Follow-up study in local allergic rhinitis shows a consistent entity not evolving to systemic allergic rhinitis

V Brazilian Consensus on Rhinitis - 2024

Since we published the "IV Brazilian Consensus on Rhinitis", in2017, several advances have been achieved and have enabled a further understanding of the different aspects of "Rhinitis". This new guideline, developed jointly by ASBAI, SBP and SBORL, represents a relevant milestone in the updated and integrated management of the different forms of the disease, and it aims to unify evidence-based approaches to improve the diagnosis and treatment of this common and often underestimated condition. The document covers a wide range of topics, including clear definitions of the different phenotypes and endotypes of rhinitis, risk factors, updated diagnostic criteria, and recommended methods for clinical and laboratory investigation. We stress the importance of detailed clinical history and objective assessment, as well as tools for control and assessing severity tools an accurate diagnostic approach to the disease. Regarding treatment, it emphasizes the treatment customization, considering the severity of symptoms, the presence of comorbidities and the impact on the patient's quality of life. We discuss different drug treatment, in addition to non-pharmacological measures, such as environmental control and specific immunotherapy; and the possible role of immunobiological agents. Furthermore, the consensus addresses issues related to patient education, prevention and management of special situations, such as rhinitis in children, in pregnant women and in the elderly. In short, the "V Brazilian Consensus on Rhinitis" represents a comprehensive and updated guide for healthcare professionals involved in the diagnosis and management of rhinitis, aiming to improve patients' quality of life through an integrated and evidence-based approach.

Local Allergic Rhinitis-A Challenge for Allergology and Otorhinolaryngology Cooperation (Scoping Review)

Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) represents a medical provocation for allergists and otorhinolaryngologists. LAR is considered to be a subtype of allergic rhinitis (AR) that affects a great percentage of patients who were, for decades, diagnosed as having chronic non-allergic rhinitis. The clinical picture is represented by rhinorrhea, sneezing, and nasal itching correlated with specific pollen season or dust, mold, or pet interior exposure. Usual assessment of AR (skin prick testing and serum IgE assessment) produces negative results. Specialized centers in allergology and ENT around the globe use a nasal allergen challenge, assessment of local IgE, basophil activation test (BAT), and nasal cytology in the diagnostic approach to the disease, taking into account their current limitations. The impact of LAR on quality-of-life indicators is the same as in AR. Treatment for LAR is similar to that for AR and is the same as for AR: allergen exposure avoidance, drug therapy, and allergen immunotherapy. This scoping review gathers the current up-to-date open access evidence available on PubMed on the subject of LAR.

Local allergic rhinitis in children: Clinical characteristics and role of basophil activation test as a diagnostic tool

BACKGROUND

Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is a condition involving a localized nasal allergic response in absence of systemic atopy. Most studies on LAR have been performed in adults. We aimed to describe clinical characteristics of LAR pediatric patients, its clinical evolution over a 7-year follow-up period and to study the role of basophil activation test (BAT), for its diagnosis.

METHODS

Forty-four children with non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) were included (24 males, 20 females, aged under 15 years). Nasal allergen provocation test (NAPT) and BAT were performed with Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus and Phleum pratense.

RESULTS

Seven patients (16%) were diagnosed of LAR. Six reacted to D pteronyssinus and one to P pratense. All LAR and 86% of NAR patients presented perennial symptoms. Fifty-seven percent of NAR and LAR patients referred persistent symptoms. Around half of NAR and LAR patients reported mild-moderate clinical manifestations. Three LAR patients associated conjunctival symptoms, proportionally more than NAR patients (19%, 7 out of 37). NAR patients presented bronchial asthma (n = 10) more frequently than LAR children (n = 1). More than half of LAR and NAR patients presented family history of atopy. BAT was negative in all LAR patients. On follow-up, 3 LAR patients and 10 of the 25 NAR patients who agreed to be retested, presented systemic sensitization. Dust mites were the most frequent allergen involved.

CONCLUSIONS

LAR should be ruled out in children with NAR. Almost half of children with LAR develop systemic sensitization over time. BAT shows low sensitivity for the diagnosis of LAR in children.

International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: Allergic rhinitis - 2023

BACKGROUND

In the 5 years that have passed since the publication of the 2018 International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2018), the literature has expanded substantially. The ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update presents 144 individual topics on allergic rhinitis (AR), expanded by over 40 topics from the 2018 document. Originally presented topics from 2018 have also been reviewed and updated. The executive summary highlights key evidence-based findings and recommendation from the full document.

METHODS

ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 employed established evidence-based review with recommendation (EBRR) methodology to individually evaluate each topic. Stepwise iterative peer review and consensus was performed for each topic. The final document was then collated and includes the results of this work.

RESULTS

ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 includes 10 major content areas and 144 individual topics related to AR. For a substantial proportion of topics included, an aggregate grade of evidence is presented, which is determined by collating the levels of evidence for each available study identified in the literature. For topics in which a diagnostic or therapeutic intervention is considered, a recommendation summary is presented, which considers the aggregate grade of evidence, benefit, harm, and cost.

CONCLUSION

The ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update provides a comprehensive evaluation of AR and the currently available evidence. It is this evidence that contributes to our current knowledge base and recommendations for patient evaluation and treatment.

Local allergic rhinitis: considerations

The term "local allergic rhinitis" has gained popularity as a clinical entity in recent years. Despite the apparent contradiction in the definitions of "nasal" and "local," we offer insights based on our extensive experience in the field. Local allergic rhinitis has been recognized and treated for many years, so it is not a new discovery. The nasal provocation test, which was introduced in the 1980s, was critical in identifying allergic rhinitis cases with suggestive symptoms but negative allergy tests. Our reflections aim to contribute to a precise terminological decision that is consistent with various points of view.

IL-4/IL-13 Axis in Allergic Rhinitis: Elevated Serum Cytokines Levels and Inverse Association With Tight Junction Molecules Expression

The IL-4/IL-13 axis is involved in the pathogenesis of allergic rhinitis (AR). In this study, we investigated the serum cytokines levels of IL-4, IL-5, IL-6, and IL-13 in AR patients, and the transcript expression levels of their receptors (i.e. IL4R, IL5RA, IL6R, and IL13RA1) in nasal epithelial cells of AR patients versus non-allergic controls. Nasal epithelial cells and blood samples of non-allergic controls (n = 30) and AR patients (n = 30) were collected to examine mRNA expression and serum cytokines levels, respectively. Bioinformatics analyses of IL-4/IL-13 receptor heterodimer association with tight junction (TJ) and JAK/STAT signaling genes were conducted in a gene expression profiling (GEP) dataset (GSE44037) of AR patients (n = 12) and healthy controls (n = 6). Serum IL-4, IL-5, IL-6 or IL-13 levels, and IL13RA1 transcript expression were significantly higher in AR patients compared with non-allergic controls. IL-4 and IL-13 serum levels were positively correlated with IL13RA1 expression in AR patients but not in non-allergic controls. In the GEP dataset (GSE44037), six TJ (CLDN4, CLDN7, CLDN12, CLDN15, TJP1, and TJP2) genes’ expressions were negatively correlated, respectively, with IL-4Rα/IL-13Rα1 heterodimeric receptor expression in AR patients and not in control samples. These six TJ genes contributed to the significant enrichment of tight junction Gene Ontology (GO ID: 0070160). Lastly, STATs DNA binding motif analysis showed that each of these TJ genes contains STATs binding consensus sequence within intronic and intergenic regions. Our results suggest that increased IL-4/IL-13 serum cytokines levels may contribute to decreased TJs expression via IL-4Rα/IL-13Rα1 heterodimeric receptor in nasal epithelium of AR patients.

