Detecting Changes in Mast Cell Numbers Versus Activation in Human Disease: A Roadblock for Current Biomarkers?

The pathophysiology of mast cell (MC)-driven disorders is diverse, ranging from localized reactions to systemic disorders caused by abnormal accumulation and activation in multiorgan systems. Prompt and accurate diagnosis is critically important, both for informing treatment and objective assessment of treatment outcomes. As new therapeutics are being developed to deplete MCs or silence them (eg, by engaging inhibitory receptors that block activation), new biomarkers are needed that can distinguish between MC activation versus burden. Serum tryptase is the gold standard for assessing both MC burden and activation; however, commercial tryptase assays have limitations related to timing of release, lack of discernment between inactive (α) and active (β) forms of tryptase, and interpatient variability of baseline levels. Alternative approaches to measuring MC activation include urinary MC mediators, flow cytometry-based assays or gene expression profiling. Additional markers of MC activation are needed for use in clinical diagnostics, to help selection of treatment of MC diseases, and for assessing outcomes of therapy. We review the spectrum of disorders with known or suspected MC contribution, describe the utility and limitations of current MC markers and assays, and discuss the need for new markers that can differentiate between MC activation and burden.

Reversible Elevation of Tryptase Over the Individual's Baseline: Why is It the Best Biomarker for Severe Systemic Mast Cell Activation and MCAS?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Mast cell (MC) activation syndromes (MCAS) are conditions defined by recurrent episodes of severe systemic anaphylaxis or similar systemic events triggered by MC-derived mediators that can be measured in biological fluids. Since some symptoms of MC activation may occur due to other, non-MC etiologies and lead to confusion over diagnosis, it is of crucial importance to document the involvement of MC and their products in the patients´ symptomatology.

RECENT FINDINGS

The most specific and generally accepted marker of severe systemic MC activation is an event-related, transient increase in the serum tryptase level over the individual baseline of the affected individual. However, baseline concentrations of serum tryptase vary among donors, depending on the genetic background, age, kidney function, and underlying disease. As a result, it is of critical importance to provide a flexible equation that defines the diagnostic increase in tryptase qualifying as MCAS criterion in all patients, all situations, and all ranges of baseline serum tryptase. In 2012, the consensus group proposed the 120% + 2 ng/ml formula, which covers the great majority of groups, including cases with low, normal, or elevated basal serum tryptase level. This formula has been validated in subsequent studies and has proven to be a robust and consistent diagnostic criterion of MCAS. The present article is discussing the impact of this formula and possible limitations as well as alternative markers and mediators that may be indicative of MCAS.

Anaphylaxis: A 2023 practice parameter update

This practice parameter update focuses on 7 areas in which there are new evidence and new recommendations. Diagnostic criteria for anaphylaxis have been revised, and patterns of anaphylaxis are defined. Measurement of serum tryptase is important for diagnosis of anaphylaxis and to identify underlying mast cell disorders. In infants and toddlers, age-specific symptoms may differ from older children and adults, patient age is not correlated with reaction severity, and anaphylaxis is unlikely to be the initial reaction to an allergen on first exposure. Different community settings for anaphylaxis require specific measures for prevention and treatment of anaphylaxis. Optimal prescribing and use of epinephrine autoinjector devices require specific counseling and training of patients and caregivers, including when and how to administer the epinephrine autoinjector and whether and when to call 911. If epinephrine is used promptly, immediate activation of emergency medical services may not be required if the patient experiences a prompt, complete, and durable response. For most medical indications, the risk of stopping or changing beta-blocker or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor medication may exceed the risk of more severe anaphylaxis if the medication is continued, especially in patients with insect sting anaphylaxis. Evaluation for mastocytosis, including a bone marrow biopsy, should be considered for adult patients with severe insect sting anaphylaxis or recurrent idiopathic anaphylaxis. After perioperative anaphylaxis, repeat anesthesia may proceed in the context of shared decision-making and based on the history and results of diagnostic evaluation with skin tests or in vitro tests when available, and supervised challenge when necessary.

Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in Non-advanced Systemic Mastocytosis

Systemic mastocytosis is associated with KIT D816V mutation in more than 90% of cases. Patients with non-advanced forms of mastocytosis (indolent systemic mastocytosis, bone marrow mastocytosis, and smoldering systenic mastocytosis) have a low rate of progession to advanced variants and generally have a comparable life expectancy to age-matched general population. Symptomatology in non-advanced mastocytosis is variable and is related to mast cell mediator release. While some patients require no or minimal symptomatic therapy with antimediator drugs, other may suffer from refractory symptoms impacting the quality of life despite being on multiple anti-mediator drugs. KIT tyrosine kinase inhibitors have been approved for advanced SM, and avapritinib has also been recently approved as the first such inhibitor for indolent systemic mastocytosis. Other TKIs are currently in clinical trials for patients with non-advanced SM who have persistent and severe symptoms despite optimized antimediator therapy. This article will review the current state of the science and available clinical data from trials of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in non-advanced systemic mastocytosis.

