Global classification and coding of hypersensitivity diseases - An EAACI - WAO survey, strategic paper and review

Drug allergy awareness and perspectives with the implementation of the International Classification of Diseases-11

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To understand the current global scale of drug hypersensitivity (DH) and drug allergy (DA), and to identify possible strategies to increase the accuracy of epidemiological data.

RECENT FINDINGS

Global patterns of DH/DA seem to be changing and increasing worldwide, but there are still great challenges in capturing quality DH/DA mortality and morbidity statistics (MMS). DH/DA MMS may gain new perspectives with the global implementation of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-11. Improving the quality of epidemiological data related to DH/DA should clarify areas of uncertainty, which would lead to better strategies to reduce the burden of these conditions.

SUMMARY

DH/DA remains a complex and unaddressed problem globally that often deprives patients of optimal medication choices and places them at risk for life-threatening reactions. DH/DA labels should contribute to people well being, by protecting true allergic individuals from being re-exposed to their allergic drugs and providing needed medications to individuals wrongly labeled as allergic or who have lost allergic sensitivity. The true rate of DH/DA is in fact unknown due to a number of factors, such as misdiagnosis, miscoding and under- and over-notification, among others. Moreover, there is lack of data about DH/DA epidemiology in many countries. Difficulties on collecting accurate and comparable data should be acknowledged, with great impact in the correct labeling DH/DA in electronic health records and official statistics. More accurate definitions, classification and coding may contribute to a better-quality MMS thanks to the ICD-11, under implementation worldwide. Improving the quality of epidemiological data related to DH/DA should clarify areas of uncertainty, which would lead to better strategies to reduce the burden of these conditions. As knowledge derived from populations is key information for more realistic decision-making, the construction of the new section addressed to DH/DA in the ICD-11 will allow the collection of more accurate epidemiological data to support quality management of patients, and facilitate healthcare planning to implement public health measures to prevent and reduce the morbidity and mortality attributable to these conditions.

How to manage drug-virus interplay underlying skin eruptions in children

The majority of viral rashes occurring during an antibiotic therapy are considered as a drug hypersensitivity reaction (DHR). Differentiating a viral rash versus a DHR is difficult or even impossible. In delayed DHRs the interplay between viruses and drugs is summarized according to the recent literature. The question is if the same reaction will again occur in case of drug re-exposure in absence of the concomitant viral infection because of persistent immune reactivity. Epstein Barr Virus (EBV) and Human Herpes virus 6 (HHV-6) models are analyzed in case of maculopapular exanthemas (MPEs) and drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) over a course of drug therapy. MPEs are the most common skin manifestation during a viral infection and a concomitant drug therapy. In type IVb reactions to drugs a hapten/pro-hapten mechanism and a pharmacological interaction (p-i mechanism) are described as the 2 major ways to make T cells response functional. Rarely the altered repertoire model is involved. The Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) predisposition is an additional essential factor that can facilitate DHR. In MPEs rarely a DHR is confirmed by allergy testing. Severity and duration of MPEs, the presence of eosinophilia and systemic symptoms make more reliable the persistent nature of the reaction. Research on this topic is needed in order to provide the clinicians with instruments to decide when to suspect future reactions upon drug re-exposure even in the absence of a viral infection, because those patients should be investigated by a complete drug allergy work up.

Epidemiology of anaphylaxis: is the trend still going up?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To understand the current global scale of anaphylaxis and identify possible strategies to increase the accuracy of epidemiological data.

RECENT FINDINGS

Anaphylaxis mortality and morbidity statistics may gain new perspectives with the global implementation of the ICD-11. Improving the quality of epidemiological data related to anaphylaxis should clarify some areas of uncertainty about risk factors, leading to better targeting of strategies to protect those patients at risk, and support decision-making to facilitate health care planning and implementation of public health measures to prevent anaphylaxis.

SUMMARY

The true rate of anaphylaxis is unknown due to a number of factors, such as misdiagnosis, miscoding and undernotification. Moreover, there is lack of information about anaphylaxis epidemiology in many countries. Difficulties on collecting accurate and comparable data should be acknowledged and anaphylaxis data can vary widely. Currently, most robust data are derived from hospitalization datasets and national mortality databases. Anaphylaxis accounts for up to 0.26% of overall hospital admissions. It is suggested that the number of hospital admissions for anaphylaxis is increasing in many countries, both with respect to all-causes of anaphylaxis and by trigger, but the mortality rate remains low. However, there are still great challenges in capturing quality anaphylaxis mortality and morbidity statistics. Better understanding of anaphylaxis trends should clarify some areas of uncertainty about risk factors and prospect effective prevention strategies. As the knowledge derived from populations is key information for more realistic decision-making, the construction of the new section addressed to anaphylaxis in the ICD-11 will allow the collection of more accurate epidemiological data to support high quality management of patients, and to better facilitate health care planning to implement public health measures, reduce the morbidity and mortality attributable to anaphylaxis.

Overview of registries for anaphylaxis: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

This review aimed to describe the scope and operational features of anaphylaxis registries, and to assess their contribution to improving knowledge of anaphylaxis and care of patients who experience anaphylaxis by measuring their research output.

INTRODUCTION

Structured data collection and reporting systems, such as registries, are needed to better understand the burden of anaphylaxis and to protect the growing number of patients with severe allergy. There is a need to characterize current anaphylaxis registries to identify their value in anaphylaxis surveillance, management, and research. Information synthesized in this review will provide knowledge on benefits and gaps in current registries, which may inform the implementation and global standardization of future anaphylaxis reporting systems.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This scoping review considered literature describing registries worldwide that enroll patients who have experienced anaphylaxis. Published and gray literature sources were included if they described the scope and operational features of anaphylaxis registries.

