The Benefit of Complete Response to Treatment in Patients With Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria-CURE Results

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a distressing disease. We report real-world data from the global Chronic Urticaria Registry (CURE) about associations between various CSU states and sleep impairment, plus important health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) outcomes and compared different methods to assess CSU states.

METHODS

CURE data were collected at baseline and 6-monthly follow-ups (FU). Assessments included CSU states using the Urticaria Control Test (UCT), weekly Urticaria Activity Score (UAS7), and Physician Global Assessment (PhyGA) of treatment response. Complete response to treatment (CR, UAS7 = 0), complete control of disease (CC, UCT = 16), and PhyGA = CR were assessed, plus the Dermatology Life Quality Index and the Chronic Urticaria Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (CU-Q₂oL) sleep domain.

RESULTS

Overall, 2078 patients were included. At baseline, 9.8%, 17.9%, and 42.3% of patients had UCT = 16, UAS7 = 0, or PhyGA = CR, respectively, which increased at FU1 and FU2. Patients with higher UCT scores had better sleep and HRQoL. The presence of angioedema without wheals, episodic disease, omalizumab treatment, and male sex were associated with CC (P < .05). Among 469 patients who achieved CC or CR, 16.4% (n = 77) showed CC or CR with all 3 instruments. Agreement between UCT = 16 and UAS7 = 0 measurements was moderate (κ = 0.581), but poor between UCT = 16 and PhyGA = CR (κ = 0.208).

CONCLUSIONS

Few patients had CR/CC of their CSU at baseline entry. Disease control strongly related to good sleep and better HRQoL; therefore, it is important to aim for CR in CSU treatment. Patient-reported UCT and UAS7 assessments demonstrated a more accurate measurement of CSU state versus physician assessments.

Adrenaline autoinjector is under-prescribed in typical cold urticaria patients living in tropical climate countries

Background: The diagnosis of typical cold urticaria (ColdU) relies on whealing in response to local cold stimulation testing (CST). It can also manifest with cold-induced anaphylaxis (ColdA). Till date, it is largely unclear how often patients with ColdU receive adrenaline treatment and are provided with an adrenaline autoinjector (AAI). Methods: An international, cross-sectional study, COLD-CE (i.e., comprehensive evaluation of ColdU and other cold-induced reactions), was carried out at 32 UCAREs. Detailed histories were taken and CST with an ice cube and/or TempTest^® performed. ColdA was defined as an acute cold-induced (i.e., by cold water, air, or surfaces) involvement of the skin and/or visible mucosal tissue and at least one of the symptoms (cardiovascular manifestations, difficulty breathing, or gastrointestinal symptoms). Results: Of the 551 ColdU patients, 75% (n = 412) had a positive CST. Of them, concomitant chronic spontaneous urticaria was diagnosed in 10%. Of 372 patients with stand-alone ColdU, 69% were women and 91% adults. Their median age was 36 (IQR 26 − 48) years. Patients were also categorized into residents of countries with a tropical (n = 33), temperate (n = 264), or cold (n = 75) climate (Table 1: R13C1, R17C1, R21C1). AAI was more often prescribed to residents of temperate than tropical countries (30% vs. 12%, p = .038; Table 1: R31C1), although the frequency of ColdA did not significantly differ between these countries (44% vs. 42%, p = 1.000; R29C2). Residents of tropical countries had a higher frequency of ColdA induced by cold air than residents of temperate (36% vs. 12%, p = .001; R29C4) or cold (36% vs. 12%, p = .007; R25C4) countries. Cardiovascular manifestations induced by cold air were diagnosed in 33% (n = 11) of residents of tropical countries, but only 18% (n = 2) and 36% (n = 4) of them had received adrenaline and AAI, respectively (R13 − 15C7). Furthermore, hypotension and/or loss of consciousness induced by cold air occurred in 18% (n = 6) of patients, but only 17% (n = 1) received adrenaline (R13 − 14C10). ColdA was induced by complete cold water immersion in 9% (n = 3) of patients, and none of them received adrenaline treatment nor AAI (R13 − 15C3). Conclusion: Our findings suggest that ColdA is undertreated and call for changes in ColdU management.

Risk factors for systemic reactions in typical cold urticaria: Results from the COLD-CE study

BACKGROUND

Cold urticaria (ColdU), that is, the occurrence of wheals or angioedema in response to cold exposure, is classified into typical and atypical forms. The diagnosis of typical ColdU relies on whealing in response to local cold stimulation testing (CST). It can also manifest with cold-induced anaphylaxis (ColdA). We aimed to determine risk factors for ColdA in typical ColdU.

METHODS

An international, cross-sectional study COLD-CE was carried out at 32 urticaria centers of reference and excellence (UCAREs). Detailed history was taken and CST with an ice cube and/or TempTest^® performed. ColdA was defined as an acute cold-induced involvement of the skin and/or visible mucosal tissue and at least one of: cardiovascular manifestations, difficulty breathing, or gastrointestinal symptoms.

