Publication:
International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis

Issued Date

2018-02-01

Resource Type

Article

ISSN

20426984
20426976

DOI

10.1002/alr.22073

Other identifier(s)

2-s2.0-85042124858

Rights

Mahidol University

Rights Holder(s)

SCOPUS

Bibliographic Citation

International Forum of Allergy and Rhinology. Vol.8, No.2 (2018), 108-352

Suggested Citation

Sarah K. Wise, Sandra Y. Lin, Elina Toskala, Richard R. Orlandi, Cezmi A. Akdis, Jeremiah A. Alt, Antoine Azar, Fuad M. Baroody, Claus Bachert, G. Walter Canonica, Thomas Chacko, Cemal Cingi, Giorgio Ciprandi, Jacquelynne Corey, Linda S. Cox, Peter Socrates Creticos, Adnan Custovic, Cecelia Damask, Adam DeConde, John M. DelGaudio, Charles S. Ebert, Jean Anderson Eloy, Carrie E. Flanagan, Wytske J. Fokkens, Christine Franzese, Jan Gosepath, Ashleigh Halderman, Robert G. Hamilton, Hans Jürgen Hoffman, Jens M. Hohlfeld, Steven M. Houser, Peter H. Hwang, Cristoforo Incorvaia, Deborah Jarvis, Ayesha N. Khalid, Maritta Kilpeläinen, Todd T. Kingdom, Helene Krouse, Desiree Larenas-Linnemann, Adrienne M. Laury, Stella E. Lee, Joshua M. Levy, Amber U. Luong, Bradley F. Marple, Edward D. McCoul, K. Christopher McMains, Erik Melén, James W. Mims, Gianna Moscato, Joaquim Mullol, Harold S. Nelson, Monica Patadia, Ruby Pawankar, Oliver Pfaar, Michael P. Platt, William Reisacher, Carmen Rondón, Luke Rudmik, Matthew Ryan, Joaquin Sastre, Rodney J. Schlosser, Russell A. Settipane, Hemant P. Sharma, Aziz Sheikh, Timothy L. Smith, Pongsakorn Tantilipikorn, Jody R. Tversky, Maria C. Veling, De Yun Wang, Marit Westman, Magnus Wickman, Mark Zacharek International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis. International Forum of Allergy and Rhinology. Vol.8, No.2 (2018), 108-352. doi:10.1002/alr.22073 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/46992

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Authors

Journal Issue

Thesis

Title

International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis

Author(s)

Sarah K. Wise
 Sandra Y. Lin
 Elina Toskala
 Richard R. Orlandi
 Cezmi A. Akdis
 Jeremiah A. Alt
 Antoine Azar
 Fuad M. Baroody
 Claus Bachert
 G. Walter Canonica
 Thomas Chacko
 Cemal Cingi
 Giorgio Ciprandi
 Jacquelynne Corey
 Linda S. Cox
 Peter Socrates Creticos
 Adnan Custovic
 Cecelia Damask
 Adam DeConde
 John M. DelGaudio
 Charles S. Ebert
 Jean Anderson Eloy
 Carrie E. Flanagan
 Wytske J. Fokkens
 Christine Franzese
 Jan Gosepath
 Ashleigh Halderman
 Robert G. Hamilton
 Hans Jürgen Hoffman
 Jens M. Hohlfeld
 Steven M. Houser
 Peter H. Hwang
 Cristoforo Incorvaia
 Deborah Jarvis
 Ayesha N. Khalid
 Maritta Kilpeläinen
 Todd T. Kingdom
 Helene Krouse
 Desiree Larenas-Linnemann
 Adrienne M. Laury
 Stella E. Lee
 Joshua M. Levy
 Amber U. Luong
 Bradley F. Marple
 Edward D. McCoul
 K. Christopher McMains
 Erik Melén
 James W. Mims
 Gianna Moscato
 Joaquim Mullol
 Harold S. Nelson
 Monica Patadia
 Ruby Pawankar
 Oliver Pfaar
 Michael P. Platt
 William Reisacher
 Carmen Rondón
 Luke Rudmik
 Matthew Ryan
 Joaquin Sastre
 Rodney J. Schlosser
 Russell A. Settipane
 Hemant P. Sharma
 Aziz Sheikh
 Timothy L. Smith
 Pongsakorn Tantilipikorn
 Jody R. Tversky
 Maria C. Veling
 De Yun Wang
 Marit Westman
 Magnus Wickman
 Mark Zacharek

Other Contributor(s)

University of Texas Rio Grande Valley
 Ospedale Policlinico San Martino
 Humanitas University
 National Jewish Health
 Universiteit Gent
 Wake Forest University
 University of California, San Diego
 Temple University
 Aarhus Universitet
 The University of Chicago
 Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi
 University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston
 University of Edinburgh
 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
 Turun Yliopistollinen Keskussairaala
 University of Utah
 George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences
 University of Missouri System
 Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (MHH)
 Medical University of South Carolina
 Boston University
 Nippon Medical School
 Ochsner Health System
 The University of North Carolina System
 National University of Singapore
 Universität Heidelberg
 Oregon Health and Science University
 University of Pittsburgh
 Università degli Studi di Pavia
 Imperial College London
 Hospital Regional Universitario Carlos Haya
 Mahidol University
 Stanford University
 Karolinska Institutet
 Swiss Institute of Allergy and Asthma Research
 Brown University
 Weill Cornell Medical College
 Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
 Johns Hopkins University
 Rutgers New Jersey Medical School
 Harvard Medical School
 University of Amsterdam
 University of Calgary
 Universitat de Barcelona
 Emory University
 Case Western Reserve University
 University of Colorado at Boulder
 Hospital Universitario Fundacion Jiminez Diaz
 ASST Pini/CTO
 Loyola University
 Otorhinolaryngology
 Otolaryngology
 Hospital Médica Sur
 University of Texas Southwestern
 San Antonio Military Medical Center
 Allergy/Immunology

Abstract

© 2018 ARS-AAOA, LLC 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.

Keyword(s)

Medicine

Availability

URI

https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/46992

Collections

Scopus 2018