METHODS

This review followed the JBI methodology for scoping reviews. Embase, MEDLINE, Scopus, and CINAHL were searched for relevant articles. Identified keywords and index terms were adapted for searches of gray literature sources, using Google advanced search functions. Only full-text studies in English were considered for inclusion. Two independent reviewers conducted title and abstract screening and those that did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded. The full text of potentially relevant articles were retrieved; full-text screening and data extraction were also conducted by two independent reviewers. Any discrepancies were resolved through discussion or with a third reviewer. Tables and a narrative summary were used to describe and compare the scope and features (eg, inclusion criteria, patient demographics, clinical symptoms) of the identified anaphylaxis registries, and to outline their output to assess their contribution to research and clinical practice for anaphylaxis.

RESULTS

A total of 77 full-text publications and eight gray literature sources were used to extract data. The literature search identified 19 anaphylaxis registries, with sites in 28 countries including Europe, the United Kingdom, Canada, the United States, Korea, and Australia. The main purposes of the identified registries were to collect clinical data for research; provide clinical support tools to improve patient care; and operate as allergen surveillance systems to protect the wider community with allergies. Differences in inclusion and health care settings exist, with 11 collecting data on anaphylaxis of any cause, two on food reactions alone, three on fatal anaphylaxis, one on perioperative anaphylaxis, and two on allergic reactions (including anaphylaxis). Five registries enroll cases in allergy centers, five in hospital settings, one in schools, and others target a combination of general practitioners, specialists in emergency departments, and other relevant hospital departments and allergy outpatient clinics. Only three registries operate under a mandatory framework. A total of 57 publications were considered research outputs from registries. All registries except two have published studies from collected data, with the greatest number of articles published from 2019 to the present. Publications mostly addressed questions regarding demographic profile, causes and cofactors, severity, fatal reactions, and gaps in management.

CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrated that anaphylaxis registries differ in their scope and operation, having been established for different purposes. Importantly, registries have contributed significantly to research, which has highlighted gaps in anaphylaxis management, provoking allergens, and informed targets for prevention for severe and fatal events. Beyond this, registries relay information about anaphylaxis to clinicians and regulatory bodies to improve patient care and protect the community. The ability to link registry data with other health datasets, standardization of data across registries, and incorporation of clinical care indicators to promote quality health care across the health system represent important targets for future systems.

Food allergy in the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-11

There are increasing global data regarding the prevalence of food allergy and food-induced anaphylaxis. However, knowledge in morbidity and mortality epidemiological data is still not optimal, and international comparable standards remain poorly accessed. This information could in turn support better clinical practice and possibly prevent future severe reactions and avoidable fatalities. The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) is the standard diagnostic tool used for epidemiology, health management, and clinical purposes supported by the World Health Organization (WHO). It is also used to determine health care payment and reimbursement of providers and health care services in hospitals. Thanks to the academic and technical efforts under the ALLERGY in ICD-11 initiative the pioneer "Allergy and hypersensitivity conditions" section has been built under the "Disorders of the Immune System" chapter of the ICD-11. The "Food hypersensitivity" (FH) subsection is classified under the "Complex allergic or hypersensitivity conditions" section and "Food-induced anaphylaxis" is under the "Anaphylaxis" section. In order to inform the development of strategies to reduce preventable FHs/food allergies, the burden of disease in different healthcare settings and patient populations and their common etiologies need to be understood. Besides, greater specificity regarding clinical conditions and services delivered will provide payers, policy makers, and providers with better information to make major refinements to countries payment and reimbursement systems, including the design and implementation of pay-for-performance program.The new classification addressed to FHs will enable the collection of more accurate epidemiological data to support quality management of patients with FHs/food allergies, and better facilitate health care planning and decision-making and public health measures to prevent and reduce their morbidity and mortality. The improved logic and standardized definitions through the ICD-11 (and other WHO classifications) will also facilitate international comparisons of quality care and the sharing of best practice globally.

Food-induced anaphylaxis morbidity: Emergency department and hospitalization data support preventive strategies

BACKGROUND

Anaphylaxis is a recognized public health issue. There is no doubt that food-induced anaphylaxis (FIA) has tremendous impact on the quality of life of patients and their families and increases direct and indirect costs. FIA is associated with increasing rates of emergency department admissions and hospitalizations and implies the risk of death. Morbidity epidemiological data are a key to tailor public health actions to this non-communicable disease. The aim of this article was to review published morbidity epidemiological data relating to FIA and potential risk factors, in order to provide evidence-based recommendations to reduce the risk of severe adverse outcomes.

METHODS

We identified published studies available in PUBMED/MEDLINE (1966-2020), EMBASE (1980-2020) and CINAHL (1982-2020). The systematic review was carried out using MeSH terms related to FIA ED admissions and hospitalizations.

RESULTS

A total of 25 articles were selected, 80% published in the last 5 years. After critical analysis of methodological and clinical characteristics reported in the data selected, we were able to propose preventive strategies.

CONCLUSION

Anaphylaxis is a recognized public health issue. FIA is associated with increasing rates of ED admissions and hospitalizations and imply in risk of death. More than reviewing and critically interpreting the key patterns related to FIA morbidity published data, we proposed strategies in order to promote quality care of patients suffering from FIA. Our World Health Organization Collaborative Center is deeply involved in this process, and we believe that the proposed strategies will inform future healthcare policies on anaphylaxis. The long-term objective would be to improve clinical care and quality of life of patients and their families, and develop risk-stratified, cost-effective preventive measures.

SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination and Anaphylaxis: Recommendations of the French Allergy Community and the Montpellier World Health Organization Collaborating Center

Vaccines against COVID-19 (and its emerging variants) are an essential global intervention to control the current pandemic situation. Anaphylactic reactions have been reported after SARS-CoV2 RNA vaccines. Anaphylaxis is defined as a severe life-threatening generalized or systemic hypersensitivity reaction. This risk is estimated at 1/1,000,000 in the context of vaccine safety surveillance programs. The COVID-19 vaccination is rolling-out vastly in different courtiers and surveillance programs are key to monitor severe adverse reactions, such as anaphylaxis. Anaphylaxis due to vaccine is extremely rare and specific cases should receive individualized investigation and care. The here presented recommendations and follow-up from the French allergy community and the Montpellier WHO Collaborating Center in order to support the vaccination program and intends to support to healthcare professionals in their daily basis.

Epidemiology of anaphylaxis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To understand the current global epidemiological data of anaphylaxis and identify potential strategies to improve patients' care and prevention.

RECENT FINDINGS

Anaphylaxis mortality and morbidity statistics (MMS) may gain new perspectives with the implementation of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-11 in the forthcoming years. Improving the quality of epidemiological data related to anaphylaxis should clarify some areas of uncertainty about risk factors, leading to better targeting of strategies to protect those patients at risk, and support decision-making to facilitate healthcare planning and implementation of public health measures to prevent anaphylaxis.

SUMMARY

Anaphylaxis is a complex noncommunicable diseases with adverse impact on health-related quality of life of patients and their carriers and a significant proportion of deaths may be preventable. It requires an integrated holistic plan to improve quality of healthcare and gathering accurate and comparable epidemiological data is key. Morbidity related to anaphylaxis seems to be increasing worldwide whereas mortality of anaphylaxis appears to be low and stable, but this still has great challenges in capturing quality anaphylaxis MMS. Improving the quality of epidemiological data related to anaphylaxis should clarify some areas of uncertainty about risk factors, leading to better targeting of strategies to protect those patients at risk. As knowledge derived from populations is key information for more realistic decision-making, the construction of the new section addressed to anaphylaxis in the ICD-11 will allow the collection of more accurate epidemiological data to support quality management of patients, and better facilitate healthcare planning to implement public health measures to prevent and reduce the morbidity and mortality attributable to these conditions.

Viral Infections and Cutaneous Drug-Related Eruptions

In the general population, up to 10% of children treated by antibiotics have cutaneous adverse drug reaction, but allergy is confirmed in less than 20% of patients. Most of the non-allergic reactions are probably due to virus, such as enterovirus acute infection or Ebstein-Barr Virus (EBV) acute infection or reactivation. Especially in children, viruses have the propensity to induce skin lesions (maculopapular rash, urticaria) due to their skin infiltration or immunologic response. In drug-related skin eruptions, a virus can participate by activating an immune predisposition. The culprit antibiotic is then the trigger for reacting. Even in severe drug-induced reactions, such as Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS) syndrome, viruses take part in immune phenomena, especially herpes viruses. Understanding the mechanisms of both virus- and drug-induced skin reaction is important to develop our clinical reflection and give an adaptive care to the patient. Our aim is to review current knowledge on the different aspects and potential roles of viruses in the different type of drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHR). Although major advances have been made those past year, further studies are needed for a better understanding of the link between viruses and DHR, to improve management of those patients.

Overview of registries for anaphylaxis: a scoping review protocol

OBJECTIVE

This review will describe the scope and operational features of global registries for anaphylaxis and assess their contribution to improving knowledge and care of anaphylaxis by measuring their research output.

INTRODUCTION

The incidence of anaphylaxis is increasing around the world. Structured reporting systems, such as patient registries, are needed to better understand the burden of anaphylaxis and protect the growing number of allergic patients.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

The concept to be mapped is registries across the world that enroll patients who have experienced anaphylaxis. Published and gray literature sources will be considered if they describe the scope and operational features of anaphylaxis registries. Only full-text studies published in English will be included. There will be no date restriction.

METHODS

The JBI methodology for scoping reviews will be followed. Embase, MEDLINE, Scopus, and CINAHL will be searched from inception date for relevant articles. Identified keyword and index terms will be adapted for searches of gray literature sources, using Google advanced search functions. The authors and developers of identified registries will be contacted, where possible, to obtain additional information about the development and structure of systems. Data will be extracted by two independent reviewers. Any discrepancies will be resolved by a third reviewer. Tables and a narrative summary will be used to describe and compare the scope and features of anaphylaxis registries and outline their output to assess their contribution to research, clinical practice, and public health policy for anaphylaxis.

Global implementation of the world health organization's International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-11: The allergic and hypersensitivity conditions model

The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) provides a common language for use worldwide as a diagnostic and classification tool for epidemiology, clinical purposes and health management. Since its first edition, the ICD has maintained a framework distributing conditions according to topography, with the result that some complex conditions, such as allergies and hypersensitivity disorders (A/H) including anaphylaxis, have been poorly represented. The change in hierarchy in ICD-11 permitted the construction of the pioneer section addressed to A/H, which may result in more accurate mortality and morbidity statistics, including more accurate accounting for mortality due to anaphylaxis, strengthen classification, terminology and definitions. The ICD-11 was presented and adopted by the 72nd World Health Assembly in May 2019, and the implementation is ongoing worldwide. We here present the outcomes from an online survey undertaken to reach out the allergy community worldwide in order to peer review the terminology, classification and definitions of A/H introduced into ICD-11 and to support their global implementation. Data are presented here for 406 respondents from 74 countries. All of the subsections of the new A/H section of the ICD-11 had been considered with good accuracy by the majority of respondents. We believe that, in addition to help during the implementation phase, all the comments provided will help to improve the A/H classification and to increase awareness by different disciplines of what actions are needed to ensure more accurate epidemiological data and better clinical management of A/H patients.

