Search

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.)

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory lung disease. Refractory asthma poses a significant challenge in management due to its resistance to standard therapies. Key molecular pathways of refractory asthma include T2 inflammation mediated by Th2 and ILC2 cells, eosinophils, and cytokines including IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13. Additionally, non-T2 mechanisms involving neutrophils, macrophages, IL-1, IL-6, and IL-17 mediate a corticosteroid resistant phenotype. Mediators including alarmins (IL-25, IL-33, TSLP) and OX40L have overlap between T2 and non-T2 inflammation and may signify unique pathways of asthma inflammation. Therapies that target these pathways and mediators have proven to be effective in reducing exacerbations and improving lung function in subsets of severe asthma patients. However, there are patients with severe asthma who do not respond to approved therapies. Small molecule inhibitors, such as JAK-inhibitors, and monoclonal antibodies targeting mast cells, IL-1, IL-6, IL-33, TNFα, and OX40L are under investigation for their potential to modulate inflammation involved in refractory asthma. Understanding refractory asthma heterogeneity and identifying mediators involved are essential in developing therapeutic interventions for patients unresponsive to currently approved biologics. Further investigation is needed to develop personalized treatments based on these molecular insights to potentially offer more effective treatments for this complex disease.

Background: Black adults are disproportionately affected by asthma and are often considered a homogeneous group in research studies despite cultural and ancestral differences., Objective: We sought to determine if asthma morbidity differs across adults in Black ethnic subgroups., Methods: Adults with moderate-severe asthma were recruited across the continental United States and Puerto Rico for the PREPARE (PeRson EmPowered Asthma RElief) trial. Using self-identifications, we categorized multiethnic Black (ME/B) participants (n = 226) as Black Latinx participants (n = 146) or Caribbean, continental African, or other Black participants (n = 80). African American (AA/B) participants (n = 518) were categorized as Black participants who identified their ethnicity as being American. Baseline characteristics and retrospective asthma morbidity measures (self-reported exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids [SCs], emergency department/urgent care [ED/UC] visits, hospitalizations) were compared across subgroups using multivariable regression., Results: Compared with AA/B participants, ME/B participants were more likely to be younger, residing in the US Northeast, and Spanish speaking and to have lower body mass index, health literacy, and <1 comorbidity, but higher blood eosinophil counts. In a multivariable analysis, ME/B participants were significantly more likely to have ED/UC visits (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.34, 95% CI = 1.04-1.72) and SC use (IRR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.00-1.62) for asthma than AA/B participants. Of the ME/B subgroups, Puerto Rican Black Latinx participants (n = 120) were significantly more likely to have ED/UC visits (IRR = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.22-2.21) and SC use for asthma (IRR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.06-1.92) than AA/B participants. There were no significant differences in hospitalizations for asthma among subgroups., Conclusions: ME/B adults, specifically Puerto Rican Black Latinx adults, have higher risk of ED/UC visits and SC use for asthma than other Black subgroups., (Copyright © 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Black and Latinx adults experience disproportionate asthma-related morbidity and limited specialty care access. The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic expanded telehealth use., Objective: To evaluate visit type (telehealth [TH] vs in-person [IP]) preferences and the impact of visit type on asthma outcomes among Black and Latinx adults with moderate-to-severe asthma., Methods: For this PREPARE trial ancillary study, visit type preference was surveyed by e-mail or telephone post-trial. Emergency medical record data on visit types and asthma outcomes were available for a subset (March 2020 to April 2021). Characteristics associated with visit type preferences, and relationships between visit type and asthma outcomes (control [Asthma Control Test] and asthma-related quality of life [Asthma Symptom Utility Index]), were tested using multivariable regression., Results: A total of 866 participants consented to be surveyed, with 847 respondents. Among the participants with asthma care experience with both visit types, 42.0% preferred TH for regular checkups, which associated with employment (odds ratio [OR] = 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-2.39; P = .02), lower asthma medication adherence (OR = 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.11; P = .03), and having more historical emergency department and urgent care asthma visits (OR = 1.10 for each additional visit; 95% CI, 1.02-1.18; P = .02), after adjustment. Emergency medical record data were available for 98 participants (62 TH, 36 IP). Those with TH visits were more likely Latinx, from the Southwest, employed, using inhaled corticosteroid-only controller therapy, with lower body mass index, and lower self-reported asthma medication adherence vs those with IP visits only. Both groups had comparable Asthma Control Test (18.4 vs 18.9, P = .52) and Asthma Symptom Utility Index (0.79 vs 0.84, P = .16) scores after adjustment., Conclusion: TH may be similarly efficacious as and often preferred over IP among Black and Latinx adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, especially for regular checkups., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02995733., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. 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.)

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 the 5 years that have passed since the publication of the 2018 International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2018), the literature has expanded substantially. The ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update presents 144 individual topics on allergic rhinitis (AR), expanded by over 40 topics from the 2018 document. Originally presented topics from 2018 have also been reviewed and updated. The executive summary highlights key evidence-based findings and recommendation from the full document., Methods: ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 employed established evidence-based review with recommendation (EBRR) methodology to individually evaluate each topic. Stepwise iterative peer review and consensus was performed for each topic. The final document was then collated and includes the results of this work., Results: ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 includes 10 major content areas and 144 individual topics related to AR. For a substantial proportion of topics included, an aggregate grade of evidence is presented, which is determined by collating the levels of evidence for each available study identified in the literature. For topics in which a diagnostic or therapeutic intervention is considered, a recommendation summary is presented, which considers the aggregate grade of evidence, benefit, harm, and cost., Conclusion: The ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update provides a comprehensive evaluation of AR and the currently available evidence. It is this evidence that contributes to our current knowledge base and recommendations for patient evaluation and treatment., (© 2023 The Authors. International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Academy of Otolaryngic Allergy and American Rhinologic Society.)

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.)

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: 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.)

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: 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.)