Prevalence, comorbidities, diagnosis, and treatment of nonallergic rhinitis: real-world comparison with allergic rhinitis

Rhinitis is among the most common respiratory diseases in children. Nonallergic rhinitis, which involves nasal symptoms without evidence of systemic allergic inflammation or infection, is a heterogeneous entity with diverse manifestations and intensities. Nonallergic rhinitis accounts for 16%-89% of the chronic rhinitis cases, affecting 1%-50% (median 10%) of the total pediatric population. The clinical course of nonallergic rhinitis is generally rather mild and less likely to be associated with allergic comorbidities than allergic rhinitis. Here, we aimed to estimate the rate of coexisting comorbidities of nonallergic rhinitis. Nonallergic rhinitis is more prevalent during the first 2 years of life; however, its underestimation for children with atopic tendencies is likely due to low positive rates of specific allergic tests during early childhood. Local allergic rhinitis is a recently noted phenotype with rates similar to those in adults (median, 44%; range, 4%-67%), among patients previously diagnosed with nonallergic rhinitis. Idiopathic rhinitis, a subtype of nonallergic rhinitis, has been poorly studied in children, and its rates are known to be lower than those in adults. The prevalence of nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome is even lower. A correlation between nonallergic rhinitis and pollution has been suggested owing to the recent increase in nonallergic rhinitis rates in highly developing regions such as some Asian countries, but many aspects remain unknown. Conventional treatments include antihistamines, intranasal corticosteroids, and recent treatments include combination of intranasal corticosteroids with azelastin or decongestants. Here we review the prevalence, diagnosis, comorbidities, and treatment recommendations for nonallergic rhinitis versus allergic rhinitis in children.

Rhinitis Phenotypes

Rhinitis is an umbrella term of a group of upper airway diseases with nasal symptoms and signs with different etiologies and various clinical features or traits. It can be classified into different "phenotypes," based on these observable traits. A proper differential diagnosis is necessary to adequately manage the disease. The objective of this review is to clarify the concept of rhinitis phenotypes while analyzing the clinical features and/or traits of each in order to determine a proper differential diagnosis and appropriate treatment.

Diagnosis and treatment of non-allergic rhinitis: focus on immunologic mechanisms

INTRODUCTION

Non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) is a heterogeneous nasal disease with high global prevalence. NAR can be subclassified as nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome (NARES), vasomotor rhinitis (VMR), and local allergic rhinitis (LAR). Although the precise factors involved in the etiology of NAR are not clear, there is evidence that immunological factors play an important role in the pathogenesis of NAR. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the immunological and neurogenic mechanisms involved in the diagnosis and treatment of NAR.

AREAS COVERED

This review provides a comprehensive overview of the immunological basis of diagnostic and treatment strategies for NARES, VMR, and LAR. In particular, recently documented molecular and immunological mechanisms of NAR are discussed, which may help to better understand the mechanisms underlying the pathologies of the different endotypes of NAR.

EXPERT OPINION

An increasing number of studies investigating the pathogenesis of NAR suggest that the immunological mechanisms underlying the different subtypes of NAR vary greatly, and are still not fully understood to accurately diagnose these subtypes. Thus, further studies should focus on making diagnosis and treatment of NAR more precise, safe, and effective. A better understanding of the immunological mechanisms involved in NAR should help in the discovery of new diagnostic and treatment strategies.

The role of the nasal allergen provocation test in local allergic rhinitis cases: a preliminary report

INTRODUCTION

The current state of knowledge is that allergic rhinitis can occur in two forms. One is allergic rhinitis as a manifestation of a systemic allergy with systemic atopy and positive results of skin prick tests or sIgE tests. The other is local allergic rhinitis (LAR) as a local allergic reaction affecting only the nasal mucosa without systemic atopy.

AIM

To attempt to assess the usefulness of the nasal allergen provocation test for the purposes of differential diagnosis and the qualification of LAR patients for therapy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The subjects in the study were a group of 6 adults diagnosed with LAR on the basis of their medical history and the results of nasal allergen provocation tests, with the allergens being house dust mites (Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, Dermatophagoides farinae). The methods adopted in the study were a point-based rating scale as a measure of nasal/extranasal complaints and active anterior rhinomanometry.

RESULTS

Significant differences (p < 0.05) were observed, using the subjective rating scale, in relation to registered nasal and extranasal complaints in the early phase of the allergic reaction. Similarly, the rhinomanometry method revealed significant differences in nasal resistance values before and after the administration of an allergen.

CONCLUSIONS

The nasal allergen provocation test is the only testing tool that objectively measures the degree of the patient's allergic reactions and is useful in qualifying LAR patients for further therapy.

Potential Differences between Local and Systemic Allergic Rhinitis Induced by Birch Pollen

INTRODUCTION

Different endotypes of rhinitis are known, but its pathomechanism has not been conclusively established. For example, the precise difference between systemic allergic rhinitis (SAR) and local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is still being checked. Comparison of patients with LAR and with allergies to birch of those with intermittent allergic rhinitis, same allergy, or with non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) was the purpose of this study.

METHODS

Twenty-six patients with LAR, 18 with SAR and allergy to birch, and 21 with NAR were included. Patients who met the inclusion criteria were selected to undergo the following procedures at baseline: medical examinations, nasal provocation test (NPT), detection of nasal-specific IgE to birch as well as basophil activation test (BAT). All immunological parameters were detected before and after NPT.

RESULTS

Concentration of nasal IgE to Bet v1 increased comparably in the LAR and SAR groups after NPT to birch as follows: in 21 (81%) patients with LAR, 14 (78%) with SAR, and in everyone in the NAR group. Serum concentration of allergen-specific IgE to Bet v1 increased significantly from a median of 20.7 (25-75% interval: 11.2-35.6) IU/mL to 29.9 (13.6-44.1) (p = 0.028) after NPT in patients with SAR. Allergen-specific IgE to Bet v1 was absent in all patients with LAR and NAR before and after NPT. BAT with Bet v1 was positive in 22 (85%) patients with LAR, in 14 (78%) with SAR, and 2 (9.5%) with NAR.

