Updated grading system for systemic allergic reactions: Joint Statement of the World Allergy Organization Anaphylaxis Committee and Allergen Immunotherapy Committee

There is a lack of consensus over the description and severity assignment of allergic adverse reactions to immunotherapy, although there seems to be a consensus at least in terms of using the World Allergy Organization (WAO) grading systems to describe local adverse events for Sublingual Immunotherapy (SLIT) and Systemic Allergic Reactions (SARs) to Subcutaneous Immunotherapy (SCIT) amongst the major national/regional allergy societies. In this manuscript, we propose a modification of the previous WAO Grading system for SARs, which aligns with the newly-proposed Consortium for Food Allergy Research (CoFAR) Grading Scale for Systemic Allergic Reactions in Food Allergy (version 3.0). We hope this can facilitate a unified grading system appropriate to SARs due to allergen immunotherapy, independent of allergen and route of administration, and across clinical and research practice.

Anaphylaxis: A 2023 practice parameter update

This practice parameter update focuses on 7 areas in which there are new evidence and new recommendations. Diagnostic criteria for anaphylaxis have been revised, and patterns of anaphylaxis are defined. Measurement of serum tryptase is important for diagnosis of anaphylaxis and to identify underlying mast cell disorders. In infants and toddlers, age-specific symptoms may differ from older children and adults, patient age is not correlated with reaction severity, and anaphylaxis is unlikely to be the initial reaction to an allergen on first exposure. Different community settings for anaphylaxis require specific measures for prevention and treatment of anaphylaxis. Optimal prescribing and use of epinephrine autoinjector devices require specific counseling and training of patients and caregivers, including when and how to administer the epinephrine autoinjector and whether and when to call 911. If epinephrine is used promptly, immediate activation of emergency medical services may not be required if the patient experiences a prompt, complete, and durable response. For most medical indications, the risk of stopping or changing beta-blocker or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor medication may exceed the risk of more severe anaphylaxis if the medication is continued, especially in patients with insect sting anaphylaxis. Evaluation for mastocytosis, including a bone marrow biopsy, should be considered for adult patients with severe insect sting anaphylaxis or recurrent idiopathic anaphylaxis. After perioperative anaphylaxis, repeat anesthesia may proceed in the context of shared decision-making and based on the history and results of diagnostic evaluation with skin tests or in vitro tests when available, and supervised challenge when necessary.

Evaluation and management of chronic cough in adults

Background: Chronic cough (CC), a cough that lasts > 8 weeks, has an overall prevalence of 5-11% in adults, peaking between 60 and 80 years of age. Of the 15% of patients who remain undiagnosed or refractory to treatment, two thirds are women. Objective: The objective was to present an updated evidence-based algorithmic approach for evaluating and managing CC, with emphasis on treatment modalities for refractory CC. Methods: A literature search was conducted of medical literature data bases for guidelines, position papers, systematic reviews, and clinical trials from January 2022 to June 2023, on the evaluation and management of CC. Results: The initial assessment should be limited to a detailed history, physical examination, chest radiograph, spirometry, exhaled nitric oxide, blood eosinophil count, and measurement of cough severity and quality of life by using validated instruments. The top diagnoses to consider are asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, nonasthmatic eosinophilic bronchitis, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and upper airway cough syndrome. Additional studies are only obtained when red flags are present or the patient fails to respond after avoidance of high-risk factors, e.g., smoking and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and 4-6 weeks of empiric treatment for the most likely respiratory and gastrointestinal diseases. When diagnostic tests and/or specific directed treatments fail to control CC, low-dose morphine (preferred), gabapentin, pregabalin, and/or cough control therapy are recommended. Non-narcotic purinergic 2×3 (P2×3) receptor antagonists, gafapixant and campilixant, are currently being studied for CC. Conclusion: For the evaluation and management of patients with CC, clinicians should use an algorithmic approach and identify "red flags," reduce high-risk factors, and use empiric treatment for the five top diagnoses before extensive diagnostic testing. Current treatment for refractory cough is limited to symptomatic management.

