Search

Severe inherited alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency (AATD) is an autosomal genetic condition linked to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The significance of heterozygous, milder deficiency variants (PiSZ, PiMZ, PiMS) is less clear. We studied AATD genotypes in 145 children (up to 72 months old) with assessed wheezing severity using the Pediatric Respiratory Assessment Measure (BCCH PRAM score). A control group of 74 children without airway obstruction was included. AAT concentration and Pi phenotype were determined from dry blood spot samples using nephelometry and real-time PCR; PiS and PiZ alleles were identified by isoelectrofocusing. Among the wheezers, the Pi*S allele incidence was 2.07% (3 cases) and the Pi*Z allele was 6.9% (10 cases). The Pi*Z allele frequency was higher in wheezers compared to controls (44.8% vs. 20.27%) and the general Lithuanian population (44.8% vs. 13.6%) and was similar to adult COPD patients in Lithuania: Pi*S 10.3% vs. 15.8% and Pi*Z 44.8% vs. 46.1%. No association was found between AAT genotypes and wheezing severity. Finding that wheezer children exhibit a frequency of Z* and S* alleles like that found in adults with COPD suggests a potential genetic predisposition that links early wheezing in children to the development of COPD in adulthood. Larger cohort studies are needed to confirm this finding.

The traditional healthcare model is focused on diseases (medicine and natural science) and does not acknowledge patients' resources and abilities to be experts in their own lives based on their lived experiences. Improving healthcare safety, quality, and coordination, as well as quality of life, is an important aim in the care of patients with chronic conditions. Person-centered care needs to ensure that people's values and preferences guide clinical decisions. This paper reviews current knowledge to develop (1) digital care pathways for rhinitis and asthma multimorbidity and (2) digitally enabled, person-centered care. 1 It combines all relevant research evidence, including the so-called real-world evidence, with the ultimate goal to develop digitally enabled, patient-centered care. The paper includes (1) Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA), a 2-decade journey, (2) Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), the evidence-based model of guidelines in airway diseases, (3) mHealth impact on airway diseases, (4) From guidelines to digital care pathways, (5) Embedding Planetary Health, (6) Novel classification of rhinitis and asthma, (7) Embedding real-life data with population-based studies, (8) The ARIA-EAACI (European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology) strategy for the management of airway diseases using digital biomarkers, (9) Artificial intelligence, (10) The development of digitally enabled, ARIA person-centered care, and (11) The political agenda. The ultimate goal is to propose ARIA 2024 guidelines centered around the patient to make them more applicable and sustainable., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Rationale: It is unclear how each individual asthma symptom is associated with asthma diagnosis or control., Objectives: To assess the performance of individual asthma symptoms in the identification of patients with asthma and their association with asthma control., Methods: In this cross-sectional study, we assessed real-world data using the MASK-air ® app. We compared the frequency of occurrence of five asthma symptoms (dyspnea, wheezing, chest tightness, fatigue and night symptoms, as assessed by the Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test [CARAT] questionnaire) in patients with probable, possible or no current asthma. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of each symptom, and assessed the association between each symptom and asthma control (measured using the e-DASTHMA score). Results were validated in a sample of patients with a physician-established diagnosis of asthma., Measurement and Main Results: We included 951 patients (2153 CARAT assessments), with 468 having probable asthma, 166 possible asthma and 317 no evidence of asthma. Wheezing displayed the highest specificity (90.5%) and positive predictive value (90.8%). In patients with probable asthma, dyspnea and chest tightness were more strongly associated with asthma control than other symptoms. Dyspnea was the symptom with the highest sensitivity (76.1%) and the one consistently associated with the control of asthma as assessed by e-DASTHMA. Consistent results were observed when assessing patients with a physician-made diagnosis of asthma., Conclusions: Wheezing and chest tightness were the asthma symptoms with the highest specificity for asthma diagnosis, while dyspnea displayed the highest sensitivity and strongest association with asthma control., (© 2024 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Allergy published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology.)

Monitoring is a major component of asthma management in children. Regular monitoring allows for diagnosis confirmation, treatment optimization, and natural history review. Numerous factors that may affect disease activity and patient well-being need to be monitored: response and adherence to treatment, disease control, disease progression, comorbidities, quality of life, medication side-effects, allergen and irritant exposures, diet and more. However, the prioritization of such factors and the selection of relevant assessment tools is an unmet need. Furthermore, rapidly developing technologies promise new opportunities for closer, or even "real-time," monitoring between visits. Following an approach that included needs assessment, evidence appraisal, and Delphi consensus, the PeARL Think Tank, in collaboration with major international professional and patient organizations, has developed a set of 24 recommendations on pediatric asthma monitoring, to support healthcare professionals in decision-making and care pathway design., (© 2024 The Authors. Pediatric Allergy and Immunology published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: It has been reported that the disease-initiated and disease-mediated effects of aerosol pollutants can be related to concentration, site of deposition, duration of exposure, as well as the specific chemical composition of pollutants., Objectives: To investigate the microelemental composition of dust aggregates in primary schools of Vilnius and determine trace elements related to acute upper respiratory infections among 6-to 11-year-old children., Methods: Microelemental analysis of aerosol pollution was performed using dust samples collected in the classrooms of 11 primary schools in Vilnius from 2016 to 2020. Sites included areas of its natural accumulation behind the radiator heaters and from the surface of high cupboards. The concentrations of heavy metals (Pb, W, Sb, Sn, Zr, Zn, Cu, Ni, Mn, Cr, V, and As) in dust samples were analyzed using a SPECTRO XEPOS spectrometer. The annual incidence rates of respiratory diseases in children of each school were calculated based on data from medical records., Results: The mean annual incidence of physician-diagnosed acute upper respiratory infections (J00-J06 according to ICD-10A) among younger school-age children was between 25.1 and 71.3% per school. A significant correlation was found between vanadium concentration and the number of episodes of acute upper respiratory infections during each study year from 2016 to 2020. The lowest was r = 0.67 ( p  = 0.024), and the highest was r = 0.82 ( p  = 0.002). The concentration of vanadium in the samples of dust aggregates varied from 12.7 to 52.1 parts per million (ppm). No significant correlations between the other trace elements and the incidence of upper respiratory infections were found, which could be caused by a small number of study schools and relatively low concentrations of other heavy metals found in the samples of indoor dust aggregates., Conclusion: A significant and replicable correlation was found between the concentration of vanadium in the samples of natural dust aggregates collected in primary schools and the incidence of acute upper respiratory infections in children. Monitoring the concentration of heavy metals in the indoor environment can be an important instrument for the prevention and control of respiratory morbidity in children., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Prokopciuk, Taminskiene, Vaideliene, Juskiene, Svist, Valiulyte, Valskys, Valskiene, Valiulis, Aukstikalnis, Vaidelys, Butikis, Norkuniene, Tarasiuk and Valiulis.)

The main objective of this study is to thoroughly evaluate the diversity and sources of heavy metals in the school environment. Specifically, this study examines the presence of heavy metals in the dust found and collected from 24 schools in Vilnius. Employing hierarchical cluster analysis, principal component analysis, and positive matrix factorization, we identified combustion-related activities as primary contributors to elevated metal concentrations, notably zinc, scandium, and copper, with PM2.5/PM10 ratios indicating a combustion source. They reveal significant differences in the levels of elements such as arsenic (4.55-69.96 mg/kg), copper (51.28-395.37 mg/kg), zinc, and lead, which are affected by both local environmental factors and human activities. Elevated pollution levels were found in certain school environments, indicating environmental degradation. Pollution assessment and specific element pairings' strong positive correlations suggested shared origins or deposition processes. While this study primarily assesses non-carcinogenic risks to children based on a health risk assessment model, it acknowledges the well-documented carcinogenic potential of substances such as lead and arsenic. The research emphasizes the immediate necessity for efficient pollution management in educational environments, as indicated by the elevated hazard index for substances such as lead and arsenic, which present non-carcinogenic risks to children. This research offers important insights into the composition and origins of dust pollution in schools. It also promotes the need for broader geographic sampling and prolonged data collection to improve our understanding of pollution sources, alongside advocating for actionable strategies such as environmental management and policy reforms to effectively reduce exposure risks in educational settings. Furthermore, it aims to develop specific strategies to safeguard the health of students in Vilnius and similar urban areas.

Background and objectives: Respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) frequently necessitates respiratory support. While non-invasive methods are typically the preferred approach, mechanical ventilation becomes necessary for patients with insufficient response. Our study aimed to compare two common respiratory support modes, volume-targeted mechanical ventilation and non-invasive ventilation continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), using electrical impedance tomography. Materials and Methods : Infants with very low birth weight and gestational ages of less than 32 weeks were eligible for inclusion in the study. All enrolled infants were beyond the transitional period (>72 h of age). The infants were divided into two groups: infants receiving invasive respiratory support through an endotracheal tube and infants receiving non-invasive respiratory support. We used electrical impedance tomography to assess end-expiratory lung impedance (EELZ), DeltaZ, heterogeneity, and regional ventilation distribution. Patients were evaluated at 0, 30, and 60 min after assuming the supine position to examine potential time-related effects. Results : Our study initially enrolled 97 infants, and the final analysis included a cohort of 72 infants. Ventilated infants exhibited significantly larger EELZ compared to their non-invasive counterparts ( p = 0.026). DeltaZ was also greater in the invasive respiratory support group ( p < 0.001). Heterogeneity was higher in the non-invasive group and did not change significantly over time. The non-invasive group demonstrated significantly greater ventilation in the dependent lung areas compared to intubated patients ( p = 0.005). Regional distribution in the left lung was lower than in the right lung in both groups; however, this difference was significantly more pronounced in intubated patients ( p < 0.001). Conclusions : Our study revealed that volume-targeted mechanical ventilation results in higher EELZ and DeltaZ compared to spontaneously breathing infants receiving non-invasive respiratory support. However, lung heterogeneity was lower during mechanical ventilation. Our study also reaffirmed that spontaneous breathing promotes greater involvement of the dependent lung compared to mechanical ventilation.

Objective: The rising global epidemic of childhood obesity is a major public health challenge. Despite the urgency, there is a lack of data on the awareness and implementation of preventative measures. The aim of this study was to identify areas for improvement in the prevention and management of childhood obesity worldwide., Methods: A cross-sectional electronic survey was distributed to 132 members of national pediatric societies of the International Pediatric Association., Results: Twenty-eight (21.2%) participants, each from a different country across six World Health Organization (WHO) regions completed the survey. Most participants reported that national prevalence data of childhood obesity is available (78.6%), and the number increased during the Coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic (60.7%). In most countries (78.6%), the amount of sugar and salt in children’s products is provided but only 42.9% enacted regulations on children-targeted advertising. Childhood obesity prevention programs from the government (64.3%) and schools (53.6%) are available with existing support from private or non-profit organizations (71.4%). Participants were aware of WHO’s guidance concerning childhood obesity (78.6%), while fewer were aware of The United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund’s (UNICEF) guidance (50%). Participants reported that WHO/UNICEF guidance acted as a reference to develop policies, regulations and national programs. However, progress was hindered by poor compliance. Lastly, participants provided suggestions on tackling obesity, with responses ranging from developing and reinforcing policies, involvement of schools, and prevention across all life stages., Conclusion: There are different practices in implementing prevention measures to counter childhood obesity globally, particularly in statutory regulation on food advertising and national programs. While support and awareness was relatively high, implementation was hindered. This reflects the need for prompt, country-specific evaluation and interventions., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: None declared., (©Copyright 2024 by Turkish Society for Pediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes / The Journal of Clinical Research in Pediatric Endocrinology published by Galenos Publishing House.)