Background: Peanut (Arachis hypogaea) allergen powder-dnfp (PTAH; previously known as AR101) is a daily oral immunotherapy approved to mitigate allergic reactions after accidental peanut exposure in peanut-allergic individuals aged 4-17 years., Objective: We sought to comprehensively summarize the PTAH safety profile for up to ∼2 years of treatment., Methods: Safety and adverse event (AE) data from participants aged 4-17 years from 3 controlled, phase 3 and 2 open-label extension trials were pooled and assessed., Results: Of the 944 individuals receiving ≥1 PTAH dose, median exposure was ∼49 weeks; most participants experienced ≥1 treatment-related AE (TRAE; n = 853; 90.4%). A total of 829 participants experienced TRAEs with a maximum severity of mild (497, 52.6%) or moderate (332, 35.2%); 24 participants (2.5%) experienced TRAEs graded as severe. Overall, 80 participants (9.5%) discontinued as a result of AEs; most experienced gastrointestinal symptoms and discontinued during the first 6 months. When adjusted for exposure, AEs and TRAEs occurred at a rate of 76.4 and 58.7 events per participant-year of exposure (PYE), respectively, during updosing; AEs and TRAEs decreased to 23.0 and 14.2, respectively, during 300 mg maintenance. Overall, exposure-adjusted rates of systemic allergic reactions were 0.12 events/PYE (mild), 0.11 events/PYE (moderate), and 0.01 events/PYE (severe [anaphylaxis])., Conclusion: The safety profile of PTAH was consistent across trials, manageable, and improved over time. AEs were predominantly mild to moderate, and all grades declined in frequency with continued treatment. These data can be used to facilitate shared decision-making discussions with patients and families considering treatment with PTAH., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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.)

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: Patients with severe asthma frequently have associated comorbidities, which can compound existing symptoms, complicating asthma management., Objective: To describe the real-world effectiveness of mepolizumab in patients with severe asthma stratified by common overlapping comorbidities., Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of patients with asthma from the MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Database initiating mepolizumab treatment (index date). Eligible patients had more than or equal to 1 claim (excluding claims for diagnostic tests) with a diagnosis code for more than or equal to 1 of 7 comorbidities (atopic disease, nasal polyps, chronic sinusitis, obesity, respiratory infections, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and depression/anxiety) during the 12-month preindex baseline period; these were used to stratify patients into 7 nonmutually exclusive subgroups. Outcomes included asthma exacerbations and exacerbation-related health care resource utilization during the 12-month baseline and follow-up periods. Each patient acted as their own control., Results: Of the 639 patients included, the most common comorbidities were atopic diseases (73.2%), respiratory infections (55.6%), and chronic sinusitis (45.1%). Across all 7 comorbidity subgroups, there were significant (P < .05) reductions of 38% to 55% and 57% to 83% in exacerbations and exacerbations requiring hospitalization, respectively, during the follow-up vs baseline period, except for exacerbations requiring hospitalization in the nasal polyp subgroup, owing to the small subgroup sample size. During the follow-up vs baseline periods, mean number of oral corticosteroids claims was significantly (P < .001) reduced by 29% to 38%; 39% to 47% of patients achieved greater than or equal to 50% oral corticosteroids dose reduction. Significant reductions in exacerbation-related health care resource utilization were also observed., Conclusion: Mepolizumab treatment provided real-world clinical benefits in patients., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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.)

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

The introduction of personalized medicine (PM) has been a milestone in the history of medical therapy, because it has revolutionized the previous approach of treating the disease with that of treating the patient. It is known today that diseases can occur in different genetic variants, making specific treatments of proven efficacy necessary for a given endotype. Allergic diseases are particularly suitable for PM, because they meet the therapeutic success requirements, including a known molecular mechanism of the disease, a diagnostic tool for such disease, and a treatment blocking the mechanism. The stakes of PM in allergic patients are molecular diagnostics, to detect specific IgE to single-allergen molecules and to distinguish the causative molecules from those merely cross-reactive, pursuit of patient's treatable traits addressing genetic, phenotypic, and psychosocial features, and omics, such as proteomics, epi-genomics, metabolomics, and breathomics, to forecast patient's responsiveness to therapies, to detect biomarker and mediators, and to verify the disease control. This new approach has already improved the precision of allergy diagnosis and is likely to significantly increase, through the higher performance achieved with the personalized treatment, the effectiveness of allergen immunotherapy by enhancing its already known and unique characteristics of treatment that acts on the causes., (© 2020 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Since the first description of anaphylaxis in 1902, its clinical importance as an emergency condition has been recognized worldwide. Anaphylaxis is a severe, potentially life-threatening systemic hypersensitivity reaction characterized by rapid onset and the potential to endanger life through respiratory or circulatory compromise. It is usually, although not always, associated with skin and mucosal changes. Although the academic/scientific communities have advocated to promote greater awareness and protocols for the management of anaphylaxis based on best evidence, there are few efforts documenting feedback as to the success of these efforts. In this article, we review the key unmet needs related to the diagnosis and management of anaphylaxis, and propose a public health initiative for prevention measures and a timetable action plan that intends to strengthen the collaboration among health professionals and especially primary care physicians dealing with anaphylaxis, which can encourage enhanced quality of care of patients with anaphylaxis. More than calling for a harmonized action for the best management of anaphylaxis to prevent undue morbidity and mortality, the Montpellier World Health Organization Collaborating Centre here proposes an action plan as a baseline for a global initiative against anaphylaxis. We strongly believe that these collaborative efforts are a strong public health and societal priority that is consistent with the overarching goals of providing optimal care of allergic patients and best practices of allergology., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Digital anamorphosis is used to define a distorted image of health and care that may be viewed correctly using digital tools and strategies. MASK digital anamorphosis represents the process used by MASK to develop the digital transformation of health and care in rhinitis. It strengthens the ARIA change management strategy in the prevention and management of airway disease. The MASK strategy is based on validated digital tools. Using the MASK digital tool and the CARAT online enhanced clinical framework, solutions for practical steps of digital enhancement of care are proposed., (© 2020 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Severe asthma imposes a significant burden on patients, families and healthcare systems. Management is difficult, due to disease heterogeneity, co-morbidities, complexity in care pathways and differences between national or regional healthcare systems. Better understanding of the mechanisms has enabled a stratified approach to the management of severe asthma, supporting the use of targeted treatments with biologicals. However, there are still many issues that require further clarification. These include selection of a certain biological (as they all target overlapping disease phenotypes), the definition of response, strategies to enhance the responder rate, the duration of treatment and its regimen (in the clinic or home-based) and its cost-effectiveness. The EAACI Guidelines on the use of biologicals in severe asthma follow the GRADE approach in formulating recommendations for each biological and each outcome. In addition, a management algorithm for the use of biologicals in the clinic is proposed, together with future approaches and research priorities., (© 2020 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Background: The analysis of mobile health (mHealth) data has generated innovative insights into improving allergic rhinitis control, but additive information is needed. A cross-sectional real-world observational study was undertaken in 17 European countries during and outside the estimated pollen season. The aim was to collect novel information including the phenotypic characteristics of the users., Methods: The Allergy Diary-MASK-air-mobile phone app, freely available via Google Play and App, was used to collect the data of daily visual analogue scales (VASs) for overall allergic symptoms and medication use. Fluticasone Furoate (FF), Mometasone Furoate (MF), Azelastine Fluticasone Proprionate combination (MPAzeFlu) and eight oral H1-antihistamines were studied. Phenotypic characteristics were recorded at entry. The ARIA severity score was derived from entry data. This was an a priori planned analysis., Results: 9037 users filled in 70,286 days of VAS in 2016, 2017 and 2018. The ARIA severity score was lower outside than during the pollen season. Severity was similar for all treatment groups during the pollen season, and lower in the MPAzeFlu group outside the pollen season. Days with MPAzeFlu had lower VAS levels and a higher frequency of monotherapy than the other treatments during the season. Outside the season, days with MPAzeFlu also had a higher frequency of monotherapy. The number of reported days was significantly higher with MPAzeFlu during and outside the season than with MF, FF or oral H1-antihistamines., Conclusions: This study shows that the overall efficacy of treatments is similar during and outside the pollen season and indicates that medications are similarly effective during the year.