Updated guidance regarding the risk of allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines and recommended evaluation and management: A GRADE assessment and international consensus approach

This guidance updates 2021 GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) recommendations regarding immediate allergic reactions following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and addresses revaccinating individuals with first-dose allergic reactions and allergy testing to determine revaccination outcomes. Recent meta-analyses assessed the incidence of severe allergic reactions to initial COVID-19 vaccination, risk of mRNA-COVID-19 revaccination after an initial reaction, and diagnostic accuracy of COVID-19 vaccine and vaccine excipient testing in predicting reactions. GRADE methods informed rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations. A modified Delphi panel consisting of experts in allergy, anaphylaxis, vaccinology, infectious diseases, emergency medicine, and primary care from Australia, Canada, Europe, Japan, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States formed the recommendations. We recommend vaccination for persons without COVID-19 vaccine excipient allergy and revaccination after a prior immediate allergic reaction. We suggest against >15-minute postvaccination observation. We recommend against mRNA vaccine or excipient skin testing to predict outcomes. We suggest revaccination of persons with an immediate allergic reaction to the mRNA vaccine or excipients be performed by a person with vaccine allergy expertise in a properly equipped setting. We suggest against premedication, split-dosing, or special precautions because of a comorbid allergic history.

Knowledge Gaps in the Diagnosis and Management of Anaphylaxis

Knowledge gaps in the diagnosis and treatment of anaphylaxis impede the clinician's ability to effectively manage patients with anaphylaxis. This review will emphasize the lack of a global consensus on defining and determining the severity of anaphylaxis; the need for validating biomarkers used for diagnosing anaphylaxis; and data collection deficiencies. Perioperative anaphylaxis has a wide differential diagnosis, often requires treatment beyond epinephrine, and poses a challenge for the clinician in identifying the responsible trigger(s), and in preventing future reactions. Consensus-derived definitions and determination of risk factors for biphasic, refractory, and persistent anaphylaxis are needed, recognizing that these often impact the emergency department observation time following recovery from initial anaphylaxis. Knowledge gaps exist in the use of epinephrine, including route of administration, dosage, needle length, and ideal timing for administration. Consensus is needed on when and how many epinephrine auto-injectors to prescribe and how to prevent patient underuse and accidental injury. The role of antihistamines and corticosteroids in the prevention and treatment of anaphylaxis requires consensus and additional research. A consensus-derived algorithm for management of idiopathic anaphylaxis is needed. The role of beta blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in the incidence, severity, and treatment of anaphylaxis remain unanswered. Rapid recognition and treatment of anaphylaxis in the community needs improvement. The article will conclude with exploring the recommended components of both a patient-specific and generic anaphylaxis emergency plan, including when to activate emergency medical services, all of which are paramount to improving patient outcomes.

Treatment options for moderate to severe atopic dermatitis

Background: The treatment of chronic refractory moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) has traditionally relied on broad-spectrum systemic anti-inflammatory agents. With the introduction of biologics and Janus kinase inhibitors (Jakinib), the step management of moderate-to-severe AD is rapidly changing; however, guidelines have yet to provide formal recommendations for how to best incorporate these agents into the treatment plan. Objective: To summarize the updated evidence-based medical treatment for AD, including a proposed position for biologics and Jakinibs in the treatment algorithm. Methods: A literature search of several medical literature data bases for guidelines, position papers, systematic reviews, and clinical trials from 2012 to 2022 on the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD was conducted to prepare this narrative review. Results: Emollients and topical corticosteroids are the mainstay for treating acute flares and for maintaining chronic control. Second-line topical agents include calcineurin inhibitors, e.g., tacrolimus and pimecrolimus; crisaborole; and ruxolitinib. For acute flares, cyclosporine is preferred over systemic corticosteroids. For chronic treatment, phototherapy should be considered before systemic anti-inflammatory agents. Of the traditional anti-inflammatory agents, cyclosporine is the first-line choice, with methotrexate and azathioprine equal secondary choices. Although abrocitinib may have better efficacy then dupilumab based on indirect comparisons, abrocitinib requires closer monitoring for adverse events. Based on package labeling, Jakinibs, e.g., abrocitinib and upadacitinib, should be used only after failure with other systemic agents, including biologics (e.g., dupilumab and tralokinumab). Biologics and Jakinibs should be considered before the traditional systemic anti-inflammatory agents. Conclusion: Clinicians should consider a modified step management for AD as they await the development of national and international guideline recommendations for how best to position the biologics and Jakinibs into the AD treatment algorithm.

