Asthma and obstructive sleep apnea: Unveiling correlations and treatable traits for comprehensive care.

Asthma and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) are common respiratory disorders. They share characteristics such as airway obstruction, poor sleep quality, and low quality of life. They are often present as comorbidities, along with obesity, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and allergic rhinitis (AR), which impacts the disease's control. In recent years, there has been discussion about the association between these conditions and their pathophysiological and clinical consequences, resulting in worse health outcomes, increased healthcare resource consumption, prolonged hospital stays, and increased morbidity and mortality. Some studies demonstrate that treatment with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) can have a beneficial effect on both pathologies. This review summarizes the existing evidence of the association between asthma and OSA at their pathophysiological, epidemiological, clinical, and therapeutic levels. It intends to raise awareness among healthcare professionals about these conditions and the need for further research.

Tablet allergen immunotherapy: the anaphylaxis issue.

For the first time 15 years ago, tablet allergen immunotherapy (T-AIT) formulations were approved by regulatory agencies for treating allergic rhinitis caused by grass pollen in adults and children aged >5 years. Extensive evidences existed about effectiveness and safety of AIT. However, the safety profile is particularly compelling in children. Generally, T-AIT causes local reactions, mostly in the oral cavity, that are usually mild-to-moderate and often self-resolving. However, systemic allergic reactions are also observed with T-AIT, anaphylaxis representing the most fearsome adverse event, considering that it occurs in subjects treated for allergic rhinitis. Therefore, we conducted a literature search of patients reporting anaphylaxis because of T-AIT. Nine cases of anaphylactic reactions were reported in literature. Notably, no death was reported using T-AIT. This outcome was very important as it underscored the substantial safety of T-AIT. However, T-AIT deserves careful attention, mainly in the pediatric population. In this regard, after the first report of anaphylactic reaction at the first administration of T-AIT, manufacturers recommended that the first dose should be administered in a medical facility in the presence of staff with experience in managing anaphylaxis and the patient should be observed for at least 30 min. Interestingly, reported anaphylactic reactions were due to grass pollen extracts, with no report concerning other allergen extracts. However, it is relevant to note that anaphylactic reactions because of T-AIT are not reported in recent years.

[Recent advances in the practical management of allergic rhinitis.] / Recenti progressi nella gestione pratica della rinite allergica.

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a widespread disease, and its prevalence is still growing. AR may be associated with other diseases, including conjunctivitis, rhinosinusitis, asthma, food allergy, and atopic dermatitis. Diagnosis is based on history, physical examination, documentation of sensitization, such as the production of allergen-specific IgE, also using molecular diagnostics in selected patients. Treatments is based on education, engagement, allergen avoidance, non-pharmacological and pharmacological remedies, and allergen-specific immunotherapy (Ait). Symptomatic treatments mainly concern intranasal/oral antihistamines and/or nasal corticosteroids. This article also aims to discuss new management strategies for AR patients. The self-management of allergic rhinitis could include new strategies. In this regard, particular interest should be considered to intranasal corticosteroids and antihistamines without medical prescription, probiotics and other natural substances, and new formulations (tablets) of Ait.

[Research advances of mesenchymal stem cell in allergic rhinitis].

Allergic rhinitis is a chronic nasal mucosal inflammation characterized by upper airway hyperresponsiveness, involving a variety of immune cells and inflammatory mediators. Drugs, immunotherapy, and surgical operation are the principal treatments at present. The study found that mesenchymal stem cells have the ability of immune regulation and have a promising clinical application in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. In this review, the action mechanism of mesenchymal stem cells, the immunomodulatory effect of mesenchymal stem cells on the key cells of allergic rhinitis, and the challenges of clinical application are reviewed, to provide new directions for the treatment of allergic rhinitis.

Automatic pterygopalatine fossa segmentation and localisation based on DenseASPP.

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis constitutes a widespread health concern, with traditional treatments often proving to be painful and ineffective. Acupuncture targeting the pterygopalatine fossa proves effective but is complicated due to the intricate nearby anatomy. METHODS: To enhance the safety and precision in targeting the pterygopalatine fossa, we introduce a deep learning-based model to refine the segmentation of the pterygopalatine fossa. Our model expands the U-Net framework with DenseASPP and integrates an attention mechanism for enhanced precision in the localisation and segmentation of the pterygopalatine fossa. RESULTS: The model achieves Dice Similarity Coefficient of 93.89% and 95% Hausdorff Distance of 2.53 mm with significant precision. Remarkably, it only uses 1.98 M parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Our deep learning approach yields significant advancements in localising and segmenting the pterygopalatine fossa, providing a reliable basis for guiding pterygopalatine fossa-assisted punctures.

