Correlation between work impairment, scores of rhinitis severity and asthma using the MASK-air® App

BACKGROUND

In allergic rhinitis, a relevant outcome providing information on the effectiveness of interventions is needed. In MASK-air (Mobile Airways Sentinel Network), a visual analogue scale (VAS) for work is used as a relevant outcome. This study aimed to assess the performance of the work VAS work by comparing VAS work with other VAS measurements and symptom-medication scores obtained concurrently.

METHODS

All consecutive MASK-air users in 23 countries from 1 June 2016 to 31 October 2018 were included (14 189 users; 205 904 days). Geolocalized users self-assessed daily symptom control using the touchscreen functionality on their smart phone to click on VAS scores (ranging from 0 to 100) for overall symptoms (global), nose, eyes, asthma and work. Two symptom-medication scores were used: the modified EAACI CSMS score and the MASK control score for rhinitis. To assess data quality, the intra-individual response variability (IRV) index was calculated.

RESULTS

A strong correlation was observed between VAS work and other VAS. The highest levels for correlation with VAS work and variance explained in VAS work were found with VAS global, followed by VAS nose, eye and asthma. In comparison with VAS global, the mCSMS and MASK control score showed a lower correlation with VAS work. Results are unlikely to be explained by a low quality of data arising from repeated VAS measures.

CONCLUSIONS

VAS work correlates with other outcomes (VAS global, nose, eye and asthma) but less well with a symptom-medication score. VAS work should be considered as a potentially useful AR outcome in intervention studies.

Changing the history of anaphylaxis mortality statistics through the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases-11

We review the history of the classification and coding changes for anaphylaxis and provide current and perspective information in the field. In 2012, an analysis of Brazilian data demonstrated undernotification of anaphylaxis-related deaths because of the difficulties of coding using the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision. This work triggered strategic international actions supported by the Joint Allergy Academies and the International Classification of Diseases World Health Organization (WHO) leadership to update the classification of allergic disorders for the International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11), which resulted in construction of the pioneer "Allergic and hypersensitivity conditions" chapter. The usability of the new framework has been tested by evaluating the same data published in 2012 from the ICD-11 perspective. Coding accuracy was much improved, reaching 95% for definite anaphylaxis. As the results were provided to the WHO Mortality Reference Group, coding rules have been changed, allowing anaphylaxis to be recorded as an underlying cause of death in official mortality statistics. The mandatory use of ICD-11 from January 2022 for documenting cause of death could have 2 immediate consequences: (1) the reported number of anaphylaxis-related deaths might increase because of more appropriate coding and (2) the cross-sectional and longitudinal mortality data generated might ultimately lead to a better understanding of anaphylaxis epidemiology and improved health policies directed at reducing anaphylaxis-related mortality.

Guiding Principles for the Recognition, Diagnosis, and Management of Infants with Anaphylaxis: An Expert Panel Consensus

Infant anaphylaxis is an emerging risk, with food allergy the most common cause. Although the presentation of anaphylaxis involves the same systems as in older children and adults, there are real-world challenges to identifying symptoms of an allergic emergency in nonverbal children, as well as implementing optimal treatment. Recognition of anaphylaxis in infants can be challenging because allergic symptoms and certain normal infant behaviors may overlap. Intramuscular epinephrine is the treatment of choice for infants, as it is for older children and adults, and an epinephrine autoinjector approved by the Food and Drug Administration is now available for infants weighing between 7.5 and 15 kg. A panel of experts sought to develop guiding principles for the recognition, diagnosis, and management of anaphylaxis in infants, and provide a framework for the development of new guidelines and future research. Accordingly, anaphylaxis emergency action planning for infants was addressed by the panel. In considering formation of future infant anaphylaxis guidelines, health care providers should be aware of the needs to improve the recognition, diagnosis, and management of infants with anaphylaxis. Future research should identify and validate clinical criteria for the diagnosis of anaphylaxis in infants, as well as risk factors for the most severe reactions.

New H1-Receptor Antagonists: A Review

The new H1-receptor antagonists such as astemizole, cetirizine, loratadine, levocabastine, ketotifen, and azelastine have diverse pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and potency. Astemizole, for example, is the most long-acting of the new drugs and is not suitable for sporadic use. Cetirizine, the carboxylic acid metabolite of hydroxyzine, unlike other H1-receptor antagonists, is minimally metabolized in the body and is primarily excreted in unchanged form in the urine. Levocabastine is the most potent of the new drugs and can be applied topically to the conjunctivae or to the nasal mucosa for relief of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. Ketotifen and azelastine have well-described antiallergic effects in addition of their antihistaminic effects. None of the new H1-receptor antagonists is any more effective in relieving nasal congestion than the first-generation H1-receptor antagonists are. Most, but not all, of the new H1-receptor antagonists lack anticholinergic effects and are relatively nonsedating.

Critical view of anaphylaxis epidemiology: open questions and new perspectives

In contrast to the majority of allergic or hypersensitivity conditions, worldwide anaphylaxis epidemiological data remain sparse with low accuracy, which hampers comparable morbidity statistics. Data can differ widely depending on a number of variables. In the current document we reviewed the forms on which anaphylaxis has been defined and classified; and how it can affect epidemiological data. With regards to the methods used to capture morbidity statistics, we observed the impact of the anaphylaxis coding utilizing the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases. As an outcome and depending on the anaphylaxis definition, we extracted the cumulative incidence, which may not reflect the real number of new cases. The new ICD-11 anaphylaxis subsection developments and critical view of morbidity statistics data are discussed in order to reach new perspectives on anaphylaxis epidemiology.

Adherence with epinephrine autoinjector prescriptions in primary care

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to estimate primary adherence for epinephrine autoinjector (EA) prescriptions in primary care practices in Manitoba, Canada.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of electronic medical record and administrative data was performed to determine primary adherence, defined as dispensation of a new EA prescription within 90 days of the date the prescription was written. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to test predictors of filling an EA prescription.

