Decreasing the undernotification of anaphylaxis deaths in Brazil through the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-11 revision.

BACKGROUND: In 2012, an analysis of the Brazilian mortality database demonstrated undernotification of anaphylaxis deaths due, at least in part, to difficult coding under the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10. This work triggered a cascade of strategic international actions supported by the Joint Allergy Academies and the ICD World Health Organization (WHO) representatives to update the classifications of allergic disorders for the ICD-11 revision. These efforts have resulted in the construction of the new 'Allergic and hypersensitivity conditions' section under the 'Disorders of the Immune system' chapter. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the capacity of the new ICD-11 revision to capture anaphylaxis deaths. METHODS: We re-estimated the anaphylaxis deaths that occurred in Brazil during the period 2008 to 2010, utilizing this new framework and the database of the Brazilian mortality information system that had initially been extracted in May 2011. However, in 2016, a manual review of each of the 3638 records was performed. RESULTS: We identified 639 anaphylaxis deaths, of which 95% were classified as 'definitive anaphylaxis deaths'. In contrast to the 2012 published data, we found a higher number of cases; moreover, all 606 definitive anaphylaxis deaths would be considered as underlying causes of death utilizing the ICD-11 revision. CONCLUSION: This study is the first example of how the new 'Allergic and hypersensitivity conditions' section of the forthcoming ICD-11 can improve the quality of official vital statistics data and the visibility of an important public health concern. This research will facilitate comprehensive, comparable population-based epidemiologic data collection on anaphylaxis.

ARIA 2016: Care pathways implementing emerging technologies for predictive medicine in rhinitis and asthma across the life cycle.

The Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) initiative commenced during a World Health Organization workshop in 1999. The initial goals were (1) to propose a new allergic rhinitis classification, (2) to promote the concept of multi-morbidity in asthma and rhinitis and (3) to develop guidelines with all stakeholders that could be used globally for all countries and populations. ARIA-disseminated and implemented in over 70 countries globally-is now focusing on the implementation of emerging technologies for individualized and predictive medicine. MASK [MACVIA (Contre les Maladies Chroniques pour un Vieillissement Actif)-ARIA Sentinel NetworK] uses mobile technology to develop care pathways for the management of rhinitis and asthma by a multi-disciplinary group and by patients themselves. An app (Android and iOS) is available in 20 countries and 15 languages. It uses a visual analogue scale to assess symptom control and work productivity as well as a clinical decision support system. It is associated with an inter-operable tablet for physicians and other health care professionals. The scaling up strategy uses the recommendations of the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing. The aim of the novel ARIA approach is to provide an active and healthy life to rhinitis sufferers, whatever their age, sex or socio-economic status, in order to reduce health and social inequalities incurred by the disease.

Mosquito salivary allergen Aed a 3: cloning, comprehensive molecular analysis, and clinical evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Allergic reactions to mosquito bites are an increasing clinical concern. Due to the lack of availability of mosquito salivary allergens, they are underdiagnosed. Here, we reported a newly cloned mosquito Aedes (Ae.) aegypti salivary allergen. METHODS: A cDNA encoding a 30-kDa Ae. aegypti salivary protein, designated Aed a 3, was isolated from an expression library. The full-length cDNA was cloned into a baculovirus expression vector, and recombinant Aed a 3 (rAed a 3) was expressed, purified, and characterized. Skin prick tests with purified rAed a 3 and Ae. aegypti bite tests were performed in 43 volunteers. Serum rAed a 3-specific IgE levels were measured in 28 volunteers. RESULTS: The primary nucleotide sequence, deduced amino acid sequence, and IgE-binding sites of Aed a 3 were identified. rAed a 3-selected antibodies recognized a 30-kDa Ae. aegypti saliva protein. rAed a 3 bound IgE in mosquito-allergic volunteers and the binding could be inhibited by the addition of natural mosquito extract dose dependently. Immediate skin test reactions to rAed a 3 correlated significantly with mosquito bite-induced reactions. Of the bite test-positive volunteers, 32% had a positive rAed a 3 skin test and 46% had specific IgE. No bite test-negative volunteers reacted to rAed a 3 in either the skin tests or the IgE assays, confirming the specificity of the assay. CONCLUSIONS: Aed a 3 that corresponds to the Aegyptin protein is a major mosquito salivary allergen. Its recombinant form has biological activity and is suitable for use in skin tests and specific IgE assays in mosquito-allergic individuals.

