Digitally-enabled, person-centred care (PCC) in allergen immunotherapy: An ARIA-EAACI Position Paper.

In rhinitis and asthma, several mHealth apps have been developed but only a few have been validated. However, these apps have a high potential for improving person-centred care (PCC), especially in allergen immunotherapy (AIT). They can provide support in AIT initiation by selecting the appropriate patient and allergen shared decision-making. They can also help in (i) the evaluation of (early) efficacy, (ii) early and late stopping rules and (iii) the evaluation of (carried-over) efficacy after cessation of the treatment course. Future perspectives have been formulated in the first report of a joint task force (TF)-Allergic Rhinitis and Its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) and the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI)-on digital biomarkers. The TF on AIT now aims to (i) outline the potential of the clinical applications of mHealth solutions, (ii) express their current limitations, (iii) make proposals regarding further developments for both clinical practice and scientific purpose and (iv) suggest which of the tools might best comply with the purpose of digitally-enabled PCC in AIT.

Poor Rhinitis and Asthma Control Is Associated With Decreased Health-Related Quality of Life and Utilities: A MASK-air Study.

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma may affect health-related quality of life. However, national estimates on the quality of life of patients with AR or asthma are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To provide estimates for utility scores and EuroQoL five-dimension (EQ-5D) visual analog scale (VAS) for patients with AR or asthma. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study using direct patient data from the MASK-air app on European MASK-air users with self-reported AR or asthma. We used a multi-attribute instrument (EQ-5D) to measure quality of life (as utility scores and EQ-5D VAS values). Mean scores were calculated per country and disease control level using multilevel regression models with poststratification, accounting for age and sex biases. RESULTS: We assessed data from 7905 MASK-air users reporting a total of up to 82,737 days. For AR, utilities ranged from 0.86 to 0.99 for good control versus 0.72 to 0.85 for poor control; EQ-5D VAS levels ranged from 78.9 to 87.9 for good control versus 55.3 to 64.2 for poor control. For asthma, utilities ranged from 0.84 to 0.97 for good control versus 0.73 to 0.87 for poor control; EQ-5D VAS levels ranged from 68.4 to 81.5 for good control versus 51.4 to 64.2 for poor control. Poor disease control was associated with a mean loss of 0.14 utilities for both AR and asthma. For the same control levels, AR and asthma were associated with similar utilities and EQ-5D VAS levels. However, lower values were observed for asthma plus AR compared with AR alone. CONCLUSIONS: Poor AR or asthma control are associated with reduced quality of life. The estimates obtained from mobile health data may provide valuable insights for health technology assessment studies.

Intranasal antihistamines and corticosteroids in allergic rhinitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is insufficient systematised evidence on the effectiveness of individual intranasal medications in allergic rhinitis (AR). OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review to compare the efficacy of individual intranasal corticosteroids and antihistamines against placebo in improving the nasal and ocular symptoms and the rhinoconjunctivitis-related quality-of-life of patients with perennial or seasonal AR. METHODS: We searched four electronic bibliographic databases and three clinical trials databases for randomised controlled trials (i) assessing adult patients with seasonal or perennial AR and (ii) comparing the use of intranasal corticosteroids or antihistamines versus placebo. Assessed outcomes included the Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS), the Total Ocular Symptom Score (TOSS) and the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (RQLQ). We performed random-effects meta-analyses of mean differences for each medication and outcome. We assessed evidence certainty using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: We included 151 primary studies, most of which assessed patients with seasonal AR and displayed unclear or high risk of bias. Both in perennial and seasonal AR, most assessed treatments were more effective than placebo. In seasonal AR, azelastine-fluticasone, fluticasone furoate and fluticasone propionate were the medications with the highest probability of resulting in moderate or large improvements in the TNSS and RQLQ. Azelastine-fluticasone displayed the highest probability of resulting in moderate or large improvements of TOSS. Overall, evidence certainty was considered "high" in 6/46 analyses, "moderate" in 23/46 analyses, and "low"/"very low" in 17/46 analyses. CONCLUSION: Most intranasal medications are effective in improving rhinitis symptoms and quality-of-life. However, there are relevant differences in the associated evidence certainty.