The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) provides a common language for use worldwide as a diagnostic and classification tool for epidemiology, clinical purposes and health management. Since its first edition, the ICD has maintained a framework distributing conditions according to topography, with the result that some complex conditions, such as allergies and hypersensitivity disorders (A/H) including anaphylaxis, have been poorly represented. The change in hierarchy in ICD-11 permitted the construction of the pioneer section addressed to A/H, which may result in more accurate mortality and morbidity statistics, including more accurate accounting for mortality due to anaphylaxis, strengthen classification, terminology and definitions. The ICD-11 was presented and adopted by the 72nd World Health Assembly in May 2019, and the implementation is ongoing worldwide. We here present the outcomes from an online survey undertaken to reach out the allergy community worldwide in order to peer review the terminology, classification and definitions of A/H introduced into ICD-11 and to support their global implementation. Data are presented here for 406 respondents from 74 countries. All of the subsections of the new A/H section of the ICD-11 had been considered with good accuracy by the majority of respondents. We believe that, in addition to help during the implementation phase, all the comments provided will help to improve the A/H classification and to increase awareness by different disciplines of what actions are needed to ensure more accurate epidemiological data and better clinical management of A/H patients., (© 2020 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody against interleukin-4 receptor α, is approved as add-on maintenance treatment for inadequately controlled type 2 severe asthma. This systematic review evaluated the efficacy, safety and economic impact of dupilumab compared to standard of care for uncontrolled severe asthma. PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched for RCTs and health economic evaluations. Critical and important asthma-related outcomes were evaluated. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. Three RCTs including 2735 subjects >12 years old and 24-52 weeks of follow-up were included. Dupilumab reduced with high certainty severe asthma exacerbations (Incidence rate ratio 0.51; 95% CI 0.45-0.59) and the percentage use of oral corticosteroid use (mean difference (MD) -28.2 mg/d; 95% CI -40.7 to -15.7). Asthma control (ACQ-5), quality of life (AQLQ) and rescue medication use [puffs/d] improved, without reaching the minimal important clinical difference: ACQ-5 MD -0.28 (95% CI -0.39 to -0.17); AQLQ MD +0.28 (95% CI 0.20-0.37); and rescue medication MD -0.35 (95% CI -0.73 to +0.02). FEV 1 increased (MD +0.15; 95% CI +0.11 to +0.18) (moderate certainty). There was an increased rate of dupilumab-related adverse events (AEs) (moderate certainty) and of drug-related serious AEs (low certainty). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of dupilumab versus standard therapy was 464 000$/QALY (moderate certainty). More data on long-term safety are needed both for children and for adults, together with more efficacy data in the paediatric population., (© 2020 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Allergic asthma is a frequent asthma phenotype. Both IgE and type 2 cytokines are increased, with some degree of overlap with other phenotypes. Systematic reviews assessed the efficacy and safety of benralizumab, dupilumab and omalizumab (alphabetical order) vs standard of care for patients with uncontrolled severe allergic asthma. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched to identify RCTs and health economic evaluations, published in English. Critical and important asthma-related outcomes were evaluated. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. All three biologicals reduced with high certainty the annualized asthma exacerbation rate: benralizumab incidence rate ratios (IRR) 0.63 (95% CI 0.50 - 0.81); dupilumab IRR 0.58 (95%CI 0.47 - 0.73); and omalizumab IRR 0.56 (95%CI 0.42 - 0.73). Benralizumab and dupilumab improved asthma control with high certainty and omalizumab with moderate certainty; however, none reached the minimal important difference (MID). Both benralizumab and omalizumab improved QoL with high certainty, but only omalizumab reached the MID. Omalizumab enabled ICS dose reduction with high certainty. Benralizumab and omalizumab showed an increase in drug-related adverse events (AEs) with low to moderate certainty. All three biologicals had moderate certainty for an ICER/QALY value above the willingness to pay threshold. There was high certainty that in children 6-12 years old omalizumab decreased the annualized exacerbation rate [IRR 0.57 (95%CI 0.45-0.72)], improved QoL [relative risk 1.43 (95%CI 1.12 -1.83)], reduced ICS [mean difference (MD) -0.45 (95% CI -0.58 to -0.32)] and rescue medication use [ MD -0.41 (95%CI -0.66 to -0.15)]., (© 2020 John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Five biologicals have been approved for severe eosinophilic asthma, a well-recognized phenotype. Systematic reviews (SR) evaluated the efficacy and safety of benralizumab, dupilumab, mepolizumab, omalizumab and reslizumab (alphabetical order) compared to standard of care for severe eosinophilic asthma. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched to identify RCTs and health economic evaluations, published in English. Critical and important asthma-related outcomes were evaluated for each of the biologicals. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. 19 RCTs (three RCTs for benralizumab, three RCTs for dupilumab, three RCTs for mepolizumab, five RCTs for omalizumab and five RCTs for reslizumab), including subjects 12 to 75 years old (except for omalizumab including also subjects 6-11 years old), ranging from 12 to 56 weeks were evaluated. All biologicals reduce exacerbation rates with high certainty of evidence: benralizumab incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.53 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.72), dupilumab (IRR) 0.43 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.59), mepolizumab IRR 0.49 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.66), omalizumab (IRR) 0.56 (95% CI 0.40 to 0.77) and reslizumab (IRR) 0.46 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.58). Benralizumab, dupilumab and mepolizumab reduce the daily dose of oral corticosteroids (OCS) with high certainty of evidence. All evaluated biologicals probably improve asthma control, QoL and FEV 1 , without reaching the minimal important difference (moderate certainty). Benralizumab, mepolizumab and reslizumab slightly increase drug-related adverse events (AE) and drug-related serious AE (low to very low certainty of evidence). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life year value is above the willingness to pay threshold for all biologicals (moderate certainty). Potential savings are driven by decrease in hospitalizations, emergency and primary care visits. There is high certainty that all approved biologicals reduce the rate of severe asthma exacerbations and for benralizumab, dupilumab and mepolizumab for reducing OCS. There is moderate certainty for improving asthma control, QoL, FEV 1 . More data on long-term safety are needed together with more efficacy data in the paediatric population., (© 2020 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Allergic asthma is defined as asthma associated with sensitization to aeroallergens, which leads to asthma symptoms and airway inflammation. Allergic asthma is the most common asthma phenotype. The onset of allergic asthma is most often in childhood and is usually accompanied by other comorbidities including atopic dermatitis and allergic rhinitis. It is often persistent although there is a wide variation in disease severity. It is a T H 2-driven process. Biomarkers have been identified to distinguish patients with allergic asthma, particularly serum IgE levels, tests to indicate sensitization to aeroallergens such as specific IgE or skin prick test positivity, blood and sputum eosinophil levels, fraction of exhaled nitric oxide, and periostin. Treatments for allergic asthma include environmental control measures, allergen immunotherapy, and glucocorticoids. Biologics, targeting the T H 2 pathway, have been shown to be effective in the treatment of allergic asthma., (Copyright © 2019 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The selection of pharmacotherapy for patients with allergic rhinitis aims to control the disease and depends on many factors. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines have considerably improved the treatment of allergic rhinitis. However, there is an increasing trend toward use of real-world evidence to inform clinical practice, especially because randomized controlled trials are often limited with regard to the applicability of results. The Contre les Maladies Chroniques pour un Vieillissement Actif (MACVIA) algorithm has proposed an allergic rhinitis treatment by a consensus group. This simple algorithm can be used to step up or step down allergic rhinitis treatment. Next-generation guidelines for the pharmacologic treatment of allergic rhinitis were developed by using existing GRADE-based guidelines for the disease, real-world evidence provided by mobile technology, and additive studies (allergen chamber studies) to refine the MACVIA algorithm., (Copyright © 2019 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. All rights reserved.)