RESULTS

Of 1212 EA prescriptions written between 2012 and 2014, only 69.9% (N = 847) were filled. An increased number of prescriptions for non-EA mediations was associated with an increased odds ratio of not filling an EA prescription.

INTERPRETATION

This is the first study in Canada to examine adherence for EA prescriptions. The non-adherence rate identified is higher than rates previously reported in the literature, and indicates that many EA prescriptions for adults seen in primary care may never be filled. It also suggests that prescriptions of EAs for all patients at risk of anaphylaxis in community settings should consistently be accompanied by concise information about the importance of having the EA prescription filled and having the EA readily available.

CHRODIS criteria applied to the MASK (MACVIA-ARIA Sentinel NetworK) Good Practice in allergic rhinitis: a SUNFRAIL report

A Good Practice is a practice that works well, produces good results, and is recommended as a model. MACVIA-ARIA Sentinel Network (MASK), the new Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) initiative, is an example of a Good Practice focusing on the implementation of multi-sectoral care pathways using emerging technologies with real life data in rhinitis and asthma multi-morbidity. The European Union Joint Action on Chronic Diseases and Promoting Healthy Ageing across the Life Cycle (JA-CHRODIS) has developed a checklist of 28 items for the evaluation of Good Practices. SUNFRAIL (Reference Sites Network for Prevention and Care of Frailty and Chronic Conditions in community dwelling persons of EU Countries), a European Union project, assessed whether MASK is in line with the 28 items of JA-CHRODIS. A short summary was proposed for each item and 18 experts, all members of ARIA and SUNFRAIL from 12 countries, assessed the 28 items using a Survey Monkey-based questionnaire. A visual analogue scale (VAS) from 0 (strongly disagree) to 100 (strongly agree) was used. Agreement equal or over 75% was observed for 14 items (50%). MASK is following the JA-CHRODIS recommendations for the evaluation of Good Practices.

Epinephrine for First-aid Management of Anaphylaxis

Anaphylaxis is a severe, generalized allergic or hypersensitivity reaction that is rapid in onset and may cause death. Epinephrine (adrenaline) can be life-saving when administered as rapidly as possible once anaphylaxis is recognized. This clinical report from the American Academy of Pediatrics is an update of the 2007 clinical report on this topic. It provides information to help clinicians identify patients at risk of anaphylaxis and new information about epinephrine and epinephrine autoinjectors (EAs). The report also highlights the importance of patient and family education about the recognition and management of anaphylaxis in the community. Key points emphasized include the following: (1) validated clinical criteria are available to facilitate prompt diagnosis of anaphylaxis; (2) prompt intramuscular epinephrine injection in the mid-outer thigh reduces hospitalizations, morbidity, and mortality; (3) prescribing EAs facilitates timely epinephrine injection in community settings for patients with a history of anaphylaxis and, if specific circumstances warrant, for some high-risk patients who have not previously experienced anaphylaxis; (4) prescribing epinephrine for infants and young children weighing <15 kg, especially those who weigh 7.5 kg and under, currently presents a dilemma, because the lowest dose available in EAs, 0.15 mg, is a high dose for many infants and some young children; (5) effective management of anaphylaxis in the community requires a comprehensive approach involving children, families, preschools, schools, camps, and sports organizations; and (6) prevention of anaphylaxis recurrences involves confirmation of the trigger, discussion of specific allergen avoidance, allergen immunotherapy (eg, with stinging insect venom, if relevant), and a written, personalized anaphylaxis emergency action plan; and (7) the management of anaphylaxis also involves education of children and supervising adults about anaphylaxis recognition and first-aid treatment.

Fatal anaphylaxis registries data support changes in the who anaphylaxis mortality coding rules

Anaphylaxis is defined as a severe life-threatening generalized or systemic hypersensitivity reaction. The difficulty of coding anaphylaxis fatalities under the World Health Organization (WHO) International Classification of Diseases (ICD) system is recognized as an important reason for under-notification of anaphylaxis deaths. On current death certificates, a limited number of ICD codes are valid as underlying causes of death, and death certificates do not include the word anaphylaxis per se. In this review, we provide evidences supporting the need for changes in WHO mortality coding rules and call for addition of anaphylaxis as an underlying cause of death on international death certificates. This publication will be included in support of a formal request to the WHO as a formal request for this move taking the 11^th ICD revision.

ARIA 2016: Care pathways implementing emerging technologies for predictive medicine in rhinitis and asthma across the life cycle

The Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) initiative commenced during a World Health Organization workshop in 1999. The initial goals were (1) to propose a new allergic rhinitis classification, (2) to promote the concept of multi-morbidity in asthma and rhinitis and (3) to develop guidelines with all stakeholders that could be used globally for all countries and populations. ARIA—disseminated and implemented in over 70 countries globally—is now focusing on the implementation of emerging technologies for individualized and predictive medicine. MASK [MACVIA (Contre les Maladies Chroniques pour un Vieillissement Actif)-ARIA Sentinel NetworK] uses mobile technology to develop care pathways for the management of rhinitis and asthma by a multi-disciplinary group and by patients themselves. An app (Android and iOS) is available in 20 countries and 15 languages. It uses a visual analogue scale to assess symptom control and work productivity as well as a clinical decision support system. It is associated with an inter-operable tablet for physicians and other health care professionals. The scaling up strategy uses the recommendations of the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing. The aim of the novel ARIA approach is to provide an active and healthy life to rhinitis sufferers, whatever their age, sex or socio-economic status, in order to reduce health and social inequalities incurred by the disease.

