Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Sublingual immunotherapy tablets (SLIT-T) are an effective treatment for allergic rhinitis (AR), but some patients experience local allergic reactions (LAR) in the first few weeks of treatment that can lead to treatment discontinuation. Although oral antihistamines are recommended for the treatment and pretreatment of LAR associated with SLIT-T, there are no clinical trial data to support this recommendation. Rupatadine is an H1 antihistamine that also inhibits platelet activating factor activity. The objective of this case series is to describe real-world clinical situations in which rupatadine was used to treat or mitigate SLIT-T–related LAR. Case presentations Five cases are presented by the managing allergist and off-label use of rupatadine is their expert opinion only. Patients in all 5 cases were treated with a SLIT-T (e.g. ragweed, tree, grass, or house dust mites) for the management of allergic rhinitis and experienced bothersome LAR with the first SLIT-T administration. In 3 cases, rupatadine 10 mg was administered for the immediate treatment of LAR (either in-office with the first SLIT-T dose or for subsequent LAR experienced at home) and the symptoms resolved. In 3 cases, pretreatment with other second-generation H1 antihistamines was unable to prevent LAR and the patients discontinued the SLIT-T. In these 3 cases, switching to pretreatment with rupatadine allowed the patients to restart and tolerate SLIT-T treatment with minimal or no LAR. In these patients with an established history of LAR, proactive pretreatment with rupatadine in subsequent seasons or with initiation of a different SLIT-T mitigated the previously experienced LARs. Conclusions In the cases presented, treatment with rupatadine resolved LAR associated with SLIT-T treatment and rupatadine pretreatment appeared to mitigate subsequent LAR. Rupatadine may be an option to treat or improve the tolerability of the SLIT-T, potentially improving early treatment persistence.

Local allergic rhinitis, defined as a localized allergic response of the nasal mucosa in the absence of systemic atopy, poses a considerable clinical issue due to its prevalence. The gold standard in local allergic rhinitis diagnostics is primarily the patient's history taking and nasal allergen provocation testing or, alternatively, the basophil activation test, described as \"an allergic reaction in a test tube\".

The current state of knowledge is that allergic rhinitis can occur in two forms. One is allergic rhinitis as a manifestation of a systemic allergy with systemic atopy and positive results of skin prick tests or sIgE tests. The other is local allergic rhinitis (LAR) as a local allergic reaction affecting only the nasal mucosa without systemic atopy. To attempt to assess the usefulness of the nasal allergen provocation test for the purposes of differential diagnosis and the qualification of LAR patients for therapy. The subjects in the study were a group of 6 adults diagnosed with LAR on the basis of their medical history and the results of nasal allergen provocation tests, with the allergens being house dust mites ( The methods adopted in the study were a point-based rating scale as a measure of nasal/extranasal complaints and active anterior rhinomanometry. Significant differences ( < 0.05) were observed, using the subjective rating scale, in relation to registered nasal and extranasal complaints in the early phase of the allergic reaction. Similarly, the rhinomanometry method revealed significant differences in nasal resistance values before and after the administration of an allergen. The nasal allergen provocation test is the only testing tool that objectively measures the degree of the patient's allergic reactions and is useful in qualifying LAR patients for further therapy.

Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) in patients with no systemic markers of atopy is a very interesting phenomenon due to the lack of any definitive explanation for the mechanism of this IgE-dependent reaction. Some of the recent attempts to explain this phenomenon consider LAR to be closely associated with an allergic reaction, some suggest that this phenomenon is a spontaneous process in the nasal mucosa. Future attempts to elucidate the complexity of inflammatory reactions will undoubtedly establish a clear differential diagnostics algorithm for rhinitis.

Background: Although allergic reactions to amide local anesthetics (LA) are rare, it is important for medical professionals to be aware of their potential occurrence. Despite the fact that articaine is one of the most commonly used LA in dentistry, a survey of documented cases of allergies to articaine is absent from the literature. The objective of this review was to ascertain how often true allergies to articaine, verified by standard allergological procedures, have been reported over the last 25 years. Methods: A comprehensive review of the literature from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2024 was conducted using the PubMed-MEDLINE database. The search was limited to articles investigating suspected allergy to articaine. The search strategy encompassed indexing terms, keywords, and free-text words, complemented by an extensive manual search. The final determination was based on the application of skin and/or challenge tests as the gold standard for identifying articaine as the causative agent. Results: During the investigation period, 10 case reports and six case series, encompassing 29 patients with a confirmed true allergy to articaine, were identified. The age of the patients ranged from 8 to 65 years, with a median age of 34 years. Of these patients, 20 were diagnosed with an immediate type I allergy, while 5 patients exhibited a delayed type IV allergy. In four cases the specific type of allergy was not mentioned. In the majority of cases an intradermal test (IDT) was employed to ascertain the specific type of allergy. Cross-reactivity with other amide LA was reported in three cases. Conclusions: True allergies to articaine are exceedingly rare. Investigation strategies should include a combination of a thorough clinical history and a standardized allergological procedure entailing skin tests and challenge. Only a comprehensive approach ensures the accurate identification of affected patients and facilitates the selection of a tolerated LA.

