Aims: To analyze the changes in the prevalence of asthma, bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) and allergies in elite athletes over the past years, to review the specific pathogenetic features of these conditions and to make recommendations for their diagnosis. Methods: The Task Force reviewed present literature by searching Medline up to November 2006 for relevant papers by the search words: asthma, bronchial responsiveness, EIB, athletes and sports. Sign criteria were used to assess level of evidence and grades of recommendation.Results: The problems of sports-related asthma and allergy are outlined. Epidemiological evidence for an increased prevalence of asthma and BHR among competitive athletes, especially in endurance sports, is provided. The mechanisms for development of asthma and bronchial hyperresponsiveness in athletes are outlined. Criteria are given for the diagnosis of asthma and exercise induced asthma in the athlete. Conclusions: The prevalence of asthma and bronchial hyperresponsiveness is markedly increased in athletes, especially within endurance sports. Environmental factors often contribute. Recommendations for the diagnosis of asthma in athletes are outlined.

Ocular allergy includes several clinically different conditions that can be considered as hypersensitivity disorders of the ocular surface. The classification of these conditions is complex, and their epidemiology has not been adequately studied because of the lack of unequivocal nomenclature. Ocular allergy symptoms are often, but not always, associated with other allergic manifestations, mostly rhinitis. However, specific ocular allergic diseases need to be recognized and managed by a team that includes both an ophthalmologist and an allergist. The diagnosis of ocular allergy is usually based on clinical history and signs and symptoms, with the support of in vivo and in vitro tests when the identification of the specific allergic sensitization is required for patient management. The aims of this Task Force Report are (i) to unify the nomenclature and classification of ocular allergy, by combining the ophthalmology and allergy Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma criteria; (ii) to describe current methods of diagnosis; (iii) to summarize the therapeutic options for the management of ocular allergic inflammation. Ocular allergy is a localized allergic condition that is observed as the only or dominant presentation of an allergic sensitiza-tion, or is associated with rhinitis. It is not a single clinical entity, but includes several conditions with different pathogen-esis, hypersensitivity mechanisms, diagnostic criteria, and management. Ocular allergies are encountered daily in the phy-sician's office. Approximately 15-20% of the world population is affected by some form of allergic disease; ocular symptoms are estimated to be present in 40-60% of allergic patients (1) and contribute significantly to poor quality of life (2-4). Most of the available prevalence data encompass both ocular and nasal symptoms, making it impossible to separate ocular allergy from allergic rhinitis. Moreover, the frequently confusing nomenclature makes estimations of prevalence difficult. The purpose of this position paper is to unify the nomenclature and classification of ocular allergies, in order to facilitate the exchange of information and knowledge on diagnosis and management between allergists and ophthalmologists. The existing evidence for treatment options was evaluated using the SIGN criteria (5). Classification and nomenclature The ocular allergy nomenclature is based either on clinical signs and symptoms (Table 1) or on pathophysiology, according to the different hypersensitivity mechanisms introduced by Gell and Coombs. In 2001, the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI)

No abstract

The effects of a 3-month physical training programme on airway inflammation and clinical outcomes were studied in school-aged children with asthma.Subjects with persistent allergic asthma (aged 12.7¡3.4 yrs; n534) were randomly allocated into training and control groups. Exercise consisted of twice-weekly 50-min sessions for 12 weeks. Inflammation was assessed by levels of exhaled nitric oxide, blood eosinophils, eosinophil cationic protein, C-reactive protein, and total and mite-specific immunoglobulin (Ig)E. Lung volumes and bronchial responsiveness to methacholine were determined. The Paediatric Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire and Paediatric Asthma Caregiver's Quality of Life Questionnaire were used to evaluate activity restrictions, symptoms and emotional stress. The efficacy of the training was assessed by accelerometry.Following the programme, the exercise group spent twice as much time as the controls undertaking moderate-to-vigorous activities. No differences in changes were seen between groups for asthma outcomes. However, total IgE decreased more in the exercise group, as did mite-specific IgE.Training did not increase inflammation in children with persistent asthma, and may have decreased both total and allergen-specific immunoglobulin E levels. It is concluded that there is no reason to discourage asthmatic children with controlled disease to exercise.