Anaphylaxis in Latin America: a report of the online Latin American survey on anaphylaxis (OLASA)

OBJECTIVES: The aims of the Online Latin American Survey of Anaphylaxis (OLASA) were to identify the main clinical manifestations, triggers, and treatments of severe allergic reactions in patients who were seen by allergists from July 2008 to June 2010 in 15 Latin American countries and Portugal (n =634). RESULTS: Of all patients, 68.5% were older than 18 years, 41.6% were male, and 65.4% experienced the allergic reaction at home. The etiologic agent was identified in 87.4% of cases and predominantly consisted of drugs (31.2%), foods (23.3%), and insect stings (14.9%). The main symptom categories observed during the acute episodes were cutaneous (94.0%) and respiratory (79.0%). The majority of patients (71.6%) were treated initially by a physician (office/emergency room) within the first hour after the reaction occurred (60.2%), and 43.5% recovered in the first hour after treatment. Most patients were treated in an emergency setting, but only 37.3% received parenteral epinephrine alone or associated with other medication. However, 80.5% and 70.2% were treated with corticosteroids or antihistamines (alone or in association), respectively. A total of 12.9% of the patients underwent reanimation maneuvers, and 15.2% were hospitalized. Only 5.8% of the patients returned to the emergency room after discharge, with 21.7% returning in the first 6 hours after initial treatment. CONCLUSION: The main clinical manifestations of severe allergic reactions were cutaneous. The etiologic agents that were identified as causing these acute episodes differed according to age group. Following in order: drugs (31.2%), foods (23.3% and insect stings (14.9%) in adults with foods predominance in children. Treatment provided for acute anaphylactic reactions was not appropriate. It is necessary to improve educational programs in order to enhance the knowledge on this potentially fatal emergency.Federal University of São Paulo Clinical Immunology and Rheumatology Department of Pediatrics Division of AllergyUniversidad del Salvador Medical School ImmunologyClínica Santa Isabel Head of the Division of Allergy and ImmunologyCentro Médico-Docente La Trinidad Allergy and Clinical Immunology DepartmentClínica El Avila Head of Allergy and Immunology DepartmentUniversity of Montes ClarosFederal University of Paraná Department of PediatricsNational University of Rosario Faculty of Medical SciencesFederal Faculty Foundation of Medical Sciences of Porto Alegre Division of Immunology and ImmunopathologyUNIFESP, Clinical Immunology and Rheumatology Department of Pediatrics Division of AllergySciEL

Manejo de la anafilaxia en América Latina: situación actual

La anafilaxia es una reacción alérgica grave y sistémica, que puede ser fatal. El tratamiento de primera línea de elección, según las pautas internacionales, es la adrenalina intramuscular. Sin embargo, diferentes estudios muestran que el desempeño de los profesionales de la salud que manejan la anafilaxia a menudo es inadecuado. ABSTRACT Anaphylaxis is a systemic and severe allergic reaction, which can be fatal. The first-line treatment of choice, according to international guidelines, is intramuscular adrenaline. However, different studies show that the performance of health professionals managing anaphylaxis is often inadequate

Correction to: Is diet partly responsible for differences in COVID-19 death rates between and within countries?

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article

Spices to Control COVID-19 Symptoms:Yes, but Not Only…

There are large country variations in COVID-19 death rates that may be partly explained by diet. Many countries with low COVID-19 death rates have a common feature of eating large quantities of fermented vegetables such as cabbage and, in some continents, various spices. Fermented vegetables and spices are agonists of the antioxidant transcription factor nuclear factor (erythroid-derived 2)-like 2 (Nrf2), and spices are transient receptor potential ankyrin 1 and vanillin 1 (TRPA1/V1) agonists. These mechanisms may explain many COVID-19 symptoms and severity. It appears that there is a synergy between Nrf2 and TRPA1/V1 foods that may explain the role of diet in COVID-19. One of the mechanisms of COVID-19 appears to be an oxygen species (ROS)-mediated process in synergy with TRP channels, modulated by Nrf2 pathways. Spicy foods are likely to desensitize TRP channels and act in synergy with exogenous antioxidants that activate the Nrf2 pathway

Academic productivity of young people with allergic rhinitis:A MASK-air® study

Peer reviewe

Mobile Technology in Allergic Rhinitis : Evolution in Management or Revolution in Health and Care?