Treatment options for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

Background: The management of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is evolving, with an emphasis on treating the underlying type 2 inflammation. Objective: The objective was to summarize the updated evidence-based medical and surgical treatment recommendations for CRSwNP, including the position of biologics in the treatment algorithm. Methods: This review compared and contrasted the therapeutic recommendations presented by the European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2020 and the International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Rhinosinusitis 2021. Results: The long-term use of intranasal corticosteroids and the short-term use of oral corticosteroids are strongly recommended, whereas corticosteroid-eluting implants are considered an option. Although the use of saline solution rinses is recommended, there is uncertainty as to whether irrigation is more effective than sprays. Oral aspirin (ASA) desensitization, followed by ASA ≥ 300 mg daily for patients with ASA-exacerbated respiratory disease may be considered. In general, the use of antifungal agents offers no benefit and potential harm. Although the use of oral antibiotics for an acute exacerbation is still debated, oral and topical antibiotics are discouraged for subacute or chronic use. Antileukotrienes are inferior to intranasal corticosteroids and are unlikely to provide added benefit when used concomitantly. It is unlikely that the benefit of oral antihistamines and decongestants outweigh the potential harm. Dupilumab is recommended for severe CRSwNP when consensus-determined criteria are met. Omalizumab may be an option with concomitant poorly controlled asthma. Mepolizumab and reslizumab may be used, particularly in patients with concomitant uncontrolled asthma. In allergic fungal rhinosinusitis, oral and topical antifungals, antileukotrienes, allergen immunotherapy, and omalizumab are therapeutic options. Although surgical intervention is recognized to be of benefit for CRSwNP, there are no evidence-based criteria to indicate when maximum medical treatment has failed. Conclusion: An evidence-based CRSwNP treatment algorithm for when to recommend surgery and/or initiate or discontinue biologics to maximize quality of life and cost-effectiveness is still lacking.

The spectrum of allergic ocular diseases

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to review the pathophysiologic mechanisms, differential diagnosis, evaluation, and treatment of the various manifestations of ocular allergy, with an especial focus on immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated disease.

DATA SOURCES

A PubMed search was performed to include articles, using the search terms ocular allergy and allergic conjunctivitis.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Recent and relevant human studies in the English language pertaining to our topic of study were selected. Animal studies pertaining to pathophysiology of ocular allergy were also reviewed. We focused on clinical trials, practice guidelines, reviews, and systematic reviews. In addition, case reports were reviewed if they described rare clinical presentations, disease mechanisms, or novel therapies.

RESULTS

Ocular allergy encompasses both IgE- and non-IgE-mediated disease, and the clinical severity may range from mild to sight-threatening inflammation. A comprehensive treatment regimen including education, lifestyle measures, topical therapies, and even systemic interventions may be necessary for the effective management of ocular allergies, tailored according to symptom severity.

CONCLUSION

Ocular allergy is frequently encountered by allergists and eye-care specialists, and despite progressively increasing incidence, it often remains underdiagnosed and, hence, untreated.

Rhinitis 2020: A practice parameter update

This comprehensive practice parameter for allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) provides updated guidance on diagnosis, assessment, selection of monotherapy and combination pharmacologic options, and allergen immunotherapy for AR. Newer information about local AR is reviewed. Cough is emphasized as a common symptom in both AR and NAR. Food allergy testing is not recommended in the routine evaluation of rhinitis. Intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) remain the preferred monotherapy for persistent AR, but additional studies support the additive benefit of combination treatment with INCS and intranasal antihistamines in both AR and NAR. Either intranasal antihistamines or INCS may be offered as first-line monotherapy for NAR. Montelukast should only be used for AR if there has been an inadequate response or intolerance to alternative therapies. Depot parenteral corticosteroids are not recommended for treatment of AR due to potential risks. While intranasal decongestants generally should be limited to short-term use to prevent rebound congestion, in limited circumstances, patients receiving regimens that include an INCS may be offered, in addition, an intranasal decongestant for up to 4 weeks. Neither acupuncture nor herbal products have adequate studies to support their use for AR. Oral decongestants should be avoided during the first trimester of pregnancy. Recommendations for use of subcutaneous and sublingual tablet allergen immunotherapy in AR are provided. Algorithms based on a combination of evidence and expert opinion are provided to guide in the selection of pharmacologic options for intermittent and persistent AR and NAR.

Making the GRADE in anaphylaxis management: Toward recommendations integrating values, preferences, context, and shared decision making

OBJECTIVE

To review GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) methods and discuss the clinical application of conditional recommendations in clinical guidelines, specifically in the context of anaphylaxis.

