Currently, asthma represents the most common chronic disorder in children, showing an increasingly consistent burden worldwide. Childhood asthma, similar to what happens in adults, is a diversified disease with a great variability of phenotypes, according to genetic predisposition of patients, age, severity of symptoms, grading of risk, and comorbidities, and cannot be considered a singular well-defined disorder, but rather a uniquely assorted disorder with variable presentations throughout childhood. Despite several developments occurring in recent years in pediatric asthma, above all, in the management of the disease, some essential areas, such as the improvement of pediatric asthma outcomes, remain a hot topic. Most treatments of the type 2 (T2) target phenotype of asthma, in which IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13 modulate the central signals of inflammatory reactions. Although, there may be an unresolved need to identify new biomarkers used as predictors to improve patient stratification using disease systems and to aid in the selection of treatments. Moreover, we are globally facing many dramatic challenges, including climate change and the SARS-CoV2 pandemic, which have a considerable impact on children and adolescent asthma. Preventive strategies, including allergen immunotherapy and microbiome evaluation, and targeted therapeutic strategies are strongly needed in this population. Finally, the impact of asthma on sleep disorders has been reviewed.

Precision medicine refers to the tailoring of therapeutic strategies to the individual characteristics of each patient; thus, it could be a new approach for the management of severe asthma that considers individual variability in genes, environmental exposure, and lifestyle. Precision medicine would also assist physicians in choosing the right treatment, the best timing of administration, consequently trying to maximize drug efficacy, and, possibly, reducing adverse events. Metabolomics is the systematic study of low molecular weight (bio)chemicals in a given biological system and offers a powerful approach to biomarker discovery and elucidating disease mechanisms. In this point of view, metabolomics could play a key role in targeting precision medicine.

Acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) represents a cornerstone of antiplatelet therapy for the treatment of atherosclerotic coronary artery disease (CAD). ASA is in fact indicated in case of an acute coronary syndrome or after a percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation. Aspirin hypersensitivity is frequently reported by patients, and this challenging situation requires a careful evaluation of the true nature of the presumed sensitivity and of its mechanisms, as well as to differentiate it from a more frequent (and more easily manageable) aspirin intolerance. Two main strategies are available to allow ASA administration for patients with CAD and suspected ASA hypersensitivity: a low-dose ASA challenge, aimed at assessing the tolerability of ASA at the antiplatelet dose of 100 mg, and desensitization, a therapeutic procedure which aims to induce tolerance to ASA. For those patients who cannot undergo ASA challenge and desensitization due to previous serious adverse reactions, or for those in whom desensitization was unsuccessful, a number of further alternative strategies are available, even if these have not been validated and approved by guidelines. The aim of this state-of-the-art review is therefore to summarize the established evidence regarding pathophysiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and management of aspirin hypersensitivity and to provide a practical guide for cardiologists (and clinicians) who have to face the not uncommon situation of a patient with concomitant coronary artery disease and aspirin hypersensitivity.

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) are severe complications of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Risk factors for ASCVD and VTE in IBD are not entirely elucidated. This study investigated the incidence and risk factors for ASCVD and VTE in IBD compared to acute infective gastroenteritis and colitis (AGC). We reviewed the clinical records of inpatients with IBD and AGC over 6 years. Each group's propensity score-matched (PS) subpopulation consisted of 831 patients, ensuring a balanced comparison. Additionally, the effect of IBD on ASCVD and VTE was assessed. The PS cohorts indicated a significantly higher number of ASCVD events in IBD than controls (10.1 % vs. 5.5 %, p = 0.001) and an increased prevalence of ischemic heart disease (IHD) (7.9 % vs. 3.6 %, p < 0.001). Conversely, the study groups demonstrated similar VTE incidence. IBD diagnosis, male sex, hypertension, diabetes, and the Charlson Index were independently associated with ASCVD. Age was significantly associated with VTE. Inpatients with IBD demonstrated an increased risk of ASCVD and IHD. IBD was an independent risk factor for ASCVD, and chronic inflammation was a significant enhancer factor for ASCVD. Aggressive control of inflammation is an essential target to reduce ASCVD risk.

The advent of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, including tofacitinib, filgotinib, and upadacitinib, has significantly widened the therapeutic options for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). These agents offer the advantage of oral administration and have demonstrated efficacy in inducing and maintaining remission. However, concerns regarding their safety have emerged, particularly concerning cardiovascular and infectious complications, which appear more pronounced in patients with pre-existing risk factors such as older age, smoking, or comorbidities. While these risks are better understood, the potential association between JAK inhibitors and malignancies remains a subject of ongoing investigation. Current data from randomised controlled trials, pooled and integrated analyses, and real-world studies provide conflicting evidence regarding cancer risk. Notably, studies in patients with rheumatologic diseases treated with JAK inhibitors have contributed additional insights into long-term safety outcomes. Despite the uncertainty surrounding malignancy risks, it is likely that predisposing factors, including older age, smoking history, and long-standing IBD with chronic inflammation, play a more substantial role in cancer development than JAK inhibitor therapy alone. This paper reviews safety data from clinical trials, meta-analyses, and observational studies, focusing on cancer risk in patients treated with JAK inhibitors for IBD. We also review evidence from rheumatology studies, highlighting the need for individualised risk assessment and close monitoring to optimise the safety profile of these medications in clinical practice.