Effect of high-flow nasal oxygen on hypoxaemia during procedural sedation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the effect of high-flow nasal oxygen and conventional oxygen therapy during procedural sedation amongst adults and children. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL for randomised controlled trials that reported the effects of high-flow nasal oxygen during procedural sedation. The primary outcome measure was hypoxaemia and the secondary outcomes were minimum oxygen saturation; hypercarbia; requirement for airway manoeuvres; and procedure interruptions. The quality of evidence was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of bias tool and grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE). Nineteen randomised controlled trials (4121 patients) including three in children were included. Administration of high-flow nasal oxygen reduced hypoxaemia, risk ratio (95%CI) 0.37 (0.24-0.56), p < 0.001; minor airway manoeuvre requirements, risk ratio (95%CI) 0.26 (0.11-0.59), p < 0.001; procedural interruptions, risk ratio (95%CI) 0.17 (0.05-0.53), p = 0.002; and increased minimum oxygen saturation, mean difference (95%CI) 4.1 (2.70-5.50), p < 0.001; as compared with the control group. High-flow nasal oxygen had no impact on hypercarbia, risk ratio (95%CI) 1.24 (0.97-1.58), p = 0.09, I2 = 0%. High-flow nasal oxygen reduced the incidence of hypoxaemia regardless of the procedure involved, degree of fractional inspired oxygen, risk-profile of patients and mode of propofol administration. The evidence was ascertained as moderate for all outcomes except for procedure interruptions. In summary, high-flow nasal oxygen compared with conventional oxygenation techniques reduced the risk of hypoxaemia, increased minimum oxygen saturation and reduced the requirement for airway manoeuvres. High-flow nasal oxygen should be considered in patients at risk of hypoxaemia during procedural sedation.

A comparison of ultrasound guided bilateral single injection shot Erector Spinae Plane blocks versus wound infiltration for post-operative analgesia in laparoscopic assisted colonic surgery- a prospective randomised study.

BACKGROUND: Both wound infiltration (WI) with local anaesthetic and Erector Spinae Plane block (ESPB) have been described for post-operative analgesia after abdominal surgery. This study compared the efficacy of WI versus ESPB for post-operative analgesia after laparoscopic assisted colonic surgery. METHODS: Seventy-two patients between 18 and 85 years of age undergoing elective surgery were randomised to receive either WI or ESPB. In the WI group a 40 ml bolus of 0.5% Ropivacaine, infiltrated at the ports and minimally invasive wound at subcutaneous and fascia layers. In the ESPB group at T8 level, under ultrasound guidance, a 22-gauge nerve block needle was passed through the Erector Spinae muscle to reach its fascia. A dose up to 40 ml of 0.5% Ropivacaine, divided into two equal volumes, was injected at each side. Both groups had a multimodal analgesic regime, including regular Paracetamol, dexamethasone and patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with Fentanyl. The primary end point was a post-operative pain score utilising a verbal Numerical Rating Score (NRS, 0-10) on rest and coughing in the post anaesthetic care unit (PACU) and in the first 24 h. Secondary outcomes measured were: opioid usage, length of stay and any clinical adverse events. RESULTS: There was no significant treatment difference in PACU NRS at rest and coughing (p-values 0. 382 and 0.595respectively). Similarly, there were no significant differences in first 24 h NRS at rest and coughing (p-values 0.285 and 0.431 respectively). There was no significant difference in Fentanyl use in PACU or in the first 24 h (p- values 0.900 and 0.783 respectively). Neither was there a significant difference found in mean total Fentanyl use between ESPB and WI groups (p-value 0.787). CONCLUSION: Our observations found both interventions had an overall similar efficacy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ACTRN: 12619000113156 ).

Peanut components measured by ISAC: comparison with ImmunoCap and clinical relevance in peanut allergic children.

