Real-life treatment of patients with cholinergic urticaria in German-speaking countries.

Cholinergic urticaria (CholU) is a frequent type of chronic inducible urticaria. Symptomatic treatment with second-generation antihistamines (sgAH) is recommended by current guidelines as first-line therapy, but little is known about how patients with CholU are treated in real life and how they respond to treatment. To assess real-life treatment of CholU in German-speaking countries. Patients with CholU (n = 111) took part in an online survey study that assessed their treatments and their treatment responses. Virtually all patients (97 %) had used antihistamines, 87 % of them sgAH; 23 % had also taken first-generation antihistamines (fgAH). The proportion of patients who benefited from standard-dosed antihistamine treatment was low (sgAH: 32 % vs. fgAH: 16 %), and side effects of sgAH and fgAH were comparable. Updosing of antihistamines had been tried by 66 patients (59 %) (most commonly [98 %, n = 65] with sgAH) and resulted in marginally better responses (sgAH: 38 % vs. fgAH: 32 %). Only very few patients had used other treatments, mostly corticosteroids (30 %) and omalizumab (5 %). SgAH were commonly used, but insufficient in about two thirds of CholU patients. Accordingly, improved use of third-line and fourth-line treatment options and development of better therapies for patients with CholU are needed.

Mellerowicz E ，Weller K ，Zuberbier T ，Maurer M ，Altrichter S ... -  《-》

Targeting histamine receptor 4 in cholinergic urticaria with izuforant (LEO 152020): results from a phase IIa randomized double-blind placebo-controlled multicentre crossover trial.

Cholinergic urticaria (CholU) is a common subtype of chronic inducible urticaria, where signs and symptoms (e.g. pruritic wheals and angioedema) are triggered by sweating due to physical exercise, passive warming and by other sweat-inducing situations. While guidelines recommend treatment with second-generation H1 antihistamines, approximately 90% of patients report uncontrolled disease. Targeting the histamine 4 receptor (H4R) has shown promise in preclinical/clinical studies of allergic/inflammatory diseases. Izuforant (LEO 152020) is a selective oral H4R antagonist with expected dual antipruritic and anti-inflammatory effects. To assess the effects of izuforant in adults with CholU, a common type of chronic urticaria driven by histamine and characterized by high skin levels of H4R expression. This was a phase IIa randomized double-blind placebo-controlled multicentre crossover trial where patients with CholU with an inadequate response to ≥ 1 standard dose of H1 antihistamine received izuforant 100 mg twice daily or placebo (EUCTR2020-004961-38-DE; NCT04853992). The primary endpoint was change from baseline in Urticaria Activity Score. Exploratory endpoints included CholU activity score over 7 days, urticaria control test, Physician Global Assessment, patient global assessment of severity (PGA-S), provocation tests, Dermatology Life Quality Index and CholU quality of life (CholU-QoL). Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters, and serum biomarkers were assessed, as well as safety and tolerability. Nineteen patients were randomized and included in the full analysis set; 18 completed treatment [mean (SD) age 29.5 (9.8) years; mean (SD) CholU duration 8.0 (6.3) years]. The primary and most of prespecified exploratory endpoints were not met; there were significant improvements in PGA-S for izuforant vs. placebo (P = 0.02), and nonsignificant improvements for other endpoints in quality of life and histamine skin prick test. All adverse events (AEs) experienced with izuforant were considered mild. The most frequently reported (> 1 patient) were nausea (three patients) and upper abdominal pain (two patients), occurring more frequently with izuforant vs. placebo (one patient each). There were no treatment-related serious AEs and no patient receiving izuforant discontinued the study. Treatment with izuforant did not cause downregulation of H4R. This is the first study to explore the role of H4R as a therapeutic target in urticaria. Targeting H4R with izuforant was well tolerated but did not demonstrate significant improvements vs. placebo in the primary endpoint and all but one prespecified exploratory endpoint in CholU.

Grekowitz E ，Metz M ，Altrichter S ，Bauer A ，Brockow K ，Heine G ，Lionnet L ，Saday KK ，Hultsch T ，Søerensen OE ，Maurer M ... -  《-》

An evaluation of remission rates with first and second line treatments and indicators of antihistamine refractoriness in chronic urticaria.

Guidelines recommend standard doses of antihistamines as first-line, and updosing of antihistamines as second-line treatment for the management of chronic urticaria (CU). However, remission rates with different types of first- and second-line treatments and indicators of antihistamine response are largely lacking in the literature. To examine response rates to first- and second-line treatments in CU, and to identify patient characteristics that can predict antihistamine treatment outcomes. We retrospectively analyzed treatment outcomes of 657 CU (556 chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU), 101 chronic inducible urticaria (CIndU)) patients who had at least 3-months of follow-up data. A standard dose of second generation antihistamines (sgAH) was effective in 43.1 % of the patients. An additional 28.8 % of patients were in remission with second-line treatments. Among patients whose disease was in remission with a standard dose of sgAHs, 14.8 % benefited from switching from their current sgAH to another sgAH. Updosing sgAHs, combination of two different sgAHs, sgAH and first generation H1-antihistamine combination, and sgAH and leukotriene receptor antagonist combination provided remission in 38.3 %, 35.8 %, 37.5 % and 25 % of patients who were given these treatments, respectively. Baseline UCT score ≤ 4, emergency referral and family history of CSU were found to be risk factors for antihistamine refractoriness in patients with CSU. A step-wise approach to the management of CU is practical as more patients respond to treatment at each step. The presence of baseline UCT score ≤ 4, emergency referral and family history of CSU might be helpful to determine patients who require third-line treatments in advance.

