EUFOREA/EPOS2020 statement on the clinical considerations for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps care.

Following the European Forum for Research and Education in Allergy and Airway Diseases (EUFOREA) treatment algorithm for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), patients suffering from severe uncontrolled CRSwNP are recommended to receive oral corticosteroids, (revision) sinus surgery, systemic biologicals and/or aspirin treatment after desensitization (ATAD). Given the major differences in indications, outcomes, practical considerations, risks and costs of these key pillars of treatment, there is a growing need to define criteria for each treatment option and list the clinically relevant and major considerations for them. This EUFOREA document therefore provides an expert panel overview of the expected outcomes, specific considerations and (contra)indications of the five major treatment arms of severe uncontrolled CRSwNP: oral corticosteroids, primary and revision sinus surgery, biological treatment and ATAD. This overview of treatment considerations is needed to allow physicians and patients to consider the different options in the context of providing optimal and personalized care for severe uncontrolled CRSwNP. In conclusion, the five major treatment options for severe uncontrolled CRSwNP have intrinsic advantages, specific indications and considerations that are of importance to the patient, the physician and the society. This EUFOREA statement supports the unmet need to define criteria for the indication of every treatment pillar of CRSwNP.

Current allergy educational needs in primary care. Results of the EAACI working group on primary care survey exploring the confidence to manage and the opportunity to refer patients with allergy.

The aim of this survey was to explore the specific educational needs of a cohort of European GPs with regards to allergy training so that future educational initiatives may better support the delivery of allergy services in primary care. METHOD: This study took the form of a cross-sectional observational study in which a structured electronic questionnaire was distributed to primary care providers, in eight languages, across 8 European countries between September 2019 and November 2019. Data associated with demographic parameters, professional qualifications, type of employment, level of confidence regarding competencies for diagnosis and treatment of allergic diseases, referral of patients to allergist and preferred method of learning and assessment were collected. A 5-point Likert scale was used to assess level of confidence. Exploratory analysis was carried out. RESULTS: A total of 687 responses were available for analysis, with 99.3% of responders working within Europe. 70.1% of participants were female; and 48.0% and 48.0% of participants respectively had received some undergraduate and/or postgraduate allergy education. Confidence in dealing with different aspect of allergy management differed between countries. The main reason for specialist referral was a perceived need for tertiary assessment (54.3%), and the main barrier for referral was the consideration that the patient's condition could be appropriately diagnosed and treated in a primary care facility. Up to 44.7% and 55.3% of participants reported that they preferred e-Learning over traditional learning. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified the specific areas of skills training and educational needs of GPs in managing allergic conditions in primary care, and provided insights into possible strategies for more feasible and cost-effective approaches.

Allergic and hypersensitivity conditions in non-specialist care: Flow diagrams to support clinical practice.

Most patients presenting with allergies are first seen by primary care health professionals. The perceived knowledge gaps and educational needs were recently assessed in response to which the LOGOGRAM Task Force was established with the remit of constructing pragmatic flow diagrams for common allergic conditions in line with an earlier EAACI proposal to develop simplified pathways for the diagnosis and management of allergic diseases in primary care. To address the lack of accessible and pragmatic guidance, we designed flow diagrams for five major clinical allergy conditions: asthma, anaphylaxis, food allergy, drug allergy, and urticaria. Existing established allergy guidelines were collected and iteratively distilled to produce five pragmatic and accessible tools to aid diagnosis and management of these common allergic problems. Ultimately, they should now be validated prospectively in primary care settings.

