A European survey of management approaches in chronic urticaria in children: EAACI pediatric urticaria taskforce.

BACKGROUND: Although well described in adults, there are scarce and heterogeneous data on the diagnosis and management of chronic urticaria (CU) in children (0-18 years) throughout Europe. Our aim was to explore country differences and identify the extent to which the EAACI/GA²LEN/EDF/WAO guideline recommendations for pediatric urticaria are implemented. METHODS: The EAACI Task Force for pediatric CU disseminated an online clinical survey among EAACI pediatric section members. Members were asked to answer 35 multiple choice questions on current practices in their respective centers. RESULTS: The survey was sent to 2,773 physicians of whom 358 (13.8%) responded, mainly pediatric allergists (80%) and pediatricians (49.7%), working in 69 countries. For diagnosis, Southern European countries used significantly more routine tests (eg, autoimmune testing, allergological tests, and parasitic investigation) than Northern European countries. Most respondents (60.3%) used a 2nd -generation antihistamine as first-line treatment of whom 64.8% updosed as a second line. Omalizumab was used as a second-line treatment by 1.7% and third line by 20.7% of respondents. Most clinicians (65%) follow EAACI/WAO/GA2LEN/EDF guidelines when diagnosing CU, and only 7.3% follow no specific guidelines. Some clinicians prefer to follow national guidelines (18.4%, mainly Northern European) or the AAAAI practice parameter (1.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Even though most members of the Pediatric Section of EAACI are familiar with the EAACI/WAO/GA2LEN/EDF guidelines, a significant number do not follow them. Also, the large variation in diagnosis and treatment strengthens the need to re-evaluate, update, and standardize guidelines on the diagnosis and management of CU in children.

Systemic treatments in the management of atopic dermatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: As an evidence resource for the currently planned European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) clinical practice guideline "systemic treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD)," we critically appraised evidence on systemic treatments for moderate-to-severe AD. METHODS: We systematically identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the safety and efficacy of systemic treatments for AD up to February 2020. Primary efficacy outcomes were clinical signs, AD symptoms and health-related quality of life. Primary safety outcomes included cumulative incidence rates for (serious) adverse events. Trial quality was assessed applying the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. Meta-analyses were conducted where appropriate. RESULTS: 50 RCTs totalling 6681 patients were included. Trial evidence was identified for apremilast, azathioprine (AZA), baricitinib, ciclosporin A (CSA), corticosteroids, dupilumab, interferon-gamma, intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG), mepolizumab, methotrexate (MTX), omalizumab, upadacitinib and ustekinumab. Meta-analyses were indicated for the efficacy of baricitinib [EASI75 RD 0.16, 95% CI (0.10;0.23)] and dupilumab [EASI75, RD 0.37, 95% CI (0.32;0.42)] indicating short-term (ie 16-week treatment) superiority over placebo. Furthermore, efficacy analyses of AZA and CSA indicated short-term superiority over placebo; however, nonvalidated scores were used and can therefore not be compared to EASI. CONCLUSION: The most robust, replicated high-quality trial evidence is present for the efficacy and safety of dupilumab for up to 1 year in adults. Robust trial evidence was further revealed for AZA, baricitinib and CSA. Methodological restrictions led to limited evidence-based conclusions for all other systemic treatments. Head-to-head trials with novel systemic treatments are required to clarify the future role of conventional therapies.

The role of mobile health technologies in allergy care: An EAACI position paper.

Mobile health (mHealth) uses mobile communication devices such as smartphones and tablet computers to support and improve health-related services, data and information flow, patient self-management, surveillance, and disease management from the moment of first diagnosis to an optimized treatment. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology created a task force to assess the state of the art and future potential of mHealth in allergology. The task force endorsed the "Be He@lthy, Be Mobile" WHO initiative and debated the quality, usability, efficiency, advantages, limitations, and risks of mobile solutions for allergic diseases. The results are summarized in this position paper, analyzing also the regulatory background with regard to the "General Data Protection Regulation" and Medical Directives of the European Community. The task force assessed the design, user engagement, content, potential of inducing behavioral change, credibility/accountability, and privacy policies of mHealth products. The perspectives of healthcare professionals and allergic patients are discussed, underlining the need of thorough investigation for an effective design of mHealth technologies as auxiliary tools to improve quality of care. Within the context of precision medicine, these could facilitate the change in perspective from clinician- to patient-centered care. The current and future potential of mHealth is then examined for specific areas of allergology, including allergic rhinitis, aerobiology, allergen immunotherapy, asthma, dermatological diseases, food allergies, anaphylaxis, insect venom, and drug allergy. The impact of mobile technologies and associated big data sets are outlined. Facts and recommendations for future mHealth initiatives within EAACI are listed.

Current state and future of pediatric allergology in Europe: A road map.

The history of pediatric allergology (PA) in Europe is relatively youthful, dating back to 1984, when a small group of pediatricians founded the European Working Group on Pediatric Allergy and Immunology-later giving rise to ESPACI (European Society on Pediatric Allergology and Clinical Immunology). In 1990, the first dedicated journal, Pediatric Allergy and Immunology (PAI), was founded. There are striking differences across Europe, and even within European countries, in relation to the training pathways for doctors seeing children with allergic disease(s). In 2016, the EAACIClemens von Pirquet Foundation (CvP) organized and sponsored a workshop with the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) Pediatric Section. This collaboration focussed on the future of PA and specifically on education, research, and networking/ advocacy. The delegates representing many countries across Europe have endorsed the concept that optimal care of children with allergic diseases is delivered by pediatricians who have received dedicated training in allergy, or allergists who have received dedicated training in pediatrics. In order to meet the needs of children and families with allergic disease(s), the pediatric allergist is highly encouraged to develop several networks. Our challenge is to reinforce a clear strategic approach to scientific excellence to across our member base and to ensure and enhance the relevance of European pediatric research in allergy. With research opportunities in basic, translational, clinical, and epidemiologic trials, more trainees and trained specialists are needed and it is an exciting time to be a pediatric allergologist.

Antihistamine use in children.

This review provides an overview of the use of antihistamines in children. We discuss types of histamine receptors and their mechanism of action, absorption, onset and duration of action of first-generation and second-generation H(1)-antihistamines, as well as elimination of H(1)-antihistamines which has important implications for dosing in children. The rationale for the use of H(1)-antihistamines is explored for the relief of histamine-mediated symptoms in a variety of allergic conditions including: non-anaphylactic allergic reactions, atopic eczema (AE), allergic rhinitis (AR) and conjunctivitis, chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) and whether they have a role in the management of intermittent and chronic cough, anaphylaxis, food protein-induced gastrointestinal allergy and asthma prevention. Second-generation H(1)-antihistamines are preferable to first-generation H(1)-antihistamines in the management of non-anaphylactic allergic reactions, AR, AE and CSU due to: their better safety profile, including minimal cognitive and antimuscarinic side effects and a longer duration of action. We offer some guidance as to the choices of H(1)-antihistamines available currently and their use in specific clinical settings. H(1)-antihistamine class, availability, licensing, age and dosing administration, recommended indications in allergic conditions and modalities of delivery for the 12 more commonly used H(1)-antihistamines in children are also tabulated.