In a prospective clinical study to better understand how biological markers can improve diagnosis of and prognosis for asthmatic and atopic conditions, we contacted over 3500 eligible patients and observed noticeable differences in the range of their likelihood to enroll based on gender (3.8–13.4%), race and ethnicity (4.8–29.8%), and distance to study site (1.1–29.2%). Both the eligible patients and enrolled participants exhibited a more diverse racial and ethnic composition compared to local population demographics. Based on the eligible patients that the study team contacted (“eligible patients”, n = 3648) and those who agreed to enroll (“enrolled participants”, n = 454), we analyzed the gender, age, race and ethnicity composition of the groups, together with their proximity to the study site. Living close to the study site was the largest contributor to a patient's decision to enroll for both adults (odds ratio OR: 2.26, 95% confidence interval CI: 1.64–3.15, p < 0.001) and children (OR: 2.59, 95% CI: 1.67–4.41, p < 0.001). We also observed that patients from White and non-Hispanic racial and ethnic background were more likely to participate in the study among both pediatric (OR: 1.51, CI: 0.92–2.62, p = 0.122) and adult patients (OR: 1.81, CI: 1.18–2.89, p = 0.009). Eligible patients of female gender were also more likely to enroll in both adult (OR: 1.53, CI: 1.16–2.05, p = 0.003) and pediatric groups (OR: 2.14, CI: 1.42–3.22, p < 0.001). Overall, the pediatric patients (18 years old or younger) were much less willing to participate in the clinical biomarker study. Nonetheless, as they age, the enrollment likelihood increased accordingly (5 years OR: 1.71, CI, 1.32–2.21, p < 0.001). The eligible patient population of the study reflected the evolving demographics and different disease prevalence for asthma and other allergic diseases in adult and pediatric groups. These factors in turn influenced the composition of the enrolled participants.

Local anesthetics (LA) are commonly used in procedures and in topical agents for pain management. With the increasing use of LA drugs, the management of LA reactions is more frequently encountered in the office and in operating rooms. True allergic reactions involving IgE-mediated reactions and anaphylaxis are rare; they have only been identified in case reports and account for less than 1% of adverse LA reactions. Most reactions are non-allergic or are a result of hypersensitivity to other culprits such as preservatives, excipients, or other exposures. LA reactions that are misclassified as true allergies can lead to unnecessary avoidance of LA drugs or delays in surgical procedures that require their use. A detailed history of prior LA reactions is the first and most crucial step for understanding the nature of the reaction. Reactions that are suspicious for an immediate hypersensitivity reaction can be evaluated with skin prick and intradermal testing with subsequent graded challenge. Reactions that are suspicious for a delayed hypersensitivity reaction can be evaluated with patch testing.

Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is a specific phenotype of allergic rhinitis. One characteristic feature of LAR is a medical history indicative of an allergic disease, negative skin-prick test results, undetectable levels of specific IgE, and a positive allergen-specific nasal provocation test. This paper presents a case of a patient with LAR and underlying house dust mite allergy, who was ultimately diagnosed >10 years after the onset of his first symptoms. Currently, there are only pharmacological treatments available for LAR. However, some studies show encouraging results with the use of allergen-specific immunotherapy in LAR, which offer hope for a future use of this causative treatment in LAR patients. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2020;33(2):241-6.

Implementing management practices for the control of invasive species can be a complex task with multiple dimensions, where the identification of stakeholders and drivers of those practices is of paramount importance. The invasive hornet Vespa velutina has spread across Europe and Asia from its native range in SE Asia in recent years. A common control method is the removal and destruction of its nests on citizens’ request to call centers. In this paper we have explored the knowledge and main factors that influence the perceptions of the citizens on the species in an invaded municipality in NW Spain, as well as the management practices of the municipal emergency unit responsible for nest removal activities. Our analysis brings out multiple drivers of management practices that derive both from the citizens’ and practitioners’ knowledge, and highlights several points of conflict between both stakeholder groups connected to (1) the degree of service provided to the local population, (2) the risk of allergic reactions as a motive to urge removals, or (3) the quality of information provided by mass media. Our results support the crucial importance of environmental education programs that seek to increase the knowledge of the general public about the threats of invasive species. Such programs might be incorporated to implement and optimize management plans of V. velutina by enhancing communication between experts and local population.

We assessed the safety of allergoid adjuvanted by monophosphoryl lipid A (uSCIT-MPL-4) in a real-life setting. Patients treated with uSCIT-MPL-4 were followed-up for 1 year. Systemic reactions (SRs) were registered and the association with potential risk factors was evaluated. 2929 patients were included. Grade 0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 SR reactions were observed respectively in 3.3, 1.5, 0.31, 0.07 and 0.07% of patients. A significant association was detected between Grade ≥1 SRs and: female gender, number of administrations, previous local reactions. uSCIT-MPL-4 is safe. Local reactions should be accurately assessed as they may represent a risk factor for Grade ≥1 SRs, together with gender and number of doses/year.