Search

A small fraction of people vaccinated with mRNA–lipid nanoparticle (mRNA-LNP)-based COVID-19 vaccines display acute or subacute inflammatory symptoms whose mechanism has not been clarified to date. To better understand the molecular mechanism of these adverse events (AEs), here, we analyzed in vitro the vaccine-induced induction and interrelations of the following two major inflammatory processes: complement (C) activation and release of proinflammatory cytokines. Incubation of Pfizer-BioNTech's Comirnaty and Moderna's Spikevax with 75% human serum led to significant increases in C5a, sC5b-9, and Bb but not C4d, indicating C activation mainly via the alternative pathway. Control PEGylated liposomes (Doxebo) also induced C activation, but, on a weight basis, it was ~5 times less effective than that of Comirnaty. Viral or synthetic naked mRNAs had no C-activating effects. In peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) cultures supplemented with 20% autologous serum, besides C activation, Comirnaty induced the secretion of proinflammatory cytokines in the following order: IL-1α < IFN-γ < IL-1β < TNF-α < IL-6 < IL-8. Heat-inactivation of C in serum prevented a rise in IL-1α, IL-1β, and TNF-α, suggesting C-dependence of these cytokines' induction, although the C5 blocker Soliris and C1 inhibitor Berinert, which effectively inhibited C activation in both systems, did not suppress the release of any cytokines. These findings suggest that the inflammatory AEs of mRNA-LNP vaccines are due, at least in part, to stimulation of both arms of the innate immune system, whereupon C activation may be causally involved in the induction of some, but not all, inflammatory cytokines. Thus, the pharmacological attenuation of inflammatory AEs may not be achieved via monotherapy with the tested C inhibitors; efficacy may require combination therapy with different C inhibitors and/or other anti-inflammatory agents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Angioedema is a non-inflammatory edema of the subcutaneous tissue and/or mucosal membranes. It commonly coexists with urticaria and is considered a deep form of urticaria. Less commonly, it occurs as an isolated disease in one of two basic forms: acquired angioedema and hereditary angioedema. Four types of acquired angioedema and seven types of hereditary angioedema were difinied. The treatment of angioedema depends on its form and etiological factors, with hereditary angioedema posing a most significant challenge.

BackgroundHereditary angioedema (HAE) due to C1 inhibitor deficiency manifests as recurrent swelling attacks that can be disabling and sometimes fatal. Long-term prophylaxis with twice-weekly intravenous injections of plasma-derived C1-inhibitor (pdC1-INH) has been established as an effective treatment. Subcutaneous (SC) administration of pdC1-INH has not been studied in patients with HAE.MethodsThis open-label, dose-ranging, crossover study (COMPACT Phase II) was conducted in 18 patients with type I or II HAE who received two of twice-weekly 1500, 3000, or 6000 IU SC doses of highly concentrated volume-reduced CSL830 for 4 weeks each. The mean trough plasma levels of C1-INH functional activity, C1-INH and C4 antigen levels during Week 4, and overall safety and tolerability were evaluated. The primary outcome was model-derived steady-state trough C1-INH functional activity.ResultsAfter SC CSL830 administration, a dose-dependent increase in trough functional C1-INH activity was observed. C1-INH and C4 levels both increased. The two highest dose groups (3000 and 6000 IU) achieved constant C1-INH activity levels above 40% values, a threshold that was assumed to provide clinical protection against angioedema attacks. Compared with intravenous injection, pdC1-INH SC injection with CSL830 showed a lower peak-to-trough ratio and more consistent exposures. All doses were well tolerated. Mild-to-moderate local site reactions were noted with pain and swelling being the most common adverse event.ConclusionsSubcutaneous volume-reduced CSL830 was well tolerated and led to a dose-dependent increase in physiologically relevant functional C1-INH plasma levels. A clinical outcome study of SC CSL830 in patients with HAE warrants further investigation.

