Inhaled corticosteroids in early COVID-19 – a tale of many facetsLudger Klimek1, Cezmi A. Akdis2, Marek Jutel3, Torsten Zuberbier4, Jean Bousquet5-71. Center for Rhinology and Allergology, Wiesbaden, Germany.2. Swiss Institute of Allergy and Asthma Research (SIAF), University of Zurich - Christine Kühne - Center for Allergy Research and Education (CK-CARE), Davos, Switzerland.3. Department of Clinical Immunology, Medical University of Wroclaw, ALL-MED Medical Research Institute, Wrocław, Poland.4. Clinic for Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, Charité - University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany.5. Charité, Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany6. Comprehensive Allergy Center, Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany7. Centre Hospitalier Universitaire, Montpellier, France

Introduction: Exposure to respiratory viruses is a significant cause of morbidity and affects virus-specific antibody levels. Little is known about determinants associated with immune response to these viruses. We aimed to investigate the determinants of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and rhinovirus (RV) specific IgG responses in both children and adults. Methods: The study is based on the EGEA cohort, composed of 530 samples of children in EGEA1 (1991-95) and 1241 samples of adults in EGEA2 (2003-07). Cumulative RV-specific IgG responses (species A, B and C) and IgG responses to RSV-G protein were measured by micro-array technology. Multiple linear mixed models (random effect to account for familial dependence) were performed to assess associations between age, sex, body mass index (BMI), tobacco smoke exposure and season of blood sampling with RSV and RV-specific IgG levels. Results: In children (11.1±2.8 years old, 57% of boys), higher RV-specific IgG levels were associated with older age (only for RV-B), female sex and lower BMI, while only older age was associated with higher RSV-specific IgG levels. In adults (43.5±16.7 years old, 48% of men), younger age, female sex, lower BMI, active smoking and all seasons except summer were associated with higher RV-specific IgG levels. Older age, active smoking and all seasons except summer were associated with higher RSV-specific IgG levels. Conclusion: Personal and seasonal determinants of RSV- and RV-specific IgG levels seem to vary according to the respiratory virus type and between children and adults, suggesting different patterns of responses along the life course.

Background: Information and communication technologies (ICTs) improve patient-centered care and are routinely used in Allergic Rhinitis (AR), but patients’ preferences and attitudes are unexplored. This study examines AR-related information preferences and ICT use by AR patients. Methods: A survey-based cross-sectional study was carried out in Ecuador in seven centers of reference of allergic disease. Participants were 18 or older, diagnosed with AR, and had access to ICT and the internet. Descriptive and binomial logistic regression were done. A value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: 217 patients were included. 47% used ICTs to learn about AR, 38.2% found it useful. 75% disagreed that ICTs reduce doctor’s appointments. Individuals with poorer quality of life were 27% more likely to utilize ICTs to contact their doctor and 23% more likely to be interested in AR-related content. Patients with long-term AR or other allergies were less likely to use ICTs. Higher education and lower quality of life may increase AR app adoption by 4.8 times. Academic preparation five-fold increased ICT use for health provider communication. Mild-persistent allergic rhinitis 12 times enhanced the probabilities of using ICTs to share experiences and communicate with other patients. Conclusions: Our study found that moderate-to-severe AR individuals are not interested in information despite ICTs’ potential benefits. Consequently, allergists should use evidence-based resources and establish new technological options for content, follow-up, and emotional support for AR patients in Ecuador.

A document by Bernardo Sousa-Pinto. Click on the document to view its contents.

Background Limited information exists on nursing home (NH) residents regarding BNT162b2/Pfizer vaccine efficacy in preventing SARS-CoV-2 and severe Covid-19, and its association with post-vaccine humoral response. Methods 396 residents from seven NHs suffering a SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.7 (VOC-α) outbreak at least 14 days after a vaccine campaign were repeatedly tested using SARS-CoV-2 real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction on nasopharyngeal swab test (RT-PCR). SARS-CoV-2 Receptor-Binding Domain (RBD) of the S1 subunit (RBD-IgG) was measured in all residents. Nucleocapsid antigenemia (N-Ag) was measured in RT-PCR-positive residents, and serum neutralizing antibodies in vaccinated residents from one NH. Results The incidence of positive RT-PCR was lower in residents vaccinated by two doses (22.7%) vs one dose (32.3%) or non-vaccinated residents (43.7%)(p<0.01). Covid-19-induced deaths were observed in 10.4% of the non-vaccinated residents, in 6.4% of those who had received one dose, and in 0.9% with two doses (p=0.0007). Severe symptoms were more common in infected non-vaccinated (21.0%) vs vaccinated residents (47.6%, p=0.002). Higher levels of RBD-IgG (n=325) were associated with a lower SARS-CoV-2 incidence. No in vitro serum neutralization activity was found for RBD-IgG levels below 1,050 AU/mL. RBD-IgG levels were inversely associated with N-Ag levels, found as a risk factor of severe Covid-19. Conclusions Two BNT162b2/Pfizer doses are associated with a 48% reduction of SARS-CoV-2 incidence and a 91.3% reduction of death risk in residents from NHs facing a VOC-α outbreak. BNT162b2/Pfizer efficacy was partly predicted by post-vaccine RBD-IgG levels.