DATA SOURCES

Articles that described GRADE, evidence synthesis, evidence to recommendation frameworks, and shared decision making were used to discuss conditional recommendations of the 2020 Anaphylaxis GRADE guideline.

STUDY SELECTIONS

A narrative review detailing concepts of GRADE and approaches to translate conditional recommendations to individualized and contextualized patient care.

RESULTS

GRADE methods encourage a nuanced relationship between certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations. Strength of recommendation must incorporate key factors, including the balance between benefits and harms, patient values and preferences, and resource allocation (costs), with equity, feasibility, and acceptability also often included as considerations. GRADE guidelines provide recommendations that are characterized by directionality (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional). A conditional recommendation is tailored to context and primarily applied through a lens of patient preferences related to the likelihood of outcomes of importance and a shared decision-making approach. Although the 2020 Anaphylaxis GRADE guideline better informs the practice of anaphylaxis prevention through (1) identification and mitigation of risk factors for biphasic anaphylaxis and (2) evaluation of the use of glucocorticoid and/or antihistamine pretreatment, all GRADE recommendations, although directional, are conditional and as such should not be universally applied to every circumstance.

CONCLUSION

Clinical guidelines provide an important opportunity to critically appraise evidence and translate evidence to practice. Patients, practitioners, and policy makers should appreciate the strength of recommendation and certainty of evidence and understand how this affects guideline applicability and implementation.

Anaphylaxis-a 2020 practice parameter update, systematic review, and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) analysis

Anaphylaxis is an acute, potential life-threatening systemic allergic reaction that may have a wide range of clinical manifestations. Severe anaphylaxis and/or the need for repeated doses of epinephrine to treat anaphylaxis are risk factors for biphasic anaphylaxis. Antihistamines and/or glucocorticoids are not reliable interventions to prevent biphasic anaphylaxis, although evidence supports a role for antihistamine and/or glucocorticoid premedication in specific chemotherapy protocols and rush aeroallergen immunotherapy. Evidence is lacking to support the role of antihistamines and/or glucocorticoid routine premedication in patients receiving low- or iso-osmolar contrast material to prevent recurrent radiocontrast media anaphylaxis. Epinephrine is the first-line pharmacotherapy for uniphasic and/or biphasic anaphylaxis. After diagnosis and treatment of anaphylaxis, all patients should be kept under observation until symptoms have fully resolved. All patients with anaphylaxis should receive education on anaphylaxis and risk of recurrence, trigger avoidance, self-injectable epinephrine education, referral to an allergist, and be educated about thresholds for further care.

Guidance to 2018 good practice: ARIA digitally-enabled, integrated, person-centred care for rhinitis and asthma

Aims

Mobile Airways Sentinel NetworK (MASK) belongs to the Fondation Partenariale MACVIA-LR of Montpellier, France and aims to provide an active and healthy life to rhinitis sufferers and to those with asthma multimorbidity across the life cycle, whatever their gender or socio-economic status, in order to reduce health and social inequities incurred by the disease and to improve the digital transformation of health and care. The ultimate goal is to change the management strategy in chronic diseases.

Methods

MASK implements ICT technologies for individualized and predictive medicine to develop novel care pathways by a multi-disciplinary group centred around the patients.

Stakeholders

Include patients, health care professionals (pharmacists and physicians), authorities, patient’s associations, private and public sectors.

Results

MASK is deployed in 23 countries and 17 languages. 26,000 users have registered.

EU grants (2018)

MASK is participating in EU projects (POLLAR: impact of air POLLution in Asthma and Rhinitis, EIT Health, DigitalHealthEurope, Euriphi and Vigour).

Lessons learnt

(i) Adherence to treatment is the major problem of allergic disease, (ii) Self-management strategies should be considerably expanded (behavioural), (iii) Change management is essential in allergic diseases, (iv) Education strategies should be reconsidered using a patient-centred approach and (v) Lessons learnt for allergic diseases can be expanded to chronic diseases.