BACKGROUND: Specific IgE (sIgE) against the peanut component Arachis hypogaea (Ara h) 2 has been shown to be the most important allergen to discriminate between peanut allergy and peanut tolerance. Several studies determined sIgE cut off values for Ara h 2, determined by singleplex measurements. However, cut off values for Ara h 2 from multiplex arrays are less well defined. The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between Ara h 2 sIgE determined by singleplex versus multiplex measurements and to assess the diagnostic value of the different peanut components included in Immuno Solid-phase Allergen Chip (ISAC) multiplex analysis in children with a suspected peanut allergy. METHODS: In this retrospective study we analyzed Ara h 2 sIgE values with singleplex Fluorescence Enzyme Immunoassay (FEIA, ImmunoCap) and multiplex microarray (ISAC) measurements in 117 children with a suspected peanut allergy. Also, other peanut components measured by ISAC were analyzed. Double blinded placebo controlled oral food challenges were used as golden standard. RESULTS: Among all studied peanut components FEIA Ara h 2 sIgE showed the highest area under the curve (AUC, 0.922), followed by ISAC Ara h 6 and Ara h 2 sIgE with AUCs of respectively 0.906 and 0.902. Best cut off values to diagnose peanut allergy were 4.40 kU/l for FEIA Ara h 2 sIgE and, 7.43 ISU and 8.13 ISU for respectively Ara h 2 and Ara h 6 sIgE in ISAC microarray. Ara h 2 sIgE determined in FEIA and ISAC showed a good correlation (r = 0.88; p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Ara h 6 and Ara h 2 sIgE in multiplex ISAC are both good predictors of clinical peanut allergy in Dutch children, and their performance is comparable to the use of Ara h 2 in singleplex FEIA. The simultaneous measurement of different peanut components using ISAC is an advantage and clinically useful to detect peanut allergic children that are Ara h 2 negative but sensitized to other peanut proteins such as Ara h 6.

Comparison of ultrasound-guided transmuscular quadratus lumborum block catheter technique with surgical pre-peritoneal catheter for postoperative analgesia in abdominal surgery: a randomised controlled trial.

Following abdominal surgery, the provision of postoperative analgesia with local anaesthetic infusion through both transmuscular quadratus lumborum block and pre-peritoneal catheter have been described. This study compared these two methods of postoperative analgesia following laparotomy. Eighty-two patients 18-85 years of age scheduled to undergo elective surgery were randomly allocated to receive either transmuscular quadratus lumborum block or pre-peritoneal catheter block. In the transmuscular quadratus lumborum group, an 18-gauge Tuohy needle was passed through the quadratus lumborum muscle under ultrasound guidance to reach its anterior aspect. A 20-ml bolus of ropivacaine 0.375% was administered and catheters placed bilaterally. In the pre-peritoneal catheter group, 20 ml of ropivacaine 0.375% was infiltrated at each of three subcutaneous sub-fascial levels, and pre-peritoneal plane catheters were placed bilaterally. Both groups received an infusion of ropivacaine 0.2% at 5 ml.h-1 , continued up to 48 h along with a multimodal analgesic regime that included regular paracetamol and patient-controlled analgesia with fentanyl. The primary end-point was postoperative pain score on coughing, assessed using a numerical rating score (0-10). Secondary outcomes were pain score at rest, fentanyl usage until 48 h post-operation, satisfaction scores and costs. There was no treatment difference between the two groups for pain score on coughing (p = 0.24). In the transmuscular quadratus lumborum group, there was a reduction in numerical rating score at rest (p = 0.036) and satisfaction scores on days 1 and 30 (p = 0.004, p = 0.006, respectively), but fentanyl usage was similar. In the transmuscular quadratus lumborum group, the highest and lowest blocks observed in the recovery area were T4 and L1, respectively. The transmuscular quadratus lumborum technique cost 574.64 Australian dollars more per patient than the pre-peritoneal catheter technique.

Health economic analysis of allergen immunotherapy for the management of allergic rhinitis, asthma, food allergy and venom allergy: A systematic overview.