Methods: Twenty-two French nursing homes were included. COVID-19 had been diagnosed with real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for SARS-CoV-2. Blood S-protein IgG and nucleocapsid (N) IgG protein (N-protein IgG) were measured 21-24 days after the first jab (1,004 residents) and 6 weeks after the second (820 residents). Results: Among the 735 residents without prior COVID-19, 41.7% remained seronegative for S-protein IgG after the first jab vs 2.1% of the 270 residents with a previous positive RT-PCR (p<0.001). After the second jab, only 3% of the 586 residents without prior COVID-19 remained seronegative. However, 26.5% of them had low S-protein IgG levels (50-1050 UA/mL) vs 6.4% of the 222 residents with prior COVID-19. Residents with old infection (first wave), or seropositive for N-protein IgG at the time of vaccination, had the highest S-protein IgG levels. Residents with a prior COVID-19 infection had higher S-protein IgG levels after one dose than those without two jabs. Interpretation: A single vaccine jab is sufficient to reach immunity in residents with prior COVID-19. Most residents without prior COVID-19 are seropositive for S-protein IgG after the second jab, but around 30% have low levels of S-protein IgG. Whether residents with no or low post-vaccine immunity are at higher risk of symptomatic COVID-19 requires further analysis.

Following the emergency use authorization of the vaccine mRNA-1273 on 18th December 2020 in the US and the vaccine BNT162b2 one week earlier, two mRNA vaccines are in currently used for the prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Phase 3 pivotal trials on both vaccines excluded individuals with a history of allergy to vaccine components. Immediately after the initiation of vaccination in the United Kingdom, Canada, and in the US, anaphylactic reactions have been reported. While the culprit trigger requires investigation, initial reports suggested the excipient polyethylene glycol 2000 (PEG-2000), which is contained in both vaccines as PEG-micellar carrier system as the potential culprit. Surface PEG chains form a hydrate shell to increase stability and prevent opsonization. Allergic reactions to such PEG-ylated lipids are rarely IgE-mediated, but may result from complement activation-related pseudoallergy (CARPA) that has been described to similar liposomes. In addition, mRNA-1273 also contains tromethamine (trometamol), which has been reported to cause anaphylaxis to e.g. gadolinium-based or iodinated contrast media. Skin prick-, intradermal-, epicutaneous- tests, in vitro sIgE assessment, evaluation of sIgG/IgM, as well as basophil activation test are in use to demonstrate allergic reactions to various components of the vaccines.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine BNT162b2 received approval and within the first few days of public vaccination several severe anaphylaxis cases occurred. An investigation is taking place to understand the cases and their triggers. The vaccine will be administered to a large number of individuals worldwide and concerns raised for severe adverse events might occur. With the current information, the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) states its position for the following preliminary recommendations that are to be revised as soon as more data emerges. To minimize the risk of severe allergic reactions in vaccinated individuals, it is urgently required to understand the specific nature of the reported severe allergic reactions, including the background medical history of the individuals affected and the mechanisms involved. To achieve this goal all clinical and laboratory information should be collected and reported. Mild and moderate allergic patients should not be excluded from the vaccine as the exclusion of all these patients from vaccination may have a significant impact on reaching the goal of population immunity. Health care practitioners vaccinating against COVID-19 are required to be sufficiently prepared to recognise and treat anaphylaxis properly with the ability to administer adrenaline. A mandatory observation period after vaccine administration of at least 15 minutes for all individuals should be followed. The current guidelines, which exclude patients with severe allergies from vaccination with BNT162b2, should be re-evaluated after more information and experience with the new vaccine develops.