Ayse Ornek S ，Orcen C ，Church MK ，Kocaturk E ... -  《-》

Clinical characteristics and management of chronic spontaneous urticaria in patients refractory to H(1)-Antihistamines in Asia, Middle-East and Africa: Results from the AWARE-AMAC study.

Chronic urticaria (CU) is a condition characterized by recurrent itchy hives and/or angioedema for ≥6 weeks. Most of the data about CU come from western countries with very little information available about CU in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. AWARE-AMAC is a 24-month prospective, observational, real-world, non-interventional study in patients aged ≥18 years from Asia, the Middle East, and Africa (AMAC) with CU refractory to H1-antihistamines (H1-AH). The main objective was to describe the real-world experience with CU, including clinical characteristics, presence of angioedema, treatment patterns (shifts between treatment classes and changes within a treatment class), investigator-assessed disease control, and the impact on quality of life. Subgroups of interest were type of CU at Baseline and treatment class (based on 2013 urticaria guidelines). There were no mandatory visits and diagnostic/monitoring procedures additional to routine practice, except the patient diary (7-day Urticaria Activity Score) and patient reported outcome assessments. The focus of the current manuscript is on patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU), who formed 98% of the sample. Patients were predominantly female (69.6% female, mean age ± SD 39.8 ± 13.29 years). Time since current diagnosis (Mean ± SD) was 28.6 ± 49.06 months. Amongst patients with CSU, 31.0% had comorbid chronic inducible urticaria (CINDU) and 46.4% had a history of angioedema. 91.9% received H1-AH therapy (±other treatments). The most frequently prescribed treatment classes at Baseline were any/combination of medications, not classified under the other 7 treatment classes, named "Others" (30.5%) followed by, omalizumab (OMA; 23.6%) and second-generation H1-AH monotherapy (sgAH; 15.1%). At Month 12, the most prescribed treatment classes (>15%) for patients were OMA (23.5%) and "Other" (21.3%); 19.7% received "No drug". At Month 24, OMA (22.5%), and "Other" (17.9%) were most frequently prescribed; 28.6% received "No drug". Overall, 79.5% of patients had some type of change in treatment. Over the study period, improvement in self-reported QoL increased, which was mirrored by better disease control. In AMAC countries, the non-recommended "Other" treatment class played a major role in the initial management of CU patients. High usage of H1-AH (±other treatments) and OMA was observed. Treatment changes were observed in a majority of patients. Treatment escalation from sgAH was mostly via OMA. Improvement of disease control and QoL was achieved during the study period. Observational study (NA).

Chu CY ，Al Hammadi A ，Agmon-Levin N ，Atakan N ，Farag A ，Arnaout RK ，Kannenberg S ，Kulthanan K ，Mubarak A ，Zaitoun F ，Crowe S ，Malfait S ，Cooke K ，Dekker EL ... -  《World Allergy Organization Journal》

Delayed Pressure Urticaria: A Systematic Review of Treatment Options.

Delayed pressure urticaria (DPU) is characterized by recurrent erythematous and often painful swelling after the skin is exposed to sustained pressure. Treatment is challenging. Antihistamines, the first-line and only approved treatment, are often not effective. To systematically review the treatment options for DPU. A literature search of electronic databases for all relevant articles published till April 29, 2019, was conducted using the search terms "delayed pressure urticaria" and "pressure urticaria." This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses recommendations. Twenty-one studies (8 randomized controlled trials [RCTs], 10 retrospective cohort studies, and 3 open-label prospective studies) were included. Second-generation H1 antihistamines (sgAHs) were effective in 3 RCTs. The combination of an sgAH and montelukast (2 RCTs) or an sgAH and theophylline (1 non-RCT) was more effective than the sgAH alone. The disease improved with omalizumab (4 non-RCTs), sulphones (3 non-RCTs), oral prednisolone (1 RCT and 2 non-RCTs), intravenous immunoglobulin (1 non-RCT), and gluten-free diet (1 non-RCT). There are no studies on updosing of antihistamines over standard dosage in DPU. Overall, the quality of studies on DPU is low. Because of the lack of other evidence, antihistamines remain the first-line therapy. Updosing of sgAHs could be considered in patients with uncontrolled symptoms on the basis of the extrapolation of evidence from chronic spontaneous urticaria, even though there is no evidence of its efficacy over standard dosage. Addition of montelukast may be considered. Omalizumab or sulphones may be used in treatment-resistant patients. High-quality DPU studies should be conducted.

Kulthanan K ，Ungprasert P ，Tuchinda P ，Chularojanamontri L ，Charoenpipatsin N ，Maurer M ... -  《-》