BACKGROUND: The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is developing guidelines for allergen immunotherapy (AIT) for the management of allergic rhinitis, allergic asthma, IgE-mediated food allergy and venom allergy. To inform the development of clinical recommendations, we undertook systematic reviews to critically assess evidence on the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of AIT for these conditions. This study focusses on synthesizing data and gaps in the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of AIT for these conditions. METHODS: We produced summaries of evidence in each domain, and then, synthesized findings on health economic data identified from four recent systematic reviews on allergic rhinitis, asthma, food allergy and venom allergy, respectively. The quality of these studies was independently assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool for health economic evaluations. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies satisfied our inclusion criteria. Of these, 19 studies investigated the cost-effectiveness of AIT in allergic rhinitis, of which seven were based on data from randomized controlled trials with economic evaluations conducted from a health system perspective. This body of evidence suggested that sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) and subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) would be considered cost-effective using the (English) National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY). However, the quality of the studies and the general lack of attention to characterizing uncertainty and handling missing data should be taken into account when interpreting these results. For asthma, there were three eligible studies, all of which had significant methodological limitations; these suggested that SLIT, when used in patients with both asthma and allergic rhinitis, may be cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £10 726 per QALY. We found one economic modelling study for venom allergy which, despite being based largely on expert opinion and plausible assumptions, suggested that AIT for bee and wasp venom allergy is only likely to be cost-effective for very high-risk groups who may be exposed to multiple exposures to venom/year (eg bee keepers). We found no eligible studies investigating the cost-effectiveness of AIT for food allergy. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the evidence to support the cost-effectiveness of AIT is limited and of low methodological quality, but suggests that AIT may be cost-effective for people with allergic rhinitis with or without asthma and in high-risk subgroups for venom allergy. We were unable to draw any conclusions on the cost-effectiveness of AIT for food allergy.

The roadmap for allergology in Europe: The subspecialty of allergology as "stop-over" on the way to a full specialty. An EAACI position statement.

The vision of European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) and the Union of European Medical Specialists Section and Board on allergology is to promote and to establish a full specialty of allergology in all European countries. In many European countries, a full specialty does not exist. In those countries, organ-based (sub)specialists or paediatricians and internists with an expertise in allergology may deliver allergy care. There are no generally accepted requirements for the training of subspecialists available. To fill the gap between the need and availability of experienced and accredited physicians who can deliver optimal care to the allergic patients, the EAACI Specialty Committee proposes the minimal requirements for training and certification of subspecialists in allergology. This paper describes the required theoretical knowledge, skills, competences and training facilities (staff and institution). The subspecialist as described in this paper should ideally show the necessary competence in providing good quality care to patients in an environment lacking those full specialists in allergology or tertiary care paediatric subspecialists in allergy.

Low frequency of acetyl salicylic acid hypersensitivity in mastocytosis: The results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled challenge study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with mastocytosis are at increased risk of anaphylaxis. The use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is often discouraged because of this reason. However, the actual prevalence and severity of NSAID-related hypersensitivity among patients with mastocytosis is unknown. METHODS: A double-blind, placebo-controlled acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) challenge up to a cumulative dose of 520 mg was performed among adult patients with mastocytosis. In addition, a retrospective search of the entire outpatient cohort was performed to obtain "real-life" data on NSAID hypersensitivity. RESULTS: Fifty patients underwent an ASA challenge. Seventy percent had indolent systemic mastocytosis, 18% had mastocytosis in the skin, and 12% had advanced mastocytosis. The ASA challenge was positive in 1 patient who developed urticaria. The additional retrospective chart review revealed that 8 of 191 patients had a history of NSAID-related hypersensitivity reaction(s), of whom 3 reported severe systemic reactions. All 8 patients had already experienced NSAID-related hypersensitivity reactions before mastocytosis was diagnosed. CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of ASA hypersensitivity was 2% in a prospective challenge study and 4.1% in a retrospective chart review of 191 patients with mastocytosis. NSAIDs can be administered safely to most patients with mastocytosis. Extra caution should be taken in patients with a history of hypersensitivity reactions to other drugs, or traditional risk factors for NSAID hypersensitivity.

Challenges in the implementation of the EAACI AIT guidelines: A situational analysis of current provision of allergen immunotherapy.