[Results of a survey on the current management of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps in Germany]. / Ergebnisse einer Umfrage zur aktuellen Behandlung der chronischen Rhinosinusitis mit nasalen Polypen.

INTRODUCTION: With a prevalence of 0.55% to 4%, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a relevant part of the daily work of German otolaryngologists. The aim of the questionnaire-based data collection was to assess the current treatment status of CRSwNP in Germany. MATERIAL AND METHODS: For this purpose, 24 questions within an anonymized online questionnaire were sent to all German ENT departments. RESULTS: Of 160 contacted ENT departments, 50 participated in the survey (31.3%). Among these, 76% performed more than 100 sinus surgeries annually and 38% treated more than 50 patients with biologics. Saline irrigations (80%) and intranasal glucocorticoids (GCS, 96%) were the most common conservative therapies. Systemic GCSs (52%) and intranasal GCS irrigation (20%) were less common. 80% of departments used biologics in the therapy of CRSwNP with an overall preference for dupilumab (70%). For therapy of aspirin intolerance, biologics (52%) were preferred to aspirin desensitization (26%). Prior to treatment with biologics clinical workup included the nasal polyp score (90%), the SNOT-22 questionnaire (84%), surrogate markers of type 2 inflammation (60%-72%), and computer tomography (50%). Final treatment success was assessed after 24 weeks (50%). CONCLUSION: Mostly, the responding departments followed German and European recommendations for diagnosis and therapy of CRSwNP. Therapy with biologics is widely used. The value of preoperative systemic GCS and the frequent performance of CT before initiation of therapy with a biologic should be debated in regard to its currently widespread use.

Eosinophil granulocytes in chronic inflammatory respiratory diseases and CRSwNP: Function, immunological basis, and clinical significance.

INTRODUCTION: Eosinophils play an important regulatory and immunomodulatory role in airway mucosa and have antiparasitic and antiviral properties as well as pro-inflammatory effects that may also cause persistence of inflammation with tissue remodeling. The number of eosinophils and the detection of specific mediators in biological samples from, e.g., blood, nasal secretions, and bronchial fluid can serve as biomarkers that reflect the underlying pathophysiology of certain diseases, predict treatment success, and detect therapy effects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search was conducted to determine the immunologic basis, mode of action, clinical significance, and available evidence for therapeutic approaches using eosinophil-targeted monoclonal antibodies by searching Medline, Pubmed, and the national and international trial database (ClinicalTrials.gov) and guideline registries as well as the Cochrane Library. Human studies published on the topic in the period up to and including 10/2023 were considered. RESULTS: Based on the international literature and previous experience, the results are summarized, and recommendations are given. CONCLUSION: The important role of eosinophils in immunological processes in the airway mucosa is comprehensively analyzed and can serve as a basis for current and future treatment approaches.

EGPA: Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (Churg-Strauss syndrome) as a special presentation of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP).

INTRODUCTION: Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) was formerly known as Churg-Strauss syndrome. The condition is characterized by disseminated necrotizing vasculitis with extravascular granulomas associated with hypereosinophilia. The vasculitides affect small vessels and are associated with antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies (ANCAs) detectable in the blood. Distinguishing between type 2-mediated chronic airway inflammation such as chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) without vasculitis can be clinically challenging and should be considered. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Immunological background, diagnosis, and therapy of EGPA were identified through literature searches in Medline, PubMed, as well as national and international studies (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the Cochrane Library. Human studies published up to and including 10/2023 on the topic were considered. RESULTS: In cases of deteriorating general health with previously known eosinophilic inflammation of the upper and lower airways, EGPA and its interdisciplinary investigation should be considered. Various types of eosinophilic inflammation and syndromes must be considered differentially. CONCLUSION: Characterization of mucosal airway inflammation through biomarker determination is meaningful and occasionally makes the difference for targeted therapy.

Monitoring mepolizumab treatment in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP): Discontinue, change, continue therapy?

