Author
Timothy J. Craig
Other affiliations: University of Bristol, San Diego State University, National Jewish Health ...read more
Bio: Timothy J. Craig is an academic researcher from Pennsylvania State University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Hereditary angioedema & Asthma. The author has an hindex of 69, co-authored 458 publications receiving 18340 citations. Previous affiliations of Timothy J. Craig include University of Bristol & San Diego State University.
Topics: Hereditary angioedema, Asthma, Angioedema, Population, Medicine
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
Humboldt University of Berlin1, Medical University of Graz2, Hospital Kuala Lumpur3, University of Zurich4, University of Cincinnati5, University of Southern Denmark6, Medical University of Silesia7, Humanitas University8, Charité9, Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center10, Federal University of São Paulo11, Autonomous University of Barcelona12, St Thomas' Hospital13, Laval University14, Hiroshima University15, Medical University of South Carolina16, Hannover Medical School17, Campbelltown Hospital18, Mahidol University19, Royal Free Hospital20, University of Bari21, University Medical Center Groningen22, Johns Hopkins University23, University of Toronto24, Technion – Israel Institute of Technology25, Aarhus University Hospital26, Peking University27
TL;DR: In this paper, an evidence-and consensus-based guideline was developed following the methods recommended by Cochrane and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group.
Abstract: This evidence- and consensus-based guideline was developed following the methods recommended by Cochrane and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group. The conference was held on 1 December 2016. It is a joint initiative of the Dermatology Sectionof the European Academy of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the EU-founded network of excellence, the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA(2)LEN), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF) and the World Allergy Organization (WAO) with the participation of 48 delegates of 42 national and international societies. This guideline was acknowledged and accepted by the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS). Urticaria is a frequent, mast cell-driven disease, presenting with wheals, angioedema, or both. The lifetime prevalence for acute urticaria is approximately 20%. Chronic spontaneous urticaria and other chronic forms of urticaria are disabling, impair quality of life and affect performance at work and school. This guideline covers the definition and classification of urticaria, taking into account the recent progress in identifying its causes, eliciting factors and pathomechanisms. In addition, it outlines evidence-based diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for the different subtypes of urticaria.
819 citations
TL;DR: Genotype at the 16th aminoacid residue of the beta2-adrenergic receptor affects the long-term response to albuterol use and Bronchodilator treatments avoiding albutersol may be appropriate for patients with the Arg/Arg genotype.
600 citations
TL;DR: It is possible that higher doses of ICSs are necessary to manage more severe patients or to achieve goals of therapy not evaluated in this study, such as prevention of asthma exacerbations, after a 24-week, parallel, open-label, multicenter trial.
Abstract: Background: A clinical model is needed to compare inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) with respect to efficacy. Objective: The purpose of this investigation was to compare the relative beneficial and systemic effects in a dose-response relationship for 2 ICSs. Methods: A 24-week, parallel, open-label, multicenter trial examined the benefit-risk ratio of 2 ICSs in persistent asthma. Benefit was assessed by improvements in FEV 1 and PC 20 ; risk was assessed by overnight plasma cortisol suppression. Thirty subjects were randomized to either beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) 168, 672, and 1344 μg/day (n = 15) or fluticasone propionate (FP) 88, 352, and 704 μg/day (n = 15), both administered by means of a metered dose inhaler (MDI) with chlorofluorocarbon propellant via a spacer, in 3 consecutive 6-week intervals; this was followed by 3 weeks of FP dry powder inhaler (DPI) 2000 μg/day. Results: Maximum FEV 1 response occurred with the low dose for FP-MDI and the medium dose for BDP-MDI and was not further increased by treatment with FP-DPI. Near-maximum methacholine PC 20 improvement occurred with the low dose for FP-MDI and the medium dose for BDP-MDI. Both BDP-MDI and FP-MDI caused dose-dependent cortisol suppression. Responsiveness to ICS treatment was found to vary markedly among subjects. Good (>15%) FEV 1 response, in contrast to poor ( 1 /forced vital capacity ratio (0.63 vs 0.73) before treatment. Excellent (>3 doubling dilutions) improvement in PC 20 , in contrast to poor ( Conclusions: Near-maximal FEV 1 and PC 20 effects occurred with low-medium dose for both ICSs in the subjects studied. High-dose ICS therapy did not significantly increase the efficacy measures that were evaluated, but it did increase the systemic effect measure, overnight cortisol secretion. Significant intersubject variability in response occurred with both ICSs. It is possible that higher doses of ICSs are necessary to manage more severe patients or to achieve goals of therapy not evaluated in this study, such as prevention of asthma exacerbations. (J Allergy Clin Immunol 2002;109:410-8.)