CONCLUSION

These obtained data suggest there are no potential mechanisms that could explain LAR compared to SAR.

Rhinitis 2020: A practice parameter update

This comprehensive practice parameter for allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) provides updated guidance on diagnosis, assessment, selection of monotherapy and combination pharmacologic options, and allergen immunotherapy for AR. Newer information about local AR is reviewed. Cough is emphasized as a common symptom in both AR and NAR. Food allergy testing is not recommended in the routine evaluation of rhinitis. Intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) remain the preferred monotherapy for persistent AR, but additional studies support the additive benefit of combination treatment with INCS and intranasal antihistamines in both AR and NAR. Either intranasal antihistamines or INCS may be offered as first-line monotherapy for NAR. Montelukast should only be used for AR if there has been an inadequate response or intolerance to alternative therapies. Depot parenteral corticosteroids are not recommended for treatment of AR due to potential risks. While intranasal decongestants generally should be limited to short-term use to prevent rebound congestion, in limited circumstances, patients receiving regimens that include an INCS may be offered, in addition, an intranasal decongestant for up to 4 weeks. Neither acupuncture nor herbal products have adequate studies to support their use for AR. Oral decongestants should be avoided during the first trimester of pregnancy. Recommendations for use of subcutaneous and sublingual tablet allergen immunotherapy in AR are provided. Algorithms based on a combination of evidence and expert opinion are provided to guide in the selection of pharmacologic options for intermittent and persistent AR and NAR.

Local Allergic Rhinitis Revisited

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) represents a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge for clinicians. Even though it affects a considerable number of chronic rhinitis patients and a significant number of articles regarding prevalence, evolution, diagnosis, and treatment have been published, the condition remains still largely unrecognized and therefore misdiagnosed and mistreated.

RECENT FINDINGS

LAR is a unique form of chronic rhinitis; it is neither classical allergic rhinitis (AR) nor non-allergic rhinitis (NAR). The symptoms, duration, severity, and complications of LAR are similar to those of AR and can affect adults and children. Thus, a portion of patients diagnosed with NAR or chronic rhinitis of unknown etiology may have LAR. The relationship between LAR inflammation and systemic allergic inflammation is unclear. Patients are frequently misdiagnosed with idiopathic NAR, and distinguishing between both entities is difficult without specific diagnostic tests. Underdiagnosis of LAR has implications on the management of these patients, as they are deprived of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) that has been demonstrated to modulate the immune mechanisms underlying allergic diseases. This review aims to comprehensively summarize the current knowledge on LAR and address unmet needs in the areas of disease diagnosis and treatment.

Allergen Immunotherapy for Local Respiratory Allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIESW

Local respiratory allergy (LRA) is an eosinophilic phenotype of chronic airway disease. Three entities have been described within the LRA spectrum: local allergic rhinitis (LAR) and local allergic asthma (LAA) in non-atopic patients, and dual allergic rhinitis (DAR) in atopic patients (coexistence of LAR and allergic rhinitis). In this article, we aim to review the current evidence on the therapeutic options for LRA.

RECENT FINDINGS

No controlled study has assessed the effect of standard therapy (oral antihistamines, intranasal or inhaled corticosteroids, bronchodilators) in LRA subjects. Three randomized clinical trials and one observational study demonstrated that allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is able to control nasal and ocular symptoms, decrease the need for rescue medication, and improve quality of life in LAR individuals. Nasal or inhaled steroids can be expected to improve eosinophilic inflammation in LRA patients but cannot change the natural course of the disease. Moreover, the long-term and disease-modifying effects of AIT in LRA subjects need to be investigated.

Total and specific immunoglobulin E in induced sputum in allergic and non-allergic asthma

Background

Most patients with nonallergic asthma have normal serum immunoglobulin E (IgE) levels. Recent reports suggest that total and aeroallergen-specific IgE levels in induced sputum may be higher in nonallergic asthmatics than in healthy controls. Our objective is to compare total and dust-mite specific (Der p 1) IgE levels in induced sputum in allergic and nonallergic asthmatics and healthy controls.

Methods

Total and Der p 1-specific IgE were measured in induced sputum (ImmunoCAP immunoassay) from 56 age- and sex-matched asthmatics (21 allergic, 35 nonallergic) and 9 healthy controls. Allergic asthma was defined as asthma with a positive prick test and/or clinically-significant Der p 1-specific serum IgE levels.

Results

Patients with allergic asthma presented significantly higher total and Der p 1-specific serum IgE levels. There were no significant between-group differences in total sputum IgE. However, Der p 1-specific sputum IgE levels were significantly higher (p = 0.000) in the allergic asthmatics, but without differences between the controls and nonallergic asthmatics. Serum and sputum IgE levels were significantly correlated, both for total IgE (rho = 0.498; p = 0.000) and Der p 1-specific IgE (rho, 0.621; p = 0001).

Conclusions

Total IgE levels measured in serum and induced sputum are significantly correlated. No significant differences were found between the differents groups in total sputum IgE. Nevertheless, the levels of Der p 1-specific sputum IgE levels were significantly higher in the allergic asthmatics, but without differences between the controls and nonallergic asthmatics. Probably due to the lack of sensitivity of the test used, but with the growing evidence for local allergic reactions better methods are need to explore its presence. The Clinical Trials Identifier for this project is NCT03640936.

Current and Future Treatments of Rhinitis and Sinusitis

Advances in understanding the pathogenic mechanisms of both rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis have resulted in new treatment options, especially for chronic rhinosinusitis. A review of relevant medical and surgical clinical studies shows that intranasal corticosteroids, antihistamines, and allergen immunotherapy continue to be the best treatments for chronic rhinitis. Dupilumab is the first biologic approved for chronic rhinosinusitis with polyps. Omalizumab, mepolizumab, and benralizumab may have a future role in the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis. Novel corticosteroid delivery devices such as an exhalation delivery system for fluticasone and bioabsorbable sinus implants provide enhanced and localized distribution of corticosteroids. Surgical management tailored to the underlying disease process improves clinical outcomes in chronic rhinosinusitis with or without nasal polyposis. Advances in the understanding of the heterogeneous nature of rhinitis and rhinosinusitis have resulted in more precise treatments. Improving the understanding of different endotypes should provide better knowledge to determine appropriate current and new therapies to treat these diseases.

Allergic and Mixed Rhinitis: Diagnosis and Natural Evolution

Chronic rhinitis (CR) is divided into two main categories: allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR). These conditions are more recognizable to an experienced clinician, as they can be more clearly demarcated diagnostically. However, an additional 30% to 50% of patients with CR might have an overlap of NAR and AR, referred to as mixed rhinitis (MR). Progress in elucidating the pathophysiologic mechanisms behind MR and NAR has been made in the past several years, and there are now several guidelines published to assist the clinician in accurately diagnosing AR, NAR, and MR. Clinical history and subjective symptoms can provide clues for differentiating AR from MR and NAR, but allergy testing is recommended to confirm these conditions. Progress in accurately diagnosing patients with CR will be made as studies incorporate subjective (i.e., validated questionnaires such as the irritant index questionnaire (IIQ), medication responsiveness, and quality-of-life tools) and objective (i.e., nasal cytologic testing, nasal provocation, and biomarkers) methods characterizing rhinitis subtypes.