BACKGROUND: Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a multifactorial inflammatory disease of the mucous membranes of the nose and sinuses. Eosinophilic inflammation is described as a common endotype. The anti-IL-5 antibody mepolizumab was approved in November 2021 as an add-on therapy to intranasal glucocorticosteroids for the treatment of adults with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps when systemic glucocorticosteroids or surgery do not provide adequate disease control. While national and international recommendations exist for the use of mepolizumab in CRSwNP, it has not yet been adequately specified how this therapy should be monitored, what follow-up documentation is necessary, and when it should be discontinued if necessary. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search was performed to analyze previous data on the treatment of CRSwNP with mepolizumab and to determine the available evidence by searching Medline, Pubmed, the national and international trial and guideline registries, and the Cochrane Library. Human studies published in the period up to and including 10/2022 were considered. RESULTS: Based on the international literature and previous experience by an expert panel, recommendations for follow-up, adherence to therapy intervals, and possible therapy breaks as well as discontinuation of therapy when using mepolizumab for the indication CRSwNP in the German healthcare system are given on the basis of a documentation sheet. CONCLUSION: Understanding the immunological basis of CRSwNP opens up new non-surgical therapeutic approaches with biologics for patients with severe, uncontrolled courses. Here, we provide recommendations for follow-up, adherence to therapy intervals, possible therapy pauses, or discontinuation of therapy when mepolizumab is used as add-on therapy with intranasal glucocorticosteroids to treat adult patients with severe CRSwNP that cannot be adequately controlled with systemic glucocorticosteroids and/or surgical intervention.

House dust mite SCIT reduces asthma risk and significantly improves long-term rhinitis and asthma control-A RWE study.

BACKGROUND: The German Therapy Allergen Ordinance (TAO) triggered an ongoing upheaval in the market for house dust mite (HDM) allergen immunotherapy (AIT) products. Three HDM subcutaneous AIT (SCIT) products hold approval in Germany and therefore will be available after the scheduled completion of the TAO procedure in 2026. In general, data from clinical trials on the long-term effectiveness of HDM AIT are rare. We evaluated real-world data (RWD) in a retrospective, observational cohort study based on a longitudinal claims database including 60% of all German statutory healthcare prescriptions to show the long-term effectiveness of one of these products in daily life. Aim of this analysis was to provide a per product analysis on effectiveness of mite AIT as it is demanded by international guidelines on AIT. METHODS: Subjects between 5 and 70 years receiving their first (index) prescription of SCIT with a native HDM product (SCIT group) between 2009 and 2013 were included. The exactly 3:1 matched control group received prescriptions for only symptomatic AR medication (non-AIT group); the evaluation period for up to 6 years of follow-up ended in February 2017. Study endpoints were the progression of allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma, asthma occurrence and time to the onset of asthma after at least 2 treatment years. RESULTS: In total, 892 subjects (608 adults and 284 children/adolescents) were included in the SCIT group and 2676 subjects (1824 adults and 852 children/adolescents) in the non-AIT group. During the follow-up period after at least 2 years of SCIT, the number of prescriptions in the SCIT group was reduced by 62.8% (p < .0001) for AR medication and by 42.4% for asthma medication (p = .0003). New-onset asthma risk was significantly reduced in the SCIT vs non-AIT group by 27.0% (p = .0212). The asthma-preventive effect of SCIT occurred 15 months after start of the treatment. In the SCIT group, the time to onset of asthma was prolonged compared to the non-AIT group (p = .0010). CONCLUSION: In this first product based RWD analysis on SCIT with a native HDM product, patients aged 5 to 70 years benefited from AIT in the long term in terms of reduced progression of AR and asthma after at least 2 years of treatment. The effects seemed to last for up to 6 years after treatment termination. A significantly reduced risk of asthma onset was observed, starting after 15 months of treatment.

[Biologic therapy in patients with severe NSAID-exacerbated respiratory disease and previous aspirin desensitization : Results of a multicentric study]. / Biologikatherapie bei schwer erkrankten Patienten mit "NSAID-exacerbated respiratory disease" und stattgehabter ASS­Desaktivierung : Ergebnisse einer multizentrischen Studie.