World Health Organization Classification and Diagnosis of Mastocytosis: Update 2023 and Future Perspectives

Experts of the European Competence Network on Mastocytosis (ECNM) and the American Initiative on Mast Cell Disorders have discussed and updated diagnostic criteria and the classification of mastocytosis, based on new insights in the field and data collected in recent years, mostly within ECNM registry projects in which studies on several thousand cases have been performed. Based on this proposal, the World Health Organization has updated its classification of mastocytosis. This article discusses the revised classification of mastocytosis in light of a rapidly moving field and the advent of new diagnostic parameters, new prognostication tools, and new therapies.

Antibody-Based and Cell Therapies for Advanced Mastocytosis: Established and Novel Concepts

Advanced systemic mastocytosis (SM) is a heterogeneous group of myeloid neoplasms characterized by an uncontrolled expansion of mast cells (MC) in one or more internal organs, SM-induced tissue damage, and poor prognosis. Advanced SM can be categorized into aggressive SM (ASM), MC leukemia (MCL), and SM with an associated hematologic neoplasm (SM-AHN). In a vast majority of all patients, neoplastic cells display a KIT mutation, mostly D816V and rarely other KIT variants. Additional mutations in other target genes, such as SRSF2, ASXL1, or RUNX1, may also be identified, especially when an AHN is present. During the past 10 years, improved treatment approaches have led to a better quality of life and survival in patients with advanced SM. However, despite the availability of novel potent inhibitors of KIT D816V, not all patients enter remission and others relapse, often with a multi-mutated and sometimes KIT D816V-negative disease exhibiting multi-drug resistance. For these patients, (poly)chemotherapy, antibody-based therapies, and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation may be viable treatment alternatives. In this article, we discuss treatment options for patients with drug-resistant advanced SM, including novel KIT-targeting drugs, antibody-based drugs, and stem cell-eradicating therapies.

The Normal Range of Baseline Tryptase Should Be 1 to 15 ng/mL and Covers Healthy Individuals With HαT

Physiological levels of basal serum tryptase vary among healthy individuals, depending on the numbers of mast cells, basal secretion rate, copy numbers of the TPSAB1 gene encoding alpha tryptase, and renal function. Recently, there has been a growing debate about the normal range of tryptase because individuals with the hereditary alpha tryptasemia (HαT) trait may or may not be symptomatic, and if symptomatic, uncertainty exists as to whether this trait directly causes clinical phenotypes or aggravates certain conditions. In fact, most HαT-positive cases are regarded as asymptomatic concerning mast cell activation. To address this point, experts of the European Competence Network on Mastocytosis (ECNM) and the American Initiative in Mast Cell Diseases met at the 2022 Annual ECNM meeting and discussed the physiological tryptase range. Based on this discussion, our faculty concluded that the normal serum tryptase range should be defined in asymptomatic controls, inclusive of individuals with HαT, and based on 2 SDs covering the 95% confidence interval. By applying this definition in a literature screen, the normal basal tryptase in asymptomatic controls (HαT-positive persons included) ranges between 1 and 15 ng/mL. This definition should avoid overinterpretation, unnecessary referrals, and unnecessary anxiety or anticipatory fear of illness in healthy individuals.

Updated guidance regarding the risk of allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines and recommended evaluation and management: A GRADE assessment and international consensus approach

This guidance updates 2021 GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) recommendations regarding immediate allergic reactions following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and addresses revaccinating individuals with first-dose allergic reactions and allergy testing to determine revaccination outcomes. Recent meta-analyses assessed the incidence of severe allergic reactions to initial COVID-19 vaccination, risk of mRNA-COVID-19 revaccination after an initial reaction, and diagnostic accuracy of COVID-19 vaccine and vaccine excipient testing in predicting reactions. GRADE methods informed rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations. A modified Delphi panel consisting of experts in allergy, anaphylaxis, vaccinology, infectious diseases, emergency medicine, and primary care from Australia, Canada, Europe, Japan, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States formed the recommendations. We recommend vaccination for persons without COVID-19 vaccine excipient allergy and revaccination after a prior immediate allergic reaction. We suggest against >15-minute postvaccination observation. We recommend against mRNA vaccine or excipient skin testing to predict outcomes. We suggest revaccination of persons with an immediate allergic reaction to the mRNA vaccine or excipients be performed by a person with vaccine allergy expertise in a properly equipped setting. We suggest against premedication, split-dosing, or special precautions because of a comorbid allergic history.

Disease Spectrum of Anaphylaxis Disorders

Anaphylaxis results from massive mast cell activation. Mechanisms of mast cell activation may involve IgE- and non-IgE-mediated triggers, clonal mast cell disease, or be idiopathic and may be modified by several factors including but not restricted to hormonal status, stress, heritable factors, mast cell burden, and simultaneous exposure to more than 1 factor. Patients with recurrent anaphylaxis with a nonidentifiable trigger present a particular challenge in diagnosis and management. Presence of clonal disease may be suggested by hypotensive episodes with urticaria and angioedema, and high baseline tryptase levels. A number of scoring systems have been developed to identify patients who are at high risk to have underlying mastocytosis. This review provides an overview of anaphylaxis disorders and our current understanding of their mechanisms of action, evaluation, and management.

