Search

Hirst pollen traps and operator pollen recognition are worldwide used by aerobiologists, providing essential services for the diagnosis and monitoring of allergic patients. More recently, semiautomated or fully automated detector systems have been developed, which facilitate prediction of pollen exposure and risk for the individual patient. In parallel, smartphone apps consisting of short questionnaires filled in daily by the patient/user provide daily scores, time trajectories, and descriptive reports of the severity of respiratory allergies in patients with pollen allergy. The usual scientific and clinical approach to this matter is to monitor the environment (pollen concentration) in order to predict the risk of symptoms (allergic rhinitis) in a population. We discuss here the opposite, contraintuitive possibility, that is, the use of e‐diaries to collect daily information of mono‐sensitized pollen‐allergic patients in order to predict the clinically efficient airborne exposure to a given pollen, area, and time period. In line with the "Patient as Sensor" concept, proposed in 2013 by Bernd Resch, the "allergic nose" may be used as a pollen detector in addition to existing calibrated hardware sensors, namely the pollen stations, thus contributing with individual measurements, sensations, and symptoms' perception. The target of this review is to present a novel concept of pollen monitoring based on "pollen‐detector" patients to inspire future cooperative studies aimed at investigating and hopefully validating our hypothesis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mobile health is the "medical and public health practice supported by mobile devices, such as mobile phones, patient monitoring devices, personal digital assistants, and other wireless devices." For example, mobile apps (such as MASK‐Air, Allergy.Monitor, Pollen, and others) have proven useful in the management of patients with allergic rhinitis. These apps can be used in the context of broader clinical decision support systems (CDSS) for enhancing allergy‐related decisions and actions with pertinent, organized clinical knowledge and patient information to improve allergy care. A CDSS targeted to control rhinitis with drugs and other interventions guiding the patient in his/her self‐ and doctor‐driven management is currently being produced and investigated by the MACVIA network. Another one, called @IT‐2020, is targeted to support etiologic diagnostics and allergen immunotherapy (AIT) prescriptions for patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Intensive investigation is necessary to better define the advantages and limitations of mobile‐health technology in allergology and establish guidelines for their proper use in daily practice in the context of a rapidly evolving European regulatory environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mobile health (mHealth) uses mobile communication devices such as smartphones and tablet computers to support and improve health‐related services, data and information flow, patient self‐management, surveillance, and disease management from the moment of first diagnosis to an optimized treatment. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology created a task force to assess the state of the art and future potential of mHealth in allergology. The task force endorsed the "Be He@lthy, Be Mobile" WHO initiative and debated the quality, usability, efficiency, advantages, limitations, and risks of mobile solutions for allergic diseases. The results are summarized in this position paper, analyzing also the regulatory background with regard to the "General Data Protection Regulation" and Medical Directives of the European Community. The task force assessed the design, user engagement, content, potential of inducing behavioral change, credibility/accountability, and privacy policies of mHealth products. The perspectives of healthcare professionals and allergic patients are discussed, underlining the need of thorough investigation for an effective design of mHealth technologies as auxiliary tools to improve quality of care. Within the context of precision medicine, these could facilitate the change in perspective from clinician‐ to patient‐centered care. The current and future potential of mHealth is then examined for specific areas of allergology, including allergic rhinitis, aerobiology, allergen immunotherapy, asthma, dermatological diseases, food allergies, anaphylaxis, insect venom, and drug allergy. The impact of mobile technologies and associated big data sets are outlined. Facts and recommendations for future mHealth initiatives within EAACI are listed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses use of allergen‐specific immunotherapy (AIT) to cure allergic diseases by attacking their antigen‐specific immunologic mechanisms. Topics include better standardization of allergen products for diagnosis and therapy with molecular allergology, selection of molecules in order to identify genuine sensitization to the allergen, and producing recombinant molecules with hybrid technology.

