Consensus document on dog and cat allergy.

The prevalence of sensitization to dogs and cats varies by country, exposure time and predisposition to atopy. It is estimated that 26% of European adults coming to the clinic for suspected allergy to inhalant allergens are sensitized to cats and 27% to dogs. This document is intended to be a useful tool for clinicians involved in the management of people with dog or cat allergy. It was prepared from a consensus process based on the RAND/UCLA method. Following a literature review, it proposes various recommendations concerning the diagnosis and treatment of these patients, grounded in evidence and clinical experience. The diagnosis of dog and cat allergy is based on a medical history and physical examination that are consistent with each other and is confirmed with positive results on specific IgE skin tests. Sometimes, especially in polysensitized patients, molecular diagnosis is strongly recommended. Although the most advisable measure would be to avoid the animal, this is often impossible and associated with a major emotional impact. Furthermore, indirect exposure to allergens occurs in environments in which animals are not present. Immunotherapy is emerging as a potential solution to this problem, although further supporting studies are needed.

SLIT: indications, follow-up, and management.

Specific sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has been proved to be a safe and effective approach in respiratory allergy. However, further research is required on aspects such as patient selection, use of optimal dosing, effects on asthma, long-term effects, and management of adverse reactions. In addition, the widely heterogeneous nature of studies on SLIT performed to date and the application of the criteria for subcutaneous immunotherapy make it difficult for the prescribing clinician to draw accurate and useful conclusions. Therefore, the QUASAR Group (QUality in the Administration of SLIT in Allergic Rhinitis), which comprises allergologists with broad clinical experience in SLIT, investigated the latest research findings and available data on this approach. Working parties were formed in 3 different categories: selection of candidates for SLIT, treatment efficacy, and adverse reactions. We performed a PubMed search for articles that were representative of each category and found 850. From these, we finally selected 266 articles, which were reviewed to retrieve data on SLIT. Evidence for each clinical question was graded according to the Oxford classification. The resulting text was evaluated on 3 occasions by all the members of the group until the final version was agreed upon. In this version, we review available evidence on SLIT, particularly with pollens, which is the subject of most articles. In areas where evidence is insufficient, an alternative agreed upon by the members of the QUASAR group is presented. Finally, we propose algorithms for selecting candidates for SLIT and for management of adverse events.

A multicenter study of sensitization profiles in an allergic pediatric population in an area with high allergen exposure.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In areas with a high number of allergens and high allergen concentrations, it is essential to identify the main causes of allergy, especially in pediatric patients. This study was conducted in allergic patients aged 14 or less to identify sensitization profiles during an initial phase, and to then evaluate changes in these profiles after 3 years of follow-up. This article describes the first phase of our investigation. METHODS: A total of 187 patients aged between 2 and 14 years were included by 5 allergy units; all the children had symptoms suggestive of allergic disease (rhinoconjunctivitis andlor asthma). Allergy diagnosis was confirmed by evaluation of clinical history, allergen exposure, and in vivo or in vitro tests. Specific immunoglobulin E (slgE) to major allergens was tested. RESULTS: Patients were sensitized to both seasonal (especially grass, olive, cypress and Cynodon dactylon) and perennial allergens (Alternaria alternata) and to panallergens (especially profilin and lipid transfer protein). Almost 60% of the patients included were polysensitized. Sensitization to certain major allergens such as Cup s1, Phl p1, or Sal k1 seems to increase with age. Patients sensitized to profilin had a higher number of sensitizations than non-profilin-sensitized patients. This panallergen is a diagnostic confounding factor. CONCLUSIONS: A high percentage of allergic pediatric patients living in an area with high exposure levels to a large number of allergens are polysensitized and have a high percentage of sensitization to panallergens. The implementation of new diagnostic tools such as component-resolved diagnosis is crucial.