To the Editor,We appreciate the interest and comments of Soriano and Ancochea1 regarding our papers 2. Further to the suggestion that “it would be of interest to repeat their statistics conducted during the first wave of COVID-19, again with the current estimates during the ongoing second wave, or later ones”, we would like to emphasize that our geographical observation was a type of anecdotal evidence that contributed to formulating a hypothesis. In a previous paper, we found that after adjusting for potentially relevant country-level confounders, there was a negative ecological association between COVID-19 mortality and the consumption of cabbage and cucumber in European countries 3. In this study, we acknowledged that “As in any ecological study, any inference from the observed association should be made at the country level, as the possibility of ecological fallacy precludes inferences at the individual level; and that further testing in properly designed individual studies would be of interest”. Indeed, what would be useful is testing the hypothesis in robust observational studies and/or clinical trials.Regarding our observation that COVID-19 could be considered as a disease of the Anthropocene 4 , other authors have recently provided a more complete description of the links between the disruption of the natural ecosystems that characterize the Anthropocene and the occurrence of zoonosis 5 6.1. Soriano J and Ancochea J. Saved by cabbage, killed by cabbage, and COVID-19. Allergy 2020; in press.2. Bousquet J, Anto JM, Czarlewski W, et al. Cabbage and fermented vegetables: from death rate heterogeneity in countries to candidates for mitigation strategies of severe COVID-19. Allergy 2020. DOI: 10.1111/all.14549.3. Fonseca S, Rivas I, Romaguera D, et al. Association between consumption of vegetables and COVID-19 mortality at a country level in Europe. MedRix 2020; 10.1101/2020.07.17.201558464. O’Callaghan C and Anto J. COVID-19: The Disease of the Anthropocene.Env Res 2020; 187: 109683.doi: 109610.101016/j.envres.102020.109683. Epub 102020 May 109615.5. Morens DM and Fauci AS. Emerging Pandemic Diseases: How We Got to COVID-19. Cell 2020; 182: 1077-1092. 2020/08/28. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.08.021.6. Roche B, Garchitorena A, Guegan JF, et al. Was the COVID-19 pandemic avoidable? A call for a ”solution-oriented” approach in pathogen evolutionary ecology to prevent future outbreaks. Ecol Lett 2020 2020/09/02. DOI: 10.1111/ele.13586.JM AntoISGlobAL, Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology (CREAL), Barcelona, Spain. IMIM (Hospital del Mar Research Institute), Barcelona, Spain. Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF), Barcelona, Spain. CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Barcelona, Spain.J BousquetCharité, Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Comprehensive Allergy Center, Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Berlin, Germany. MACVIA-France, Montpellier, France.

Background: The practice of allergology varies widely between countries, and the costs and sales for the treatment of rhinitis differ depending on practices and health systems. To understand these differences and their implications, the rhinitis market was studied in some of the EU countries. Methods: We conducted a pharmaco-epidemiological database analysis to assess the medications that were prescribed for allergic rhinitis in the years 2016, 2017 and 2018. We used the IQVIA platforms for prescribed medicines (MIDAS® - Meaningful Integration of Data, Analytics and Services) and for OTC medicines (OTC International Market Tracking - OTCims). We selected the five most important markets in the EU (France, Germany, Italy, Poland and Spain). The UK was excluded due to a lack of data. Results: Intra-nasal decongestants were excluded from the analyses because they are not prescribed for allergic rhinitis. For both Standard Units (SU) and costs, France is leading the other countries. In terms of SU, the four other countries are similar. For costs, Poland is lower than the three others. However, medication use differs largely. For 2018, in SU, intra-nasal corticosteroid is the first treatment in Poland (70.0%), France (51.3%), Spain (51.1%) and Germany (50.3%) whereas the Italian market is dominated by systemic anti-histamines (41.4%) followed by intra-nasal corticosteroids (30.1%). Results of other years were similar. Discussion: There are major differences between countries in terms of rhino-conjunctivitis medication usage.

Large differences in COVID-19 death rates exist between countries and between regions of the same country. Some very low death rate countries such as Eastern Asia, Central Europe or the Balkans have a common feature of eating large quantities of fermented foods. Although biases exist when examining ecological studies, fermented vegetables or cabbage were associated with low death rates in European countries. SARS-CoV-2 binds to its receptor, the angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). As a result of SARS-Cov-2 binding, ACE2 downregulation enhances the angiotensin II receptor type 1 (AT1R) axis associated with oxidative stress. This leads to insulin resistance, lung and endothelial damage, two severe outcomes of COVID-19. The nuclear factor (erythroid-derived 2)-like 2 (Nrf2) is the most potent antioxidant in humans and can block the AT1R axis. Cabbage contains precursors of sulforaphane, the most active natural activator of Nrf2. Fermented vegetables contain many lactobacilli, which are also potent Nrf2 activators. It is proposed that fermented cabbage is a proof-of-concept of dietary manipulations that may enhance Nrf2-associated antioxidant effects helpful in mitigating COVID-19 severity.

To the Editor, The fermentation process, born as a preservation method in the Neolithic age, enabled humans to eat not-so-fresh food and to survive.1 Fermented foods are “foods or beverages made via controlled microbial growth (including lactic acid bacteria (LAB)) and enzymatic conversions of food components.” 2 Not all fermented foods contain live cultures, as some undergo further processing after fermentation: pasteurization, smoking, baking, or filtration. These processes kill or remove the live microorganisms in foods such as soy sauces, bread, most beers and wines as well as chocolate. Live cultures can be found in fermented vegetables and fermented milk (fermented sour milk, yoghurt, probiotics, …). The westernized diet is lacking many traditional fermented foods.3The gut microbiota has an inter-individual variability due to genetic predisposition and diet 3. Some foods like cabbage can be fermented by the gut microbiota. 4 The westernized diet has been associated with changes in the gut microbiome.5In this Rostrum, we consider loss of food fermentation either as a reduction of fermented food consumption in the diet or as a change in the microbiome leading to a reduction of fermentation of foods in the gut. This paper is based on the hypothesis that diet may partly explain differences in COVID-19 death rates within and between countries.6