David M. Lang

Allergy diagnostic testing: an updated practice parameter.

I. Leonard Bernstein, MD; James T. Li, MD, PhD; David I. Bernstein, MD; Robert Hamilton, PhD, DABMLI; Sheldon L. Spector, MD; Ricardo Tan, MD; Scott Sicherer, MD; David B. K. Golden, MD; David A. Khan, MD; Richard A. Nicklas, MD; Jay M. Portnoy, MD; Joann Blessing-Moore, MD; Linda Cox, MD; David M. Lang, MD; John Oppenheimer, MD; Christopher C. Randolph, MD; Diane E. Schuller, MD; Stephen A. Tilles, MD; Dana V. Wallace, MD; Estelle Levetin, PhD; and Richard Weber, MD

Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in clinical practice guidelines

The GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach provides guidance to grading the quality of underlying evidence and the strength of recommendations in health care. The GRADE system’s conceptual underpinnings allow for a detailed stepwise process that defines what role the quality of the available evidence plays in the development of health care recommendations. The merit of GRADE is not that it eliminates judgments or disagreements about evidence and recommendations, but rather that it makes them transparent. This first article in a three‐part series describes the GRADE framework in relation to grading the quality of evidence about interventions based on examples from the field of allergy and asthma. In the GRADE system, the quality of evidence reflects the extent to which a guideline panel’s confidence in an estimate of the effect is adequate to support a particular recommendation. The system classifies quality of evidence as high, moderate, low, or very low according to factors that include the study methodology, consistency and precision of the results, and directness of the evidence.

Patterns of Asthma Mortality in Philadelphia from 1969 to 1991

BACKGROUND The rate of mortality from asthma has increased substantially in the United States since 1978. We analyzed the patterns of the rates of death from asthma in Philadelphia between 1969 and 1991. METHODS The rates of death from asthma were analyzed and compared with trends in the concentrations of major air pollutants: ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter (particles < 10 microns in diameter), and sulfur dioxide. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to study the rates of death from asthma from 1985 to 1991 and their association with race, poverty, sex, and other factors. RESULTS The rate of death from asthma decreased from 1.68 per 100,000 people in 1969 to 0.68 per 100,000 in 1977, but then increased to 0.92 per 100,000 in 1978 and 2.41 per 100,000 in 1991. Between 1965 and 1990, the concentrations of major air pollutants declined substantially. From 1985 to 1991, 258 people were identified for whom asthma was the primary cause of death. According to multivariate analysis, the rates of death from asthma from 1985 to 1991 were significantly higher in census tracts with higher percentages of blacks (P = 0.032), Hispanics (P = 0.013), female residents (P < 0.001), and people with incomes in the poverty range (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS The rates of death from asthma have increased in Philadelphia, whereas concentrations of major air pollutants have declined. The rates are highest in census tracts with the highest percentages of poor people and minority residents, particularly blacks. Public health efforts should target urban areas where the risk of death from asthma is highest.

International Consensus on drug allergy

When drug reactions resembling allergy occur, they are called drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) before showing the evidence of either drug‐specific antibodies or T cells. DHRs may be allergic or nonallergic in nature, with drug allergies being immunologically mediated DHRs. These reactions are typically unpredictable. They can be life‐threatening, may require or prolong hospitalization, and may necessitate changes in subsequent therapy. Both underdiagnosis (due to under‐reporting) and overdiagnosis (due to an overuse of the term ‘allergy’) are common. A definitive diagnosis of such reactions is required in order to institute adequate treatment options and proper preventive measures. Misclassification based solely on the DHR history without further testing may affect treatment options, result in adverse consequences, and lead to the use of more‐expensive or less‐effective drugs, in contrast to patients who had undergone a complete drug allergy workup. Several guidelines and/or consensus documents on general or specific drug class‐induced DHRs are available to support the medical decision process. The use of standardized systematic approaches for the diagnosis and management of DHRs carries the potential to improve outcomes and should thus be disseminated and implemented. Consequently, the International Collaboration in Asthma, Allergy and Immunology (iCAALL), formed by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (AAAAI), the American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (ACAAI), and the World Allergy Organization (WAO), has decided to issue an International CONsensus (ICON) on drug allergy. The purpose of this document is to highlight the key messages that are common to many of the existing guidelines, while critically reviewing and commenting on any differences and deficiencies of evidence, thus providing a comprehensive reference document for the diagnosis and management of DHRs.