H1-antihistamines for primary mast cell activation syndromes: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Primary mast cell activation syndromes (MCAS) are a group of disorders presenting with symptoms of mast cell mediator release. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of orally administered H1 -antihistamines in the treatment of primary MCAS compared with placebo and other pharmacologic treatments. METHODS: We systematically searched five databases and three trial repositories and contacted an international panel of experts to identify published and unpublished trials. RESULTS: A total of 36 potentially relevant studies were identified. Of these, five crossover trials, enrolling a total of 71 patients (63 adults), met the eligibility criteria. All five of these studies were judged to be at moderate or high risk of bias. Two studies compared an H1 -antihistamine with placebo, two compared two different H1 -antihistamines, and one study compared H1 - and H2 -antihistamines with oral cromolyn sodium. Four of the five randomized controlled trials were historic (reported from 1983-1993), small (enrolling 8-15 patients), and used agents and/or dosing regimens that are now less commonly used in clinical practice (i.e. azelastine, chlorpheniramine, hydroxyzine, and ketotifen). The fifth trial, which enrolled 33 adults with cutaneous and systemic mastocytosis found 4 weeks of treatment with the second-generation H1 -antihistamine rupatadine, compared with placebo, resulted in significant improvements in quality of life, symptom control (itching, wheals and flares, flushing, tachycardia, and headache, but not gastrointestinal symptoms), and reduction in itching and whealing after standardized skin provocation to elicit Darier's sign. CONCLUSIONS: There is an urgent need for large, well-designed, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trials investigating the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and safety of second-generation H1 -antihistamines in treatment of primary MCAS.

Anaphylaxis and cardiovascular disease: therapeutic dilemmas.

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) increases the risk of severe or fatal anaphylaxis, and some medications for CVD treatment can exacerbate anaphylaxis. The aim of this article is to review the effect of anaphylaxis on the heart, the potential impact of medications for CVD on anaphylaxis and anaphylaxis treatment, and the cardiovascular effects of epinephrine. The therapeutic dilemmas arising from these issues are also discussed and management strategies proposed. PubMed searches were performed for the years 1990-2014 inclusive, using terms such as angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, adrenaline, allergic myocardial infarction, anaphylaxis, angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs), beta-adrenergic blockers, epinephrine, and Kounis syndrome. Literature analysis indicated that: cardiac mast cells are key constituents of atherosclerotic plaques; mast cell mediators play an important role in acute coronary syndrome (ACS); patients with CVD are at increased risk of developing severe or fatal anaphylaxis; and medications for CVD treatment, including beta-adrenergic blockers and ACE inhibitors, potentially exacerbate anaphylaxis or make it more difficult to treat. Epinephrine increases myocardial contractility, decreases the duration of systole relative to diastole, and enhances coronary blood flow. Its transient adverse effects include pallor, tremor, anxiety, and palpitations. Serious adverse effects (including ventricular arrhythmias and hypertension) are rare, and are significantly more likely after intravenous injection than after intramuscular injection. Epinephrine is life-saving in anaphylaxis; second-line medications (including antihistamines and glucocorticoids) are not. In CVD patients (especially those with ACS), the decision to administer epinephrine for anaphylaxis can be difficult, and its benefits and potential harms need to be carefully considered. Concerns about potential adverse effects need to be weighed against concerns about possible death from untreated anaphylaxis, but there is no absolute contraindication to epinephrine injection in anaphylaxis.

