Patient reported outcomes on food immunotherapy differ between countries and foods: results from COFAITH.

IF 8.2 1区 医学 Q1 ALLERGY
Pablo Rodríguez Del Río, Carmen Riggioni, Antoine Deschildre, Matthew Greenhawt, Sabine Schnadt, Stefania Arasi, Anna Nowak-Wegrzyn, Richard L Wasserman, Philippe Begin, Susan Waserman, Nandinee Patel, Gabriel Lins de Holanda Coelho, Pedro Cuesta Alvaro, Francesca Mori, Lucia Caminiti, Douglas P Mack, Michael Wexler, Marta Bernaola, Francisco Javier Ruano Perez, Antonio Ramirez Jimenez, Kamal El Abd, Stephanie Wanin, Mohamed Yassin, Lydie Guenard-Bilbaut, Carine Metz-Favre, Laura Badina, Rachel Schreiber, Silvia Molo Amorós, Adam T Fox, Sonia Vazquez-Cortés, Teresa Garriga-Baraut, Pierrick Cros, Raphaëlle Bazire, David Fitzhugh, Antonella Muraro, Alberto Alvarez Perea, Paul J Turner, Montse Alvaro-Lozano, Montserrat Fernandez-Rivas, Audrey Dunn Galvin
{"title":"Patient reported outcomes on food immunotherapy differ between countries and foods: results from COFAITH.","authors":"Pablo Rodríguez Del Río, Carmen Riggioni, Antoine Deschildre, Matthew Greenhawt, Sabine Schnadt, Stefania Arasi, Anna Nowak-Wegrzyn, Richard L Wasserman, Philippe Begin, Susan Waserman, Nandinee Patel, Gabriel Lins de Holanda Coelho, Pedro Cuesta Alvaro, Francesca Mori, Lucia Caminiti, Douglas P Mack, Michael Wexler, Marta Bernaola, Francisco Javier Ruano Perez, Antonio Ramirez Jimenez, Kamal El Abd, Stephanie Wanin, Mohamed Yassin, Lydie Guenard-Bilbaut, Carine Metz-Favre, Laura Badina, Rachel Schreiber, Silvia Molo Amorós, Adam T Fox, Sonia Vazquez-Cortés, Teresa Garriga-Baraut, Pierrick Cros, Raphaëlle Bazire, David Fitzhugh, Antonella Muraro, Alberto Alvarez Perea, Paul J Turner, Montse Alvaro-Lozano, Montserrat Fernandez-Rivas, Audrey Dunn Galvin","doi":"10.1016/j.jaip.2025.04.049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Food allergen immunotherapy (FAIT) is a consolidated treatment included in clinical guidelines that has shown efficacy in terms of researcher-defined variables, but little work has been done yet to evaluate patient´s perspectives.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to understand and explore the relevance of different patient-reported outcomes (PROs) METHODS: An EAACI Taskforce designed a questionnaire to prospectively collect information from parents or caregivers of patients below 18 years on FAIT. Participants from North America and several European countries were invited to provide data regarding socioeconomic aspects, allergic background, FAIT modality, burden, safety and food allergy quality of life (FAQoL). As primary outcome, 19 proposed PROs were ranked according to their relevance (5-point Likert scale). A descriptive and cluster analysis of the data was performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>84 FAIT prescribers recruited 857 patients suitable for analysis, 41.5%, 39.7% and 18.8% were on milk, peanut, and egg AIT, respectively. Patients were grouped into regions, South Europe (46.2%), North America (24.3%), Western Europe (20.7%) and United Kingdom (8.9%). Total FAQoL questionnaire score was 4.1 (±SD1.4), significantly higher among South Europeans [4.7 (±SD1.3), p<0.0001]. Worse FAQoL scores were found for milk and egg FAIT vs peanut. Cluster analysis identified 5 different phenotypes of patients considering similar replies to the proposed PROs, labeled: \"High expectations\", \"Beyond protection\", \"Social Functioning\", \"Aiming at normalization\" and \"Low motivations\".</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The data-driven analysis provided novel information on the level of complexity and personalization that patient´s desires display and opens the field to future research lines to improve FAIT patient-perceived value.</p>","PeriodicalId":51323,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology-In Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology-In Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaip.2025.04.049","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Food allergen immunotherapy (FAIT) is a consolidated treatment included in clinical guidelines that has shown efficacy in terms of researcher-defined variables, but little work has been done yet to evaluate patient´s perspectives.