RESULTS

Of 551 ColdU patients, 75% (n = 412) had a positive CST and ColdA occurred in 37% (n = 151) of the latter. Cold-induced generalized wheals, angioedema, acral swelling, oropharyngeal/laryngeal symptoms, and itch of earlobes were identified as signs/symptoms of severe disease. ColdA was most commonly provoked by complete cold water immersion and ColdA caused by cold air was more common in countries with a warmer climate. Ten percent (n = 40) of typical ColdU patients had a concomitant chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU). They had a lower frequency of ColdA than those without CSU (4% vs. 39%, p = .003). We identified the following risk factors for cardiovascular manifestations: previous systemic reaction to a Hymenoptera sting, angioedema, oropharyngeal/laryngeal symptoms, and itchy earlobes.

CONCLUSION

ColdA is common in typical ColdU. High-risk patients require education about their condition and how to use an adrenaline autoinjector.

Cold urticaria - What we know and what we do not know

Cold urticaria (ColdU) is a common form of chronic inducible urticaria characterized by the development of wheals, angioedema or both in response to cold exposure. Recent research and guideline updates have advanced our understanding and management of ColdU. Today, its pathophysiology is thought to involve the cold-induced formation of autoallergens and IgE to these autoallergens, which provoke a release of proinflammatory mediators from skin mast cells. The classification of ColdU includes typical and atypical subtypes. We know that cold-induced wheals usually develop on rewarming and resolve within an hour and that anaphylaxis can occur. The diagnosis relies on the patient's history and cold stimulation testing. Additional diagnostic work-up, including a search for underlying infections, should only be done if indicated by the patient's history. The management of ColdU includes cold avoidance, the regular use of nonsedating antihistamines and the off-label use of omalizumab. However, many questions regarding ColdU remain unanswered. Here, we review what is known about ColdU, and we present important unanswered questions on the epidemiology, underlying pathomechanisms, clinical heterogeneity and treatment outcomes. Our aim is to guide future efforts that will close these knowledge gaps and advance the management of ColdU.

The global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management and course of chronic urticaria

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically disrupts health care around the globe. The impact of the pandemic on chronic urticaria (CU) and its management are largely unknown.

AIM

To understand how CU patients are affected by the COVID-19 pandemic; how specialists alter CU patient management; and the course of CU in patients with COVID-19.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Our cross-sectional, international, questionnaire-based, multicenter UCARE COVID-CU study assessed the impact of the pandemic on patient consultations, remote treatment, changes in medications, and clinical consequences.

RESULTS

The COVID-19 pandemic severely impairs CU patient care, with less than 50% of the weekly numbers of patients treated as compared to before the pandemic. Reduced patient referrals and clinic hours were the major reasons. Almost half of responding UCARE physicians were involved in COVID-19 patient care, which negatively impacted on the care of urticaria patients. The rate of face-to-face consultations decreased by 62%, from 90% to less than half, whereas the rate of remote consultations increased by more than 600%, from one in 10 to more than two thirds. Cyclosporine and systemic corticosteroids, but not antihistamines or omalizumab, are used less during the pandemic. CU does not affect the course of COVID-19, but COVID-19 results in CU exacerbation in one of three patients, with higher rates in patients with severe COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic brings major changes and challenges for CU patients and their physicians. The long-term consequences of these changes, especially the increased use of remote consultations, require careful evaluation.

Ligelizumab for Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria

BACKGROUND

In the majority of patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria, most currently available therapies do not result in complete symptom control. Ligelizumab is a next-generation high-affinity humanized monoclonal anti-IgE antibody. Data are limited regarding the dose-response relationship of ligelizumab and the efficacy and safety of ligelizumab as compared with omalizumab and placebo in patients who have moderate-to-severe chronic spontaneous urticaria that is inadequately controlled with H₁-antihistamines at approved or increased doses, alone or in combination with H₂-antihistamines or leukotriene-receptor antagonists.

METHODS

In a phase 2b dose-finding trial, we randomly assigned patients to receive ligelizumab at a dose of 24 mg, 72 mg, or 240 mg, omalizumab at a dose of 300 mg, or placebo, administered subcutaneously every 4 weeks for a period of 20 weeks, or a single 120-mg dose of ligelizumab. Disease symptoms of hives, itch, and angioedema were monitored by means of weekly activity scores. The main objective was to determine a dose-response relationship for the complete control of hives (indicated by a weekly hives-severity score of 0, on a scale from 0 to 21, with higher scores indicating greater severity); the primary end point of this response was assessed at week 12. Complete symptom control was indicated by a weekly urticaria activity score of 0 (on a scale from 0 to 42, with higher scores indicating greater severity). Safety was analyzed throughout the trial.