MASK 2017: ARIA digitally-enabled, integrated, person-centred care for rhinitis and asthma multimorbidity using real-world-evidence

mHealth, such as apps running on consumer smart devices is becoming increasingly popular and has the potential to profoundly affect healthcare and health outcomes. However, it may be disruptive and results achieved are not always reaching the goals. Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) has evolved from a guideline using the best evidence-based approach to care pathways suited to real-life using mobile technology in allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma multimorbidity. Patients largely use over-the-counter medications dispensed in pharmacies. Shared decision making centered around the patient and based on self-management should be the norm. Mobile Airways Sentinel networK (MASK), the Phase 3 ARIA initiative, is based on the freely available MASK app (the Allergy Diary, Android and iOS platforms). MASK is available in 16 languages and deployed in 23 countries. The present paper provides an overview of the methods used in MASK and the key results obtained to date. These include a novel phenotypic characterization of the patients, confirmation of the impact of allergic rhinitis on work productivity and treatment patterns in real life. Most patients appear to self-medicate, are often non-adherent and do not follow guidelines. Moreover, the Allergy Diary is able to distinguish between AR medications. The potential usefulness of MASK will be further explored by POLLAR (Impact of Air Pollution on Asthma and Rhinitis), a new Horizon 2020 project using the Allergy Diary.

Pharmacologic Treatment of Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis: Synopsis of Guidance From the 2017 Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters

DESCRIPTION

The Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters, which comprises representatives of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (AAAAI) and the American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (ACAAI), formed a workgroup to review evidence and provide guidance to health care providers on the initial pharmacologic treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis in patients aged 12 years or older.

METHODS

To update a prior systematic review, the workgroup searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 18 July 2012 to 29 July 2016 to identify studies that addressed efficacy and adverse effects of single or combination pharmacotherapy for seasonal allergic rhinitis. In conjunction with the Joint Task Force, the workgroup reviewed the evidence and developed recommendations about initial treatment approaches by using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Members of the AAAAI, the ACAAI, and the general public provided feedback on the draft document, which the Joint Task Force reviewed before finalizing the guideline.

RECOMMENDATION 1

For initial treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis in persons aged 12 years or older, routinely prescribe monotherapy with an intranasal corticosteroid rather than an intranasal corticosteroid in combination with an oral antihistamine. (Strong recommendation).

RECOMMENDATION 2

For initial treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis in persons aged 15 years or older, recommend an intranasal corticosteroid over a leukotriene receptor antagonist. (Strong recommendation).

RECOMMENDATION 3

For treatment of moderate to severe seasonal allergic rhinitis in persons aged 12 years or older, the clinician may recommend the combination of an intranasal corticosteroid and an intranasal antihistamine for initial treatment. (Weak recommendation).

Clinical practice guideline: allergic rhinitis executive summary

The American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation (AAO-HNSF) has published a supplement to this issue featuring the new Clinical Practice Guideline: Allergic Rhinitis. To assist in implementing the guideline recommendations, this article summarizes the rationale, purpose, and key action statements. The 14 recommendations developed address the evaluation of patients with allergic rhinitis, including performing and interpretation of diagnostic testing and assessment and documentation of chronic conditions and comorbidities. It will then focus on the recommendations to guide the evaluation and treatment of patients with allergic rhinitis, to determine the most appropriate interventions to improve symptoms and quality of life for patients with allergic rhinitis.

Clinical practice guideline: Allergic rhinitis

OBJECTIVE

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is one of the most common diseases affecting adults. It is the most common chronic disease in children in the United States today and the fifth most common chronic disease in the United States overall. AR is estimated to affect nearly 1 in every 6 Americans and generates $2 to $5 billion in direct health expenditures annually. It can impair quality of life and, through loss of work and school attendance, is responsible for as much as $2 to $4 billion in lost productivity annually. Not surprisingly, myriad diagnostic tests and treatments are used in managing this disorder, yet there is considerable variation in their use. This clinical practice guideline was undertaken to optimize the care of patients with AR by addressing quality improvement opportunities through an evaluation of the available evidence and an assessment of the harm-benefit balance of various diagnostic and management options.

PURPOSE

The primary purpose of this guideline is to address quality improvement opportunities for all clinicians, in any setting, who are likely to manage patients with AR as well as to optimize patient care, promote effective diagnosis and therapy, and reduce harmful or unnecessary variations in care. The guideline is intended to be applicable for both pediatric and adult patients with AR. Children under the age of 2 years were excluded from the clinical practice guideline because rhinitis in this population may be different than in older patients and is not informed by the same evidence base. The guideline is intended to focus on a limited number of quality improvement opportunities deemed most important by the working group and is not intended to be a comprehensive reference for diagnosing and managing AR. The recommendations outlined in the guideline are not intended to represent the standard of care for patient management, nor are the recommendations intended to limit treatment or care provided to individual patients.

