Nasal provocation test is useful for discriminating allergic, nonallergic, and local allergic rhinitis

Current Management of Allergic Rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is the most common allergic disease worldwide and one of the most common chronic diseases in general. Allergic rhinitis is caused by inhalant allergens from outdoor and indoor environments with varying significance of different allergens in global regions. We provide options for the current management for AR including pharmacological treatments and nonpharmacological options and allergen immunotherapy (AIT). A literature review has been conducted in Medline, Pubmed, as well as the national and international study (ClinicalTrials.gov) and guideline registers and the Cochrane Library. Human studies published on the topic in the period up to and including November 2023 were taken into account. Allergen avoidance measures, pharmacotherapy, and AIT are the cornerstones of AR treatment. Nonpharmacological measures and behavioral recommendations should be adequately added. Tools of precision medicine are already playing a significant role and will be part of the diagnostic and therapeutic standard in the future. Patients benefit most in a network of different pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatment measures including AIT. Application of precision medicine tools for diagnosis and treatment will improve standards of care.

Clinical characteristics of local allergic rhinitis sensitized to house dust mites in Asia

PURPOSE

Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is characterized by a localized nasal allergic response without evidence of systemic atopy. LAR is an underdiagnosed entity and is a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge for clinicians. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and clinical characteristics of patients with LAR to house dust mites (LAR-HDM) in Korea.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart review of 336 adult patients with rhinitis symptoms who visited the Rhinologic Clinic at Korea University Guro Hospital from October 2019 to April 2021. Using results of the skin prick test, serologic test, and nasal provocation test, patients were classified as allergic rhinitis (AR) to HDM (AR-HDM), AR to other allergens, non-allergic rhinitis (NAR), or LAR-HDM. We excluded patients with AR to other allergens and compared the clinical characteristics of the remaining three groups. Patient demographic data were reviewed, and patients' nasal symptoms, olfactory function, serum total IgE, and severity of accompanying rhinosinusitis were evaluated.

RESULTS

In total, 336 patients were examined. AR-HDM was diagnosed in 138 (41.1%) patients, AR to other allergens in 36 (10.7%) patients, NAR in 21 (42.0%) patients, and LAR-HDM in 21 (6.3%) patients. The mean age of patients with LAR-HDM was significantly higher than that of patients with AR-HDM. There were no significant differences in sex, smoking history, asthma, and family history of allergic diseases between the groups. Compared to NAR patients, there were significantly more patients with LAR-HDM who had persistent nasal symptoms. The frequency of nasal itching and sneezing was significantly higher in the LAR-HDM group than in the NAR group. The olfactory function score in the LAR-HDM group was significantly worse than that in the AR-HDM group, and the Lund-Mackay score was significantly higher in the LAR-HDM group than in the other groups.

CONCLUSION

Clinical history and nasal symptoms are very similar in LAR-HDM and AR-HDM. Clinicians should take more care to differentiate them. LAR-HDM should also be considered in patients with persistent and severe nasal symptoms without systemic atopy.

Factors predicting the outcome of allergen-specific nasal provocation test in children with grass pollen allergic rhinitis

Background

Nasal provocation testing (NPT) is a reference methodology to identify the culprit allergen in patients with allergic rhinitis. Selecting the right allergen for NPT is particularly difficult in poly-sensitized patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). Predictors of NPT outcomes may facilitate the proper use of this test or even substitute it.

Objective

To identify predictors of grass pollen NPT outcome from an array of clinical data, e-diary outcomes, and allergy test results in poly-sensitized pediatric patients with SAR.

Methods

Poly-sensitized, SAR patients with grass pollen allergy, participating in the @IT.2020 pilot project in Rome and Pordenone (Italy), participated in a baseline (T0) visit with questionnaires, skin prick testing (SPT), and blood sampling to measure total (ImmunoCAP, TFS, Sweden) and specific IgE antibodies to grass pollen extracts and their major allergenic molecules (ESEP, Euroimmun Labordiagnostika, Germany). During the pollen season, patients filled the AllergyMonitor® e-diary app measuring their symptoms, medication intake, and allergy-related well-being via the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). After the pollen season (T1), patients answered clinical questionnaires and underwent a nasal provocation test (NPT) with grass pollen extract.

Results

We recruited 72 patients (age 14.3 ± 2.8 years, 46 males) sensitized to grass and/or other pollens, including olive (63; 87.5%) and pellitory (49; 68.1%). Patients positive to grass pollen NPT (61; 84.7%), compared to the negative ones, had worse VAS values in the e-diary, larger SPT wheal reactions, and higher IgE levels, as well as specific activity to timothy and Bermuda grass extracts, rPhl p 5 and nCyn d 1. A positive NPT to grass pollen was predicted by an index combining the specific activity of IgE towards Phl p 5 and Cyn d 1 (AUC: 0.82; p < 0.01; best cut-off ≥7.25%, sensitivity 70.5%, specificity: 90.9%). VAS results also predicted NPT positivity, although with less precision (AUC: 0.77, p < 0.01; best cut-off ≥7, sensitivity: 60.7%, specificity: 81.8%).