Angioedema is a non-inflammatory oedema of the subcutaneous tissue and/or mucosal membranes. It most commonly coexists with urticaria wheals and is considered to be a deep form of urticaria. Less commonly, it occurs in isolation and can take two basic forms: acquired angioedema and hereditary angioedema. Currently, there are 4 defined types of acquired angioedema and 7 types of hereditary angioedema. Treatment of angioedema depends on its form and etiological factors. Especially the genetic form, i.e. hereditary angioedema, is a considerable challenge for medical specialists, particularly dermatologists and allergists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Polish Journal of Allergology / Alergologia Polska is the property of Termedia Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are a commonly prescribed and effective medication to treat hypertension. Although generally well tolerated, about 1% of patients will experience angioedema, a potentially life-threatening adverse drug reaction. This reaction is thought to be mediated via a buildup of bradykinin and does not typically respond to epinephrine, corticosteroids, or antihistamines. Alternative treatment strategies have been investigated, the bulk of which surround the use of therapies approved for hereditary angioedema.Objective: Utilization of C1 esterase inhibitors at our institution was reviewed between 2016 and 2018 for treatment of ACE inhibitor-induced angioedema. We describe the clinical course of case series, along with a review of current literature.Discussion: Utilization of C1 esterase inhibitors for treating ACE inhibitor-induced angioedema is an uncommon therapy and has limited efficacy in our case series. Treatment did not result in rapid improvement of swelling, prevention of intubation, or prevention of intensive care unit admission.Conclusions: Based on our case series, C1 esterase therapy should not be utilized routinely for ACE inhibitor-induced angioedema and is not expected to prevent intubation in severe cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To describe 2 cases of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)-induced angioedema treated with C1 esterase inhibitor (human) [Berinert]. Summary: Case 1 is a 60-year-old Caucasian male with angioedema from lisinopril. He was initially treated with a conventional regimen of an antihistamine, methylprednisolone, epinephrine, and fresh frozen plasma. When symptoms did not resolve, intravenous C1 peptide esterase inhibitor (C1INH) was administered, with clinical improvement. Four hours later, symptoms returned and the patient underwent emergency tracheostomy. Case 2 is a 64-year-old Caucasian male who presented with angioedema due to enalapril. In the emergency department, he received conventional treatment. Endotracheal tube placement was unsuccessful. While the patient was undergoing intubation in the operating room, intravenous C1INH was administered resulting in quick improvement of symptoms. Discussion: Angioedema from ACEI occurs at an incidence of 0.7%. Conventional treatment may be of limited benefit due to the mechanism of the reaction. C1INHs, which are indicated for hereditary angioedema, have been utilized in treating ACEI-induced angioedema. According to the Naranjo algorithm scale, the patient in case 1 experienced angioedema that is probably related to lisinopril. C1INH was administered intravenously when symptoms progressed, despite conventional treatment. In case 2, the patient experienced angioedema, which is possibly related to enalapril, and was treated with C1INH. Conclusion: C1INH (human) was a successful addition to the traditional management of 2 patients with angioedema due to ACEI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presently, medications approved for children with Hereditary Angioedema (HAE) are extremely limited. This is especially the case for children under 12 years of age. For this reason we reviewed and summarized the data on treatment of children with HAE. Available data indicate that plasma derived C1-inhibitor is a safe, effective treatment option for HAE in pediatric patients, including those below 12 years of age. Other therapies are also appear safe for the under 12 year of age, but less data are available. Importantly, home-based treatment of HAE in this age group appears to be safe and effective and can improve quality of life. These findings support current HAE consensus guidelines which strongly recommend the use of plasma derived C1-inhibitor as a first-line treatment in children and encourage home and self-treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although treatment with C1 esterase inhibitor (C1-INH) concentrate is well established for hereditary angioedema (HAE) attacks in general, data that assess its efficacy for cutaneous attack treatment are sparse. Objective: To assess efficacy of plasma-derived, nanofiltered C1-INH concentrate for cutaneous attack treatment by comparing treated attacks from the uncontrolled I.M.P.A.C.T.2 study with historical data for untreated attacks. Methods: Cutaneous attack data from patients with HAE who were treated for cutaneous edema with 20 IU/kg body weight C1-INH concentrate in the uncontrolled I.M.P.A.C.T.2 study (38 patients) were compared with data from untreated patients from an historical data base (46 patients) and included subset analyses for facial edema (treated group, 21 patients; untreated group, 33 patients) and peripheral edema (30 patients in each group). Average attack duration (AAD) per patient was the efficacy end point used to compare treated and untreated patients. Differences were assessed with a Wilcoxon test (primary analysis) and a log-rank test; AAD per patient was analyzed descriptively and graphically with Kaplan-Meier curves. Results: The AAD per patient of all cutaneous attacks or facial and peripheral cutaneous attack subsets was significantly faster with C1-INH treatment than without treatment (Wilcoxon and log-rank tests, both p < 0.0001 for all comparisons). Mean AADs per patient for all, facial, and peripheral attacks were 2.04, 1.45, and 2.16 days, respectively, in the C1-INH-treated group, and were 3.74, 4.45, and 2.98 days, respectively, in the untreated group. Kaplan-Meier curves corroborated the observed group differences. Conclusion: Treatment of cutaneous HAE attacks (all attacks or facial and peripheral attack subsets) with 20 IU/kg C1-INH concentrate provided faster attack resolution compared with no treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Therapies used for hereditary angioedema (HAE) have been associated with adverse events to include thrombosis, emboli, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), exacerbation of attacks, and anaphylaxis. It is difficult to determine incidence of these adverse events from the literature. For this reason we surveyed multiple HAE physicians to determine the risk associated with therapies used in HAE. This study was designed to determine by survey the risk of thrombosis associated with