RESULTS

A total of 382 patients underwent randomization. At week 12, a total of 30%, 51%, and 42% of the patients treated with 24 mg, 72 mg, and 240 mg, respectively, of ligelizumab had complete control of hives, as compared with 26% of the patients in the omalizumab group and no patients in the placebo group. A dose-response relationship was established. At week 12, a total of 30%, 44%, and 40% of the patients treated with 24 mg, 72 mg, and 240 mg, respectively, of ligelizumab had complete control of symptoms, as compared with 26% of the patients in the omalizumab group and no patients in the placebo group. In this small and short trial, no safety concerns regarding ligelizumab or omalizumab emerged.

CONCLUSIONS

A higher percentage of patients had complete control of symptoms of chronic spontaneous urticaria with ligelizumab therapy of 72 mg or 240 mg than with omalizumab or placebo. (Funded by Novartis Pharma; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02477332.).

Differences in chronic spontaneous urticaria between Europe and Central/South America: results of the multi-center real world AWARE study

Background

Global chronic urticaria (CU) disease experience and management is not well documented. This study descriptively compares these aspects among CU patients residing in Europe (EU) and Central and South America (C/SA).

Methods

AWARE (A World-wide Antihistamine-Refractory chronic urticaria patient Evaluation) is a global prospective, non-interventional study of CU in the real-world setting. Patients were ≥ 18 years with a diagnosis of H1-antihistamine-refractory CU for > 2 months. Differences between the EU and C/SA regions in demographic and clinical characteristics, quality of life (QoL), work and activity impairment, pharmacological treatment, and healthcare resource use were examined.

Results

In total, 4224 patients were included in the analysis (C/SA 492; EU 3732). Rates of untreated patients were greater in the C/SA region (45.1% vs. 31.9%; P < 0.005) and escalation to third-line therapy was rare in both regions. Differences in disease experience emerged, with C/SA patients more commonly experiencing angioedema (C/SA 50.8% vs. EU 46.1%; P = 0.03) or comorbid chronic inducible urticaria (C/SA 30% vs. EU 22%; P < 0.001). Correspondingly, rates of uncontrolled urticaria were higher among C/SA patients (82.8% vs. 77.5%; P = 0.017) and patients in the C/SA region showed significantly greater work and activity impairment (absenteeism: 10.4 ± 19.7 vs. 6.7 ± 19.0, P = 0.004; presenteeism: 30.3 ± 31.9 vs. 24.4 ± 25.8, P = 0.001; work productivity loss: 33.9 ± 33.9 vs. 26.5 ± 27.5, P < 0.001; activity impairment: 37.7 ± 34.7 vs. 32.7 ± 30.1, P = 0.001). However, QoL impairment was greater in the EU region (Dermatology Life Quality Index: C/SA 6.5 ± 5.9 vs. EU 8.3 ± 7.0; P < 0.001). There was a significant difference in use of healthcare resources, including emergency services (39.6% vs. 29.3%; P < 0.001), hospitalization (7.7% vs 21.9%; P < 0.001) general practitioners (31.7% vs 57.3%; P < 0.001), and additional allergists or dermatologists (50.6% vs. 47.3%, P < 0.001), among patients in the C/SA and EU region, respectively. In both regions, patients with a primary diagnosis of CU with angioedema had significantly greater impairment in work and non-work activities and healthcare resource utilization compared to those without angioedema.

Conclusions

This study revealed that CU is a heterogeneous condition with differences in healthcare utilization and outcomes between EU and C/SA. However, overall there is a high unmet need of H1-antihistamine-refractory CU patients, which is associated with high use of healthcare resources, and has a large negative effect on QoL and work productivity.

Definition, aims, and implementation of GA(2) LEN Urticaria Centers of Reference and Excellence

BACKGROUND

GA²LEN, the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network, has recently launched a program for the development, interaction, and accreditation of centers of reference and excellence in special areas of allergy embedded in its overall quality management of allergy centers of excellence. The first area chosen is urticaria. Urticaria is a common and debilitating condition and can be a challenge for both patients and treating physicians, especially when chronic. Centers of reference and excellence in urticaria (UCAREs) can help to improve the management of hard-to-treat conditions such as urticaria.

AIMS

Here, we describe the aims, the requirements and deliverables, the application process, and the audit and accreditation protocol for GA²LEN UCAREs.

RESULTS

The main aims of GA²LEN UCAREs are to provide excellence in urticaria management, to increase the knowledge of urticaria by research and education, and to promote the awareness of urticaria by advocacy activities. To become a certified GA²LEN UCARE, urticaria centers have to apply and fulfill 32 requirements, defined by specific deliverables that are assessed during an audit visit.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The GA²LEN UCARE program will result in a strong network of urticaria specialists, promote urticaria research, and harmonize and improve urticaria management globally.