Skin prick testing is an essential test procedure to confirm sensitization in IgE‐mediated allergic disease in subjects with rhinoconjunctivitis, asthma, urticaria, anapylaxis, atopic eczema and food and drug allergy. This manuscript reviews the available evidence including Medline and Embase searches, abstracts of international allergy meetings and position papers from the world allergy literature. The recommended method of prick testing includes the appropriate use of specific allergen extracts, positive and negative controls, interpretation of the tests after 15 – 20 minutes of application, with a positive result defined as a wheal ≥3 mm diameter. A standard prick test panel for Europe for inhalants is proposed and includes hazel (Corylus avellana), alder (Alnus incana), birch (Betula alba), plane (Platanus vulgaris), cypress (Cupressus sempervirens), grass mix (Poa pratensis, Dactilis glomerata, Lolium perenne, Phleum pratense, Festuca pratensis, Helictotrichon pretense), Olive (Olea europaea), mugwort (Artemisia vulgaris), ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), Alternaria alternata (tenuis), Cladosporium herbarum, Aspergillus fumigatus, Parietaria, cat, dog, Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, Dermatophagoides farinae, and cockroach (Blatella germanica). Standardization of the skin test procedures and standard panels for different geographic locations are encouraged worldwide to permit better comparisons for diagnostic, clinical and research purposes.

Synopsis: Ageing, a basic biological process seen in all living creatures, is not preventable. Surgical and topical modalities have been invented and substances were applied topically to alter the ageing process. Peptides and proteins, frequently used for this purpose, were categorized into four groups: signal peptides, enzyme‐inhibitor peptides, neurotransmitter‐inhibitor peptides and carrier peptides. We comprehensively review eligible studies ‐including controlled ex vivo or in vivo efficacy studies on any topical peptide or protein that has been administered to treat signs and symptoms of ageing.

Background: This overview critically compares subjective assessment tools and available objective measurement tools with potential devices becoming available. Our goal is to lay out the benefits of each scar assessment scale in order to propose good management skills for scars along with strong metric skills.Methods: Classifying a scar is important in daily clinical practice. Ultimately choosing which treatment modality best fits can become a challenge. Scar classification needs a more detailed and systematic approach. We researched all different factors contributing to scar formation to come up with a more detailed criteria. Such factors included pigmentation/vascularity, surface texture, surface area, thickness (scar height), and pliability.Results: Few studies have assessed scars; each provided an assessment scale of their own. Each scale is compared on the basis of accuracy, reliability, convenience in terms of feasibility and price.Conclusions: There remains still no ideal objective measurement out there despite promise seen in subjective evaluation. Method refinement will however accelerate our knowledge and interventions – based on increasing study power with enhanced metrics.