Safety and Efficacy of Aspirin Desensitization Combined With Long-Term Aspirin Therapy in Aspirin-Exacerbated Respiratory Disease

Safety analysis of Oseltamivir and Baloxavir Marboxil after market approval: a pharmacovigilance study based on the FDA adverse event reporting system

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Amidst limited influenza treatment options, evaluating the safety of Oseltamivir and Baloxavir Marboxil is crucial, particularly given their comparable efficacy. This study investigates post-market safety profiles, exploring adverse events (AEs) and their drug associations to provide essential clinical references.

METHODS

A meticulous analysis of FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) data spanning the first quarter of 2004 to the fourth quarter of 2022 was conducted. Using data mining techniques like reporting odds ratio (ROR), proportional reporting ratio, Bayesian Confidence Propagation Neural Network, and Multiple Gamma Poisson Shrinkage, AEs related to Oseltamivir and Baloxavir Marboxil were examined. Venn analysis compared and selected specific AEs associated with each drug.

RESULTS

Incorporating 15,104 Oseltamivir cases and 1,594 Baloxavir Marboxil cases, Wain analysis unveiled 21 common AEs across neurological, psychiatric, gastrointestinal, dermatological, respiratory, and infectious domains. Oseltamivir exhibited 221 significantly specific AEs, including appendicolith [ROR (95% CI), 459.53 (340.88 ∼ 619.47)], acne infantile [ROR (95% CI, 368.65 (118.89 ∼ 1143.09)], acute macular neuroretinopathy [ROR (95% CI), 294.92 (97.88 ∼ 888.64)], proctitis [ROR (95% CI), 245.74 (101.47 ∼ 595.31)], and Purpura senile [ROR (95% CI), 154.02 (81.96 ∼ 289.43)]. designated adverse events (DMEs) associated with Oseltamivir included fulminant hepatitis [ROR (95% CI), 12.12 (8.30-17.72), n=27], ventricular fibrillation [ROR (95% CI), 7.68 (6.01-9.83), n=64], toxic epidermal necrolysis [ROR (95% CI), 7.21 (5.74-9.05), n=75]. Baloxavir Marboxil exhibited 34 specific AEs, including Melaena [ROR (95% CI), 21.34 (14.15-32.18), n = 23], cystitis haemorrhagic [ROR (95% CI), 20.22 (7.57-54.00), n = 4], ileus paralytic [ROR (95% CI), 18.57 (5.98-57.71), n = 3], and haemorrhagic diathesis [ROR (95% CI), 16.86 (5.43-52.40)), n = 3]. DMEs associated with Baloxavir Marboxil included rhabdomyolysis [ROR (95% CI), 15.50 (10.53 ∼ 22.80), n = 26].

CONCLUSION

Monitoring fulminant hepatitis during Oseltamivir treatment, especially in patients with liver-related diseases, is crucial. Oseltamivir's potential to induce abnormal behavior, especially in adolescents, necessitates special attention. Baloxavir Marboxil, with lower hepatic toxicity, emerges as a potential alternative for patients with liver diseases. During Baloxavir Marboxil treatment, focused attention on the occurrence of rhabdomyolysis is advised, necessitating timely monitoring of relevant indicators for those with clinical manifestations. The comprehensive data aims to provide valuable insights for clinicians and healthcare practitioners, facilitating an understanding of the safety profiles of these influenza treatments in real-world scenarios.

GEMA 5.3. Spanish Guideline on the Management of Asthma

The Spanish Guideline on the Management of Asthma, better known by its acronym in Spanish GEMA, has been available for more than 20 years. Twenty-one scientific societies or related groups both from Spain and internationally have participated in the preparation and development of the updated edition of GEMA, which in fact has been currently positioned as the reference guide on asthma in the Spanish language worldwide. Its objective is to prevent and improve the clinical situation of people with asthma by increasing the knowledge of healthcare professionals involved in their care. Its purpose is to convert scientific evidence into simple and easy-to-follow practical recommendations. Therefore, it is not a monograph that brings together all the scientific knowledge about the disease, but rather a brief document with the essentials, designed to be applied quickly in routine clinical practice. The guidelines are necessarily multidisciplinary, developed to be useful and an indispensable tool for physicians of different specialties, as well as nurses and pharmacists. Probably the most outstanding aspects of the guide are the recommendations to: establish the diagnosis of asthma using a sequential algorithm based on objective diagnostic tests; the follow-up of patients, preferably based on the strategy of achieving and maintaining control of the disease; treatment according to the level of severity of asthma, using six steps from least to greatest need of pharmaceutical drugs, and the treatment algorithm for the indication of biologics in patients with severe uncontrolled asthma based on phenotypes. And now, in addition to that, there is a novelty for easy use and follow-up through a computer application based on the chatbot-type conversational artificial intelligence (ia-GEMA).

