Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: Severe asthma affects up to 20,000 citizens of Israel. Novel biological therapies, which individually have been proven to reduce asthma morbidity in clinical trials, have become available in recent years. Comparative data among different drugs are scarce.

Objectives: To describe and compare the clinical outcomes of biological therapies in severe asthma patients treated at Shamir Medical Center.

Methods: We conducted a cohort study based on a review of cases treated with monoclonal antibodies for severe asthma at our center. Data were extracted for demographics, eosinophil count, lung function (FEV1), exacerbation rate, and median dose of oral prednisone. Between-drug comparison was conducted by repeated measures ANOVA.

Results: The cohort included 62 patients receiving biological therapy. All biologic drugs were found to reduce exacerbation rate [F(1, 2) = 40.4, P < 0.0001] and prednisone use [F(1, 4) = 16, P < 0.001] significantly. ANOVA revealed no difference of efficacy endpoints between the different drugs. Eosinophil count was significantly reduced post-biologic treatment in the anti-interleukin-5 agents (P < 0.001) but not under treatment with omalizumab and dupilumab.

Conclusions: All of the biological therapies were effective for improving clinical outcomes. None of the agents was clearly superior to any other. These data emphasize the need for severe asthma patients to be seen by pulmonary medicine specialists and offered, where appropriate, biological therapies.

Background: Skin-prick tests (SPT), food-specific immunoglobulin E level (sIgE) and clinical history have limited value individually in predicting the severity of outcome of the oral food challenge (OFC). 

Objectives: To develop a score that accounts for SPT, sIgE and clinical history to predict the risk of severe reaction to the OFC. 

Methods: A 5 year retrospective chart review was performed on 983 children who underwent OFC to egg, milk and peanut. 

Results: Using multilogistic regression, four major indicators were found to be independently associated with failed OFC: sIgE (odds ratio = 1.04, P < 0.0001) , wheal size of the SPT (OR = 1.23, P < 0.0001), a history of any prior reaction to the food (OR = 1.13, P < 0.01), and a history of a prior non-cutaneous reaction (OR = 1.99, P < 0.01)  and three were independently associated with anaphylaxis: wheal size (OR = 1.16, P < 0.001), a history of a prior non-cutaneous reaction (OR = 4.24, P < 0.01), and age (OR = 1.07, P < 0.03). A Food Challenge Score (0–4) was developed which accounted for SPT wheal, sIgE, a history of a prior non-cutaneous reaction, and age. A score of 0–1 had a negative predictive value for multisystem reaction to the OFC: 95% for milk, 91% for egg and 93% for peanut. A score of 3–4 had a positive predictive value for anaphylaxis:  62% for milk, 92% for egg and 86% for peanut.

Conclusions: Severe reaction to milk, egg and peanut OFC can be predicted using a simple score that takes into account clinical data that are commonly available prior to the challenges.