Background: ASSURE‐CSU revealed differences in physician and patient reporting of angioedema. This post hoc analysis was conducted to evaluate the actual rate of angioedema in the study population and explore differences between patients with and without angioedema.Methods: This international observational study assessed 673 patients with inadequately controlled chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU). Physicians abstracted angioedema data from medical records, which were compared with patient‐reported data. Patients in the Yes‐angioedema category had angioedema reported in the medical record and a patient‐reported source. For those in the No‐angioedema category, angioedema was reported in neither the medical record nor a patient‐reported source. Those in the Misaligned category had angioedema reported in only one source. Statistical comparisons between Yes‐angioedema and No‐angioedema categories were conducted for measures of CSU activity, health‐related quality of life (HRQoL), productivity and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU). Regression analyses explored the relationship between Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score and angioedema, adjusting for important covariates.Results: Among evaluable patients, 259 (40.3%), 173 (26.9%) and 211 (32.8%) were in the Yes‐angioedema, No‐angioedema and Misaligned category, respectively. CSU activity and impact on HRQoL, productivity, and HCRU was greater for Yes‐angioedema patients than No‐angioedema patients. After covariate adjustment, mean DLQI score was significantly higher (indicating worse HRQoL) for patients with angioedema versus no angioedema (9.88 vs 7.27, P < .001). The Misaligned category had similar results with Yes‐angioedema on all outcomes.Conclusions: Angioedema in CSU seems to be under‐reported but has significant negative impacts on HRQoL, daily activities, HCRU and work compared with no angioedema.

The introduction of omalizumab to the management of chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) has markedly improved the therapeutic possibilities for both, patients and physicians dealing with this disabling disease. But there is still a hard core of patients who do not tolerate or benefit from existing therapies and who require effective treatment. Novel approaches include the use of currently available drugs off-licence, investigational drugs currently undergoing clinical trials and exploring the potential for therapies directed at pathophysiological targets in CSU. Off-licence uses of currently available drugs include rituximab and tumour necrosis factor inhibitors. Ligelizumab (anti-IgE), canakinumab (anti-IL-1), AZD1981 (a PGD2 receptor antagonist) and GSK 2646264 (a selective Syk inhibitor) are currently in clinical trials for CSU. Examples of drugs that could target potential pathophysiological targets in CSU include substance P antagonists, designed ankyrin repeat proteins, C5a/C5a receptor inhibitors, anti-IL-4, anti-IL-5 and anti-IL-13 and drugs that target inhibitory mast cell receptors. Other mediators and receptors of likely pathogenic relevance should be explored in skin profiling and functional proof of concept studies. The exploration of novel therapeutic targets for their role and relevance in CSU should help to achieve a better understanding of its etiopathogenesis.

Omalizumab is approved in the UK as add-on treatment for chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) in patients with inadequate response to H1-antihistamines. Ciclosporin is an established but unlicensed 3rd line option for CSU. Two parallel retrospective observational studies were conducted to describe outcomes of treatment and adverse events with omalizumab or ciclosporin for CSU treatment. Data from UK specialist centres prescribing omalizumab (five centres) or ciclosporin (three centres) in CSU patients were collected from hospital records by clinical staff and pooled for analysis. Forty-six patients prescribed omalizumab and 72 patients prescribed ciclosporin were included. Twenty-two (48%) omalizumab-treated patients had paired Urticaria Activity Scores (UAS7), showing a 25.4 point improvement during treatment (P < 0.0001). Paired Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) was available in 28 (61%) omalizumab-treated and 17 (24%) ciclosporin-treated patients. At least a 75% improvement in DLQI score was observed in 79% of omalizumab-treated and 41% of ciclosporin-treated patients, and 65% of omalizumab-treated patients had complete resolution of their quality-of-life impairment (DLQI 0–1) versus 21% of ciclosporin-treated patients. Clinician comments reported symptom clearance in 15/36 (42%) omalizumab-treated and 10/60 (17%) ciclosporin-treated patients. Proportions of patients with adverse events were similar but those for omalizumab resembled CSU symptoms, making causality assignment difficult, whereas those for ciclosporin were consistent with its known adverse effect profile. Validated patient-reported measures of disease severity and quality of life should be used routinely in CSU management. Based on clinician comments and DLQI scores, symptoms and quality of life showed a greater improvement in the omalizumab-treated cohort than in the ciclosporin-treated cohort.

Since more than a century ago, there has been awareness of the connection between viral infections and the onset and exacerbation of urticaria. Our knowledge about the role of viral infection and vaccination in acute and chronic urticaria improved as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic but it has also highlighted knowledge gaps. Viral infections, especially respiratory tract infections like COVID-19, can trigger the onset of acute urticaria (AU) and the exacerbation of chronic urticaria (CU). Less frequently, vaccination against viruses including SARS-CoV-2 can also lead to new onset urticaria as well as worsening of CU in minority. Here, with a particular focus on COVID-19, we review what is known about the role of viral infections and vaccinations as triggers and causes of acute and chronic urticaria. We also discuss possible mechanistic pathways and outline the unmet needs in our knowledge. Although the underlying mechanisms are not clearly understood, it is believed that viral signals, medications, and stress can activate skin mast cells (MCs). Further studies are needed to fully understand the relevance of viral infections and vaccinations in acute and chronic urticaria and to better clarify causal pathways.