ACTION STATEMENTS

The development group made a strong recommendation that clinicians recommend intranasal steroids for patients with a clinical diagnosis of AR whose symptoms affect their quality of life. The development group also made a strong recommendation that clinicians recommend oral second-generation/less sedating antihistamines for patients with AR and primary complaints of sneezing and itching. The panel made the following recommendations: (1) Clinicians should make the clinical diagnosis of AR when patients present with a history and physical examination consistent with an allergic cause and 1 or more of the following symptoms: nasal congestion, runny nose, itchy nose, or sneezing. Findings of AR consistent with an allergic cause include, but are not limited to, clear rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, pale discoloration of the nasal mucosa, and red and watery eyes. (2) Clinicians should perform and interpret, or refer to a clinician who can perform and interpret, specific IgE (skin or blood) allergy testing for patients with a clinical diagnosis of AR who do not respond to empiric treatment, or when the diagnosis is uncertain, or when knowledge of the specific causative allergen is needed to target therapy. (3) Clinicians should assess patients with a clinical diagnosis of AR for, and document in the medical record, the presence of associated conditions such as asthma, atopic dermatitis, sleep-disordered breathing, conjunctivitis, rhinosinusitis, and otitis media. (4) Clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, immunotherapy (sublingual or subcutaneous) for patients with AR who have inadequate response to symptoms with pharmacologic therapy with or without environmental controls. The panel recommended against (1) clinicians routinely performing sinonasal imaging in patients presenting with symptoms consistent with a diagnosis of AR and (2) clinicians offering oral leukotriene receptor antagonists as primary therapy for patients with AR. The panel group made the following options: (1) Clinicians may advise avoidance of known allergens or may advise environmental controls (ie, removal of pets; the use of air filtration systems, bed covers, and acaricides [chemical agents formulated to kill dust mites]) in patients with AR who have identified allergens that correlate with clinical symptoms. (2) Clinicians may offer intranasal antihistamines for patients with seasonal, perennial, or episodic AR. (3) Clinicians may offer combination pharmacologic therapy in patients with AR who have inadequate response to pharmacologic monotherapy. (4) Clinicians may offer, or refer to a surgeon who can offer, inferior turbinate reduction in patients with AR with nasal airway obstruction and enlarged inferior turbinates who have failed medical management. (5) Clinicians may offer acupuncture, or refer to a clinician who can offer acupuncture, for patients with AR who are interested in nonpharmacologic therapy. The development group provided no recommendation regarding the use of herbal therapy for patients with AR.

International consensus on (ICON) anaphylaxis

ICON: Anaphylaxis provides a unique perspective on the principal evidence-based anaphylaxis guidelines developed and published independently from 2010 through 2014 by four allergy/immunology organizations. These guidelines concur with regard to the clinical features that indicate a likely diagnosis of anaphylaxis -- a life-threatening generalized or systemic allergic or hypersensitivity reaction. They also concur about prompt initial treatment with intramuscular injection of epinephrine (adrenaline) in the mid-outer thigh, positioning the patient supine (semi-reclining if dyspneic or vomiting), calling for help, and when indicated, providing supplemental oxygen, intravenous fluid resuscitation and cardiopulmonary resuscitation, along with concomitant monitoring of vital signs and oxygenation. Additionally, they concur that H1-antihistamines, H2-antihistamines, and glucocorticoids are not initial medications of choice. For self-management of patients at risk of anaphylaxis in community settings, they recommend carrying epinephrine auto-injectors and personalized emergency action plans, as well as follow-up with a physician (ideally an allergy/immunology specialist) to help prevent anaphylaxis recurrences. ICON: Anaphylaxis describes unmet needs in anaphylaxis, noting that although epinephrine in 1 mg/mL ampules is available worldwide, other essentials, including supplemental oxygen, intravenous fluid resuscitation, and epinephrine auto-injectors are not universally available. ICON: Anaphylaxis proposes a comprehensive international research agenda that calls for additional prospective studies of anaphylaxis epidemiology, patient risk factors and co-factors, triggers, clinical criteria for diagnosis, randomized controlled trials of therapeutic interventions, and measures to prevent anaphylaxis recurrences. It also calls for facilitation of global collaborations in anaphylaxis research. IN ADDITION TO CONFIRMING THE ALIGNMENT OF MAJOR ANAPHYLAXIS GUIDELINES, ICON: Anaphylaxis adds value by including summary tables and citing 130 key references. It is published as an information resource about anaphylaxis for worldwide use by healthcare professionals, academics, policy-makers, patients, caregivers, and the public.