BACKGROUND: Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a type­2 inflammatory disease of the upper airways, with severe impairment of quality of life. Persons affected by NSAID-exacerbated respiratory disease (NERD) usually present with highly dynamic recurrence of polyps and disease despite prior treatment with sinus surgeries, oral corticosteroids, and aspirin desensitization (ATAD). Biologic therapy has fundamentally changed the choice of therapeutic concept; however, limited data exist on subgroups such as NERD patients. The aim of the current article is to report on a multicenter retrospective study on add-on therapy with dupilumab, omalizumab, and mepolizumab in patients with NERD. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients (NERD+, status after ATAD) in three reference centers in Germany (Munich, Mainz, Berlin). Subjective and objective parameters were collected at 4, 8, and 12 months after biologic therapy initiation in accordance with current EPOS/EUFOREA (European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps/European Forum for Research and Education in Allergy and Airway Diseases) guidelines. Biologic agents were chosen depending on availability and patient characteristics. RESULTS: Treatment was commenced in 122 patients meeting the criteria for CRSwNP and NERD. The endoscopic polyp score, SNOT-22 questionnaire score, visual analogue scoring of total symptoms/severity of disease, and sense of smell (psychophysical testing with Sniffin'Sticks/Brief Smell Identification Test, B­SIT; Sensonics, Inc., Haddon Heights, NJ, USA) improved significantly after 4 and 12 months of add-on therapy (p < 0.0001). All three biologic agents significantly improved one or more disease parameter. Adverse events were not life threatening but led to change of biologic agent in 4 cases. Patients rated biologic therapy significantly better than ATAD, with improved long-term disease control. CONCLUSION: Add-on biologic therapy is effective, safe, and widely accepted among CRSwNP + NERD patients. Future studies might allow for personalized algorithms with sequential surgery, ATAD, and/or biologic therapy.

The impact of cineole treatment timing on common cold duration and symptoms: Non-randomized exploratory clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Common cold (CC) symptoms arise from an inflammatory response treatable with cineole and generally peak within two days, which complicates research implementation. We therefore explored the benefits of early cineole administration with enrolment of participants prior to CC onset. METHODS: Out of 522 adults enrolled in our phase IV, open-label, non-randomized, exploratory clinical trial (EudraCT No. 2020-000860-51), 329 developed a CC and used 200 mg cineole (Soledum®, CNL-1976) t.i.d. for max. 15 (± 2) days. Primary endpoint was burden of disease based on the Wisconsin Upper Respiratory Symptom Survey (WURSS-11). RESULTS: Comparing three strata based on time to treatment (≤ 12 h, > 12 to ≤ 24 h and > 24 h), earliest treatment resulted in lowest AUC-WURSS (Spearman correlation coefficient of 0.36) and reduced the overall burden of disease by 38% (p < 0.0001). Earlier and lower symptom severity peak resulted, with shorter time to remission (average 8.9 vs. 10.7 days with latest treatment initiation, p < 0.05), and higher and faster recovering quality of life (p < 0.05). Tolerability was mostly rated as "very good", with adverse events of suspected causal relationship reported in 4.3% of participants. CONCLUSIONS: Early intervention shows clinical benefits relevant for the effective treatment of CC with cineole.

The pharmacotherapeutic management of allergic rhinitis in people with asthma.

INTRODUCTION: Up to 90% of asthmatic patients have comorbid allergic rhinitis (AR). Although appropriate therapy of AR can improve asthma symptoms and management, AR is often underdiagnosed and under-treated in asthmatics.A non-systematic literature research was conducted on AR as a comorbidity and risk factor of asthma. Latest international publications in medical databases, international guidelines, and the Internet were reviewed. AREAS COVERED: Based on the conducted literature research there is proved evidence of the necessity of diagnosis and treatment of AR in patients with asthma because it affects health care utilization. Therefore, it is recommended in national and global guidelines. EXPERT OPINION: AR increases the risk of asthma development and contributes to the severity of an existing asthma. Early treatment of AR with drugs as intranasal steroids, antihistamines, leukotriene receptor antagonists, and especially allergen-specific immunotherapy can reduce the risk of asthma development and the concomitant medication use in addition to severity of symptoms in AR and asthma.