Update on rupatadine in the management of allergic disorders.

In a review of rupatadine published in 2008, the primary focus was on its role as an antihistamine, with a thorough evaluation of its pharmacology and interaction with histamine H1 -receptors. At the time, however, evidence was already emerging of a broader mechanism of action for rupatadine involving other mediators implicated in the inflammatory cascade. Over the past few years, the role of platelet-activating factor (PAF) as a potent mediator involved in the hypersensitivity-type allergic reaction has gained greater recognition. Rupatadine has dual affinity for histamine H1 -receptors and PAF receptors. In view of the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma group's call for oral antihistamines to exhibit additive anti-allergic/anti-inflammatory properties, further exploration of rupatadine's anti-PAF effects was a logical step forward. New studies have demonstrated that rupatadine inhibits PAF effects in nasal airways and produces a greater reduction in nasal symptoms than levocetirizine. A meta-analysis involving more than 2500 patients has consolidated the clinical evidence for rupatadine in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis in adults and children (level of evidence Ia, recommendation A). Other recent advances include observational studies of rupatadine in everyday clinical practice situations and approval of a new formulation (1 mg/ml oral solution) for use in children. In this reappraisal, we revisit some key properties and pivotal clinical studies of rupatadine and examine new clinical data in more detail including studies that measured health-related quality of life and studies that investigated the efficacy and safety of rupatadine in other indications such as acquired cold urticaria, mosquito bite allergy and mastocytosis.

Methods report on the development of the 2013 revision and update of the EAACI/GA2 LEN/EDF/WAO guideline for the definition, classification, diagnosis, and management of urticaria.

This methods report describes the process of guideline development in detail. It is the result of a systematic literature review using the 'Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation' (GRADE) methodology and a structured consensus conference held on 28 and 29 November 2012, in Berlin. It is a joint initiative of the Dermatology Section of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the EU-funded network of excellence, the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA(2) LEN), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF), and the World Allergy Organization (WAO) with the participation of delegates of 21 national and international societies. This guideline covers the definition and classification of urticaria, taking into account the recent progress in identifying its causes, eliciting factors and pathomechanisms. In addition, it outlines evidence-based diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for the different subtypes of urticaria. This guideline was acknowledged and accepted by the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS) and is published in Allergy 2014; 69:868-887.

The EAACI/GA(2) LEN/EDF/WAO Guideline for the definition, classification, diagnosis, and management of urticaria: the 2013 revision and update.

This guideline is the result of a systematic literature review using the 'Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation' (GRADE) methodology and a structured consensus conference held on 28 and 29 November 2012, in Berlin. It is a joint initiative of the Dermatology Section of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the EU-funded network of excellence, the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA(2) LEN), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF), and the World Allergy Organization (WAO) with the participation of delegates of 21 national and international societies. Urticaria is a frequent, mast cell-driven disease, presenting with wheals, angioedema, or both. The life-time prevalence for acute urticaria is approximately 20%. Chronic spontaneous urticaria and other chronic forms of urticaria do not only cause a decrease in quality of life, but also affect performance at work and school and, as such, are members of the group of severe allergic diseases. This guideline covers the definition and classification of urticaria, taking into account the recent progress in identifying its causes, eliciting factors and pathomechanisms. In addition, it outlines evidence-based diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for the different subtypes of urticaria. This guideline was acknowledged and accepted by the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS).

Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA): achievements in 10 years and future needs.

Allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma represent global health problems for all age groups. Asthma and rhinitis frequently coexist in the same subjects. Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) was initiated during a World Health Organization workshop in 1999 (published in 2001). ARIA has reclassified AR as mild/moderate-severe and intermittent/persistent. This classification closely reflects patients' needs and underlines the close relationship between rhinitis and asthma. Patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals are confronted with various treatment choices for the management of AR. This contributes to considerable variation in clinical practice, and worldwide, patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals are faced with uncertainty about the relative merits and downsides of the various treatment options. In its 2010 Revision, ARIA developed clinical practice guidelines for the management of AR and asthma comorbidities based on the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. ARIA is disseminated and implemented in more than 50 countries of the world. Ten years after the publication of the ARIA World Health Organization workshop report, it is important to make a summary of its achievements and identify the still unmet clinical, research, and implementation needs to strengthen the 2011 European Union Priority on allergy and asthma in children.

