and Mexicans, rates of asthma were greater after relocation versus before relocation (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] for after versus before relocation, 2.42, 95% CI=1.44, 4.05 among Dominicans; AHR=2.90, 95% CI=2.02, 4.16 among Mexicans). Puerto Ricans had modestly increased asthma onset associated with U.S. mainland residence (AHR=1.52, 95% CI=1.06, 2.17). No similar increase associated with U.S. residence was observed among Central/South American immigrants (AHR=0.94, 95% CI=0.53, 1.67). Asthma rates among Cuban immigrants were lower after relocation (AHR=0.45, 95% CI=0.24, 0.82)., Conclusions: The effect of relocation to the U.S. on asthma risk among Hispanics is not uniform across Hispanic/Latino groups., (Copyright © 2017 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The immunomodulatory effects of helminths have been well described. However, there is a relative lack of literature regarding the link between parasites and allergic diseases. A number of patients with allergic symptoms have positive serologic test results for Strongyloides stercoralis., Objective: To identify patients with allergy-type symptoms and coexisting Strongyloides infection and to analyze the effect of Strongyloides eradication therapy with ivermectin on these symptoms., Methods: The medical records of our allergy clinic sites were reviewed for Strongyloides test results between January 2011 and October 2014. Each allergy-type symptom was assessed separately with regard to improvement after ivermectin therapy., Results: Among the 1,446 patients who had Strongyloides serologic tests ordered, 127 (8.8%) had positive test results. Eighty-four patients had follow-up data regarding allergy-type symptoms after ivermectin treatment. Among these, 52 patients (61.9%) reported skin-related problems (pruritus, urticaria, angioedema, and/or rash). Forty-nine patients (58.3%) had asthma, and 73.8% had allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. Although respiratory symptoms typically did not respond to ivermectin treatment, 24 of 48 patients (50%) with skin symptoms reported a significant subjective improvement of symptoms after ivermectin treatment. Peripheral eosinophil counts significantly decreased after ivermectin treatment from 450 to 200/μL (P < .001)., Conclusion: Serologic testing for strongyloides may be indicated for patients with allergy-type symptoms and a suggestive exposure history. Patients with strongyloidiasis and primarily cutaneous symptoms experienced significant symptomatic improvement after ivermectin therapy., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD) is diagnosed through graded aspirin challenges that induce hypersensitivity reactions and eicosanoid level changes. It is not known whether diagnostically useful changes also occur after low-dose aspirin challenges that do not induce hypersensitivity reactions., Objective: To investigate the utility of low-dose oral aspirin challenges for diagnosing AERD by measuring different clinical parameters and eicosanoid changes., Methods: Sixteen patients with AERD and 13 patients with aspirin-tolerant asthma underwent oral challenges with low-dose (20 or 40 mg) aspirin and diagnostic oral graded aspirin challenges (up to 325 mg of aspirin). Forced expiratory volume in 1 second, nasal peak flow, the fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), and eicosanoid levels in plasma and urine were analyzed., Results: In patients with AERD but not in those with aspirin-tolerant asthma, 40-mg aspirin challenges induced a significant mean (SEM) decrease from baseline in FeNO (19% [5.1%]; P = .001) without causing any hypersensitivity reaction. The FeNO decrease also occurred after higher-dose aspirin challenges (27.8% [4.9%]; P < .001). The sensitivity and specificity of 40-mg aspirin-induced FeNO changes for identifying AERD were 90% and 100% with an area under the curve of 0.98 (95% CI, 0.92-1.00). The low-dose challenge also induced a significant leukotriene E4 urine increase in patients with AERD (from 6.32 [0.08] to 6.91 [0.15] log-pg/mg creatinine; P < .001), but the sensitivity and specificity of these changes were less than for the FeNO changes., Conclusion: The low-dose aspirin-induced decrease in FeNO in patients with AERD may be useful for the diagnosis of aspirin allergy without inducing a hypersensitivity reaction., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01320072., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)