Telemedicine with special focus on allergic diseases and asthma-Status 2022: An EAACI position paper.

Efficacious, effective and efficient communication between healthcare professionals (HCP) and patients is essential to achieve a successful therapeutic alliance. Telemedicine (TM) has been used for decades but during the COVID-19 pandemic its use has become widespread. This position paper aims to describe the terminology and most important forms of TM among HCP and patients and review the existing studies on the uses of TM for asthma and allergy. Besides, the advantages and risks of TM are discussed, concluding that TM application reduces costs and time for both, HCP and patients, but cannot completely replace face-to-face visits for physical examinations and certain tests that are critical in asthma and allergy. From an ethical point of view, it is important to identify those involved in the TM process, ensure confidentiality and use communication channels that fully guarantee the security of the information. Unmet needs and directions for the future regarding implementation, data protection, privacy regulations, methodology and efficacy are described.

Long-term effects of pollen allergoid tyrosine-adsorbed subcutaneous immunotherapy on allergic rhinitis and asthma.

BACKGROUND: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) may have a long-term disease-modifying effect. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the long-term effects of pollen allergoid tyrosine-adsorbed subcutaneous AIT on allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma (AA) in clinical practice. METHODS: This retrospective study, funded by an AIT manufacturer, analysed the impact of AIT on AR progression and onset of need for AA medication, using a German database covering ~35% of national prescriptions during 2008-2020. Anonymized prescription data of AR patients aged 5-65 years treated with grass or tree pollen AIT between 2009 and 2013 and followed for at least 2 years after AIT cessation were compared with matched control patients with seasonal AR. RESULTS: 181,496 patients received AIT prescriptions. 5959 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The median AIT treatment duration was 1092 days and the follow-up duration was 6.4 years. Less patients treated with AIT received prescriptions for symptomatic AR medication in the follow-up versus controls (AIT: OR: 0.37; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.34, 0.40; p < .001, tyrosine-adsorbed AIT: OR: 0.27; 95% CI 0.20, 0.35 p < .001). Less asthmatic patients under AIT received prescriptions for AA medications versus controls (AIT: OR: 0.48; 95% CI 0.41, 0.55; p < .001, tyrosine-adsorbed AIT: OR: 0.48; 95% CI 0.29, 0.79; p = .004). AR and AA medication prescriptions for AIT patients were reduced in the follow-up versus baseline and controls (AIT: AR: 20.0%; 1.5 vs. 0.2 prescriptions; AA: 29.1%; 2.0 vs. 0.6 prescriptions, p < .001; tyrosine-adsorbed AIT: AR: 24.2%, 1.4 vs. 0.2 prescriptions; AA: 35.6%, 2.1 vs. 0.6 prescriptions, p < .001). The probability of AA medication onset in non-asthmatic patients during follow-up was reduced for AIT patients compared to controls (OR: 0.77, 95% CI 0.66, 0.90; p = .001). All endpoints were significant for children/adolescents and adults in stratified analyses. CONCLUSIONS: We found evidence for long-term effects up to 9.5 years for tyrosine-adsorbed AIT.

A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the efficacy and safety of two doses of azelastine hydrochloride in perennial allergic rhinitis.

Background: Azelastine hydrochloride (AZE) is a selective, non-sedating H1 antagonist with anti-inflammatory and mast cell stabilizing properties, which can be used as an alternative to intranasal corticosteroids. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of the new formulation of 0.15% AZE compared to that of the placebo at a dosage of two sprays per nostril twice daily for 4 weeks in patients with perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR). Materials and methods: A total of 581 subjects were randomized in this double-blind (DB) placebo-controlled trial (NCT00712920) that compared 0.10% (1,096 µg daily) and 0.15% AZE (1,644 µg daily) to the placebo in PAR patients. The study consisted of a 7-day single-blind placebo lead-in period and a 28-day DB treatment period. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in the 12-h reflective total nasal symptom score (rTNSS) for the entire 28-day study period of 0.15% AZE, two sprays per nostril BID compared to the placebo. The efficacy and safety of 0.15% AZE were compared to the placebo. Results: Least square (LS) mean improvement from baseline in the morning (AM) and evening (PM) combined rTNSS was statistically significant for the 0.15% AZE group (p = 0.04) compared to the placebo group. LS mean improvement from baseline in the AM and PM combined rTNSS was 4.10 (4.26) units for 0.15% AZE and 3.81 (3.99) for 0.10% AZE. For individual symptoms, there was a statistically significant change in the LS mean (p = 0.04) improvement from baseline on the 12-h reflective assessment for the 0.15% AZE group for runny nose. Further numerical improvements were shown for itchy nose, nasal congestion, runny nose, and sneezing compared to the placebo. No deaths or serious adverse events related to the study medication were reported. Conclusion: The present formulation of 0.15% AZE is safe and effective in relieving PAR symptoms. It effectively relieves nasal and non-nasal symptoms. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT00712920.