2015 update of the evidence base: World Allergy Organization anaphylaxis guidelines

The World Allergy Organization (WAO) Guidelines for the assessment and management of anaphylaxis provide a unique global perspective on this increasingly common, potentially life-threatening disease. Recommendations made in the original WAO Anaphylaxis Guidelines remain clinically valid and relevant, and are a widely accessed and frequently cited resource. In this 2015 update of the evidence supporting recommendations in the Guidelines, new information based on anaphylaxis publications from January 2014 through mid- 2015 is summarized. Advances in epidemiology, diagnosis, and management in healthcare and community settings are highlighted. Additionally, new information about patient factors that increase the risk of severe and/or fatal anaphylaxis and patient co-factors that amplify anaphylactic episodes is presented and new information about anaphylaxis triggers and confirmation of triggers to facilitate specific trigger avoidance and immunomodulation is reviewed. The update includes tables summarizing important advances in anaphylaxis research.

Sublingual Diffusion of Epinephrine Microcrystals from Rapidly Disintegrating Tablets for the Potential First-Aid Treatment of Anaphylaxis: In Vitro and Ex Vivo Study

For the first-aid treatment of anaphylaxis, epinephrine (Epi) 0.3 mg intramuscular (IM) injection in the thigh is the drug of choice. Epi auto-injectors are widely recommended for anaphylaxis treatment in community settings but not necessarily carried or used as prescribed when anaphylaxis occurs. We therefore developed rapidly disintegrating sublingual tablets (RDSTs) as an alternative noninvasive dosage form. Our objective in this study was to evaluate the effect of reducing Epi particle size on its in vitro and ex vivo diffusion, with the goal of enhancing Epi sublingual absorption from Epi RDSTs. Epi particle size was reduced by top-bottom technique using a microfluidizer for one pass at 30,000 Psi. The micronized Epi crystals (Epi-MC) were characterized using Zetasizer, Fourier transform infrared (FT-IR), differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Epi RDSTs were formulated and manufactured using our previously developed method. In vitro and ex vivo diffusion of Epi 10, 20, and 40 mg RDSTs and Epi-MC 10 and 20 mg RDSTs (n = 4) were evaluated using Franz cells. Epi 10 mg solution was used as a control. Mean (±standard deviation (SD)) Epi particle size was successfully reduced from 131.8 ± 10.5 to 2.5 ± 0.4 μm. Cumulative Epi diffused and influx from 40 mg Epi RDSTs and 20 mg Epi-MC RDSTs were not significantly different from each other in vitro and ex vivo (p > 0.05). Also, Epi permeability from 20 mg Epi-MC RDSTs was significantly higher than from the rest (p < 0.05). Epi-MC RDSTs improved Epi diffusion twofold and might have the potential to reduce the Epi dose needed in RDSTs by 50%.

MACVIA-ARIA Sentinel NetworK for allergic rhinitis (MASK-rhinitis): the new generation guideline implementation

Several unmet needs have been identified in allergic rhinitis: identification of the time of onset of the pollen season, optimal control of rhinitis and comorbidities, patient stratification, multidisciplinary team for integrated care pathways, innovation in clinical trials and, above all, patient empowerment. MASK-rhinitis (MACVIA-ARIA Sentinel NetworK for allergic rhinitis) is a simple system centred around the patient which was devised to fill many of these gaps using Information and Communications Technology (ICT) tools and a clinical decision support system (CDSS) based on the most widely used guideline in allergic rhinitis and its asthma comorbidity (ARIA 2015 revision). It is one of the implementation systems of Action Plan B3 of the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing (EIP on AHA). Three tools are used for the electronic monitoring of allergic diseases: a cell phone-based daily visual analogue scale (VAS) assessment of disease control, CARAT (Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test) and e-Allergy screening (premedical system of early diagnosis of allergy and asthma based on online tools). These tools are combined with a clinical decision support system (CDSS) and are available in many languages. An e-CRF and an e-learning tool complete MASK. MASK is flexible and other tools can be added. It appears to be an advanced, global and integrated ICT answer for many unmet needs in allergic diseases which will improve policies and standards.

Insights and advances in chronic urticaria: a Canadian perspective

In the past few years there have been significant advances which have changed the face of chronic urticaria. In this review, we aim to update physicians about clinically relevant advances in the classification, diagnosis and management of chronic urticaria that have occurred in recent years. These include clarification of the terminology used to describe and classify urticaria. We also detail the development and validation of instruments to assess urticaria and understand the impairment on quality-of-life and the morbidity caused by this disease. Additionally, the approach to management of chronic urticaria now focuses on evidence-based use of non-impairing, non-sedating H1-antihistamines given initially in standard doses and if this is not effective, in up to 4-fold doses. For urticaria refractory to H1-antihistamines, omalizumab treatment has emerged as an effective, safe option.

Anaphylaxis: Unique aspects of clinical diagnosis and management in infants (birth to age 2 years)

In this rostrum we aim to increase awareness of anaphylaxis in infancy in order to improve clinical diagnosis, management, and prevention of recurrences. Anaphylaxis is increasingly reported in this age group. Foods are the most common triggers. Presentation typically involves the skin (generalized urticaria), the respiratory tract (cough, wheeze, stridor, and dyspnea), and/or the gastrointestinal tract (persistent vomiting). Tryptase levels are seldom increased because of infant anaphylaxis, although baseline tryptase levels can be increased in the first few months of life, reflecting mast cell burden in the developing immune system. The differential diagnosis of infant anaphylaxis includes consideration of age-unique entities, such as food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome with acute presentation. Epinephrine (adrenaline) treatment is underused in health care and community settings. No epinephrine autoinjectors contain an optimal dose for infants weighing 10 kg or less. After treatment of an anaphylactic episode, follow-up with a physician, preferably an allergy/immunology specialist, is important for confirmation of anaphylaxis triggers and prevention of recurrences through avoidance of confirmed specific triggers. Natural desensitization to milk and egg can occur. Future research should include validation of the clinical criteria for anaphylaxis diagnosis in infants, prospective longitudinal monitoring of baseline serum tryptase levels in healthy and atopic infants during the first year of life, studies of infant comorbidities and cofactors that increase the risk of severe anaphylaxis, development of autoinjectors containing a 0.1-mg epinephrine dose suitable for infants, and inclusion of infants in prospective studies of immune modulation to prevent anaphylaxis recurrences.