Changing the history of anaphylaxis mortality statistics through the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases-11

We review the history of the classification and coding changes for anaphylaxis and provide current and perspective information in the field. In 2012, an analysis of Brazilian data demonstrated undernotification of anaphylaxis-related deaths because of the difficulties of coding using the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision. This work triggered strategic international actions supported by the Joint Allergy Academies and the International Classification of Diseases World Health Organization (WHO) leadership to update the classification of allergic disorders for the International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11), which resulted in construction of the pioneer "Allergic and hypersensitivity conditions" chapter. The usability of the new framework has been tested by evaluating the same data published in 2012 from the ICD-11 perspective. Coding accuracy was much improved, reaching 95% for definite anaphylaxis. As the results were provided to the WHO Mortality Reference Group, coding rules have been changed, allowing anaphylaxis to be recorded as an underlying cause of death in official mortality statistics. The mandatory use of ICD-11 from January 2022 for documenting cause of death could have 2 immediate consequences: (1) the reported number of anaphylaxis-related deaths might increase because of more appropriate coding and (2) the cross-sectional and longitudinal mortality data generated might ultimately lead to a better understanding of anaphylaxis epidemiology and improved health policies directed at reducing anaphylaxis-related mortality.

AllerGAtlas 1.0: a human allergy-related genes database

Allergy is a detrimental hypersensitive response to innocuous environmental antigen, which is caused by the effect of interaction between environmental factors and multiple genetic pre-disposition. In the past decades, hundreds of allergy-related genes have been identified to illustrate the epidemiology and pathogenesis of allergic diseases, which are associated with better endophenotype, novel biomarkers, early-life risk factors and individual differences in treatment responses. However, the information of all these allergy-related genes is dispersed in thousands of publications. Here, we present a manually curated human allergy-related gene database of AllerGAtlas, which contained 1195 well-annotated human allergy-related genes, determined by text-mining and manual curation. AllerGAtlas will be a valuable bioinformatics resource to search human allergy-related genes and explore their functions in allergy for experimental research.

Database URL: http://biokb.ncpsb.org/AlleRGatlas/

Systematic review of atopic dermatitis disease definition in studies using routinely collected health data

BACKGROUND

Routinely collected electronic health data obtained for administrative and clinical purposes are increasingly used to study atopic dermatitis (AD). Methods for identifying AD patients in routinely collected electronic health data differ, and it is unknown how this might affect study results.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate how patients with AD have been identified in studies using routinely collected electronic health data, to determine whether these methods were validated and to estimate how the method for identifying patients with AD affected variability in prevalence estimates.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase and Web of Science for studies using routinely collected electronic health data that reported on AD as a primary outcome. Studies of localized AD and other types of dermatitis were excluded. The protocol for this review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42016037968).

RESULTS

In total, 59 studies met eligibility criteria. Medical diagnosis codes for inclusion and exclusion, number of occasions of a code, type of provider associated with a code and prescription data were used to identify patients with AD. Only two studies described validation of their methods and no study reported on disease severity. Prevalence estimates ranged from 0·18% to 38·33% (median 4·91%) and up to threefold variation in prevalence was introduced by differences in the method for identifying patients with AD.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review highlights the need for clear reporting of methods for identifying patients with AD in routinely collected electronic health data to allow for meaningful interpretation and comparison of results.

What can we learn in drug allergy management from World Health Organization's international classifications?

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) represent growing health problem worldwide, affecting more than 7% of the general population, and represent an important public health problem. However, knowledge in DHRs morbidity and mortality epidemiological data is still not optimal and international comparable standards remain poorly accessed. Institutional databases worldwide increasingly use the WHO International Classification of Diseases (ICD) system to classify diagnoses, health services utilization, and death data. The misclassification of disorders in the ICD system contributes to a lack of ascertainment and recognition of their importance for healthcare planning and resource allocation. It also hampers clinical practice and prevention actions. To further inform the allergy community and to ensure that the revision process is transparent as advised in the WHO ICD-11 revision agenda, we report the advances and use of the pioneering "Drug hypersensitivity" subsection of ICD-11 and implementation in the WHO International Classification of Health Interventions (ICHI). The new classification addressed to DHRs will enable the collection of more accurate epidemiological data to support quality management of patients with drug allergies and better facilitate healthcare planning and decision-making and public health measures to prevent and reduce the morbidity and mortality attributable to DHRs.

Critical view of anaphylaxis epidemiology: open questions and new perspectives

In contrast to the majority of allergic or hypersensitivity conditions, worldwide anaphylaxis epidemiological data remain sparse with low accuracy, which hampers comparable morbidity statistics. Data can differ widely depending on a number of variables. In the current document we reviewed the forms on which anaphylaxis has been defined and classified; and how it can affect epidemiological data. With regards to the methods used to capture morbidity statistics, we observed the impact of the anaphylaxis coding utilizing the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases. As an outcome and depending on the anaphylaxis definition, we extracted the cumulative incidence, which may not reflect the real number of new cases. The new ICD-11 anaphylaxis subsection developments and critical view of morbidity statistics data are discussed in order to reach new perspectives on anaphylaxis epidemiology.

Physicians' experience and opinion on contraindications to allergen immunotherapy: The CONSIT survey

BACKGROUND

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease-modifying treatment in allergy but several contraindications limit its use.

OBJECTIVE

To collect the outcome of using AIT in theoretically contraindicated situations in real patients in the Contraindications to Specific ImmunoTherapy (CONSIT) survey.