Background: Patient‐generated symptom and medication scores are essential for diagnostic and therapeutic decisions in seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). Previous studies have shown solid consistencies between different scores at population level in real‐life data and trials. For clinicians, the evaluation of individual data quality over time is essential to decide whether to rely on these data in clinical decision‐making. Objective: To analyze the consistency of different symptom (SS) and symptom medication scores (SMSs) at individual level in two study cohorts with different characteristics and explore individual patient trajectories over time. Methods: Within the pilot phase of the @IT.2020 project on diagnostic synergy of mobile health and molecular IgE assessment in patients with SAR, we analyzed data of 101 children and 93 adults with SAR and instructed them to record their symptoms and medication intake daily via the mobile app AllergyMonitor®. We then assessed the correlation between different SMS and a visual analogue scale (VAS) on the impact of allergy symptoms on daily life at population and individual level. Results: At population level, the Rhinoconjunctivitis total symptom score (RTSS) correlated better with VAS than the combined symptom and medication score (CSMS). At individual level, consistency among RTSS and VAS was highly heterogeneous and unrelated to disease severity or adherence to recording. Similar heterogeneity was observed for CSMS and VAS. Conclusions: The correlation of clinical information provided by different disease severity scores based on data collected via electronic diaries (e‐diaries), is sufficient at population level, but broadly heterogeneous for individual patients. Consistency of the recorded data must be examined for each patient before remotely collected information is used for clinical decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease‐modifying treatment in patients with seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (SAR). Its efficacy depends on the precise identification of the triggering allergen. However, diagnostics based on retrospective clinical history and sensitization to whole extracts (SWE) often leads to equivocal results. Objectives: To assess the usability and impact of a recently established algorithm for a clinical decision support system (@IT2020‐CDSS) for SAR and its diagnostic steps [anamnesis, SWE (skin prick test or serum IgE), component resolved diagnosis, CRD, and real‐time digital symptom recording, eDiary] on doctor's AIT prescription decisions. Methods: After educational training on the @IT2020‐CDSS algorithm, 46 doctors (18 allergy specialists, AS, and 28 general practitioners, GP) expressed their hypothetical AIT prescription for 10 clinical index cases. Decisions were recorded repeatedly based on different steps of the algorithm. The usability and perceived impact of the algorithm were evaluated. Results: The combined use of CRD and an eDiary increased the hypothetical AIT prescriptions, both among AS and GP (p <.01). AIT prescription for pollen and Alternaria allergy based on anamnesis and SWE was heterogeneous but converged towards a consensus by integrating CRD and eDiary information. Doctors considered the algorithm useful and recognized its potential in enhancing traditional diagnostics. Conclusions and clinical implications: The implementation of CRD and eDiary in the @IT2020‐CDSS algorithm improved consensus on AIT prescription for SAR among AS and GP. The potential usefulness of a CDSS for aetiological diagnosis of SAR and AIT prescription in real‐world clinical practice deserves further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The measurement of specific IgE to allergenic extracts and molecules in patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) is crucial for a precise diagnosis and further immunotherapy. Companies providing in vitro diagnostic methods in allergology continuously strive for the optimization and modernization of such methods. A new generation of automated allergy tests based on chemiluminescence detection and paramagnetic microparticles is now available, with possible advantages in sample volume, cost‐effectiveness and avoidance of sample‐related interference. Objectives: To test whether sIgE antibody levels obtained with a new singleplex chemiluminescent method have a good agreement with the corresponding results obtained with a "gold standard" test. Methods: We tested sera from 368 AR patients. Specific IgE sera levels (kU/L) to a comprehensive panel of 15 allergen extracts and 6 molecules were tested with ImmunoCAP® (Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc, Phadia AB, Uppsala, Sweden) and NOVEOS™ (HYCOR® Biomedical, Garden Grove, CA, USA). We evaluated the qualitative and quantitative performance of the new NOVEOS system in matching the outcome of ImmunoCAP to each of the examined allergens. Results: In relation to ImmunoCAP, the overall diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of sIgE tests with NOVEOS were 90.8% (95% CI = 