Adrenaline (epinephrine) microcrystal sublingual tablet formulation: enhanced absorption in a preclinical model

Objectives

For anaphylaxis treatment in community settings, adrenaline (epinephrine) administration using an auto-injector in the thigh is universally recommended. Despite this, many people at risk of anaphylaxis in community settings do not carry their prescribed auto-injectors consistently and hesitate to use them when anaphylaxis occurs.The objective of this research was to study the effect of a substantial reduction in adrenaline (Epi) particle size to a few micrometres (Epi microcrystals (Epi-MC)) on enhancing adrenaline dissolution and increasing the rate and extent of sublingual absorption from a previously developed rapidly disintegrating sublingual tablet (RDST) formulation in a validated preclinical model.

Methods

The in-vivo absorption of Epi-MC 20 mg RDSTs and Epi 40 mg RDSTs was evaluated in rabbits. Epi 0.3 mg intramuscular (IM) injection in the thigh and placebo RDSTs were used as positive and negative controls, respectively.

Key findings

Epimean(standard deviation) area under the plasma concentration vs time curves up to 60 min and Cmax from Epi-MC 20 mg and Epi 40 mg RDSTs did not differ significantly (P &gt; 0.05) from Epi 0.3 mg IM injection. After adrenaline, regardless of route of administration, pharmacokinetic parameters were significantly higher (P &lt; 0.05) than after placebo RDSTs administration (reflecting endogenous adrenaline levels).

Conclusion

Epi-MC RDSTs facilitated a twofold increase in Epi absorption and a 50% reduction in the sublingual dose. This novel sublingual tablet formulation is potentially useful for the first-aid treatment of anaphylaxis in community settings.

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.

H2-antihistamines for the treatment of anaphylaxis with and without shock: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Anaphylaxis is a serious allergic or hypersensitivity reaction, which is rapid in onset and sometimes can prove fatal. Although H2-antihistamines are often administered for emergency treatment in anaphylaxis, there is uncertainty about their effectiveness in this disease.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the benefits and harms of H2-antihistamines in the treatment of anaphylaxis.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed of randomized controlled trials and quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing H2-antihistamines with placebo or no intervention in patients with anaphylaxis.

RESULTS

The authors failed to identify any eligible studies for inclusion in this systematic review.

CONCLUSION

When H2-antihistamines are recommended for anaphylaxis treatment, the status of the evidence base supporting their use should be described. Well-designed randomized controlled trials investigating the role of H2-antihistamines in anaphylaxis treatment are urgently needed.

Anaphylaxis in America: the prevalence and characteristics of anaphylaxis in the United States

BACKGROUND

Although anaphylaxis is recognized as an important life-threatening condition, data are limited regarding its prevalence and characteristics in the general population.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to estimate the lifetime prevalence and overall characteristics of anaphylaxis.

METHODS

Two nationwide, cross-sectional random-digit-dial surveys were conducted. The public survey included unselected adults, whereas the patient survey captured information from household members reporting a prior reaction to medications, foods, insect stings, or latex and idiopathic reactions in the previous 10 years. In both surveys standardized questionnaires queried anaphylaxis symptoms, treatments, knowledge, and behaviors.

RESULTS

The public survey included 1,000 adults, of whom 7.7% (95% CI, 5.7% to 9.7%) reported a prior anaphylactic reaction. Using increasingly stringent criteria, we estimate that 5.1% (95% CI, 3.4% to 6.8%) and 1.6% (95% CI, 0.8% to 2.4%) had probable and very likely anaphylaxis, respectively. The patient survey included 1,059 respondents, of whom 344 reported a history of anaphylaxis. The most common triggers reported were medications (34%), foods (31%), and insect stings (20%). Forty-two percent sought treatment within 15 minutes of onset, 34% went to the hospital, 27% self-treated with antihistamines, 10% called 911, 11% self-administered epinephrine, and 6.4% received no treatment. Although most respondents with anaphylaxis reported 2 or more prior episodes (19% reporting ≥5 episodes), 52% had never received a self-injectable epinephrine prescription, and 60% did not currently have epinephrine available.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of anaphylaxis in the general population is at least 1.6% and probably higher. Patients do not appear adequately equipped to deal with future episodes, indicating the need for public health initiatives to improve anaphylaxis recognition and treatment.

World Allergy Organization Anaphylaxis Guidelines: 2013 update of the evidence base

The World Allergy Organization (WAO) Guidelines for the assessment and management of anaphylaxis are a widely disseminated and used resource for information about anaphylaxis. They focus on patients at risk, triggers, clinical diagnosis, treatment in health care settings, self-treatment in the community, and prevention of recurrences. Their unique strengths include a global perspective informed by prior research on the global availability of essentials for anaphylaxis assessment and management and a global agenda for anaphylaxis research. Additionally, detailed colored illustrations are linked to key concepts in the text [Simons et al.: J Allergy Clin Immunol 2011;127:593.e1-e22]. The recommendations in the original WAO Anaphylaxis Guidelines for management of anaphylaxis in health care settings and community settings were based on evidence published in peer-reviewed, indexed medical journals to the end of 2010. These recommendations remain unchanged and clinically relevant. An update of the evidence base was published in 2012 [Simons et al.: Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2012;12:389-399]. In 2012 and early 2013, major advances were reported in the following areas: further characterization of patient phenotypes; development of in vitro tests (for some allergens) that help distinguish clinical risk of anaphylaxis from asymptomatic sensitization; epinephrine (adrenaline) research, including studies of a new epinephrine auto-injector for use in community settings, and randomized controlled trials of immunotherapy to prevent food-induced anaphylaxis. Despite these advances, the need for additional prospective studies, including randomized controlled trials of interventions in anaphylaxis is increasingly apparent. This 2013 Update highlights publications from 2012 and 2013 that further contribute to the evidence base for the recommendations made in the original WAO Anaphylaxis Guidelines. Ideally, it should be used in conjunction with these Guidelines and with the 2012 Guidelines Update.