Aim: To assess fatigue in children aged 2-17 years with asthma from both child and parent perspectives and describe associated factors., Methods: Fatigue scores were self-reported by children aged 5-17 years old and proxy-reported by parents or carers for all children. The Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory Multidimensional Fatigue Scale was used. Fatigue scores ranged from 0 to 100, higher scores meant less fatigue., Results: There were 527 children and parents enrolled. The mean overall fatigue score by self-report was 72.7 ± 15.8 and by proxy report was 75.8 ± 16.3. Self-reported fatigue score was lower in children aged 5-7 years (71.5 ± 15.9) compared to proxy-reported score (76.3 ± 15.5). Proxy and self-reported fatigue scores were similar between parents and older children. Fatigue scores were lower in association with poor asthma control and receipt of social support. Lower self-reported, but not proxy-reported, fatigue score was related to asthma severity. Lower proxy-reported, but not self-reported, fatigue score was related to the child being older and having shortness of breath., Conclusion: Parents underestimated the fatigue of younger children aged 5-7 years, but fatigue scores were similar between parents and older children. Both clinical and social factors are associated with fatigue in children with asthma., (© 2023 Foundation Acta Paediatrica. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: In allergic rhinitis and asthma, adolescents and young adult patients are likely to differ from older patients. We compared adolescents, young adults and adults on symptoms, control levels, and medication adherence., Methods: In a cross-sectional study (2015-2022), we assessed European users of the MASK-air mHealth app of three age groups: adolescents (13-18 years), young adults (18-26 years), and adults (>26 years). We compared them on their reported rhinitis and asthma symptoms, use and adherence to rhinitis and asthma treatment and app adherence. Allergy symptoms and control were assessed by means of visual analogue scales (VASs) on rhinitis or asthma, the combined symptom-medication score (CSMS), and the electronic daily control score for asthma (e-DASTHMA). We built multivariable regression models to compare symptoms or medication accounting for potential differences in demographic characteristics and baseline severity., Results: We assessed 965 adolescent users (15,252 days), 4595 young adults (58,161 days), and 15,154 adult users (258,796 days). Users of all three age groups displayed similar app adherence. In multivariable models, age groups were not found to significantly differ in their adherence to rhinitis or asthma medication. These models also found that adolescents reported lower VAS on global allergy, ocular, and asthma symptoms (as well as lower CSMS) than young adults and adults., Conclusions: Adolescents reported a better rhinitis and asthma control than young adults and adults, even though similar medication adherence levels were observed across age groups. These results pave the way for future studies on understanding how adolescents control their allergic diseases., (© 2024 The Authors. Pediatric Allergy and Immunology published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The advancement of technology and the increasing digitisation of healthcare systems have opened new opportunities to transform the delivery of child health services. The importance of interoperable electronic health data in enhancing healthcare systems and improving child health care is evident. Interoperability ensures seamless data exchange and communication among healthcare entities, providers, institutions, household and systems. Using standardised data formats, coding systems, and terminologies is crucial in achieving interoperability and overcoming the barriers of different systems, formats, and locations. Paediatricians and other child health stakeholders can effectively address data structure, coding, and terminology inconsistencies by promoting interoperability and improving data quality and accuracy of children and youth, according to guidelines of the World Health Organisation. Thus, ensure comprehensive health assessments and screenings for children, including timely follow-up and communication of results. And implement effective vaccination schedules and strategies, ensuring timely administration of vaccines and prompt response to any concerns or adverse events. Developmental milestones can be continuously monitored. This can improve care coordination, enhance decision-making, and optimise health outcomes for children. In conclusion, using interoperable electronic child health data holds great promise in advancing international child healthcare systems and enhancing the child's care and well-being. By promoting standardised data exchange, interoperability enables timely health assessments, accurate vaccination schedules, continuous monitoring of developmental milestones, coordination of care, and collaboration among child healthcare professionals and the individual or their caregiver. Embracing interoperability is essential for creating a person-centric and data-driven healthcare ecosystem where the potential of digitalisation and innovation can be fully realized., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (© 2023 Siderius, Perera, Gelander, Jankauskaite, Katz, Valiulis, Hadjipanayis, Reali and Grossman.)