88.6–92.7) and 96.2% (95% CI = 93.9–97.8), respectively. These values were higher when only molecules were considered (sensitivity = 98.7% [95% CI = 96.4%–99.7%]; specificity = 94.2% [95% CI = 88.4%–97.6%]) and lower when only extracts were considered (sensitivity = 87.6% [95% CI = 84.7%–90.2%]; specificity = 97% [95% CI = 94.4%–98.6%]). Spearman's correlation between the data set of both methods for a ≥ 0.1 kU/L cut‐off was 0.84 (p <.001). Conclusions: The new singleplex NOVEOS system presented good results for qualitative and quantitative comparisons when testing specific serum IgE antibodies against a range of 21 allergens. This novel immunoassay system using only 4 µl of sample per test appears to be robust and reliable and can, therefore, be used as an aid in allergy diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Digital health technologies carry the great potential of assisting physicians in making well-informed diagnostic and therapeutic decisions. In allergy care, electronic clinical diaries have been recently used to prospectively collect patient data and improve diagnostic precision. Objective: This review summarizes the clinical and scientific experience we gathered over 10 years of using a digital platform for patients suffering from seasonal allergic rhinitis. Methods: The mobile application and back-office of AllergyMonitor (TPS software production, Rome, Italy) enable patients to record their daily allergy symptoms as well as drug and immunotherapy intake plus possible side effects in a customizable way. The results can be accessed by the patient and attending physician as concise reports via a smartphone or computer. This technology has been used in several clinical studies and routine practice since 2009. Results: Our studies showed that A) the etiological diagnosis of SAR may be supported by matching prospectively registered symptoms with pollen counts; B) it is possible to perform a short-term prediction of SAR-symptoms at individual level; C) the adherence to daily symptom monitoring can remain high (> 80%) throughout several weeks when prescribed and thoroughly explained by the treating doctor; D) the use of mobile technology can improve adherence to symptomatic drugs as well as allergen-specific immunotherapy and E) the choice of the correct symptom-severity-score is critical at patient level, but not at group level. Conclusion: The studies and clinical practice based on the use of AllergyMonitor have proven the reliability and positive impact of a digital platform including an electronic diary (eDiary) on the diagnostic precision of SAR in poly-sensitized patients as well as patient adherence to both, drug therapy and allergen immunotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is growing interest both in testing IgE in nasal secretions (NS) and in molecular diagnosis of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). Yet, the reliability of nasal IgE detection with the newest molecular assays has never been assessed in a large cohort of pollen allergic patients. Objective: To investigate with microarray technology and compare the repertoires of specific IgE (sIgE) antibodies in NS and sera of a large population of children and adults with SAR. Methods: Nasal secretions were collected with an absorbent device (Merocel 2000®, Medtronic) and a minimal dilution procedure from 90 children and 71 adults with SAR. Total IgE (tIgE) (ImmunoCAP, Thermo Fisher Scientific (TFS)) and sIgE antibodies against 112 allergen molecules (ISAC‐112, TFS) were measured in NS and serum. Results: Nasal sIgE was detectable in 68.3% of the patients. The detected nasal sIgE antibodies recognized airborne (88%), vegetable (10%), and animal food or other (<1%) allergen molecules. The prevalence and average levels of sIgE in NS and serum were highly interrelated at population level. A positive nasal sIgE antibody to a given molecule predicted the detection of the same antibody in the patient's serum with a specificity of 99.7% and a sensitivity of 40%. Conclusions: The concentration of sIgE is much lower in nasal secretions than in the serum. sIgE assays with very high analytical sensitivity and sampling methods with minimal dilution will be therefore needed to validate nasal secretions as alternative to serum in testing the sIgE repertoire. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Background: The identification of the primary sensitizing pollen is difficult in Southern European patients with Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis (SAR) if sensitized to various pollen sources with overlapping seasonality. A more precise diagnosis is obtained by IgE assays to allergen molecules, currently available as singleplex or microarrays. Objectives: To test the analytical performance of a multi‐parameter immunoblot molecular "Pollen Test" specifically designed to test IgE antibodies to pollen extracts and molecules clinically relevant in Southern Europe. Methods: Sera were obtained from 101 children and 98 adults with SAR and tested with a customized multiplex immunoblot assay (EUROLINE