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

mHealth and telemedicine utility in the monitoring of allergic diseases

This literature review discusses the use of mHealth technologies and telemedicine for monitoring various allergic diseases both in everyday life and in the context of COVID-19. Telemedicine, whose popularity, and demand has skyrocketed during the pandemic, rely on mHealth technologies, video calls and websites as a resource-saving and safe way of consulting patients. The incorporation of new mHealth technologies into telemedicine practice may not only be relevant in the context of pandemic restrictions but can also be applied in everyday medical practice as an effective method of patient counseling. The mobile healthcare applications include a wide range of mobile apps for patients' education, monitoring, and disease management. However, applications for the people with food allergies lack relevant information about allergies and, like most other applications, are developed without the contribution of healthcare specialists. During the COVID-19 pandemic, low-risk food-allergic patients were able to rely on telemedicine services where they could get the help, they needed without increasing risk of contracting COVID-19 while saving time. Meanwhile, some applications for allergic rhinitis and asthma patients are showing practical benefits in clinical trials by allowing an efficient assessment of treatment regimens and efficacy. The use of digital symptom diaries further facilitates the implementation of real-life studies. However, for respiratory allergic diseases, the often insufficient quality of pollen prediction needs to be taken into account. Even though studies have shown that asthma is better controlled with mHealth technologies, the quality of mobile apps for asthma patients varies widely, as many products provide information that has not been scientifically proven. Inhaler sensors – have been shown to improve the course of asthma and its monitoring, while push notifications prompting people to take their medication double the likelihood of treatment adherence. Teledermatology has a high level of patient satisfaction – as it is perceived as a more time-saving method of consultation. However, the diagnostic accuracy of contact consultations remains higher. mHealth technologies provide a patient's health data from his/her daily life, which enables insights into behavioral patterns. This closer look at the daily routine can have a significant impact on developing individualized treatment and care guidelines

Suspected rivaroxaban-induced anaphylaxis secondary to ingestion of rivaroxaban and nimesulide without cross-reactivity to dabigatran – a case report /

Here, we describe a case of anaphylaxis secondary to rivaroxaban in a 61-year-old woman 24 hours after orthopedic surgery. 10–15 minutes after ingestion of rivaroxaban and nimesulide, the patient’s palms started itching, her face and lips swelled, her face flushed, she developed shortness of breath and subsequently lost consciousness. Serum tryptase levels at the time of the anaphylactic reaction were elevated, with subsequent measurement one month later returning a value within the normal range. Dabigatran and meloxicam were identified as suitable alternative drugs by oral provocation at an allergy clinic. Even though rivaroxaban rarely causes serious allergic reactions, when prescribing it, it is important to analyze patients’ medical history for possible previously experienced drug-induced allergic reactions and to be aware of the risks of possible undesired drug interactions

The value of low dose provocation test in the diagnosis of non-immediate iodinate contrast media hypersensitivity

Background: Iodinated contrast media enhance the visibility of vascular structures and organs during radiographic procedures. Although generally considered safe, it is the third leading cause of cutaneous drug reactions. Iodinated contrast media is one of the most frequently used drugs in diagnostic medicine, but non-immediate hypersensitivity reactions are believed to be underreported because of delayed onset, which makes recognising and diagnosing these reactions challenging. For this reason, it is important to raise awareness about non-immediate hypersensitivity reactions to iodinated contrast media in the medical society. Case Reports: We present two case reports of non-immediate hypersensitivity reaction to iodinated contrast media after the first exposure. Patient I reacted to iohexol and iopromide with fixed drug eruption. Patient II reacted to iodixanol with a maculopapular rash on the chest and abdomen, Quincke’s oedema in her face and neck. Both patients had negative skin testing (prick, intradermal and patch test), but drug provocation test confirmed the allergy to iodixanol for Patient II. Patient I underwent premedication before re-exposure to iodinated contrast media, but it was unsuccessful. Histological examination of eruptions of both patients showed dermatitis, usual for drug hypersensitivity. Conclusion: In this article, we demonstrate the importance of drug provocative test as well as limitations of skins tests and premedication

Mobile health app for monitoring allergic rhinitis and asthma in real life in Lithuanian MASK‐air users

Abstract Background: MASK‐air® is an app whose aim is to reduce the global burden of allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma. A transfer of innovative practices was performed to disseminate and implement MASK‐air® in European regions. The aim of the study was to examine the implementation of the MASK‐air® app in Lithuanian adults in order to investigate (i) the rate of acceptance in this population, (ii) the duration of app use and (iii) the evaluation of the app after its use. Methods: In a longitudinal study, Lithuanian adults with AR and/or asthma were recruited by allergists. They were informed about how to use MASK‐air® and were followed closely. They were reviewed after one to 3 months to evaluate satisfaction and were asked to continue using the app. Results: Among the 149 patients recruited (37.2 � 10.4 years), 52.4% had rhinitis alone, 42.9% had rhinitis, asthma and/or conjunctivitis multimorbidity, and 2.7% isolated asthma. According to the MASK‐air® baseline questionnaire, 88.3% of patients considered that their symptoms were troublesome. Data were available for 102 (68.4%) patients. The duration of app usage in patients ranged from 1 to 680 days (median, 25–75 percentile: 54, 23.2–151 days). Forty‐two (41.1% of patients who were reviewed) patients agreed to share their opinion on MASK‐air®. Most users of the app were satisfied, from 46.5% thinking their allergy was treated more successfully to 90.4% recommending this app to other allergy sufferers. Discussion: When recommended by physicians, MASK‐air® was used for a longer period of time

Improvement of daily allergy control by sublingual immunotherapy: A MASK-air® study

Non peer reviewe