Background: EQ-5D-5L (EuroQOL, 5 Domains, 5 Levels) is a widely used health-related quality-of-life instrument, comprising 5 domains. However, it is not known how each domain is impacted by rhinitis or asthma control., Objective: To assess the association between rhinitis or asthma control and the different EQ-5D-5L domains using data from the MASK-air mHealth app., Methods: In this cross-sectional study, we assessed data from all MASK-air users (2015-2021; 24 countries). For the levels of each EQ-5D-5L domain, we assessed rhinitis and asthma visual analog scales (VASs) and the combined symptom-medication score (CSMS). We built ordinal multivariable models assessing the adjusted association between VAS/CSMS values and the levels of each EQ-5D-5L domain. Finally, we compared EQ-5D-5L data from users with rhinitis and self-reported asthma with data from users with rhinitis alone., Results: We assessed 5354 days from 3092 users. We observed an association between worse control of rhinitis or asthma (higher VASs and CSMS) and worse EQ-5D-5L levels. In multivariable models, all VASs and the CSMS were associated with higher levels of pain/discomfort and daily activities. For anxiety/depression, the association was mostly observed for rhinitis-related tools (VAS nose, VAS global, and CSMS), although the presence of self-reported asthma was also associated with worse anxiety/depression. Worse mobility ("walking around") was particularly associated with VAS asthma and with the presence of asthma., Conclusions: A worse rhinitis control and a worse asthma control are associated with higher EQ-5D-5L levels, particularly regarding pain/discomfort and activity impairment. Worse rhinitis control is associated with worse anxiety/depression, and poor asthma control with worse mobility., (Copyright © 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Eight million Ukrainians have taken refuge in the European Union. Many have asthma and/or allergic rhinitis and/or urticaria, and around 100,000 may have a severe disease. Cultural and language barriers are a major obstacle to appropriate management. Two widely available mHealth apps, MASK-air® (Mobile Airways Sentinel NetworK) for the management of rhinitis and asthma and CRUSE® (Chronic Urticaria Self Evaluation) for patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria, were updated to include Ukrainian versions that make the documented information available to treating physicians in their own language. The Ukrainian patients fill in the questionnaires and daily symptom-medication scores for asthma, rhinitis (MASK-air) or urticaria (CRUSE) in Ukrainian. Then, following the GDPR, patients grant their physician access to the app by scanning a QR code displayed on the physician's computer enabling the physician to read the app contents in his/her own language. This service is available freely. It takes less than a minute to show patient data to the physician in the physician's web browser. UCRAID-developed by ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma) and UCARE (Urticaria Centers of Reference and Excellence)-is under the auspices of the Ukraine Ministry of Health as well as European (European Academy of Allergy and Clinical immunology, EAACI, European Respiratory Society, ERS, European Society of Dermatologic Research, ESDR) and national societies., (© 2023 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Adherence to controller medication is a major problem in asthma management, being difficult to assess and tackle. mHealth apps can be used to assess adherence. We aimed to assess the adherence to inhaled corticosteroids+long-acting β2-agonists (ICS+LABA) in users of the MASK-air® app, comparing the adherence to ICS+formoterol (ICS+F) with that to ICS+other LABA., Materials and Methods: We analysed complete weeks of MASK-air® data (2015-2022; 27 countries) from patients with self-reported asthma and ICS+LABA use. We compared patients reporting ICS+F versus ICS+other LABA on adherence levels, symptoms and symptom-medication scores. We built regression models to assess whether adherence to ICS+LABA was associated with asthma control or short-acting beta-agonist (SABA) use. Sensitivity analyses were performed considering the weeks with no more than one missing day., Results: In 2598 ICS+LABA users, 621 (23.9%) reported 4824 complete weeks and 866 (33.3%) reported weeks with at most one missing day. Higher adherence (use of medication ≥80% of weekly days) was observed for ICS+other LABA (75.1%) when compared to ICS+F (59.3%), despite both groups displaying similar asthma control and work productivity. The ICS+other LABA group was associated with more days of SABA use than the ICS+F group (median=71.4% versus 57.1% days). Each additional weekly day of ICS+F use was associated with a 4.1% less risk in weekly SABA use (95%CI=-6.5;-1.6%;p=0.001). For ICS+other LABA, the percentage was 8.2 (95%CI=-11.6;-5.0%;p<0.001)., Conclusions: In asthma patients adherent to the MASK-air app, adherence to ICS+LABA was high. ICS+F users reported lower adherence but also a lower SABA use and a similar level of control., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest JS reports grants and personal fees from SANOFI, personal fees from GSK, personal fees from NOVARTIS, personal fees from ASTRA ZENECA, personal fees from MUNDIPHARMA, personal fees from FAES FARMA, outside the submitted work. BS reports personal fees from Polpharma, personal fees from Viatris, grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from TEVA, personal fees from patient ombudsman, personal fees from Polish Allergology Society, grants from GSK, outside the submitted work. SBA reports grants from TEVA, personal fees from TEVA, personal fees from TEVA, personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from GSK, personal fees from Sanofi, personal fees from Mylan, personal fees from Menarini, outside the submitted work. BG reports grants from Chiesi, grants from Sandoz, grants from GSK, grants from AstraZeneca, grants from Deva, grants from Abdi İbrahim, outside the submitted work. RL reports grants and personal fees from AZ, grants and personal fees from GSK, grants from Chiesi, outside the submitted work. MK reports personal fees from Astra Zeneca, personal fees from Chiesi, personal fees from GSK, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Berlin Chemie, personal fees from Zentiva, personal fees from Allergopharma, personal fees from LEK-AM, personal fees from Polpharma, personal fees from Teva, personal fees from Sanofi, personal fees from Adamed, personal fees from Sandoz, personal fees from EMMA, outside the submitted work. FDB reports other from NOVARTIS, other from ALK, other from STALLERGENES, other from REGENERON, other from DBV, other from SANOFI, other from BOEHRINGER, other from ASTRAZENECA, outside the submitted work. CSU reports grants and personal fees from AZ, personal fees from GSK, personal fees from TEVA, grants and personal fees from Sanofi, grants and personal fees from BI, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees and non-financial support from Orion Pharma, personal fees from Chiesi, personal fees from TFF Pharmaceuticals, personal fees from Takeda, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Covis Pharma, outside the submitted work. NP reports grants from Capricare, personal fees from Nestle, personal fees from Numil, personal fees from Vianex, outside the submitted work. FR reports personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Sanofi, personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from GSK, personal fees from Medinfar, personal fees from Azentis, outside the submitted work. TZ reports grants and personal fees from Novartis, grants and personal fees from Henkel, personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from FAES, personal fees from Astra Zeneca, personal fees from AbbVie, personal fees from ALK, personal fees from Almirall, personal fees from Astellas, personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from Bencard, personal fees from Berlin Chemie, personal fees from FAES, personal fees from Hal, personal fees from Leti, personal fees from Mesa, personal fees from Menarini, personal fees from Merck, personal fees from MSD, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Sanofi, personal fees from Stallergenes, personal fees from Takeda, personal fees from Teva, personal fees from UCB, personal fees from Henkel, personal fees from Kryolan, personal fees from L'Oreal, outside the submitted work; and Organizational affiliations: Commitee member: WHO-Initiative "Allergic Rhinitis and Its Impact on Asthma" (ARIA); Member of the Board: German Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI); Head: European Centre for Allergy Research Foundation (ECARF); President: Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA2LEN); Member: Committee on Allergy Diagnosis and Molecular Allergology, World Allergy Organization (WAO). AP reports grants from CHIESI, ASTRAZENECA, GSK, SANOFI, personal fees from CHIESI, ASTRAZENECA, GSK, NOVARTIS, SANOFI, IQVIA, AVILLION, ELPEN PHARMACEUTICALS, personal fees from CHIESI, ASTRAZENECA, GSK, BI, MENARINI, NOVARTIS, ZAMBON, MUNDIPHARMA, TEVA, SANOFI, EDMOND PHARMA, IQVIA, MSD, AVILLION, ELPEN PHARMACEUTICALS, outside the submitted work. RB reports grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis and Roche, personal fees from AstraZeneca, Berlin-Chemie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Cipla, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Sanofi, Roche and Teva, outside the submitted work. LTB reports personal fees from DIATER, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from LETI, outside the submitted work. JF reports personal fees from Viatris/Mylan, personal fees from AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work; and being co-founder of an SME that develops mHealth technologies, such as digital biomarkers and has the copyright of the CARAT anda CARATkids PROM. VK reports non-financial support from Norameda, non-financial support from Berlin CHemie Menarini, outside the submitted work. NR reports grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, grants and personal fees from Novartis, grants and personal fees from GSK, personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Chiesi, grants and personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Sanofi, personal fees from Zambon, personal fees from MSD, personal fees from Austral, outside the submitted work. SB reports personal fees from Sanofi Genzyme, personal fees from AstraZeneca, grants from Auris medical, personal fees from Allergopharma, personal fees from ALK Abello, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Bencard Allergy, personal fees from Allergy Therapeutics, non-financial support from Smart Reporting, personal fees from Stryker, personal fees from MSD, personal fees from Mylan, personal fees from GSK, outside the submitted work. JB reports personal fees from Cipla, Menarini, Mylan, Novartis, Purina, Sanofi-Aventis, Teva, Uriach, other from KYomed-Innov, other from Mask-air-SAS, outside the submitted work. TH reports personal fees from Orion Pharma, outside the submitted work. LC reports personal fees from Thermofisher, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from ALK, personal fees from Sanofi, personal fees from GSK, personal fees from Astra Zeneca, outside the submitted work. LPB reports grants from Time frame: past 36 months Amgen, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, Sanofi-Regeneron, personal fees from Astra Zeneca, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Sanofi-Regeneron, personal fees from AstraZeneca, Covis, Cipla, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Merck, Sanofi, outside the submitted work. SDG reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Chiesi, grants and personal fees from GSK, grants and personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Guidotti, personal fees from Sanofi, outside the submitted work. PK reports personal fees from Adamed, personal fees from Berlin Chemie Menarini, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Glenmark, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Polpharma, personal fees from GSK, personal fees from Sanofi, personal fees from Chiesi, personal fees from Celon Pharma, outside the submitted work. AC reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Chiesi, personal fees from GSK, personal fees from Eurofarma, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Sanofi, outside the submitted work. MS reports grants from Immune Tolerance Network, grants from Medical Research Council, grants and personal fees from Allergy Therapeutics, grants and personal fees from LETI Laboratorios, grants from Revolo biotherapeutics, grants from Angany Inc, personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, outside the submitted work. GB reports personal fees from Astra Zeneca, personal fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim, personal fees from Chiesi, personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Sanofi, grants from MerckSharp&Dohme, outside the submitted work. MJ reports personal fees from ALK-Abello, personal fees from Allergopharma, personal fees from Stallergenes, personal fees from Anergis, personal fees from Allergy Therapeutics, personal fees from Leti, personal fees from HAL, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from GSK, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Teva, personal fees from Takeda, personal fees from Chiesi, outside the submitted work. DLL reports personal fees from ALK, Astrazeneca national and global, Bayer, Chiesi, Grunenthal, Grin, GSK national and global, Viatris, Menarini, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Siegfried, UCB, Carnot, grants from Abbvie, Bayer, Lilly, Sanofi, Astrazeneca, Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, Circassia, UCB, GSK, Purina institute., outside the submitted work. OP reports grants and personal fees from ALK-Abelló, grants and personal fees from Allergopharma, grants and personal fees from Stallergenes Greer, grants and personal fees from HAL Allergy Holding B.V./HAL Allergie GmbH, grants from Bencard Allergie GmbH/Allergy Therapeutics, grants from Lofarma, grants and personal fees from ASIT Biotech Tools S.A., grants and personal fees from Laboratorios LETI/LETI Pharma, grants and personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline, personal fees from ROXALL Medizin, personal fees from Novartis, grants and personal fees from Sanofi-Aventis and Sanofi-Genzyme, personal fees from Med Update Europe GmbH, personal fees from streamedup! GmbH, grants from Pohl-Boskamp, grants from Inmunotek S.L., personal fees from John Wiley and Sons, AS, personal fees from Paul-Martini-Stiftung (PMS), personal fees from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc., personal fees from RG Aerztefortbildung, personal fees from Institut für Disease Management, personal fees from Springer GmbH, grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from IQVIA Commercial, personal fees from Ingress Health, personal fees from Wort&Bild Verlag, personal fees from Verlag ME, personal fees from Procter&Gamble, personal fees from ALTAMIRA, personal fees from Meinhardt Congress GmbH, personal fees from Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, personal fees from Thieme, grants from Deutsche AllergieLiga e.V., personal fees from AeDA, personal fees from Alfried-Krupp Krankenhaus, personal fees from Red Maple Trials Inc., personal fees from TU Dresden, outside the submitted work. YO reports personal fees from Torii pharmaceutical Co., LTD., personal fees from Tanabe-Mitsubishi Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., personal fees from Kirin Holdings Co., Ltd., personal fees from Novartis Co., Ltd., personal fees from Allergologisk Laboratorium København, personal fees from Shionogi Co., Ltd., outside the submitted work. JCI reports personal fees and non-financial support from Laboratorios Casasco, personal fees from Abbott Ecuador, personal fees from Laboratorios Bago Bolvia, personal fees from Faes Farma, outside the submitted work. HK reports personal fees from Mylan/Viatris, personal fees from Sanofi, outside the submitted work. MO reports personal fees from Hycor Diagnostics, outside the submitted work; and Scientific Co-Founder, Tolerogenics SARL, Luxembourg. The other authors have no COIs to disclose, outside the submitted work., (Copyright © 2023 Sociedade Portuguesa de Pneumologia. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Biomarkers for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of patients with rhinitis and/or asthma are urgently needed. Although some biologic biomarkers exist in specialist care for asthma, they cannot be largely used in primary care. There are no validated biomarkers in rhinitis or allergen immunotherapy (AIT) that can be used in clinical practice. The digital transformation of health and health care (including mHealth) places the patient at the center of the health system and is likely to optimize the practice of allergy. Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) and EAACI (European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology) developed a Task Force aimed at proposing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as digital biomarkers that can be easily used for different purposes in rhinitis and asthma. It first defined control digital biomarkers that should make a bridge between clinical practice, randomized controlled trials, observational real-life studies and allergen challenges. Using the MASK-air app as a model, a daily electronic combined symptom-medication score for allergic diseases (CSMS) or for asthma (e-DASTHMA), combined with a monthly control questionnaire, was embedded in a strategy similar to the diabetes approach for disease control. To mimic real-life, it secondly proposed quality-of-life digital biomarkers including daily EQ-5D visual analogue scales and the bi-weekly RhinAsthma Patient Perspective (RAAP). The potential implications for the management of allergic respiratory diseases were proposed., (© 2023 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The self-reporting of asthma frequently leads to patient misidentification in epidemiological studies. Strategies combining the triangulation of data sources may help to improve the identification of people with asthma. We aimed to combine information from the self-reporting of asthma, medication use and symptoms to identify asthma patterns in the users of an mHealth app., Methods: We studied MASK-air® users who reported their daily asthma symptoms (assessed by a 0-100 visual analogue scale - "VAS Asthma") at least three times (either in three different months or in any period). K-means cluster analysis methods were applied to identify asthma patterns based on: (i) whether the user self-reported asthma; (ii) whether the user reported asthma medication use and (iii) VAS asthma. Clusters were compared by the number of medications used, VAS asthma levels and Control of Asthma and Allergic Rhinitis Test (CARAT) levels., Findings: We assessed a total of 8,075 MASK-air® users. The main clustering approach resulted in the identification of seven groups. These groups were interpreted as probable: (i) severe/uncontrolled asthma despite treatment (11.9-16.1% of MASK-air® users); (ii) treated and partly-controlled asthma (6.3-9.7%); (iii) treated and controlled asthma (4.6-5.5%); (iv) untreated uncontrolled asthma (18.2-20.5%); (v) untreated partly-controlled asthma (10.1-10.7%); (vi) untreated controlled asthma (6.7-8.5%) and (vii) no evidence of asthma (33.0-40.2%). This classification was validated in a study of 192 patients enrolled by physicians., Interpretation: We identified seven profiles based on the probability of having asthma and on its level of control. mHealth tools are hypothesis-generating and complement classical epidemiological approaches in identifying patients with asthma., (Copyright © 2022 Sociedade Portuguesa de Pneumologia. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To evaluate differences regarding sigh frequency between noninvasive respiratory support types and to assess regional ventilation distribution, delta Z, and end-expiratory lung impedance differences before and after sighs., Methods: Very low-birth-weight infants with gestational ages less than 32 wk were included in the study. Participants were split into two groups: those receiving continuous positive airway pressure and infants receiving high-flow nasal cannula therapy., Results: The study enrolled 30 infants. The high-flow nasal cannula therapy group had more sighs per 10-min period than infants receiving continuous positive airway pressure (p = 0.016). Ventilation distribution was similar in the anterior and right ventilation distribution compartments pre- and post-sigh (46.30% vs. 45.68% and 54.27% vs. 55.26%, respectively). No statistically significant increase in end-expiratory lung impedance or delta Z was observed in global or separate lung regions (p > 0.05)., Conclusion: The study has demonstrated that sighs are more frequent in infants receiving high-flow nasal cannula respiratory support compared to continuous positive airway pressure. Spontaneously occurring sighs on noninvasive respiratory support due to respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) do not increase end-expiratory lung impedance or alter delta Z, and appear to have limited clinical significance., Trial Registration: Prospectively registered at www., Clinicaltrials: gov , reg. No. NCT04542096, reg. date 01/09/2020., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Dr. K C Chaudhuri Foundation.)

Children and adolescents are no longer a priority in the most recent European Programme of Work (EPW) 2020-2025 of the World Health Organization (WHO) Regional Office for Europe. In this position statement we provide arguments for why we think this population should be explicitly addressed in this important and influential document. We firstly emphasize the persistent health problems and inequalities in access to care for children and adolescents that are challenging to solve, and thus require a continuous focus. Secondly, we urge the WHO to prioritize children and adolescents in their EPW due to the new and emerging health problems related to global issues. Finally, we explain why permanent prioritization of children and adolescents is essential for the future of children and of society., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (© 2023 Jansen, Brenner, Illy, Dembiński, del Torso, Grossman, Valiulis, De Guchtenaere, Mazur, Da Dalt, Størdal, Koletzko and Hadjipanayis.)

Background: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Efforts to promote the judicious use of antibiotics and contain AMR are a priority of several medical organizations, including the WHO. One effective way to achieve this goal is the deployment of antibiotic stewardship programs (ASPs). This study aimed to survey the current situation of pediatric ASPs in European countries and establish a baseline for future attempts to harmonize pediatric ASPs and antibiotic use in Europe., Methods: A web-based survey was conducted among national delegates of the European Academy of Paediatrics (EAP). The survey assessed the presence of pediatric ASPs in the representatives' countries in the inpatient and outpatient settings, the staff included in the programs, and their detailed activities regarding antibiotic use., Results: Of the 41 EAP delegates surveyed, 27 (66%) responded. Inpatient pediatric ASPs were reported in 74% (20/27) countries, and outpatient programs in 48% (13/27), with considerable variability in their composition and activities. Guidelines for managing pediatric infectious diseases were available in nearly all countries (96%), with those for neonatal infections (96%), pneumonia (93%), urinary tract (89%), peri-operative (82%), and soft tissue (70%) infections being the most common. Pediatric ASPs were reported at the national (63%), institutional (41%), and regional/local (<15%) levels. Pediatricians with infectious disease training (62%) and microbiologists (58%) were the most common members of the program personnel, followed by physician leaders (46%), infectious disease/infection control physicians (39%), pharmacists (31%), and medical director representatives (15%). Activities of the pediatric ASPs included educational programs (85%), monitoring and reporting of antibiotic use (70%) and resistance (67%), periodic audits with feedback (44%), prior approval (44%), and post-prescription review of selected antibiotic agents (33%)., Conclusion: Although pediatric ASPs exist in most European countries, their composition and activities vary considerably across countries. Initiatives to harmonize comprehensive pediatric ASPs across Europe are needed., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (© 2023 Reingold, Grossman, Hadjipanayis, Del Torso, Valiulis, Dembinski and Ashkenazi.)