Objective: We aimed to understand and explore the relevance of different patient-reported outcomes (PROs) METHODS: An EAACI Taskforce designed a questionnaire to prospectively collect information from parents or caregivers of patients below 18 years on FAIT. Participants from North America and several European countries were invited to provide data regarding socioeconomic aspects, allergic background, FAIT modality, burden, safety and food allergy quality of life (FAQoL). As primary outcome, 19 proposed PROs were ranked according to their relevance (5-point Likert scale). A descriptive and cluster analysis of the data was performed.

Results: 84 FAIT prescribers recruited 857 patients suitable for analysis, 41.5%, 39.7% and 18.8% were on milk, peanut, and egg AIT, respectively. Patients were grouped into regions, South Europe (46.2%), North America (24.3%), Western Europe (20.7%) and United Kingdom (8.9%). Total FAQoL questionnaire score was 4.1 (±SD1.4), significantly higher among South Europeans [4.7 (±SD1.3), p<0.0001]. Worse FAQoL scores were found for milk and egg FAIT vs peanut. Cluster analysis identified 5 different phenotypes of patients considering similar replies to the proposed PROs, labeled: "High expectations", "Beyond protection", "Social Functioning", "Aiming at normalization" and "Low motivations".

Conclusions: The data-driven analysis provided novel information on the level of complexity and personalization that patient´s desires display and opens the field to future research lines to improve FAIT patient-perceived value.

患者报告的食物免疫治疗结果因国家和食物而异:来自COFAITH的结果。
背景:食物过敏原免疫疗法(FAIT)是临床指南中包含的一种综合治疗方法,在研究人员定义的变量方面显示出疗效,但尚未做多少工作来评估患者的观点。目的:我们旨在了解和探讨不同患者报告结局(PROs)的相关性。方法:EAACI工作组设计了一份问卷,前瞻性地收集18岁以下FAIT患者的父母或照顾者的信息。来自北美和几个欧洲国家的参与者被邀请提供有关社会经济方面、过敏背景、FAIT方式、负担、安全性和食物过敏生活质量(FAQoL)的数据。作为主要结局,根据其相关性(5分Likert量表)对19个建议的PROs进行排名。对数据进行描述性和聚类分析。结果:84名FAIT处方者招募了857名适合分析的患者,牛奶、花生和鸡蛋AIT分别占41.5%、39.7%和18.8%。患者分为以下地区:南欧(46.2%)、北美(24.3%)、西欧(20.7%)和英国(8.9%)。FAQoL问卷总分为4.1(±SD1.4),在南欧人群中显著高于4.7(±SD1.3)。结论:数据驱动的分析提供了关于患者期望显示的复杂性和个性化水平的新信息,并为未来的研究开辟了领域,以提高FAIT患者感知价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.10
自引率
9.60%
发文量
683
审稿时长
50 days
期刊介绍: JACI: In Practice is an official publication of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (AAAAI). It is a companion title to The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, and it aims to provide timely clinical papers, case reports, and management recommendations to clinical allergists and other physicians dealing with allergic and immunologic diseases in their practice. The mission of JACI: In Practice is to offer valid and impactful information that supports evidence-based clinical decisions in the diagnosis and management of asthma, allergies, immunologic conditions, and related diseases. This journal publishes articles on various conditions treated by allergist-immunologists, including food allergy, respiratory disorders (such as asthma, rhinitis, nasal polyps, sinusitis, cough, ABPA, and hypersensitivity pneumonitis), drug allergy, insect sting allergy, anaphylaxis, dermatologic disorders (such as atopic dermatitis, contact dermatitis, urticaria, angioedema, and HAE), immunodeficiency, autoinflammatory syndromes, eosinophilic disorders, and mast cell disorders. The focus of the journal is on providing cutting-edge clinical information that practitioners can use in their everyday practice or to acquire new knowledge and skills for the benefit of their patients. However, mechanistic or translational studies without immediate or near future clinical relevance, as well as animal studies, are not within the scope of the journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信