Sublingual allergen immunotherapy: mode of action and its relationship with the safety profile.

Allergen immunotherapy reorients inappropriate immune responses in allergic patients. Sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT) has been approved, notably in the European Union, as an effective alternative to subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT) for allergic rhinitis patients. Compared with SCIT, SLIT has a better safety profile. This is possibly because oral antigen-presenting cells (mostly Langerhans and myeloid dendritic cells) exhibit a tolerogenic phenotype, despite constant exposure to danger signals from food and microbes. This reduces the induction of pro-inflammatory immune responses leading to systemic allergic reactions. Oral tissues contain relatively few mast cells and eosinophils (mostly located in submucosal areas) and, in comparison with subcutaneous tissue, are less likely to give rise to anaphylactic reactions. SLIT-associated immune responses include the induction of circulating, allergen-specific Th1 and regulatory CD4+ T cells, leading to clinical tolerance. Although 40-75% of patients receiving SLIT experience mild, transient local reactions in the oral mucosa, these primary reactions rarely necessitate dose reduction or treatment interruption. We discuss 11 published case reports of anaphylaxis (all nonfatal) diagnosed according to the World Allergy Organization criteria and relate this figure to the approximately 1 billion SLIT doses administered worldwide since 2000. Anaphylaxis risk factors associated with SCIT and/or SLIT should be characterized further.

Practical guide to skin prick tests in allergy to aeroallergens.

This pocket guide is the result of a consensus reached between members of the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA(2) LEN) and Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA). The aim of the current pocket guide is to offer a comprehensive set of recommendations on the use of skin prick tests in allergic rhinitis-conjunctivitis and asthma in daily practice. This pocket guide is meant to give simple answers to the most frequent questions raised by practitioners in Europe, including 'practicing allergists', general practitioners and any other physicians with special interest in the management of allergic diseases. It is not a long or detailed scientific review of the topic. However, the recommendations in this pocket guide were compiled following an in-depth review of existing guidelines and publications, including the 1993 European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology position paper, the 2001 ARIA document and the ARIA update 2008 (prepared in collaboration with GA(2) LEN). The recommendations cover skin test methodology and interpretation, allergen extracts to be used, as well as indications in a variety of settings including paediatrics and developing countries.

How to design and evaluate randomized controlled trials in immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis: an ARIA-GA(2) LEN statement.

Specific immunotherapy (SIT) is one of the treatments for allergic rhinitis. However, for allergists, nonspecialists, regulators, payers, and patients, there remain gaps in understanding the evaluation of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Although treating the same diseases, RCTs in SIT and pharmacotherapy should be considered separately for several reasons, as developed in this study. These include the severity and persistence of allergic rhinitis in the patients enrolled in the study, the problem of the placebo, allergen exposure (in particular pollen and mite), the analysis and reporting of the study, the level of symptoms of placebo-treated patients, the clinical relevance of the efficacy of SIT, the need for a validated combined symptom-medication score, the differences between children and adults and pharmacoeconomic analyses. This statement reviews issues raised by the interpretation of RCTs in sublingual immunotherapy. It is not possible to directly extrapolate the rules or parameters used in medication RCTs to SIT. It also provides some suggestions for the research that will be needed. Interestingly, some of the research questions can be approached with the available data obtained from large RCTs.

Development and implementation of guidelines in allergic rhinitis ­ an ARIA-GA2LEN paper.