How to Diagnose and Treat Local Allergic Rhinitis: A Challenge for Clinicians

Chronic rhinitis is a very common disease that can be divided in various phenotypes. Historically, the condition has been classified into the allergic rhinitis (AR) and non-allergic non-infectious rhinitis (NAR) forms, based on the results of the classical biomarkers of atopy: skin prick test and serum allergen-specific IgE However, this classification does not reflect the complexity of the rhinitis syndrome, as illustrated by the existence of non-atopic rhinitis patients who display a nasal reactivity to environmental allergens. This new phenotype has been termed local allergic rhinitis (LAR) and can be only recognized if an additional test such as the nasal allergen challenge (NAC) is integrated in the diagnostic algorithm for chronic rhinitis. Recent data shows that the NAC is a very safe and reliable technique ready for the clinical practice. LAR is a differentiated rhinitis phenotype which often commences during childhood and quickly progresses towards a clinical worsening and the association of comorbidities in other mucosal organs. Recent evidence supports the existence of a bronchial counterpart of LAR (local allergic asthma), which highlights the pathophysiological links between the upper and lower airways and reinforces the united airways concept. Importantly, several controlled studies have demonstrated the ability of allergen immunotherapy to control LAR symptoms while the therapy is being administered. This review emphasizes the need to implement the NAC in the clinical practice in order to facilitate the recognition of LAR patients, allowing for an early prescription of specific therapies with disease-modifying potential.

Nasal Cytology as a Diagnostic Tool for Local Allergic Rhinitis

Background

Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is characterized by chronic rhinitis with localized nasal allergic response to allergens in the absence of systemic immunoglobulin (IgE)-mediated disease assessed by skin prick test (SPT) or specific serum IgE level. Nasal provocation test (NPT) is the gold standard for the diagnosis of LAR. Nasal eosinophilia is a known inflammatory marker in allergic rhinitis. We hypothesized that nasal eosinophilia can be used as a screening tool for LAR.

Objective

To determine the applicability of nasal eosinophilia as a diagnostic tool for LAR.

Methods

Forty-eight perennial nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) patients with SPT negative were recruited. Nasal cytology analysis was performed. NPTs with 3 allergens (mixed mites, mixed cockroaches, and Bermuda grass) were performed to diagnose LAR. Nasal symptoms combined with nasal patency were used to determine the results of NPT. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of nasal eosinophilia as a diagnostic tool of LAR were calculated.

Results

LAR was diagnosed in 41.6% of the NAR patients. Nasal eosinophilia was found in 58% of the NAR patients. The sensitivity of nasal eosinophilia for diagnosing LAR was 80%, the specificity was 57.14%, the positive predictive value was 57.14%, and the negative predictive value was 80%. The most common allergen of LAR was mixed mites.

Conclusion

Nasal eosinophilia on nasal cytology was a good screening tool for diagnosing LAR because of its high sensitivity and simplicity of the procedure. Unfortunately, the low specificity of nasal eosinophilia makes the NPT necessary for confirmation of LAR.

The complex pathophysiology of allergic rhinitis: scientific rationale for the development of an alternative treatment option

Allergic rhinitis (AR) poses a global health problem and can be challenging to treat. Many of the current symptomatic treatments for AR have been available for decades, yet there has been little improvement in patient quality of life or symptom burden over the years. In this review, we ask why this might be and explore the pathophysiological gaps that exist within the various AR treatment classes. We focus on the benefits and drawbacks of different treatment options and delivery routes for AR treatments and consider how, given what is known about AR pathophysiology and symptomatology, patients may be offered more effective treatment options for rapid, effective, and sustained AR control. In particular, we consider how a new AR preparation, MP-AzeFlu (Dymista^®, Meda, Sweden), comprising a formulation of an intranasal antihistamine (azelastine hydrochloride), an intranasal corticosteroid (fluticasone propionate), and excipients delivered in a single spray, may offer benefits over and above single and multiple AR therapy options. We review the evidence in support of this treatment across the spectrum of AR disease. The concept of AR control is also reviewed within the context of new European Union and Contre les Maladies Chroniques pour un VIeillissement Actif-Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma initiatives.

Is the evidence of local allergic rhinitis growing?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To examine the recent advances on epidemiological studies, diagnostic approach and clinical management of local allergic rhinitis (LAR) in adults and children.

RECENT FINDINGS

Evidence about LAR is growing especially in pediatric and Asian populations. The prevalence of LAR is lower in Asian countries compared with western countries in both children and adults. LAR is considered a chronic condition and an independent rhinitis phenotype that affects up to 26.5% of nonatopic rhinitis patients. The disease rapidly progress toward the clinical worsening with associated onset of asthma and conjunctivitis, which further impairs patient's quality of life. Nasal Allergen Provocation Test is the diagnostic gold standard that can be complemented by basophil activation test and the detection of specific IgE in nasal secretions. Allergen immunotherapy induces a significant and early improvement in both clinical symptoms and quality of life in LAR patients.

SUMMARY

LAR is a common entity, with different prevalence depending on geographical locations. LAR has to be considered in the process of differential diagnosis in children and adults with rhinitis. Diagnosis of LAR is crucial in order to start an etiologic treatment such as allergen immunotherapy, which has proven to be very effective in these patients.

Endotypes of chronic rhinitis: A cluster analysis study

BACKGROUND

Chronic rhinitis (CR) is currently regarded as a syndrome, which presents as several endotypes. The aim of this study was to identify the CR endotype clusters and investigate the inflammatory patterns associated with the different endotypes.

METHODS

A total of 259 CR patients and 20 control subjects were enrolled in this prospective study. Twelve clinical variables were analyzed using cluster analysis and five inflammatory variables were measured to investigate the inflammatory patterns associated with the different clusters.

RESULTS

Six endotype clusters of CR were defined in the Chinese CR patients. Patients in cluster 1 (38.6%) were diagnosed as allergic rhinitis (AR) without asthma, and in cluster 2 (13.5%) as AR with asthma, with all demonstrating positive results for local eosinophils and high levels of local and serum IgE. Similarly, patients in cluster 3 (18.6%) were diagnosed as nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome (NARES) without asthma and in cluster 5 (5.0%) as NARES with asthma, with all demonstrating positive results for local eosinophils, and negative results for both local and serum IgE. Patients in cluster 4 (4.6%) were diagnosed as local allergic rhinitis and showed positive results for local eosinophils and local IgE, but negative results for serum IgE, whereas patients in cluster 6 (19.7%) were diagnosed as idiopathic rhinitis because of high symptoms scores, but negative findings for local eosinophils, local IgE, and serum IgE.