Objectives: Our survey aims to highlight parents' and healthcare workers' opinions and hesitations regarding children's vaccination, identify the main factors influencing these opinions, and assess the impact of hesitations on immunisation for children, included in the National Immunisation Programme in Lithuania., Methods: We used the questionnaire developed by the European Academy of Paediatrics Research in Ambulatory Settings Network (EAPRASnet). This questionnaire is designed to assess attitudes toward vaccination. The study involved parents raising children aged 1-4 years and primary healthcare providers (paediatricians, family doctors and nurses)., Results: We analysed the completed questionnaires from a total of 329 parents (142 fathers, 187 mothers) and 386 medical personnel (150 physicians, 236 nurses). Most parents expressed positive opinions about vaccines (> 8 points out of 10 possible), with older parents exhibiting more favourable attitudes. Compared to mothers, fathers showed more criticism regarding the information provided by physicians (p = 0.04). Family doctors and paediatricians were more supportive of vaccination than nurses and homoeopaths (p < 0.001). Parents and healthcare providers with higher education showed statistically significantly stronger opinions about the benefits of vaccines than those with lower education levels (p = 0.01 for parents, p < 0.001 for physicians and nurses). The Internet was identified as the primary source of negative information for both parents (69.6%) and healthcare providers (86%). However, verbal information received from medical staff during patient consultations or informal conversations among colleagues had the greatest impact on parents' opinions (17.3%) and medical personnel (35.5%)., Conclusions: Confidential conversations with physicians and nurses remain the most trustworthy sources of information and influential factors shaping opinions. The Internet serves as the primary source of inaccurate information about vaccinations for both parents and medical professionals, although verbal information from primary healthcare providers has a more significant impact on vaccination attitudes. Discrepancies in basic education and specific knowledge about vaccination within the same family can pose additional obstacles to child vaccination.

Asthma, rhinitis, and atopic dermatitis (AD) are interrelated clinical phenotypes that partly overlap in the human interactome. The concept of "one-airway-one-disease," coined over 20 years ago, is a simplistic approach of the links between upper- and lower-airway allergic diseases. With new data, it is time to reassess the concept. This article reviews (i) the clinical observations that led to Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA), (ii) new insights into polysensitization and multimorbidity, (iii) advances in mHealth for novel phenotype definitions, (iv) confirmation in canonical epidemiologic studies, (v) genomic findings, (vi) treatment approaches, and (vii) novel concepts on the onset of rhinitis and multimorbidity. One recent concept, bringing together upper- and lower-airway allergic diseases with skin, gut, and neuropsychiatric multimorbidities, is the "Epithelial Barrier Hypothesis." This review determined that the "one-airway-one-disease" concept does not always hold true and that several phenotypes of disease can be defined. These phenotypes include an extreme "allergic" (asthma) phenotype combining asthma, rhinitis, and conjunctivitis. Rhinitis alone and rhinitis and asthma multimorbidity represent two distinct diseases with the following differences: (i) genomic and transcriptomic background (Toll-Like Receptors and IL-17 for rhinitis alone as a local disease; IL-33 and IL-5 for allergic and non-allergic multimorbidity as a systemic disease), (ii) allergen sensitization patterns (mono- or pauci-sensitization versus polysensitization), (iii) severity of symptoms, and (iv) treatment response. In conclusion, rhinitis alone (local disease) and rhinitis with asthma multimorbidity (systemic disease) should be considered as two distinct diseases, possibly modulated by the microbiome, and may be a model for understanding the epidemics of chronic and autoimmune diseases., (© 2023 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: In clinical and epidemiological studies, cutoffs of patient-reported outcome measures can be used to classify patients into groups of statistical and clinical relevance. However, visual analog scale (VAS) cutoffs in MASK-air have not been tested., Objective: To calculate cutoffs for VAS global, nasal, ocular, and asthma symptoms., Methods: In a cross-sectional study design of all MASK-air participants, we compared (1) approaches based on the percentiles (tertiles or quartiles) of VAS distributions and (2) data-driven approaches based on clusters of data from 2 comparators (VAS work and VAS sleep). We then performed sensitivity analyses for individual countries and for VAS levels corresponding to full allergy control. Finally, we tested the different approaches using MASK-air real-world cross-sectional and longitudinal data to assess the most relevant cutoffs., Results: We assessed 395,223 days from 23,201 MASK-air users with self-reported allergic rhinitis. The percentile-oriented approach resulted in lower cutoff values than the data-driven approach. We obtained consistent results in the data-driven approach. Following the latter, the proposed cutoff differentiating "controlled" and "partly-controlled" patients was similar to the cutoff value that had been arbitrarily used (20/100). However, a lower cutoff was obtained to differentiate between "partly-controlled" and "uncontrolled" patients (35 vs the arbitrarily-used value of 50/100)., Conclusions: Using a data-driven approach, we were able to define cutoff values for MASK-air VASs on allergy and asthma symptoms. This may allow for a better classification of patients with rhinitis and asthma according to different levels of control, supporting improved disease management., (Copyright © 2022 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