The links between asthma and rhinitis are well characterized. The Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines stress the importance of these links and provide guidance for their prevention and treatment. Despite effective treatments being available, too few patients receive appropriate medical care for both diseases. Most patients with rhinitis and asthma consult primary care physicians and therefore these physicians are encouraged to understand and use ARIA guidelines. Patients should also be informed about these guidelines to raise their awareness of optimal care and increase control of the two related diseases. To apply these guidelines, clinicians and patients need to understand how and why the recommendations were made. The goal of the ARIA guidelines is to provide recommendations about the best management options for most patients in most situations. These recommendations should be based on the best available evidence. Making recommendations requires the assessment of the quality of available evidence, deciding on the balance between benefits and downsides, consideration of patients' values and preferences, and, if applicable, resource implications. Guidelines must be updated as new management options become available or important new evidence emerges. Transparent reporting of guidelines facilitates understanding and acceptance, but implementation strategies need to be improved.

Allergy, total serum immunoglobulin E, and airflow in children and adolescents in TENOR.

In children and adolescents with difficult-to-treat asthma, few data exist characterizing the relationships between basic patient characteristics (e.g., age, sex) and atopic indicators in asthma. These associations were examined in The Epidemiology and Natural History of Asthma: Outcomes and Treatment Regimens (TENOR), an observational study of a large cohort of patients with severe or difficult-to-treat asthma. To characterize allergy patterns and the relationship between total serum immunoglobulin E (IgE) and airflow in young patients with severe or difficult-to-treat asthma. A total of 1261 patients from the TENOR study were stratified into four age groups at baseline (6-8, 9-11, 12-14, and 15-17 yr). The objective was to characterize allergy patterns and the relationship between total serum immunoglobulin E (IgE) and ratio of pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second to forced vital capacity (FEV(1) /FVC) in young patients with severe or difficult-to-treat asthma. The chi-square test for categorical variables and analysis of variance for continuous variables were used to identify significant differences among age groups. Multivariable linear regression was used to evaluate the association between IgE and FEV(1) /FVC. Allergic rhinitis was reported in approximately two-thirds of patients. Up to 25% of patients had atopic dermatitis, which differed across age groups in boys (p < 0.05). Positive allergen skin test rate differed across age groups in boys (p < 0.05). Rates of asthma triggers were higher and differed across age groups in girls (p < 0.05), particularly around menarche (12-14 yr). IgE levels were higher in boys and differed across age groups in boys (p < 0.01) and girls (p < 0.05). IgE was associated with a lower FEV(1) /FVC after adjusting for age and sex (p < 0.01). Severe or difficult-to-treat asthma in children and adolescents is characterized by high frequencies of comorbid allergic diseases, allergen sensitization, and high IgE levels. This burden is amplified by the association of more airflow limitation with higher IgE levels, suggesting the need for allergy evaluations.

Risk of first-generation H(1)-antihistamines: a GA(2)LEN position paper.

BACKGROUND: First-generation H(1)-antihistamines obtained without prescription are the most frequent form of self-medication for allergic diseases, coughs and colds and insomnia even though they have potentially dangerous unwanted effects which are not recognized by the general public. AIMS: To increase consumer protection by bringing to the attention of regulatory authorities, physicians and the general public the potential dangers of the indiscriminate use first-generation H(1)-antihistamines purchased over-the counter in the absence of appropriate medical supervision. METHODS: A GA(2)LEN (Global Allergy and Asthma European Network) task force assessed the unwanted side-effects and potential dangers of first-generation H1-antihistamines by reviewing the literature (Medline and Embase) and performing a media audit of US coverage from 1996 to 2008 of accidents and fatal adverse events in which these drugs were implicated. RESULTS: First-generation H(1)-antihistamines, all of which are sedating, are generally regarded as safe by laypersons and healthcare professionals because of their long-standing use. However, they reduce rapid eye movement (REM)-sleep, impair learning and reduce work efficiency. They are implicated in civil aviation, motor vehicle and boating accidents, deaths as a result of accidental or intentional overdosing in infants and young children and suicide in teenagers and adults. Some exhibit cardiotoxicity in overdose. CONCLUSIONS: This review raises the issue of better consumer protection by recommending that older first-generation H(1)-antihistamines should no longer be available over-the-counter as prescription- free drugs for self-medication of allergic and other diseases now that newer second- generation nonsedating H(1)-antihistamines with superior risk/benefit ratios are widely available at competitive prices.