Conclusions

An index combining the specific activity of IgE to rPhl p 5 and nCyn d 1 predicted with moderate sensitivity and high specificity the outcome of a grass pollen NPT in complex, poly-sensitized pediatric patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Further studies are needed to improve the index sensitivity and to assess its usefulness for NPT allergen selection or as an alternative to this demanding test procedure.

Challenges in Local Allergic Rhinitis Diagnosis, Management, and Research: Current Concepts and Future Perspectives

Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is diagnosed based on the presence of clinical symptoms such as rhinorrhea, sneezing, and nasal itching using negative skin prick testing and serum IgE assessment. Several novel studies have shown that it is possible to use the assessment of nasal sIgE (specific immunoglobulin E) secretion as an additional diagnostic criterion for local allergic rhinitis. Additionally, allergen immunotherapy is a promising-albeit still not fully assessed and evaluated-future method of managing patients with LAR. In this review, the historical background, epidemiology, and main pathophysiological mechanisms of LAR shall be presented. Additionally, we address the current state of knowledge based on selected articles regarding the assessment of the local mucosal IgE presence in response to exposure to such allergens as mites, pollen, molds, and others. The impact of LAR on quality of life as well as the possible options of management (including allergen immunotherapy (AIT), which showed promising results) will then be presented.

Nasal eosinophilia as a preliminary discriminative biomarker of non-allergic rhinitis in every day clinical pediatric practice

BACKGROUND

Non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) in children, named local allergic rhinitis (LAR) and non-allergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome (NARES), are recently termed entities in childhood characterized by symptoms suggestive of allergic rhinitis in the absence of systemic atopy. Nasal eosinophils (nEo) are the principal cells involved in the allergy inflammation and nasal allergen provocation test is the gold standard method for the diagnosis, albeit with several limitations. The aim of this study was to validate the presence of nEo in combination with the therapeutic response to nasal steroids, as a preliminary discriminator of NAR in real life data.

METHODS

In a prospective cohort study, 128 children (63.3% male, aged 72 ± 42 m) with history of NAR were enrolled and followed up for 52 ± 32 m. Nasal cytology was performed and nasal steroids trial was recommended initially in all and repeatedly in relapsing cases. Response to therapy was clinically evaluated using 10-VAS.

RESULTS

Significant nEo was found in 59.3% of the cases and was related to reported dyspnea episodes. 23.4% had no response to therapy, whereas 51.5% were constantly good responders. Response to therapy was related to nEo and a cutoff point of 20% was defined as the most reliable biological marker with 94% sensitivity and 77% specificity.

CONCLUSIONS

In children with symptoms of NAR, the presence of nEo > 20% constantly responding to nasal steroid therapy, is a clear indicator of atopy. In an everyday clinical setting, it emerged as an easy, preliminary, cell biomarker suggestive of further investigation such as NAPT, to discriminate LAR from NARES.

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.

The Importance of Nasal Provocation Testing in the Diagnosis of Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus-Induced Allergic Rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Allergen identification is the first step for allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) of allergic rhinitis (AR). Currently, the diagnosis of AR is based mainly on the positive results of the skin prick test (SPT) and/or serum specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) measurement. However, the results of these two tests may not always directly correlate with AR.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the importance of nasal provocation testing (NPT) in the diagnosis of Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (Der p)-induced AR.

METHODS

Rhinitis patients willing to undergo AIT (n = 171) were enrolled. The correlations of Der p SPT, sIgE, NPT, and clinical symptom severity were assessed.

RESULTS

NPT-positive responses were more common in patients with higher SPT and sIgE levels. The optimal cut-off value for a NPT-positive response for SPT was 5.5 mm and for sIgE was 2.77 kUA/L, based on the respective receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. The area under the curve (AUC) of the ROCs was 0.814 (SPT only) and 0.794 (sIgE only) and increased to 0.828 with the combination of SPT and sIgE. The Der p-NPT concentration was inversely correlated with SPT and sIgE levels (r = -0.477, P < .001, and r = -0.461, P < .001, respectively), but none was correlated with the total nasal symptom score.

CONCLUSION

For patients who are willing to receive Der p AIT, NPT is a useful and safe test to confirm diagnosis prior to treatment initiation, especially in patients with lower levels of Der p SPT (< 5.5 mm) or sIgE (< 2.77 kUA/L).