[Frequency of sensitization to shrimp with house dust mite immunotherapy with polymerized extracts]. / Frecuencia de sensibilización a camarón con inmunoterapia a ácaros con extractos polimerizados.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the risk of IgE sensitization and symptoms to shrimp in a population that has received AIT with polymerized mite extract. METHODS: Patients with allergic rhinitis sensitized to dust mites (Dermatophogides spp) with an indication for mite AIT were included. Those patients who had not yet received AIT or had received less than 6 doses were included as controls and those who had received more than 24 doses of AIT were included as cases. Sensitization to shrimp was assessed by skin prick test with complete shrimp extract and/or shrimp-specific IgE. RESULTS: A total of 68 patients were included; 47 cases and 21 controls. When calculating the odds ratio of sensitization according to time with immunotherapy we observed that there were no differences between the group of cases and controls (OR 0.76 95% CI 0.26 to 2.22 p 0.7 by MacNemar technique). Factors such as consumption or not of shrimp and frequency of consumption do not seem to be related to the outcome. CONCLUSION: In contrast to what was reported with aqueous extracts, we observed that AIT with polymerized extracts is not a risk factor for shrimp sensitization. It is necessary to reproduce these results with a larger sample size to explore other factors.

OBJETIVO: Evaluar el riesgo de sensibilización IgE y síntomas a camarón en una población que ha recibido AIT con extracto polimerizado para ácaros. MÉTODOS: Se incluyeron pacientes con rinitis alérgica sensibilizados a ácaros del polvo (Dermatophogides spp) con indicación de AIT para ácaros. Aquellos pacientes que no habían aún recibido AIT o llevaban menos de seis dosis, fueron incluidos como controles, y aquellos que llevaban más de 24 dosis de AIT, fueron incluidos como casos. Se evaluó la sensibilización a camarón mediante prueba cutánea con extracto completo de camarón y/o IgE específica a camarón. RESULTADOS: En total, 68 pacientes fueron incluidos; 47 casos y 21 controles. Al calcular el odds ratio de la sensibilización de acuerdo al tiempo con la inmunoterapia, observamos que no había diferencias entre el grupo de casos y controles (OR 0,76 95% IC 0,26 a 2,22 p 0,7 por técnica de MacNemar). Factores como el consumo o no de camarón y la frecuencia de consumo, no parecen estar relacionados con el desenlace. CONCLUSIÓN: A diferencia de lo reportado con extractos acuosos, observamos de AIT con extractos polimerizados para no es un factor de riesgo para la sensibilización a camarón. Es necesario reproducir estos resultados con un mayor tamaño de muestra que permita explorar otros factores.

[Integrated traditional Chinese and western medicine expert consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of combined allergic rhinitis and asthma syndrome].

Combined allergic rhinitis and asthma syndrome (CARAS) refers to a common respiratory disease that occurs simultaneously with clinical or subclinical allergic symptoms of the upper respiratory tract (allergic rhinitis) and the lower respiratory tract (asthma). The incidence of CARAS is high and the quality of life of the patients is greatly affected. At present, treatment of this comprehensive disease is often carried out separately in the otorhinolaryngology and respiratory departments. One of the reasons is a lack of coordinated treatment consensus on the comprehensive management of this disease. As a common respiratory disease, this syndrome also has a profound clinical basis of traditional Chinese medicine in its diagnosis and treatment. Therefore, the Allergy Committee of Chinese Association of Integrative Medicine organized domestic experts in respiratory medicine, otolaryngology, allergy, pediatrics, traditional Chinese Medicine internal medicine and other related fields to discuss and summarize the etiology and anatomical characteristics, pathophysiology and pathogenesis, laboratory examination, diagnostic evaluation and differential diagnosis as well as treatment of both traditional Chinese medicine and western medicine, in order to provide integrated diagnosis and treatment opinions for this common integrative disease of upper and lower respiratory system in clinical practice.