Avapritinib versus Placebo in Indolent Systemic Mastocytosis

Avapritinib in Indolent Systemic MastocytosisIn a randomized trial, patients with indolent systemic mastocytosis were treated with avapritinib or placebo along with supportive care. The trial primary end point was the change in mean total symptom scores at 24 weeks. Avapritinib-treated patients had a decrease in mean total symptom score of 15.6 points compared with 9.2 points in the placebo group.

Psychometric evaluation of the Indolent Systemic Mastocytosis Symptom Assessment Form (ISM-SAF©) and determination of a threshold score for moderate symptoms

BACKGROUND

The Indolent Systemic Mastocytosis Symptom Assessment Form (ISM-SAF) (©Blueprint Medicines Corporation), a 12-item daily diary that assesses 11 signs and symptoms of indolent systemic mastocytosis (ISM) and smoldering systemic mastocytosis (SSM), was psychometrically evaluated among patients with ISM. Additionally, thresholds of the ISM-SAF total symptom score (TSS) to distinguish patients with moderate to severe symptoms from those with mild symptoms were evaluated.

METHODS

The ISM-SAF was completed daily as an electronic diary in a prospective, observational study utilizing an online survey of patients with ISM in the United States. Descriptive statistics, psychometric analyses, and analyses to estimate ISM-SAF TSS clinical cutoff values were conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 103 patients (81.6% female; mean age = 50.2 [± 12.6]) with a self-reported diagnosis of ISM or SSM (58 of whom also had a medically documented diagnosis) contributed to the analyses. Psychometric analysis supported the trustworthiness of the biweekly TSS, which was reliable (α > 0.8, ICC > 0.9), construct-valid, and able to distinguish among clinically distinct groups as specified by the Patient Global Impression of Severity, 12-item Short-Form Health Survey, and Mastocytosis Quality of Life Questionnaire (p < 0.01). A biweekly ISM-SAF TSS from 21 to 28 begins to distinguish the moderately to severely symptomatic ISM/SSM patients from mildly symptomatic patients.

CONCLUSION

The biweekly TSS of ISM-SAF was reliable, construct-valid, and able to distinguish among clinically distinct groups. A cut-off value of 28 is a conservative threshold that can be used for screening purposes in future clinical studies to identify patients with at least a moderate severity of ISM symptoms.

Mastocytosis in Pregnancy

Mastocytosis is a rare neoplastic disorder of the mast cell lineage resulting in unregulated proliferation and activation of mast cells. Symptoms worsen in about one-third of pregnant patients. Treatment focuses on management of symptoms with antimediator therapy (H1 & H2 antihistamines, glucocorticoids, and epinephrine, if required). Medication selection requires care during labor and delivery. Although it is generally considered safe to use a medication patient tolerated before, some common medications may need to be avoided or used with caution (eg, codeine, morphine, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, vancomycin) if the patient does not have any history of exposure to them.

New Insights into the Pathogenesis of Mastocytosis: Emerging Concepts in Diagnosis and Therapy

Mastocytosis is a heterogeneous group of neoplasms defined by a numerical increase and accumulation of clonal mast cells (MCs) in various organ systems. The disease may present as cutaneous mastocytosis or systemic mastocytosis (SM). On the basis of histopathological and molecular features, clinical variables, and organ involvement, SM is divided into indolent SM, smoldering SM, SM with an associated hematologic neoplasm, aggressive SM, and MC leukemia. Each variant is defined by unique diagnostic criteria and a unique spectrum of clinical presentations. A key driver of MC expansion and disease evolution is the oncogenic machinery triggered by mutant forms of KIT. The genetic background, additional somatic mutations, and comorbidities also contribute to the course and prognosis. Patients with SM may also suffer from mediator-related symptoms or even an MC activation syndrome. This article provides an update of concepts on the genetics, etiology, and pathology of mastocytosis, with emphasis on diagnostic criteria and new treatment concepts.

Proposed refined diagnostic criteria and classification of eosinophil disorders and related syndromes

Eosinophilia and eosinophil activation are recurrent features in various reactive states and certain hematologic malignancies. In patients with hypereosinophilia (HE), HE-induced organ damage is often encountered and may lead to the diagnosis of a hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES). A number of known mechanisms and etiologies contribute to the development of HE and HES. Based on these etiologies and the origin of eosinophils, HE and HES are divided into primary forms where eosinophils are clonal cells, reactive forms where an underlying reactive or neoplastic condition is detected and eosinophils are considered to be "non-clonal" cells, and idiopathic HE and HES in which neither a clonal nor a reactive underlying pathology is detected. Since 2012, this classification and the related criteria have been widely accepted and regarded as standard. However, during the past few years, new developments in the field and an increasing number of markers and targets have created a need to update these criteria and the classification of HE and HES. To address this challenge, a Working Conference on eosinophil disorders was organized in 2021. In this conference, a panel of experts representing the relevant fields, including allergy, dermatology, hematology, immunology, laboratory medicine, and pathology, met and discussed new markers and concepts as well as refinements in definitions, criteria and classifications of HE and HES. The outcomes of this conference are presented in this article and should assist in the diagnosis and management of patients with HE and HES in daily practice and in the preparation and conduct of clinical trials.

