Back to Authors

Lin, Sandra Y.

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8959-1828

Mayo Clinic

University of Wisconsin–Madison

Citations 4

External Validation of a Multivariable Diagnostic Prediction Model for Acute Invasive Fungal Rhinosinusitis in Tertiary Care Settings
Ellefson, Johanna L. , Yang, Qiuyu , Stokken, Janalee K., Pasic, Thomas R., Koszewski, Ian J., Lin, Sandra Y. , Stokken, Janalee K. , Yin, Linda X , Carlson, Matthew L , Spillinger, Aviv , Yin, Linda X.

International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology | August 23, 2025 | Volume: 16 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 16-22

10.1002/alr.70024 Get It

ABSTRACT Background Prompt detection and intervention are crucial for improving outcomes in acute invasive fungal rhinosinusitis (AIFS). Diagnostic prediction models assist in risk‐stratification, but their accuracy requires testing through external validation. This study aims to validate a previously published diagnostic prediction model for AIFS in an independent cohort. Methods A retrospective chart review was conducted at a tertiary care center (2008–2023) to identify patients with an otolaryngology consult for suspected AIFS. Of 65 patients identified, 11 (16.9%) were diagnosed with AIFS based on histopathology. Risk was calculated using Yin et al.’s predictive model. Predictive performance was assessed by calibration and discrimination. Results Patients had significantly higher rates of diabetes (46.2% vs. 26.1%, p = 0.002), long‐term steroid use (60% vs. 28.2%, p < 0.0001), and solid organ transplantation (38.5% vs. 8.5%, p < 0.001), compared with the development cohort, with conversely lower rates of hematologic malignancy (29.2% vs. 58.7, p < 0.001) and neutropenia (19.4% vs. 41%, p = 0.001). Despite these differences, both the three‐variable (C‐index: 0.844; 95% CI, 0.736–0.952) and four‐variable models (C‐index: 0.963; 95% CI, 0.919–1) showed adequate discrimination. Both models exhibited slight overprediction of risk, with a calibration‐in‐the‐large predicted risk of 24.1% (95% CI, 13.68–34.46) for the three‐variable model and 24.2% (95% CI, 13.76–34.57) for the four‐variable model. Calibration plots confirmed overprediction. Conclusion The AIFS diagnostic model demonstrates acceptable discrimination and calibration on external validation, with generalizability to patients with different comorbidities. Larger studies are recommended to further test the model's predictive performance and clinical applicability.
International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: Allergic rhinitis – 2023
Wise, Sarah K. , Damask, Cecelia, Ebert, Charles S. , Levy, Joshua M. , Lin, Sandra Y. , Luong, Amber , Rodriguez, Kenneth , Sedaghat, Ahmad R. , Toskala, Elina , Akdiş, Cezmi A. , Ansotegui, Ignacio J. , Azar, Antoine , Baroody, Fuad M. , Benninger, Michael S. , Casale, Thomas B. , Chaaban, Mohamad R. , Chew, Fook Tim , Chambliss, Jeffrey , Cianferoni, Antonella , Čustović, Adnan , Davis, Elizabeth Mahoney , DelGaudio, John M. , Flanagan, Carrie E. , Franzese, Christine B., Gill, Amarbir S. , Halderman, Ashleigh A. , Joe, Stephanie, Joshi, Shyam , Kuruvilla, Merin , Kim, Jean , Klein, Adam M. , Krouse, Helene J. , Lang, David M. , Laury, Adrienne M., Lee, Victoria S. , Loftus, Patricia A. , Marzouk, Haidy, Mims, James W., Oppenheimer, John , Orlandi, Richard R. , Phillips, Katie M. , Raymond, Mallory , Ryan, Matthew W., Sastre, J. , Schlosser, Rodney J. , Shaker, Marcus , Smith, Kristine A. , Soyka, Michael , Tang, Monica , Tantilipikorn, Pongsakorn , Taw, Malcolm B., Tversky, Jody , Tyler, Matthew A. , Veling, Maria C., Wallace, Dana , White, Andrew A. , Roland, Lauren T , Levy, Joshua M , Luong, Amber U , Sedaghat, Ahmad R , Villwock, Jennifer , Abdullah, Baharudin , Alt, Jeremiah A , Chaaban, Mohamad R , Gill, Amarbir , Kuruvilla, Merin Elizabeth , Kim, Jean , Kuan, Edward C , Lee, Victoria S , Marcus, Sonya , Mattos, Jose , McCoul, Edward D , Nayak, Jayakar V , Orlandi, Richard , Schuman, Theodore A , Smith, Kristine , Soyka, Michael B , Tantilipikorn, Pongsakorn , Tyler, Matthew A , Zhang, Luo , Schlosser, Rodney J , Chew, Fook Tim , Casale, Thomas , Alt, Jeremiah A. , Bernstein, Jonathan A. , Brook, Christopher D. , Campbell, Raewyn Gay , Ellis, Anne K. , Fokkens, Wytske Johanna , Greenhawt, Matthew , Hohlfeld, Jens Michael , Incorvaia, Cristoforo , Larenas‐Linnemann, Désirée E. , Lechner, Matt , Lee, Stella E. , Mattos, José L. , McCoul, Edward D. , Melén, Erik , Mullol, Joaquim , Nayak, Jayakar V. , Platt, Michael P. , Ramanathan, Murugappan , Raymond, Mallory J , Rhee, Chae‐Seo , Reitsma, Sietze , Sheikh, Aziz , Takashima, Masayoshi , Wang, De Yun , Zhang, Luo