Efficacy of 300 IR house dust mite immunotherapy as a function of disease activity: Tertile analysis in clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: The symptoms of house dust mite (HDM)-induced allergic rhinitis (AR) vary with changes in exposure related to the weather or the domestic environment. In allergen immunotherapy (AIT) studies, a certain level of AR disease activity is necessary to demonstrate treatment efficacy; the latter can be underestimated if a substantial proportion of the patient population is weakly symptomatic. OBJECTIVE: To better estimate the real treatment effect of a HDM sublingual AIT (SLIT) tablet, we analysed the results of natural field studies in detail by applying a tertile approach. METHODS: We used data from three randomised, controlled trials (RCT) in a total of 2585 patients with AR treated with the 300 index of reactivity (IR) HDM SLIT-tablet or placebo. The study centres were grouped into tertiles according to the level of combined symptom and medication scores in patients in the placebo group. In each tertile, the difference between SLIT and placebo was assessed through an analysis of covariance. RESULTS: In the three RCTs, combined scores were found to be similar in the SLIT and placebo groups in the low tertiles. The treatment effect of the 300 IR HDM tablet increased in the medium and high tertiles, with notably significant differences versus placebo in the highest tertile and greater (ranging from -21% to -39%) than in the entire study population (-13% to -20%). The positive relationship between treatment efficacy and the combined score in each tertile was independent of the RCT and the score used. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Application of the tertile approach to AIT studies in a field in which many variables interact strongly might provide more accurate and meaningful measurements of efficacy and benefit for patients, better reflecting their real-life condition.

Increased Nasal Blimp1 + Treg Cells After Sublingual Immunotherapy Reflect the Efficacy of Treatment in Allergic Rhinitis.

INTRODUCTION: Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) plays a pivotal role in altering the immune status and tissue responses in allergic rhinitis (AR). This study focuses on the impact of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) involving dust mite drops, exploring the modulation of regulatory T cells (Treg) and their specific marker, BLIMP1, in the nasal mucosa. METHODS: Immune cells were isolated from nasal lavage fluid of patients with AR undergoing SLIT (n = 94). Treg cells were analyzed for BLIMP1 expression, and chemokine levels associated with Treg recruitment were assessed using Luminex assay. Patients were categorized on the basis of SLIT efficacy and followed for changes after discontinuation. RESULTS: SLIT induced a significant increase in nasal Treg cells (7.09 ± 2.59% vs. 0.75 ± 0.27%, P < 0.0001). BLIMP1 expression in Treg cells notably increased after SLIT (0.36 ± 0.22% to 16.86 ± 5.74%, P < 0.0001). Ineffective SLIT cases exhibited lower levels of nasal Treg and Blimp1 + Treg cells (both P < 0.0001). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis confirmed their potential as efficacy predictors (AUC = 0.908 and 0.968, respectively). SLIT discontinuation led to a significant reduction in Treg and Blimp1 + Treg cells (P < 0.001), emphasizing their maintenance during treatment. Pro-inflammatory cytokines decreased (P < 0.001), while CCL2 associated with Treg recruitment increased (P = 0.0015). CONCLUSION: Elevated nasal Blimp1 + Treg cells serve as a predictive biomarker for SLIT responsiveness in pediatric AR. Their influence on immunotherapy effectiveness contributes to a nuanced understanding of SLIT mechanisms, allowing for disease stratification and personalized treatment plans. This study offers scientific support for predicting SLIT efficacy, enhancing the prospects of improved treatment outcomes in AR.

Baseline Severity and Disease Duration Can Predict the Response to Allergen-specific Immunotherapy in Allergic Rhinitis.

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) has confirmed its efficacy in improving the symptoms of allergic rhinitis. However, no reliable biomarkers have been identified to predict the efficacy of AIT were found. We aimed to find clinical and immunological markers to predict efficacy in children after 2 years of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). A total of 285 children diagnosed with allergic rhinitis were recruited. The clinical efficacy was evaluated by comparing endpoint and baseline symptom and medication scores (SMS). Baseline clinical and immunological markers (serum total and specific immunoglobulin [Ig]E) and their correlation with clinical efficacy were analyzed. Of the 285 children recruited, 249 completed the 2-year SLIT program. After 2 years of SLIT, 68.3% of the children showed a significant response. Children in the Remarkable Response Group had the highest baseline SMS and most extended disease duration, followed by the Effective Relief and Unresponsive Group. Correlation analysis demonstrated that SMS improvement was positively correlated with baseline SMS (r=0.67) and disease duration (r=0.35). SMS improvement was not correlated with age, body mass index, total or specific IgE levels, or their ratios. Our results show that baseline SMS and disease duration can predict the efficacy of SLIT. Our study can guide the selection of suitable candidates for SLIT.