CONCLUSIONS

Chinese CR patients may be clustered into six endotypes with different inflammatory patterns, which may help in delivering individualized treatment.

Allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis is a common disorder that is strongly linked to asthma and conjunctivitis. It is usually a long-standing condition that often goes undetected in the primary-care setting. The classic symptoms of the disorder are nasal congestion, nasal itch, rhinorrhea and sneezing. A thorough history, physical examination and allergen skin testing are important for establishing the diagnosis of allergic rhinitis. Second-generation oral antihistamines and intranasal corticosteroids are the mainstay of treatment. Allergen immunotherapy is an effective immune-modulating treatment that should be recommended if pharmacologic therapy for allergic rhinitis is not effective or is not tolerated, or if chosen by the patient. This article provides an overview of the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and appropriate management of this disorder.

Recent advances in allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis affects 20 to 30% of adults in both the United States and Europe and perhaps a somewhat higher percentage of children. In addition to nasal and ocular symptoms directly related to the allergic process, interference of these symptoms with sleep leads to daytime sleepiness and impaired quality of life. Patients miss work because of symptoms but an even greater problem is interference with work productivity, or presenteeism, which has been reported to be the biggest contributor to the total economic cost of allergic rhinitis. There has been increasing awareness that many patients with either seasonal or perennial symptoms but negative skin and in vitro tests for allergen sensitivity have local nasal allergy, diagnosable by the presence of allergen-specific IgE in their nasal secretions or a positive nasal allergen challenge or both. The pharmaceutical management of allergic rhinitis rests on symptomatic treatment with antihistamines that perhaps are more effectively administered intranasally than orally and intranasal corticosteroids. Allergen immunotherapy is very effective, even for local allergic rhinitis, and the shortcomings of subcutaneous immunotherapy of inconvenience and safety are reduced by the introduction of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Use of the latter is currently somewhat limited by the lack of appropriate dosing information for SLIT liquids and the limited number of allergens for which SLIT tablets are available.

EAACI Position paper on the standardization of nasal allergen challenges

Nasal allergen challenge (NAC) is an important tool to diagnose allergic rhinitis. In daily clinical routine, experimentally, or when measuring therapeutic success clinically, nasal allergen challenge is fundamental. It is further one of the key diagnostic tools when initiating specific allergen immunotherapy. So far, national recommendations offered guidance on its execution; however, international divergence left many questions unanswered. These differences in the literature caused EAACI to initiate a task force to answer unmet needs and find a consensus in executing nasal allergen challenge. On the basis of a systematic review containing nasal allergen challenges of the past years, task force members reviewed evidence, discussed open issues, and studied variations of several subjective and objective assessment parameters to propose a standardized way of a nasal allergen challenge procedure in clinical practice. Besides an update on indications, contraindications, and preparations for the test procedure, main recommendations are a bilaterally challenge with standardized allergens, with a spray device offering 0.1 mL per nostril. A systematic catalogue for positivity criteria is given for the variety of established subjective and objective assessment methods as well as a schedule for the challenge procedure. The task force recommends a unified protocol for NAC for daily clinical practice, aiming at eliminating the previous difficulty of comparing NAC results due to unmet needs.

Prevalence and clinical characteristics of local allergic rhinitis to house dust mites

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is a recently classified subtype of rhinitis defined by a nasal allergic response in patients without systemic evidence of atopy. Recent studies have reported the prevalence, clinical course, culprit allergens, diagnostic methods and treatment outcomes of LAR. The purpose of this review is to summarize the most relevant and updated scientific evidence for LAR, especially focusing on its prevalence and clinical characteristics.

RECENT FINDINGS

LAR is found in a significant proportion (3.7-61.9%) of patients previously diagnosed with nonallergic rhinitis, but the prevalence may differ among ethnic groups and countries. Common allergens of LAR are similar to those of allergic rhinitis, in which house dust mites are the most common cause, followed by grass pollen, tree pollen, weed pollen and animal dander confirmed by provocation tests. Although the nasal provocation test to a single allergen is considered the gold standard method, the detection of allergen-specific IgE and other inflammatory mediators from nasal secretions and the basophil activation test can assist in the diagnosis of LAR. Conjunctivitis and asthma are the most common comorbid conditions, and the occurrence rate of asthma increases over period. However, the conversion rate to allergic rhinitis was not significantly different between LAR and healthy controls.

SUMMARY

LAR is a well-differentiated entity of rhinitis, which should be considered in patients with persistent and severe symptoms without any systemic evidence of atopy. Further research is needed to investigate the long-term outcome, and geographic and ethnic differences of LAR.

Nasal cytology: Methodology with application to clinical practice and research

Nasal cytology is an easy, cheap, non-invasive and point-of-care method to assess nasal inflammation and disease-specific cellular features. By means of nasal cytology, it is possible to distinguish between different inflammatory patterns that are typically associated with specific diseases (ie, allergic and non-allergic rhinitis). Its use is particularly relevant when other clinical information, such as signs, symptoms, time-course and allergic sensitizations, is not enough to recognize which of the different rhinitis phenotypes is involved; for example, it is only by means of nasal cytology that it is possible to distinguish, among the non-allergic rhinitis, those characterized by eosinophilic (NARES), mast cellular (NARMA), mixed eosinophilic-mast cellular (NARESMA) or neutrophilic (NARNE) inflammation. Despite its clinical usefulness, cheapness, non-invasiveness and easiness, nasal cytology is still underused and this is at least partially due to the fact that, as far as now, there is not a consensus or an official recommendation on its methodological issues. We here review the scientific literature about nasal cytology, giving recommendations on how to perform and interpret nasal cytology.

Local allergic rhinitis: Implications for management

A significant proportion of rhinitis patients without systemic IgE-sensitisation tested by skin prick test and serum allergen-specific IgE (sIgE) display nasal reactivity upon nasal allergen provocation test (NAPT). This disease phenotype has been termed local allergic rhinitis (LAR). LAR is an underdiagnosed entity affecting children and adults from different parts of the world, with moderate-to-severe symptoms, impairment of quality of life and rapid progression to symptom worsening. LAR is a stable phenotype and not merely an initial state of AR. Allergic rhinitis and LAR share many clinical features including a positive NAPT response, markers of type 2 nasal inflammation including sIgE in nasal secretions and a significant rate of asthma development. LAR should be considered as a differential diagnosis in those subjects of any age with symptoms suggestive of AR but no evidence of systemic atopy. Although LAR pathophysiology is partially unknown, in some patients sIgE can be demonstrated directly in the nasal secretions and/or indirectly via positive responses in basophil activation test (BAT). LAR can coexist with other rhinitis phenotypes, especially AR. The diagnosis currently relies on the positivity of NAPT to a single or multiple allergens. NAPT has high sensitivity, specificity and reproducibility, and it is considered the gold standard. BAT and the measurement of nasal sIgE can also contribute to LAR diagnosis. LAR patients benefit from the same therapeutic strategies than AR individuals, including the avoidance of allergen exposure and the pharmacotherapy. Moreover, several recent studies support the effectiveness and safety of allergen immunotherapy for LAR, which opens a window of treatment opportunity in these patients.

