Disease Impact, Diagnostic Delay, and Unmet Medical Needs of Patients With Cholinergic Urticaria in German-Speaking Countries.
angioedema
cholinergic urticaria
hives
mast cells
unmet medical needs
wheals
Journal
Frontiers in allergy
ISSN: 2673-6101
Titre abrégé: Front Allergy
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 9918227355906676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
31
01
2022
accepted:
19
04
2022
entrez:
30
6
2022
pubmed:
1
7
2022
medline:
1
7
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Cholinergic urticaria (CholU) is a common type of chronic inducible urticaria. Little is known about the burden of the disease and its unmet medical needs. To characterize the unmet medical needs of patients with CholU. Patients with CholU ( Virtually all patients reported typical signs and symptoms of CholU, i.e., whealing (93.7%) and itching (91.9%), in response to typical trigger situations, such as physical activity, passive warming, or stress. Despite this, patients reported a marked diagnostic delay of 30.2 months (range from 0 to 279 months). Only 38% of the patients received a blood examination, and only 16% underwent provocation testing for diagnosing CholU, as recommended by the international guidelines. Physician contacts were common, but patient satisfaction with their disease management was low. In total, 90.1% of the patients stated to have an uncontrolled disease, resulting in a strong impact on their everyday activities, sleep, and QoL. Patients with CholU exhibit many important unmet needs, and improvement in the diagnostic workup and patient care is needed, as are better treatment options.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Cholinergic urticaria (CholU) is a common type of chronic inducible urticaria. Little is known about the burden of the disease and its unmet medical needs.
Aim
UNASSIGNED
To characterize the unmet medical needs of patients with CholU.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
Patients with CholU (
Results
UNASSIGNED
Virtually all patients reported typical signs and symptoms of CholU, i.e., whealing (93.7%) and itching (91.9%), in response to typical trigger situations, such as physical activity, passive warming, or stress. Despite this, patients reported a marked diagnostic delay of 30.2 months (range from 0 to 279 months). Only 38% of the patients received a blood examination, and only 16% underwent provocation testing for diagnosing CholU, as recommended by the international guidelines. Physician contacts were common, but patient satisfaction with their disease management was low. In total, 90.1% of the patients stated to have an uncontrolled disease, resulting in a strong impact on their everyday activities, sleep, and QoL.
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
Patients with CholU exhibit many important unmet needs, and improvement in the diagnostic workup and patient care is needed, as are better treatment options.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35769577
doi: 10.3389/falgy.2022.867227
pmc: PMC9234879
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
867227Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Altrichter, Mellerowicz, Terhorst-Molawi, Grekowitz, Weller and Maurer.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
KW is a speaker and advisor and has received research funding from Biocryst, CSL Behring, Dr. Pfleger, FAES, Moxie, Novartis, Shire/Takeda, and Uriach. MM is a speaker and advisor and has received research funding from Allakos, Amgen, Aralez, ArgenX, AstraZeneca, Celldex, Centogene, CSL Behring, FAES, Genentech, GIInnovation, GSK, Innate Pharma, Kyowa Kirin, Leo Pharma, Lilly, Menarini, Moxie, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi/Regeneron, Third HarmonicBio, UCB, and Uriach. SA has been a speaker and advisor and has conducted studies for Astra Zeneca, Allakos, GSK, LeoPharma, Lilly, Moxie, Novartis, Thermo Fisher, and Sanofi. DT-M has been an advisor and has received research funding from Moxie, Novartis, Celldex, and Sanofi. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2018 Jul - Aug;6(4):1119-1130
pubmed: 30033913
Allergy. 2016 Aug;71(8):1210-8
pubmed: 27038243
Clin Exp Allergy. 2018 Apr;48(4):433-444
pubmed: 29369455
Br J Community Nurs. 2011 Feb;16(2):90-8
pubmed: 21378675
N Engl J Med. 2019 Oct 3;381(14):1321-1332
pubmed: 31577874
Clin Exp Allergy. 2017 Dec;47(12):1609-1614
pubmed: 28873238
Schweiz Med Wochenschr. 1987 Jan 3;117(1):9-16
pubmed: 3810106
Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2022 Jan;21(1):21-40
pubmed: 34417579
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2019 Feb;143(2):788-791.e8
pubmed: 30312709
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2017 Dec;140(6):1710-1713.e11
pubmed: 28625805
Dermatology. 1996;193(4):324-7
pubmed: 8993958
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2019 Apr;7(4):1355-1357.e1
pubmed: 30368007
J Am Acad Dermatol. 1994 Dec;31(6):978-81
pubmed: 7962780
Acta Derm Venereol. 1980;60(5):373-80
pubmed: 6162306
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2022 May;149(5):1683-1690.e7
pubmed: 34954198
Br J Dermatol. 1999 Apr;140(4):667-71
pubmed: 10233318
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2021 Mar;9(3):1067-1078
pubmed: 33685605
J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. 2019 Nov;17(11):1141-1147
pubmed: 31765087
Int Arch Allergy Immunol. 2011;154(2):177-80
pubmed: 20733327
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2016 Dec;30(12):2060-2065
pubmed: 27324252
Clin Exp Allergy. 2021 May;51(5):730-734
pubmed: 33522024
J Dermatol. 2017 Nov;44(11):1291-1294
pubmed: 28665007
Biomed Res Int. 2020 May 24;2020:7301652
pubmed: 32596363
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2018 Feb;141(2):638-649
pubmed: 28751232
Arch Klin Exp Dermatol. 1967 Aug 31;229(3):231-47
pubmed: 5593413
Allergy. 2014 Jul;69(7):868-87
pubmed: 24785199
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2016 Nov;138(5):1483-1485.e9
pubmed: 27496595
J Dermatol Sci. 2014 Aug;75(2):88-93
pubmed: 24837213
Allergy. 2016 Jun;71(6):780-802
pubmed: 26991006
Korean J Intern Med. 2019 Mar;34(2):418-425
pubmed: 29742892