Intranasal antihistamines and corticosteroids in the treatment of allergic rhinitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Intranasal antihistamines and corticosteroids are some of the most frequently used drug classes in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. However, there is uncertainty as to whether effectiveness differences may exist among different intranasal specific medications. This systematic review aims to analyse and synthesise all evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the effectiveness of intranasal antihistamines and corticosteroids in rhinitis nasal and ocular symptoms and in rhinoconjunctivitis-related quality-of-life. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search four electronic bibliographic databases and three clinical trials databases for RCTs (1) assessing patients ≥12 years old with seasonal or perennial allergic rhinitis and (2) comparing the use of intranasal antihistamines or corticosteroids versus placebo. Assessed outcomes will include the Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS), the Total Ocular Symptom Score (TOSS) and the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (RQLQ). We will assess the methodological quality of included primary studies by using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Certainty in the body of evidence for the analysed outcomes will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. We will perform a random-effects meta-analysis for each assessed medication and outcome, presenting results as pooled mean differences and standardised mean differences. Heterogeneity will be explored by sensitivity and subgroup analyses, considering (1) the risk of bias, (2) the follow-up period and (3) the drug dose. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical considerations will not be required. Results will be disseminated in a peer-review journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023416573.

Nomenclature of allergic diseases and hypersensitivity reactions: Adapted to modern needs: An EAACI position paper.

The exponential growth of precision diagnostic tools, including omic technologies, molecular diagnostics, sophisticated genetic and epigenetic editing, imaging and nano-technologies and patient access to extensive health care, has resulted in vast amounts of unbiased data enabling in-depth disease characterization. New disease endotypes have been identified for various allergic diseases and triggered the gradual transition from a disease description focused on symptoms to identifying biomarkers and intricate pathogenetic and metabolic pathways. Consequently, the current disease taxonomy has to be revised for better categorization. This European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Position Paper responds to this challenge and provides a modern nomenclature for allergic diseases, which respects the earlier classifications back to the early 20th century. Hypersensitivity reactions originally described by Gell and Coombs have been extended into nine different types comprising antibody- (I-III), cell-mediated (IVa-c), tissue-driven mechanisms (V-VI) and direct response to chemicals (VII). Types I-III are linked to classical and newly described clinical conditions. Type IVa-c are specified and detailed according to the current understanding of T1, T2 and T3 responses. Types V-VI involve epithelial barrier defects and metabolic-induced immune dysregulation, while direct cellular and inflammatory responses to chemicals are covered in type VII. It is notable that several combinations of mixed types may appear in the clinical setting. The clinical relevance of the current approach for allergy practice will be conferred in another article that will follow this year, aiming at showing the relevance in clinical practice where various endotypes can overlap and evolve over the lifetime.

Diagnosis and treatment of Hymenoptera venom allergy: S2k Guideline of the German Society of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI) in collaboration with the Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Berufs- und Umweltdermatologie e.V. (ABD), the Medical Association of German Allergologists (AeDA), the German Society of Dermatology (DDG), the German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery (DGHNOKC), the German Society of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (DGKJ), the Society for Pediatric Allergy and Environmental Medicine (GPA), German Respiratory Society (DGP), and the Austrian Society for Allergy and Immunology (ÖGAI).

