Background Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a clinical entity with specific features that impacts significantly on patient quality of life (QoL). CRSwNP is often associated with asthma and is difficult to control and manage despite pharmacological and/or surgical treatment. Omalizumab, a monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, has emerged as a putative therapeutic option. Objective To evaluate the effects of omalizumab on nasal polyp (NP) size and QoL assessed by Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22) in patients with recalcitrant CRSwNP and mild asthma. Methods A multicenter retrospective analysis of patient data from the Community of Valencia (Spain) was performed. Adult patients with recalcitrant CRSwNP and comorbid mild asthma receiving compassionate use of omalizumab were included. NP size measured by total nasal endoscopic polyp score (TPS) and QoL evaluated through the SNOT-22 questionnaire were assessed at baseline and monthly over 12 months. An ordinal regression model was built to analyze the results. Results A total of 23 CRSwNP patients with a mean age (± SD) of 54.78 ± 9.46 years were included. Nineteen suffered from aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD). In all patients, a significant and sustained reduction in TPS was observed over time, accompanied by improvements in QoL reflected in lower SNOT-22 scores. In the ordinal regression model, time but not total IgE, age or tissue eosinophilia impacted on NP size and SNOT-22 outcomes. Additionally, improvements in QoL were not explained by reductions in the size of polyps. Conclusion Omalizumab was effective for the treatment of patients with recalcitrant CRSwNP and mild asthma, even when AERD was present, by reducing NP size and improving QoL; treatment time was a key factor. SNOT-22 improvements were not explained by decreases in TPS, indicating that omalizumab may be effective in all patients, regardless of polyp size.

Background Benralizumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting the human interleukin-5 (IL-5) receptor (IL-5R), was used before marketing authorisation in Spain in a real world setting as part of an early-access programme (EAP) to treat patients with severe eosinophilic asthma with prior insufficient response or intolerance to anti-IL5 treatment (mepolizumab or reslizumab). The objective of this study is to describe the patient profile candidate for treatment and to assess benralizumab effectiveness. Methods This is an observational, retrospective, multicentre study in severe eosinophilic asthma patients refractory to other biological agents targeting the IL-5 pathway. Baseline characteristics included closest data, from the previous 12 months, to benralizumab treatment onset (index date). Patients were followed until the last treatment dosage while EAP was active (March to December 2018). Effectiveness was evaluated versus baseline, in patients who received at least three doses, with asthma control test (ACT), Mini Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (MiniAQLQ), annual severe exacerbation rate, oral corticosteroids treatment (OCS) and asthma-related healthcare resources utilization. Results Twenty-seven patients treated with benralizumab were included in the analysis. Effectiveness was assessed in 19 patients. Both questionnaires showed clinically meaningful differences, i.e. ACT score ≥ 3 and MiniAQLQ score ≥ 0.5, compared with baseline [mean (SD), 3.3 (6.8) and 1.2 (1.9), respectively]. Patients treated with OCS decreased during follow-up from 88.9% (n = 24/27) at baseline to 78.9% (n = 15/19) and 31.6% (n = 6/19) had an OCS dose reduction ≥ 50%. The difference in annual severe exacerbation rate during follow-up showed a significant reduction vs. baseline (2.12 per patient-year, 95% CI 0.99–3.24, p = 0.002). The differences in annual rate of non-scheduled primary care and specialist visits during follow-up indicated a significant decrease [2.28 per patient-year (95% CI 1.55–3.01; p < 0.001) and 1.47 per patient-year (95% CI 0.65–2.30; p = 0.004), respectively], as well as the difference in annual rate of number of emergency department visits [1.18 per patient-year (95% CI 0.51–1.85; p = 0.007)]. Conclusions These results suggest that severe eosinophilic asthma patients receiving benralizumab, presented clinically meaningful improvement in asthma control and asthma-related QoL as well as OCS dose reduction. Results also aim to significant reductions in annual severe exacerbation rates, non-scheduled primary care and specialist visits, and emergency department visits rates.

Background: COVID-19 disease is a serious global health problem. Few treatments have been shown to reduce mortality and accelerate time to recovery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the potential effect of a food supplement (probiotics, prebiotics, vitamin D, zinc and selenium) in patients admitted with COVID-19. Methods: A prospective randomized non-blinded clinical trial was conducted in a sample of 162 hospitalized patients diagnosed with COVID-19 recruited over eight months. All patients received standard treatment, but the intervention group (n = 67) was given one food supplement stick daily during their admission. After collecting the study variables, a statistical analysis was performed comparing the intervention and control groups and a multivariate analysis controlling for variables that could act as confounding factors. Results: ROC curve analysis with an area under the curve (AUC) value of 0.840 (p < 0.001; 95%CI: 0.741–0.939) of the food supplement administration vs. recovery indicated good predictive ability. Moreover, the intervention group had a shorter duration of digestive symptoms compared with the control group: 2.6 ± 1.3 vs. 4.3 ± 2.2 days (p = 0.001); patients with non-severe disease on chest X-ray had shorter hospital stays: 8.1 ± 3.9 vs. 11.6 ± 7.4 days (p = 0.007). Conclusions: In this trial, the administration of a food supplement (Gasteel Plus®) was shown to be a protective factor in the group of patients with severe COVID-19 and allowed early recovery from digestive symptoms and a shorter hospital stay in patients with a normal–mild–moderate chest X-ray at admission (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04666116).

Background COVID-19 severely impacted older adults and long-term care facility (LTCF) residents. Our primary aim was to describe differences in clinical and epidemiological variables, in-hospital management, and outcomes between LTCF residents and community-dwelling older adults hospitalized with COVID-19. The secondary aim was to identify risk factors for mortality due to COVID-19 in hospitalized LTCF residents. Methods This is a cross-sectional analysis within a retrospective cohort of hospitalized patients≥75 years with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to 160 Spanish hospitals. Differences between groups and factors associated with mortality among LTCF residents were assessed through comparisons and logistic regression analysis. Results Of 6,189 patients≥75 years, 1,185 (19.1%) were LTCF residents and 4,548 (73.5%) were community-dwelling. LTCF residents were older (median: 87.4 vs. 82.1 years), mostly female (61.6% vs. 43.2%), had more severe functional dependence (47.0% vs 7.8%), more comorbidities (Charlson Comorbidity Index: 6 vs 5), had dementia more often (59.1% vs. 14.4%), and had shorter duration of symptoms (median: 3 vs 6 days) than community-dwelling patients (all, p&lt;.001). Mortality risk factors in LTCF residents were severe functional dependence (aOR:1.79;95%CI:1.13-2.83;p=.012), dyspnea (1.66;1.16-2.39;p=.004), SatO2&lt;94% (1.73;1.27-2.37;p=.001), temperature≥37.8ºC (1.62;1.11-2.38; p=.013); qSOFA index≥2 (1.62;1.11-2.38;p=.013), bilateral infiltrates (1.98;1.24-2.98;p&lt;.001), and high C-reactive protein (1.005;1.003-1.007;p&lt;.001). In-hospital mortality was initially higher among LTCF residents (43.3% vs 39.7%), but lower after adjusting for sex, age, functional dependence, and comorbidities (aOR:0.74,95%CI:0.62-0.87;p&lt;.001). Conclusion Basal functional status and COVID-19 severity are risk factors of mortality in LTCF residents. The lower adjusted mortality rate in LTCF residents may be explained by earlier identification, treatment, and hospitalization for COVID-19.

No abstract