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a proven therapeutic option for the treatment of allergic rhinitis and/or asthma. Many guidelines or national practice guidelines have been produced but the evidence-based method varies, many are complex and none propose care pathways. This paper reviews care pathways for AIT using strict criteria and provides simple recommendations that can be used by all stakeholders including healthcare professionals. The decision to prescribe AIT for the patient should be individualized and based on the relevance of the allergens, the persistence of symptoms despite appropriate medications according to guidelines as well as the availability of good-quality and efficacious extracts. Allergen extracts cannot be regarded as generics. Immunotherapy is selected by specialists for stratified patients. There are no currently available validated biomarkers that can predict AIT success. In adolescents and adults, AIT should be reserved for patients with moderate/severe rhinitis or for those with moderate asthma who, despite appropriate pharmacotherapy and adherence, continue to exhibit exacerbations that appear to be related to allergen exposure, except in some specific cases. Immunotherapy may be even more advantageous in patients with multimorbidity. In children, AIT may prevent asthma onset in patients with rhinitis. mHealth tools are promising for the stratification and follow-up of patients., (© 2019 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Background: In all societies, the burden and cost of allergic and chronic respiratory diseases are increasing rapidly. Most economies are struggling to deliver modern health care effectively. There is a need to support the transformation of the health care system into integrated care with organizational health literacy., Main Body: As an example for chronic disease care, MASK (Mobile Airways Sentinel NetworK), a new project of the ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma) initiative, and POLLAR (Impact of Air POLLution on Asthma and Rhinitis, EIT Health), in collaboration with professional and patient organizations in the field of allergy and airway diseases, are proposing real-life ICPs centred around the patient with rhinitis, and using mHealth to monitor environmental exposure. Three aspects of care pathways are being developed: (i) Patient participation, health literacy and self-care through technology-assisted "patient activation", (ii) Implementation of care pathways by pharmacists and (iii) Next-generation guidelines assessing the recommendations of GRADE guidelines in rhinitis and asthma using real-world evidence (RWE) obtained through mobile technology. The EU and global political agendas are of great importance in supporting the digital transformation of health and care, and MASK has been recognized by DG Santé as a Good Practice in the field of digitally-enabled, integrated, person-centred care., Conclusion: In 20 years, ARIA has considerably evolved from the first multimorbidity guideline in respiratory diseases to the digital transformation of health and care with a strong political involvement., Competing Interests: Competing interestsDr. Ansotegui reports personal fees from Mundipharma, Roxall, Sanofi, MSD, Faes Farma, Hikma, UCB, Astra Zeneca, outside the submitted work. Dr. Bosnic-Anticevich reports grants from TEVA, personal fees from TEVA, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Mylan, outside the submitted work. Dr. Bousquet reports personal fees and others from Chiesi, Cipla, Hikma, Menarini, Mundipharma, Mylan, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis, Takeda, Teva, Uriach, others from Kyomed, outside the submitted work. Dr. Boulet reports and Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest—last 3 years. Research grants for participation to multicentre studies, AstraZeneca, Boston Scientific, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffman La Roche, Novartis, Ono Pharma, Sanofi, Takeda. Support for research projects introduced by the investigator AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Takeda. Consulting and advisory boards Astra Zeneca, Novartis, Methapharm. Royalties Co-author of “Up-To-Date” (occupational asthma). Nonprofit grants for production of educational materials AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck Frosst, Novartis. Conference fees AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis. Support for participation in conferences and meetings Novartis, Takeda. Other participations Past president and Member of the Canadian Thoracic Society Respiratory Guidelines Committee; Chair of the Board of Directors of the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA). Chair of Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Guidelines Dissemination and Implementation Committee; Laval University Chair on Knowledge Transfer, Prevention and Education in Respiratory and Cardiovascular Health; Member of scientific committees for the American College of Chest Physicians, American Thoracic Society, European Respiratory Society and the World Allergy Organization; 1st Vice-President of the Global Asthma Organization “InterAsma”. Dr. Casale reports grants and non-financial support from Stallergenes, outside the submitted work. Dr. Cruz reports grants and personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline, personal fees from Boehrinher Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Merk, Sharp & Dohme, MEDA Pharma, EUROFARMA, Sanofi Aventis, outside the submitted work. Dr. Ebisawa reports personal fees from DBV Technologies, Mylan EPD maruho, Shionogi & CO., Ltd., Kyorin Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Thermofisher Diagnostics, Pfizer, Beyer, Nippon Chemifar, Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., MSD, outside the submitted work. Dr. Ivancevich reports personal fees from Euro Farma Argentina, Faes Farma, non-financial support from Laboratorios Casasco, outside the submitted work. Dr. Haahtela reports personal fees from Mundipharma, Novartis, and Orion Pharma, outside the submitted work. Dr. Klimek reports grants and personal fees from ALK Abelló, Denmark, Novartis, Switzerland, Allergopharma, Germany, Bionorica, Germany, GSK, Great Britain, Lofarma, Italy, personal fees from MEDA, Sweden, Boehringer Ingelheim, Germany, grants from Biomay, Austria, HAL, Netherlands, LETI, Spain, Roxall, Germany, Bencard, Great Britain, outside the submitted work. V.KV has received payment for consultancy from GSK and for lectures from StallergensGreer, Berlin-CHemie and sponsorship from MYLAN for in the following professional training: ARIA masterclass in allergic rhinitis participation. Dr. Larenas Linnemann reports personal fees from GSK, Astrazeneca, MEDA, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Grunenthal, UCB, Amstrong, Siegfried, DBV Technologies, MSD, Pfizer., grants from Sanofi, Astrazeneca, Novartis, UCB, GSK, TEVA, Chiesi, Boehringer Ingelheim, outside the submitted work. Dr. Mösges reports personal fees from ALK, grants from ASIT biotech, Leti, BitopAG, Hulka, Ursapharm, Optima; personal fees from allergopharma, Nuvo, Meda, Friulchem, Hexal, Servier, Bayer, Johnson & Johnson, Klosterfrau, GSK, MSD, FAES, Stada, UCB, Allergy Therapeutics; grants and personal fees from Bencard, Stallergenes; grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Lofarma; non-financial support from Roxall, Atmos, Bionorica, Otonomy, Ferrero; personal fees and non-financial support from Novartis; Dr. Okamoto reports personal fees from Eizai Co., Ltd., Shionogi Co., Ltd., Torii Co., Ltd., GSK, MSD, Kyowa Co., Ltd., grants and personal fees from Kyorin Co., Ltd., Tiho Co., Ltd., grants from Yakuruto Co., Ltd., Yamada Bee Farm, outside the submitted work. Dr. Papadopoulos reports grants from Gerolymatos, personal fees from Hal Allergy B.V., Novartis Pharma AG, Menarini, Hal Allergy B.V., outside the submitted work. Dr. Pépin reports grants from AIR LIQUIDE FOUNDATION, AGIR à dom, ASTRA ZENECA, FISHER & PAYKEL, MUTUALIA, PHILIPS, RESMED, VITALAIRE, other from AGIR à dom, ASTRA ZENECA, BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM, JAZZ PHARMACEUTICAL, NIGHT BALANCE, PHILIPS, RESMED, SEFAM, outside the submitted work. Dr. 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, grants from Biomay, ASIT Biotech Tools S.A, Laboratorios LETI/LETI Pharma, Anergis S.A., grants from Nuvo, Circassia, Glaxo Smith Kline, personal fees from Novartis Pharma, MEDA Pharma, Mobile Chamber Experts (a GA2LEN Partner), Pohl-Boskamp, Indoor Biotechnologies, grants from, outside the submitted work. Dr. Todo-Bom reports grants and personal fees from Novartis, Mundipharma, GSK Teva Pharma, personal fees from AstraZeneca, grants from Leti, outside the submitted work. Dr. Tsiligianni reports advisory boards from Boehringer Ingelheim and Novartis and a grant from GSK, outside the submitted work. Dr. Wallace reports and Indicates that she is the co-chair of the Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters, a task force composed of 12 members of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology and the American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology. Dr. Waserman reports other from CSL Behring, Shire, AstraZeneca,Teva, Meda, Merck, outside the submitted work. Dr. Zuberbier 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).