Hymenoptera venom (HV) is injected into the skin during a sting by Hymenoptera such as bees or wasps. Some components of HV are potential allergens and can cause large local and/or systemic allergic reactions (SAR) in sensitized individuals. During their lifetime, ~ 3% of the general population will develop SAR following a Hymenoptera sting. This guideline presents the diagnostic and therapeutic approach to SAR following Hymenoptera stings. Symptomatic therapy is usually required after a severe local reaction, but specific diagnosis or allergen immunotherapy (AIT) with HV (VIT) is not necessary. When taking a patient's medical history after SAR, clinicians should discuss possible risk factors for more frequent stings and more severe anaphylactic reactions. The most important risk factors for more severe SAR are mast cell disease and, especially in children, uncontrolled asthma. Therefore, if the SAR extends beyond the skin (according to the Ring and Messmer classification: grade > I), the baseline serum tryptase concentration shall be measured and the skin shall be examined for possible mastocytosis. The medical history should also include questions specific to asthma symptoms. To demonstrate sensitization to HV, allergists shall determine concentrations of specific IgE antibodies (sIgE) to bee and/or vespid venoms, their constituents and other venoms as appropriate. If the results are negative less than 2 weeks after the sting, the tests shall be repeated (at least 4 - 6 weeks after the sting). If only sIgE to the total venom extracts have been determined, if there is double sensitization, or if the results are implausible, allergists shall determine sIgE to the different venom components. Skin testing may be omitted if in-vitro methods have provided a definitive diagnosis. If neither laboratory diagnosis nor skin testing has led to conclusive results, additional cellular testing can be performed. Therapy for HV allergy includes prophylaxis of reexposure, patient self treatment measures (including use of rescue medication) in the event of re-stings, and VIT. Following a grade I SAR and in the absence of other risk factors for repeated sting exposure or more severe anaphylaxis, it is not necessary to prescribe an adrenaline auto-injector (AAI) or to administer VIT. Under certain conditions, VIT can be administered even in the presence of previous grade I anaphylaxis, e.g., if there are additional risk factors or if quality of life would be reduced without VIT. Physicians should be aware of the contraindications to VIT, although they can be overridden in justified individual cases after weighing benefits and risks. The use of ß-blockers and ACE inhibitors is not a contraindication to VIT. Patients should be informed about possible interactions. For VIT, the venom extract shall be used that, according to the patient's history and the results of the allergy diagnostics, was the trigger of the disease. If, in the case of double sensitization and an unclear history regarding the trigger, it is not possible to determine the culprit venom even with additional diagnostic procedures, VIT shall be performed with both venom extracts. The standard maintenance dose of VIT is 100 µg HV. In adult patients with bee venom allergy and an increased risk of sting exposure or particularly severe anaphylaxis, a maintenance dose of 200 µg can be considered from the start of VIT. Administration of a non-sedating H1-blocking antihistamine can be considered to reduce side effects. The maintenance dose should be given at 4-weekly intervals during the first year and, following the manufacturer's instructions, every 5 - 6 weeks from the second year, depending on the preparation used; if a depot preparation is used, the interval can be extended to 8 weeks from the third year onwards. If significant recurrent systemic reactions occur during VIT, clinicians shall identify and as possible eliminate co-factors that promote these reactions. If this is not possible or if there are no such co-factors, if prophylactic administration of an H1-blocking antihistamine is not effective, and if a higher dose of VIT has not led to tolerability of VIT, physicians should should consider additional treatment with an anti IgE antibody such as omalizumab as off lable use. For practical reasons, only a small number of patients are able to undergo sting challenge tests to check the success of the therapy, which requires in-hospital monitoring and emergency standby. To perform such a provocation test, patients must have tolerated VIT at the planned maintenance dose. In the event of treatment failure while on treatment with an ACE inhibitor, physicians should consider discontinuing the ACE inhibitor. In the absence of tolerance induction, physicians shall increase the maintenance dose (200 µg to a maximum of 400 µg in adults, maximum of 200 µg HV in children). If increasing the maintenance dose does not provide adequate protection and there are risk factors for a severe anaphylactic reaction, physicians should consider a co-medication based on an anti-IgE antibody (omalizumab; off-label use) during the insect flight season. In patients without specific risk factors, VIT can be discontinued after 3 - 5 years if maintenance therapy has been tolerated without recurrent anaphylactic events. Prolonged or permanent VIT can be considered in patients with mastocytosis, a history of cardiovascular or respiratory arrest due to Hymenoptera sting (severity grade IV), or other specific constellations associated with an increased individual risk of recurrent and/or severe SAR (e.g., hereditary α-tryptasemia). In cases of strongly increased, unavoidable insect exposure, adults may receive VIT until the end of intense contact. The prescription of an AAI can be omitted in patients with a history of SAR grade I and II when the maintenance dose of VIT has been reached and tolerated, provided that there are no additional risk factors. The same holds true once the VIT has been terminated after the regular treatment period. Patients with a history of SAR grade ≥ III reaction, or grade II reaction combined with additional factors that increase the risk of non response or repeated severe sting reactions, should carry an emergency kit, including an AAI, during VIT and after regular termination of the VIT.

