Paghmejer9668

Background Biologics are effective treatments for patients with severe allergic disease. Impacts of delays in the prior authorization process on clinical outcomes has not been studied. Objective The objective was to quantify the times for approval and filling of biologics, and whether patients were at risk of exacerbations during this time frame. Methods The times for insurance approval and pharmacy filling of biologics (omalizumab, benralizumab, mepolizumab, dupilumab) in 80 subjects with severe asthma (n = 60) or urticaria (n = 20) from our clinic were reviewed. We compared the impact of clinical features, insurance, specialty pharmacy on fill times, and quantified exacerbations and prednisone use while awaiting biologic initiation. Results The mean ± standard deviation (SD) time (days) from submission of a prescription to the first dose available for injection was 44.0 ± 23.2 days. This was composed of the mean ± SD time for insurance approval (21.5 ± 19.6 days) and the mean ± SD time for a specialty pharmacy to fill the medication (22.8 ± 14.1 days). There was no significant difference between the times for diagnosis (asthma versus urticaria), specific biologic, or insurance. The "buy and bill" system was faster than filling via a specialty pharmacy (mean ± SD, 7.3 ± 8.5 days versus 23.3 ± 21.3 days, respectively, p less then 0.001). Conteltinib mouse Clinical features of patients with fast versus slow approval times was not significantly different. The subjects with asthma were at high risk of exacerbations and need for prednisone while awaiting initiation of the biologics; 28 of 59 patients (47%) required prednisone, with an mean cumulative dose of 483.2 ± 273.7 mg per person. Conclusion The prior authorization process for biologics was slow, and the subjects were at high risk of exacerbations during this time. The system needs to be improved to expedite approval and initiation of these medications.Background Oak pollen is an important allergen in North America. The genus Quercus (oak) belongs to the family Fagaceae under the order Fagales. Objective The objective of this article was to narratively review the oak pollen season, clinical and epidemiologic aspects of allergy to oak pollen, oak taxonomy, and oak allergen cross-reactivity, with a focus on the North American perspective. Methods A PubMed literature review (no limits) was conducted. Publications related to oak pollen, oak-related allergic rhinitis with or without conjunctivitis, and oak-related allergic asthma were selected for review. Results Oak species are common throughout the United States and contribute up to 50% to overall atmospheric pollen loads. Mean peak oak pollen counts can reach >2000 grains/m³. The start of the oak pollen season generally corresponds to the seasonal shift from winter to spring based on latitude and elevation, and may begin as early as mid February. The duration of the season can last > 100 days and, in general, is longer at lower latitudes. In the United States, ∼30% of individuals with allergy are sensitized to oak. The oak pollen season correlates with increased allergic rhinitis symptom-relieving medication use and asthma-related emergency department visits or hospitalizations. Oak falls within the birch homologous group. Extensive immunologic cross-reactivity has been demonstrated between oak pollen and birch pollen allergens, and, more specifically, their major allergens Que a 1 and Bet v 1. The cross-reactivity between oak and birch has implications for allergy immunotherapy (AIT) because guidelines suggest selecting one representative allergen within a homologous group for AIT, a principle that would apply to oak. Conclusion Allergy to oak pollen is common in North America and has a substantial clinical impact. Oak pollen allergens are cross-reactive with birch pollen allergens, which may have implications for AIT.The latest evidence on the mechanisms, efficacy, and safety of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) was reviewed. Interleukin (IL) 35 and IL-35-producing regulatory T cells were assessed as new biomarkers for SLIT responsiveness. A detailed analysis of clinical studies, including timothy grass pollen, 5-grass pollen, ragweed, and house-dust mite SLIT tablets, was provided, including a comparative analysis of efficacy and safety of SLIT versus subcutaneous immunotherapy.Immediate hypersensitivity to drugs is characterized by symptoms such as hives, swelling, and wheezing. To prevent a negative impact on care, assessment by an allergist is important. Evaluation requires a clear clinical history, but it is often lacking or vague, which makes a diagnosis difficult. Allergists instead can use skin testing and drug challenge to evaluate drug hypersensitivity reactions, which help the patient and provider understand the causative drug(s) and, more importantly, enables the use of the exonerated drug(s). Although penicillin skin testing is standardized, well described, and widely used, skin testing for most other drugs requires the use of a nonirritating skin testing concentration that can have a low negative predictive value. Drug challenges are the criterion standard for confirming tolerance. The allergist must obtain an in-depth clinical history and then follow with skin testing and/or drug challenges when indicated to determine which drugs can be de-labelled and which should be avoided. In this review, we focused on the evaluation of drug hypersensitivity reactions to antibiotics, perioperative agents, biologics, and chemotherapeutics.Background Since its initial description in December 2019 in Wuhan, China, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly progressed into a worldwide pandemic, which has affected millions of lives. Unlike the disease in adults, the vast majority of children with COVID-19 have mild symptoms and are largely spared from severe respiratory disease. However, there are children who have significant respiratory disease, and some may develop a hyperinflammatory response similar to that seen in adults with COVID-19 and in children with Kawasaki disease (KD), which has been termed multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C). Objective The purpose of this report was to examine the current evidence that supports the etiopathogenesis of COVID-19 in children and the relationship of COVID-19 with KD and MIS-C as a basis for a better understanding of the clinical course, diagnosis, and management of these clinically perplexing conditions. Results The pathogenesis of COVID-19 is carried out in two distinct but overlapping phases of COVID-19 the first triggered by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) itself and the second by the host immune response.