Background. Assessment methods for atopic dermatitis (AD) are not standardized, and therapeutic studies are difficult to interpret. Aims. To obtain a consensus on assessment methods in AD and to use a statistical method to develop a composite severity index.Methods. Consensus definitions were given for items used in the scoring system (extent, intensity, subjective) and illustrated for intensity items. Slides were reviewed to address within and between-observer variability by a group of 10 trained clinicians, and data were statistically evaluated with a two way analysis of variance. Two variants of an assessment system were compared in 88 patients at 5 different institutions. Data were analyzed using principal-component analysis. Results. For 5 intensity items studied (erythema, edema/papulation, oozing/crusts, excoriations, lichenification), within- and between-observer variability was good overall, except for edema/papulation which was difficult to assess with slides. In the series of 88 patients, principal-component analysis allowed to extract two unrelated components: the first one accounting for 33% of total variance was interpreted as a ‘severity’ component; the second one, accounting for 18% of variance, was interpreted as a ‘profile’ component distinguishing patients with mostly erythema and subjective symptoms and those with mostly lichenification and dryness and lower subjective symptoms. Of the two evaluation systems used, the one using the rule of nine to assess extent was found more workable than the one using a distribution × intensity product. A scoring index (SCORAD) combining extent, severity and subjective symptoms was mathematically derived from the first system and showed a normal distribution of the population studied. Conclusion. The final choice for the evaluation system was mostly made based on simplicity and easy routine use in outpatient clinics. Based on mathematical appreciation of weights of the items used in the assessment of AD, extent and subjective symptoms account for around 20% each of the total score, intensity items representing 60%. The so-designed composite index SCORAD needs to be further tested in clinical trials.

Histamine-induced food intolerance is not IgE-mediated. Skin-prick testing and specific IgE to food allergens are typically negative. Food rich in histamine or red wine may cause allergy-like symptoms such as sneezing, flush, skin itching, diarrhoea and even shortness of breath. The suspected reason is a diminished histamine degradation based on a deficiency of diamine oxidase. As diamine oxidase cannot be supplemented, a histamine-free diet was implemented to reduce histamine intake. Forty-five patients with a history of suffering from intolerance to food or wine (n = 17) and chronic headache (n = 28) were put on the diet over months to years. Fish, cheese, hard cured sausages, pickled cabbage and alcoholic beverages had to be avoided. Complaint intensity and drug-use per week prior to and 4 weeks after a histamine-free diet were compared. After 4 weeks on the diet 33/45 patients improved considerably (P < 0.01), eight of them had total remission. In 12/45 patients, however, no changes in symptoms were observed. Symptoms of food or wine intolerance significantly decreased (P < 0.02; treatment of choice), headaches decreased in frequency (P < 0.001), duration and intensity. After eating histamine-rich food symptoms were reproducible and could be eliminated by anti-histamines in most patients. These data indicate the role of histamine in food and wine intolerance and that histamine-rich food causes a worsening of symptoms in patients suffering from chronic headaches. Results obtained support the hypothesis of a deficiency of diamine oxidase in patients with intolerance to food or wine.

Sneezing,flush, headache, diarrhea, skin itch, and shortness of breath are symptoms occurring in patients intolerant to wine after drinking one glass of red wine. The role of histamine in wine intolerance was evaluated by a red wine provocation test in 28 patients with a history of wine intolerance and in 10 controls with good tolerance of wine. Patients were challenged with 125 ml red wine (equivalent to 50 Ilg histamine); blood samples were drawn before and after 15 and 30 minutes. Plasma histamine was assessed by a radioimmunoassay. Lung function tests were performed before and after the wine test. Twenty-two oftwenty-eight patients had symptoms showing significantly higher plasma histamine levels 30 minutes after wine challenge (p < .01) compared with asymptomatic controls. Basal histamine levels of patients were higher (p < .05) than in controls. A slight asthmatic attack as well as a 30% decrease of FEF 25 was seen in 2/22 patients. Terfenadine premedication significantly eliminated symptoms in 10/ 12 patients (p < .05) in a subsequent wine test. Histamine assessment was done in 52 wines (red. white, and champagne) and in 17 beers by radioimmunoassay. Histamine levels rangedfrom 3-120 Ilgjl in white wines; 15-670 Ilg/1 in champagnes; 60-3800 Ilg/1 in red wines; and 21-305 Ilg/1 in beers. Histamine is causing wine intolerance. Patients intolerant to wine seem to have diminished histamine degradation probably based on a deficiency of diamine oxidase.

In clinical practice it appears reasonable to assess BST, besides after anaphylactic reactions also in patients suffering repeatedly from vertigo, flush, tachycardia, palpitations, oedema and nausea. Even patients with slightly eBST have a higher risk of anaphylaxis and experience more severe reactions.

Summary This statement was written by a group of pulmonologists and pediatric pulmonologists belonging to the corresponding professional associations ÖGP (Austrian Society for Pulmonology) and ÖGKJ (Austrian Society for pediatric and adolescent medicine) to provide a concise overview of the latest updates in the 2015 GINA Guidelines and to include aspects that are specific to Austria.