Allergic Rhinitis: A Review.

Importance: Allergic rhinitis affects an estimated 15% of the US population (approximately 50 million individuals) and is associated with the presence of asthma, eczema, chronic or recurrent sinusitis, cough, and both tension and migraine headaches. Observations: Allergic rhinitis occurs when disruption of the epithelial barrier allows allergens to penetrate the mucosal epithelium of nasal passages, inducing a T-helper type 2 inflammatory response and production of allergen-specific IgE. Allergic rhinitis typically presents with symptoms of nasal congestion, rhinorrhea, postnasal drainage, sneezing, and itching of the eyes, nose, and throat. In an international study, the most common symptoms of allergic rhinitis were rhinorrhea (90.38%) and nasal congestion (94.23%). Patients with nonallergic rhinitis present primarily with nasal congestion and postnasal drainage frequently associated with sinus pressure, ear plugging, muffled sounds and pain, and eustachian tube dysfunction that is less responsive to nasal corticosteroids. Patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis typically have physical examination findings of edematous and pale turbinates. Patients with perennial allergic rhinitis typically have erythematous and inflamed turbinates with serous secretions that appear similar to other forms of chronic rhinitis at physical examination. Patients with nonallergic rhinitis have negative test results for specific IgE aeroallergens. Intermittent allergic rhinitis is defined as symptoms occurring less than 4 consecutive days/week or less than 4 consecutive weeks/year. Persistent allergic rhinitis is defined as symptoms occurring more often than 4 consecutive days/week and for more than 4 consecutive weeks/year. Patients with allergic rhinitis should avoid inciting allergens. In addition, first-line treatment for mild intermittent or mild persistent allergic rhinitis may include a second-generation H1 antihistamine (eg, cetirizine, fexofenadine, desloratadine, loratadine) or an intranasal antihistamine (eg, azelastine, olopatadine), whereas patients with persistent moderate to severe allergic rhinitis should be treated initially with an intranasal corticosteroid (eg, fluticasone, triamcinolone, budesonide, mometasone) either alone or in combination with an intranasal antihistamine. In contrast, first-line therapy for patients with nonallergic rhinitis consists of an intranasal antihistamine as monotherapy or in combination with an intranasal corticosteroid. Conclusions and Relevance: Allergic rhinitis is associated with symptoms of nasal congestion, sneezing, and itching of the eyes, nose, and throat. Patients with allergic rhinitis should be instructed to avoid inciting allergens. Therapies include second-generation H1 antihistamines (eg, cetirizine, fexofenadine, desloratadine, loratadine), intranasal antihistamines (eg, azelastine, olopatadine), and intranasal corticosteroids (eg, fluticasone, triamcinolone, budesonide, mometasone) and should be selected based on the severity and frequency of symptoms and patient preference.

Evaluation of the treatment strategy for complicated allergic rhinitis.

OBJECTIVE: Aim: To carry out a comprehensive evaluation of treatment modification for patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) complicated by anxiety-neurotic disorders. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Materials and Methods: Patients with SAR in the acute stage on the background of anxiety disorders were studied. Immunological studies were carried out, an assessment of the dynamics of indicators of the quality of life of patients, the level of anxiety / depression was assessed. In the clinical group, a variant of therapy modification was proposed. RESULTS: Results: Significant changes in the subpopulation ratio of lymphocytes, an increase in the immunoregulatory index, which indicated the severity of the immunological process, were revealed in SAR patients in the acute stage against the background of anxiety disorders. At the same time, a significant activation of the humoral link of immunity was observed: an increase and a significant increase in IgE in the blood serum and an increase in the content of sIgA in the nasal secretion. In most patients, eosinophilia was found in the peripheral blood and in the rhinocytogram before treatment. In the study of the quality of life of patients, changes in many parameters were found. CONCLUSION: Conclusions: The combination of "Nazafort Allergy Protection" and Atarax seems to be the most successful, which significantly improved the physical and psycho-emotional state of patients with SAR, complicated by anxiety and neurotic disorders. This combination led to an increase in the stress resistance of patients.