576 citations
University of Calgary1, University of Milan2, Semmelweis University3, University of Mainz4, Queen Mary University of London5, University of California, San Diego6, Goethe University Frankfurt7, Pennsylvania State University8, University of Toronto9, Laval University10, University of Alberta11, University of British Columbia12, St. John's University13, McMaster University14, Dalhousie University15, Ottawa Hospital16, Université de Montréal17, Halifax18, Queen's University19, University of Manitoba20, University of Auckland21, University of Cincinnati22, Odense University Hospital23, Duke University24, University of Tromsø25, Tel Aviv University26, University of Bern27, Peking Union Medical College Hospital28
TL;DR: Consensus approach is only an interim guide to a complex disorder such as HAE and should be replaced as soon as possible with large phase III and IV clinical trials, meta analyses, and using data base registry validation of approaches.
Abstract: C1 inhibitor deficiency (hereditary angioedema [HAE]) is a rare disorder for which there is a lack of consensus concerning diagnosis, therapy, and management, particularly in Canada. European initiatives have driven the approach to managing HAE with 3 C1-INH Deficiency Workshops held every 2 years in Hungary starting in 1999, with the third Workshop having recently been held in May 2003. The European Contact Board has established a European HAE Registry that will hopefully advance our knowledge of this disorder. The Canadian Hereditary Angioedema Society/Societe d'Angioedeme Hereditaire du Canada organized a Canadian International Consensus Conference held in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, on October 24 to 26, 2003, to foster consensus between major European and North American HAE treatment centers. Papers were presented by investigators from Europe and North America, and this consensus algorithm approach was discussed. There is a paucity of double-blind placebo-controlled trials in the treatment of HAE, making levels of evidence to support the algorithm less than optimal. Enclosed is the consensus algorithm approach recommended for the diagnosis, therapy, and management of HAE and agreed to by the authors of this article. This document is only a consensus algorithm approach and requires validation. As such, participants agreed to make this a living 2003 algorithm (ie, a work in progress) and agreed to review its content at future international HAE meetings. The consensus, however, has strength in that it was arrived at by the meeting of patient-care providers along with patient group representatives and individual patients reviewing information available to date and reaching agreement on how to approach the diagnosis, therapy, and management of HAE circa 2003. Hopefully evidence to support approaches to the management of HAE will approach the level of meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials in the near future.
575 citations
University of Cincinnati1, Cleveland Clinic2, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center3, Pennsylvania State University4, Yale University5, Harvard University6, Texas A&M University7, University of California, San Diego8, Stanford University9, Nova Southeastern University10, George Washington University11, Rutgers University12, University of Missouri–Kansas City13, University of California, Los Angeles14, University of Washington15
TL;DR: These parameters were developed by the Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters (JTFPP), representing the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology, representing the AAAAI, the ACAAI, and the Joint Council of All allergy, asthma and Immunology.