C1-inhibitor (C1-INH), worsening attacks with fresh frozen plasma (FFP), and carcinoma secondary to androgens (mainly danazol). An Internet-based survey was sent to physicians internationally who treat patients with HAE. The survey queried physicians about their observations while treating HAE. Of the 66 physicians who participated in the survey, 37 had patients (856 patients) who were on C1-INH but only 4 (total of 5 patients) had patients on C1-INH who experienced an thromboembolic episode. Of the 17 patients on C1 esterase inhibitor and an indwelling catheter, 3 experienced an embolic, thrombosis, or thromboembolic event. The likelihood of an abnormal event when a patient is on a C1-INH is 5/856 (0.6%), compared with 3/17 (18%) with a central catheter. The incidence of HCC is rare. The incidence of adverse effects to FFP is greater than the literature suggests. Patients with HAE should avoid indwelling catheters, use FFP only when other therapies are unavailable, and use androgens with caution. Most importantly, adverse events to drugs should be reported so that the true incidence of adverse events can be determined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In patients with hereditary angioedema (HAE), premonitory symptoms ('prodromes') may appear hours to days before attack onset. It remains to be determined if prodromes could be useful indicators for early treatment initiation. Most published reports of prodromes have been limited to case reports or small case series. The common objective of several recent survey-based studies was to collect information relevant to prodromal patterns in patients with HAE. Three separate surveys solicited prodromal data from HAE patients. Although differences in survey methodologies permit only descriptive analysis of data, responses to the surveys provide the largest compilation of observational data on this topic to date. Prodromes were reported by 82.5-95.7% of patients surveyed. In one survey, about two-thirds of subjects reported experiencing prodromes before all or most acute HAE attacks, and only 6% of subjects noted the appearance of prodromes in <10% of all attacks. The most common types of prodromal symptoms were related to skin/soft tissue and gastrointestinal tract. Most prodromes were experienced hours to days before the onset of angioedema. A large percentage of surveyed subjects indicated being able to predict an impending HAE attack all or most of the time; <10% reported being rarely or never able to predict an attack. Although insufficient to establish the clinical role of prodromal symptoms, results of these surveys provide additional data on the scope of prodromes and could stimulate further research into the potential efficacy and cost-effectiveness of HAE attack prediction and prodrome-triggered interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background We analyzed the clinical response of pediatric and adolescent hereditary angioedema ( HAE) patients to pd C1- INH in the International Multicenter Prospective Angioedema C1- INH Trials ( I.M.P.A.C.T.) 1 and 2. Methods Patients included in this post hoc analysis of prospectively collected data were between 10 and 18 yr old with type I or II HAE and a documented history of abdominal or facial attacks. Patients received a single injection of pd C1- INH concentrate ( Berinert®, CSL Behring, Marburg, Germany) 20 U/kg. Efficacy end-points were time from the administration of study drug to onset of symptom relief and time to complete relief of all symptoms. Results Seven pediatric patients were included in I.M.P.A.C.T.1 with only 1 attack analyzed per patient. Median time to onset of relief was 0.42 h and to complete resolution was 8.08 h. No patient experienced a worsening of symptoms during the 0-4-h assessment period. Nine patients who experienced a total of 115 attacks were included in the analysis of I.M.P.A.C.T.2. Abdominal attacks were rated as 'severe' more frequently than were other types of attacks. The number of attacks per patient ranged from 2 to 42, and study participation ranged from 1 to 38 months. Median times to onset of symptom relief and to complete symptom resolution were 0.49 h and 14.1 h, respectively. Of 4 treatment-emergent adverse events in both studies, only 2 were considered related to treatment. Conclusions Study results showed that outcomes with pd C1- INH treatment of HAE in pediatric patients are comparable with outcomes in adults. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Placebo-controlled studies established the efficacy of replacement therapy with C1 esterase inhibitor (C1-INH) concentrate for treating single acute hereditary angioedema (HAE) attacks, but only limited data from prospective studies are available on repeated treatment of successive HAE attacks. This study evaluates the association between repeated treatments with 20 U/kg of C1-INH concentrate (Berinert; CSL Behring, Marburg, Germany) for HAE attacks at any body location and treatment response. In a post hoc analysis of an open-label extension study (International Multicenter Prospective Angioedema C1-INH Trial [I.M.P.A.C.T.2]), the association between repeated treatment with C1-INH and times to onset of symptom relief and complete resolution of HAE symptoms was assessed in patients who were treated for at least 15 attacks by linear regression on the ordinal attack number. Eighteen patients received C1-INH concentrate for at least 15 HAE attacks over a mean duration of 34 months. Demographic and baseline characteristics of these patients were similar to those of all patients in the study. The distribution of body locations and the intensity of HAE attacks were similar for each of the first 15 attacks and subsequent attacks. The extent of previous use of C1-INH concentrate had no effect on the time to onset of symptom relief, the time to complete resolution of HAE symptoms, or the time between attacks treated with C1-INH concentrate; the median of individual linear regression coefficients was not statistically significantly different from 0. Treatment with 20 U/kg of C1-INH concentrate provided consistent treatment response in patients treated for multiple successive HAE attacks at any body location. (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00292981) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hereditary angioedema is characterized by severe, episodic edema of the subcutaneous and mucosal tissue. The disease carries significant morbidity and mortality due to involvement of the gastrointestinal tract and upper airway. Recent advances in the treatment of hereditary angioedema include new techniques used to isolate and purify human-derived C1 inhibitor, the production of a recombinant form of C1 inhibitor, and the development of drugs that target the kallikrein-kinin pathway. This paper reviews the mechanisms, efficacy, and adverse reactions associated with these medications., Competing Interests: Nathan M. Johnson reports no relevant conflicts of interest. Mariana A. Phillips reports no relevant conflicts of interest.

