The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) outbreak is posing considerable challenges to healthcare systems and societies worldwide. While the knowledge on the acute phase of the disease has rapidly expanded, little is known on the consequences of COVID-19 following clinical remission. We set up a multidisciplinary COVID-19 follow-up outpatient clinic to identify and address the clinical needs of COVID-19 survivors. Here we describe the features of our follow-up programme. The multidisciplinary assessment comprises a complete physical examination, respiratory evaluation (peripheral oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, dyspnoea assessment, lung ultrasound and pulmonary function), cardiovascular assessment (electrocardiography, echocardiography), nutritional assessment (anthropometrics, mini Nutritional Assessment screening tool), neurological examination including cognitive tests, and mental health assessment. All data are prospectively collected, and blood is sampled for biobanking. Since 7 April to 5 June, 2020, 453 out of the 1388 COVID-19 survivors managed at our University Hospital have been evaluated at the Outpatient COVID-19 Follow-up Clinic. The characteristics of the follow-up cohort are similar to those of the whole cohort of COVID-19 in terms of demographics, comorbidities, and COVID-19 severity upon ED presentation, indicating that the follow-up cohort is representative of the whole cohort. Continuous patient monitoring might give an answer to the numerous unsolved questions about what comes next in this pandemic and beyond. This will help physicians and researchers establish strategies to face future pandemics and develop preventative and therapeutic strategies for similar hyperinflammatory conditions.

Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is a heterogeneous, multiorgan and potentially life-threatening drug-hypersensitivity reaction (DHR) that occurs several days or weeks after drug initiation or discontinuation. DHRs constitute an emerging issue for public health, due to population aging, growing multi-organ morbidity, and subsequent enhanced drug prescriptions. DRESS has more consistently been associated with anticonvulsants, allopurinol and antibiotics, such as sulphonamides and vancomycin, although new drugs are increasingly reported as culprit agents. Reactivation of latent infectious agents such as viruses (especially Herpesviridae) plays a key role in prompting and sustaining aberrant T-cell and eosinophil responses to drugs and pathogens, ultimately causing organ damage. However, the boundaries of the impact of viral agents in the pathophysiology of DRESS are still ill-defined. Along with growing awareness of the multifaceted aspects of immune perturbation caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during the ongoing SARS-CoV-2-related disease (COVID-19) pandemic, novel interest has been sparked towards DRESS and the potential interactions among antiviral and anti-drug inflammatory responses. In this review, we summarised the most recent evidence on pathophysiological mechanisms, diagnostic approaches, and clinical management of DRESS with the aim of increasing awareness on this syndrome and possibly suggesting clues for future research in this field.

Monoclonal antibodies targeting interleukin (IL)-5 pathways have revolutionized the treatment expectations for eosinophilic-associated conditions, particularly in patients with respiratory involvement. Mepolizumab (IL-5 antagonist monoclonal antibody), benralizumab (IL-5 receptor blocker monoclonal antibody), and reslizumab (IL-5 antagonist monoclonal antibody) have collectively contributed to the overall improvement of the disease burden in various conditions. Eosinophilic asthma currently boasts the most robust evidence across all age groups: all three biologics are approved for adults (aged ≥18 years); mepolizumab is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) also in children (aged ≥ 6 years), while bernalizumab was recently approved by the FDA for patients aged ≥6 years in the USA. In chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, subcutaneous mepolizumab is the only anti-IL-5 therapy approved so far and can be used in adult patients (aged ≥18 years). For eosinophilic esophagitis, conflicting evidence surrounds both mepolizumab, reslizumab, and benralizumab, leading to non-approval of these agents by the FDA/EMA. Recently, mepolizumab was approved for eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis patients aged ≥6 years or older and for hypereosinophilic syndrome adult patients. A phase III trial proving noninferiority of benralizumab versus mepolizumab in eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis has been recently published, while evidence on reslizumab is scant. Overall, current evidence on anti-IL-5 biologics for eosinophilic-associated disorders is mostly focused on adults, whereas data for individuals aged under 18 years and over 65 years are scarce, resulting in a lack of evidence, particularly regarding efficacy, for the use of anti-IL-5 agents in these specific patient populations. This review addresses high-quality evidence from randomized controlled trials and real-world post-marketing studies regarding the use of anti-IL-5 therapies for eosinophilic-associated disorders across all age groups, spanning childhood, adulthood, and older age.