Sinus Tachycardia: a Multidisciplinary Expert Focused Review

Sinus tachycardia (ST) is ubiquitous, but its presence outside of normal physiological triggers in otherwise healthy individuals remains a commonly encountered phenomenon in medical practice. In many cases, ST can be readily explained by a current medical condition that precipitates an increase in the sinus rate, but ST at rest without physiological triggers may also represent a spectrum of normal. In other cases, ST may not have an easily explainable cause but may represent serious underlying pathology and can be associated with intolerable symptoms. The classification of ST, consideration of possible etiologies, as well as the decisions of when and how to intervene can be difficult. ST can be classified as secondary to a specific, usually treatable, medical condition (eg, pulmonary embolism, anemia, infection, or hyperthyroidism) or be related to several incompletely defined conditions (eg, inappropriate ST, postural tachycardia syndrome, mast cell disorder, or post-COVID syndrome). While cardiologists and cardiac electrophysiologists often evaluate patients with symptoms associated with persistent or paroxysmal ST, an optimal approach remains uncertain. Due to the many possible conditions associated with ST, and an overlap in medical specialists who see these patients, the inclusion of experts in different fields is essential for a more comprehensive understanding. This article is unique in that it was composed by international experts in Neurology, Psychology, Autonomic Medicine, Allergy and Immunology, Exercise Physiology, Pulmonology and Critical Care Medicine, Endocrinology, Cardiology, and Cardiac Electrophysiology in the hope that it will facilitate a more complete understanding and thereby result in the better care of patients with ST.

Global Classification of Mast Cell Activation Disorders: An ICD-10-CM-Adjusted Proposal of the ECNM-AIM Consortium

Mast cell activation (MCA) is common and occurs in a number of pathologic conditions, including IgE-dependent and independent allergic reactions, atopic disorders, autoimmune processes, and mastocytosis. In a subset of patients, no underlying disease and no known trigger of MCA are found. When the symptoms are severe, systemic, and recurrent, and accompanied by a diagnostic increase in the serum tryptase level or other mast cell mediators, an MCA syndrome (MCAS) may be diagnosed. In these patients, the symptoms typically respond to drugs suppressing MCA, mediator production in mast cells, or mediator effects. In each case, diagnostic consensus criteria must be fulfilled to diagnose MCAS. In other patients, MCA may be local, less severe, or less acute, or may be suspected but not confirmed, so that the diagnostic criteria of MCAS are not fulfilled. In these patients, it may be difficult to prove MCA, for example, by measuring multiple mast cell mediators or basophil activation, the latter as a surrogate of IgE-dependent hypersensitivity. However, validated diagnostic criteria for implicating suspected MCA behind such conditions are lacking, even if some of these conditions have recently been assigned to an International Classification of Diseases-10-Clinical Modification code (ICD-10-CM). In this article, we discuss diagnostic features and criteria and propose a ICD-10-CM-adjusted classification for disorders associated with MCA, herein referred to as MCA disorders (MCADs), with special emphasis on the delineation between confirmed MCAS, MCAD not fulfilling MCAS criteria, and suspected MCAD that is not present. In addition, we discuss the discrimination between overt MCAD and predisposing conditions, such as atopic states, mastocytosis, and hereditary alpha tryptasemia.

Mast Cell Diseases in Practice and Research: Issues and Perspectives Raised by Patients and Their Recommendations to the Scientific Community and Beyond

BACKGROUND

Since 2010, patients and physicians have collaborated to understand unmet needs of patients with mast cell diseases, incorporating mastocytosis and mast cell activation disorders, which include mast cell activation syndromes.

OBJECTIVE

This Open Innovation in Science project aims to expand understanding of the needs of patients affected by mast cell diseases, and encourage global communication among patient advocacy groups, physicians, researchers, industry, and government. A major aim is to support the scientific community's efforts to improve diagnosis, management, therapy, and patients' quality of life by addressing unmet needs.

METHODS

In collaboration with mast cell disease specialists, 13 patient advocacy groups from 12 countries and regions developed lists of top patient needs. A core team of leaders from patient advocacy groups collected and analyzed the data and proposed possible actions to address patient needs.

RESULTS

Findings identified similarities and differences among participating countries in unmet needs between patients with mastocytosis and those with mast cell activation syndromes. Issues emphasized struggles relating to the nature and rarity of mast cell diseases, their impact on quality of life, the diagnostic process, access to appropriate care, more effective treatment, and the need for research.

CONCLUSIONS

Solutions vary across countries because situations differ, in particular regarding the existence of and access to centers of excellence and reference centers. Multifaceted mast cell activation syndrome barriers necessitate innovative approaches to improve access to appropriate care. The outcomes of this project should greatly support scientists and clinicians in their efforts to improve diagnosis, management, and treatment of patients with mastocytosis and mast cell activation disorders.

Vaccination counseling with and without excipient skin testing in patients with suspected allergic reactions to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and patients with atopy

Background

Allergic reactions have been reported with mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 prevention. Patients perceived to be at higher risk for a reaction may be referred to an allergist, although evaluation strategies may differ between allergists.

Objective

Our aim was to determine outcomes of COVID-19 vaccinations in patients evaluated by an allergist using different approaches.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective case series evaluation of 98 patients seen at the University of Michigan Allergy Clinic for concerns regarding COVID-19 vaccination. Of these 98 patients, 34 underwent skin testing with polyethylene glycol (PEG) 2000 with or without PEG 3350/polysorbate 80 testing.