We review the history of the classification and coding changes for anaphylaxis and provide current and perspective information in the field. In 2012, an analysis of Brazilian data demonstrated undernotification of anaphylaxis-related deaths because of the difficulties of coding using the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision. This work triggered strategic international actions supported by the Joint Allergy Academies and the International Classification of Diseases World Health Organization (WHO) leadership to update the classification of allergic disorders for the International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11), which resulted in construction of the pioneer "Allergic and hypersensitivity conditions" chapter. The usability of the new framework has been tested by evaluating the same data published in 2012 from the ICD-11 perspective. Coding accuracy was much improved, reaching 95% for definite anaphylaxis. As the results were provided to the WHO Mortality Reference Group, coding rules have been changed, allowing anaphylaxis to be recorded as an underlying cause of death in official mortality statistics. The mandatory use of ICD-11 from January 2022 for documenting cause of death could have 2 immediate consequences: (1) the reported number of anaphylaxis-related deaths might increase because of more appropriate coding and (2) the cross-sectional and longitudinal mortality data generated might ultimately lead to a better understanding of anaphylaxis epidemiology and improved health policies directed at reducing anaphylaxis-related mortality., (Copyright © 2019 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction : Allergen bioavailability underpins the efficacy and safety of SLIT tablets. Three product-related factors are likely to influence this: tablet potency, formulation and sublingual holding time. Areas covered : Tablet formulation determines the rate and extent of solubilized allergen release. Using validated in vitro dissolution assays, the two licensed grass pollen SLIT tablets are shown to release ≥85% of their total allergenic activity within several minutes. Sublingual holding time affects the contact duration between solubilized allergens and sublingual tissue. Maximal uptake of allergens by sublingual tissue requires ~5 minutes, with little uptake occurring within the first minute. A higher potency tablet with longer sublingual holding time would provide higher bioavailability, while faster rates of allergen release in vitro are unlikely to translate to a greater increase in bioavailability. Differences in dissolution times cannot serve as a surrogate of in vivo bioavailability, and are not related to differences in efficacy at the marketed tablet dosages. Rapid in vitro dissolution is likely not a key requirement for inducing a potent immune response. Expert opinion : In vitro dissolution cannot predict the clinical efficacy of SLIT tablets but could be important in immune tolerance and safety. In addition, a discontinuous administration regimen may have benefits for adherence and cost without compromising efficacy.

