In the October 2014 issue of Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Brough et al show that early environmental peanut exposure from house dust increases the risk of peanut allergy in children with impaired skin barrier. Children were assessed for peanut allergy and had genetic studies to determine whether they could produce normal filaggrin levels. Dust samples were collected and analyzed for peanut concentration to determine in which groups of children environmental peanut exposure influenced the development of peanut allergy. In normal children environmental peanut exposure did not influence the development of peanut allergy. In contrast, in filaggrin deficient children the risk of peanut allergy increased as peanut concentration in the house dust increased. To read the full article, please click here: http://bit.ly/1qkfHeY
Each month, the Editors of the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology will select two JACI articles for discussion. Readers are invited to send in their questions and comments, which will be addressed by the authors. Articles highlighted on this blog are available free of charge from the links in each post.
Search This Blog
Wednesday, October 8, 2014
Thursday, October 2, 2014
Standardizing the assessment of clinical signs of atopic eczema
Atopic eczema (AE, syn. atopic dermatitis) is a major
medical condition that causes substantial burden to patients, their
families, and society. Various different interventions exist, many of
which have been assessed in randomized controlled
trials (RCTs). However, there is a lack of core outcome sets for atopic
eczema (AE) which is a major obstacle for advancing evidence-based
treatment. There are several different instruments identified to assess
clinical signs of AE and the global Harmonizing
Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative has already defined
clinical signs, symptoms, quality of life, and long-term control of
flares as core outcome domains for AE-trials. To resolve the current
lack of standardization of the assessment of clinical
signs of AE, the HOME initiative followed a structured process of
systematic reviews and international consensus sessions to identify one
core outcome measurement instrument to assess clinical signs in all
future AE-trials (J Allergy Clin Immunol 2014; 134(4): 800-807).
The authors determined that from 16 different
instruments identified to assess clinical signs of AE, only the Eczema
Area and Severity Index (EASI) and the objective Scoring Atopic
Dermatitis Index (objective SCORAD) were identified as sufficiently
tested for inclusion in the core outcome set. The EASI has adequate
validity, responsiveness, internal consistency, and intra-observer
reliability. The objective SCORAD has adequate validity, responsiveness,
and inter-observer reliability, but unclear intra-observer
reliability to measure clinical signs of AE. In an international
consensus study, patients, physicians, nurses, methodologists, and
pharmaceutical industry representatives agreed that EASI is the
preferred core instrument to measure clinical signs in all future
AE-trials. The EASI was chosen as the core outcome measure for clinical
trials because (1) it only includes the 4 essential signs, (2) assesses
the severity of AE signs at multiple body sites, rather than at a
single representative site for each sign, and
(3) gives the extent of AE lesions sufficient weighting.
The HOME initiative recommends that all investigators,
pharmaceutical industry, and regulatory authorities observe this
consensus and include the EASI in all future atopic eczema trials to
enable improved evidence-based decision making and
scientific communication in the future. This does
not preclude the use of other scales in trials (such as SCORAD)
in addition
to the core outcome measure. Better training materials for use of EASI are in preparation and will be freely available via the HOME website (www.homeforeczema.org).
Furthermore, the process of standardization and selection of
measurement instruments for the assessment of the other core outcome
domains of AE, i.e. symptoms such as pruritus and sleeping problems,
quality of life and long-term control of flares, is currently
underway.
Complexities of atopic dermatitis
Atopic dermatitis (AD) is the most common chronic
inflammatory skin disease and often precedes the development of food allergy
and asthma. The defective skin barrier
in AD is thought to allow the absorption of allergens through the skin. This promotes systemic allergen sensitization,
contributing to the development of food allergy and asthma, as well as skin
infections such as Staphylococcus aureus
and herpes simplex virus (HSV). This
month’s JACI focuses on the importance of both genetic and acquired causes of
epithelial skin barrier dysfunction in driving the natural history of AD. In
their review, Donald Leung and Emma Guttman-Yassky summarize current insights
into AD that may lead to new treatment approaches, including several articles
published in this month’s journal (J Allergy Clin Immunol 2014; 134(4): 769-779).
The causes of AD are complex and driven by a combination of
genetic, environmental and immunologic factors which likely account for
heterogeneity of AD onset, severity and natural history of the disease. While
there is currently no cure for AD, recent studies suggest prevention of AD can
be achieved by early interventions that protect the skin barrier such as
emollients and topical anti-inflammatory treatments. Importantly, the control
of lesional AD may improve long term outcomes not only in AD, but in allergic
diseases of the gastrointestinal and respiratory tracts as well, due to the
reduction of associated allergen sensitization.
Although current treatment options for AD are limited, the
authors explain that in addition to Th2 antagonists (i.e. the anti IL-4R drug
dupilumab), determining the key role of TSLP-receptor signaling and IL-22 that
involve clinical trials with agents that target TSLP, Th22, and TH17/IL-23 will
be of interest. Furthermore, the selection of therapeutics for patients with
differing degrees of disease severity and /or phenotypes should be guided by
defining the extent of activation in the skin and blood. For example, anti
IL-23/IL-17 might provide beneficial responses particularly in intrinsic AD
patients. The individual contributions of the TH22, Th17, and Th2 immune
pathways to the disease phenotype will be clarified through clinical trials
coupled with mechanistic studies that are currently in progress. This
comprehensive review highlights the importance of translational medicine, from
animal models to clinical trials, and how this approach is advancing AD
research.
Questions for the
authors:
Recently, both basic
science and clinical research have provided novel insights into the prevention,
identification, and treatment options for AD. Do you anticipate these findings
to improve outcomes for not only AD but other allergic diseases as well?
Yes, because the
principle underlying causation of allergic diseases likely have in common a
defective epithelial barrier and abberant immune response. This is modulated by different resident cells
in each organ.
AD is most often a
first step in a series of atopic diseases in the Atopic March that often leads
to rhinitis, food allergy, and asthma. Could removing the first step in the
Atopic March reduce the global burden of atopic disease?
Possibly. The studies in the current issue of JACI
support the concept that skin barrier dysfunction enhances sensitization via
environmental allergen exposure. A natural progression of this concept would be
to correct the skin barrier defect to determine whether elimination of AD could
prevent food allergy, asthma and allergic rhinitis.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)