METHODS

The CONSIT is an electronic European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology survey conducted to gather the safety outcomes of patients undergoing subcutaneous, sublingual, or venom AIT and the opinions of physicians on each of 17 selected conditions: children younger than 5 years; starting AIT during pregnancy; controlled severe asthma; arrhythmias; coronary disease; cancer; autoimmune disease; bone marrow and solid organ transplantation; human immunodeficiency virus and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome; previous anaphylaxis during AIT; use of β-blockers, angiotensin-converting inhibitors, cyclosporine, and methotrexate; and inability to communicate. Safety using AIT was reported in a 3-point scale: 1, "no problems"; 2, "minor problems" (requiring only dose modifications); and 3, "major problems" (AIT not tolerated). Each physician was asked about the degree of contraindication that each condition should have: no contraindication (score 1), relative contraindication (score 2), or absolute contraindication (score 3).

RESULTS

Five hundred twenty physicians (75% Europeans, 89% allergists) reported on approximately 45,000 patients undergoing AIT with any of these conditions. Major problems were infrequent, occurring more frequently in patients with asthma (9.9%) and with previous anaphylaxis from AIT (9.5%). Regarding opinions, experienced physicians scored a significantly lower mean for all conditions than non-experienced physicians for all routes.

CONCLUSION

Major problems were infrequent and experienced physicians were less likely to be restrictive in the use of AIT.

Implementation gaps for asthma prevention and control

Asthma and allergic diseases can start in childhood and persist throughout life, but could also be manifested later, at any time for still misunderstood reasons. They are major chronic multifactorial respiratory diseases, for which prevention, early diagnosis and treatment is recognized as a priority for the Europe's public health policy and the United Nations. Given that allergy triggers (including infections, rapid urbanization leading to loss in biodiversity, pollution and climate changes) are not expected to change in a foreseeable future, it is imperative that steps are taken to develop, strengthen and optimize preventive and treatment strategies. Currently there are good treatments for asthma, several risk factors are known (e.g., allergies, rhinitis, tobacco smoke) and tools to control the disease have been developed. However, we are still uncertain how to prevent patients from developing asthma and allergic diseases. In this paper, we list the positive and negative experiences in this field as well as analyze the missing links in the process. This critical analysis will be the basis of setting-up an effective program for prevention and making, a process labeled as "implementation gaps".

Field-testing the new anaphylaxis' classification for the WHO International Classification of Diseases-11 revision

BACKGROUND

To consolidate the new classification model addressed to the allergic and hypersensitivity conditions according to the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-11 revision timeline, we here propose real-life application of quality assurance methodology to evaluate sensitivity and accuracy of the 'Anaphylaxis' subsection.

METHODS

We applied field-testing methodology by analysing all the consecutive inpatients' files documented as allergies from the University Hospital of Montpellier electronic database for the period of 1 year. The files clinically validated as being anaphylaxis were manually blind-coded under ICD-10 and current ICD-11 beta draft. The correspondence of coding and the impressions regarding sensibility were evaluated.

RESULTS

From all 2318 files related to allergic or hypersensitivity conditions, 673 had some of the anaphylaxis ICD-10 codes; 309 files (46%) from 209 patients had anaphylaxis and allergic or hypersensitivity comorbidities description. The correspondence between the two coders was perfect for 162 codes from all 309 entities (52.4%) (Cohen-kappa value 0.63) with the ICD-10 and for 221 codes (71.5%) (Cohen-kappa value 0.77) with the ICD-11. There was a high agreement regarding sensibility of the ICD-11 usability (Cohen-kappa value 0.75).

CONCLUSION

We here propose the first attempt of real-life application to validate the new ICD-11 'Anaphylaxis' subsection. Clearer was the improvement in accuracy reaching 71.5% of agreement when ICD-11 was used. By allowing all the relevant diagnostic terms for anaphylaxis to be included into the ICD-11 framework, WHO has recognized their importance not only to clinicians but also to epidemiologists, statisticians, healthcare planners and other stakeholders.

Nanomaterials in the Context of Type 2 Immune Responses-Fears and Potentials

The type 2 immune response is an adaptive immune program involved in defense against parasites, detoxification, and wound healing, but is predominantly known for its pathophysiological effects, manifesting as allergic disease. Engineered nanoparticles (NPs) are non-self entities that, to our knowledge, do not stimulate detrimental type 2 responses directly, but have the potential to modulate ongoing reactions in various ways, including the delivery of substances aiming at providing a therapeutic benefit. We review, here, the state of knowledge concerning the interaction of NPs with type 2 immune responses and highlight their potential as a multifunctional platform for therapeutic intervention.

Reaching multidisciplinary consensus on classification of anaphylaxis for the eleventh revision of the World Health Organization's (WHO) International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11)

Background

Although currently misclassified in the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) and still not officially listed as a rare disease, anaphylaxis is a well-known clinical emergency. Anaphylaxis is now one of the principal headings in the “Allergic and hypersensitivity conditions” section recently compiled for the forthcoming 11^th Revision of ICD (ICD-11). We here report the building process used for the pioneering “Anaphylaxis” subsection of ICD-11 in which we aimed for transparency as recommended in the ICD-11 revision guidelines.

Results

During an online intensive scientific and technical discussions with ICD-11 Topic Advisory Groups and Expert Working Groups, we drafted a total of 35 proposals for the classification of anaphylaxis. From all the 35 proposals, 77% were implemented, 20% remain to be implemented, and the others being partially implemented (1.5%) or rejected (1.5%).