Southern European Pollen Profile [ESEP]; EUROIMMUN AG, Luebeck, Germany) containing a comprehensive panel of allergen extracts and molecules. ESEP's outcomes were then compared in selected sera (ESEP positive to negative = 2:1) with those of singleplex IgE assays (ImmunoCAP; ThermoFisher Scientific, Uppsala, Sweden). For each of the examined reagents, qualitative (sensitivity, specificity, accuracy), semi‐quantitative (classes) and quantitative (Spearman's rank correlation, Bland‐Altmann plots) comparisons were performed. Results: Compared to ImmunoCAP, cumulative ESEP's sensitivity and specificity were 87% (95% CI 84%‐90%) and 88% (83%‐93%) for extracts and 99% (98%‐100%) and 87% (83%‐91%) for molecules. Cohen's kappa coefficients (κC) ranged for extracts from 0.18 (Pellitory) to 0.50 (Cypress) and for molecules from 0.21 (Ole e 1) to 0.68 (Phl p 7). The quantitative outcomes of the two diagnostic tests were highly correlated, with Spearman's rank correlation coefficients always exceeding 0.80. Bland‐Altmann plots showed a tendency of ESEP to overestimate serum specific IgE levels, when compared to ImmunoCAP. Conclusions and clinical relevance: Sensitivity and specificity of ESEP in testing serum IgE antibodies against pollen allergen extracts and molecules, in Italian patients with SAR, both exceeded 85%. The advantages and limitations of a multiplex customized immunoblot assay, in the routine clinical use of molecular diagnostics in Southern European pollen allergic patients, deserve to be tested. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The so-called local allergic rhinitis ( LAR) has been proposed as a phenotype of rhinitis with Th2-driven prominent local allergic inflammation, nasal synthesis of specific IgE and a positive response to a nasal allergen provocation test, in the absence of 'systemic' atopy (negative skin prick test and serum allergen-specific IgE antibodies). To date, available data on LAR are mostly focused on adults. The purpose of this 'Rostrum' was to critically discuss data and implications of the ' LAR concept' in paediatrics. In the natural history of rhinitis due to IgE-mediated reactions triggered by exposure to allergens, a ' LAR' can be either the initial, transient stage of classical allergic rhinitis or a stable phenotype never evolving to 'systemic' IgE sensitization. Given the present difficulties in performing routinely nasal allergen provocation test in children, the development of sensitive and specific tests to detect IgE in the child's nasal secretions is a research priority. We suggest also the hypothetical role of allergen immunoprophylaxis or immunotherapy in LAR. Last, the term 'local allergic rhinitis' may be inappropriate, as rhinitis is always 'local', while IgE sensitization can be either 'local' or 'systemic'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Many different symptom (medication) scores are nowadays used as measures of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis severity in individual patients and in clinical trials. Their differences contribute to the heterogeneity of the primary end-point in meta-analyses, so that calls for symptom (medication) score harmonization have been launched. Objective To prospectively compare six different severity scores for allergic rhinitis ( AR) against pollen counts at both population and individual levels. Methods Two groups of children with seasonal AR and grass pollen sensitization were recruited in Ascoli, Italy (n = 76) and Berlin, Germany (n = 29). Symptoms and drug intake were monitored daily for 40 and 30 days of the grass pollen season in 2011 (Ascoli) and 2013 (Berlin), respectively, through an Internet-based platform (AllergyMonitor™, TPS Production srl, Rome, Italy). From the gathered data, the informatics platform automatically generated one symptom score ( RTSS) and five symptom-medication scores ( RC- ACS©, ACS, RTSS[ LOCF], RTSS[ WC] and Ad SS). Values were then statistically normalized for reciprocal comparison and matched against the daily variations of local grass pollen counts (Spearman's rank correlation). Results The grass pollen counts were higher in Ascoli than in Berlin (peak values 194 vs. 59 grains/m3). At population level, the trajectories of the normalized average values of the six scores differed only slightly in both studies and correlated well with the pollen counts (ranges r2: 0.38-0.50 in Ascoli, 0.41-0.56 in Berlin). By contrast, in individual patients, trajectories of different scores were often quite heterogeneous. The RTSS[ WC] had a very low discriminatory power and generated in many patients long, flat horizontal segments. Conclusions Disease severity scores for seasonal AR, as evaluated via an Internet-based platform, tend to provide similar results at population level but can often produce heterogeneous slopes in individual patients. The choice of the disease severity score might have only a low impact on the outcome of a very large clinical trial, but it may be crucial in the management of individual patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]