PURPOSE: The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) has produced Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT). We sought to gauge the preparedness of primary care to participate in the delivery of AIT in Europe. METHODS: We undertook a mixed-methods, situational analysis. This involved a purposeful literature search and two surveys: one to primary care clinicians and the other to a wider group of stakeholders across Europe. RESULTS: The 10 papers identified all pointed out gaps or deficiencies in allergy care provision in primary care. The surveys also highlighted similar concerns, particularly in relation to concerns about lack of knowledge, skills, infrastructural weaknesses, reimbursement policies and communication with specialists as barriers to evidence-based care. Almost all countries (92%) reported the availability of AIT. In spite of that, only 28% and 44% of the countries reported the availability of guidelines for primary care physicians and specialists, respectively. Agreed pathways between specialists and primary care physicians were reported as existing in 32%-48% of countries. Reimbursement appeared to be an important barrier as AIT was only fully reimbursed in 32% of countries. Additionally, 44% of respondents considered accessibility to AIT and 36% stating patient costs were barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Successful working with primary care providers is essential to scaling-up AIT provision in Europe, but to achieve this, the identified barriers must be overcome. Development of primary care interpretation of guidelines to aid patient selection, establishment of disease management pathways and collaboration with specialist groups are required as a matter of urgency.

Challenges in the implementation of EAACI guidelines on allergen immunotherapy: A global perspective on the regulation of allergen products.

Regulatory approaches for allergen immunotherapy (AIT) products and the availability of high-quality AIT products are inherently linked to each other. While allergen products are available in many countries across the globe, their regulation is very heterogeneous. First, we describe the regulatory systems applicable for AIT products in the European Union (EU) and in the United States (US). For Europe, a depiction of the different types of relevant procedures, as well as the committees involved, is provided and the fundamental role of national agencies of the EU member states in this complex and unique network is highlighted. Furthermore, the regulatory agencies from Australia, Canada, Japan, Russia, and Switzerland provided information on the system implemented in their countries for the regulation of allergen products. While AIT products are commonly classified as biological medicinal products, they are made available by varying types of procedures, most commonly either by obtaining a marketing authorization or by being distributed as named patient products. Exemptions from marketing authorizations in exceptional cases, as well as import of allergen products from other countries, are additional tools applied by countries to ensure availability of needed AIT products. Several challenges for AIT products are apparent from this analysis and will require further consideration.

Allergen manufacturing and quality aspects for allergen immunotherapy in Europe and the United States: An analysis from the EAACI AIT Guidelines Project.

Adequate quality is essential for any medicinal product to be eligible for marketing. Quality includes verification of the identity, content and purity of a medicinal product in combination with a specified production process and its control. Allergen products derived from natural sources require particular considerations to ensure adequate quality. Here, we describe key aspects of the documentation on manufacturing and quality aspects for allergen immunotherapy products in the European Union and the United States. In some key parts, requirements in these areas are harmonized while other fields are regulated separately between both regions. Essential differences are found in the use of Reference Preparations, or the requirement to apply standardized assays for potency determination. As the types of products available are different in specific regions, regulatory guidance for such products may also be available in one specific region only, such as for allergoids in the European Union. Region-specific issues and priorities are a result of this. As allergen products derived from natural sources are inherently variable in their qualitative and quantitative composition, these products present special challenges to balance the variability and ensuring batch-to-batch consistency. Advancements in scientific knowledge on specific allergens and their role in allergic disease will consequentially find representation in future regulatory guidelines.

EAACI Guidelines on allergen immunotherapy: IgE-mediated food allergy.

Food allergy can result in considerable morbidity, impairment of quality of life, and healthcare expenditure. There is therefore interest in novel strategies for its treatment, particularly food allergen immunotherapy (FA-AIT) through the oral (OIT), sublingual (SLIT), or epicutaneous (EPIT) routes. This Guideline, prepared by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) Task Force on Allergen Immunotherapy for IgE-mediated Food Allergy, aims to provide evidence-based recommendations for active treatment of IgE-mediated food allergy with FA-AIT. Immunotherapy relies on the delivery of gradually increasing doses of specific allergen to increase the threshold of reaction while on therapy (also known as desensitization) and ultimately to achieve post-discontinuation effectiveness (also known as tolerance or sustained unresponsiveness). Oral FA-AIT has most frequently been assessed: here, the allergen is either immediately swallowed (OIT) or held under the tongue for a period of time (SLIT). Overall, trials have found substantial benefit for patients undergoing either OIT or SLIT with respect to efficacy during treatment, particularly for cow's milk, hen's egg, and peanut allergies. A benefit post-discontinuation is also suggested, but not confirmed. Adverse events during FA-AIT have been frequently reported, but few subjects discontinue FA-AIT as a result of these. Taking into account the current evidence, FA-AIT should only be performed in research centers or in clinical centers with an extensive experience in FA-AIT. Patients and their families should be provided with information about the use of FA-AIT for IgE-mediated food allergy to allow them to make an informed decision about the therapy.