Concomitant chronic pulmonary diseases and their association with hospital outcomes in patients with anaphylaxis and other allergic conditions: a cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To determine if chronic pulmonary diseases adversely impact selected outcomes in hospitalised patients who have various allergic conditions including anaphylaxis.

DESIGN

A population-based cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

A statewide hospital inpatient discharge database from Texas, USA, covering the years 2004-2007 was analysed. Patients with anaphylaxis and other allergic conditions were identified using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes. Within each group of patients (the overall group with various selected allergic conditions and the subgroup with anaphylaxis), the exposure variables were 11 chronic pulmonary diseases including asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and cystic fibrosis.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Admission to an intensive care unit, a prolonged (>3 days) hospital stay, receipt of mechanical ventilation and death in hospital. Logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted OR and 95% CI for these four outcomes.

RESULTS

30 390 patients with allergic conditions were identified, of whom 2410 had anaphylaxis. The following results pertain to the subcohort of patients with anaphylaxis. Median age was 50 years (range 0-95 years) and 1470 (61%) were female. The hospital mortality was 2.7%. Although asthma was not associated with hospital mortality (OR=1.27, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.90), asthmatics had more than twice the odds of non-asthmatics of receiving mechanical ventilation (OR=2.45, 95% CI 1.81 to 3.33). Chronic bronchitis, COPD, emphysema and interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) were also associated with an increased risk of requiring mechanical ventilation. Chronic bronchitis and COPD were associated with a prolonged length of stay: OR=2.69 (95% CI 1.45 to 4.98) and OR=1.86 (95% CI 1.30 to 2.66), respectively. ILD was the only chronic pulmonary disease associated with an elevated risk of hospital mortality: OR=8.71 (95% CI 1.48 to 51.20).

CONCLUSIONS

In this unique analysis of a large database, we found that asthma, COPD and other chronic pulmonary diseases increased the risk of adverse outcomes among hospitalised patients with anaphylaxis.

Auvi-Q versus EpiPen: preferences of adults, caregivers, and children

BACKGROUND

Auvi-Q is a novel epinephrine autoinjector (EAI) that provides audio and visual cues for patients at risk for life-threatening allergic reactions.

OBJECTIVE

We tested the preference for Auvi-Q or EpiPen with regard to method of instruction, preference to carry, device size, and device shape.

METHODS

This large, multicenter, simulated-use study evaluated whether adults (aged 18-65 years), caregivers (parents/guardians aged 18-65 years of children aged 5-17 years), and children (aged 11-17 years), with and without experience in using an EAI, had a preference for the current design of Auvi-Q or the current design of EpiPen. Participants were given a scenario that involved anaphylaxis and were instructed to simulate use of an EAI. They received and tested each device individually according to the randomization assignment. After testing both devices, they completed a survey to indicate their preference for Auvi-Q versus EpiPen.

RESULTS

Among all 693 participants combined, Auvi-Q was preferred over EpiPen on all study end points (P < .001). For experienced and inexperienced participants in all 3 groups (adults, caregivers, and children), Auvi-Q was preferred over EpiPen for method of instruction, preference to carry, and device size (all P < .001). The preference for Auvi-Q device shape was not significant among experienced children (P = .10); however, it was significant for inexperienced children (P = .04) and highly significant for experienced and inexperienced adults and caregivers (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

In this large multicenter, simulated-use study, Auvi-Q was preferred over EpiPen by experienced and inexperienced adults, caregivers, and children.

Assessment of asthma control and asthma exacerbations in the epidemiology and natural history of asthma: outcomes and treatment regimens (TENOR) observational cohort

Patients with severe or difficult-to-treat asthma account for substantial asthma morbidity, mortality, and healthcare burden despite comprising only a small proportion of the total asthma population. TENOR, a multicenter, observational, prospective cohort study was initiated in 2001. It enrolled 4,756 adults, adolescents and children with severe or difficult-to-treat asthma who were followed semi-annually and annually for three years, enabling insight to be gained into this understudied population. A broad range of demographic, clinical, and patient self-reported assessments were completed during the follow-up period. Here, we present key findings from the TENOR registry in relation to asthma control and exacerbations, including the identification of specific subgroups found to be at particularly high-risk. Identification of the factors and subgroups associated with poor asthma control and increased risk of exacerbations can help physicians design individual asthma management, and improve asthma-related health outcomes for these patients.

