EAACI position paper on the clinical use of the bronchial allergen challenge: Unmet needs and research priorities

Allergic asthma (AA) is a common asthma phenotype, and its diagnosis requires both the demonstration of IgE-sensitization to aeroallergens and the causative role of this sensitization as a major driver of asthma symptoms. Therefore, a bronchial allergen challenge (BAC) would be occasionally required to identify AA patients among atopic asthmatics. Nevertheless, BAC is usually considered a research tool only, with existing protocols being tailored to mild asthmatics and research needs (eg long washout period for inhaled corticosteroids). Consequently, existing BAC protocols are not designed to be performed in moderate-to-severe asthmatics or in clinical practice. The correct diagnosis of AA might help select patients for immunomodulatory therapies. Allergen sublingual immunotherapy is now registered and recommended for controlled or partially controlled patients with house dust mite-driven AA and with FEV1 ≥ 70%. Allergen avoidance is costly and difficult to implement for the management of AA, so the proper selection of patients is also beneficial. In this position paper, the EAACI Task Force proposes a methodology for clinical BAC that would need to be validated in future studies. The clinical implementation of BAC could ultimately translate into a better phenotyping of asthmatics in real life, and into a more accurate selection of patients for long-term and costly management pathways.

COVID-19 pandemic and allergen immunotherapy-an EAACI survey

BACKGROUND

As in many fields of medical care, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) resulted in an increased uncertainty regarding the safety of allergen immunotherapy (AIT). Therefore, the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) aimed to analyze the situation in different countries and to systematically collect all information available regarding tolerability and possible amendments in daily practice of sublingual AIT (SLIT), subcutaneous AIT (SCIT) for inhalant allergies and venom AIT.

METHODS

Under the framework of the EAACI, a panel of experts in the field of AIT coordinated by the Immunotherapy Interest Group set-up a web-based retrospective survey (SurveyMonkey^® ) including 27 standardized questions on practical and safety aspects on AIT in worldwide clinical routine.

RESULTS

417 respondents providing AIT to their patients in daily routine answered the survey. For patients (without any current symptoms to suspect COVID-19), 60% of the respondents informed of not having initiated SCIT (40% venom AIT, 35% SLIT) whereas for the maintenance phase of AIT, SCIT was performed by 75% of the respondents (74% venom AIT, 89% SLIT). No tolerability concern arises from this preliminary analysis. 16 physicians reported having performed AIT despite (early) symptoms of COVID-19 and/or a positive test result for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).

CONCLUSIONS

This first international retrospective survey in atopic diseases investigated practical aspects and tolerability of AIT during the COVID-19 pandemic and gave no concerns regarding reduced tolerability under real-life circumstances. However, the data indicate an undertreatment of AIT, which may be temporary, but could have a long-lasting negative impact on the clinical care of allergic patients.

COVID-19 pandemic: Practical considerations on the organization of an allergy clinic-An EAACI/ARIA Position Paper

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has evolved into a pandemic infectious disease transmitted by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Allergists and other healthcare providers (HCPs) in the field of allergies and associated airway diseases are on the front line, taking care of patients potentially infected with SARS-CoV-2. Hence, strategies and practices to minimize risks of infection for both HCPs and treated patients have to be developed and followed by allergy clinics.

METHOD

The scientific information on COVID-19 was analysed by a literature search in MEDLINE, PubMed, the National and International Guidelines from the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the Cochrane Library, and the internet.

RESULTS

Based on the diagnostic and treatment standards developed by EAACI, on international information regarding COVID-19, on guidelines of the World Health Organization (WHO) and other international organizations, and on previous experience, a panel of experts including clinicians, psychologists, IT experts, and basic scientists along with EAACI and the "Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA)" initiative have developed recommendations for the optimal management of allergy clinics during the current COVID-19 pandemic. These recommendations are grouped into nine sections on different relevant aspects for the care of patients with allergies.

CONCLUSIONS

This international Position Paper provides recommendations on operational plans and procedures to maintain high standards in the daily clinical care of allergic patients while ensuring the necessary safety measures in the current COVID-19 pandemic.

Gender and occupational allergy: Report from the task force of the EAACI Environmental and Occupational Allergy Interest Group

Women's work has traditionally been considered less hazardous to health in comparison with men's work. The increased women's participation in the workforce has led to an increased attention to women's working conditions. Women and men are unequally represented in individual professions or sectors (horizontal segregation), with women also under-represented in leadership positions (vertical segregation). The selection of specific occupations can result in differences between types and levels of occupational exposures among women and men and can affect prevalence of occupational allergy. Gender distribution of work-related asthma appears to vary across countries without clear global difference. Occupational rhinitis tends to be higher in women, although is not clear if this is related to a sex/gender effect or to differences in work exposure. Women are more likely to have occupational contact dermatitis, mainly due to wet work. No clear effects of gender on rates of hypersensitivity pneumonitis have been shown. Besides variation in exposures, physical and physiological characteristics, different behaviours and health consciousness have an impact on the occupational health hazards of women and men. Occupational allergy health promotion strategies need to consider approaches for women and men adjusted by gender, and legislative actions similarly could be implemented in a more gender-sensitive way.

Food processing and occupational respiratory allergy- An EAACI position paper

Occupational exposure to foods is responsible for up to 25% of cases of occupational asthma and rhinitis. Animal and vegetable high-molecular-weight proteins present in aerosolized foods during food processing, additives, preservatives, antioxidants, and food contaminants are the main inhalant allergen sources. Most agents typically cause IgE-mediated allergic reactions, causing a distinct form of food allergy (Class 3 food allergy). The allergenicity of a food protein, allergen exposure levels, and atopy are important risk factors. Diagnosis relies on a thorough medical and occupational history, functional assessment, assessment of sensitization, including component-resolved diagnostics where appropriate, and in selected cases specific inhalation tests. Exposure assessment, including allergen determination, is a cornerstone for establishing preventive measures. Management includes allergen exposure avoidance or reduction (second best option), pharmacological treatment, assessment of impairment, and worker's compensation. Further studies are needed to identify and characterize major food allergens and define occupational exposure limits, evaluate the relative contribution of respiratory versus cutaneous sensitization to food antigens, evaluate the role of raw versus cooked food in influencing risk, and define the absolute or relative contraindication of patients with ingestion-related food allergy, pollinosis, or oral allergy syndrome continuing to work with exposure to aerosolized food allergens.