Abstract: These parameters were developed by the Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters (JTFPP), representing the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (AAAAI); the American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (ACAAI); and the Joint Council of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. The AAAAI and ACAAI have jointly accepted responsibility for establishing "The diagnosis and management of acute and chronic urticaria: 2014 update." This is a complete and comprehensive document at the current time. The medical environment is a changing environment, and not all recommendations will be appropriate for all patients. Because this document incorporated the efforts of many participants, no single individual, including those who served on the JTFPP, is authorized to provide an official AAAAI or ACAAI interpretation of these practice parameters. Any request for information about or an interpretation of these practice parameters by the AAAAI or ACAAI should be directed to the Executive Offices of the AAAAI, the ACAAI, and the Joint Council of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. The JTFPP understands that the cost of diagnostic tests and therapeutic agents is an important concern that might appropriately influence the work-up and treatment chosen for a given patient. The JTFPP recognizes that the emphasis of our primary recommendations regarding a medication might vary, for example, depending on third-party payer issues and product patent expiration dates. However, because a given test or agent's cost is so widely variable and there is a paucity of pharmacoeconomic data, the JTFPP generally does not consider cost when formulating practice parameter recommendations. In extraordinary circumstances, when the cost/benefit ratio of an intervention is prohibitive, as supported by pharmacoeconomic data, commentary might be provided. These parameters are not designed for use by pharmaceutical companies in drug promotion. The JTFPP is committed to ensuring that the practice parameters are based on the best scientific evidence that is free of commercial bias. To this end, the parameter development process includes multiple layers of rigorous review. These layers include the workgroup convened to draft the parameter, the task force reviewers, and peer review by members of each sponsoring society. Although the task force has the final responsibility for the content of the documents submitted for publication, each reviewer comment will be discussed, and reviewers will receive written responses to comments, when appropriate. To preserve the greatest transparency regarding potential conflicts of interest, all members of the JTFPP and the practice parameter workgroups will complete a standard potential conflict of interest disclosure form, which will be available for external review by the sponsoring organization and any other interested individual. In addition, before confirming the selection of a Work Group chairperson, the Joint Task Force will discuss and resolve all relevant potential conflicts of interest associated with this selection. Finally, all members of parameter workgroups will be provided a written statement regarding the importance of ensuring that the parameter development process is free of commercial bias. Practice parameters are available online at www.jcaai.org and www.allergyparameters.org.
517 citations
Cited by
More filters
TL;DR: The CES-D scale as discussed by the authors is a short self-report scale designed to measure depressive symptomatology in the general population, which has been used in household interview surveys and in psychiatric settings.
Abstract: The CES-D scale is a short self-report scale designed to measure depressive symptomatology in the general population. The items of the scale are symptoms associated with depression which have been used in previously validated longer scales. The new scale was tested in household interview surveys and in psychiatric settings. It was found to have very high internal consistency and adequate test- retest repeatability. Validity was established by pat terns of correlations with other self-report measures, by correlations with clinical ratings of depression, and by relationships with other variables which support its construct validity. Reliability, validity, and factor structure were similar across a wide variety of demographic characteristics in the general population samples tested. The scale should be a useful tool for epidemiologic studies of de pression.
48,339 citations
[...]
01 Feb 2009
TL;DR: This Secret History documentary follows experts as they pick through the evidence and reveal why the plague killed on such a scale, and what might be coming next.
Abstract: Secret History: Return of the Black Death Channel 4, 7-8pm In 1348 the Black Death swept through London, killing people within days of the appearance of their first symptoms. Exactly how many died, and why, has long been a mystery. This Secret History documentary follows experts as they pick through the evidence and reveal why the plague killed on such a scale. And they ask, what might be coming next?
5,234 citations
Federal University of Bahia1, McMaster University2, University of Amsterdam3, National Institutes of Health4, Charité5, Catholic University of Cordoba6, University of Genoa7, Radboud University Nijmegen8, Transilvania University of Brașov9, Ghent University10, University of Tennessee Health Science Center11, University of Naples Federico II12, Laval University13, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais14, University of Oslo15, University of Manchester16, Aarhus University17, Imperial College London18, Erasmus University Rotterdam19, George Washington University20, Seoul National University21, Medical University of Łódź22, Hai phong University Of Medicine and Pharmacy23, Université de Montréal24, Guangzhou Medical University25, University of South Florida26, University of California, San Diego27, University of California28, University of Chicago29, Monash University30, Teikyo University31, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens32, Nippon Medical School33, Sofia Medical University34, Leiden University35, Leiden University Medical Center36, University College London37, University of Manitoba38, University of Helsinki39, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health40, National University of Singapore41, Karolinska Institutet42, University of Minnesota43, Celal Bayar University44, University of Cape Town45, Pierre-and-Marie-Curie University46, Tunis University47, University of Ghana48, University of Wisconsin-Madison49, University of British Columbia50, Georgia Regents University51, Vilnius University52, University of Washington53, University of Dundee54, University of Poitiers55, University of Mississippi56, Federal University of São Paulo57, German Red Cross58, Jagiellonian University Medical College59, Chiba University60, American Pharmacists Association61, University of Aberdeen62, University of Nevada, Reno63, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill64
TL;DR: The ARIA guidelines for the management of allergic rhinitis and asthma are similar in both the 1999 ARIA workshop report and the 2008 Update as discussed by the authors, but the GRADE approach is not yet available.