In 2021, concentrations of heavy metals (Ba, Cr, Fe, Mn, Pb, Ru, Sr, Zn, Zr) and radiocesium ( 137 Cs) were measured in 13 locations in Vilnius in surface samples of walls and facades of buildings built of yellow bricks in order to evaluate possible aerosol air pollution due to sandblasting. The activity concentrations of 137 Cs appeared there as a result of global fallout and precipitation of the products of the accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, and the concentration of Pb, as a component of road transport emissions. Other trace elements turned out to be impurities in the material of yellow bricks. In spring 2018, sandblasting of the walls of the building adjacent to the school led to the long-term significant aerosol contamination of school premises (up to 660 µg/m 3 ). Due to sandblasting, the surface of the school sport yard was covered with a thin layer of scraped particles, which were transported by gusts of wind into the school premises. Sandblasting of walls and facades can also be a source of aerosols with 137 Cs activity concentrations reaching ~ 40 Bq/kg and Pb - up to 98 ppm. Estimates show that along with 137 Cs, the formation of aerosols with activity concentrations of 239, 240 Pu reaching 1.6 Bq/kg is possible. Isotopes of 239, 240 Pu are analogues of calcium and, when ingested, are deposited in the bones. The ingress of radioactive aerosols into the respiratory tract, especially of children of primary school age, creates additional risks of malignant diseases., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Introduction: Data from mHealth apps can provide valuable information on rhinitis control and treatment patterns. However, in MASK-air®, these data have only been analyzed cross-sectionally, without considering the changes of symptoms over time. We analyzed data from MASK-air® longitudinally, clustering weeks according to reported rhinitis symptoms., Methods: We analyzed MASK-air® data, assessing the weeks for which patients had answered a rhinitis daily questionnaire on all 7 days. We firstly used k-means clustering algorithms for longitudinal data to define clusters of weeks according to the trajectories of reported daily rhinitis symptoms. Clustering was applied separately for weeks when medication was reported or not. We compared obtained clusters on symptoms and rhinitis medication patterns. We then used the latent class mixture model to assess the robustness of results., Results: We analyzed 113,239 days (16,177 complete weeks) from 2590 patients (mean age ± SD = 39.1 ± 13.7 years). The first clustering algorithm identified ten clusters among weeks with medication use: seven with low variability in rhinitis control during the week and three with highly-variable control. Clusters with poorly-controlled rhinitis displayed a higher frequency of rhinitis co-medication, a more frequent change of medication schemes and more pronounced seasonal patterns. Six clusters were identified in weeks when no rhinitis medication was used, displaying similar control patterns. The second clustering method provided similar results. Moreover, patients displayed consistent levels of rhinitis control, reporting several weeks with similar levels of control., Conclusions: We identified 16 patterns of weekly rhinitis control. Co-medication and medication change schemes were common in uncontrolled weeks, reinforcing the hypothesis that patients treat themselves according to their symptoms., (© 2022 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Validated questionnaires are used to assess asthma control over the past 1-4 weeks from reporting. However, they do not adequately capture asthma control in patients with fluctuating symptoms. Using the Mobile Airways Sentinel Network for airway diseases (MASK-air) app, we developed and validated an electronic daily asthma control score (e-DASTHMA)., Methods: We used MASK-air data (freely available to users in 27 countries) to develop and assess different daily control scores for asthma. Data-driven control scores were developed based on asthma symptoms reported by a visual analogue scale (VAS) and self-reported asthma medication use. We included the daily monitoring data from all MASK-air users aged 16-90 years (or older than 13 years to 90 years in countries with a lower age of digital consent) who had used the app in at least 3 different calendar months and had reported at least 1 day of asthma medication use. For each score, we assessed construct validity, test-retest reliability, responsiveness, and accuracy. We used VASs on dyspnoea and work disturbance, EQ-5D-VAS, Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test (CARAT), CARAT asthma, and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Allergy Specific (WPAI:AS) questionnaires as comparators. We performed an internal validation using MASK-air data from Jan 1 to Oct 12, 2022, and an external validation using a cohort of patients with physician-diagnosed asthma (the INSPIRERS cohort) who had had their diagnosis and control (Global Initiative for Asthma [GINA] classification) of asthma ascertained by a physician., Findings: We studied 135 635 days of MASK-air data from 1662 users from May 21, 2015, to Dec 31, 2021. The scores were strongly correlated with VAS dyspnoea (Spearman correlation coefficient range 0·68-0·82) and moderately correlated with work comparators and quality-of-life-related comparators (for WPAI:AS work, we observed Spearman correlation coefficients of 0·59-0·68). They also displayed high test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients range 0·79-0·95) and moderate-to-high responsiveness (correlation coefficient range 0·69-0·79; effect size measures range 0·57-0·99 in the comparison with VAS dyspnoea). The best-performing score displayed a strong correlation with the effect of asthma on work and school activities in the INSPIRERS cohort (Spearman correlation coefficients 0·70; 95% CI 0·61-0·78) and good accuracy for the identification of patients with uncontrolled or partly controlled asthma according to GINA (area under the receiver operating curve 0·73; 95% CI 0·68-0·78)., Interpretation: e-DASTHMA is a good tool for the daily assessment of asthma control. This tool can be used as an endpoint in clinical trials as well as in clinical practice to assess fluctuations in asthma control and guide treatment optimisation., Funding: None., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests IA is an associate editor for Allergy and Clinical and Translational Allergy journals. RAl reports personal fees from operation POCI-01–0145–36 FEDER-029130 (titled “mINSPIRE-mHealth to measure and improve adherence to medication in chronic respiratory diseases—generalisation and evaluation of gamification, peer support and advanced image processing technologies”), co-funded by European Regional Development Fund, Programa Operacional Competitividade e Internacionalização, Portugal 2020, and by Portuguese Funds through Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, outside the submitted work. SB-A reports grants from TEVA, and personal fees from Teva, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Sanofi, and Mylan, outside the submitted work. L-PB reports grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, and Sanofi-Regeneron; personal fees from AstraZeneca, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Sanofi-Regeneron, Covis, and Sanofi, outside the submitted work; and is a member of the Chair of Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Board of Directors, President of the Global Asthma Organisation (Interasma), and is a member of the Canadian Thoracic Society Respiratory Guidelines Committee and Laval University Chair on Knowledge Transfer, and Prevention and Education in Respiratory and Cardiovascular Health. JB reports personal fees from Chiesi, Cipla, Hikma, Menarini, Mundipharma, Mylan, Novartis, Purina, Sanofi-Aventis, Takeda, Teva, and Uriach; and other from Kyomed-Innov, outside the submitted work. GB reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, and Sanofi, outside the submitted work. RB reports grants to Mainz University Hospital from Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, and Roche; and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Berlin-Chemie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Cipla, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, and Teva, all outside the submitted work. LC reports personal fees from Thermofisher, Sanofi, Novartis, and AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work. AAC reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Eurofarma, GSK, Novartis, and Sanofi, outside the submitted work. FdB reports other grants from Novartis, ALK, Stallergenes, Regeneron, DBV, Sanofi, Boehringer, and AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work. PD reports non-financial support from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Stallergenes, and ALK Abelló; and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Chiesi, Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Menarini, Stallergenes, ALK Abelló, and IQVIA, outside the submitted work. JAF reports grants from Astrazeneca and Mundipharma; and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Mundipharma, Sanofi, GSK, and Teva, outside the submitted work; and is co-founder of a company that develops mobile health technologies and has the copyright of the Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement. BG reports grants from AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Deva, Abdi Ibrahim, and Sandoz, outside the submitted work. TH reports personal fees from Orion Pharma, outside the submitted work. GJ reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, GSK, Chiesi, Novartis, and Laparcon; support from GSK, outside the submitted work; and is a member of European Respiratory Society Chair of Operational Committee International Respiratory Coalition. MJ reports personal fees from ALK-Abello, Allergopharma, Stallergenes, Anergis, Allergy Therapeutics, Leti, and HAL, during the conduct of the study; and personal fees from GSK, Novartis, Teva, Takeda, and Chiesi, outside the submitted work. LK reports grants from Allergopharma, MEDA/Mylan, ALK Abelló, LETI Pharma, Stallergenes, Sanofi, ASIT biotech, Lofarma Quintiles, AstraZeneca, GSK, and Inmunotk; and personal fees from Allergopharma, MEDA/Mylan, HAL Allergie, LETI Pharma, Sanofi, Allergy Therapeut, and Cassella Med, outside the submitted work; and is a member of Ärzteverband Deutscher Allergologen, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Hals-Nasen-Ohren, Deutsche Akademie für Allergologie und klinische Immunologie, Berufsverband der Hals-Nasen-Ohrenärzte, Gesellschaft für Pädiatrische Allergologie, andEuropean Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. PK reports personal fees from Adamed, AstraZeneca, Berlin Chemie Menarini, FAES, Glenmark, Novartis, Polpharma, Boehringer Ingelheim, Teva, and Zentiva, outside the submitted work. MKup reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Chiesi, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Lekam, Alvogen, Emma, Nexter, Teva, Sanofi Aventis, and Berlin Chemie, outside the submitted work. VK reports non-financial support from Norameda and Berlin Chemie Menarini, outside the submitted work. DL-L reports personal fees from ALK, Allakos, Amstrong, Astrazeneca national and global, Chiesi, DBV Technologies, Grunenthal, GSK national and global, Mylan/Viatris, Menarini, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Siegfried, UCB, Alakos, Gossamer, and Carnot; and grants from Sanofi, Astrazeneca, Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, Circassia, UCB, GSK, and Purina institute, outside the submitted work. RL reports personal fees from GSK and AZ; and grants from GSK, AZ, and Chiesi, outside the submitted work. NGP reports personal fees from Novartis, Nutricia, HAL, MENARINI/FAES FARMA, SANOFI, MYLAN/MEDA, BIOMAY, AstraZeneca, GSK, MSD, ASIT BIOTECH, and Boehringer Ingelheim; and grants from Gerolymatos International SA and Capricare, outside the submitted work. AP reports grants from Chiesi, Astrazeneca, GSK, BI, Pfizer, Teva, and Sanofi; personal fees from CHIESI, Astrazeneca, GSK, Novartis, Sanofi, Iqvia, Avillion, Elpen Pharmaceuticals, BI, Menarini, Zambon, Mundipharma, Teva, Edmon Pharma, and MSD, outside the submitted work. OP reports grants from ALK Abelló, Allergopharma, Stallergenes Greer, HAL Allergy Holding BV/HAL Allergie, Bencard Allergie/Allergy Therapeutics, Lofarma, Biomay, Circassia, ASIT Biotech Tools SA, Laboratorios LETI/LETI Pharma, Anergis SA, GlaxoSmithKline, Pohl-Boskamp, Inmunotek SL, and AstraZeneca; and personal fees from ALK-Abelló, Allergopharma, Stallergenes Greer, HAL Allergy Holding BV/HAL Allergie, Bencard Allergie/Allergy Therapeutics, Lofarma, ASIT Biotech Tools SA, Laboratorios LETI/LETI Pharma, MEDA Pharma/MYLAN, Anergis SA, AstraZeneca, Mobile Chamber Experts (a GA2LEN Partner), Indoor Biotechnologies, GlaxoSmithKline, Astellas Pharma Global, EUFOREA, ROXALL Medizin, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis and Sanofi-Genzyme, Med Update Europe, streamedup!, John Wiley and Sons, AS, Paul-Martini-Stiftung, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, RG Aerztefortbildung, Institut für Disease Management, Springer, IQVIA Commercial, Ingress Health, Wort & Bild Verlag, Verlag ME, and Procter & Gamble, outside the submitted work; and is a member of EAACI Excom, member of external board of directors Deutsche Gesellschaft für Allergologie und klinische Immunologie; and is a coordinator, main author, or coauthor of different position papers and guidelines in rhinology, allergology, and allergen immunotherapy. FSR reports speaker and advisory fees from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Sanofi, GSK, Teva, Kedrion, Takeda, LEO Pharma, and Lusomedicamenta, all outside the submitted work. NR reports grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, GSK, and Pfizer; and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, GSK, AstraZeneca, Chiesi, Pfizer, Sanofi, Zambon, and MSD, outside the submitted work. JS reports grants from Sanofi; and personal fees from Sanofi, GSK, Novartis, AstraZeneca, MundiPharma, and Faes Farma, outside the submitted work. CSU reports personal fees from GSK, AZ, TEVA, Novartis, BI, Chiesi, Sanofi, Orion Pharma, and Covis Pharma; and grants from AZ, Novartis, BI, Sanofi, Orion Pharma, and Covis Pharma, outside the submitted work. OV reports grants from Astrazeneca and Chiesi, outside the submitted work. TZ reports grants from Novartis and Henkel; personal fees from Bayer Health Care, FAES, Novartis, Henkel, AstraZeneca, AbbVie, ALK, Almirall, Astellas, Bencard, Berlin Chemie, HAL, Leti, Meda, Menarini, Merck, MSD, Pfizer, Sanofi, Stallergenes, Takeda, Teva, UCB, Kryolan, and L'Oréal, outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The number of children suffering from respiratory allergies and asthma has been increasing worldwide and, hence, it is crucial to understand the burden of inhalant biological particles present in school facilities, where children spend one third of their life. From the perspective of indoor air quality, while there are numerous studies on outdoor bioaerosol exposure, there are still uncertainties regarding the diversity and deposition of airborne pollen and fungi indoors. When it comes to schools, there is limited research as to the potential bioaerosol exposure. Here we studied the indoor environment of public schools aiming to reveal whether primary schools of different sizes and at localities of different levels of urbanization may exhibit a variability in the biodiversity and abundance of particles of biological origin, which could pose a risk to child health. To achieve this, 11 schools were selected, located in a variety of environments, from downtown, to city centre-periphery, and to the suburbs. Fungal and pollen samples were collected from various surfaces in school classrooms and corridors, using passive air sampling and swab sampling. We demonstrated that fungi and pollen are detected in school premises during and after the vegetation season. The highest diversity of bioaerosols was found on the top of cabinets and windowsills, with Penicillium , Cladosporium and Acremonium being the most abundant indoors. The levels of fungi were higher in schools with more students. The diversity and amount of pollen in the spring were significantly higher than in samples collected in autumn. Our findings complemented existing evidence that bioaerosol measurements in schools (including kindergartens or informal education facilities) are vital. Hence, we here suggest that, in addition to monitoring air quality and bacterial levels indoors, fungi and pollen measurements have to be integrated in the existing regular biomonitoring campaigns so as to prevent exposure, increase awareness and manage efficiently allergic symptomatology., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

MASK-air ® , a validated mHealth app (Medical Device regulation Class IIa) has enabled large observational implementation studies in over 58,000 people with allergic rhinitis and/or asthma. It can help to address unmet patient needs in rhinitis and asthma care. MASK-air ® is a Good Practice of DG Santé on digitally-enabled, patient-centred care. It is also a candidate Good Practice of OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). MASK-air ® data has enabled novel phenotype discovery and characterisation, as well as novel insights into the management of allergic rhinitis. MASK-air ® data show that most rhinitis patients (i) are not adherent and do not follow guidelines, (ii) use as-needed treatment, (iii) do not take medication when they are well, (iv) increase their treatment based on symptoms and (v) do not use the recommended treatment. The data also show that control (symptoms, work productivity, educational performance) is not always improved by medications. A combined symptom-medication score (ARIA-EAACI-CSMS) has been validated for clinical practice and trials. The implications of the novel MASK-air ® results should lead to change management in rhinitis and asthma., (© 2023 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Allergy published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology.)

Background: Point-of-care-tests (POCTs) have been advocated to optimise care in patients with infections but their actual use varies. This study aimed to estimate the variability in the adoption of current POCTs by paediatricians across Europe, and to explore the determinants of variability., Methods and Findings: A cross-sectional survey was conducted of hospital and primary care paediatricians, recruited through professional networks. Questions focused on the availability and use of currently available POCTs. Data were analysed descriptively and using Median Odds Ratio (MOR) to measure variation between countries. Multilevel regression modelling using changes in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of models were used to assess the contribution of individual or workplace versus country level factors, to the observed variation. The commonest POCT was urine dipsticks (UD) which were available to >80% of primary care and hospital paediatricians in 68% (13/19) and 79% (23/29) countries, respectively. Availability of all POCTs varied between countries. In primary care, the country (MOR) varied from 1.61 (95%CI: 1.04-2.58) for lactate to 7.28 (95%CI: 3.04-24.35) for UD. In hospitals, the country MOR varied from 1.37 (95%CI:1.04-1.80) for lactate to 11.93 (95%CI:3.35-72.23) for UD. Most paediatricians in primary care (69%, 795/1154) and hospital (81%, 962/1188) would use a diagnostic test in the case scenario of an infant with undifferentiated fever. Multilevel regression modelling showed that the country of work was more important in predicting both the availability and use of POCTs than individual or workplace characteristics., Conclusion: There is substantial variability in the adoption of POCTs for the management of acute infections in children across Europe. To inform future implementation of both existing and innovative tests, further research is needed to understand what drives the variation between countries, the needs of frontline clinicians, and the role of diagnostic tests in the management of acute childhood infections., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2022 Dewez et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Drug repurposing is a major field of value-added medicine. It involves investigating and evaluating existing drugs for new therapeutic purposes that address unmet healthcare needs. Several unmet needs in allergic rhinitis could be improved by drug repurposing. This could be game-changing for disease management. Current medications for allergic rhinitis are centered on continuous long-term treatment, and medication registration is based on randomized controlled trials carried out for a minimum of 14 days with adherence of 70% or greater. A new way of treating allergic rhinitis is to propose as-needed treatment depending on symptoms, rather than classical continuous treatment. This rostrum will discuss existing clinical trials on as-needed treatment for allergic rhinitis and real-world data obtained by the mobile health app MASK-air, which focuses on digitally-enabled, patient-centered care pathways., (Copyright © 2022 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Digital health is an umbrella term which encompasses eHealth and benefits from areas such as advanced computer sciences. eHealth includes mHealth apps, which offer the potential to redesign aspects of healthcare delivery. The capacity of apps to collect large amounts of longitudinal, real-time, real-world data enables the progression of biomedical knowledge. Apps for rhinitis and rhinosinusitis were searched for in the Google Play and Apple App stores, via an automatic market research tool recently developed using JavaScript. Over 1500 apps for allergic rhinitis and rhinosinusitis were identified, some dealing with multimorbidity. However, only six apps for rhinitis (AirRater, AllergyMonitor, AllerSearch, Husteblume, MASK-air and Pollen App) and one for rhinosinusitis (Galenus Health) have so far published results in the scientific literature. These apps were reviewed for their validation, discovery of novel allergy phenotypes, optimisation of identifying the pollen season, novel approaches in diagnosis and management (pharmacotherapy and allergen immunotherapy) as well as adherence to treatment. Published evidence demonstrates the potential of mobile health apps to advance in the characterisation, diagnosis and management of rhinitis and rhinosinusitis patients., (© 2022 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Allergy published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology.)

