xRead - September 2022

Wise et al.

Page 331

Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author Manuscript TABLE VIII.E.3.

Evidence for the role of blended skin testing techniques in the diagnosis of allergic rhinitis Study Year LOE Study design Study groups Clinical endpoint Conclusion Lewis et al. 862 2008 3b Systematic review with cost effectiveness analysis Comparison of sIgE, intradermal tests, and MQT from a payer perspective MQT most cost-effective when population prevalence of AR is 20% or higher. Fornadley 847 2014 4 Systematic review Review of skin testing techniques MQT is a valid form of skin testing. Peltier & Ryan 844 2007 4 Case series Adults with AR (n = 134) 1 Intradermal tests for 5 antigens; 2 SPT and subsequent IDT following MQT protocol for 5 antigens MQT is a safe alternative to classic IDT for determining AIT starting doses. Krouse & Krouse 861 2006 4 Case series Adults with AR (n = 9) 1 MQT; 2 IgE and IgG4 levels for 3 antigens; 3 SNOT-20, AOS, RSDI MQT-based AIT demonstrates immune system changes and QOL improvement. Peltier & Ryan 850 2006 4 Case series Adults with AR (n = 86) 1 Intradermal tests for 6 mold antigens; 2 MQT for 6 mold antigens MQT-based testing is a safe method for determining starting AIT doses for fungal allergens.

AIT = allergen immunotherapy; AOS = Allergy Outcome Survey; AR = allergic rhinitis; IDT = intradermal dilutional testing; IgG4 = immunoglobulin G4; LOE = level of evidence; MQT = modified quantitative testing; QOL = quality of life; RSDI = Rhinosinusitis Disability Index; sIgE = antigen-specific immunoglobulin E; SNOT-20 = 20-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test; SPT = skin-prick testing;

Int Forum Allergy Rhinol . Author manuscript; available in PMC 2020 June 10.