Appropriate Antigen Concentrations and Timing of a Nasal Provocation Test

PURPOSE

We aimed to determine appropriate antigen concentrations and the right time to evaluate intranasal changes when performing a nasal provocation test (NPT). Also, we sought to analyze the diagnostic usefulness of individual nasal symptom and peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We divided 46 patients into allergic rhinitis (AR) group (n=19) and a non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) group (n=27). We performed intranasal challenge with 100 AU/mL of Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (DP) and measured changes in nasal symptoms [scored using the visual analogue scale (VAS)] and PNIF%. If the patient showed significant changes, VAS and PNIF were assessed again after another 15 minutes. In patients without significant changes, we administered 1000 AU/mL and measured changes in nasal symptoms and PNIF% after 15 and 30 minutes.

RESULTS

Fifteen minutes after the 100 AU/mL challenge, the AR group showed more significant VAS changes in all nasal symptoms, total nasal symptom score (TNSS), and PNIF% change than the NAR group. Among the AR group, patients who did not respond to 100 AU/mL exhibited less significant differences relative to the NAR group, even after 1000 AU/mL challenge. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis for VAS changes 15 minutes after 100 AU/mL challenge revealed that all nasal symptoms had area under the curve (AUC) values of ≥0.84 (p<0.001). TNSS change had an AUC value of 0.929 (p<0.001), while PNIF% change had an AUC value of 0.834.

CONCLUSION

We could determine the optimal concentration (100 AU/mL), timing (15 minutes after challenge), and parameters (changes in TNSS and PNIF%) when performing NPT.

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.

Systematic evaluation of allergic phenotypes of rhinitis in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Three allergic phenotypes of rhinitis have been described in adults: allergic rhinitis (AR), local allergic rhinitis (LAR), and dual allergic rhinitis (DAR, coexistence of AR and LAR). Nevertheless, most centers follow a diagnostic approach only based on skin prick test and serum allergen-specific IgE (collectively called atopy tests, AT). This approach prevents the recognition of LAR and DAR, the diagnosis of which requires a nasal allergen challenge (NAC). Here, we investigate the existence of LAR and DAR phenotypes in children and adolescents, and the misdiagnosis rate associated with a work-up exclusively based on AT.

METHODS

Clinical data were obtained during physician-conducted interviews, and AT and NAC were systematically performed in 5- to 18-year-old patients with chronic rhinitis. The misdiagnosis rate was defined as the proportion of cases where AT and NAC results were discordant.

RESULTS

A total of 173 patients (mean age 15.1 years, 39.9% male) completed the study. AR (positive AT and NAC), LAR (negative AT and positive NAC), DAR (positive AT and NAC for some allergens and negative AT and positive NAC for other allergens), and non-allergic rhinitis (negative NAC) were diagnosed in 45.7%, 24.9%, 11.6%, and 17.9% of individuals, respectively. The clinical profile was comparable among allergic phenotypes, but allergic patients had a significantly earlier rhinitis onset, higher conjunctivitis prevalence, and more severe disease than NAR individuals. A diagnostic work-up exclusively based on AT misclassified 37.6% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

LAR and DAR represent relevant differential diagnosis in pediatric rhinitis. NAC increases the diagnostic accuracy of clinical algorithms for rhinitis in children and adolescents.

Local Respiratory Allergy: From Rhinitis Phenotype to Disease Spectrum

Local respiratory allergy (LRA) is defined by the negativity of atopy tests, a clinical history suggestive of airway allergy and a positive response to the nasal and/or bronchial allergen challenge. The clinical spectrum of LRA is comprised of three conditions: local allergic rhinitis (LAR) and local allergic asthma in non-atopic patients, and dual allergic rhinitis (coexistence of allergic rhinitis and LAR) in atopic individuals. LRA is an independent disease phenotype not progressing to atopy over time, but naturally evolving to the clinical worsening and the onset of comorbidities. Published data suggests that LRA is mediated through the mucosal synthesis of allergen-specific (s)IgE, which binds to FcϵRI on resident mast cells, and in >50% of cases traffics to the blood stream to sensitize circulating basophils. To date, 4 clinical trials have demonstrated the capacity of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) to decrease nasal, conjunctival and bronchial symptoms, to improve quality of life, to increase the threshold dose of allergen eliciting respiratory symptoms, and to induce serum sIgG₄ in LRA individuals. Collectively, these data indicate that local allergy is a relevant disease mechanisms in both atopic and non-atopic patients with airway diseases.

Nasal specific IgE to Der p is not an acceptable screening test to predict the outcome of the nasal challenge test in patients with non-allergic rhinitis

Objectives

Nasal specific IgE (NsIgE) is the most common marker to identify type-2 inflammation in local allergic rhinitis (LAR). However, the comparison of NsIgE in different types of rhinitis, its frequency in tropical countries, and its diagnostic performance for predicting the outcome of a nasal challenge test (NCT) has had limited study. The main objective of this study was to explore the diagnostic performance of NsIgE to Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (Der p) among different types of rhinitis and control subjects in a tropical population.