Lung Function and Asthma Clinical Control in N-ERD Patients, Three-Year Follow-Up in the Context of Real-World Evidence

Purpose

To describe the lung function and clinical control of asthma in patients with N-ERD during three years of medical follow-up using GINA guidelines.

Methods

We evaluated 75 N-ERD and 68 asthma patients (AG). Clinical control, lung function, and asthma treatment were evaluated according to GINA-2014. We compared all variables at baseline and one, two, and three years after treatment.

Results

At baseline, the N-ERD group had better basal lung function (LF) than the AG group (p<0.01), and the AG group used higher doses of inhaled corticosteroids than the N-ERD group (52.4% vs 30.5%, p=0.01) and short-term oral corticosteroid (OCS) use (52.4% vs 30.5%, p<0.01). Instead, N-ERD patients needed more use of leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA) (29.3% vs 5.9%, p<0.01). This group had better clinical control than the AG group (62.1% vs 34.1%, p<0.01). During the medical follow-up, the LF of the N-ERD group remained at normal values; however, these parameters improved in AG from one year (p<0.01). Likewise, there was a diminished use of high doses of ICS (52.4% vs 33%, p<0.05) and short-term OCS (67.6% vs 20.6%, p<0.01) in asthma patients. However, N-ERD patients still needed more use of LTRAs (p<0.02) during the study. In this context, one-third of N-ERD patients had to use a combination of two drugs to maintain this control. From the second year on, clinical control of asthma was similar in both groups (p>0.05).

Conclusion

According to GINA guidelines, only one-third of patients with N-ERD can gradually achieve adequate lung function and good asthma control with a high ICS dosage. Only a very small portion of patients will require the continued use of a second medication as an LTRA to keep their asthma under control.

Aspirin desensitization following endoscopic sinus surgery is effective in patients with nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug exacerbated respiratory disease

Introduction: Aspirin desensitization (AD) is effective in relieving asthma and sinonasal outcomes in patients with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-exacerbated respiratory disease (N-ERD). So far, only a limited number of studies evaluated the effect of AD prospectively in a controlled manner in N-ERD. It is also a current approach to recommend endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) before AD. This study aimed to prospectively document the clinical effects of AD for 1 year in patients with N-ERD who underwent ESS in the presence of a control group.Methods: The study included patients with N-ERD who underwent AD (group 1, n = 22) and patients with N-ERD in whom desensitization was indicated but was not performed (group 2, n = 21). All patients had ESS before enrolment in the study. Asthma and rhinosinusitis outcomes were assessed at baseline and after 1 year.Results: The study included a total of 43 subjects (F/M:28/15, mean age: 44.7 ± 2.8 years). Fewer patients had nasal polyp recurrency in group 1 (5/22, 22.7%) than in group 2 (11/21, 52.3%) at the end of the first year (p = 0.035). Smell-test scores were preserved only in group 1 after 1 year. There were significant decreases in the use of both asthma and nasal medications only in group 1.Conclusion: Our results strongly support the use of AD for the improvement of both nasal and asthmatic outcomes in patients with N-ERD for 1 year. We also recommend patients undergo ESS before AD. Further controlled studies are necessary to evaluate whether this effect lasts longer.

[Biologics: A New Option in Treatment of Severe Chronic Rhinosinusits with Nasal Polyps]

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is defined as an inflammation of the nose and paranasal sinuses with prevalence of 10.9 % and by the presents of 2 or more symptoms, which last more than 12 weeks. The symptoms are nasal obstruction, nasal discharge (anterior/post nasal drip), facial pain or pressure and/or olfactory disorder. CRS has a high negative impact on an individual's quality of life. The pathogenesis is multifactorial and complex. CRS has been subclassified into 2 groups: CRS with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and CRS without nasal polyps (CRSsNP). Regarding further knowledge of the inflammatory pathway the primary CRS is considered by endotype dominance, either type 2 or non-type 2. 80 % of the CRSwNP reveals a type 2 inflammation. The proteins, interleukin (IL)-4, IL-5, IL-13, and IgE were previously identified as key mediators in nasal polyp tissues pattern. CRSwNP is often refractory to medical and surgical management, especially in patients with asthma and aspirin intolerance. In most cases the control of the disease is a challenge. Patients with asthma but especially with Samter's triad are significantly more likely to have a recurrence of nasal polyps and undergo a second surgery following recurrence. In patients with severe CRSwNP, in whom the current standard of care including topical and oral corticosteroids, antibiotics and surgical procedures fail to control the disease, biologics can open new perspectives in treatment. They allow avoiding the possible adverse events resulting from repeated use of systemic corticosteroids and surgery. These biologics have a high impact on type 2 immune reaction and lead to a reduction of IgE as well as of local mucosal eosinophil migration and activation, resulting in a significant effect on nasal polyps, smell, quality of life and asthma comorbidity.