In the (sub)tropics allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma classification of allergic rhinitis is more useful than perennial-seasonal classification

BackgroundTwo different allergic rhinitis (AR) symptom phenotype classifications exist. Treatment recommendations are based on intermittent–persistent (INT-PER) cataloging, but clinical trials still use the former seasonal AR–perennial AR (SAR-PAR) classification. This study was designed to describe how INT-PER, mild–moderate/severe and SAR-PAR of patients seen by allergists are distributed over the different climate zones in a (subtropical country and how these phenotypes relate to allergen sensitization patterns.MethodsSix climate zones throughout Mexico were determined, based on National Geographic Institute (Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía) data. Subsequent AR patients (2–68 years old) underwent a blinded, standardized skin-prick test and filled out a validated questionnaire phenotyping AR.ResultsFive hundred twenty-nine subjects participated in this study. In the tropical zone with 87% house-dust mite sensitization, INT (80.9%; p < 0.001) and PAR (91%; p = 0.04) were more frequent than in the subtropics. In the central high-pollen areas, there was less moderate/severe AR (65.5%; p < 0.005). Frequency of comorbid asthma showed a clear no -south gradient, from 25% in the dry north to 59% in the tropics (p < 0.005). No differences exist in AR cataloging among patients with different sensitization patterns, with two minor exceptions (more PER in tree sensitized and more PAR in mold positives; p < 0.05).ConclusionIn a (sub)tropical country the SAR-PAR classification seems of limited value and bears poor relation with the INT-PER classification. INT is more frequent in the tropical zone. Because PER has been shown to relate to AR severity, clinical trials should select patients based on INT-PER combined with the severity cataloging because these make for a better treatment guide than SAR-PAR.