Conclusion

For the first time, anaphylaxis is now properly classified and has attained greater visibility within ICD. In addition to all the benefits expected from the actions we have undertaken in updating the terminology, definitions and classification of allergic and hypersensitivity conditions for ICD-11, we strongly believe that anaphylaxis should be a public health priority and that it should therefore be formally added into the list of rare diseases in order to support awareness and quality clinical management of patients.

Collaboration between specialties for respiratory allergies in the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-11

Background

The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) has been grouping the allergic and hypersensitivity disorders involving the respiratory tract under topographic distribution, regardless of the underlying mechanisms, triggers or concepts currently in use for allergic and hypersensitivity conditions. In order to strengthen awareness and deliberate the creation of the new “Allergic or hypersensitivity disorders involving the respiratory tract” section of the ICD-11, we here propose make the building process public.

Methods

The new frame has been constructed to cover the gaps previously identified and was based on consensus academic reports and ICD-11 principles. Constant and bilateral discussion was kept with relevant groups representing specialties and resulted in proposals submission into the ICD-11 online platform.

Results

The “Allergic or hypersensitivity disorders involving the respiratory tract” section covers 64 entities distributed across five main categories. All the 79 proposals submitted resulted from an intensive collaboration of the Allergy working group, relevant Expert working groups and the WHO ICD governance.

Conclusion

The establishment of the ICD-11 “Allergic or hypersensitivity disorders involving the respiratory tract” section will allow the dissemination of the updated concepts to be used in clinical practice by many different specialties and health professionals.

Fatal anaphylaxis registries data support changes in the who anaphylaxis mortality coding rules

Anaphylaxis is defined as a severe life-threatening generalized or systemic hypersensitivity reaction. The difficulty of coding anaphylaxis fatalities under the World Health Organization (WHO) International Classification of Diseases (ICD) system is recognized as an important reason for under-notification of anaphylaxis deaths. On current death certificates, a limited number of ICD codes are valid as underlying causes of death, and death certificates do not include the word anaphylaxis per se. In this review, we provide evidences supporting the need for changes in WHO mortality coding rules and call for addition of anaphylaxis as an underlying cause of death on international death certificates. This publication will be included in support of a formal request to the WHO as a formal request for this move taking the 11^th ICD revision.

Decreasing the undernotification of anaphylaxis deaths in Brazil through the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-11 revision

BACKGROUND

In 2012, an analysis of the Brazilian mortality database demonstrated undernotification of anaphylaxis deaths due, at least in part, to difficult coding under the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10. This work triggered a cascade of strategic international actions supported by the Joint Allergy Academies and the ICD World Health Organization (WHO) representatives to update the classifications of allergic disorders for the ICD-11 revision. These efforts have resulted in the construction of the new 'Allergic and hypersensitivity conditions' section under the 'Disorders of the Immune system' chapter.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the capacity of the new ICD-11 revision to capture anaphylaxis deaths.

METHODS

We re-estimated the anaphylaxis deaths that occurred in Brazil during the period 2008 to 2010, utilizing this new framework and the database of the Brazilian mortality information system that had initially been extracted in May 2011. However, in 2016, a manual review of each of the 3638 records was performed.

RESULTS

We identified 639 anaphylaxis deaths, of which 95% were classified as 'definitive anaphylaxis deaths'. In contrast to the 2012 published data, we found a higher number of cases; moreover, all 606 definitive anaphylaxis deaths would be considered as underlying causes of death utilizing the ICD-11 revision.

CONCLUSION

This study is the first example of how the new 'Allergic and hypersensitivity conditions' section of the forthcoming ICD-11 can improve the quality of official vital statistics data and the visibility of an important public health concern. This research will facilitate comprehensive, comparable population-based epidemiologic data collection on anaphylaxis.

Usage of allergy codes in primary care electronic health records: a national evaluation in Scotland

BACKGROUND

The UK's NHS intends to move from the current Read code system to the international, detailed Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine Clinical Terms (SNOMED-CT) to facilitate more clinically appropriate coding of conditions and associated risk factors and outcomes. Given concerns about coding behaviour of general practitioners, we sought to study the current coding patterns in allergies and identify lessons for the future migration to SNOMED-CT.

METHODS

Data from 2 014 551 primary care consultations in over 100 000 patients with one or more of 11 potentially allergic diseases (anaphylaxis, angioedema, asthma, conjunctivitis, drug allergies, eczema, food allergy, rhinitis, urticaria, venom allergy and other probable allergic disorders) from the Scottish Primary Care Clinical Informatics Unit Research (PCCIU-R) database were descriptively analysed and visualized to understand Read code usage patterns.

RESULTS

We identified 352 Read codes for these allergic diseases, but only 36 codes (10%) were used in 95% of consultations; 73 codes (21%) were never used. Half of all usage was for Quality and Outcomes Framework codes for asthma. Despite 149 detailed codes (42%) being available for allergic triggers, these were infrequently used.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis of Read codes use suggests that introduction of the more detailed SNOMED-CT, in isolation, will not improve the quality of allergy coding in Scottish primary care. The introduction of SNOMED-CT should be accompanied by initiatives aimed at improving coding quality, such as the definition of terms/codes, the availability of terminology browsers, a recommended list of codes and mechanisms to incentivize detailed coding of the condition and the underlying allergic trigger.

Determinants of Treatment Abandonment in Childhood Cancer: Results from a Global Survey

BACKGROUND

Understanding and addressing treatment abandonment (TxA) is crucial for bridging the pediatric cancer survival gap between high-income (HIC) and low-and middle-income countries (LMC). In childhood cancer, TxA is defined as failure to start or complete curative cancer therapy and known to be a complex phenomenon. With rising interest on causes and consequences of TxA in LMC, this study aimed to establish the lay-of-the-land regarding determinants of TxA globally, perform and promote comparative research, and raise awareness on this subject.