[Allergology in the public health service of the Community of Madrid: current situation and opportunities in the XXI century public health system]. / La alergología en el sistema sanitario público de la Comunidad de Madrid: situación actual y oportunidades en el sis. sanitario público del siglo XXI.

The high prevalence of allergic diseases and the use of more complex diagnostic techniques and therapeutic options require allergists to be highly trained professionals and health-care organizations to be knowledgeable about available structural and human resources. Updated information is lacking in Spain, and current activity indicators do not reflect complexity. The present article analyzes the situation of allergology in Madrid and proposes improvements where necessary. The heads of the allergy departments of public hospitals in Madrid voluntarily completed a purpose-designed survey. Data on care activity (2010) and on teaching and research activity (2009-2010) were provided. A SWOT analysis was performed, and strategic lines and proposals for improvement were designed. One hundred and seventeen allergists (41% with a PhD) worked in 24 hospitals with an allergology department (4.6 physicians/center; ≤3 in 10 hospitals). All the institutions had an outpatient clinic (4,000 first consultations/hospital/year, 36% high-resolution rate; 6200 successive visits/hospital/year) performing complex diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, most of which were not taken into account by activity indicators. Two hospitals had their own hospitalization facilities and 10 were accredited teaching hospitals (2.78 medical residents/year). The survey revealed that, twice yearly, a typical allergology service participated in 4 research projects, 2 clinical trials, 16 publications and 17 communications at scientific meetings, with notable differences between hospitals. Allergists in Madrid are well prepared. The allergology care structure is adequate, although possibly insufficient. Quality and efficiency can be improved with new tools for recording activity and by increasing coordination and taking advantage of new technologies and geographical proximity.

Training of Spanish allergology residents in pediatric allergology: a survey of the current situation

No disponible

La alergología en el sistema sanitario público de la Comunidad de Madrid: situación actual y oportunidades en el sistema sanitario público del siglo XXI / Allergology in the public health service of the Community of Madrid: current situation and opportunities in the XXI century public health system

La alta prevalencia de las enfermedades alérgicas y una mayor complejidad diagnóstica y terapéutica, exigen un alergólogo altamente capacitado profesionalmente y organizaciones sanitarias conocedoras de los recursos humanos y estructurales disponibles. En España faltan datos actualizados en alergología e indicadores de actividad que reflejen esta complejidad. Este trabajo analiza la situación, detecta necesidades y plantea soluciones de mejora para la alergología en la Comunidad de Madrid. Los 24 jefes de servicio de Alergología de los hospitales públicos madrileños con asistencia alergológica, completaron voluntariamente la encuesta diseñada específicamente para este trabajo, con datos de actividad asistencial (2010), docencia e investigación (2009-2010). Se realizó un análisis DAFO y se diseñaron líneas estratégicas y propuestas de mejora orientadas a adoptar las soluciones más idóneas. Un total de 117 alergólogos (41% doctores) en el sistema público de salud (4,6 profesionales/centro; ≤ 3 en 10 hospitales), realizaban consulta externa (4000 primeras consultas/ hospital/año, 36% de alta resolución; 6200 visitas sucesivas/ hospital/año). Se ejecutaban procedimientos básicos diagnósticos y terapéuticos, incluyendo pruebas complejas propias de hospital de día, mayoritariamente no reconocidas en los indicadores de actividad. Dos hospitales tenían hospitalización propia y 10 disponían de acreditación docente (2,78 MIR/año). Bianualmente, un servicio participaba en 4 proyectos de investigación, 2 ensayos clínicos, 16 publicaciones y 17 comunicaciones a congresos, con notables diferencias entre hospitales. Madrid cuenta con alergólogos bien preparados y una organización asistencial alergológica adecuada aunque posiblemente insuficiente. Nuevas herramientas de registro de actividad y el incremento de la cooperación corporativa, aprovechando nuevas tecnologías y la proximidad geográfica, mejorarían la calidad y la eficiencia (AU)