EAACI guidelines on allergen immunotherapy: Hymenoptera venom allergy.

Hymenoptera venom allergy is a potentially life-threatening allergic reaction following a honeybee, vespid, or ant sting. Systemic-allergic sting reactions have been reported in up to 7.5% of adults and up to 3.4% of children. They can be mild and restricted to the skin or moderate to severe with a risk of life-threatening anaphylaxis. Patients should carry an emergency kit containing an adrenaline autoinjector, H1 -antihistamines, and corticosteroids depending on the severity of their previous sting reaction(s). The only treatment to prevent further systemic sting reactions is venom immunotherapy. This guideline has been prepared by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology's (EAACI) Taskforce on Venom Immunotherapy as part of the EAACI Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy initiative. The guideline aims to provide evidence-based recommendations for the use of venom immunotherapy, has been informed by a formal systematic review and meta-analysis and produced using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) approach. The process included representation from a range of stakeholders. Venom immunotherapy is indicated in venom-allergic children and adults to prevent further moderate-to-severe systemic sting reactions. Venom immunotherapy is also recommended in adults with only generalized skin reactions as it results in significant improvements in quality of life compared to carrying an adrenaline autoinjector. This guideline aims to give practical advice on performing venom immunotherapy. Key sections cover general considerations before initiating venom immunotherapy, evidence-based clinical recommendations, risk factors for adverse events and for relapse of systemic sting reaction, and a summary of gaps in the evidence.

EAACI Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy: Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.

Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (AR) is an allergic disorder of the nose and eyes affecting about a fifth of the general population. Symptoms of AR can be controlled with allergen avoidance measures and pharmacotherapy. However, many patients continue to have ongoing symptoms and an impaired quality of life; pharmacotherapy may also induce some side-effects. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) represents the only currently available treatment that targets the underlying pathophysiology, and it may have a disease-modifying effect. Either the subcutaneous (SCIT) or sublingual (SLIT) routes may be used. This Guideline has been prepared by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology's (EAACI) Taskforce on AIT for AR and is part of the EAACI presidential project "EAACI Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy." It aims to provide evidence-based clinical recommendations and has been informed by a formal systematic review and meta-analysis. Its generation has followed the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) approach. The process included involvement of the full range of stakeholders. In general, broad evidence for the clinical efficacy of AIT for AR exists but a product-specific evaluation of evidence is recommended. In general, SCIT and SLIT are recommended for both seasonal and perennial AR for its short-term benefit. The strongest evidence for long-term benefit is documented for grass AIT (especially for the grass tablets) where long-term benefit is seen. To achieve long-term efficacy, it is recommended that a minimum of 3 years of therapy is used. Many gaps in the evidence base exist, particularly around long-term benefit and use in children.

sIgE Ana o 1, 2 and 3 accurately distinguish tolerant from allergic children sensitized to cashew nuts.