METHODS

Physicians (medical oncologists, surgeons, and radiation therapists), nurses, social workers, and psychologists involved in care of children with cancer were approached through an online survey February-May 2012. Queries addressed social, economic, and treatment-related determinants of TxA. Free-text comments were collected. Descriptive and qualitative analyses were performed. Appraisal of overall frequency, burden, and predictors of TxA has been reported separately.

RESULTS

581 responses from 101 countries were obtained (contact rate = 26%, cooperation rate = 70%). Most respondents were physicians (86%), practicing pediatric hematology/oncology (86%) for >10 years (54%). Providers from LMC considered social/economic factors (families' low socioeconomic status, low education, and long travel time), as most influential in increasing risk of TxA. Treatment-related considerations such as preference for complementary and alternative medicine and concerns about treatment adverse effects and toxicity, were perceived to play an important role in both LMC and HIC. Perceived prognosis seemed to mediate the role of other determinants such as diagnosis and treatment phase on TxA risk. For example, high-risk of TxA was most frequently reported when prognosis clearly worsened (i.e. lack of response to therapy, relapse), or conversely when the patient appeared improved (i.e. induction completed, mass removed), as well as before aggressive/mutilating surgery. Provider responses allowed development of an expanded conceptual model of determinants of TxA; one which illustrates established and emerging individual, family, center, and context specific factors to be considered in order to tackle this problem. Emerging factors included vulnerability, family dynamics, perceptions, center capacity, public awareness, and governmental healthcare financing, among others.

CONCLUSION

TxA is a complex and multifactorial phenomenon. With increased recognition of the role of TxA on global pediatric cancer outcomes, factors beyond social/economic status and beliefs have emerged. Our results provide insights regarding the role of established determinants of TxA in different geographical and economic contexts, allow probing of key determinants by deliberating their mechanisms, and allow building an expanded conceptual model of established and emerging determinants TxA.

The safety of influenza vaccines in children: An Institute for Vaccine Safety white paper

Most influenza vaccines are generally safe, but influenza vaccines can cause rare serious adverse events. Some adverse events, such as fever and febrile seizures, are more common in children than adults. There can be differences in the safety of vaccines in different populations due to underlying differences in genetic predisposition to the adverse event. Live attenuated vaccines have not been studied adequately in children under 2 years of age to determine the risks of adverse events; more studies are needed to address this and several other priority safety issues with all influenza vaccines in children. All vaccines intended for use in children require safety testing in the target age group, especially in young children. Safety of one influenza vaccine in children should not be extrapolated to assumed safety of all influenza vaccines in children. The low rates of adverse events from influenza vaccines should not be a deterrent to the use of influenza vaccines because of the overwhelming evidence of the burden of disease due to influenza in children.

Dissemination of definitions and concepts of allergic and hypersensitivity conditions

BACKGROUND

Allergy and hypersensitivity can affect people of any age and manifest with problems in a range of organ systems. Moreover, they can have a significant impact on the quality of life of patients and their families. Although once rare, there is presently an epidemic of allergic disorders with associated considerable societal consequences. Our understanding of the pathophysiology of these disorders has changed substantially over the last 20 years. In the light of these developments, the Joint Allergy Academies have made concerted efforts to ensure that these are reflected in the current definitions and concepts used in clinical allergy and to ensure these are reflected in the forthcoming International Classification of Diseases-11 (ICD-11).

OBJECTIVE

In this review, we seek to provide an update on the current definitions and concepts in relation to allergic disorders.

RESULTS

Once the new section has been built in the ICD-11 to address allergic and hypersensitivity conditions, we have been moving actions to try to support awareness by disseminating updated concepts in the field. Aligned with the ICD and the WAO philosophy of being global, this document presents fundamental and broad allergy concepts to strengthen the understanding by different health professionals worldwide, besides to support the formation of in training students.

CONCLUSION

This current review intends to be accepted and used universally by all health professionals involved in diseases' classification and coding and, therefore, contribute to improve care and outcomes in this increasing sub-section of the world's population.

Supporting the validation of the new allergic and hypersensitivity conditions section of the World Health Organization International Classification of Diseases-11

Background

The new International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-11 "Allergic and hypersensitivity conditions" section has been constructed as a result of a detailed and careful action plan based on scientific evidences for the necessity of changes and collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO) ICD-11 revision governance. All the efforts are being acknowledged by the Joint Allergy Academies.

Objective

Considering the new classification model addressed to the allergic and hypersensitivity conditions and following the ICD WHO agenda, we believe it is the appropriate time to start supporting the validation process in collaboration with the WHO ICD governance.

Methods

We conducted a mapping of ICD-10 allergic and hypersensitivity conditions in the ICD-11 beta phase structure and categorized the conditions as fitting by "precoordination," "postcoordination," "indexed to the ICD-11 Foundation," "no code fit properly" or "no correspondence" in the ICD-11.

Results

From overall 125 ICD-10 entities spread in 6 chapters, 57.6% were able to be precoordinated, 4% postcoordinated, 12% indexed to the Foundation, 9.6% had no code fitting properly and 18.6% had no correspondence in the ICD-11 framework.

Conclusion

We have been able to demonstrate that 83.2% of the ICD-10 allergic and hypersensitivity conditions could be captured by the current ICD-11 beta draft framework. We strongly believe that our findings constitute a key step forward for a softer transition of the ICD-10 allergic and hypersensitivity conditions to the ICD-11, supporting the WHO in this process as well as strengthening the visibility of the Allergy specialty and ensuring quality management of allergic patients.