Results

Of the 34 patients on whom skin testing was performed, 16 underwent testing before vaccination and 18 underwent testing after a reported vaccine-related event. One patient had a positive skin testing result in response to PEG 3350 following a vaccination reaction and natural infection and was advised against a second dose. One patient with a significant history concerning of anaphylaxis in response to PEG had positive results of testing to identify allergy to PEG 2000, PEG 3350, and polysorbate 80 and was advised against vaccination. Of the 98 patients, 63 (64%) tolerated COVID-19 vaccination without complication after evaluation by an allergist.

Conclusion

No significant differences were found between vaccination counseling with and without skin testing to excipients. Patients who presented before the first dose of vaccination were more likely to proceed with COVID-19 vaccination and tolerate vaccination without complication.

Proposed European Competence Network on Mastocytosis-American Initiative in Mast Cell Diseases (ECNM-AIM) Response Criteria in Advanced Systemic Mastocytosis

Advanced systemic mastocytosis (AdvSM) is characterized by the presence of KIT D816V and other somatic mutations (eg, in SRSF2, ASXL1, and RUNX1) in 95% and 60% to 70% of patients, respectively. The biological and clinical consequences of AdvSM include multilineage involvement (eg, associated hematologic neoplasm) in 60% to 80% of patients, variable infiltration and damage (C-findings) of predominantly bone marrow and visceral organs through affected mast cell (MC) and non-MC lineages, and elevated levels of serum tryptase. Recently, the treatment landscape has substantially changed with the introduction of the multikinase/KIT inhibitor midostaurin and the selective KIT D816V inhibitor avapritinib. In this review, we discuss the evolution of AdvSM response criteria that have been developed to better capture clinical benefit (eg, improved responses and progression-free and overall survival). We propose refined response criteria from European Competence Network on Mastocytosis and American Initiative in Mast Cell Diseases investigators that use a tiered approach to segregate the effects of histopathologic (eg, bone marrow MC burden, tryptase), molecular (eg, KIT D816V variant allele frequency), clinical (eg, C-findings), and symptom response on long-term outcomes. These response criteria require evaluation in future prospective clinical trials of selective KIT inhibitors and other novel agents.

Standards of Pathology in the Diagnosis of Systemic Mastocytosis: Recommendations of the EU-US Cooperative Group

Pathology plays a central role in the diagnosis of systemic mastocytosis (SM), its delineation from other neoplasms and reactive conditions, and in monitoring of SM under therapy. The morphologic hallmark of SM is the accumulation of spindle-shaped, hypogranulated mast cells (MCs) in bone marrow (BM) and other extracutaneous tissues. Four of the 5 World Health Organization-defined diagnostic criteria (ie, compact MC aggregates [=major criterion]; atypical MC morphology; activating KIT point mutations; aberrant expression of CD25 and/or CD2 and/or CD30 in MCs [=minor criteria]) can be addressed by the pathologist. The final classification of SM variants as either BM mastocytosis, indolent SM, smoldering SM, aggressive SM (ASM), SM with an associated hematologic neoplasm (SM-AHN), or MC leukemia (MCL) has important prognostic significance and requires the integration of certain morphological, clinical, radiological, and biochemical data, referred to as B- and C-findings. Substantial diagnostic challenges may be posed to the pathologist and clinician especially in the so-called advanced SM variants, that is, ASM, MCL, and SM-AHN. In this article, updated recommendations of the EU-US Cooperative Group regarding standards of pathology in the diagnosis of SM, presented during the year 2020 Working Conference held in September in Vienna, are reported.

Refined Treatment Response Criteria for Indolent Systemic Mastocytosis Proposed by the ECNM-AIM Consortium

Indolent systemic mastocytosis (ISM) has a favorable prognosis and normal life expectancy. However, many patients suffer from mast cell (MC) mediator-related symptoms, which significantly affect quality of life (QoL). Cutaneous, gastrointestinal, and neurological complaints, musculoskeletal pain, and the presence of skin lesions, anaphylaxis, and osteoporosis are the main symptoms and signs in ISM and must be assessed in all patients before and during treatment. Validated mastocytosis-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) should be used for this purpose. Serum tryptase and KIT D816V allele burden are recommended as secondary outcome parameters, noting that they do not reflect the severity of signs, symptoms, and related QoL impairment, but indirectly express MC burden. Changes from baseline of 90%, 60%, and 30% indicate complete response >90%, major response 60% to 90%, partial response 30% to 60%, and no response <30% to treatment. To conclude, we recommend the use of PROMs as primary outcome parameters to define treatment response in patients with ISM in clinical trials and in everyday clinical practice.

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors for the treatment of indolent systemic mastocytosis: are we there yet?