Smart devices and Internet-based applications (apps) are largely used in allergic rhinitis and may help to address some unmet needs. However, these new tools need to first of all be tested for privacy rules, acceptability, usability, and cost-effectiveness. Second, they should be evaluated in the frame of the digital transformation of health, their impact on health care delivery, and health outcomes. This review (1) summarizes some existing mobile health apps for allergic rhinitis and reviews those in which testing has been published, (2) discusses apps that include risk factors of allergic rhinitis, (3) examines the impact of mobile health apps in phenotype discovery, (4) provides real-world evidence for care pathways, and finally (5) discusses mobile health tools enabling the digital transformation of health and care, empowering citizens, and building a healthier society. (C) 2019 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & ImmunologyPeer reviewe

Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of daily monitoring visual analog scales in MASK‐air®

Background: MASK-air® is an app that supports allergic rhinitis patients in disease control. Users register daily allergy symptoms and their impact on activities using visual analog scales (VASs). We aimed to assess the concurrent validity, reliability, and responsiveness of these daily VASs. Methods: Daily monitoring VAS data were assessed in MASK-air® users with allergic rhinitis. Concurrent validity was assessed by correlating daily VAS values with those of the EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) VAS, the Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test (CARAT) score, and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Allergic Specific (WPAI-AS) Questionnaire (work and activity impairment scores). Intra-rater reliability was assessed in users providing multiple daily VASs within the same day. Test–retest reliability was tested in clinically stable users, as defined by the EQ-5D VAS, CARAT, or “VAS Work” (i.e., VAS assessing the impact of allergy on work). Responsiveness was determined in users with two consecutive measurements of EQ-5D-VAS or “VAS Work” indicating clinical change. Results: A total of 17,780 MASK-air® users, with 317,176 VAS days, were assessed. Concurrent validity was moderate–high (Spearman correlation coefficient range: 0.437–0.716). Intra-rater reliability intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) ranged between 0.870 (VAS assessing global allergy symptoms) and 0.937 (VAS assessing allergy symptoms on sleep). Test–retest reliability ICCs ranged between 0.604 and 0.878—“VAS Work” and “VAS asthma” presented the highest ICCs. Moderate/large responsiveness effect sizes were observed—the sleep VAS was associated with lower responsiveness, while the global allergy symptoms VAS demonstrated higher responsiveness. Conclusion: In MASK-air®, daily monitoring VASs have high intra-rater reliability and moderate–high validity, reliability, and responsiveness, pointing to a reliable measure of symptom loads

Behavioural patterns in allergic rhinitis medication in Europe : A study using MASK-air(R) real-world data

Background Co-medication is common among patients with allergic rhinitis (AR), but its dimension and patterns are unknown. This is particularly relevant since AR is understood differently across European countries, as reflected by rhinitis-related search patterns in Google Trends. This study aims to assess AR co-medication and its regional patterns in Europe, using real-world data. Methods We analysed 2015-2020 MASK-air(R) European data. We compared days under no medication, monotherapy and co-medication using the visual analogue scale (VAS) levels for overall allergic symptoms ('VAS Global Symptoms') and impact of AR on work. We assessed the monthly use of different medication schemes, performing separate analyses by region (defined geographically or by Google Trends patterns). We estimated the average number of different drugs reported per patient within 1 year. Results We analysed 222,024 days (13,122 users), including 63,887 days (28.8%) under monotherapy and 38,315 (17.3%) under co-medication. The median 'VAS Global Symptoms' was 7 for no medication days, 14 for monotherapy and 21 for co-medication (p < .001). Medication use peaked during the spring, with similar patterns across different European regions (defined geographically or by Google Trends). Oral H-1-antihistamines were the most common medication in single and co-medication. Each patient reported using an annual average of 2.7 drugs, with 80% reporting two or more. Conclusions Allergic rhinitis medication patterns are similar across European regions. One third of treatment days involved co-medication. These findings suggest that patients treat themselves according to their symptoms (irrespective of how they understand AR) and that co-medication use is driven by symptom severity.Peer reviewe