Methods

We evaluated the frequency of NsIgE, systemic atopy (serum sIgE and Skin Prick Test), and nasal eosinophils, and we performed nasal challenge tests (NCTs) with Der p in 3 groups of patients; rhinitis without atopy (RWoA) (n = 25), rhinitis with atopy (RWA) (n = 25), and control subjects (n = 18).

Results

NsIgE had a low sensitivity and specificity to predict a positive NCT in the RWoA group: 48% had NsIgE, but only 28% had a positive NCT. Among the RWA group 84% had NsIgE and 80% had a positive NCT; the association of NsIgE and positive NCT was high (>80%). In the control group 27.8% had NsIgE, but none had a positive NCT.

Conclusions

NsIgE performs poorly in predicting NCT results in patients with non-allergic rhinitis. More methodical investigations are needed in this complex area of rhinitis. In patients with allergic rhinitis, NsIgE was useful in predicting a positive nasal challenge, but not superior to the systemic atopic test.

Korean Modification of Nasal Provocation Test with House Dust Mites Antigen following EAACI Guidelines

Objectives

We evaluated the usefulness of the standardized nasal provocation test (NPT) protocol recently published by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) and compared the utility of several parameters for diagnosing allergic rhinitis (AR) caused by house dust mites (HDM). Subjective parameters were nasal and ocular symptoms measured using a visual analog scale (VAS), and objective parameters were peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF), minimal cross-sectional area (MCA), and total nasal volume (TNV).

Methods

Before and after spraying Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (DP) allergen (1,000 AU/mL, 100 μL) into both nostrils of 13 patients with AR (AR group) and 22 patients with non-AR (NAR group), we used VAS scores to measure nasal symptoms (nasal obstruction, rhinorrhea, sneezing, and itching) and ocular symptoms and assessed PNIF, MCA, and TNV.

Results

The AR group had significantly worse symptoms than the NAR group 15 minutes after DP challenge (P<0.001). After 30 minutes, nasal obstruction and rhinorrhea remained worse in the AR group (P<0.001); a similar but less marked difference was seen for sneezing (P=0.012) and itching (P=0.039). Ocular symptoms, PNIF, MCA, and TNV differed between groups after both 15 and 30 minutes (P<0.05). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was higher for nasal obstruction (0.977), rhinorrhea (0.906), and TNV (0.979) than for sneezing (0.755), itching (0.673), and MCA (0.836).

Conclusion

NPT performed according to the EAACI guidelines could help diagnose AR caused by HDM. TNV and VAS changes in nasal obstruction and rhinorrhea had higher diagnostic accuracy than other parameters.

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.

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.

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.

Recent developments and highlights in rhinitis and allergen immunotherapy

This review paper aims to provide an overview of recent developments in the field of allergic and non-allergic rhinitis, as well as allergen immunotherapy. Recent advances in phenotyping and endotyping various forms of rhinitis have brought us one step closer towards tailoring treatment more appropriately for a given patient. Updates on local allergic rhinitis are also covered. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is an area of significant interest, with multiple original papers and recent position papers and guidelines published. Evidence related to the application of AIT in seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis (AR), local allergic rhinitis and novel and expanded applications is discussed in the publication.

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.

Responsiveness of Nasal Provocation Testing-But Not Skin Test and Specific Immunoglobulin E Blood Level-Correlates With Severity of Allergic Rhinitis in Dermatophagoides Species-Sensitized Patients

Background The results of skin and blood allergen testing are not consistently relevant to clinical manifestations in allergic patients. Objective The aim of the study was to investigate the relationship between severity of allergic rhinitis and different allergen diagnostic tests in Dermatophagoides species-sensitized patients. Methods Study subjects included 65 rhinitis patients-50 with Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (DP) sensitization (DP+) and 15 without DP sensitization (DP-), and 15 DP+ and 37 DP- healthy controls (HCs) confirmed by allergen skin prick (SPT) and blood specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) tests. The Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) was tested. All subjects underwent DP nasal provocation test (DP-NPT). Visual analogue scoring (VAS) of nasal symptoms and nasal airway resistance (NAR) were measured before and after NPT. Correlations between the 3 allergen tests and score of RQLQ were performed. Results All rhinitis subjects had significantly higher VAS and NAR after DP-NPT than HCs ( P < .01). All DP+ rhinitis, 40% of DP- rhinitis subjects, 13.3% of DP+ HCs and 0% of DP- HCs had positive DP-NPT. Dose of positive DP-NPT positively correlated with SPT diameter and sIgE level in all tested subjects ( P < .001). Score of RQLQ positively correlated with dose of DP-NPT ( P < .001), but not with SPT diameter and sIgE level in rhinitis patients. Conclusion Although DP nasal provocation, skin prick wheal size and blood sIgE level correlate with each other, only nasal provocation testing is associated with severity of nasal symptoms. It is suggested that NPT should be performed to verify a clinically relevant allergy.