Indolent systemic mastocytosis (ISM) is the most prevalent form of systemic mastocytosis. Many patients with ISM suffer from mast cell (MC) mediator-related symptoms In a small number of patients, hematologic progression is seen in the follow up. In some patients with ISM, symptoms arising from MC-derived mediators including gastrointestinal symptoms, anaphylaxis, neuropsychiatric symptoms are kept under control with conventional mediator-targeting drugs or MC-stabilizing agents. However, in a substantial number of patients, the symptoms are refractory to such conventional therapy. For these patients, novel drugs and targeted approaches are considered. One reasonable approach may be to apply tyrosine kinase inhibitors directed against KIT and other key kinase targets expressed in neoplastic MC in ISM. Since MC in over 90% of all patients with typical ISM display the KIT D816V mutant receptor, clinically effective KIT-targeting drugs have to be active against this mutant form of KIT. The two such most effective and well-studied agents currently available are midostaurin and avapritinib. Other KIT-targeting drugs, such as imatinib or masitinib, are less effective or even non-effective against KIT D816V and are thus only recommended for use in patients with other KIT mutant forms (non codon 816 mutations) or with wild type KIT. In the present article, we review the current state in the treatment of ISM with tyrosine kinase inhibitors, with special emphasis on treatment responses and potential adverse effects. In fact, all of these agents also have unique and common adverse effects, and their use to treat ISM patients should be balanced against their toxicity and short and long term safety.

Drug-Induced Mast Cell Eradication: A Novel Approach to Treat Mast Cell Activation Disorders?

Mast cell activation is a key event in allergic reactions, other inflammatory states, and mast cell activation syndromes. Mast cell-stabilizing agents, mediator-targeting drugs and drugs interfering with mediator effects are often prescribed in these patients. However, the clinical efficacy of these drugs varies, depending on the numbers of involved mast cells and the underlying pathology. One straightforward approach would be to eradicate the primary target cell. However, to date, no mast cell-eradicating treatment approach has been developed for patients suffering from mast cell activation disorders. Nevertheless, recent data suggest that long-term treatment with agents that effectively inhibit KIT-function results in the virtual eradication of tissue mast cells and a sustained decrease in serum tryptase levels. In many of these patients, mast cell depletion is associated with a substantial improvement in mediator-induced symptoms. In patients with an underlying KIT D816V+ mastocytosis, such mast cell eradication requires an effective inhibitor of KIT D816V, such as avapritinib. However, the use of KIT inhibitors must be balanced against potential side effects. We here discuss mast cell-eradicating strategies in various disease models, the feasibility of this approach, available clinical data, and future prospects for the use of KIT-targeting drugs in mast cell activation disorders.

Personalized Management Strategies in Mast Cell Disorders: ECNM-AIM User's Guide for Daily Clinical Practice

Mastocytosis is a myeloid neoplasm defined by expansion and focal accumulation of clonal mast cells (MCs) in one or more organs. The disease exhibits a complex pathology and may be complicated by MC activation, bone abnormalities, neurological problems, gastrointestinal symptoms, and/or hematologic progression. The World Health Organization divides mastocytosis into cutaneous forms, systemic mastocytosis (SM) and MC sarcoma. In most patients with SM, somatic mutations in KIT are detected. Patients with indolent SM have a normal to near-normal life expectancy, whereas patients with advanced SM, including aggressive SM and MC leukemia, have a poor prognosis. In those with advanced SM, multiple somatic mutations and an associated hematologic neoplasm may be detected. Mediator-related symptoms can occur in any type of mastocytosis. Symptoms may be mild, severe, or even life-threatening. In patients with severe acute symptoms, an MC activation syndrome may be diagnosed. In these patients, relevant comorbidities include IgE-dependent and IgE-independent allergies. Management of patients with SM is an emerging challenge in daily practice and requires in-depth knowledge and a multidisciplinary and personalized approach with selection of appropriate procedures and interventions. In this article, we review the current knowledge on SM and MC activation syndrome, with emphasis on multidisciplinary aspects in diagnosis and patient-specific management. In addition, we provide a user's guide for application of markers, algorithms, prognostic scores, and treatments for use in daily practice.

Standards of Genetic Testing in the Diagnosis and Prognostication of Systemic Mastocytosis in 2022: Recommendations of the EU-US Cooperative Group

Mastocytosis comprises rare heterogeneous diseases characterized by an increased accumulation of abnormal mast cells in various organs/tissues. The pathogenesis of mastocytosis is strongly linked to the presence of KIT-activating mutations. In systemic mastocytosis (SM), the most frequent mutation encountered is KIT p.D816V, whose presence constitutes one of the minor diagnostic criteria. Different techniques are used to search and quantify the KIT p.D816V mutant; however, allele-specific quantitative PCR and droplet digital PCR are today the most sensitive. The analysis of the KIT p.D816V allele burden has undeniable interest for diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic monitoring. The analysis of non-mast cell hematological compartments in SM is similarly important because KIT p.D816V multilineage involvement is associated with a worse prognosis. In addition, in advanced forms of SM, mutations in genes other than KIT are frequently identified and affect negatively disease outcome and response to therapy. Thus, combined quantitative and sensitive analysis of KIT mutations and next-generation sequencing of other recurrently involved myeloid genes make it possible to better characterize the extent of the affected cellular compartments and additional molecular aberrations, providing a more detailed overview of the complex mutational landscape of SM, in relation with the clinical heterogeneity of the disease. In this article, we report the latest recommendations of the EU-US Cooperative Group presented in September 2020 in Vienna during an international working conference, on the techniques we consider standard to detect and quantify the KIT p.D816V mutant in SM and additional myeloid mutations found in SM subtypes.

Efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines in patients taking immunosuppressants

OBJECTIVES

We intended to assess the effectiveness of all three US Food and Drug Administration approved COVID-19 vaccines at preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 hospitalisation in a large cohort of individuals on immunosuppressants for a diverse range of conditions.

METHODS

We studied the effectiveness of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), mRNA-1273 (Moderna) and Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson-Janssen) vaccines among individuals who take immunosuppressants (including disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and glucocorticoids) by comparing vaccinated (n=97688) and unvaccinated (n=42094) individuals in the Michigan Medicine healthcare system from 1 January to 7 December 2021, using Cox proportional hazards modelling with time-varying covariates.

RESULTS

Among vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, taking immunosuppressants increased the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (adjusted HR (aHR)=2.17, 95% CI 1.69 to 2.79 for fully vaccinated and aHR=1.40, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.83 for unvaccinated). Among individuals taking immunosuppressants, we found: (1) vaccination reduced the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (aHR=0.55, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.78); (2) the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines were highly effective at reducing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (n=2046, aHR=0.59, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.91 for BNT162b2; n=2064, aHR=0.52, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.82 for mRNA-1273); (3) with a smaller sample size (n=173), Ad26.COV2.S vaccine protection did not reach statistical significance (aHR=0.34, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.30, p=0.17); and (4) receiving a booster dose reduced the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (aHR=0.42, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.76).

CONCLUSIONS

The mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 vaccines are effective in individuals who take immunosuppressants. However, individuals who are vaccinated but on immunosuppressants are still at higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 hospitalisation than the broader vaccinated population. Booster doses are effective and crucially important for individuals on immunosuppressants.

Comparative Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines against the Delta Variant

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of data regarding how the delta variant of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has impacted the effectiveness of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), mRNA-1273 (Moderna), and Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson-Janssen) vaccines at preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 hospitalization.

METHODS

We compared the effectiveness of the three vaccines during the pre- and post-delta variant period (before and after July 1 st, 2021) in a large cohort of vaccinated and unvaccinated patients in the Michigan Medicine healthcare system. We assessed vaccine effectiveness using two analyses: an Inverse Propensity Weighted (IPW) Kaplan-Meier (KM) analysis based on time from vaccination, and a Cox model based on calendar time with vaccination as a time-varying covariate.

RESULTS

Compared to Ad26.COV2.S recipients, the risk of hospitalization for COVID-19 in the post-delta variant period was lower for BNT162b2 recipients (HR=0.37; 95% CI: [0.14-0.98]; p=0.05) and mRNA-1273 recipients (HR=0.21; 95% CI: [0.07-0.64]; p=0.006). Recipients of the mRNA-1273 vaccine had a lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection than Ad26.COV2.S recipients (HR=0.6; 95% CI: [0.43-0.83]; p=0.003) and BNT162b2 recipients (HR=0.64; 95% CI: [0.54-0.76]; p<0.001). After July 1 st, efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 infection declined for Ad26.COV2.S recipients (VE=76% before; VE=49% after; p=0.02), BNT162b2 recipients (VE=87% before; VE=52% after; p<0.001), and mRNA-1273 recipients (VE=92% before; VE=70% after; p<0.001). Waning immunity and the delta variant contributed independently and significantly to this decline.

DISCUSSION

Although there is a substantial decline in effectiveness, the approved COVID-19 vaccines remain effective against infection and hospitalization due to the delta variant. The mRNA-based vaccines are more effective than the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine.

Updated Diagnostic Criteria and Classification of Mast Cell Disorders: A Consensus Proposal

Mastocytosis is a hematologic neoplasm characterized by expansion and focal accumulation of neoplastic mast cells (MC) in diverse organs, including the skin, bone marrow (BM), spleen, liver, and gastrointestinal tract. The World Health Organization classification divides the disease into prognostically distinct variants of cutaneous mastocytosis (CM) and systemic mastocytosis (SM). Although this classification remains valid, recent developments in the field and the advent of new diagnostic and prognostic parameters created a need to update and refine definitions and diagnostic criteria in MC neoplasms. In addition, MC activation syndromes (MCAS) and genetic features predisposing to SM and MCAS have been identified. To discuss these developments and refinements in the classification, we organized a Working Conference comprised of experts from Europe and the United States in August 2020. This article reports on outcomes from this conference. Of particular note, we propose adjustments in the classification of CM and SM, refinements in diagnostic criteria of SM variants, including smoldering SM and BM mastocytosis (BMM), and updated criteria for MCAS and other conditions involving MC. CD30 expression in MC now qualifies as a minor SM criterion, and BMM is now defined by SM criteria, absence of skin lesions and absence of B- and C-findings. A basal serum tryptase level exceeding 20 ng/mL remains a minor SM criterion, with recognition that hereditary alpha-tryptasemia and various myeloid neoplasms may also cause elevations in tryptase. Our updated proposal will support diagnostic evaluations and prognostication in daily practice and the conduct of clinical trials in MC disorders.