Elevated antigen-driven IL-9 responses are prominent in peanut allergic humans

Food allergies, and peanut allergy in particular, are leading causes of anaphylactic fatalities worldwide. The immune mechanisms that underlie food allergy remain ill-defined and controversial, in part because studies in humans typically focus on analysis of a limited number of prototypical Th1/Th2 cytokines. Here we determine the kinetics and prevalence of a broad panel of peanut-driven cytokine and chemokine responses in humans with current peanut allergy vs those with stable, naturally occurring clinical tolerance to peanut. Our primary focus is identification of novel indicators of immune dysregulation. Antigen-specific cytokine mRNA and protein responses were elicited in primary culture via peanut or irrelevant antigen (Leishmania extract, milk antigens) mediated stimulation of fresh peripheral blood cells from 40 individuals. Peanut extract exposure in vitro induced a broad panel of responses associated with Th2/Th9-like, Th1-like and Th17-like immunity. Peanut-dependent Type 2 cytokine responses were frequently found in both peanut allergic individuals and those who exhibit clinical tolerance to peanut ingestion. Among Th2/Th9-associated cytokines, IL-9 responses discriminated between allergic and clinically tolerant populations better than did commonly used IL-4, IL-5 or IL-13 responses. Comparison with responses evoked by unrelated control antigen-mediated stimulation showed that these differences are antigen-dependent and allergen-specific. Conversely, the intensity of IL-12, IL-17, IL-23 and IFN-γ production was indistinguishable in peanut allergic and peanut tolerant populations. In summary, the ability to generate and maintain cytokine responses to peanut is not inherently distinct between allergic and peanut tolerant humans. Quantitative differences in the intensity of cytokine production better reflects clinical phenotype, with optimally useful indicators being IL-9, IL-5, IL-13 and IL-4. Equivalent, and minimal, Ag-dependent pro-inflammatory cytokine levels in both healthy and peanut allergic volunteers argues against a key role for such cytokines in maintenance of clinical tolerance to food antigens in humans.

Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA): achievements in 10 years and future needs

Allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma represent global health problems for all age groups. Asthma and rhinitis frequently coexist in the same subjects. Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) was initiated during a World Health Organization workshop in 1999 (published in 2001). ARIA has reclassified AR as mild/moderate-severe and intermittent/persistent. This classification closely reflects patients' needs and underlines the close relationship between rhinitis and asthma. Patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals are confronted with various treatment choices for the management of AR. This contributes to considerable variation in clinical practice, and worldwide, patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals are faced with uncertainty about the relative merits and downsides of the various treatment options. In its 2010 Revision, ARIA developed clinical practice guidelines for the management of AR and asthma comorbidities based on the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. ARIA is disseminated and implemented in more than 50 countries of the world. Ten years after the publication of the ARIA World Health Organization workshop report, it is important to make a summary of its achievements and identify the still unmet clinical, research, and implementation needs to strengthen the 2011 European Union Priority on allergy and asthma in children.

Allergen-specific oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy

BACKGROUND

Peanut allergy is one of the most common forms of food allergy encountered in clinical practice.  In most cases, it does not spontaneously resolve; furthermore, it is frequently implicated in acute life-threatening reactions. The current management of peanut allergy centres on meticulous avoidance of peanuts and peanut-containing foods. Allergen-specific oral immunotherapy (OIT) for peanut allergy aims to induce desensitisation and then tolerance to peanut, and has the potential to revolutionise the management of peanut allergy. However, at present there is still considerable uncertainty about the effectiveness and safety of this approach.

OBJECTIVES

To establish the effectiveness and safety of OIT in people with IgE-mediated peanut allergy who develop symptoms after peanut ingestion.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched in the following databases: AMED, BIOSIS, CAB, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Global Health, Google Scholar, IndMed, ISI Web of Science, LILACS, MEDLINE, PakMediNet and TRIP. We also searched registers of on-going and unpublished trials. The date of the most recent search was January 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs or controlled clinical trials involving children or adults with clinical features indicative of IgE-mediated peanut allergy treated with allergen-specific OIT, compared with control group receiving either placebo or no treatment, were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently checked and reviewed titles and abstracts of identified studies and assessed risk of bias. The full text of potentially relevant trials was assessed. Data extraction was independently performed by two reviewers with disagreements resolved through discussion.

MAIN RESULTS

We found one small RCT, judged to be at low risk of bias, that enrolled 28 children aged 1 to 16 years with evidence of sensitisation to peanut and a clinical history of reaction to peanut within 60 minutes of exposure. The study did not include children who had moderate to severe asthma or who had a history of severe peanut anaphylaxis. Randomisation was in a 2:1 ratio resulting in 19 children being randomised to the intervention arm and nine to the placebo arm. Intervention arm children received OIT with peanut flour and control arm participants received placebo comprising of oat flour. The primary outcome was assessed using a double-blind, placebo controlled oral food challenge (OFC) at approximately one year. No data were available on longer term outcomes beyond the OFC conducted at the end of the study.Because of adverse events, three patients withdrew from the intervention arm before the completion of the study. Therefore, only 16 participants received the full course of peanut OIT, whereas all nine patients receiving placebo completed the trial. The per-protocol analysis found a significant increase in the threshold dose of peanut allergen required to trigger a reaction in those in the intervention arm with all 16 participants able to ingest the maximum cumulative dose of 5000 mg of peanut protein (which the authors equate as being equivalent to approximately 20 peanuts) without developing symptoms, whereas in the placebo group they were able to ingest a median cumulative dose of 280 mg (range: 0 to 1900 mg, P < 0.001) before experiencing symptoms.  Per-protocol analyses also demonstrated that peanut OIT resulted in reductions in skin prick test size (P < 0.001), interleukin-5 (P = 0.01), interleukin-13 (P = 0.02) and an increase in peanut-specific immunoglobulin G(4) (IgG(4)) (P < 0.01).Children in the intervention arm experienced more adverse events during treatment than those in the placebo arm. In the initial day escalation phase, nine (47%) of the 19 participants initially enrolled in the OIT arm experienced clinically-relevant adverse events which required treatment with H(1)-antihistamines, two of which required additional treatment with epinephrine (adrenaline).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The one small RCT we found showed that allergen-specific peanut OIT can result in desensitisation in children, and that this is associated with evidence of underlying immune-modulation. However, this treatment approach was associated with a substantial risk of adverse events, although the majority of these were mild.  In view of the risk of adverse events and the lack of evidence of long-term benefits, allergen-specific peanut OIT cannot currently be recommended as a treatment for the management of patients with IgE-mediated peanut allergy.  Larger RCTs are needed to investigate the acceptability, long-term effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of safer treatment regimens, particularly in relation to the induction of clinical and immunological tolerance.