Background: Several studies have suggested an impact of allergic rhinitis on academic productivity. However, large studies with real-world data (RWD) are not available., Objective: To use RWD to assess the impact of allergic rhinitis on academic performance (measured through a visual analog scale [VAS] education and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire plus Classroom Impairment Questions: Allergy Specific [WPAI+CIQ:AS] questionnaire), and to identify factors associated with the impact of allergic rhinitis on academic performance., Methods: We assessed data from the MASK-air mHealth app of users aged 13 to 29 years with allergic rhinitis. We assessed the correlation between variables measuring the impact of allergies on academic performance (VAS education, WPAI+CIQ:AS impact of allergy symptoms on academic performance, and WPAI+CIQ:AS percentage of education hours lost due to allergies) and other variables. In addition, we identified factors associated with the impact of allergic symptoms on academic productivity through multivariable mixed models., Results: A total of 13,454 days (from 1970 patients) were studied. VAS education was strongly correlated with the WPAI+CIQ:AS impact of allergy symptoms on academic productivity (Spearman correlation coefficient = 0.71 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.58; 0.80]), VAS global allergy symptoms (0.70 [95% CI = 0.68; 0.71]), and VAS nose (0.66 [95% CI = 0.65; 0.68]). In multivariable regression models, immunotherapy showed a strong negative association with VAS education (regression coefficient = -2.32 [95% CI = -4.04; -0.59]). Poor rhinitis control, measured by the combined symptom-medication score, was associated with worse VAS education (regression coefficient = 0.88 [95% CI = 0.88; 0.92]), higher impact on academic productivity (regression coefficient = 0.69 [95% CI = 0.49; 0.90]), and higher percentage of missed education hours due to allergy (regression coefficient = 0.44 [95% CI = 0.25; 0.63])., Conclusion: Allergy symptoms and worse rhinitis control are associated with worse academic productivity, whereas immunotherapy is associated with higher productivity., (Copyright © 2022 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Different treatments exist for allergic rhinitis (AR), including pharmacotherapy and allergen immunotherapy (AIT), but they have not been compared using direct patient data (i.e., "real-world data"). We aimed to compare AR pharmacological treatments on (i) daily symptoms, (ii) frequency of use in co-medication, (iii) visual analogue scales (VASs) on allergy symptom control considering the minimal important difference (MID) and (iv) the effect of AIT., Methods: We assessed the MASK-air® app data (May 2015-December 2020) by users self-reporting AR (16-90 years). We compared eight AR medication schemes on reported VAS of allergy symptoms, clustering data by the patient and controlling for confounding factors. We compared (i) allergy symptoms between patients with and without AIT and (ii) different drug classes used in co-medication., Results: We analysed 269,837 days from 10,860 users. Most days (52.7%) involved medication use. Median VAS levels were significantly higher in co-medication than in monotherapy (including the fixed combination azelastine-fluticasone) schemes. In adjusted models, azelastine-fluticasone was associated with lower average VAS global allergy symptoms than all other medication schemes, while the contrary was observed for oral corticosteroids. AIT was associated with a decrease in allergy symptoms in some medication schemes. A difference larger than the MID compared to no treatment was observed for oral steroids. Azelastine-fluticasone was the drug class with the lowest chance of being used in co-medication (adjusted OR = 0.75; 95% CI = 0.71-0.80)., Conclusion: Median VAS levels were higher in co-medication than in monotherapy. Patients with more severe symptoms report a higher treatment, which is currently not reflected in guidelines., (© 2022 European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Studies and initiatives such as the "Choosing wisely" (CW) campaign emphasise evidence-based investigations and treatment to avoid overdiagnosis and overtreatment. The perception of the extent of medical overactivity among professionals and drivers behind are not well studied in the paediatric field., Aim: We aimed to investigate the physicians' opinion and clarify the main drivers regarding medical overactivity in member countries of the European Academy of Paediatrics (EAP)., Methods: In this study, paediatricians, paediatric residents, primary care paediatricians, and family doctors treating children were surveyed in Norway, Lithuania, Ukraine, Italy, and Switzerland. Over-investigation was defined as "diagnostic work-up or referral that is unlikely to provide information which is relevant for a patient" and overtreatment was defined as "treatment that does not benefit or can harm more than benefit the patient." The original questionnaire was developed in 2018 by a working group from the Norwegian Paediatric Association., Results: Overall, 1,416 medical doctors participated in the survey, ranging from 144 in Lithuania to 337 in Switzerland. 83% stated that they experienced over-investigation/overtreatment, and 81% perceived this as a problem. The majority (83%) perceived expectations from family and patients as the most important driver for overtreatment in their country. Other drivers for overuse were use of national guidelines/recommendations, worry for reactions, and reduction of uncertainty., Conclusion: This is the first study investigating knowledge and attitude toward medical overactivity in European countries. Despite different cultural and economic environments, the patterns and drivers of increased investigations and medicalisation are similar., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Jankauskaite, Grechukha, Kjær, Mamenko, Nakstad, Romankevych, Schnyder, Selvakumar, Trapani, Daniliaviciene, Valiulis, Wyder and Størdal.)

Background: Co-medication is common among patients with allergic rhinitis (AR), but its dimension and patterns are unknown. This is particularly relevant since AR is understood differently across European countries, as reflected by rhinitis-related search patterns in Google Trends. This study aims to assess AR co-medication and its regional patterns in Europe, using real-world data., Methods: We analysed 2015-2020 MASK-air ® European data. We compared days under no medication, monotherapy and co-medication using the visual analogue scale (VAS) levels for overall allergic symptoms ('VAS Global Symptoms') and impact of AR on work. We assessed the monthly use of different medication schemes, performing separate analyses by region (defined geographically or by Google Trends patterns). We estimated the average number of different drugs reported per patient within 1 year., Results: We analysed 222,024 days (13,122 users), including 63,887 days (28.8%) under monotherapy and 38,315 (17.3%) under co-medication. The median 'VAS Global Symptoms' was 7 for no medication days, 14 for monotherapy and 21 for co-medication (p < .001). Medication use peaked during the spring, with similar patterns across different European regions (defined geographically or by Google Trends). Oral H 1 -antihistamines were the most common medication in single and co-medication. Each patient reported using an annual average of 2.7 drugs, with 80% reporting two or more., Conclusions: Allergic rhinitis medication patterns are similar across European regions. One third of treatment days involved co-medication. These findings suggest that patients treat themselves according to their symptoms (irrespective of how they understand AR) and that co-medication use is driven by symptom severity., (© 2022 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: MASK-air ® is an app whose aim is to reduce the global burden of allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma. A transfer of innovative practices was performed to disseminate and implement MASK-air ® in European regions. The aim of the study was to examine the implementation of the MASK-air ® app in Lithuanian adults in order to investigate (i) the rate of acceptance in this population, (ii) the duration of app use and (iii) the evaluation of the app after its use., Methods: In a longitudinal study, Lithuanian adults with AR and/or asthma were recruited by allergists. They were informed about how to use MASK-air ® and were followed closely. They were reviewed after one to 3 months to evaluate satisfaction and were asked to continue using the app., Results: Among the 149 patients recruited (37.2 ± 10.4 years), 52.4% had rhinitis alone, 42.9% had rhinitis, asthma and/or conjunctivitis multimorbidity, and 2.7% isolated asthma. According to the MASK-air ® baseline questionnaire, 88.3% of patients considered that their symptoms were troublesome. Data were available for 102 (68.4%) patients. The duration of app usage in patients ranged from 1 to 680 days (median, 25-75 percentile: 54, 23.2-151 days). Forty-two (41.1% of patients who were reviewed) patients agreed to share their opinion on MASK-air ® . Most users of the app were satisfied, from 46.5% thinking their allergy was treated more successfully to 90.4% recommending this app to other allergy sufferers., Discussion: When recommended by physicians, MASK-air® was used for a longer period of time., (© 2022 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Allergy published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology.)

Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: Validated combined symptom-medication scores (CSMSs) are needed to investigate the effects of allergic rhinitis treatments. This study aimed to use real-life data from the MASK-air ® app to generate and validate hypothesis- and data-driven CSMSs., Methods: We used MASK-air ® data to assess the concurrent validity, test-retest reliability and responsiveness of one hypothesis-driven CSMS (modified CSMS: mCSMS), one mixed hypothesis- and data-driven score (mixed score), and several data-driven CSMSs. The latter were generated with MASK-air ® data following cluster analysis and regression models or factor analysis. These CSMSs were compared with scales measuring (i) the impact of rhinitis on work productivity (visual analogue scale [VAS] of work of MASK-air ® , and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Allergy Specific [WPAI-AS]), (ii) quality-of-life (EQ-5D VAS) and (iii) control of allergic diseases (Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test [CARAT])., Results: We assessed 317,176 days of MASK-air ® use from 17,780 users aged 16-90 years, in 25 countries. The mCSMS and the factor analyses-based CSMSs displayed poorer validity and responsiveness compared to the remaining CSMSs. The latter displayed moderate-to-strong correlations with the tested comparators, high test-retest reliability and moderate-to-large responsiveness. Among data-driven CSMSs, a better performance was observed for cluster analyses-based CSMSs. High accuracy (capacity of discriminating different levels of rhinitis control) was observed for the latter (AUC-ROC = 0.904) and for the mixed CSMS (AUC-ROC = 0.820)., Conclusion: The mixed CSMS and the cluster-based CSMSs presented medium-high validity, reliability and accuracy, rendering them as candidates for primary endpoints in future rhinitis trials., (© 2022 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The school environment is crucial for the child's health and well-being. On the other hand, the data about the role of school's aerosol pollution on the etiology of chronic non-communicable diseases remain scarce. This study aims to evaluate the level of indoor aerosol pollution in primary schools and its relation to the incidence of doctor's diagnosed asthma among younger school-age children. The cross-sectional study was carried out in 11 primary schools of Vilnius during 1 year of education from autumn 2017 to spring 2018. Particle number (PNC) and mass (PMC) concentrations in the size range of 0.3-10 µm were measured using an Optical Particle Sizer (OPS, TSI model 3330). The annual incidence of doctor's diagnosed asthma in each school was calculated retrospectively from the data of medical records. The total number of 6-11 years old children who participated in the study was 3638. The incidence of asthma per school ranged from 1.8 to 6.0%. Mean indoor air pollution based on measurements in classrooms during the lessons was calculated for each school. Levels of PNC and PMC in schools ranged between 33.0 and 168.0 particles/cm 3 and 1.7-6.8 µg/m 3 , respectively. There was a statistically significant correlation between the incidence of asthma and PNC as well as asthma and PMC in the particle size range of 0.3-1 µm (r = 0.66, p = 0.028) and (r = 0.71, p = 0.017) respectively. No significant correlation was found between asthma incidence and indoor air pollution in the particle size range of 0.3-2.5 and 0.3-10 µm.   Conclusion: We concluded that the number and mass concentrations of indoor air aerosol pollution in primary schools in the particle size range of 0.3-1 µm are primarily associated with the incidence of doctor's diagnosed asthma among younger school-age children. What is Known: • Both indoor and outdoor aerosol pollution is associated with bronchial asthma in children. What is New: • The incidence of bronchial asthma among younger school age children is related to indoor air quality in primary schools. • Aerosol pollutants in the size range of 0.3-1 µm in contrast to larger size range particles can play major role in the etiology of bronchial asthma in children., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

In the face of the growing number of adolescents suffering from eating disorders (EDs) and access to psychiatric care limited by the epidemiological and demographic situation, the primary care pediatrician's role in diagnosing and treating EDs is growing. The European Academy of Paediatrics (EAP) decided to summarize knowledge about EDs and formulate recommendations to support European pediatricians and improve care for adolescents with EDs., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Rynkiewicz, Dembiński, Koletzko, Michaud, Hadjipanayis, Grossman, Korslund, King, Treasure, Peregud-Pogorzelski, del Torso, Valiulis and Mazur.)