Psychometric evaluation of the Indolent Systemic Mastocytosis Symptom Assessment Form (ISM-SAF) in a phase 2 clinical study

Background

Indolent systemic mastocytosis (ISM) is a rare, clonal mast cell neoplasm characterized by severe, unpredictable symptoms. The Indolent Systemic Mastocytosis Symptom Assessment Form (ISM-SAF) items compose a Total Symptom Score (TSS), Gastrointestinal Symptom Score (GSS), and Skin Symptom Score (SSS) to assess symptom severity. This study evaluated the psychometric performance of ISM-SAF among ISM patients.

Methods

In PIONEER, a Phase 2 trial evaluating safety and efficacy of selective kinase inhibitor avapritinib in patients with ISM, the 12-item ISM-SAF was administered daily. Psychometric evaluation of score reliability, validity, and clinical interpretation was conducted using the trial data.

Results

Thirty-eight patients contributed to analyses (78.9% female; mean age = 49). Baseline internal consistency reliability (α) for bi-weekly TSS, GSS, and SSS was 0.86, 0.83, and 0.82, respectively. Test–retest reliability among patients exhibiting no change in Patient Global Impression of Symptom Severity (PGIS) between Baseline and Day 15 exceeded 0.74 universally. Construct validity and known-groups analysis showed moderate to strong ISM-SAF score correlation (r = 0.382–0.881) to supportive patient-reported questionnaires (e.g., PGIS and Mastocytosis Quality of Life Questionnaire) symptom and skin scores, and ability to distinguish among clinically unique groups. Correlations of ISM-SAF and other assessment change scores reflect evidence of score sensitivity. Clinically important difference and response estimates were 7–10 and 19, respectively.

Discussion

ISM-SAF produced reliable, construct-valid, sensitive scores when administered in PIONEER to patients in the target population. Results of this study support the use of the ISM-SAF as a reliable and valid measure to evaluate disease symptomology in ISM patients.

Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03731260. Registered 10 October 2018, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT03731260.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13023-021-02037-3.

Development of symptom-focused outcome measures for advanced and indolent systemic mastocytosis: the AdvSM-SAF and ISM-SAF©

Background

Advanced systemic mastocytosis (AdvSM), indolent systemic mastocytosis (ISM), and smoldering systemic mastocytosis (SSM) are rare diseases characterized by neoplastic mast cell infiltration of more than one organ. A content-valid patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaire that assesses relevant signs and symptoms that are important and understandable to individuals with a condition is critical for assessing new treatment benefit as well as supporting product labeling claims. Notably, no such PRO questionnaire has been developed in accordance with regulatory and scientific guidelines for use in AdvSM, ISM, and SSM patient populations. To fill that gap, this study documents the development and content validity of instruments evaluating signs and symptoms of systemic mastocytosis.

Methods

A review of peer-reviewed literature, advice meetings with clinical therapeutic area experts, patient concept elicitation interviews, concept selection and questionnaire construction meetings, and patient cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted, and regulatory feedback was incorporated.

Results

For AdvSM, 26 sign- and symptom-level concepts were identified in literature, 39 by clinicians, and 33 by patients. For ISM/SSM, 38 sign- and symptom-level concepts were identified in the literature, 39 by clinicians, and 57 by patients. Two patient-reported instruments, the Advanced Systemic Mastocytosis Symptom Assessment Form (AdvSM-SAF) and Indolent Systemic Mastocytosis Symptom Assessment Form (ISM-SAF)(©Blueprint Medicines Corporation), were developed based on consolidated findings. Cognitive debriefing interviews with AdvSM and ISM patients showed the AdvSM-SAF and ISM-SAF were understood and interpreted as intended by the majority of patients.

Conclusion

The AdvSM-SAF and ISM-SAF are content-valid tools measuring symptoms from AdvSM and ISM patients’ perspective.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13023-021-02035-5.

The Risk of Allergic Reaction to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines and Recommended Evaluation and Management: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, GRADE Assessment, and International Consensus Approach

Concerns for anaphylaxis may hamper severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) immunization efforts. We convened a multidisciplinary group of international experts in anaphylaxis composed of allergy, infectious disease, emergency medicine, and front-line clinicians to systematically develop recommendations regarding SARS-CoV-2 vaccine immediate allergic reactions. Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, the World Health Organizstion (WHO) global coronavirus database, and the gray literature (inception, March 19, 2021) were systematically searched. Paired reviewers independently selected studies addressing anaphylaxis after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, polyethylene glycol (PEG) and polysorbate allergy, and accuracy of allergy testing for SARS-CoV-2 vaccine allergy. Random effects models synthesized the data to inform recommendations based on the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, agreed upon using a modified Delphi panel. The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine anaphylaxis is 7.91 cases per million (n = 41,000,000 vaccinations; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 4.02-15.59; 26 studies, moderate certainty), the incidence of 0.15 cases per million patient-years (95% CI 0.11-0.2), and the sensitivity for PEG skin testing is poor, although specificity is high (15 studies, very low certainty). We recommend vaccination over either no vaccination or performing SARS-CoV-2 vaccine/excipient screening allergy testing for individuals without history of a severe allergic reaction to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine/excipient, and a shared decision-making paradigm in consultation with an allergy specialist for individuals with a history of a severe allergic reaction to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine/excipient. We recommend further research to clarify SARS-CoV-2 vaccine/vaccine excipient testing utility in individuals potentially allergic to SARS-CoV2 vaccines or their excipients.