Chinese Society of Allergy Guidelines for Diagnosis and Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a global health problem that causes major illnesses and disabilities worldwide. Epidemiologic studies have demonstrated that the prevalence of AR has increased progressively over the last few decades in more developed countries and currently affects up to 40% of the population worldwide. Likewise, a rising trend of AR has also been observed over the last 2-3 decades in developing countries including China, with the prevalence of AR varying widely in these countries. A survey of self-reported AR over a 6-year period in the general Chinese adult population reported that the standardized prevalence of adult AR increased from 11.1% in 2005 to 17.6% in 2011. An increasing number of Journal Articles and imporclinical trials on the epidemiology, pathophysiologic mechanisms, diagnosis, management and comorbidities of AR in Chinese subjects have been published in international peer-reviewed journals over the past 2 decades, and substantially added to our understanding of this disease as a global problem. Although guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of AR in Chinese subjects have also been published, they have not been translated into English and therefore not generally accessible for reference to non-Chinese speaking international medical communities. Moreover, methods for the diagnosis and treatment of AR in China have not been standardized entirely and some patients are still treated according to regional preferences. Thus, the present guidelines have been developed by the Chinese Society of Allergy to be accessible to both national and international medical communities involved in the management of AR patients. These guidelines have been prepared in line with existing international guidelines to provide evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and management of AR in China.

Local allergic rhinitis is an independent rhinitis phenotype: The results of a 10-year follow-up study

BACKGROUND

The knowledge about the natural history of local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is limited. One unmet question is to demonstrate whether LAR should be considered the first step in the development of allergic rhinitis (AR) or an independent phenotype. The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the natural history of a population with LAR, the potential conversion to AR with systemic atopy and the development of asthma during 10 years.

METHODS

This is the second phase of a 10-year follow-up study of a cohort of 176 patients with LAR of recent onset and 115 age- and sex-matched healthy controls prospectively evaluated from 2005 to 2016. Clinical-demographic questionnaire, spirometry, skin prick test and specific IgE were evaluated yearly. Nasal allergen provocation tests (NAPT) with Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, Alternaria alternata, Olea europaea and grass pollen were performed at baseline, and after 5 and 10 years.

RESULTS

After 10-year LAR, patients experienced a significant and clinically relevant worsening of the rhinitis, with increase in emergency assistance, development of asthma, loss of allergen tolerance and impairment of the quality of life. This worsening became significant after 5 years and progressed throughout 10 years. A similar rate of development of AR with systemic atopy was detected in patients and controls (9.7% vs 7.8%, log-rank P=.623). In 5 patients, conversion to systemic atopy occurred >10 years (3%).

CONCLUSIONS

LAR is a well-differentiated clinical entity with a low rate of development of systemic atopy, a natural evolution towards worsening and a risk factor for suffering asthma.

International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Critical examination of the quality and validity of available allergic rhinitis (AR) literature is necessary to improve understanding and to appropriately translate this knowledge to clinical care of the AR patient. To evaluate the existing AR literature, international multidisciplinary experts with an interest in AR have produced the International Consensus statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR:AR).

METHODS

Using previously described methodology, specific topics were developed relating to AR. Each topic was assigned a literature review, evidence-based review (EBR), or evidence-based review with recommendations (EBRR) format as dictated by available evidence and purpose within the ICAR:AR document. Following iterative reviews of each topic, the ICAR:AR document was synthesized and reviewed by all authors for consensus.

RESULTS

The ICAR:AR document addresses over 100 individual topics related to AR, including diagnosis, pathophysiology, epidemiology, disease burden, risk factors for the development of AR, allergy testing modalities, treatment, and other conditions/comorbidities associated with AR.

CONCLUSION

This critical review of the AR literature has identified several strengths; providers can be confident that treatment decisions are supported by rigorous studies. However, there are also substantial gaps in the AR literature. These knowledge gaps should be viewed as opportunities for improvement, as often the things that we teach and the medicine that we practice are not based on the best quality evidence. This document aims to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the AR literature to identify areas for future AR research and improved understanding.

Local Allergic Rhinitis in Pediatric Patients: Is IgE Dosage in Nasal Lavage Fluid a Useful Diagnostic Method in Children?

Local Allergic Rhinitis (LAR) is an emerging disease. However, its incidence in the pediatric popolution has not yet been studied. The gold standard for the diagnosis is the nasal provocation test that is not everywhere avalaible and difficult to apply in children. The aim of our study was to evaluate the nasal lavage fluid IgE as a biomarker of LAR in children. 54 pediatric patients [IQR 4.0-12.0 years] were divided into 3 groups: study group (26 children with rhinitis symptoms and without evidence of systemic atopy); allergic rhinitis (AR) group (15 children) and 13 healty controls (HC). Every child was subjected to nasal lavage using 2 ml/nostril of physiologic saline solution, that was therefore analyzed by ImmunoCAP to obtain the IgE concentration. Rhinofibroscopy and nasal cytology were performed. Our data showed the presence of higher value of nasal lavage fluid IgE (average of 6.005 UI/ml; range: 4.47-7.74 UI/ml) in 16 out of 26 patients of the study group who therefore may be classified as affected by LAR. We observed a statistically significant difference (P< 0.0001) between NAR/HC group and LAR group, identifying a cut-off of 3.85 UI/ml. Finally, we found a better response to previous AR therapy in the LAR group than in the NAR group. Our data showed the high incidence of LAR in pediatric patients previously classified as NAR. The measurment of IgE in nasal lavage fluid may be considered an easy and rapid method for the diagnosis of LAR in children. Besides, our data add confirmatory evidence about the good response of LAR children to the classic AR therapy.

The role of local allergy in the nasal inflammation

Local allergic inflammation (LAI) is recognized recently. 'entopy' was used to define LAI, which was positively correlated with allergen provocation testing, local sIgE up-regulation, inflammatory mediator secretion, and a lack of systemic allergy. The study of LAI is in its infancy and focuses mainly on the respiratory system. It is closely related to nasal inflammation and plays important roles in patients with nonallergic rhinitis (NAR), nonallergic chronic sinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), and nonallergic fungal rhinosinusitis (NAFRS). Based on studies using nasal allergen provocation testing, 40-57% of patients with NAR exhibited positive results and could be diagnosed as local allergic rhinitis. Total IgE and common airborne allergen-sIgE were up-regulated in eosinophilic CRSwNP patients compared to noneosinophilic CRSwNP patients and healthy controls, possibly due to local allergic inflammation. Some researchers also found that the level of local sIgE was increased in patients with NAFRS; they suggested that local allergic inflammation occurs in NAFRS. Studies of LAI will increase our understanding of nasal inflammation and help to establish novel treatments. However, the diagnosis of local allergic inflammation is complex due to the lack of convenient detection methods. The relationship between local allergic inflammation and systemic allergic inflammation is unclear, and an appropriate treatment for local allergic inflammation is required.

