Recommendations for the prevention and diagnosis of asthma in children: Evidence from international guidelines adapted for Mexico

BACKGROUND

With the availability of high-quality asthma guidelines worldwide, one possible approach of developing a valid guideline, without re-working the evidence, already analysed by major guidelines, is the ADAPTE approach, as was used for the development of National Guidelines on asthma.

METHODS

The guidelines development group (GDG) covered a broad range of experts from medical specialities, primary care physicians and methodologists. The core group of the GDG searched the literature for asthma guidelines 2005 onward, and analysed the 11 best guidelines with AGREE-II to select three mother guidelines. Key clinical questions were formulated covering each step of the asthma management.

RESULTS

The selected mother guidelines are British Thoracic Society (BTS), GINA and GEMA 2015. Responses to the questions were formulated according to the evidence in the mother guidelines. Recommendations or suggestions were made for asthma treatment in Mexico by the core group, and adjusted during several rounds of a Delphi process, taking into account: 1. Evidence; 2. Safety; 3. Cost; 4. Patient preference - all these set against the background of the local reality. Here the detailed analysis of the evidence present in BTS/GINA/GEMA sections on prevention and diagnosis in paediatric asthma are presented for three age-groups: children with asthma ≤5 years, 6-11 years and ≥12 years.

CONCLUSIONS

For the prevention and diagnosis sections, applying the AGREE-II method is useful to develop a scientifically-sustained document, adjusted to the local reality per country, as is the Mexican Guideline on Asthma.

Similar biological activity in skin prick test for Oralair® (8200 BAU) and Grazax® (6200 BAU) reinforces effective SLIT dosing level

In Europe, allergen extracts are standardized based on skin prick wheal size in 20-30 allergic subjects. To understand the biological activity of clinically effective Sublingual immunotherapy, we used this method to determine the biological activity of solution and tablet Timothy grass pollen (TIM) extracts, compared to an FDA-approved extract (Reference) of 10 000 BAU/ml. Blinded, quadruplicate skin prick tests with concentrate and three serial half-log dilutions allowed the construction of a semilogarithmic regression line per extract. Bioequivalent allergy units (BAU) values were obtained from the comparison with reference. Extracts and dilutions showed a neat linear dose response (all: R² > 0.98) in 33 rhinitis patients. Relative potencies: Staloral^® 12 000 BAU/ml, Soluprick^® 10 300 BAU/ml, Oralair^® 8200 BAU, and Grazax^® 6200 BAU. Even though all extract concentrates differed in wheal size (P = 0.01-0.001), Grazax^® producing a 25% smaller wheal size than Oralair^® , and the biological activity of these clinically effective TIM tablets led in the same range (6200-8200 BAU; 0.92-1.23 cm² ). SLIT dose-finding studies for other pollens might start with allergen extracts producing 1.1 cm² wheal surface.