A multi-disciplinary approach to the diagnosis and management of allergic diseases: An EAACI Task Force.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for management of patients with allergic conditions are available, but the added value of nurses, allied healthcare professionals (AHPs), and general practitioners (GPs), in the management of allergic disease, has not been fully clarified. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) appointed a task force to explore this issue. AIM: To investigate the added value of nurses, AHPs, and GPs in management of allergic diseases, in an integrated model of care. METHODS: A search was made of peer-reviewed literature published between 2010 and December 2020 (Cochrane Library, PubMed, and CINAHL) on the involvement of the various specific healthcare providers (HCPs) in the management of allergic diseases. RESULTS: Facilitative models of care for patients with allergies can be achieved if HCP collaborates in the diagnosis and management. Working in multi-disciplinary teams (MDT) can increase patients' understanding of the disease, adherence to treatment, self-care capabilities, and ultimately improve quality of life. The MDT competencies and procedures can be improved and enhanced in a climate of mutual respect and shared values, and with inclusion of patients in the planning of care. Patient-centered communication among HCPs and emphasis on the added value of each profession can create an effective integrated model of care for patients with allergic diseases. CONCLUSION: Nurses, AHPs, and GPs, both individually and in collaboration, can contribute to the improvement of the management of patients with allergic disease. The interaction between the HCPs and the patients themselves can ensure maximum support for people with allergies.

Hormone replacement therapy and asthma onset in menopausal women: National cohort study.

BACKGROUND: There is uncertainty about the role of hormonal replacement therapy (HRT) in the development of asthma. OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether use of HRT and duration of use was associated with risk of development of asthma in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women. METHODS: We constructed a 17-year (from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2016) open cohort of 353,173 women (aged 46-70 years) from the Optimum Patient Care Database, a longitudinal primary care database from across the United Kingdom. HRT use, subtypes, and duration of use; confounding variables; and asthma onset were defined by using the Read Clinical Classification System. We fitted multilevel Cox regression models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs. RESULTS: During the 17-year follow-up (1,340,423 person years), 7,614 new asthma cases occurred, giving an incidence rate of 5.7 (95% CI = 5.5-5.8) per 1,000 person years. Compared with nonuse of HRT, previous use of any (HR = 0.83; 95% CI = 0.76-0.88), estrogen-only (HR = 0.89; 95% CI = 0.84-0.95), or combined estrogen and progestogen (HR = 0.82; 95% CI = 0.76-0.88) HRT was associated with a reduced risk of asthma onset. This was also the case with current use of any (HR = 0.79; 95% CI = 0.74-0.85), estrogen-only (HR = 0.80; 95% CI = 0.73-0.87), and combined estrogen and progestogen (HR = 0.78; 95% CI = 0.70-0.87) HRT. Longer duration of HRT use (1-2 years [HR = 0.93; 95% CI = 0.87-0.99]; 3-4 years [HR = 0.77; 95% CI = 0.70-0.84]; and ≥5 years [HR = 0.71; 95% CI = 0.64-0.78]) was associated with a dose-response reduced risk of asthma onset. CONCLUSION: We found that HRT was associated with a reduced risk of development of late onset asthma in menopausal women. Further cohort studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Hormonal contraception and the risk of severe asthma exacerbation: 17-year population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Longitudinal studies investigating impact of exogenous sex steroids on clinical outcomes of asthma in women are lacking. We investigated the association between use of hormonal contraceptives and risk of severe asthma exacerbation in reproductive-age women with asthma. METHODS: We used the Optimum Patient Care Research Database, a population-based, longitudinal, anonymised primary care database in the UK, to construct a 17-year (1 January 2000-31 December 2016) retrospective cohort of reproductive-age (16-45 years, n=83 084) women with asthma. Using Read codes, we defined use, subtypes and duration of use of hormonal contraceptives. Severe asthma exacerbation was defined according to recommendations of the European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society as asthma-related hospitalisation, accident and emergency department visits due to asthma and/or oral corticosteroid prescriptions. Analyses were done using multilevel mixed-effects Poisson regression with QR decomposition. RESULTS: The 17-year follow-up resulted in 456 803 person-years of follow-up time. At baseline, 34% of women were using any hormonal contraceptives, 25% combined (oestrogen/progestogen) and 9% progestogen-only contraceptives. Previous (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.94, 95% CI 0.92 to 0.97) and current (IRR 0.96, 95% CI 0.94 to 0.98) use of any, previous (IRR 0.92, 95% CI 0.87 to 0.97) and current use of combined (IRR 0.93, 95% CI 0.91 to 0.96) and longer duration of use (3-4 years: IRR 0.94, 95% CI 0.92 to 0.97; 5+ years: IRR 0.91, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.93) of hormonal contraceptives, but not progestogen-only contraceptives, were associated with reduced risk of severe asthma exacerbation compared with non-use. CONCLUSIONS: Use of hormonal contraceptives may reduce the risk of severe asthma exacerbation in reproductive-age women. Mechanistic studies investigating the biological basis for the influence of hormonal contraceptives on clinical outcomes of asthma in women are required. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER: European Union electronic Register of Post-Authorisation Studies (EUPAS22967).