The high prevalence of allergic diseases and the use of more complex diagnostic techniques and therapeutic options require allergists to be highly trained professionals and healthcare organizations to be knowledgeable about available structural and human resources. Updated information is lacking in Spain, and current activity indicators do not reflect complexity. The present article analyzes the situation of allergology in Madrid and proposes improvements where necessary. The heads of the allergy departments of public hospitals in Madrid voluntarily completed a purpose-designed survey. Data on care activity (2010) and on teaching and research activity (2009-2010) were provided. A SWOT analysis was performed, and strategic lines and proposals for improvement were designed. One hundred and seventeen allergists (41% with a PhD) worked in 24 hospitals with an allergology department (4.6 physicians/center; ≤3 in 10 hospitals). All the institutions had an outpatient clinic (4,000 first consultations/hospital/year, 36% high-resolution rate; 6200 successive visits/hospital/year) performing complex diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, most of which were not taken into account by activity indicators. Two hospitals had their own hospitalization facilities and 10 were accredited teaching hospitals (2.78 medical residents/ year). The survey revealed that, twice yearly, a typical allergology service participated in 4 research projects, 2 clinical trials, 16 publications and 17 communications at scientific meetings, with notable differences between hospitals. Allergists in Madrid are well prepared. The allergology care structure is adequate, although possibly insufficient. Quality and efficiency can be improved with new tools for recording activity and by increasing coordination and taking advantage of new technologies and geographical proximity (AU)

SLIT: indications, follow-up, and management

La inmunoterapia específica sublingual (SLIT) ha demostrado ser un tratamiento seguro y eficaz para la alergia respiratoria. Sin embargo, aspectos como la selección del paciente, el empleo de dosis óptimas, sus efectos en el asma y a largo plazo, o el manejo de las reacciones adversas necesitan una mayor investigación. Además, la gran heterogeneidad de estudios realizados con SLIT y la aplicación de los mismos criterios que los que se aplican a la inmunoterapia subcutánea dificultan la obtención de conclusiones precisas y útiles al clínico que prescribe este tratamiento. Por ello, el grupo Quasar (QUality in the Administration of SLIT in Allergic Rhinitis), grupo de alergólogos con amplia experiencia clínica con SLIT, se propuso recoger el estado de la investigación actual y los datos reales disponibles con SLIT. Para ello, se establecieron grupos de trabajo en tres categorías distintas: selección del paciente candidato a recibir SLIT, eficacia del tratamiento y reacciones adversas. Se realizó una búsqueda de artículos representativos para cada tema, localizándose inicialmente en PubMed 850, de los que se seleccionaron y analizaron 314 para extraer la evidencia disponible con SLIT, incorporando finalmente 266 al documento. Se realizó la gradación de la evidencia para cada pregunta clínica según la clasificación de Oxford. El texto resultante fue evaluado hasta en tres ocasiones por todos los miembros del grupo hasta consensuar el documento final que revisa el cuerpo de la evidencia existente hasta el momento sobre SLIT, particularmente con pólenes, sobre los que existe un mayor número de artículos, y, para aquellos aspectos en los que se ha demostrado evidencia insuficiente, propone una alternativa consensuada entre los miembros del grupo Quasar. Finalmente, se proponen algoritmos de selección del paciente candidato para SLIT y de manejo de reacciones adversas (AU)

Specific sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has been proved to be a safe and effective approach in respiratory allergy. However, further research is required on aspects such as patient selection, use of optimal dosing, effects on asthma, long-term effects, and management of adverse reactions. In addition, the widely heterogeneous nature of studies on SLIT performed to date and the application of the criteria for subcutaneous immunotherapy make it difficult for the prescribing clinician to draw accurate and useful conclusions. Therefore, the QUASAR Group (QUality in the Administration of SLIT in Allergic Rhinitis), which comprises allergologists with broad clinical experience in SLIT, investigated the latest research findings and available data on this approach. Working parties were formed in 3 different categories: selection of candidates for SLIT, treatment efficacy, and adverse reactions. We performed a PubMed search for articles that were representative of each category and found 850. From these, we finally selected 266 articles, which were reviewed to retrieve data on SLIT. Evidence for each clinical question was graded according to the Oxford classification. The resulting text was evaluated on 3 occasions by all the members of the group until the final version was agreed upon. In this version, we review available evidence on SLIT, particularly with pollens, which is the subject of most articles. In areas where evidence is insufficient, an alternative agreed upon by the members of the QUASAR group is presented. Finally, we propose algorithms for selecting candidates for SLIT and for management of adverse events (AU)