BACKGROUND: The double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge test (DBPCFC) is the gold standard in cashew nut allergy. This test is costly, time consuming and not without side effects. Analysis of IgE reactivity to cashew nut components may reduce the need for food challenge tests. METHODS: In a prospective and multicentre study, children with suspected cashew nut allergy underwent a DBPCFC with cashew nut. Specific IgE to cashew nut and to the components Ana o 1, 2 and 3 were determined. A skin prick test (SPT) with cashew nut extract was performed. The association between the outcome of the food challenge test and specific IgE to Ana o 1, 2 and 3 was assessed with logistic regression analyses, unadjusted and adjusted for other diagnostic variables. Discriminative ability was quantified with a concordance index (c). RESULTS: A total of 173 children (103 boys, 60%) with a median age of 9 years were included. About 79% had a positive challenge test outcome. A steep rise in the risk of a positive challenge was observed for specific IgE to each individual component Ana o 1, 2 and 3 with estimated risks up to approximately 100%. Median values of Ana o 1, 2, 3 were 1.29 kU/l (range 0-100 kU/l), 4.77 kU/l (range 0-100 kU/l) and 8.33 kU/l (range 0-100 kU/l) respectively and varied significantly (p < 0.001). Specific IgE to Ana o 1, 2 and 3 was better distinguished between cashew-allergic and tolerant children (c = 0.87, 0.85 and 0.89, respectively) than specific IgE to cashew nut or SPT (c = 0.76 and 0.83, respectively). CONCLUSION: The major cashew nut allergens Ana o 1, 2 and 3 are each individually predictive for the outcome of food challenge tests in cashew-allergic children.

Maternal psychiatric symptoms during pregnancy and risk of childhood atopic diseases.

BACKGROUND: Maternal psychiatric symptoms during pregnancy might affect the developing immune system and subsequent risk of childhood atopic diseases. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to examine the associations of maternal psychiatric symptoms during pregnancy with allergic sensitization, allergy and eczema in children until age 10 years. METHODS: This study among 5205 children was performed in a population-based prospective cohort from foetal life onwards. We assessed maternal and paternal psychiatric symptoms (overall, depressive, anxiety) during pregnancy and at 36 months after delivery, and maternal psychiatric symptoms at 2 and 6 months after delivery using the Brief Symptom Inventory. Inhalant and food allergic sensitization were measured by skin prick tests, and physician-diagnosed inhalant and food allergy or eczema by questionnaires from birth until age 10 years. We used multivariate logistic regression, multinomial logistic regression or generalized estimating equation models where appropriate. RESULTS: We observed no association of maternal psychiatric symptoms during pregnancy with allergic sensitization. Maternal overall psychiatric, depressive and anxiety symptoms during pregnancy were associated with an increased risk of inhalant allergy only (adjusted odds ratio (95% confidence interval) 1.96 (1.44, 2.65), 1.58 (1.25, 1.98) and 1.61 (1.27, 2.03), respectively, per 1-unit increase). Maternal overall psychiatric and anxiety symptoms during pregnancy were associated with an increased risk of eczema (1.21 (1.05, 1.39) and 1.15 (1.02, 1.29), respectively, per 1-unit increase). Effect estimates did not materially change when maternal psychiatric symptoms after delivery, or paternal psychiatric symptoms during pregnancy and after delivery were taken into account. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Maternal psychiatric symptoms during pregnancy were associated with increased risks of childhood inhalant allergy and eczema, independent of maternal psychiatric symptoms after delivery and of paternal psychiatric symptoms.

Symptomatic treatment of pollen-related allergic rhinoconjunctivitis in children: randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: About 12% of children are affected by allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (AR). Although the main symptomatic treatments are intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) (daily or on demand) and oral antihistamines, it remains unclear which treatment provides the best relief of symptoms. Therefore, this study examines whether daily use of INCS is superior to on-demand use or to oral antihistamines on demand. METHODS: A single-blinded randomized controlled trial in children (aged 6-18 years) with pollen-related AR. Patients received either INCS daily (fluticasone propionate), INCS on demand (fluticasone propionate) or oral antihistamine on demand (levocetirizine) for 3 months during the grass pollen season. A daily online symptom diary on both nose and eye symptoms was completed. The primary outcome was the percentage of symptom-free days. RESULTS: A total of 150 children were randomized. The percentage symptom-free days was in favour of INCS on demand (30%) compared with INCS daily (22%), that is 8% difference (95% CI -5 to +21%; not significant). The antihistamine on-demand group had 15% symptom-free days, that is 7% difference compared to INCS daily (95% CI -6 to +19%;, not significant). Patients in the INCS on-demand group used on average 61% less fluticasone than patients in the INCS daily group during the study period (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: This trial with three parallel treatment groups shows that INCS daily was not superior to INCS on demand or to antihistamine on demand regarding the number of symptom-free days. An on-demand INCS strategy has the advantage of a lower overall corticosteroid exposure and less costs.