Background: The primary lung function endpoint in clinical trials in adolescent and adult patients with asthma is usually forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV 1 ). The objective of our analysis was to assess whether peak expiratory flow (PEF) is a suitable alternative primary lung function endpoint., Methods: For this assessment, we calculated post hoc the correlation between pre-dose FEV 1 and pre-dose PEF measured under supervision in the clinic and, for both lung function parameters, the correlations between supervised clinic and unsupervised home measurements, using the results from the 8 Phase III parallel-group trials of the global clinical development programme with tiotropium Respimat® in patients with asthma aged 12 to 75 years., Results: Across all 8 trials included in this analysis, changes in lung function from baseline correlated well between pre-dose FEV 1 and pre-dose PEF when both were measured under supervision in the clinic. Correlation between supervised in-clinic and unsupervised home measurements was stronger for pre-dose PEF than for pre-dose FEV 1 ., Conclusions: Pre-dose PEF measured at home could be an alternative primary lung function endpoint for trials in adolescent and adult patients with asthma. Using home-measured PEF could facilitate trial conduct and improve the convenience for patients by relocating scheduled assessments from the clinic to the patient's home., Trial Registration: Adolescents aged 12 to 17 years: RubaTinA-asthma® ( NCT01257230 ), PensieTinA-asthma® ( NCT01277523 ). Adults aged 18 to 75 years: GraziaTinA-asthma® ( NCT01316380 ), MezzoTinA-asthma® ( NCT01172808 / NCT01172821 ), CadenTinA-asthma® ( NCT01340209 ), PrimoTinA-asthma® ( NCT00772538 / NCT00776984 ). All from Clinicaltrials.gov ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ ).