Vaccination is a highly effective preventive measure against COVID-19. However, complementary treatments are needed to better control the disease. Fermented vegetables and spices, agonists of the antioxidant transcription factor nuclear factor (erythroid-derived 2)-like 2 (Nrf2) and TRPA1/V1 channels (Transient Receptor Potential Ankyrin 1 and Vanillin 1), may help in the control of COVID-19. Some preliminary clinical trials suggest that curcumin (spice) can prevent some of the COVID-19 symptoms. Before any conclusion can be drawn and these treatments recommended for COVID-19, the data warrant confirmation. In particular, the benefits of the foods need to be assessed in more patients, through research studies and large trials employing a double-blind, placebo-controlled design., (© 2022 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Allergy published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology.)

Background: Evidence regarding the effectiveness of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) on allergic rhinitis has been provided mostly by randomised controlled trials, with little data from real-life studies., Objective: To compare the reported control of allergic rhinitis symptoms in three groups of users of the MASK-air ® app: those receiving sublingual AIT (SLIT), those receiving subcutaneous AIT (SCIT), and those receiving no AIT., Methods: We assessed the MASK-air ® data of European users with self-reported grass pollen allergy, comparing the data reported by patients receiving SLIT, SCIT and no AIT. Outcome variables included the daily impact of allergy symptoms globally and on work (measured by visual analogue scales-VASs), and a combined symptom-medication score (CSMS). We applied Bayesian mixed-effects models, with clustering by patient, country and pollen season., Results: We analysed a total of 42,756 days from 1,093 grass allergy patients, including 18,479 days of users under AIT. Compared to no AIT, SCIT was associated with similar VAS levels and CSMS. Compared to no AIT, SLIT-tablet was associated with lower values of VAS global allergy symptoms (average difference = 7.5 units out of 100; 95% credible interval [95%CrI] = -12.1;-2.8), lower VAS Work (average difference = 5.0; 95%CrI = -8.5;-1.5), and a lower CSMS (average difference = 3.7; 95%CrI = -9.3;2.2). When compared to SCIT, SLIT-tablet was associated with lower VAS global allergy symptoms (average difference = 10.2; 95%CrI = -17.2;-2.8), lower VAS Work (average difference = 7.8; 95%CrI = -15.1;0.2), and a lower CSMS (average difference = 9.3; 95%CrI = -18.5;0.2)., Conclusion: In patients with grass pollen allergy, SLIT-tablet, when compared to no AIT and to SCIT, is associated with lower reported symptom severity. Future longitudinal studies following internationally-harmonised standards for performing and reporting real-world data in AIT are needed to better understand its 'real-world' effectiveness., (© 2022 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Allergy published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology.)

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine use has increased within community pediatrics. This trend runs counter to reluctance to adaptation of the new mode of healthcare that existed prior to the pandemic. Little is known about what we can expect after the pandemic: if physicians will opt for telemedicine modalities and if tele-pediatrics will continue to be a significant mode of community pediatric care. Objective: The goal of this study was to survey primary pediatric care providers as to their experiences and clinical decision making with telemedicine modalities prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as their projected use after the pandemic ends. Material and methods: Using the EAPRASnet database we surveyed pediatricians throughout Europe, using a web-based questionnaire. The survey was performed during the COVID-19 pandemic (June-July 2020), assessed telemedicine use for several modalities, prior to and during the pandemic as well as predicted use after the pandemic will have resolved. Participants were also surveyed regarding clinical decision making in two hypothetical clinical scenarios managed by telemedicine. Results: A total of 710 physicians participated, 76% were pediatricians. The percentage of respondents who reported daily use for at least 50% of all encounters via telemedicine modalities increased during the pandemic: phone calls (4% prior to the pandemic to 52% during the pandemic), emails (2-9%), text messages (1-6%), social media (3-11%), cell-phone pictures/video (1-9%), and video conferencing (1-7%) ( p < 0.005). The predicted post-pandemic use of these modalities partially declined to 19, 4, 3, 6, 9, and 4%, respectively ( p < 0.005), yet demonstrating a prospectively sustained use of pictures/videos after the pandemic. Reported high likelihood of remotely treating suspected pneumonia and acute otitis media with antibiotics decreased from 8 to 16% during the pandemic to an assumed 2 and 4% after the pandemic, respectively ( p < 0.005). Conclusions: This study demonstrates an increased utilization of telemedicine by pediatric providers during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as a partially sustained effect that will promote telemedicine use as part of a hybrid care provision after the pandemic will have resolved., Competing Interests: SR is a paid consultant of Tytocare. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Reingold, Hadjipanayis, van Esso, del Torso, Dornbusch, de Guchtenaere, Pancheva, Mujkic, Syridou, Valiulis, Mazur, Rios, Spreitzer, Mamenko, D'Avino, Kubatova, Geitmann, Wyder, Altorjai, Michailidou and Grossman.)

As the tobacco epidemic has waned, it has been followed by the advent of electronic nicotine delivery devices (ENDS) primarily manufactured by the tobacco industry to try to recruit replacements for deceased tobacco addicts. This document sets out the ten recommendations of the European Academy of Paediatrics (EAP) with regard to e-cigarettes and children and young people (CYP). The EAP notes that nicotine is itself a drug of addiction, with toxicity to the foetus, child and adult, and were ENDS only to contain nicotine, their use to create a new generation of addicts would be rigorously opposed. However, e-cigarettes include numerous unregulated chemicals, including known carcinogens, whose acute and long term toxicities are unknown. The EAP asserts that there is incontrovertible evidence that the acute toxicity of e-cigarettes is greater than that of "traditional" tobacco smoking, and a variety of acute pulmonary toxicities, including acute lung injuries, have been recorded due to e-cigarettes usage. The chronic toxicity of e-cigarettes is unknown, but given the greater acute toxicity compared to tobacco, the EAP cannot assume that e-cigarettes are safer in the long term. The high uptake of e-cigarettes by CYP, including under-age children, is partly fuelled by deceitful marketing and internet exposure, which is also unregulated. Although proposed as aids to smoking cessation, there is no evidence that e-cigarettes add anything to standard smoking cessation strategies. In summary, the EAP regards these devices and liquids as very dangerous, and ineluctably opposed to their use, and their direct or indirect marketing., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Bush, Lintowska, Mazur, Hadjipanayis, Grossman, del Torso, Michaud, Doan, Romankevych, Slaats, Utkus, Dembiński, Slobodanac and Valiulis.)

Older adults, especially men and/or those with diabetes, hypertension, and/or obesity, are prone to severe COVID-19. In some countries, older adults, particularly those residing in nursing homes, have been prioritized to receive COVID-19 vaccines due to high risk of death. In very rare instances, the COVID-19 vaccines can induce anaphylaxis, and the management of anaphylaxis in older people should be considered carefully. An ARIA-EAACI-EuGMS (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma, European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, and European Geriatric Medicine Society) Working Group has proposed some recommendations for older adults receiving the COVID-19 vaccines. Anaphylaxis to COVID-19 vaccines is extremely rare (from 1 per 100,000 to 5 per million injections). Symptoms are similar in younger and older adults but they tend to be more severe in the older patients. Adrenaline is the mainstay treatment and should be readily available. A flowchart is proposed to manage anaphylaxis in the older patients., (© 2021 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Background: MASK-air® is an app that supports allergic rhinitis patients in disease control. Users register daily allergy symptoms and their impact on activities using visual analog scales (VASs). We aimed to assess the concurrent validity, reliability, and responsiveness of these daily VASs., Methods: Daily monitoring VAS data were assessed in MASK-air® users with allergic rhinitis. Concurrent validity was assessed by correlating daily VAS values with those of the EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) VAS, the Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test (CARAT) score, and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Allergic Specific (WPAI-AS) Questionnaire (work and activity impairment scores). Intra-rater reliability was assessed in users providing multiple daily VASs within the same day. Test-retest reliability was tested in clinically stable users, as defined by the EQ-5D VAS, CARAT, or "VAS Work" (i.e., VAS assessing the impact of allergy on work). Responsiveness was determined in users with two consecutive measurements of EQ-5D-VAS or "VAS Work" indicating clinical change., Results: A total of 17,780 MASK-air® users, with 317,176 VAS days, were assessed. Concurrent validity was moderate-high (Spearman correlation coefficient range: 0.437-0.716). Intra-rater reliability intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) ranged between 0.870 (VAS assessing global allergy symptoms) and 0.937 (VAS assessing allergy symptoms on sleep). Test-retest reliability ICCs ranged between 0.604 and 0.878-"VAS Work" and "VAS asthma" presented the highest ICCs. Moderate/large responsiveness effect sizes were observed-the sleep VAS was associated with lower responsiveness, while the global allergy symptoms VAS demonstrated higher responsiveness., Conclusion: In MASK-air®, daily monitoring VASs have high intra-rater reliability and moderate-high validity, reliability, and responsiveness, pointing to a reliable measure of symptom loads., Competing Interests: Sinthia Bosnic‐Anticevich reports grants from TEVA and personal fees from TEVA, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Sanofi, Mylan. Jean Bousquet reports personal fees from Chiesi, Cipla, Hikma, Menarini, Mundipharma, Mylan, Novartis, Sanofi‐Aventis, Takeda, Teva, Uriach, other from KYomed‐Innov, and personal fees from Purina. Victoria Cardona reports personal fees from ALK, Allergy Therapeutics, LETI, Thermofisher, Merck, Astrazeneca, and GSK. Alvaro A Cruz reports grants and personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline, personal fees from Sanofi, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Chiesi, Boehringer Ingelheim, Mylan, and Eurofarma. Philippe Devillier reports personal fees from Mylan. Bilun Gemicioğlu reports grants from AstraZeneca, MSD, GSK, Deva, Novartis, and Abdi Ibrahim. Tari Haahtela reports personal fees from GSK, Mundipharma, Orion Pharma, Sanofi, Juan Carlos Ivancevich reports personal fees from Sanofi, Faes Farma, Laboratorios Casasco, Abbott, Ludger Klimek reports grants and personal fees from Allergopharma, LETI Pharma, MEDA/Mylan, and Sanofi, personal fees from Allergy Therapeut, Casssela med, and HAL Allergie, grants from ALK Abelló, Stallergenes, Quintiles, ASIT biotech, Lofarma, AstraZeneca, GSK, Inmunotk, and Membership: AeDA, DGHNO, Deutsche Akademie für Allergologie und klinische Immunologie, HNO‐BV, GPA, and EAACI. Piotr Kuna reports personal fees from Adamed, AstraZeneca, Berlin Chemie Menarini, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, HAL Allergy, Lekam, Mylan, Novartis, and Teva. Désirée Larenas Linnemann reports personal fees from Allakos, Amstrong, Astrazeneca, DBV Technologies, Grunenthal, GSK, Mylan, Menarini, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Siegfried, UCB, Alakos, and Gossamer, grants from Sanofi, Astrazeneca, Novartis, Circassia, UCB, GSK, TEVA, and Purina Institute. Michael Makris reports personal fees from Novartis, AstraZeneca, GSK, Chiesi, Menarini, Sanofi Genzyme, and Pfizer. Joaquin Mullol reports personal fees and other from SANOFI‐GENZYME & REGENERON, Genentech‐Roche & NOVARTIS, grants and personal fees from VIATRIS (MEDA‐MYLAN Pharma) and URIACH Group, and personal fees from Mitsubishi‐Tanabe, Menarini, UCB, AstraZeneca, and GSK. Oliver Pfaar reports grants and personal fees from ALK‐Abelló, Allergopharma, Stallergenes Greer, HAL Allergy Holding B.V./HAL Allergie GmbH, Bencard Allergie GmbH/Allergy Therapeutics, Lofarma, Anergis S.A., ASIT Biotech Tools S.A., Laboratorios LETI/LETI Pharma, and Glaxo Smith Kline, grants from Biomay, Circassia, Pohl‐Boskamp, and Inmunotek S.L., and personal fees from MEDA Pharma/MYLAN, Mobile Chamber Experts (a GA2LEN Partner), Indoor Biotechnologies, Astellas Pharma Global, EUFOREA, ROXALL Medizin, Novartis, Sanofi‐Aventis and Sanofi‐Genzyme, Med Update Europe GmbH, streamedup! GmbH, John Wiley and Sons, AS, and Paul‐Martini‐Stiftung (PMS). Nikolaos G. Papadopoulos reports personal fees from Novartis, Nutricia, HAL, MENARINI/FAES FARMA, SANOFI, MYLAN/MEDA, BIOMAY, AstraZeneca, GSK, MSD, ASIT BIOTECH, and Boehringer Ingelheim and grants from Gerolymatos International SA, and Capricare. Boleslaw Samolinski reports personal fees from Allergopharma, Polpharma, Viatris, TEVA, ADAMED, patient ombudsman, and Polish Allergology Society, grants from AstraZeneca, National Health Programme, and grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca. Ana Todo‐Bom reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, GSK (GlaxoSmithKline), Novartis, Sanofi, Teva, and Mundipharma, personal fees from Bial, and grants from Leti. Torsten Zuberbier reports personal fees from Bayer Health Care, FAES, Novartis, Henkel, Novartis, from Henkel, AstraZeneca, AbbVie Fee for talk, ALK Fee for talk, Almirall Fee for talk, Astellas Fee for talk, Bayer Health Care Fee for talk, Bencard Fee for talk, Berlin Chemie Fee for talk, FAES Fee for talk, HAL Fee for talk, Leti Fee for talk, Meda Fee for talk, Menarini Fee for talk, Merck Fee for talk, MSD Fee for talk, Novartis Fee for talk, Pfizer Fee for talk, Sanofi Fee for talk, Stallergenes Fee for talk, Takeda Fee for talk, Teva Fee for talk, UCB Fee for talk, Henkel Fee for talk, Kryolan Fee for talk, and L'Oréal Fee for talk., (© 2021 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Allergy published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology.)