Severe chronic allergic (and related) diseases: a uniform approach--a MeDALL--GA2LEN--ARIA position paper

Concepts of disease severity, activity, control and responsiveness to treatment are linked but different. Severity refers to the loss of function of the organs induced by the disease process or to the occurrence of severe acute exacerbations. Severity may vary over time and needs regular follow-up. Control is the degree to which therapy goals are currently met. These concepts have evolved over time for asthma in guidelines, task forces or consensus meetings. The aim of this paper is to generalize the approach of the uniform definition of severe asthma presented to WHO for chronic allergic and associated diseases (rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, chronic urticaria and atopic dermatitis) in order to have a uniform definition of severity, control and risk, usable in most situations. It is based on the appropriate diagnosis, availability and accessibility of treatments, treatment responsiveness and associated factors such as comorbidities and risk factors. This uniform definition will allow a better definition of the phenotypes of severe allergic (and related) diseases for clinical practice, research (including epidemiology), public health purposes, education and the discovery of novel therapies.

Adrenaline auto-injectors for the treatment of anaphylaxis with and without cardiovascular collapse in the community

BACKGROUND

Anaphylaxis is a serious hypersensitivity reaction that is rapid in onset and may cause death. Adrenaline (epinephrine) auto-injectors are recommended as the initial, potentially life-saving treatment of choice for anaphylaxis in the community, but they are not universally available and have limitations in their use.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of adrenaline (epinephrine) auto-injectors in relieving respiratory, cardiovascular, and other symptoms during episodes of anaphylaxis that occur in the community.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 1), MEDLINE (Ovid SP) (1950 to January 2012), EMBASE (Ovid SP) (1980 to January 2012 ), CINAHL (EBSCO host) (1982 to January 2012 ), AMED (EBSCO host) (1985 to January 2012 ), LILACS, (BIREME) (1980 to January 2012 ), ISI Web of Science (1950 to January 2012 ). We adapted our search terms for other databases. We also searched websites listing on-going trials: the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the UK Clinical Research Network Study Portfolio, and the meta Register of Controlled Trials; and contacted pharmaceutical companies who manufacture adrenaline auto-injectors in an attempt to locate unpublished material.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing auto-injector administration of adrenaline with any control including no intervention, placebo, or other adrenergic agonists were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed articles for inclusion.

MAIN RESULTS

None of the 1328 studies that were identified satisfied the inclusion criteria.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on this review, we cannot make any new recommendations on the effectiveness of adrenaline auto-injectors for the treatment of anaphylaxis. Although randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials of high methodological quality are necessary to define the true extent of benefits from the administration of adrenaline in anaphylaxis via an auto-injector, such trials are unlikely to be performed in individuals experiencing anaphylaxis because of ethical concerns associated with randomization to placebo. There is, however, a need to consider trials in which, for example, auto-injectors of different doses of adrenaline and differing devices are compared in order to provide greater clarity on the dose and device of choice. Such trials would be practically challenging to conduct. In the absence of appropriate trials, we recommend that adrenaline administration by auto-injector should still be regarded as the most effective first-line treatment for the management of anaphylaxis in the community. In countries where auto-injectors are not commonly used, it may be possible to conduct trials to compare administration of adrenaline via auto-injector with adrenaline administered by syringe and ampoule, or comparing the effectiveness of two different types of auto-injector.

Key findings and clinical implications from The Epidemiology and Natural History of Asthma: Outcomes and Treatment Regimens (TENOR) study

Patients with severe or difficult-to-treat asthma are an understudied population but account for considerable asthma morbidity, mortality, and costs. The Epidemiology and Natural History of Asthma: Outcomes and Treatment Regimens (TENOR) study was a large, 3-year, multicenter, observational cohort study of 4756 patients (n=3489 adults ≥ 18 years of age, n=497 adolescents 13-17 years of age, and n=770 children 6-12 years of age) with severe or difficult-to-treat asthma. TENOR's primary objective was to characterize the natural history of disease in this cohort. Data assessed semiannually and annually included demographics, medical history, comorbidities, asthma control, asthma-related health care use, medication use, lung function, IgE levels, self-reported asthma triggers, and asthma-related quality of life. We highlight the key findings and clinical implications from more than 25 peer-reviewed TENOR publications. Regardless of age, patients with severe or difficult-to-treat asthma demonstrated high rates of health care use and substantial asthma burden despite receiving multiple long-term controller medications. Recent exacerbation history was the strongest predictor of future asthma exacerbations. Uncontrolled asthma, as defined by the 2007 National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute guidelines' impairment domain, was highly prevalent and predictive of future asthma exacerbations; this assessment can be used to identify high-risk patients. IgE and allergen sensitization played a role in the majority of severe or difficult-to-treat asthmatic patients.

Timing the transfer of responsibilities for anaphylaxis recognition and use of an epinephrine auto-injector from adults to children and teenagers: pediatric allergists' perspective

BACKGROUND

The optimal time for transferring responsibilities for anaphylaxis recognition and epinephrine auto-injector use from adults to children and teenagers has not yet been defined.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether pediatric allergists have age-specific goals for beginning to transfer responsibilities for anaphylaxis recognition and epinephrine auto-injector use from parents and caregivers to children and teenagers at risk of anaphylaxis in the community.

METHODS

Members of the American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Allergy and Immunology (AAP-SOAI) were surveyed about when they typically begin to transfer these responsibilities from adults to children and teenagers.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight allergists responded to the survey, 97.7% of whom provided service to children and teenagers with food allergies. Few allergists expected to begin transferring responsibilities for anaphylaxis recognition and epinephrine auto-injector use to children younger than 9 to 11 years. By the time their patients reached age 12 to 14 years, however, most allergists expected them to be able to describe some anaphylaxis symptoms (95.4%), demonstrate how to use an epinephrine auto-injector trainer (93.1%), begin carrying self-injectable epinephrine (88.2%), recognize the need for epinephrine (88.1%), learn to self-inject epinephrine (84.5%), and be able to self-inject epinephrine (78.6%) (cumulative data). The allergists rated the following as "very important" readiness factors for beginning to transfer responsibilities: medical history, developmental level, and ability to demonstrate auto-injector technique.