Development and validation of combined symptom-medication scores for allergic rhinitis*

Background Validated combined symptom-medication scores (CSMSs) are needed to investigate the effects of allergic rhinitis treatments. This study aimed to use real-life data from the MASK-air(R) app to generate and validate hypothesis- and data-driven CSMSs. Methods We used MASK-air(R) data to assess the concurrent validity, test-retest reliability and responsiveness of one hypothesis-driven CSMS (modified CSMS: mCSMS), one mixed hypothesis- and data-driven score (mixed score), and several data-driven CSMSs. The latter were generated with MASK-air(R) data following cluster analysis and regression models or factor analysis. These CSMSs were compared with scales measuring (i) the impact of rhinitis on work productivity (visual analogue scale [VAS] of work of MASK-air(R), and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Allergy Specific [WPAI-AS]), (ii) quality-of-life (EQ-5D VAS) and (iii) control of allergic diseases (Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test [CARAT]). Results We assessed 317,176 days of MASK-air(R) use from 17,780 users aged 16-90 years, in 25 countries. The mCSMS and the factor analyses-based CSMSs displayed poorer validity and responsiveness compared to the remaining CSMSs. The latter displayed moderate-to-strong correlations with the tested comparators, high test-retest reliability and moderate-to-large responsiveness. Among data-driven CSMSs, a better performance was observed for cluster analyses-based CSMSs. High accuracy (capacity of discriminating different levels of rhinitis control) was observed for the latter (AUC-ROC = 0.904) and for the mixed CSMS (AUC-ROC = 0.820). Conclusion The mixed CSMS and the cluster-based CSMSs presented medium-high validity, reliability and accuracy, rendering them as candidates for primary endpoints in future rhinitis trials.Peer reviewe

Development and validation of combined symptom‐medication scores for allergic rhinitis*

Background: Validated combined symptom-medication scores (CSMSs) are needed to investigate the effects of allergic rhinitis treatments. This study aimed to use real-life data from the MASK-air® app to generate and validate hypothesis- and data-driven CSMSs. Methods: We used MASK-air® data to assess the concurrent validity, test-retest reliability and responsiveness of one hypothesis-driven CSMS (modified CSMS: mCSMS), one mixed hypothesis- and data-driven score (mixed score), and several data-driven CSMSs. The latter were generated with MASK-air® data following cluster analysis and regression models or factor analysis. These CSMSs were compared with scales measuring (i) the impact of rhinitis on work productivity (visual analogue scale [VAS] of work of MASK-air® , and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Allergy Specific [WPAI-AS]), (ii) quality-of-life (EQ-5D VAS) and (iii) control of allergic diseases (Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test [CARAT]). Results: We assessed 317,176 days of MASK-air® use from 17,780 users aged 16-90 years, in 25 countries. The mCSMS and the factor analyses-based CSMSs displayed poorer validity and responsiveness compared to the remaining CSMSs. The latter displayed moderate-to-strong correlations with the tested comparators, high test-retest reliability and moderate-to-large responsiveness. Among data-driven CSMSs, a better performance was observed for cluster analyses-based CSMSs. High accuracy (capacity of discriminating different levels of rhinitis control) was observed for the latter (AUC-ROC = 0.904) and for the mixed CSMS (AUC-ROC = 0.820). Conclusion: The mixed CSMS and the cluster-based CSMSs presented medium-high validity, reliability and accuracy, rendering them as candidates for primary endpoints in future rhinitis trials