A Multicenter Study of Sensitization Profiles in an Allergic Pediatric Population in an Area With High Allergen Exposure

Antecedentes y objetivo: En áreas geográficas donde el paciente está expuesto a un elevado número y altas concentraciones de alérgenos, es importante identificar los principales causantes de la enfermedad alérgica, especialmente en pacientes pediátricos. El presente estudio se ha realizado en pacientes alérgicos ≤ 14 años con el objetivo de tratar de averiguar, en una primera fase, el perfil de sensibilización y, en una segunda fase, la evolución de dicho perfil tras 3 años de seguimiento. En esta publicación se presenta la primera fase. Métodos: Se incluyeron en primera visita 187 pacientes por 5 Unidades de Alergia, con edad entre 2 y 14 años y síntomas sugestivos de enfermedad alérgica (rinoconjuntivitis y/o asma). El diagnóstico alergológico fue posteriormente confirmado por prueba cutánea y/o IgE específica. Posteriormente se analizó la IgE a los alérgenos principales. Resultados: Los pacientes mostraron sensibilización tanto a alérgenos estacionales (gramíneas, olivo, ciprés, Cynodon) como perennes (Alternaria) y panalérgenos (especialmente profilina y proteínas transportadoras de lípidos). Un 60% estaban polisensibilizados. La sensibilización a ciertos alérgenos (Cup s1, Phl p1 o Sal k1) parece aumentar con la edad. Los pacientes sensibilizados a profilina mostraron un mayor número de sensibilizaciones que los negativos al panalérgeno, siendo un posible factor de confusión diagnóstica Conclusiones: Pacientes pediátricos que viven en áreas de alta exposición a numerosos alérgenos son polisensibilizados, estando un alto porcentaje de ellos sensibilizados a panalérgenos, por lo que la implementación de nuevas herramientas diagnósticas como el diagnóstico por componentes se hace imprescindible para su correcto diagnóstico (AU)

Background and objective: In areas with a high number of allergens and high allergen concentrations, it is essential to identify the main causes of allergy, especially in pediatric patients. This study was conducted in allergic patients aged 14 or less to identify sensitization profiles during an initial phase, and to then evaluate changes in these profiles after 3 years of follow-up. This article describes the first phase of our investigation. Methods: A total of 187 patients aged between 2 and 14 years were included by 5 allergy units; all the children had symptoms suggestive of allergic disease (rhinoconjunctivitis and/or asthma). Allergy diagnosis was confirmed by evaluation of clinical history, allergen exposure, and in vivo or in vitro tests. Specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) to major allergens was tested. Results: Patients were sensitized to both seasonal (especially grass, olive, cypress and Cynodon dactylon) and perennial allergens (Alternaria alternata) and to panallergens (especially profilin and lipid transfer protein). Almost 60% of the patients included were polysensitized. Sensitization to certain major allergens such as Cup s1, Phl p1, or Sal k1 seems to increase with age. Patients sensitized to profilin had a higher number of sensitizations than non-profilin-sensitized patients. This panallergen is a diagnostic confounding factor. Conclusions: A high percentage of allergic pediatric patients living in an area with high exposure levels to a large number of allergens are polysensitized and have a high percentage of sensitization to panallergens. The implementation of new diagnostic tools such as component-resolved diagnosis is crucial (AU)