Hormonal contraceptives and onset of asthma in reproductive-age women: Population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Despite well-described sex differences in asthma incidence, there remains uncertainty about the role of female sex hormones in the development of asthma. OBJECTIVE: We sought to investigate whether hormonal contraceptive use, its subtypes, and duration of use were associated with new-onset asthma in reproductive-age women. METHODS: Using the Optimum Patient Care Research Database, a UK national primary care database, we constructed an open cohort of 16- to 45-year-old women (N = 564,896) followed for up to 17 years (ie, January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2016). We fitted multilevel Cox regression models to analyze the data. RESULTS: At baseline, 26% of women were using any hormonal contraceptives. During follow-up (3,597,146 person-years), 25,288 women developed asthma, an incidence rate of 7.0 (95% CI, 6.9-7.1) per 1000 person-years. Compared with nonuse, previous use of any hormonal contraceptives (hazard ratio [HR], 0.70; 95% CI, 0.68-0.72), combined (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.68-0.72), and progestogen-only therapy (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.67-0.74) was associated with reduced risk of new-onset asthma. For current use, the estimates were as follows: any (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.61-0.65), combined (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.62-0.67), and progestogen-only therapy (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.56-0.62). Longer duration of use (1-2 years: HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.81-0.86; 3-4 years: HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.61-0.67; 5+ years: HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.44-0.49) was associated with a lower risk of asthma onset than nonuse. CONCLUSIONS: Hormonal contraceptive use was associated with reduced risk of new-onset asthma in women of reproductive age. Mechanistic investigations to uncover the biological processes for these observations are required. Clinical trials investigating the safety and effectiveness of hormonal contraceptives for primary prevention of asthma will be helpful to confirm these results.

Real-life assessment of chronic rhinosinusitis patients using mobile technology: The mySinusitisCoach project by EUFOREA.

BACKGROUND: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a chronic inflammatory disease associated with a substantial personal and socioeconomic burden. Monitoring of patient-reported outcomes by mobile technology offers the possibility to better understand real-life burden of CRS. METHODS: This study reports on the cross-sectional evaluation of data of 626 users of mySinusitisCoach (mSC), a mobile application for CRS patients. Patient characteristics of mSC users were analysed as well as the level of disease control based on VAS global rhinosinusitis symptom score and adapted EPOS criteria. RESULTS: The mSC cohort represents a heterogeneous group of CRS patients with a diverse pattern of major symptoms. Approximately half of patients reported nasal polyps. 47.3% of all CRS patients were uncontrolled based on evaluation of VAS global rhinosinusitis symptom score compared to 40.9% based on adapted EPOS criteria. The impact of CRS on sleep quality and daily life activities was significantly higher in uncontrolled versus well-controlled patients. Half of patients had a history of FESS (functional endoscopic sinus surgery) and reported lower symptom severity compared to patients without a history of FESS, except for patients with a history of more than 3 procedures. Patients with a history of FESS reported higher VAS levels for impaired smell. CONCLUSION: Real-life data confirm the high disease burden in uncontrolled CRS patients, clearly impacting quality of life. Sinus surgery improves patient-reported outcomes, but not in patients with a history of more than 3 procedures. Mobile technology opens a new era of real-life monitoring, supporting the evolution of care towards precision medicine.

