Allergic rhinitis: evidence for impact on asthma

BACKGROUND: This paper reviews the current evidence indicating that comorbid allergic rhinitis may have clinically relevant effects on asthma. DISCUSSION: Allergic rhinitis is very common in patients with asthma, with a reported prevalence of up to 100% in those with allergic asthma. While the temporal relation of allergic rhinitis and asthma diagnoses can be variable, the diagnosis of allergic rhinitis often precedes that of asthma. Rhinitis is an independent risk factor for the subsequent development of asthma in both atopic and nonatopic individuals. Controlled studies have provided conflicting results regarding the benefits for asthma symptoms of treating comorbid allergic rhinitis with intranasal corticosteroids. Effects of other treatments for comorbid allergic rhinitis, including antihistamines, allergen immunotherapy, systemic anti-IgE therapy, and antileukotriene agents, have been examined in a limited number of studies; anti-IgE therapy and antileukotriene agents such as the leukotriene receptor antagonists have benefits for treating both allergic rhinitis and asthma. Results of observational studies indicate that treating comorbid allergic rhinitis results in a lowered risk of asthma-related hospitalizations and emergency visits. Results of several retrospective database studies in the United States and in Europe indicate that, for patients with asthma, the presence of comorbid allergic rhinitis is associated with higher total annual medical costs, greater prescribing frequency of asthma-related medications, as well as increased likelihood of asthma-related hospital admissions and emergency visits. There is therefore evidence suggesting that comorbid allergic rhinitis is a marker for more difficult to control asthma and worsened asthma outcomes. CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the potential for improving asthma outcomes by following a combined therapeutic approach to comorbid allergic rhinitis and asthma rather than targeting each condition separately

Green bridges in a re-colonizing landscape: Wolves (Canis lupus) in Brandenburg, Germany

Gray wolves (Canis lupus) are recolonizing many parts of central Europe and are a key part of international conservation directives. However, roads may hinder the reestablishment of gray wolves throughout their historic range by reducing landscape connectivity and increasing mortality from wildlife-vehicle collisions. The impact of roads on wolves might be mitigated by the construction of green bridges (i.e., large vegetated overpasses, designed to accommodate the movement of wildlife over transportation corridors). In this study, we investigated the seasonal and diurnal use of a green bridge by wolves and three of their main prey species: red deer (Cervus elaphus), roe deer (Capreolus capreolus), and wild boar (Sus scrofa). We found that all four species used the green bridge. Wolves were most active in winter, whereas prey species were most active in spring and summer. All species were more active at dusk and during the night than at dawn and during the day. We found no evidence that wolf presence influenced bridge-use by prey species, consistent with other tests of the prey-trap hypothesis. Our results suggest that green bridges are used by wolves and prey species alike, and may foster connectivity and recolonization for these species in rewilding landscapes