CONCLUSION

Most pediatric allergists expected that by age 12 to 14 years, their patients should begin to share responsibilities with adults for anaphylaxis recognition and epinephrine auto-injector use; however, they individualized the timing based on assessment of patient readiness factors.

Glucocorticoids for the treatment of anaphylaxis

BACKGROUND

Anaphylaxis is a serious hypersensitivity reaction that is rapid in onset and may result in death. Anaphylaxis guidelines recommend glucocorticoids for the treatment of people experiencing anaphylaxis.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to assess the benefits and harms of glucocorticoid treatment during episodes of anaphylaxis.

SEARCH METHODS

In our previous version we searched the literature until September 2009. In this version we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 3), MEDLINE (Ovid) (1956 to September 2011), EMBASE (Ovid) (1982 to September 2011), CINAHL (EBSCOhost) (to September 2011). We also searched the UK National Research Register and websites listing ongoing trials, and contacted international experts in anaphylaxis in an attempt to locate unpublished material.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing glucocorticoids with any control (either placebo, adrenaline (epinephrine), an antihistamine, or any combination of these).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed articles for inclusion.

MAIN RESULTS

We found no studies that satisfied the inclusion criteria.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are, based on this review, unable to make any recommendations for the use of glucocorticoids in the treatment of anaphylaxis.

Evaluation of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute guidelines impairment domain for classifying asthma control and predicting asthma exacerbations

BACKGROUND

Accurate assessment of asthma control may help predict future asthma exacerbations.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate asthma guidelines impairment domain components as predictors of exacerbations in severe/difficult-to-treat asthma.

METHODS

Children (aged 6-11 years; n = 289) and adolescents/adults (aged ≥ 12 years; n = 2,094) with complete baseline and 12-month data from The Epidemiology and Natural History of Asthma Outcomes and Treatment Regimens study were included. Asthma was categorized as very poorly controlled, not well-controlled, and well-controlled using impairment domain components. Effects of omitting each component on very poorly controlled and not well controlled groups were examined. Multivariable logistic regression determined the relationship of components in predicting asthma exacerbations.

RESULTS

Omission of individual impairment domain components led to misclassification of asthma control in 11% to 39% of patients. A baseline exacerbation was the strongest independent predictor of exacerbation at month 12 in children (odds ratio = 2.94; P < .001) and adolescents/adults (odds ratio = 2.93; P < .001). In children, very poorly controlled asthma-based short-acting β2-agonist use was associated with a 2-fold higher exacerbation risk (odds ratio = 2.03; P = .011). In adolescents/adults, not well controlled or very poorly controlled asthma based on short-acting β2-agonist use (odds ratio = 1.49), lung function (odds ratio = 1.66), and the Asthma Therapy Assessment Questionnaire (odds ratio = 1.94) were also independent predictors of exacerbations (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the combined use of individual components of the impairment domain increases the sensitivity of identifying patients at high risk for future asthma exacerbations, specific components may be more important than others in severe/difficult-to-treat asthma. Prior exacerbations, short-acting β2-agonist use, lung function, and (in adolescents/adults) the Asthma Therapy Assessment Questionnaire were independent predictors of exacerbations.

Sublingual allergen immunotherapy: mode of action and its relationship with the safety profile

Allergen immunotherapy reorients inappropriate immune responses in allergic patients. Sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT) has been approved, notably in the European Union, as an effective alternative to subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT) for allergic rhinitis patients. Compared with SCIT, SLIT has a better safety profile. This is possibly because oral antigen-presenting cells (mostly Langerhans and myeloid dendritic cells) exhibit a tolerogenic phenotype, despite constant exposure to danger signals from food and microbes. This reduces the induction of pro-inflammatory immune responses leading to systemic allergic reactions. Oral tissues contain relatively few mast cells and eosinophils (mostly located in submucosal areas) and, in comparison with subcutaneous tissue, are less likely to give rise to anaphylactic reactions. SLIT-associated immune responses include the induction of circulating, allergen-specific Th1 and regulatory CD4+ T cells, leading to clinical tolerance. Although 40-75% of patients receiving SLIT experience mild, transient local reactions in the oral mucosa, these primary reactions rarely necessitate dose reduction or treatment interruption. We discuss 11 published case reports of anaphylaxis (all nonfatal) diagnosed according to the World Allergy Organization criteria and relate this figure to the approximately 1 billion SLIT doses administered worldwide since 2000. Anaphylaxis risk factors associated with SCIT and/or SLIT should be characterized further.

Practical guide to skin prick tests in allergy to aeroallergens

This pocket guide is the result of a consensus reached between members of the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA(2) LEN) and Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA). The aim of the current pocket guide is to offer a comprehensive set of recommendations on the use of skin prick tests in allergic rhinitis-conjunctivitis and asthma in daily practice. This pocket guide is meant to give simple answers to the most frequent questions raised by practitioners in Europe, including 'practicing allergists', general practitioners and any other physicians with special interest in the management of allergic diseases. It is not a long or detailed scientific review of the topic. However, the recommendations in this pocket guide were compiled following an in-depth review of existing guidelines and publications, including the 1993 European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology position paper, the 2001 ARIA document and the ARIA update 2008 (prepared in collaboration with GA(2) LEN). The recommendations cover skin test methodology and interpretation, allergen extracts to be used, as well as indications in a variety of settings including paediatrics and developing countries.