Background: The plasma-derived, highly purified, nanofiltered C1-inhibitor concentrate (Berinert; "pnfC1-INH") is approved in the United States for treating hereditary angioedema (HAE) attacks and in many European countries for attack treatment and short-term prophylaxis., Objective: The objective of this study was to describe safety and usage patterns of pnfC1-INH., Methods: A multicenter, observational, registry was conducted between 2010 and 2014 at 30 United States and 7 European sites to obtain both prospective (occurring after enrollment) and retrospective (occurring before enrollment) safety and usage data on subjects receiving pnfC1-INH for any reason., Results: Of 343 enrolled patients, 318 received 1 or more doses of pnfC1-INH for HAE attacks (11,848 infusions) or for prophylaxis (3142 infusions), comprising the safety population. Median dosages per infusion were 10.8 IU/kg (attack treatment) and 16.6 IU/kg (prophylaxis). Approximately 95% of infusions were administered outside of a health care setting. No adverse events (AEs) were reported in retrospective data. Among prospective data (n = 296 subjects; 9148 infusions), 252 AEs were reported in 85 (28.7%) subjects (rate of 0.03 events/infusion); 9 events were considered related to pnfC1-INH. Two thromboembolic events were reported in subjects with thrombotic risk factors. No patient was noted to have undergone viral testing for suspected blood-borne infection during registry participation., Conclusions: The findings from this large, international patient registry documented widespread implementation of pnfC1-INH self-administration outside of a health care setting consistent with current HAE guidelines. These real-world data revealed pnfC1-INH usage for a variety of reasons in patients with HAE and showed a high level of safety regardless of administration setting or reason for use., (Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: The plasma-derived, pasteurized C1-inhibitor (C1-INH) concentrate, Berinert has a 4-decade history of use in hereditary angioedema (HAE), with a substantial literature base that demonstrates safety and efficacy. Thromboembolic events have rarely been reported with C1-INH products, typically with off-label use or at supratherapeutic doses., Objectives: Active surveillance of safety and clinical usage patterns of pasteurized C1-inhibitor concentrate and the more recent pasteurized, nanofiltered C1-INH, with a particular interest in thromboembolic events., Methods: A registry was initiated in April 2010 at 27 US and 4 EU sites to obtain both prospective and retrospective safety and usage data on subjects who were administered C1-INH (Berinert)., Results: As of May 10, 2013, data were available for 135 subjects and 3196 infusions. By subject, 67.4% were using C1-INH as on-demand therapy and 23.0% as both on-demand therapy and prophylactic administration. Approximately half of the infusions (49.5%) were administered for prophylaxis and >90% were given by the patient or a caregiver in the home setting. A total of 299 adverse events were reported, for an overall rate of 0.09 events per infusion with only 6 considered related to C1-INH. Two thromboembolic events were reported, both in patients with prothrombotic risk factors., Conclusion: This large pool of real-world clinical usage data in HAE further supports the extensive safety profile of 2 Berinert formulations when used on demand and/or for prophylaxis in both home and health care settings. No evidence was found to suggest that Berinert is an independent, causative risk factor for thromboembolic events., (Copyright © 2014 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Consensus guidelines on hereditary angioedema (HAE) recommend that all patients have access to on-demand treatment of acute attacks. A recent patientcentric guideline recommended that at least 2 on-demand therapies be available because patients often have heterogeneous responses to different medications. Self-administration of therapeutic agents, or administration under supervision by a health care provider in the home setting, is the preferred treatment approach. Future studies are needed to show the benefits of acute on-demand therapies at improving quality of life and reducing morbidity and mortality in patients with HAE., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)