Anne Pagnier

and 14 more

Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare, life-threatening genetic disorder characterized by acute, recurrent and unpredictable episodes of cutaneous or submucosal angioedema, mediated by bradykinin, due to C1 inhibitor (C1INH) abnormalities in the vast majority of cases. The epidemiology of the disease is poorly documented in children. Clinical manifestations usually appear during childhood or early adolescence. Classical signs, preceded by prodromal symptoms in 50 % of cases, include transient, localized, non-pitting, non-pruritic swelling of deep dermal/subcutaneous or mucosal/submucosal tissues, leading to oedema of the extremities, face, lips, tongue, trunk and genitals, recurring gastrointestinal symptoms and laryngeal edema possibly causing asphyxiation and death. Diagnosis is often delayed due to low awareness in the medical community, and particularly challenging in case of isolated abdominal crises or atypical presentation and in neonates or infants. It relies on biological tests (measurement of serum/plasma levels of C1INH function, C1INH protein, and C4), genetic testing in selected cases, and imaging for differential diagnosis of acute abdominal crises. Main differential diagnosis for peripheral oedema is mast cell-mediated oedema that accounts for 95 % of angioedema in clinical practice. Quality of life can be significantly impaired. Disease management includes treatment of attacks, short-term and long-term prophylaxis, psychological support, avoidance of triggers, patients’ and parents’ education and coordination of all stakeholders, ideally within a specialized healthcare network. New plasma kallikrein inhibitors, namely lanadelumab (subcutaneous route) and berotralstat (oral route) have facilitated long-term prophylaxis thanks to improved usability.

Guillaume PIERRARD

and 11 more

Background: Limited information is available on the use of omalizumab (OMA) updosing since its introduction as a second-line therapy in chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) in 2014. Practical guidelines from health authorities are lacking, and the specific characteristics of patients requiring higher doses remain unknown. Our objectives were to characterize the patterns of OMA updosing (defined as changes in dose and/or injection intervals), to identify the predictive factors associated with updosing, and to improve CSU management. Methods: We conducted a prospective, multicentric, real-life, observational study, including patients diagnosed with CSU and starting OMA. The data were collected at 0, 3, 6 and 9 months. The primary endpoint was the frequency of OMA updosing at 3 months. The secondary endpoints included an analysis of updosed patients’ profile, and an assessment of OMA efficacy and safety. Results: We included 153 patients. Twenty percent of patients at M3 were updosed, and 27% in total during the 9-month follow-up. Practitioners mainly chose to increase the frequency of injections (66%). At baseline, the updosed patients were more likely, to have inducible urticaria (50% vs. 33%, p=0.046), more severe CSU (UCT 3 vs. 4, p<0.001; DLQI 14 vs. 11, p=0.040), a lower lymphocyte count (1894 vs. 2100, p=0.026) and IgE below 70 UI/mL (65% vs. 45%, p=0.039). The side effects of OMA were not more frequent after updosing. Conclusion: One in five patient underwent updosing within just three months. OMA updosing is frequent in particular in cases of severe disease, inducible urticaria and low IgE blood levels.