Optimizing Protein Harvest From Nasal Brushings for Determining Local Allergy Responses

Background Rhinitis is a highly prevalent yet often misdiagnosed condition. Patients who have local allergic rhinitis are regularly mislabeled as having a nonallergic etiology. Thus, a highly accurate, reproducible, and noninvasive assessment, which can be performed quickly and with minimal discomfort to the patient, is required. Objective The aim of this research was to identify the efficiency of various nasal brushes as tools for harvest and collection of epithelial proteins and its suitability for identification of rhinitis. Methods Nasal epithelial mucosa samples were taken from patients undergoing turbinate surgery using a cytology brush, a dental brush, and a nasal curette in random order. After washing in phosphate-buffered saline, the suspended cells were sonicated. Total protein content was assessed for all samples by bicinchoninic acid assay measured using a Nanodrop machine. Identification of nasal-specific immunoglobulin E (spIgE) was then assessed using immunoassay and compared to the patient's allergic status from epicutaneous and serum testing. The lower threshold limit for the spIgE in nasal brushings was determined using the results of serum spIgE tests as the reference. The diagnostic accuracy of this new established cutoff value was determined. Results The cytology brush was found to be the optimal tool for maximal nasal mucosa protein collection followed by dental brush and nasal curette (0.75 ± 0.45 mg/mL vs 0.43 ± 0.24 mg/mL vs 0.071 ± 0.55 mg/mL, respectively; P < .01). The optimal cutoff value of nasal spIgE from the cytology nasal brushings was 0.14 kUA/L to predict allergic status from serum testing. This gave a sensitivity of 75%, specificity of 86%, positive predictive value of 74%, likelihood ration positive of 5.40, and diagnostic odds ratio of 18.62. Conclusion The cytology brush is the optimal tool for protein collection. This is an easy and direct method to sample the nasal mucosa for assessment of nasal allergy or future biomarkers.

Correlation of Nasal Eosinophilia and Response after Nasal Provocation Test in Patients with Nonallergic Rhinitis

Objectives

We aimed to evaluate the relationship between nasal eosinophilia and nasal hyperresponsiveness to allergen extract.

Study Design

Retrospective chart review.

Setting

Academic tertiary rhinologic practice.

Subjects and Methods

We performed allergy tests (skin prick test and multiple allergosorbent test) and nasal cytology for 194 patients with rhinitis symptoms (76 males and 118 females; age, 11-69 years). According to the results, they were classified into 4 groups: group A (allergic rhinitis with eosinophilia, n = 26), group B (allergic rhinitis without eosinophilia, n = 77), group C (nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome, n = 20), and group D (nonallergic rhinitis without eosinophilia, n = 71). We performed a nasal provocation test (NPT) using house dust mite extract and assessed the changes in symptoms and the decrease in acoustic parameters (total nasal volume and minimal cross-sectional area [MCA]).

Results

Patients in group C were more likely to have severe rhinorrhea and sneezing than those in group D ( P < .001). After NPT, group C had greater aggravation of nasal obstruction than group D ( P < .001). Group C also showed markedly greater MCA changes as compared with group D 15 minutes after the antigen challenge ( P = .002). There was significant correlation between the number of eosinophils and an increase in nasal obstruction ( r = 0.319, P = .0009), rhinorrhea ( r = 0.302, P = .0017), sneezing ( r = 0.219, P = .0241), change in the total nasal volume 15 minutes after NPT ( r = 0.287, P = .0028), and change in the MCA 15 minutes ( r = 0.322, P = .0008) and 30 minutes ( r = 0.250, P = .0098) after NPT.

Conclusion

In patients with NAR, nasal eosinophilia is associated with provocative response after NPT. Further research should be performed to elucidate the mechanisms that underlie this phenomenon.

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.

Prevalence and Clinical Characteristics of Local Allergic Rhinitis to House Dust Mites

Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is a localized nasal allergic response in the absence of systemic atopy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence and clinical characteristics of LAR in Korean rhinitis patients compared to allergic rhinitis (AR) and non-allergic rhinitis (NAR). A total of 304 rhinitis patients were enrolled from November 2014 to March 2016. A skin prick test, serum total and specific immunoglobulin E, and a nasal provocation test (NPT) with house dust mite (HDM) were performed on all patients. Subjects also documented changes in rhinitis symptoms before and after NPT. Seventy-four patients with nasal hyper-reactivity and 80 patients with subclinical allergy were excluded. AR was diagnosed in 69 (46.0%) patients, NAR in 75 (50.0%) patients, and LAR to HDM in 6 (4.0%) patients. The average medication score and disease duration of each group were 14.5 points and 77.6 months in AR, 12.1 point and 51.1 months in NAR, and 17.7 point and 106.0 months in LAR, respectively. There were no significant differences in the baseline nasal symptom score of the three groups. However, after NPT with HDM, the score of rhinitis, itching, and obstructive were 4.83±1.47 vs. 1.95±2.53, 3.00±2.10 vs. 1.45±2.06, and 5.50±1.38 vs. 2.57±2.84 in LAR and NAR, respectively (p<0.05). LAR patients had longer duration of disease and tended to be older and have higher medication score than other rhinitis patients.