Nonallergic rhinitis and lower airway disease

In the past years, several investigators have demonstrated the existence of local nasal responses in some patients with typical allergic rhinitis symptoms but without atopy and have defined a new phenotype called local allergic rhinitis (LAR) or 'entopy'. In a percentage of LAR subjects, the upper airway disease is also associated with lower airway symptoms. After the description of this phenotype, the differential diagnosis between LAR and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) has become a challenge for the clinician. To correctly identify LAR patients is of high importance for treatment and management of these patients, and for an appropriate inclusion of patients in clinical trials and genetics studies. The treatment of LAR patients, in contrast with NAR, is oriented to allergen avoidance and specific treatment. Allergen immunotherapy, the aetiological treatment for allergic respiratory diseases, has demonstrated to be an effective and safe treatment in LAR, increasing immunological tolerance, and reducing the clinical symptoms and the use of medication. In this article, the important and novel aspects of LAR in terms of mechanisms, diagnosis and treatment will be discussed. Also, the involvement of the lower airway and the potential role of IgE in the bronchial disease will be also reviewed.

Non-allergic rhinitis in children: Epidemiological aspects, pathological features, diagnostic methodology and clinical management

Chronic rhinitis is a very common disease, as the prevalence in the general population resulted to be 40%. Allergic rhinitis has been considered to be the most frequent form of chronic rhinitis, as non-allergic rhinitis has been estimated to account for 25%. However, several evidences suggested that non-allergic rhinitis have been underrated, especially in children. In pediatrics, the diagnostic definition of non-allergic rhinitis has been often limited to the exclusion of an allergic sensitization. Actually, local allergic rhinitis has been often misdiagnosed as well as mixed rhinitis has not been recognized in most cases. Nasal cytology is a diagnostic procedure being suitable for routine clinical practice with children and could be a very useful tool to characterize and diagnose non-allergic rhinitis, providing important clues for epidemiological analysis and clinical management.

Local allergic rhinitis: entopy or spontaneous response?

BACKGROUND

The existence of a local allergic rhintis was proposed on the basis of the detection of nasal IgE in the absence of a systemic sensitization. Nevertheless, the significance of this phenomenon remains still unclear. We assessed the presence of mucosal nasal IgE in patients with ascertained allergic rhinitis, nonallergic rhinitis with inflammation and in healthy controls.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with a well ascertained diagnosis (clinical history, skin prick test, specific IgE assay, nasal endoscopy, nasal cytology) underwent an immunoenzymatic measurement of specific IgE to grass, cypress, parietaria and olive in nasal scrapings.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients with allergic rhinitis, 12 with non allergic rhinitis and 14 healthy subjects were studied. The patients with allergic and nonallergic rhinitis had higher nasal symptoms as compared to control subjects. Systemic sensitizatition (assessed by skin test and CAP-RAST) was obviously more frequent in allergic rhinitis, than in the other two groups. Allergen-specific nasal IgE could be detected in all groups (86,7, 33,3, and 50 % positive, respectively), even more frequently in the control group than in nonallergic rhinitis patients. No difference among allergens was identified. Out of the 26 non-allergic patients (non allergic rhinitis + controls) nasal IgE were positive in 11(42 %).

DISCUSSION

According to the results, the presence of nasal IgE against allergens seems to be a non-specific phenomenon, since they can be detected also in non allergic rhinitis and in healthy subjects.

CONCLUSION

It can be hypothesized that the nasal IgE production represents a form of spontaneous immune response.

Risk and safety requirements for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in allergology: World Allergy Organization Statement

One of the major concerns in the practice of allergy is related to the safety of procedures for the diagnosis and treatment of allergic disease. Management (diagnosis and treatment) of hypersensitivity disorders involves often intentional exposure to potentially allergenic substances (during skin testing), deliberate induction in the office of allergic symptoms to offending compounds (provocation tests) or intentional application of potentially dangerous substances (allergy vaccine) to sensitized patients. These situations may be associated with a significant risk of unwanted, excessive or even dangerous reactions, which in many instances cannot be completely avoided. However, adverse reactions can be minimized or even avoided if a physician is fully aware of potential risk and is prepared to appropriately handle the situation. Information on the risk of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in allergic diseases has been accumulated in the medical literature for decades; however, except for allergen specific immunotherapy, it has never been presented in a systematic fashion. Up to now no single document addressed the risk of the most commonly used medical procedures in the allergy office nor attempted to present general requirements necessary to assure the safety of these procedures. Following review of available literature a group of allergy experts within the World Allergy Organization (WAO), representing various continents and areas of allergy expertise, presents this report on risk associated with diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in allergology and proposes a consensus on safety requirements for performing procedures in allergy offices. Optimal safety measures including appropriate location, type and required time of supervision, availability of safety equipment, access to specialized emergency services, etc. for various procedures have been recommended. This document should be useful for allergists with already established practices and experience as well as to other specialists taking care of patients with allergies.

The proportion of local allergic rhinitis to Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus in children

BACKGROUND

Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is diagnosed by the positive response to nasal allergen provocation test (NAPT) to aeroallergen and/or local synthesis of specific IgE (sIgE). This entity is found in half of the adults with non-allergic rhinitis (NAR). In children, very few data of the prevalence and characteristics of LAR were reported.

METHODS

Children 8-18 years with NAR were recruited. A NAPT with Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus extract (NAPT-Dp) at 200, 600, and 2000 AU/ml, respectively, at 15-min interval was performed. The immediate response was assessed using the clinical symptom score, peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF), and acoustic rhinometry (ARM). The nasal tryptase and sIgE-Dp were measured at baseline and 15 min and 1 h after a positive NAPT-Dp. Two allergic rhinitis (AR) patients were used as positive controls.

RESULTS

Fifty-four NAR children (61.1% boys) with the mean ± SD age of 11.1 ± 2.1 years were enrolled. The median duration of disease was 6.3 years. The most frequent comorbidity was asthma (38.9%). Eighty-seven percent of patients had mild persistent severity. NAPT-Dp was positive in 2/54 (3.7%) of NAR children who had increased symptom score and decreased minimal cross-sectional area (MCA) on ARM as well as PNIF. However, there was no change in the nasal tryptase and sIgE-Dp. The control AR patients had positive NAPT-Dp and increased nasal tryptase at 15 min without the change of sIgE-Dp.

CONCLUSION

LAR is an uncommon condition in children. Further investigation in a large population of children with NAR is needed.

Local allergic rhinitis: A critical reappraisal from a paediatric perspective

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'.

