Introducción en alergia alimentaria

La alergia alimentaria es un trastorno crónico frecuente que afecta a lactantes, niños, adolescentes y adultos. La prevalencia de alergia alimentaria se ha incrementado en las últimas décadas en todo el mundo, sin limitarse a los países occidentales. Puesto que no existe ningún tratamiento, éste se centra en evitar los alergenos, además de la educación de pacientes y cuidadores en el tratamiento de urgencia de las reacciones agudas, por ejemplo: aplicación de epinefrina. Los estudios sugieren que las reacciones accidentales ocurren en alrededor del 45% de los niños con alergia alimentaria cada año, aunque la mayor parte de las reacciones son de gravedad leve o moderada. Los ingresos hospitalarios por anafilaxia alimentaria varían de 4 a 20 por cada 100,000 habitantes; las muertes son raras, con una incidencia estimada de 0.03 a 0.3 por cada millón de personas con alergia alimentaria. La muerte por anafilaxia alimentaria es rara y parece haberse mantenido estable, posiblemente por el aumento en el etiquetado de alérgenos alimentarios, los servicios de diagnóstico, las tasas de prescripción de epinefrina intramuscular y la concienciación acerca de alergias alimentarias. Omalizumab es un fármaco aprobado para varias alteraciones (urticaria crónica o asma difícil) y puede ayudar a reducir los síntomas asociados con la alergia alimentaria. La importancia relativa de las tecnologías alternativas, las estrategias de gestión y las políticas para la alergia alimentaria varía de una región a otra, debido a las diferencias en la epidemiología, educación, bienestar socioeconómico y preferencias culturales de la población

Patient‐centered digital biomarkers for allergic respiratory diseases and asthma: The ARIA‐EAACI approach – ARIA‐EAACI Task Force Report

Biomarkers for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of patients with rhinitis and/ or asthma are urgently needed. Although some biologic biomarkers exist in specialist care for asthma, they cannot be largely used in primary care. There are no validated biomarkers in rhinitis or allergen immunotherapy (AIT) that can be used in clinical practice. The digital transformation of health and health care (including mHealth) places the patient at the center of the health system and is likely to optimize the practice of allergy. Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) and EAACI (European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology) developed a Task Force aimed at proposing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as digital biomarkers that can be easily used for different purposes in rhinitis and asthma. It first defined control digital biomarkers that should make a bridge between clinical practice, randomized controlled trials, observational real-life studies and allergen challenges. Using the MASK-air app as a model, a daily electronic combined symptom-medication score for allergic diseases (CSMS) or for asthma (e-DASTHMA), combined with a monthly control questionnaire, was embedded in a strategy similar to the diabetes approach for disease control. To mimic real-life, it secondly proposed quality-of- life digital biomarkers including daily EQ-5D visual analogue scales and the bi-weekly RhinAsthma Patient Perspective (RAAP). The potential implications for the management of allergic respiratory diseases were proposed.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Rhinitis associated with asthma is distinct from rhinitis alone: TARIA‐MeDALL hypothesis

Asthma, rhinitis, and atopic dermatitis (AD) are interrelated clinical phenotypes that partly overlap in the human interactome. The concept of “one-airway-one-disease,” coined over 20 years ago, is a simplistic approach of the links between upper- and lower-airway allergic diseases. With new data, it is time to reassess the concept. This article reviews (i) the clinical observations that led to Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA), (ii) new insights into polysensitization and multimorbidity, (iii) advances in mHealth for novel phenotype definitions, (iv) confirmation in canonical epidemiologic studies, (v) genomic findings, (vi) treatment approaches, and (vii) novel concepts on the onset of rhinitis and multimorbidity. One recent concept, bringing together upper- and lower-airway allergic diseases with skin, gut, and neuropsychiatric multimorbidities, is the “Epithelial Barrier Hypothesis.” This review determined that the “one-airway-one-disease” concept does not always hold true and that several phenotypes of disease can be defined. These phenotypes include an extreme “allergic” (asthma) phenotype combining asthma, rhinitis, and conjunctivitis.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Global disparities in availability of epinephrine auto-injectors

Anaphylaxis; Epinephrine auto-injector; SurveyAnafilaxia; Autoinyector de epinefrina; EncuestaAnafilaxi; Autoinjector d'epinefrina; EnquestaBackground Anaphylaxis is the most severe clinical presentation of acute systemic allergic reactions and can cause death. Given the prevalence of anaphylaxis within healthcare systems, it is a high priority public health issue. However, management of anaphylaxis – both acute and preventative – varies by region. Methods The World Allergy Organization (WAO) Anaphylaxis Committee and the WAO Junior Members Steering Group undertook a global online survey to evaluate local practice in the diagnosis and management of anaphylaxis across regions. Results Responses were received from WAO members in 66 countries. While intramuscular epinephrine (adrenaline) is first-line treatment for anaphylaxis, some countries continue to recommend alternative routes in contrast to guidelines. Epinephrine auto-injector (EAI) devices, prescribed to individuals at ongoing risk of anaphylaxis in the community setting, are only available in 60% of countries surveyed, mainly in high-income countries. Many countries in South America, Africa/Middle-East and Asian-Pacific regions do not have EAI available, or depend on individual importation. In countries where EAIs are commercially available, national policies regarding the availability of EAIs in public settings are limited to few countries (16%). There is no consensus regarding the time patients should be observed following emergency treatment of anaphylaxis. Conclusion This survey provides a global snapshot view of the current management of anaphylaxis, and highlights key unmet needs including the global availability of epinephrine for self-injection as a key component of anaphylaxis management.Luciana Kase Tanno received an unrestricted ANS grant through CHRUM administration and a research AllerGOS grant

Update meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety issues of fexofenadine

Background: Fexofenadine emerged as one of the most representative second generation histamine H1 antagonist drugs since the 1990s, with an outstanding efficacy and appreciable safety for the treatment of allergic patients. While allergic rhino-conjunctivitis represents the most frequent atopic disease globally, an update of fexofenadine efficacy and safety on this entity was proposed as a surrogate of allergic condition. Methods: Double blind, placebo controlled, randomized clinical trials investigating the efficacy and safety of fexofenadine for the treatment of Allergic Rhinitis were searched in 5 major global databases. Eligibility criteria and characteristics, risk of bias, and validity assessment, data extraction and heterogeneity evaluation are described. Primary outcome selected corresponded to 12-reflective and instantaneous total symptom scores (TSS), besides morning instantaneous TSS and the frequency of reported adverse events (AEs); analysis was planned on the intention-to-treat population.Standardized mean differences of scoring systems were analyzed, and Cochran's Q statistic test and the I2 test were assessed for heterogeneity. Results: From the initial 83 identified records, 12 eligible studies were selected. In the evaluated patients, individuals receiving fexofenadine (1910) showed a significant reduction of TSS compared with those who received placebo (1777), change from baseline: standardized mean difference (SMD) –0.33; 95% CI–0.47 to −0.18, p < 0.0001. Morning instantaneous TSS also demonstrated lower symptoms (change from baseline: SMS -1.42; 95% CI -2.22 to −0.62, p = 0.0005). Heterogeneity was found across selected studies.Frequency of AEs was similar compared to placebo (OR = 1.04; 0.88–1.21), with no detection of heterogeneity across these 12 studies. Conclusions: According to this new evidence, fexofenadine maintains its beneficial profile on signs and symptoms of patients with allergic conditions, as well as its attributes as one of the major candidates for an ideal antihistamine medication (including special conditions such as pregnancy and pre-school age), providing support to its over-the-counter condition in several countries