[Research progress of immune cell markers in allergic rhinitis for the evaluation of allergen immunotherapy].

Allergic rhinitis（AR） is a chronic inflammation of nasal mucosa mediated by IgE, which prevalence is increasing year by year. Allergen immunotherapy（AIT） has been proved to be effective in the treatment of AR. Patients can usually achieve satisfactory clinical remission after the standard course of treatment. At present, sIgE/tIgE is mainly used to evaluate the severity of allergy in patients with AR before immunotherapy, but there is no recognized biomarker for evaluating the efficacy of AIT. Based on the mechanism that immune cells participate in the formation of immune tolerance during AIT, this paper reviews the latest progress of immune cell markers in allergic rhinitis for the evaluation of the efficacy of AIT in recent years, in order to provide a more comprehensive evaluation basis for AR patients during immunotherapy.

SQ sublingual immunotherapy tablets for children with allergic rhinitis: A review of phase three trials.

AIM: To provide paediatricians with a summary of efficacy and safety of SQ sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets from phase three, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials in children and adolescents with allergic rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis, with and without asthma. METHODS: PubMed searches were conducted and unpublished data were included if necessary. RESULTS: Of the 93 publications, 12 were identified reporting 10 trials. One trial was excluded as paediatric-specific efficacy data were unavailable. The nine eligible trials evaluated grass, house dust mite, ragweed and tree SLIT tablets. Consistent reductions in allergic rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis symptoms and medication use were observed with SQ SLIT tablets versus placebo. In a five-year trial, sustained reduction of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis symptoms, asthma symptoms and medication use were observed with SQ grass SLIT tablet versus placebo. The number-needed-to-treat to prevent asthma symptoms and medication use in one additional child during follow-up was lowest in younger children. SQ SLIT tablets were generally well tolerated across trials. CONCLUSION: Evidence supports use of SQ SLIT tablets in children and adolescents with allergic rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis, with and without asthma. Long-term data demonstrate disease-modifying effects of SQ grass SLIT tablet and suggest the clinical relevance of initiating allergy immunotherapy earlier in the disease course.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Immunotherapy for Inhalant Allergy.

OBJECTIVE: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the therapeutic exposure to an allergen or allergens selected by clinical assessment and allergy testing to decrease allergic symptoms and induce immunologic tolerance. Inhalant AIT is administered to millions of patients for allergic rhinitis (AR) and allergic asthma (AA) and is most commonly delivered as subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Despite its widespread use, there is variability in the initiation and delivery of safe and effective immunotherapy, and there are opportunities for evidence-based recommendations for improved patient care. PURPOSE: The purpose of this clinical practice guideline (CPG) is to identify quality improvement opportunities and provide clinicians trustworthy, evidence-based recommendations regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. Specific goals of the guideline are to optimize patient care, promote safe and effective therapy, reduce unjustified variations in care, and reduce the risk of harm. The target patients for the guideline are any individuals aged 5 years and older with AR, with or without AA, who are either candidates for immunotherapy or treated with immunotherapy for their inhalant allergies. The target audience is all clinicians involved in the administration of immunotherapy. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence-based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the guideline development group (GDG). It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. The statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experience and assessment of individual patients. ACTION STATEMENTS: The GDG made a strong recommendation that (Key Action Statement [KAS] 10) the clinician performing allergy skin testing or administering AIT must be able to diagnose and manage anaphylaxis. The GDG made recommendations for the following KASs: (KAS 1) Clinicians should offer or refer to a clinician who can offer immunotherapy for patients with AR with or without AA if their patients' symptoms are inadequately controlled with medical therapy, allergen avoidance, or both, or have a preference for immunomodulation. (KAS 2A) Clinicians should not initiate AIT for patients who are pregnant, have uncontrolled asthma, or are unable to tolerate injectable epinephrine. (KAS 3) Clinicians should evaluate the patient or refer the patient to a clinician who can evaluate for signs and symptoms of asthma before initiating AIT and for signs and symptoms of uncontrolled asthma before administering subsequent AIT. (KAS 4) Clinicians should educate patients who are immunotherapy candidates regarding the differences between SCIT and SLIT (aqueous and tablet) including risks, benefits, convenience, and costs. (KAS 5) Clinicians should educate patients about the potential benefits of AIT in (1) preventing new allergen sensitizations, (2) reducing the risk of developing AA, and (3) altering the natural history of the disease with continued benefit after discontinuation of therapy. (KAS 6) Clinicians who administer SLIT to patients with seasonal AR should offer pre- and co-seasonal immunotherapy. (KAS 7) Clinicians prescribing AIT should limit treatment to only those clinically relevant allergens that correlate with the patient's history and are confirmed by testing. (KAS 9) Clinicians administering AIT should continue escalation or maintenance dosing when patients have local reactions (LRs) to AIT. (KAS 11) Clinicians should avoid repeat allergy testing as an assessment of the efficacy of ongoing AIT unless there is a change in environmental exposures or a loss of control of symptoms. (KAS 12) For patients who are experiencing symptomatic control from AIT, clinicians should treat for a minimum duration of 3 years, with ongoing treatment duration based on patient response to treatment. The GDG offered the following KASs as options: (KAS 2B) Clinicians may choose not to initiate AIT for patients who use concomitant beta-blockers, have a history of anaphylaxis, have systemic immunosuppression, or have eosinophilic esophagitis (SLIT only). (KAS 8) Clinicians may treat polysensitized patients with a limited number of allergens.