Background: The 4G4G genotype of plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 (PAI-1) is associated with increased plasma PAI-1 levels and poor asthma control. Previous studies suggest that soy isoflavones can reduce PAI-1 levels., Objective: We sought to investigate PAI-1 genotype-specific differences of the soy isoflavone response in asthma outcomes., Methods: A PAI-1 functional polymorphism (rs1799768, 4G5G) was characterized in subjects with poorly controlled asthma enrolled in a randomized clinical trial of soy isoflavones (n = 265). Genotype-specific treatment responses on asthma outcomes were compared between soy isoflavones and placebo. Normal human bronchial epithelial cells were cultured with or without TGF-β1, genistein, or both, and PAI-1 levels were measured., Results: The 4G4G/4G5G genotype was associated with a greater risk for allergy-related worsened asthma symptoms and eczema at baseline compared with the 5G5G genotype. There was a significant interaction between the genotype and soy isoflavone intervention on oral corticosteroid use for asthma exacerbation (P = .005). In a subgroup analysis soy isoflavones significantly reduced the use of oral corticosteroids (number of events/person-year) by 4-fold compared with placebo in the 4G4G/4G5G genotype (0.2 vs 0.8; relative risk, 0.28; P < .001) but not in the 5G5G genotype. Soy isoflavones reduced plasma PAI-1 levels compared with placebo. Genistein treatment reduced TGF-β1-induced PAI-1 production in normal human bronchial epithelial cells., Conclusions: This study demonstrates that soy isoflavone treatment provides a significant benefit in reducing the number of severe asthma exacerbations in asthmatic patients with the high PAI-1-producing genotype. PAI-1 polymorphisms can be used as a genetic biomarker for soy isoflavone-responsive patients with asthma., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Mobile health can be used to generate innovative insights into optimizing treatment to improve allergic rhinitis (AR) control., Objectives: A cross-sectional real-world observational study was undertaken in 22 countries to complement a pilot study and provide novel information on medication use, disease control, and work productivity in the everyday life of patients with AR., Methods: A mobile phone app (Allergy Diary, which is freely available on Google Play and Apple stores) was used to collect the data of daily visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for (1) overall allergic symptoms; (2) nasal, ocular, and asthma symptoms; (3) work; and (4) medication use by using a treatment scroll list including all allergy medications (prescribed and over-the-counter) customized for 22 countries. The 4 most common intranasal medications containing intranasal corticosteroids and 8 oral H 1 -antihistamines were studied., Results: Nine thousand one hundred twenty-two users filled in 112,054 days of VASs in 2016 and 2017. Assessment of days was informative. Control of days with rhinitis differed between no (best control), single (good control for intranasal corticosteroid-treated days), or multiple (worst control) treatments. Users with the worst control increased the range of treatments being used. The same trend was found for asthma, eye symptoms, and work productivity. Differences between oral H 1 -antihistamines were found., Conclusions: This study confirms the usefulness of the Allergy Diary in accessing and assessing behavior in patients with AR. This observational study using a very simple assessment tool (VAS) on a mobile phone had the potential to answer questions previously thought infeasible., (Copyright © 2019 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. All rights reserved.)

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases organized a workshop to develop trial concepts that could improve the use and effectiveness of aeroallergen immunotherapy (AAIT). Expert groups were formed to accomplish the following tasks: (1) propose a study design to compare the effectiveness and safety of subcutaneous versus sublingual AAIT; (2) propose a study design to compare the effectiveness and safety of AAIT by using 1 or a few allergens versus all or most allergens to which a patient is sensitized; (3) propose a study design to determine whether AAIT can alter the progression of childhood allergic airways disease; and (4) propose a study design to determine the optimal dose and duration of AAIT to achieve maximal effectiveness with acceptable safety. Study designs were presented by the workgroups, extensively discussed at the workshop, and revised for this report. The proposed trials would be of long duration and require large highly characterized patient populations. Scientific caveats and feasibility matters are discussed. These concepts are intended to help the development of clinical trials that can address some of the major questions related to the practice of AAIT for the management and prevention of allergic airways disease., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Several classifications of systemic adverse reactions (SARs) during allergen immunotherapy have been proposed, but the comparison of their usefulness in daily clinical practice is lacking., Objective: The present post hoc analysis was aimed at investigating the practicality of the most relevant international classifications proposed by the European Academy of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the American Academy of Asthma, Allergology and Clinical Immunology/American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (AAAACI/ACAAI), and the World Allergy Organization (WAO) using data provided by the longitudinal European Survey on Adverse Systemic Reactions in Allergen Immunotherapy (EASSI) based on daily clinical practice in 3 countries in Europe., Methods: One hundred nine SARs over 4363 allergen immunotherapy courses were classified as mild (n = 78 [71.5%]), moderate (n = 27 [24.8%]), and severe (n = 4 [3.7%]) by EASSI-doctors, which served as a criterion standard. Every SAR was further classified according to the following grading systems: EAACI 2006 Grading System (EAACI2006), WAO 2010 Grading System (WAO2010), WAO 2017 Grading System (WAO2017), and AAAAI/ACAAI Grading System. All SAR rankings were also cross-compared among each other (Kendall correlation coefficient Tau-b). In general, a low epinephrine use was identified, severe reactions occurred within 15 minutes, and milder reactions were skin only., Results: The analysis indicated disparities in mild and moderate SARs in the different grading systems. The correlation between EASSI-severity and EAACI2006, WAO2010, WAO2017, and AAAAI/ACAAI Grading System was 0.639, 0.502, 0.315, and 0.663, respectively (P < .001 in all cases). However, correlation of severe reactions was good. The best correlation with the onset of the reaction and the number of System Organ Class involved were detected in WAO grading systems., Conclusions: Despite having a lower correlation than EAACI and AAAAI/ACAAI, the WAO grading appears to provide a moderate correlation among these classifications. The analysis might help to inform clinicians and investigators on selecting the most appropriate classification., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Aims: Mobile Airways Sentinel NetworK (MASK) belongs to the Fondation Partenariale MACVIA-LR of Montpellier, France and aims to provide an active and healthy life to rhinitis sufferers and to those with asthma multimorbidity across the life cycle, whatever their gender or socio-economic status, in order to reduce health and social inequities incurred by the disease and to improve the digital transformation of health and care. The ultimate goal is to change the management strategy in chronic diseases., Methods: MASK implements ICT technologies for individualized and predictive medicine to develop novel care pathways by a multi-disciplinary group centred around the patients., Stakeholders: Include patients, health care professionals (pharmacists and physicians), authorities, patient's associations, private and public sectors., Results: MASK is deployed in 23 countries and 17 languages. 26,000 users have registered., Eu Grants 2018: MASK is participating in EU projects (POLLAR: impact of air POLLution in Asthma and Rhinitis, EIT Health, DigitalHealthEurope, Euriphi and Vigour)., Lessons Learnt: (i) Adherence to treatment is the major problem of allergic disease, (ii) Self-management strategies should be considerably expanded (behavioural), (iii) Change management is essential in allergic diseases, (iv) Education strategies should be reconsidered using a patient-centred approach and (v) Lessons learnt for allergic diseases can be expanded to chronic diseases.

Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) has evolved from a guideline by using the best approach to integrated care pathways using mobile technology in patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma multimorbidity. The proposed next phase of ARIA is change management, with the aim of providing an active and healthy life to patients with rhinitis and to those with asthma multimorbidity across the lifecycle irrespective of their sex or socioeconomic status to reduce health and social inequities incurred by the disease. ARIA has followed the 8-step model of Kotter to assess and implement the effect of rhinitis on asthma multimorbidity and to propose multimorbid guidelines. A second change management strategy is proposed by ARIA Phase 4 to increase self-medication and shared decision making in rhinitis and asthma multimorbidity. An innovation of ARIA has been the development and validation of information technology evidence-based tools (Mobile Airways Sentinel Network [MASK]) that can inform patient decisions on the basis of a self-care plan proposed by the health care professional., (Copyright © 2018 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The purpose of the study is to evaluate whether low-dose exposure to benzene, an environmental pollutant to which male and female traffic policemen are daily exposed to could cause alterations in plasma luteinizing hormone (LH) levels., Methods: From an initial sample of 1594 workers, we only selected 95 workers of whom study we knew the values of late-shift benzene and LH hormone. All subjects underwent biological monitoring (final blood benzene evaluation) and luteinizing hormone dosing. Excluding subjects with the main confounding factors, the final sample included 76 workers. The normal distribution of the variables was evaluated using the Kolmogorov - Smirnov test, followed by the logarithmic transformation of the LH and benzene values. The comparison among means was performed by using the t-test for the independent samples. The ANOVA test was performed for variables with more than 2 modes (ages and seniority) and Pearson correlation index between variables in the total sample and after subdivision as to sex, job, sports activity and smoking. The results were considered significant when p values were less than 0.05., Results/conclusion: The study did not show a correlation between benzene levels and LH plasma levels in outdoor workers., (Copyright© Bentham Science Publishers; For any queries, please email at epub@benthamscience.net.)

Background: Allergic rhinitis (AR) management has changed in recent years following the switch from the concept of disease severity to the concept of disease control, publication of the AR clinical decision support system (CDSS) and development of mobile health (m-health) tools for patients (eg Allergy Diary). The Allergy Diary Companion app for healthcare providers is currently being developed and will be launched in 2018. It incorporates the AR CDSS to provide evidence-based treatment recommendations, linking all key stakeholders in AR management., Objective: To produce an electronic version of the AR CDSS (e-CDSS) for incorporation into the Allergy Diary Companion, to describe the app interfaces used to collect information necessary to inform the e-CDSS and to summarize some key features of the Allergy Diary Companion., Methods: The steps involved in producing the e-CDSS and incorporating it into the Allergy Diary Companion were (a) generation of treatment management scenarios; (b) expert consensus on treatment recommendations; (c) generation of electronic decisional algorithms to describe all AR CDSS scenarios; (d) digitization of these algorithms to form the e-CDSS; and (e) embedding the e-CDSS into the app to permit easy user e-CDSS interfacing., Results: Key experts in the AR field agreed on the AR CDSS approach to AR management and on specific treatment recommendations provided by Allergy Diary Companion. Based on this consensus, decision processes were developed and programmed into the Allergy Diary Companion using Titanium Appcelerator (JavaScript) for IOS tablets. To our knowledge, this is the first time the development of any m-health tool has been described in this transparent and detailed way, providing confidence, not only in the app, but also in the provided management recommendations., Conclusion: The Allergy Diary Companion for providers provides guideline and expert-endorsed AR management recommendations. [MASK paper No 32]., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

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

Background: Multimorbidity in allergic airway diseases is well known, but no data exist about the daily dynamics of symptoms and their impact on work. To better understand this, we aimed to assess the presence and control of daily allergic multimorbidity (asthma, conjunctivitis, rhinitis) and its impact on work productivity using a mobile technology, the Allergy Diary., Methods: We undertook a 1-year prospective observational study in which 4 210 users and 32 585 days were monitored in 19 countries. Five visual analogue scales (VAS) assessed the daily burden of the disease (i.e., global evaluation, nose, eyes, asthma and work). Visual analogue scale levels <20/100 were categorized as "Low" burden and VAS levels ≥50/100 as "High" burden., Results: Visual analogue scales global measured levels assessing the global control of the allergic disease were significantly associated with allergic multimorbidity. Eight hypothesis-driven patterns were defined based on "Low" and "High" VAS levels. There were <0.2% days of Rhinitis Low and Asthma High or Conjunctivitis High patterns. There were 5.9% days with a Rhinitis High-Asthma Low pattern. There were 1.7% days with a Rhinitis High-Asthma High-Conjunctivitis Low pattern. A novel Rhinitis High-Asthma High-Conjunctivitis High pattern was identified in 2.9% days and had the greatest impact on uncontrolled VAS global measured and impaired work productivity. Work productivity was significantly correlated with VAS global measured levels., Conclusions: In a novel approach examining daily symptoms with mobile technology, we found considerable intra-individual variability of allergic multimorbidity including a previously unrecognized extreme pattern of uncontrolled multimorbidity., (© 2018 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

The study aimed to compare the distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) with the pure-tone audiometry and to analyze the changes in participants exposed to noise. The results show a prevalence of participants with impaired DPOAEs higher than the prevalence of participants with impaired audiometries in the total sample, in men, and in outdoor workers and a prevalence of impaired DPOAEs and of impaired audiometries in men higher than in women and in outdoor workers higher than in indoor workers. The comparison of mean values between outdoor and indoor workers shows a significant difference only on some frequencies, in the DP-gram. The results suggest a higher effectiveness of DPOAEs compared with the pure-tone audiometry in identifying the presence of any damage in individuals exposed to noise at an early stage.

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