Background: Histamine Intolerance (HIT) is a multifaceted pseudoallergic disorder possibly due to defective histamine metabolism. Diamine oxidase (DAO) contributes to histamine degradation and can be measured in the serum. The role of DAO measurement in the diagnostic work-up of HIT still remains unclear, and conflicting results have been reported in the literature. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the possible clinical usefulness and consistency of DAO value ranges as provided by the assay manufacturer and verify whether they could predict the response to treatment. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 192 outpatients with HIT symptoms and measured serum DAO values at baseline. Patients were prescribed either with low-histamine diet and/or enzymatic supplementation according to symptom severity and re-evaluated six to eight months later. Patients were stratified into three groups according to DAO levels: 10 U/mL. HIT severity was assessed on a scale of 1 to 5 before and after treatment. Results: A total of 146 patients completed the study. Gastrointestinal and cutaneous symptoms, often associated with headache, were more frequent in subjects with DAO < 10 U/mL. Symptom severity and DAO ranges were correlated. Patients with intermediate DAO levels (3–10 U/mL) showed a more complex clinical phenotype but also a more significant improvement in symptom severity (score reduction 50%, interquartile range (IQR) = 33–60%) when compared to patients with low DAO (40%, IQR = 20–60%; p = 0.045) or high DAO (33%, IQR = 0–50%; p < 0.001). Complex clinical phenotypes were also more frequent in patients with intermediate DAO levels. Conclusions: HIT is characterized by typical symptoms and low levels of DAO activity. Symptom severity was associated with the degree of DAO deficiency. Patients with DAO values between 3 and 10 U/mL show the best response to treatment (low-histamine diet and/or DAO supplementation). DAO value could arguably be considered as a predictor of clinical response to treatment. Prospective studies are needed to confirm these data.

Drug induced exfoliative dermatitis (ED) are a group of rare and severe drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHR) involving skin and usually occurring from days to several weeks after drug exposure. Erythema multiforme (EM), Stevens–Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are the main clinical presentations of drug induced ED. Overall, T cells are the central player of these immune-mediated drug reactions. Here we provide a systematic review on frequency, risk factors, pathogenesis, clinical features and management of patients with drug induced ED.

Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disorders (EGIDs) are a group of conditions characterized by abnormal eosinophil accumulation in the gastrointestinal tract. Among these EGIDs, Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) is the most well documented, while less is known about Eosinophilic Gastritis (EoG), Eosinophilic Enteritis (EoN), and Eosinophilic Colitis (EoC). The role of endoscopy in EGIDs is pivotal, with applications in diagnosis, disease monitoring, and therapeutic intervention. In EoE, the endoscopic reference score (EREFS) has been shown to be accurate in raising diagnostic suspicion and effective in monitoring therapeutic responses. Additionally, endoscopic dilation is the first-line treatment for esophageal strictures. For EoG and EoN, while the literature is more limited, common endoscopic findings include erythema, nodules, and ulcerations. Histology remains the gold standard for diagnosing EGIDs, as it quantifies eosinophilic infiltration. In recent years, there have been significant advancements in the histological understanding of EoE, leading to the development of diagnostic scores and the identification of specific microscopic features associated with the disease. However, for EoG, EoN, and EoC, precise eosinophil count thresholds for diagnosis have not yet been established. This review aims to elucidate the role of endoscopy and histology in the diagnosis and management of the three main EGIDs and to analyze their strengths and limitations, their interconnection, and future research directions.