The allergic sensitization in infants with atopic eczema from different countries.

BACKGROUND: No study has compared allergic sensitization patterns in infants with atopic eczema from different countries. The aim of this study was to investigate the patterns of allergic sensitization in a cohort of infants with atopic eczema participating in a multicentre, international study. METHODS: Two thousand one hundred and eighty-four infants (mean age 17.6 months) with atopic eczema from allergic families were screened in 94 centres in 12 countries to participate in a randomized trial for the early prevention of asthma. Clinical history, Severity Scoring of Atopic Dermatitis Index, measurements for total serum IgE and specific IgE antibodies to eight food and inhalant allergens were entered into a database before randomization to treatment. A history of type of feeding in the first weeks of life and exposure to animals was recorded. RESULTS: A total of 52.9% of the infants had raised total IgE, and 55.5% were sensitized to at least one allergen. There was a wide difference in the total IgE values and in the sensitization rates to foods and aeroallergens among infants from different countries. The highest prevalence rates of allergen-sensitized infants were found in Australia (83%), the UK (79%) and Italy (76%). Infants from Belgium and Poland consistently had the lowest sensitization rates. In each country, a characteristic pattern of sensitization was found for aeroallergens (house dust mite > cat > grass pollen > Alternaria), but not for food allergens. CONCLUSIONS: In infants with atopic eczema, there is a wide variation in the pattern of allergic sensitization between countries, and data from one country are not necessarily generalizable to other countries.

Adrenaline for the treatment of anaphylaxis: cochrane systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is a serious allergic reaction that is rapid in onset and may cause death. Adrenaline is recommended as the initial treatment of choice for anaphylaxis. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of adrenaline in the treatment of anaphylaxis. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2007, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1966 to March 2007), EMBASE (1966 to March 2007), CINAHL (1982 to March 2007), BIOSIS (to March 2007), ISI Web of Knowledge (to March 2007) and LILACS (to March 2007). We also searched websites listing ongoing trials: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/, http://www.controlledtrials.com and http://www.actr.org.au/ and contacted pharmaceutical companies and international experts in anaphylaxis in an attempt to locate unpublished material. Randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing adrenaline with no intervention, placebo or other adrenergic agonists were eligible for inclusion. Two authors independently assessed articles for inclusion. RESULTS: We found no studies that satisfied the inclusion criteria. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of this review, we are unable to make any new recommendations on the use of adrenaline for the treatment of anaphylaxis. In the absence of appropriate trials, we recommend, albeit on the basis of less than optimal evidence, that adrenaline administration by intramuscular injection should still be regarded as first-line treatment for the management of anaphylaxis.

Epinephrine: the drug of choice for anaphylaxis. A statement of the World Allergy Organization.

Anaphylaxis is an acute and potentially lethal multi-system allergic reaction. Most consensus guidelines for the past 30 years have held that epinephrine is the drug of choice and the first drug that should be administered in acute anaphylaxis. Some state that properly administered epinephrine has no absolute contraindication in this clinical setting. A committee of anaphylaxis experts assembled by the World Allergy Organization has examined the evidence from the medical literature concerning the appropriate use of epinephrine for anaphylaxis. The Committee strongly believes that epinephrine is currently underutilized and often dosed suboptimally to treat anaphylaxis, is under-prescribed for potential future self-administration, that most of the reasons proposed to withhold its clinical use are flawed, and that the therapeutic benefits of epinephrine exceed the risk when given in appropriate i.m. doses.