Update on latex allergy: New insights into an old problem

Làtex; Gestió; A nivell mundialLatex; Management; WordwideLátex; Gestión; A nivel mundialDespite the efforts made to mitigate the consequences of this disease, natural rubber latex allergy (NRLA) continues to be a global health problem and is still considered one of the main worries in the working environment in many countries throughout the world. Due to thousands of products containing latex, it is not surprising that the current statistics suggest that prevalence remains high among healthcare workers and susceptible patients. In developed countries, reduction in the prevalence of IgE-mediated allergy to latex proteins from gloves may lead to lax attention by health care personnel. On the other hand, this situation is different in developing countries where there is a lack of epidemiological data associated with a deficit in education and awareness of this issue. The aim of this review is to provide an update of the current knowledge and practical recommendations regarding NRLA by allergologists from different parts of the world with experience in this field.The authors have not received any funding to prepare the manuscript

Practical allergy (PRACTALL) report: risk assessment in anaphylaxis

Effector mechanisms in anaphylaxis were reviewed. Current approaches to confirmation of the clinical diagnosis were discussed. Improved methods for distinguishing between allergen sensitization (which is common in the general population) and clinical risk of anaphylaxis (which is uncommon) were deliberated. Innovative techniques that will improve risk assessment in anaphylaxis in the future were described

Time to revisit the definition and clinical criteria for anaphylaxis?

Anaphylaxis represents the severe end of the spectrum of allergic reactions. A number of different definitions for anaphylaxis are currently foundin the literature (Table 1).[1-6]Manydefine anaphylaxis as a life-threatening reaction. However, data from large case series and patient registries have demonstrated that despite the fact thatthe vast majority of anaphylaxisreactionsare not treated appropriately with prompt administration of epinephrine/adrenaline, ingeneral this does not result in increased mortality or morbidity(such as hospitalization);[7-9]this observation is also consistent with national epidemiological datafor food anaphylaxis, which indicate that fatal anaphylaxis is a rare (but unpredictable) event.[10-12]Therefore, the majority of anaphylaxis reactions cannot be described as life-threatening in themselves,althoughdue to our inability to predict severity of reaction, [12]we emphasise that all anaphylaxis must be appropriately treated with intramuscular epinephrine/adrenaline. Both the descriptions used by the Australasian Society of Clinical Immunology and Allergy (ASCIA)[4] and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID)[5] refer to anaphylaxis as a serious allergic reaction, and acknowledge the spectrum of severity in terms of identifying the potential for anaphylaxis to be life-threatening

World Allergy Organization (WAO) Diagnosis and Rationale for Action against Cow's Milk Allergy (DRACMA) Guidelines update – I – Plan and definitions

Since the World Allergy Organization (WAO) Diagnosis and Rationale against Cow's Milk Allergy (DRACMA) Guidelines were published 10 years ago, new evidence has accumulated about the diagnosis, therapy, and specific immunotherapy for cow's milk allergy (CMA). For this reason, WAO has felt the need to update the guidelines. We introduce here this update. The new DRACMA guidelines aim to comprehensively address the guidance on diagnosis and therapy of both IgE non-IgE-mediated forms of cow's milk allergy in children and adults. They will be divided into 18 chapters, each of which will be dedicated to an aspect. The focus will be on the meta-analyzes and recommendations that will be expressed for the 3 most relevant clinical aspects: (a) the diagnostic identification of the condition; (b) the choice of the replacement formula in case of CMA in infancy when the mother is not able to breastfeed, and (c) the use of specific immunotherapy for cow's milk protein allergy

Biological treatments in allergy: Prescribing patterns and management of hypersensitivity reactions

Clinical Communication

Erratum to: Allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: protocol for a systematic review.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1186/s13601-016-0099-6.]