Positive allergen reaction in allergic and nonallergic rhinitis: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of allergic rhinitis (AR) is based on cutaneous and serological assessment to determine immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated disease. However, discrepancies between these tests and nasal provocation exist. Patients diagnosed as non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) but with positive nasal allergen provocation test (NAPT) may represent a local allergic condition or entopy, still suitable to allergy interventions. The objective of this study was to determine the frequency of nasal reactivity toward allergens among AR and NAR patients, and to describe the diagnostic characteristics of NAPT methodologies.

METHODS

EMBASE (1947-) and Medline (1946-) were searched until December 8, 2015. A search strategy was used to identify studies on AR or NAR patients subjected to diagnostic local nasal provocation. All studies providing original NAPT data among the AR or NAR population were included. Meta-analysis of proportion data was presented as a weighted probability % (95% confidence interval [CI]).

RESULTS

The search yielded 4504 studies and 46 were included. The probability of nasal allergen reactivity for the AR population was 86.3% (95% CI, 84.4 to 88.1) and in NAR was 24.7% (95% CI, 22.3 to 27.2). Reactivity was high with pollen for both AR 97.1% (95% CI, 94.2 to 99.2) and NAR 47.5% (95% CI, 34.8 to 60.4), and lowest with dust for both AR 79.1% (95% CI, 76.4 to 81.6) and NAR 12.2% (95% CI, 9.9 to 14.7). NAPT yielded high positivity when defined by subjective end-points: AR 91.0% (95% CI, 86.6 to 94.8) and NAR 30.2% (95% CI, 22.9 to 37.9); and lower with objective end-points: AR 80.8% (95% CI, 76.8 to 84.5) and NAR 14.1% (95% CI, 11.2 to 17.2).

CONCLUSION

Local allergen reactivity is demonstrated in 26.5% of patients previously considered non-allergic. Similarly, AR, when defined by skin-prick test (SPT) or serum specific IgE (sIgE), may lead to 13.7% of patients with inaccurate allergen sensitization or non-allergic etiologies.

Local allergic rhinitis in children: Novel diagnostic features and potential biomarkers

BACKGROUND

Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is a phenotype of rhinitis that has been poorly studied in children. It is characterized by the same symptoms of allergic rhinitis but with the absence of markers of systemic atopy.

OBJECTIVE

To identify children affected by LAR and to analyze the pathogenesis of this disease. We chose to focus our attention on interleukin (IL) and thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP).

METHODS

We enrolled 20 children affected by nonallergic rhinitis (negative skin-prick test results and serum specific immunoglobulin E [sIgE] values). Each patient underwent a nasal allergen provocation test (NAPT) with dust mite and grass pollen. Before and after NAPT, nasal lavage was performed to detect sIgE, IL-5, and TSLP; anterior active rhinomanometry was used to evaluate changes in nasal obstruction.

RESULTS

Two patients were positive to a nonspecific NAPT and, thus, were excluded from the study. Of the remaining 18 children, 12 (66.7%) had positive results to at least one NAPT. Among these 12 patients, nasal sIgE levels for Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, Dermatophagoides farinae, and Lolium perenne increased significantly after NAPT (D. pteronyssinus, p < 0.005; D. farinae, p < 0.05; L. perenne, p < 0.05). Nasal IL-5 levels showed a significant increase after NAPT (p ≤ 0.006), and this increase was significantly higher in children who had positive NAPT results than in those patients with negative NAPT results (p ≤ 0.03). Among the 12 children who had a positive NAPT result, nasal TSLP was detected in 4 patients (33.3%) and its levels showed a relevant increase after NAPT, even though the difference did not reach statistical significance (p ≤ 0.061).

CONCLUSION

Observed results raise the importance of better refining the diagnostic protocol for LAR in children. Nasal TSLP and IL-5 levels offer new insights concerning localized allergic inflammation, although the role of nasal sIgE has still to be clarified.

Local allergic rhinitis to pollens is underdiagnosed in young patients

BACKGROUND

Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) has been observed in patients without atopy. However, LAR is still underdiagnosed in patients with perennial or seasonal nasal symptoms.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of LAR in young patients with a previous diagnosis of nonallergic rhinitis or suspicion of allergy.