Background: Although there are many asymptomatic patients, one of the problems of COVID-19 is early recognition of the disease. COVID-19 symptoms are polymorphic and may include upper respiratory symptoms. However, COVID-19 symptoms may be mistaken with the common cold or allergic rhinitis. An ARIA-EAACI study group attempted to differentiate upper respiratory symptoms between the three diseases., Methods: A modified Delphi process was used. The ARIA members who were seeing COVID-19 patients were asked to fill in a questionnaire on the upper airway symptoms of COVID-19, common cold and allergic rhinitis., Results: Among the 192 ARIA members who were invited to respond to the questionnaire, 89 responded and 87 questionnaires were analysed. The consensus was then reported. A two-way ANOVA revealed significant differences in the symptom intensity between the three diseases (p < .001)., Conclusions: This modified Delphi approach enabled the differentiation of upper respiratory symptoms between COVID-19, the common cold and allergic rhinitis. An electronic algorithm will be devised using the questionnaire., (© 2021 European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Allergic rhinitis and asthma represent global health problems for all age groups. ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma) project was initiated during a WHO workshop in 1999 In its 2010 and 2017 Revisions, ARIA has developed clinical practice guidelines for the management of allergic rhinitis and asthma co-morbidities based on GRADE (Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation). The 2019 Revision embedded real-life data into the GRADE recommendations to develop next-generation guidelines. Care pathways for allergen immunotherapy proposed a multi-sectoral approach. This paper reviews these two recent documents adding the impact of ARIA in Italy.

Competing Interests: IAgache is an Associate Editor Allergy and CTA. CA reports grants from Allergopharma, grants from Idorsia, Swiss National Science Foundation, Christine Kühne‐Center for Allergy Research and Education, European Commission's Horison's 2020 Framework Programme, Cure, Novartis Research Institutes, Astra Zeneca, scibase, advisory role in Sanofi/Regeneron, grants from Glakso Smith‐Kline, advisory role in scibase. IA reports personal fees from Hikma, Roxall, Astra Zeneca, Menarini, UCB, Faes Farma, Sanofi, Mundipharma, Bial, Amgen, Stallergenes. SBA reports grants from TEVA, personal fees from TEVA, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Sanofi, Mylan. VC reports personal fees from ALK, Allergy Therapeutics, LETI, Thermofisher, Merck, Astrazeneca, GSK. TC reports grants and personal fees from Stallergenes. PD reports personal fees from ALK‐Abello, Stallergenes‐Greer, Astra Zeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Mylan, Sanofi. SD reports personal fees and non‐financial support from ALK Abello, personal fees from Adiga, Biomay, Allergopharma, Anergis, Allergy Therapeutics. TH reports personal fees from GSK, Mundipharma, Orion Pharma. SH reports other from ALK‐Abelló, other from ALK‐Abelló. EH reports personal fees from Sanofi, Novartis, GSK, AstraZeneca, Circassia, Nestlè Purina. JCI reports personal fees from Faes Farma, Laboratorios Casasco Argentina, Abbott de Ecuador, EuroFarma Argentina. MJ reports personal fees from ALK‐Abello, Allergopharma, Stallergenes, Anergis, Allergy Therapeutics, Circassia, Leti, Biomay, HAL, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Astra‐Zeneka, GSK, Novartis, Teva, Vectura, UCB, Takeda, Roche, Janssen, Medimmune, Chiesi,. LK reports grants and personal fees from Allergopharma, MEDA/Mylan, LETI Pharma, Sanofi, grants from Stallergenes, Quintiles, ASIT biotech, grants from ALK Abelló, Lofarma, AstraZeneca, GSK, Inmunotk, personal fees from Allergy Therapeut., HAL Allergie, Cassella med; and Membership: AeDA, DGHNO, Deutsche Akademie für Allergologie und klinische Immunologie, HNO‐BV, GPA, EAACI. PK reports personal fees from Adamed, Berlin Chemie Menarini, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Lekam, Novartis, Polpharma, GSK, Polpharma, Sanofi, teva. VK reports other from GSK, non‐financial support from Mylan, AstraZeneca, Dimuna, Norameda. SL reports personal fees from DBV, Sanofi Aventis, Allergopharma, ALK, Nutricia, Bencard. EM reports personal fees from Sanofi, Novartis, AstraZeneca and Chiesi. JM reports personal fees and other from SANOFI‐GENZYME & REGENERON, NOVARTIS, ALLAKOS, MITSUBISHI‐TANABE, MENARINI, UCB, ASTRAZENECA, GSK, MSD, grants and personal fees from MYLAN‐MEDA Pharma, URIACH Group. MO reports personal fees from Hycor Diagnostics, Thermo Fisher Phadia. YO reports personal fees from Torii Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Shionogi Pharmaceutical Co.,Ltd. OP received research grants from Inmunotek S.L., Novartis and MINECO and has received fees for giving scientific lectures or participation in Advisory Boards from: Allergy Therapeutics, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Diater, GlaxoSmithKline, S.A, Inmunotek S.L, Novartis, Sanofi‐Genzyme and Stallergenes. NGP reports personal fees from Novartis, Nutricia, HAL, MENARINI/FAES FARMA, SANOFI, MYLAN/MEDA, BIOMAY, AstraZeneca, GSK, MSD, ASIT BIOTECH, Boehringer Ingelheim, grants from Gerolymatos International SA, Capricare. OP reports grants and personal fees from ALK‐Abelló, Allergopharma, Stallergenes Greer, HAL Allergy Holding B.V./HAL Allergie GmbH, Bencard Allergie GmbH/Allergy Therapeutics, Lofarma, ASIT Biotech Tools S.A., Laboratorios LETI/LETI Pharma, Anergis S.A., Glaxo Smith Kline, grants from Biomay, Circassia, Pohl‐Boskamp, Inmunotek S.L., personal fees from MEDA Pharma/MYLAN, Mobile Chamber Experts (a GA2LEN Partner), Indoor Biotechnologies, Astellas Pharma Global, EUFOREA, ROXALL Medizin, Novartis, Sanofi‐Aventis and Sanofi‐Genzyme, Med Update Europe GmbH, streamedup! GmbH, John Wiley and Sons, AS. DPreports grants and personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline, personal fees from Menarini, Pliva, Belupo, AbbVie, Novartis, MSD, Chiesi, Revenio, personal fees and non‐financial support from Boehringer Ingelheim, non‐financial support from Philips. MR is on the Advisory board‐ A. Menarini ‐ Speaker ‐ Astra Zeneca, Novartis, Sanofi, Mylan. FSRreports speaker and advisory fees from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Sanofi, GSK, Teva and Lusomedicamenta. GR reports payment to his Institution from Allergo Pharma. BSreports personal fees from Allergopharma, during the conduct of the study; grants from National Health Programm, grant, personal fees from Polpharma, ASTRA, personal fees from Mylan, Adamed, patient ombudsman, national Centre for Research and Development, Polish Allergology Society. JS reports grants and personal fees from Sanofi, personal fees from GSK, Novartis, Astra Zeneca, Mundipharma, Faes Farma. GS reports personal fees from ALK, and leds on the BSACI Rhinitis Guidelines and lead for EUFOREA on Allergic Rhinitis. PSG reports personal fees from Allergopharma, ALK, grants from Bencard, grants and personal fees from Stallergenes. JS reports personal fees from Mylan, F2F events. ATB reports grants and personal fees from Teva, AstraZeneca, GSK Sanofi, Mundipharma, personal fees from Bial, Novartis. MJTreports grants from European Commission, SEAIC, ISCIII, personal fees from Diater laboratory, Leti laboratory, Aimmune Therapeutics. MW reports personal fees from ALK‐Abello, Allergopharma, AstraZeneca, Bencard, Genzyme, GlaxoSmithKline, HAL Allergy, LETI, Meda Pharma, Novartis, Sanofi, Stallergenes, Teva. DW reports other from Optinose, ALK, Sanofi; past Co‐Chair of the Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters of the AAAAI and ACAAI. Second author of a recently published practice parameter on Rhinitis. MW reports other from Aralez (Medexus), Pediapharm, Pfizer, Astra Zeneca, GSK, Alk. MZ reports personal fees from Takeda. TZ reports and Organizational affiliations: Commitee member: WHO‐Initiative “Allergic Rhinitis and Its Impact on Asthma” (ARIA). Member of the Board: German Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI). Head: European Centre for Allergy Research Foundation (ECARF). Secretary General: Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA2LEN). Member: Committee on Allergy Diagnosis and Molecular Allergology, World Allergy Organization (WAO). FIGURE 1Countries with Pocket Guide membersFIGURE 2Proposed Flow of Precision Medicine approach in allergic diseases. *examples of exceptions: Thunderstorm‐induced asthma, patient with moderate rhinitis and severe asthma during pollen seasonFIGURE 3Treatment algorithm using visual analogue scale (VAS) for adolescents and adults AIT, allergen immunotherapy; VAS, visual analogue scale.FIGURE 4Algorithm for AIT in asthma