Anaphylaxis in the allergist's office: preparing your office and staff for medical emergencies

All allergists who administer subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) experience anaphylaxis in their offices and must devote proper planning, preparation, and practice to ensure that all staff members recognize the early signs and symptoms of anaphylaxis and can respond appropriately. Educating staff and patients, preparing an anaphylaxis emergency cart, developing and following selection criteria for SCIT and high-risk procedures, and customizing an "Action Plan for Anaphylaxis Management" create the foundation for mounting an adequate response to anaphylaxis. Strategies to prevent near-fatal and fatal reactions include (1) avoiding, when possible, the administration of SCIT to patients on beta-blockers; (2) using a preinjection questionnaire to review changes in the patient's medical condition, e.g., episodes of asthma since the previous injection; (3) using standardized forms and procedures for SCIT; (4) one might also consider an objective measure of airway function (e.g., peak flow measurement) for the asthmatic patient before allergy injections; (5) insisting on a 30-minute waiting time after SCIT; and (6) giving consideration to prescribing a dual-pack epinephrine autoinjector to all SCIT patients. Treatment of anaphylaxis should start with epinephrine administered intramuscularly at the first sign of anaphylaxis. Oxygen and i.v. fluids may be needed for moderate-to-severe anaphylaxis or anaphylaxis that is quickly developing or unresponsive to the first injection of epinephrine. Emergency medical services should be called for all patients who are experiencing moderate-to-severe (grade 2 or higher) anaphylaxis, if they require more than 1 dose of epinephrine and/or i.v. fluids, or if they do not immediately respond to treatment.

Pet dander and perennial allergic rhinitis: therapeutic options

Pet allergy may now be the most common perennial allergen in the United States based on recent skin-prick testing data. This trend corresponds with the rise (from 56 to 63%) in U.S. households having indoor pets over the past 10 years. Furthermore small, suspended, particulate animal allergens may be found in 90% of all homes and most public indoor areas. Although the most important cat and dog allergens are Fel d 1 and Can f 1, respectively, there are five well-described allergens for both cats and dogs. The effects of early life domestic pet and endotoxin exposure and subsequent clinical sensitivity remain controversial. Given that only the rare pet-allergic patient is willing to give away his/her pet, it is important to take an evidence-based approach to environmental control. Unfortunately, the benefits from changes in the environment that have been shown in research studies relate more to a reduction of allergens than symptoms. The pharmacotherapy for pet allergy will vary based on whether this is episodic or perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) and on the severity of the symptoms. A stepwise approach for management, using both mono- and combination therapy, is proposed. Allergen immunotherapy, the only disease-modifying treatment available, may be the best therapeutic recommendation for patients with moderate to severe pet-induced PAR.

American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology/American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Joint Task Force Report on omalizumab-associated anaphylaxis

The American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology and the American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Executive Committees formed the Omalizumab Joint Task Force with the purpose of reviewing the Genentech Xolair (omalizumab) clinical trials and postmarketing surveillance data on anaphylaxis and anaphylactoid reactions. Using the definition of anaphylaxis proposed at a 2005 multidisciplinary symposia, the Omalizumab Joint Task Force concluded that 35 patients had 41 episodes of anaphylaxis associated with Xolair (omalizumab) administration between June 1, 2003, and December 31, 2005. With 39,510 patients receiving Xolair (omalizumab) during the same period of time, this would correspond to an anaphylaxis-reporting rate of 0.09% of patients. Of those 36 events for which the time of reaction was known, 22 (61%) reactions occurred in the first 2 hours after one of the first 3 doses. Five (14%) of the events after the fourth or later doses occurred within 30 minutes. Considering the timing of these 36 events, an observation period of 2 hours for the first 3 injections and 30 minutes for subsequent injections would have captured 75% of the anaphylactic reactions. The OJTF report provides recommendations for physicians who prescribe Xolair (omalizumab) on (1) the suggested wait periods after administration and (2) patient education regarding anaphylaxis.