METHODS

A total of 121 patients, ages 12-18 years old, with confirmed nonallergic rhinitis and typical seasonal nasal symptoms were examined. Skin-prick tests; serum and nasal specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) measurements; and nasal provocation tests by using grass (Phleum partense), Artemisia, and birch pollens were performed. A control group of age-matched patients with a diagnosis of seasonal allergic rhinitis underwent the same procedures as the test group.

RESULTS

LAR to grass pollen (P. partense), Artemisia, and birch was confirmed in 17 (16.6%), 6 (5.9%), and 9 (8.9%) of patients, respectively. Polyvalent allergy was established in 21 subjects (20.8%): grass and Artemisia, 11 patients (10.9%); and grass and birch, 10 patients (9.9%). The remaining 48 patients (47.5%) were diagnosed with nonallergic rhinitis. The results of the nasal provocation tests and the concentrations of nasal IgE were similar among the analyzed groups. Furthermore, the concentration of nasal IgE increased faster in patients with LAR than in patients with allergic rhinitis; however, this difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

LAR is a serious problem in young patients; however, its significance is still unappreciated.

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.

Specific Nasal Provocation Test with Dermatophagoides Pteronyssinus, Monitored by Acoustic Rhinometry, in Children with Rhinitis

Background

Currently, the diagnosis of allergic rhinitis (AR) is arrived at predominantly by a clinical history and by systemic sensitization tests, but specific nasal provocation tests (NPT) may establish a better direct correlation between etiologic surveyed allergens and nasal symptoms.

Objectives

To standardize the specific NPT with one of the most important house-dust mites, Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, monitored by acoustic rhinometry, in children and adolescents, and propose a simplified specific NPT to improve its clinical applicability as a diagnostic tool.

Methods

Sixteen controls (group 1) and 17 patients with an AR diagnosis sensitized to D. pteronyssinus (group 2) underwent a specific NPT with D. pteronyssinus. The acoustic rhinometry was performed after instillation of 0.15 mL of increasing concentrations of D. pteronyssinus (5000 BU/mL). The test was finalized after (1) instillation of the final concentration of D. pteronyssinus, or (2) after a 20% or more reduction in the volume of the first 5 cm of the nasal cavity (V5), or (3) a score of >3 in the symptoms questionnaire (a score from 0 to 7). A simplified specific NPT with two concentrations was proposed and implemented in a group of 10 patients with AR (group 3).

Results

At the end of the specific NPT, the median (range) variation in V5 was -5.7% (-9 to 4%) in the control group and -22.8% (-24 to -20%) in group 2. None of the patients in the control group and 88% of group 2 (15/17) showed positive specific NPT results. The simplified specific NPT triggered a positive response in 80% of patients in group 3, with median (range) V5 variation of -30.4% (-36 to -20%).

Conclusion

This protocol has been proven safe and useful to differentiate between children and adolescents with AR and controls. Concentrations of 1:1000 and 1:100 D. pteronyssinus were the best for use in simplified specific NPT, which made it simpler and faster, and expanded its clinical applicability.

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.

Usefulness of Allerkin House Dust Mite Extract for Nasal Provocation Testing

Objectives

We evaluated the clinical usefulness of Allerkin (Lofarma) for nasal provocation testing (NPT) in patients with rhinitis symptoms, by examining changes in nasal symptoms and acoustic parameters after exposure to house dust mite (HDM) extract.

Methods

Twenty patients (16 males and 4 females, mean age: 29.6±14.6 years) were enrolled. We performed skin prick test (SPT) before and 15 and 30 minutes after intranasal challenge with Allerkin HDM extract, and we evaluated symptom changes (nasal obstruction, rhinorrhea, sneezing, and itching) using a visual analogue scale. We also evaluated changes in acoustic parameters such as total nasal volume (TNV) and minimal cross-sectional area (MCA) before and after challenge.

Results

Group A (the nonallergic group, n=8) showed negative results for all tested aeroallergens in SPT and nonprovocative results (<25% decrease of TNV and MCA from the baseline value) in NPT. Group B (the allergic group, n=7) exhibited strongly positive results (wheal size larger than that of histamine) for HDM allergens on SPT. Group C (the local allergic group, n=5) showed negative results on SPT, but a provocative response on NPT (>29% decrease in TNV/MCA from the baseline value). Patients in group C showed significant aggravation of nasal obstruction compared to those in group A (P<0.05). Thirty minutes after HDM challenge, patients in groups B and C showed significantly greater decreases in MCA compared to those in group A (P<0.01).

Conclusion

Allerkin HDM extract can be a useful provocative agent in NPT for diagnosing allergic rhinitis and local allergic rhinitis.

