Current practice of allergy diagnosis and the potential impact of regulation in Europe

Yükleniyor...
Küçük Resim

Tarih

2018

Dergi Başlığı

Dergi ISSN

Cilt Başlığı

Yayıncı

Wiley

Erişim Hakkı

info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess

Özet

In the European Union (EU), the regulatory framework regarding diagnostic allergen extracts is currently in the process of being implemented at the national level. Due to these regulations, the initial and periodic renewal expenses for the registration of diagnostic allergen extracts may render extract production unprofitable. Consequently, many extracts may be at risk of removal from the market. The current survey, which was conducted by a task force of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, aimed to assess the current practice of allergy diagnosis in Europe. This survey revealed that skin tests continue to be the main diagnostic procedure and are used as the first option in almost two-third of all types of allergic diseases and in 90% of individuals suffering from respiratory allergies. Therefore, there is a need to ensure the availability of high-quality allergen extracts to maintain the common diagnostic procedures used by EU professionals. To reach this goal, it is necessary to align efforts and establish active partnerships between manufacturers, relevant scientific societies, consumer organizations and authorities to maintain the availability of these diagnostic tools.

Açıklama

Demoly, Pascal/0000-0001-7827-7964; Kalpaklioglu, A. Fusun/0000-0002-6548-6932; DR. FARID, S.H. M.H. M. Kn. - FR FARID/0000-0003-0372-4963; Hoffman, Hans Jurgen/0000-0002-6743-7931; Dreborg, Sten/0000-0002-3544-1557; Popov, Todor/0000-0001-5052-5866; Cardona, Victoria/0000-0003-2197-9767

Anahtar Kelimeler

allergen extracts, allergy diagnosis, regulation, skin tests

Kaynak

Allergy

WoS Q Değeri

Q1

Scopus Q Değeri

Q1

Cilt

73

Sayı

2

Künye

Cardona V, Demoly P, Dreborg S, et al. Current practice of allergy diagnosis and the potential impact of regulation in Europe. Allergy. 2018;73:323–327