Medicina

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a clinical syndrome defined by typical sinonasal symptoms persisting for at least 12weeks. CRS is divided into two distinct phenotypes, CRS with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and without (CRSsNP). The aim of the review is to provide an update on the current knowledge in CRS endotypes. The prevailing hypothesis regarding the pathogenesis of CRS suggests that dysfunctional interactions between the host and environmental stressors at the mucosal surface drive the diverse inflammatory mechanisms. Genetic and epigenetic variations in the mucosal immune system are believed to play a significant role in the pathomechanisms of CRS. Various environmental agents (such as microbes and irritants) have been implicated in CRS. In a healthy state, the sinonasal mucosa acts as a barrier, modulating environmental stimulation and mounting appropriate immune responses against pathogens with minimal tissue damage. Different endotypes may exist based on the specific mechanistic pathways driving the chronic tissue inflammation of CRS. There is a need to understand endotypes in order to better predict, diagnose, and treat CRS. This literature review provides an update on the role of the endotypes in CRS and the limitations of endotyping CRS in clinical practice. Understanding of the pathogenesis and optimal management of CRS has progressed significantly in the last decades; however, there still are several unmet needs in endotype research.

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-basedretrospective 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.