Executive Summary of Clinical Practice Guideline on Immunotherapy for Inhalant Allergy.

OBJECTIVE: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the therapeutic exposure to an allergen or allergens selected by clinical assessment and allergy testing to decrease allergic symptoms and induce immunologic tolerance. Inhalant AIT is administered to millions of patients for allergic rhinitis (AR) and allergic asthma (AA) and is most commonly delivered as subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Despite its widespread use, there is variability in the initiation and delivery of safe and effective immunotherapy, and there are opportunities for evidence-based recommendations for improved patient care. PURPOSE: The purpose of this clinical practice guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities and provide clinicians trustworthy, evidence-based recommendations regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. Specific goals of the guideline are to optimize patient care, promote safe and effective therapy, reduce unjustified variations in care, and reduce risk of harm. The target patients for the guideline are any individuals aged 5 years and older with AR, with or without AA, who are either candidates for immunotherapy or treated with immunotherapy for their inhalant allergies. The target audience is all clinicians involved in the administration of immunotherapy. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence-based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the guideline development group. It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. The statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experience and assessment of individual patients. ACTION STATEMENTS: The guideline development group made a strong recommendation that (Key Action Statement [KAS] 10) the clinician performing allergy skin testing or administering AIT must be able to diagnose and manage anaphylaxis. The guideline development group made recommendations for the following KASs: (KAS 1) Clinicians should offer or refer to a clinician who can offer immunotherapy for patients with AR with or without AA if their patients' symptoms are inadequately controlled with medical therapy, allergen avoidance, or both, or have a preference for immunomodulation. (KAS 2A) Clinicians should not initiate AIT for patients who are pregnant, have uncontrolled asthma, or are unable to tolerate injectable epinephrine. (KAS 3) Clinicians should evaluate the patient or refer the patient to a clinician who can evaluate for signs and symptoms of asthma before initiating AIT and for signs and symptoms of uncontrolled asthma before administering subsequent AIT. (KAS 4) Clinicians should educate patients who are immunotherapy candidates regarding the differences between SCIT and SLIT (aqueous and tablet) including risks, benefits, convenience, and costs. (KAS 5) Clinicians should educate patients about the potential benefits of AIT in (1) preventing new allergen sensitization, (2) reducing the risk of developing AA, and (3) altering the natural history of the disease with continued benefit after discontinuation of therapy. (KAS 6) Clinicians who administer SLIT to patients with seasonal AR should offer pre- and co-seasonal immunotherapy. (KAS 7) Clinicians prescribing AIT should limit treatment to only those clinically relevant allergens that correlate with the patient's history and are confirmed by testing. (KAS 9) Clinicians administering AIT should continue escalation or maintenance dosing when patients have local reactions to AIT. (KAS 11) Clinicians should avoid repeat allergy testing as an assessment of the efficacy of ongoing AIT unless there is a change in environmental exposures or a loss of control of symptoms. (KAS 12) For patients who are experiencing symptomatic control from AIT, clinicians should treat for a minimum duration of 3 years, with ongoing treatment duration based on patient response to treatment. The guideline development group offered the following KASs as options: (KAS 2B) Clinicians may choose not to initiate AIT for patients who use concomitant beta-blockers, have a history of anaphylaxis, have systemic immunosuppression, or have eosinophilic esophagitis (SLIT only). (KAS 8) Clinicians may treat polysensitized patients with a limited number of allergens.