Defining pollen exposure times for clinical trials of allergen immunotherapy for pollen-induced rhinoconjunctivitis - an EAACI position paper.

BACKGROUND: Clinical efficacy of pollen allergen immunotherapy (AIT) has been broadly documented in randomized controlled trials. The underlying clinical endpoints are analysed in seasonal time periods predefined based on the background pollen concentration. However, any validated or generally accepted definition from academia or regulatory authorities for this relevant pollen exposure intensity or period of time (season) is currently not available. Therefore, this Task Force initiative of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) aimed to propose definitions based on expert consensus. METHODS: A Task Force of the Immunotherapy and Aerobiology and Pollution Interest Groups of the EAACI reviewed the literature on pollen exposure in the context of defining relevant time intervals for evaluation of efficacy in AIT trials. Underlying principles in measuring pollen exposure and associated methodological problems and limitations were considered to achieve a consensus. RESULTS: The Task Force achieved a comprehensive position in defining pollen exposure times for different pollen types. Definitions are presented for 'pollen season', 'high pollen season' (or 'peak pollen period') and 'high pollen days'. CONCLUSION: This EAACI position paper provides definitions of pollen exposures for different pollen types for use in AIT trials. Their validity as standards remains to be tested in future studies.

Allergen exposure chambers: harmonizing current concepts and projecting the needs for the future - an EAACI Position Paper.

BACKGROUND: Allergen exposure chambers (AECs) are clinical facilities allowing for controlled exposure of subjects to allergens in an enclosed environment. AECs have contributed towards characterizing the pathophysiology of respiratory allergic diseases and the pharmacological properties of new therapies. In addition, they are complementary to and offer some advantages over traditional multicentre field trials for evaluation of novel therapeutics. To date, AEC studies conducted have been monocentric and have followed protocols unique to each centre. Because there are technical differences among AECs, it may be necessary to define parameters to standardize the AECs so that studies may be extrapolated for driving basic immunological research and for marketing authorization purposes by regulatory authorities. METHODS: For this task force initiative of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), experts from academia and regulatory agencies met with chamber operators to list technical, clinical and regulatory unmet needs as well as the prerequisites for clinical validation. RESULTS: The latter covered the validation process, standardization of challenges and outcomes, intra- and interchamber variability and reproducibility, in addition to comparability with field trials and specifics of paediatric trials and regulatory issues. CONCLUSION: This EAACI Position Paper aims to harmonize current concepts in AECs and to project unmet needs with the intent to enhance progress towards use of these facilities in determining safety and efficacy of new therapeutics in the future.

Allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is in the process of developing Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) for Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis. To inform the development of clinical recommendations, we undertook a systematic review to assess the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and safety of AIT in the management of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. METHODS: We searched nine international biomedical databases for published, in-progress, and unpublished evidence. Studies were independently screened by two reviewers against predefined eligibility criteria and critically appraised using established instruments. Our primary outcomes of interest were symptom, medication, and combined symptom and medication scores. Secondary outcomes of interest included cost-effectiveness and safety. Data were descriptively summarized and then quantitatively synthesized using random-effects meta-analyses. RESULTS: We identified 5960 studies of which 160 studies satisfied our eligibility criteria. There was a substantial body of evidence demonstrating significant reductions in standardized mean differences (SMD) of symptom (SMD -0.53, 95% CI -0.63, -0.42), medication (SMD -0.37, 95% CI -0.49, -0.26), and combined symptom and medication (SMD -0.49, 95% CI -0.69, -0.30) scores while on treatment that were robust to prespecified sensitivity analyses. There was in comparison a more modest body of evidence on effectiveness post-discontinuation of AIT, suggesting a benefit in relation to symptom scores. CONCLUSIONS: AIT is effective in improving symptom, medication, and combined symptom and medication scores in patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis while on treatment, and there is some evidence suggesting that these benefits are maintained in relation to symptom scores after discontinuation of therapy.