Immunologic responses to the major allergen of Olea europaea in local and systemic allergic rhinitis subjects

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the in vivo and in vitro responses to nOle e 1 in allergic rhinitis (AR) and local allergic rhinitis (LAR) patients sensitized to olive tree pollen (OL) confirmed by nasal allergen provocation test (NAPT).

METHODS

Twelve subjects with AR, 12 with LAR and 12 subjects as control group (CG) were selected. Skin testing and NAPT with nOle e 1 were performed. Eosinophilic cationic protein (ECP) and tryptase were measured in nasal lavages before and after NAPT. Serum IgE to OL allergens was measured by ELISA. Basophil activation tests (BAT) with OL and nOle e 1 and dendritic cell maturation/proliferation studies were carried out.

RESULTS

All AR (12/12) and 10/12 (83%) of LAR had a +NAPT to nOle e 1. ECP levels in nasal lavages were significantly increased after NAPT in both AR and LAR compared with CG at 15 min (P < 0.05). Serum IgE was positive only in AR. All AR had +BAT responses to OL and 10/12 to nOle e 1 (83%); 8/12 LAR (66.6%) had a +BAT to OL and 4/12 (33%) to nOle e 1, with only one subject of the CG with a +BAT to both OL and nOle e 1 (8%). Dendritic cell proliferation to nOle e 1 was increased in AR compared to LAR and CG (P = 0.019 and P = 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Both AR and LAR had a similar in vivo response to nOle e 1 with release of inflammatory mediators. Specific basophil activation with OL and nOle e 1 was observed in LAR confirming previous data obtained with dust mites.

Nonallergic Rhinitis: Diagnosis

Nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) is one of the most common conditions in medicine, affecting the quality of life of millions of patients throughout the United States. Despite its ubiquitous nature, NAR remains a poorly managed and often difficult to treat condition. NAR is often suboptimally managed by clinicians with poor clinical outcomes. Establishing the correct diagnosis requires a keen understanding of the unique underlying mechanisms involved in NAR, which is still evolving. Ultimately epidemiologic studies that better define NAR prevalence and its economic burden on society are needed to convince funding agencies of the need for research to elucidate mechanisms and specific treatment approaches for this condition.

Allergic Rhinitis: Mechanisms and Treatment

The prevalence of allergic rhinitis (AR) has been estimated at 10% to 40%, and its economic burden is substantial. AR patients develop specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) antibody responses to indoor and outdoor environmental allergens with exposure over time. These specific IgE antibodies bind to high-affinity IgE receptors on mast cells and basophils. Key outcome measures of therapeutic interventions include rhinitis symptom control, rescue medication requirements, and quality-of-life measures. A comprehensive multiple modality treatment plan customized to the individual patient can optimize outcomes.

Rhinitis Subtypes, Endotypes, and Definitions

Rhinitis is often seen as posing a small burden. However, rhinitis is a complex disease that is underpinned by a plethora of different mechanisms and causes. Rhinitis is frequently associated with other comorbid conditions but, by itself, is a source of considerable morbidity for patients and creates a significant financial burden on health systems worldwide. This article approaches this condition from both a phenotypic and mechanistic standpoint, focusing on the complexity of characterizing these subtypes. Developing a clearer demarcation of the currently obscure rhinitis phenotypes and endotypes will substantially improve their future prevention and treatment.

Nonallergic Rhinitis: Treatment

Chronic nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) is a syndrome rather than a specific disease. A lack of understanding of the pathogenesis of this condition has led to imprecise terminology with several alternate names for the condition, including vasomotor rhinitis, nonallergic rhinopathy, and idiopathic rhinitis. The therapy for NAR is best based on the underlying pathology, which typically exists in a form whereby an abnormality of the autonomic nervous system is dominant or a form in which inflammation seems to be the cause of symptoms. In general the most effective therapy is the combination of an intranasal antihistamine and an intranasal corticosteroid.

Local Allergic Rhinitis

This review focuses on local allergic rhinitis, a new phenotype of allergic rhinitis, commonly misdiagnosed as nonallergic rhinitis. It has gained attention over last decade and can affect patients from all countries, ethnic groups and ages, impairing their quality of life, and is frequently associated with conjunctivitis and asthma. Diagnosis is based on clinical history, the demonstration of a positive response to nasal allergen provocation test and/or the detection of nasal sIgE. A positive basophil activation test may support the diagnosis. Recent studies have demonstrated that allergen immunotherapy is an effective immune-modifying treatment, highlighting the importance of early diagnosis.

The importance of mold sensitivity in nonallergic rhinitis patients

BACKGROUND

In recent studies, local specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) production against allergens in nasal mucosa and a positive response to a nasal allergen provocation test (NAPT) have been demonstrated in some patients initially diagnosed as nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) or idiopathic rhinitis (IR). The aim of this study was to evaluate the presence of local allergic rhinitis (LAR) in patients who experience rhinitis symptoms in indoor and outdoor moldy conditions and to investigate the role of the NAPT in diagnosis.

METHODS

A total of 40 NAR patients with a history of persistent rhinitis and who had negative skin-prick tests (SPTs) and serum sIgE levels to common aeroallergens, as well as 20 healthy subjects were included in the study. NAPTs were performed with Aspergillus fumigatus (group 1) or a mixture of Alternaria alternata and Cladosporium herbarum extracts (group 2).

RESULTS

In patient nasal lavage fluids, tryptase and mold sIgE levels were not significantly different from the control group. NAPT with Aspergillus fumigatus was positive in 8 of 12 NAR patients (66.6%) in group 1 and NAPT with the mixture of extracts was positive in 9 of 13 NAR patients (69.2%) in group 2.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that LAR may exist in a significant number of the persistent rhinitis patients who were previously considered as NAR based on negative SPTs or serum sIgE tests. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study evaluating a nasal local allergic response to both indoor and outdoor molds.

Local allergic rhinitis: mechanisms, diagnosis and relevance for occupational rhinitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is a new form of allergic rhinitis that has caused a growing interest. The possibility of an occupational equivalent (occupational rhinitis) has not been yet explored. The purpose of this review is to summarize the most relevant and recent scientific evidence on LAR and occupational rhinitis.

RECENT FINDINGS

LAR is a prevalent entity well differentiated from allergic rhinitis, affecting patients from different countries, ethnic groups and ages. Occupational rhinitis appears earlier and more frequently than occupational asthma, especially for high molecular weight substances. Diagnosis of LAR is based on nasal allergen provocation test and/or detection of nasal specific IgE, and other techniques such as basophil activation test may support the diagnosis. Skin prick tests and immunological determinations are of limited use for diagnosis of occupational rhinitis caused by low molecular weight agents. Performance of nasal allergen provocation test for confirming diagnosis of occupational rhinitis is strongly recommended. Uncommon allergens should also be investigated.

SUMMARY

The possibility of a local occupational rhinitis should be considered in workers with a clear history of occupational rhinitis and negative immunological test, especially in the case of high molecular weight allergens.