[Allergen-specific immunotherapy : A brief overview in association with allergic conjunctivitis]. / Allergenspezifische Immuntherapie : Ein kurzer Überblick im Zusammenhang mit der allergischen Konjunktivitis.

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is the only causal and disease-modifying treatment for immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated type I allergies. Regular exposure to the causative allergen results in an immunomodulatory effect by which the predominant T­helper (Th) 2 lymphocyte response is shifted to a Th1 lymphocyte response and more allergen-specific blocking immunoglobulins are produced. The approval of substances for AIT is regulated by the Therapy Allergens Ordinance (TAV). There are subcutaneous and/or sublingual AITs for the following indications: allergic rhinitis, allergic conjunctivitis, allergic asthma and insect venom allergy. In this article the indications for allergic conjunctivitis are discussed in particular. Clinical symptoms and a relevant type 1 sensitization are the prerequisites for the indications for AIT. The assessment of the indications and carrying out an AIT should only be carried out by physicians who have been trained in allergology.

Immune signatures predict response to house dust mite subcutaneous immunotherapy in patients with allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Identifying predictive biomarkers for allergen immunotherapy response is crucial for enhancing clinical efficacy. This study aims to identify such biomarkers in patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) undergoing subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) for house dust mite allergy. METHODS: The Tongji (discovery) cohort comprised 72 AR patients who completed 1-year SCIT follow-up. Circulating T and B cell subsets were characterized using multiplexed flow cytometry before SCIT. Serum immunoglobulin levels and combined symptom and medication score (CSMS) were assessed before and after 12-month SCIT. Responders, exhibiting ≥30% CSMS improvement, were identified. The random forest algorithm and logistic regression analysis were used to select biomarkers and establish predictive models for SCIT efficacy in the Tongji cohort, which was validated in another Wisco cohort with 43 AR patients. RESULTS: Positive SCIT response correlated with higher baseline CSMS, allergen-specific IgE (sIgE)/total IgE (tIgE) ratio, and frequencies of Type 2 helper T cells, Type 2 follicular helper T (TFH2) cells, and CD23+ nonswitched memory B (BNSM) and switched memory B (BSM) cells, as well as lower follicular regulatory T (TFR) cell frequency and TFR/TFH2 cell ratio. The random forest algorithm identified sIgE/tIgE ratio, TFR/TFH2 cell ratio, and BNSM frequency as the key biomarkers discriminating responders from nonresponders in the Tongji cohort. Logistic regression analysis confirmed the predictive value of a combination model, including sIgE/tIgE ratio, TFR/TFH2 cell ratio, and CD23+ BSM frequency (AUC = 0.899 in Tongji; validated AUC = 0.893 in Wisco). CONCLUSIONS: A T- and B-cell signature combination efficiently identified SCIT responders before treatment, enabling personalized approaches for AR patients.

Is allergen immunotherapy a model of personalized treatment in pediatric respiratory allergy?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review recent evidence on allergen immunotherapy (AIT) as a model of personalized medicine in the treatment of children and adolescents with respiratory allergies. RECENT FINDINGS: Meta-analysis and systematic review studies continue to point out that AIT is an effective treatment for children with respiratory allergies. Molecular allergy allows the understanding of patient sensitization profiles that frequently change the prescription of AIT. There is still a lack of evidence showing that this personalized prescription of AIT is associated with better clinical outcomes. The nasal allergen challenge has extended the indications of AIT for a new group of subjects with local allergic rhinitis. Patient selection of allergens involved in the increasingly personalized composition of extracts to be used in AIT increasingly characterizes it as personalized medicine. SUMMARY: Despite the numerous studies carried out to identify the best biomarker to evaluate the response to AIT, there is still much disagreement, and clinical assessment (symptoms, quality of life, among others) continues to be the best way to evaluate the therapeutic success of AIT.