Food allergy: a practice parameter

TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Preface S1 II. Glossary S2 III. Executive Summary S3 IV. Summary Statements S6 V. Classification of Major Food Allergens and Clinical Implications S11 VI. Mucosal Immune Responses Induced by Foods S12 VII. The Clinical Spectrum of Food Allergy S15 VIII. Algorithm and Annotations S18 IX. Prevalence and Epidemiology S21 X. Natural History of Food Allergy S22 XI. Risk Factors and Prevention of Food Allergy S23 XII. Cross-reactivity of Food Allergens S24 XIII. Adverse Reactions to Food Additives S30 XIV. Genetically Modified Foods S32 XV. Diagnosis of Food Allergy S33 XVI. Food-Dependent Exercise-Induced Anaphylaxis S39 XVII. Differential Diagnosis of Adverse Reactions to Foods S40 XVIII. General Management of Food Allergy S44 XIX. Management in Special Settings and Circumstances S45 XX. Future Directions S47 XXI. Appendix: Suggested Oral Challenge Methods S48 XXII. Acknowledgments S49 XXIII. References S50

Pathogenesis, prevalence, diagnosis, and management of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction: a practice parameter

Chief Editors: John M. Weiler, MD, MBA, President, CompleWare Corporation, Professor Emeritus, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa; Sandra D. Anderson, PhD, DSc, Clinical Professor, Sydney Medical School, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Department of Respiratory and Sleep Medicine, Camperdown NSW 2050, Australia; Christopher Randolph, MD, Clinical Professor of Pediatrics, Yale Affiliated Programs, Waterbury Hospital, Center for Allergy, Asthma and Immunology, Waterbury, Connecticut

Increased Risk for Anaphylactoid Reaction from Contrast Media in Patients on β-Adrenergic Blockers or with Asthma

OBJECTIVE To determine whether greater risk for anaphylactoid reaction from intravenous urographic contrast media exists in patients receiving beta-adrenergic blockers or in asthmatic patients. DESIGN Case-control study. SETTING Tertiary care, referral-based medical center. PATIENTS Of 28,978 intravenous urographic contrast media procedures done from July 1987 to June 1988, 49 patients experienced moderate to severe anaphylactoid reaction. Medical records from these 49 reactors were compared with those from a control group matched for gender, age, and date and type of contrast study who received intravenous urographic contrast media without adverse reaction. MAIN RESULTS Patients exposed to beta-adrenergic blockers or with asthma comprised 39% (19 of 49) of reactors, compared to 16% (13 of 83) of matched controls (odds ratio, 3.43; 95% CI, 1.45 to 8.15; P = 0.005). Exposure to beta-blockers was 27% among reactors and 12% in matched controls (odds ratio, 2.67; CI, 1.01 to 7.05; P = 0.036). Asthma was found in 12% of reactors and 4% of controls; after correction for beta-blocker use, asthma was also associated with increased risk for anaphylactoid reaction (odds ratio, 4.54; CI, 1.03 to 20.05; P = 0.046). Compared with nonasthmatic patients not taking beta-blockers, asthmatic patients were at greater risk for anaphylactoid reaction with bronchospasm (P = 0.02). Five of 13 reactors receiving beta-blockers became hypotensive, and three needed hospitalization. Compared with nonasthmatic patients not taking beta-blockers, patients exposed to beta-blocking drugs were almost nine times (odds ratio, 8.7; CI, 0.81 to 93.5; P = 0.075) more likely to be hospitalized after an anaphylactoid reaction. CONCLUSION Increased risk for moderate to severe anaphylactoid reaction from intravenous urographic contrast media exists in patients receiving beta-adrenergic blockers or with asthma. These patients are appropriate target populations for efforts to reduce risk before intravenous urographic contrast media are administered.

Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in clinical practice guidelines: part 2 of 3. The GRADE approach to grading quality of evidence about diagnostic tests and strategies

The GRADE approach to grading the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations provides a comprehensive and transparent approach for developing clinical recommendations about using diagnostic tests or diagnostic strategies. Although grading the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations about using tests shares the logic of grading recommendations for treatment, it presents unique challenges. Guideline panels and clinicians should be alert to these special challenges when using the evidence about the accuracy of tests as the basis for clinical decisions. In the GRADE system, valid diagnostic accuracy studies can provide high quality evidence of test accuracy. However, such studies often provide only low quality evidence for the development of recommendations about diagnostic testing, as test accuracy is a surrogate for patient‐important outcomes at best. Inferring from data on accuracy that using a test improves outcomes that are important to patients requires availability of an effective treatment, improved patients’ wellbeing through prognostic information, or – by excluding an ominous diagnosis – reduction of anxiety and the opportunity for earlier search for an alternative diagnosis for which beneficial treatment can be available. Assessing the directness of evidence supporting the use of a diagnostic test requires judgments about the relationship between test results and patient‐important consequences. Well‐designed and conducted studies of allergy tests in parallel with efforts to evaluate allergy treatments critically will encourage improved guideline development for allergic diseases.

Anaphylaxis--a practice parameter update 2015.

Phillip Lieberman, MD; Richard A. Nicklas, MD; Christopher Randolph, MD; John Oppenheimer, MD; David Bernstein, MD; Jonathan Bernstein, MD; Anne Ellis, MD; David B.K. Golden, MD; Paul Greenberger, MD; Steven Kemp, MD; David Khan, MD; Dennis Ledford, MD; Jay Lieberman, MD; Dean Metcalfe, MD; Anna Nowak-Wegrzyn, MD; Scott Sicherer, MD; Dana Wallace, MD; Joann Blessing-Moore, MD; David Lang, MD; Jay M. Portnoy, MD; Diane Schuller, MD; Sheldon Spector, MD; and Stephen A. Tilles, MD Chief Editors: Phillip Lieberman, MD; Richard A. Nicklas, MD; John Oppenheimer, MD; Christopher Randolph, MD Members of the Joint Task Force: David Bernstein, MD; Joann Blessing-Moore, MD; David Khan, MD; David Lang, MD; Richard Nicklas, MD; John Oppenheimer, MD; Jay M. Portnoy, MD; Christopher Randolph, MD; Diane Schuller, MD; Sheldon Spector, MD; Stephen A. Tilles, MD; Dana Wallace, MD Practice ParameterWorkgroup: David Bernstein, MD; Jonathan Bernstein, MD; Anne Ellis, MD; David B.K. Golden, MD; David Khan, MD; Dennis Ledford, MD; Jay Lieberman, MD; Dean Metcalfe, MD; Dana Wallace, MD

Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in clinical practice guidelines Part 3 of 3. The GRADE approach to developing recommendations

To cite this article: Brożek JL, Akl EA, Compalati E, Kreis J, Terracciano L, Fiocchi A, Ueffing E, Andrews J, Alonso‐Coello P, Meerpohl JJ, Lang DM, Jaeschke R, Williams JW Jr, Phillips B, Lethaby A, Bossuyt P, Glasziou P, Helfand M, Watine J, Afilalo M, Welch V, Montedori A, Abraha I, Horvath AR, Bousquet J, Guyatt GH, Schünemann HJ, for the GRADE Working Group. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in clinical practice guidelines. Part 3 of 3. The GRADE approach to developing recommendations. Allergy 2011; 66: 588–595.