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.

Mobile technology offers novel insights into the control and treatment of allergic rhinitis: The MASK study.

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 H1-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 H1-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.

ERS/EAACI statement on severe exacerbations in asthma in adults: facts, priorities and key research questions.

Despite the use of effective medications to control asthma, severe exacerbations in asthma are still a major health risk and require urgent action on the part of the patient and physician to prevent serious outcomes such as hospitalisation or death. Moreover, severe exacerbations are associated with substantial healthcare costs and psychological burden, including anxiety and fear for patients and their families. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) and the European Respiratory Society (ERS) set up a task force to search for a clear definition of severe exacerbations, and to also define research questions and priorities. The statement includes comments from patients who were members of the task force.

Adherence to treatment in allergic rhinitis using mobile technology. The MASK Study.

BACKGROUND: Mobile technology may help to better understand the adherence to treatment. MASK-rhinitis (Mobile Airways Sentinel NetworK for allergic rhinitis) is a patient-centred ICT system. A mobile phone app (the Allergy Diary) central to MASK is available in 22 countries. OBJECTIVES: To assess the adherence to treatment in allergic rhinitis patients using the Allergy Diary App. METHODS: An observational cross-sectional study was carried out on all users who filled in the Allergy Diary from 1 January 2016 to 1 August 2017. Secondary adherence was assessed by using the modified Medication Possession Ratio (MPR) and the Proportion of days covered (PDC) approach. RESULTS: A total of 12 143 users were registered. A total of 6 949 users reported at least one VAS data recording. Among them, 1 887 users reported ≥7 VAS data. About 1 195 subjects were included in the analysis of adherence. One hundred and thirty-six (11.28%) users were adherent (MPR ≥70% and PDC ≤1.25), 51 (4.23%) were partly adherent (MPR ≥70% and PDC = 1.50) and 176 (14.60%) were switchers. On the other hand, 832 (69.05%) users were non-adherent to medications (MPR <70%). Of those, the largest group was non-adherent to medications and the time interval was increased in 442 (36.68%) users. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Adherence to treatment is low. The relative efficacy of continuous vs on-demand treatment for allergic rhinitis symptoms is still a matter of debate. This study shows an approach for measuring retrospective adherence based on a mobile app. This also represents a novel approach for analysing medication-taking behaviour in a real-world setting.

Management of ocular allergy.

The treatment and management of ocular allergy (OA) remain a major concern for different specialties, including allergists, ophthalmologists, primary care physicians, rhinologists, pediatricians, dermatologists, clinical immunologists, and pharmacists. We performed a systematic review of all relevant publications in MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web Science including systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Publications were considered relevant if they addressed treatments, or management strategies of OA. A further wider systematic literature search was performed if no evidence or good quality evidence was found. There are effective drugs for the treatment of OA; however, there is a lack an optimal treatment for the perennial and severe forms. Topical antihistamines, mast cell stabilizers, or double-action drugs are the first choice of treatment. All of them are effective in reducing signs and symptoms of OA. The safety and optimal dosing regimen of the most effective topical anti-inflammatory drugs, corticosteroids, are still a major concern. Topical calcineurin inhibitors may be used in steroid-dependent/resistant cases of severe allergic keratoconjunctivitis. Allergen-specific immunotherapy may be considered in cases of failure of first-line treatments or to modify the natural course of OA disease. Based on the current wealth of publications and on the collective experience, recommendations on management of OA have been proposed.

EAACI Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy: House dust mite-driven allergic asthma.