Real-world data using mHealth apps in rhinitis, rhinosinusitis and their multimorbidities

Digital health is an umbrella term which encompasses eHealth and benefits from areas such as advanced computer sciences. eHealth includes mHealth apps, which offer the potential to redesign aspects of healthcare delivery. The capacity of apps to collect large amounts of longitudinal, real-time, real-world data enables the progression of biomedical knowledge. Apps for rhinitis and rhinosinusitis were searched for in the Google Play and Apple App stores, via an automatic market research tool recently developed using JavaScript. Over 1500 apps for allergic rhinitis and rhinosinusitis were identified, some dealing with multimorbidity. However, only six apps for rhinitis (AirRater, AllergyMonitor, AllerSearch, Husteblume, MASK-air and Pollen App) and one for rhinosinusitis (Galenus Health) have so far published results in the scientific literature. These apps were reviewed for their validation, discovery of novel allergy phenotypes, optimisation of identifying the pollen season, novel approaches in diagnosis and management (pharmacotherapy and allergen immunotherapy) as well as adherence to treatment. Published evidence demonstrates the potential of mobile health apps to advance in the characterisation, diagnosis and management of rhinitis and rhinosinusitis patients.© 2022 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Allergy published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology

WAO consensus on DEfinition of Food Allergy SEverity (DEFASE).

BACKGROUND: While several scoring systems for the severity of anaphylactic reactions have been developed, there is a lack of consensus on definition and categorisation of severity of food allergy disease as a whole. AIM: To develop an international consensus on the severity of food allergy (DEfinition of Food Allergy Severity, DEFASE) scoring system, to be used globally. METHODS PHASE 1: We conducted a mixed-method systematic review (SR) of 11 databases for published and unpublished literature on severity of food allergy management and set up a panel of international experts. PHASE 2: Based on our findings in Phase 1, we drafted statements for a two-round modified electronic Delphi (e-Delphi) survey. A purposefully selected multidisciplinary international expert panel on food allergy (n = 60) was identified and sent a structured questionnaire, including a set of statements on different domains of food allergy severity related to symptoms, health-related quality of life, and economic impact. Participants were asked to score their agreement on each statement on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree". Median scores and percentage agreements were calculated. Consensus was defined a priori as being achieved if 70% or more of panel members rated a statement as "strongly agree" to "agree" after the second round. Based on feedback, 2 additional online voting rounds were conducted. RESULTS: We received responses from 92% of Delphi panel members in round 1 and 85% in round 2. Consensus was achieved on the overall score and in all of the 5 specific key domains as essential components of the DEFASE score. CONCLUSIONS: The DEFASE score is the first comprehensive grading of food allergy severity that considers not only the severity of a single reaction, but the whole disease spectrum. An international consensus has been achieved regarding a scoring system for food allergy disease. It offers an evaluation grid, which may help to rate the severity of food allergy. Phase 3 will involve validating the scoring system in research settings, and implementing it in clinical practice

WAO consensus on definition of food allergy severity (DEFASE)

Background: While several scoring systems for the severity of anaphylactic reactions have been developed, there is a lack of consensus on definition and categorisation of severity of food allergy disease as a whole. Aim: To develop an international consensus on the severity of food allergy (DEfinition of Food Allergy Severity, DEFASE) scoring system, to be used globally. Methods phase 1: We conducted a mixed-method systematic review (SR) of 11 databases for published and unpublished literature on severity of food allergy management and set up a panel of international experts. Phase 2: Based on our findings in Phase 1, we drafted statements for a two-round modified electronic Delphi (e-Delphi) survey. A purposefully selected multidisciplinary international expert panel on food allergy (n = 60) was identified and sent a structured questionnaire, including a set of statements on different domains of food allergy severity related to symptoms, health-related quality of life, and economic impact. Participants were asked to score their agreement on each statement on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree". Median scores and percentage agreements were calculated. Consensus was defined a priori as being achieved if 70% or more of panel members rated a statement as "strongly agree" to "agree" after the second round. Based on feedback, 2 additional online voting rounds were conducted. Results: We received responses from 92% of Delphi panel members in round 1 and 85% in round 2. Consensus was achieved on the overall score and in all of the 5 specific key domains as essential components of the DEFASE score. Conclusions: The DEFASE score is the first comprehensive grading of food allergy severity that considers not only the severity of a single reaction, but the whole disease spectrum. An international consensus has been achieved regarding a scoring system for food allergy disease. It offers an evaluation grid, which may help to rate the severity of food allergy. Phase 3 will involve validating the scoring system in research settings, and implementing it in clinical practice