A differential blood count, as well as a lymphocyte subset analysis, total immunoglobulin levels, and vaccination titers can help the clinician to decide whether a patient with eczematous skin lesions and elevated serum IgE should be referred to a clinical immunologist for a full immunological work-up and broad genetic analysis. Technology-based interventions (TBIs) can improve asthma management by facilitating patient education, symptom monitoring, environmental trigger control, comorbid condition management, and medication adherence. Collecting patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can identify effective interventions and ensure patient-centered care, but it is unclear which TBIs have been formally evaluated using PROs. We aim to (1) identify the TBIs that have been evaluated in clinical trials using PROs; (2) identify the most commonly used PROs in these trials; and (3) determine the impact of TBIs on PROs in the management of chronic asthma. We searched the PubMed and Clinicaltrials.gov databases for studies published in English between January 2000 and February 2020 using the following search criteria "asthma," "IT-based interventions," "information technology," "technology," "dyspnea," "patient reported outcomes," "PROs," "telehealth," "telemedicine," and "mobile devices." Two independent reviewers screened the studies and determined study inclusion. Studies were examined for the types of interventions used, the types of PROs collected, and outcomes. The final analysis included 14 clinical trials with either 1, 2, or 3 arms. Five different types of TBIs were identified, most commonly involving multimedia education. Four different categories of PROs were identified, most commonly involving treatment self-efficacy. Positive outcomes in at least 1 PRO domain were reported in 12 of 14 studies. Pooled meta-analysis was not possible due to the heterogeneity of PRO instruments across studies. TBIs improve PROs overall in patients with asthma. Future trials investigating TBIs should include standardized PROs as endpoints to better clarify this relationship. TBIs improve PROs overall in patients with asthma. Future trials investigating TBIs should include standardized PROs as endpoints to better clarify this relationship. Birch, alder, hazel, and oak are members of the birch homologous group based on cross-reactivity toward the birch pollen allergen Betula verrucosa 1. Theoretically, allergy to these tree pollens may be treated by immunotherapy with one representative allergen extract. To evaluate post hoc whether treatment of birch pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis with a standardized tree sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablet containing birch pollen extract reduces symptoms and symptom-relieving medication use during the oak pollen season (OPS). In a randomized, multinational, double-blind trial (EudraCT-2015-004821-15), 634 participants (ages 12-65 years) received daily tree SLIT-tablet (12 SQ-Bet) or placebo before and during tree pollen season (alder/hazel plus birch pollen season [BPS]). Symptom-relieving medication was allowed. The primary end point was the average total combined score (sum of rhinoconjunctivitis daily symptom score and daily medication score) during BPS. Outcomes during the OPS (excluding overlapping BPS days) were analyzed post hoc. Relative improvements in average total combined score, daily symptom score, and daily medication score with the tree SLIT-tablet versus placebo during the OPS were 25%, 22%, and 32%, respectively (all P < .001). Significant correlations were observed between birch and oak serum immunoglobulin E (sIgE) at baseline (r= 0.86) and between birch and oak IgG after treatment (r= 0.72). https://www.selleckchem.com/products/ldc203974-imt1b.html Oak sIgE and IgG kinetics in response to tree SLIT-tablet treatment were similar to birch. The tree SLIT-tablet leads to significant improvement of rhinoconjunctivitis outcomes during the OPS, supporting the clinical relevance of immunological cross-reactivity toward birch and oak allergens. The tree SLIT-tablet leads to significant improvement of rhinoconjunctivitis outcomes during the OPS, supporting the clinical relevance of immunological cross-reactivity toward birch and oak allergens. Among patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of biologics, such as anti-interleukin-4/interleukin-13 (dupilumab) and anti-immunoglobulin E (omalizumab), have demonstrated efficacy compared with intranasal corticosteroids (INCS). However, no head-to-head RCTs exist between biologics. To perform an indirect treatment comparison (ITC) of the efficacy of biologics plus INCS versus placebo (INCS) as a common comparator. Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane were searched for RCTs of biologics in CRSwNP. Bucher ITCs were performed for outcomes at week 24 nasal polyp score (NPS) (range, 0-8), nasal congestion (NC) (range, 0-3), loss of smell (range, 0-3), University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (range, 0-40), total symptom score (range, 0-12), 22-item sinonasal outcome test (range, 0-110), and responder analyses based on NPS or NC improvement of one point or greater. Assessment of trial design, baseline characteristics, and outcome measures sug in key CRSwNP outcomes versus omalizumab at week24. Although ITCs have limitations, these results demonstrated that dupilumab had consistently greater improvements in key CRSwNP outcomes versus omalizumab at week 24. The SarsCoV2, novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic necessitated a rapid transition from in-person evaluations to remote delivery of care, including both video and telephone visits, in allergy/immunology practices. To evaluate patient satisfaction, patient and physician impression of encounter completeness, and reimbursement between in-person, video, and telephone encounters. This study also assessed factors influencing patient satisfaction, perception of completeness, and choice of future evaluation type. This was a prospective study of all encounters at a health care-system owned practice. Encounter type, encounter modality, patient demographics, primary diagnoses, reimbursement data, and physician assessment of encounter completeness were tracked. Patient satisfaction was assessed via standardized questions. There were 447 encounters, with 303 in-person (67.8%), 98 video (21.9%), and 46 telephone (10.3%). Patient satisfaction data was obtained from 251 patients. There was similar patient satisfaction among all encounter modalities.