Impairment of EQ-5D-5L Domains According to Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Control: A MASK-air Real-World Study.

BACKGROUND: EQ-5D-5L (EuroQOL, 5 Domains, 5 Levels) is a widely used health-related quality-of-life instrument, comprising 5 domains. However, it is not known how each domain is impacted by rhinitis or asthma control. OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between rhinitis or asthma control and the different EQ-5D-5L domains using data from the MASK-air mHealth app. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we assessed data from all MASK-air users (2015-2021; 24 countries). For the levels of each EQ-5D-5L domain, we assessed rhinitis and asthma visual analog scales (VASs) and the combined symptom-medication score (CSMS). We built ordinal multivariable models assessing the adjusted association between VAS/CSMS values and the levels of each EQ-5D-5L domain. Finally, we compared EQ-5D-5L data from users with rhinitis and self-reported asthma with data from users with rhinitis alone. RESULTS: We assessed 5354 days from 3092 users. We observed an association between worse control of rhinitis or asthma (higher VASs and CSMS) and worse EQ-5D-5L levels. In multivariable models, all VASs and the CSMS were associated with higher levels of pain/discomfort and daily activities. For anxiety/depression, the association was mostly observed for rhinitis-related tools (VAS nose, VAS global, and CSMS), although the presence of self-reported asthma was also associated with worse anxiety/depression. Worse mobility ("walking around") was particularly associated with VAS asthma and with the presence of asthma. CONCLUSIONS: A worse rhinitis control and a worse asthma control are associated with higher EQ-5D-5L levels, particularly regarding pain/discomfort and activity impairment. Worse rhinitis control is associated with worse anxiety/depression, and poor asthma control with worse mobility.

UCRAID (Ukrainian Citizen and refugee electronic support in Respiratory diseases, Allergy, Immunology and Dermatology) action plan.

Eight million Ukrainians have taken refuge in the European Union. Many have asthma and/or allergic rhinitis and/or urticaria, and around 100,000 may have a severe disease. Cultural and language barriers are a major obstacle to appropriate management. Two widely available mHealth apps, MASK-air® (Mobile Airways Sentinel NetworK) for the management of rhinitis and asthma and CRUSE® (Chronic Urticaria Self Evaluation) for patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria, were updated to include Ukrainian versions that make the documented information available to treating physicians in their own language. The Ukrainian patients fill in the questionnaires and daily symptom-medication scores for asthma, rhinitis (MASK-air) or urticaria (CRUSE) in Ukrainian. Then, following the GDPR, patients grant their physician access to the app by scanning a QR code displayed on the physician's computer enabling the physician to read the app contents in his/her own language. This service is available freely. It takes less than a minute to show patient data to the physician in the physician's web browser. UCRAID-developed by ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma) and UCARE (Urticaria Centers of Reference and Excellence)-is under the auspices of the Ukraine Ministry of Health as well as European (European Academy of Allergy and Clinical immunology, EAACI, European Respiratory Society, ERS, European Society of Dermatologic Research, ESDR) and national societies.