Nutritional disorders in the proposed 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases: feedback from a survey of stakeholders

Objective

To receive stakeholders’ feedback on the new structure of the Nutritional Disorders section of the International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11).

Design

A twenty-five-item survey questionnaire on the ICD-11 Nutritional Disorders section was developed and sent out via email. The international online survey investigated participants’ current use of the ICD and their opinion of the new structure being proposed for ICD-11. The LimeSurvey^® software was used to conduct the survey. Summary statistical analyses were performed using the survey tool.

Setting

Worldwide.

Subjects

Individuals subscribed to the mailing list of the WHO Department of Nutrition for Health and Development.

Results

Seventy-two participants currently using the ICD, mainly nutritionists, public health professionals and medical doctors, completed the questionnaire (response rate 16 %). Most participants (n 69) reported the proposed new structure will be a useful improvement over ICD-10 and 78 % (n 56) considered that all nutritional disorders encountered in their work were represented. Overall, participants expressed satisfaction with the comprehensiveness, clarity and life cycle approach. Areas identified for improvement before ICD-11 is finalized included adding some missing disorders, more clarity on the transition to new terminology, links to other classifications and actions to address the disorders.

Conclusions

The Nutritional Disorders section being proposed for ICD-11 offers significant improvements compared with ICD-10. The new taxonomy and inclusion of currently missing entities is expected to enhance the classification and health-care professionals’ accurate coding of the full range of nutritional disorders throughout the life cycle.

Optimization and simplification of the Allergic and Hypersensitivity conditions classification for the ICD-11

BACKGROUND

Since 2013, an international collaboration of Allergy Academies, including first the World Allergy Organization (WAO), the American Academy of Allergy Asthma and Immunology (AAAAI), and the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), and then the American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (ACAAI), the Latin American Society of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (SLAAI), and the Asia Pacific Association of Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology (APAAACI), has spent tremendous efforts to have a better and updated classification of allergic and hypersensitivity conditions in the forthcoming International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-11 version by providing evidences and promoting actions for the need for changes. The latest action was the implementation of a classification proposal of hypersensitivity/allergic diseases built by crowdsourcing the Allergy Academy leaderships.

METHODS

Following bilateral discussions with the representatives of the ICD-11 revision, a face-to-face meeting was held at the United Nations Office in Geneva and a simplification process of the hypersensitivity/allergic disorders classification was carried out to better fit the ICD structure.

RESULTS

We are here presenting the end result of what we consider to be a model of good collaboration between the World Health Organization and a specialty.

CONCLUSION

We strongly believe that the outcomes of all past and future actions will impact positively the recognition of the allergy specialty as well as the quality improvement of healthcare system for allergic and hypersensitivity conditions worldwide.

New Allergic and Hypersensitivity Conditions Section in the International Classification of Diseases-11

Allergy and hypersensitivity, originally perceived as rare and secondary disorders, are one of the fastest growing conditions worldwide, but not adequately tracked in international information systems, such as the International Classification of Diseases (ICD). Having allergic and hypersensitivity conditions classification able to capture conditions in health international information systems in a realistic manner is crucial to the identification of potential problems, and in a wider system, can identify contextually specific service deficiencies and provide the impetus for changes. Since 2013, an international collaboration of Allergy Academies has spent tremendous efforts to have a better and updated classification of allergies in the forthcoming International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-11 version, by providing scientific and technical evidences for the need for changes. The following bilateral discussions with the representatives of the ICD-11 revision, a simplification process was carried out. The new parented "Allergic and hypersensitivity conditions" section has been built under the "Disorders of the Immune System" chapter through the international collaboration of Allergy Academies and upon ICD WHO representatives support. The classification of allergic and hypersensitivity conditions has been updated through the ICD-11 revision and will allow the aggregation of reliable data to perform positive quality-improvements in health care systems worldwide.

Revisiting Desensitization and Allergen Immunotherapy Concepts for the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-11

Allergy and hypersensitivity intervention management procedures, such as desensitization and/or tolerance induction and immunotherapy, have not been pondered up to now in the content of International Classification of Diseases (ICD) context because the focus has been on prioritizing the condition implementations. Tremendous efforts have been devoted to implementing allergic and hypersensitivity conditions in the forthcoming ICD-11. However, we consider that it is crucial now to have nomenclature and classification universally accepted for these procedures to be able to provide scientifically consistent proposals into the new ICD-11 platform for the best practice parameters of our specialty. With the aim of promoting a harmonized comprehension and aligning it with the ICD-11 revision, we have reviewed the definitions and concepts currently used for desensitization and/or tolerance induction and immunotherapy. We strongly believe that this review is a key instrument to support the allergy specialty identity into the ICD-11 framework and serves as a platform to perform positive quality improvement in clinical practice.

Making allergic and hypersensitivity conditions visible in the International Classification of Diseases-11

Understanding that the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-11 revision would be an opportunity to standardize the code definitions for all allergic and hypersensitivity conditions, an international collaboration of Allergy Academies, including first the World Allergy Organization, the American Academy of Allergy Asthma and Immunology and the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, has been coordinating tremendous efforts since 2013 to provide a better classification of these disorders in the new ICD-11. During this process, a strategic action plan has been constructed to keep bilateral dialog with representatives of the ICD revision by providing them scientific and technical evidences for the need of changes in the ICD framework. As a major achievement of this process, was the construction of the "allergic and hypersensitivity conditions" parented subchapter guided by the World Health Organization ICD representatives and further supported by three more regional allergy societies: the Latin American Society of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology, the American College of Allergy Asthma and Immunology, and the Asia Pacific Association of Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology. Believing that the outcomes of all past and future actions will impact positively to the Allergy specialty, we expect for the full approval by the United Nations in 2017.