Specificity and sensitivity assessment of selected nasal provocation testing techniques

Introduction

Nasal provocation testing involves an allergen-specific local reaction of the nasal mucosa to the administered allergen.

Aim

To determine the most objective nasal occlusion assessment technique that could be used in nasal provocation testing.

Material and methods

A total of 60 subjects, including 30 patients diagnosed with allergy to common environmental allergens and 30 healthy subjects were enrolled into the study. The method used in the study was a nasal provocation test with an allergen, with a standard dose of a control solution and an allergen (5,000 SBU/ml) administered using a calibrated atomizer into both nostrils at room temperature. Early-phase nasal mucosa response in the early phase of the allergic reaction was assessed via acoustic rhinometry, optical rhinometry, nitric oxide in nasal air, and tryptase levels in the nasal lavage fluid.

Results

In estimating the homogeneity of the average values, the Levene’s test was used and receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted for all the methods used for assessing the nasal provocation test with an allergen. Statistically significant results were defined for p < 0.05. Of all the objective assessment techniques, the most sensitive and characteristic ones were the optical rhinometry techniques (specificity = 1, sensitivity = 1, AUC = 1, PPV = 1, NPV = 1).

Conclusions

The techniques used showed significant differences between the group of patients with allergic rhinitis and the control group. Of all the objective assessment techniques, those most sensitive and characteristic were the optical rhinometry.

Detection of Allergen Specific Antibodies From Nasal Secretion of Allergic Rhinitis Patients

Purpose

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a common and increasing disease in which Dermatophagoides (D.) farinae is one of the most common causative allergens. The aims of this study were to confirm the presence of locally produced antibodies to D. farinae in nasal secretions between nasal provocation test (NPT)-positive and -negative groups of AR patients, to evaluate their relationships with the levels of inflammatory mediators, and to determine adaptive and innate immune responses in nasal mucosa.

Methods

Sixty AR patients sensitive to house dust mites confirmed by skin prick test or serum specific IgE to D. farinae underwent NPT for D. farinae. Nasal packs were placed in both nasal cavities of the patients for 5 minutes to obtain nasal secretions after NPT. The levels of total IgE, specific IgE to D. farinae, eosinophil cationic protein (ECP), and tryptase in nasal secretions were detected by using ImmunoCAP. The levels of specific IgE, IgA, and secretory IgA antibodies to D. farinae in nasal secretions were measured by using ELISA. The levels of IL-8, VEGF, IL-25, and IL-33 were also measured by using ELISA.

Results

High levels of total IgE, specific IgE, specific IgA, and secretory IgA to D. farinae, as well as inflammatory mediators, such as ECP, IL-8, VEGF and tryptase, were detected in nasal secretions, although the differences were not statistically significant between the NPT-positive and NPT-negative groups. Levels of all immunoglobulins measured in this study significantly correlated with ECP, IL-8, and VEGF (P<0.05), but not with tryptase (P>0.05). IL-33 and IL-25 were also detected, and IL-25 level significantly correlated with IL-8 (r=0.625, P<0.001).

Conclusions

These findings confirmed the presence of locally produced specific antibodies, including D. farinae-specific IgE and IgA, in nasal secretions collected from D. farinae-sensitive AR patients in both the NPT-positive and NPT-negative groups, and close correlations were noted between antibodies and nasal inflammatory mediators, including such as ECP, IL-8 and VEGF, indicating that locally produced antibodies may be involved in the nasal inflammation of AR.

Identification and Prevalence of Allergic, Nonallergic, and Local Allergic Rhinitis Patients in Western Area, Saudi Arabia

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the diagnostic yield of skin prick test (SPT) and serum total immunoglobulin E (IgE) antibodies level in patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) and the role of nasal provocation test (NPT) for the determination of local allergic rhinitis (LAR) in patients with nonallergic rhinitis (NAR).

METHODOLOGY

This multi-center study included 1230 patients with clinical manifestations for ≥2 years. Patients were classified according to the Allergic Rhinitis and Its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) and scored according to the quantitative Score for Allergic Rhinitis (SFAR). The SPT and total IgE antibody levels were done for all patients. Patients gave negative SPT underwent NPT, and its result was interpreted using Lebel Symptom Score Scale.

RESULTS

The SPT was positive in 77.8% of patients, mostly for grass pollen and dust mites. All patients were sensitive to multiple allergens. Median serum IgE antibody level for total study population was 162 IU/ml. Forty-two patients (3.4%) with negative SPT showed a weak response to NPT, while 231 patients (18.7%) with negative SPT had a high response to NPT and were considered to have LAR.

CONCLUSION

The SPT could discriminate between AR and NAR patients. The NPT could identify LAR in 84.6% of patients with rhinitis among those considered as NAR.

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.