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) has been in use for the treatment of allergic disease for more than 100 years. Asthma treatment relies mainly on corticosteroids and other controllers recommended to achieve and maintain asthma control, prevent exacerbations, and improve quality of life. AIT is underused in asthma, both in children and in adults. Notably, patients with allergic asthma not adequately controlled on pharmacotherapy (including biologics) represent an unmet health need. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology has developed a clinical practice guideline providing evidence-based recommendations for the use of house dust mites (HDM) AIT as add-on treatment for HDM-driven allergic asthma. This guideline was developed by a multi-disciplinary working group using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. HDM AIT was separately evaluated by route of administration and children and adults: subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual AIT (SLIT), drops, and tablets. Recommendations were formulated for each. The important prerequisites for successful treatment with HDM AIT are (a) selection of patients most likely to respond to AIT and (b) use of allergen extracts and desensitization protocols of proven efficacy. To date, only AIT with HDM SLIT-tablet has demonstrated a robust effect in adults for critical end points (exacerbations, asthma control, and safety). Thus, it is recommended as an add-on to regular asthma therapy for adults with controlled or partially controlled HDM-driven allergic asthma (conditional recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). HDM SCIT is recommended for adults and children, and SLIT drops are recommended for children with controlled HDM-driven allergic asthma as the add-on to regular asthma therapy to decrease symptoms and medication needs (conditional recommendation, low-quality evidence).

Electronic Clinical Decision Support System for allergic rhinitis management: MASK e-CDSS.

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].

Lack of asthma and rhinitis control in general practitioner-managed patients prescribed fixed-dose combination therapy in Australia.

OBJECTIVES: The first aim of the study (i) assess the current asthma status of general-practitioner-managed patients receiving regular fixed-dose combination inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta2 agonist (FDC ICS/LABA) therapy and (ii) explore patients' perceptions of asthma control and attitudes/behaviors regarding preventer inhaler use. METHODS: A cross-sectional observational study of Australian adults with a current physician diagnosis of asthma receiving ≥2 prescriptions of FDC ICS/LABA therapy in the previous year, who were recruited through general practice to receive a structured in-depth asthma review between May 2012 and January 2014. Descriptive statistics and Chi-Square tests for independence were used for associations across asthma control levels. RESULTS: Only 11.5% of the patients had controlled asthma based on guideline-defined criteria. Contrarily, 66.5% of the patients considered their asthma to be well controlled. Incidence of acute asthma exacerbations in the previous year was 26.5% and 45.6% of the patients were without a diagnosis of rhinitis. Asthma medication use and inhaler technique were sub-optimal; only 41.0% of the preventer users reported everyday use. The side effects of medication were common and more frequently reported among uncontrolled and partially controlled patients. CONCLUSIONS: The study revealed the extent to which asthma management needs to be improved in this patient cohort and the numerous unmet needs regarding the current state of asthma care. Not only there is a need for continuous education of patients, but also education of health care practitioners to better understand the way in which patient's perceptions impact on asthma management practices, incorporating these findings into clinical decision making.

Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines-2016 revision.

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis (AR) affects 10% to 40% of the population. It reduces quality of life and school and work performance and is a frequent reason for office visits in general practice. Medical costs are large, but avoidable costs associated with lost work productivity are even larger than those incurred by asthma. New evidence has accumulated since the last revision of the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines in 2010, prompting its update. OBJECTIVE: We sought to provide a targeted update of the ARIA guidelines. METHODS: The ARIA guideline panel identified new clinical questions and selected questions requiring an update. We performed systematic reviews of health effects and the evidence about patients' values and preferences and resource requirements (up to June 2016). We followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) evidence-to-decision frameworks to develop recommendations. RESULTS: The 2016 revision of the ARIA guidelines provides both updated and new recommendations about the pharmacologic treatment of AR. Specifically, it addresses the relative merits of using oral H1-antihistamines, intranasal H1-antihistamines, intranasal corticosteroids, and leukotriene receptor antagonists either alone or in combination. The ARIA guideline panel provides specific recommendations for the choice of treatment and the rationale for the choice and discusses specific considerations that clinicians and patients might want to review to choose the management most appropriate for an individual patient. CONCLUSIONS: Appropriate treatment of AR might improve patients' quality of life and school and work productivity. ARIA recommendations support patients, their caregivers, and health care providers in choosing the optimal treatment.