Abstract: Allergic rhinitis is a symptomatic disorder of the nose induced after allergen exposure by an IgE-mediated inflammation of the membranes lining the nose. It is a global health problem that causes major illness and disability worldwide. Over 600 million patients from all countries, all ethnic groups and of all ages suffer from allergic rhinitis. It affects social life, sleep, school and work and its economic impact is substantial. Risk factors for allergic rhinitis are well identified. Indoor and outdoor allergens as well as occupational agents cause rhinitis and other allergic diseases. The role of indoor and outdoor pollution is probably very important, but has yet to be fully understood both for the occurrence of the disease and its manifestations.
In 1999, during the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) WHO workshop, the expert panel proposed a new classification for allergic rhinitis which was subdivided into 'intermittent' or 'persistent' disease.
This classification is now validated. The diagnosis of allergic rhinitis is often quite easy, but in some cases it may cause problems and many patients are still under-diagnosed, often because they do not perceive the symptoms of rhinitis as a disease impairing their social life, school and work.
The management of allergic rhinitis is well established and the ARIA expert panel based its recommendations on evidence using an extensive review of the literature available up to December 1999. The statements of evidence for the development of these guidelines followed WHO rules and were based on those of Shekelle et al. A large number of papers have been published since 2000 and are extensively reviewed in the 2008 Update using the same evidence-based system. Recommendations for the management of allergic rhinitis are similar in both the ARIA workshop report and the 2008 Update. In the future, the GRADE approach will be used, but is not yet available.
Another important aspect of the ARIA guidelines was to consider co-morbidities. Both allergic rhinitis and asthma are systemic inflammatory conditions and often co-exist in the same patients. In the 2008 Update, these links have been confirmed.
The ARIA document is not intended to be a standard-of-care document for individual countries. It is provided as a basis for physicians, health care professionals and organizations involved in the treatment of allergic rhinitis and asthma in various countries to facilitate the development of relevant local standard-of-care documents for patients.
3,769 citations
TL;DR: This systematic review and meta-analyses confirmed the findings of a previous study published in “Rhinitis and Asthma: Causes and Prevention, 2nd Ed.” (2015) as well as new findings of “Mechanisms of Respiratory Disease and Allergology,” which confirmed the role of EMTs in the development of these diseases.
Abstract: Authors Jan L. Brozek, MD, PhD – Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics and Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada Jean Bousquet, MD, PhD – Service des Maladies Respiratoires, Hopital Arnaud de Villeneuve, Montpellier, France, INSERM, CESP U1018, Respiratory and Environmental Epidemiology Team, France, and WHO Collaborating Center for Rhinitis and Asthma Carlos E. Baena-Cagnani, MD – Faculty of Medicine, Catholic University of Cordoba, Cordoba, Argentina Sergio Bonini, MD – Institute of Neurobiology and Molecular Medicine – CNR, Rome, Italy and Department of Medicine, Second University of Naples, Naples, Italy G. Walter Canonica, MD – Allergy & Respiratory Diseases, DIMI, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy Thomas B. Casale, MD – Division of Allergy and Immunology, Department of Medicine, Creighton University, Omaha, Nebraska, USA Roy Gerth van Wijk, MD, PhD – Section of Allergology, Department of Internal Medicine, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands Ken Ohta, MD, PhD – Division of Respiratory Medicine and Allergology, Department of Medicine, Teikyo University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan Torsten Zuberbier, MD – Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Charite Universitatsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany Holger J. Schunemann, MD, PhD, MSc – Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics and Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
3,368 citations
01 Aug 2007
3,099 citations