International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology | March 6, 2023 | Volume: 13 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 293-859

10.1002/alr.23090 Get It

Abstract Background In the 5 years that have passed since the publication of the 2018 International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR‐Allergic Rhinitis 2018), the literature has expanded substantially. The ICAR‐Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update presents 144 individual topics on allergic rhinitis (AR), expanded by over 40 topics from the 2018 document. Originally presented topics from 2018 have also been reviewed and updated. The executive summary highlights key evidence‐based findings and recommendation from the full document. Methods ICAR‐Allergic Rhinitis 2023 employed established evidence‐based review with recommendation (EBRR) methodology to individually evaluate each topic. Stepwise iterative peer review and consensus was performed for each topic. The final document was then collated and includes the results of this work. Results ICAR‐Allergic Rhinitis 2023 includes 10 major content areas and 144 individual topics related to AR. For a substantial proportion of topics included, an aggregate grade of evidence is presented, which is determined by collating the levels of evidence for each available study identified in the literature. For topics in which a diagnostic or therapeutic intervention is considered, a recommendation summary is presented, which considers the aggregate grade of evidence, benefit, harm, and cost. Conclusion The ICAR‐Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update provides a comprehensive evaluation of AR and the currently available evidence. It is this evidence that contributes to our current knowledge base and recommendations for patient evaluation and treatment.
Gender and authorship trends in rhinology, allergy, and skull‐base literature from 2008 to 2018
Halderman, Ashleigh A. , Rao, Anupriya, Desai‐Markowski, Stuti, Yang, Alex , Luong, Amber , O’Brien, Erin K. , Gray, Stacey T. , Lal, Devyani , Lin, Sandra Y. , Orlandi, Richard R. , Wise, Sarah K. , O'Brien, Erin K , Orlandi, Richard , Lal, Devyani

International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology | March 17, 2021 | Volume: 11 | Issue: 9 | Pages: 1336-1346

10.1002/alr.22793 Get It

BackgroundA recent analysis suggested potential narrowing of the gender gap in research productivity in the field of rhinology. This analysis did not, however, provide insight into how the genders are represented in the rhinologic literature. This study aimed to evaluate 11 years of literature to evaluate for gender differences in authorship position, collaborations, category and content of research, citations, and funding to gain perspective on how gender and authorship has changed over time.MethodsAuthorship data for all articles on rhinologic subject matter published between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2018 in four otolaryngology journals was collected. The gender of authors was determined by protocol. Category and content of research and funding status/source were additionally obtained.ResultsData were collected from 2666 articles. Gender of 14,510 authors was determined. Female authors accounted for 23% of the overall authors and male authors accounted for 77%. Female first authorship increased significantly over time, but there was no change in female senior authorship. The percentage of female authors steadily increased over time, whereas male authorship decreased slightly. Mixed gender teams were shown to be increasing in frequency. Women published more than expected in basic science and allergy and less than expected in skull base. On funded studies, women were significantly underrepresented as senior authors.ConclusionThis study represents the first assessment of gender differences in the rhinology literature. Areas where female representation can improve include senior authorship, increased involvement in skull base publications, and increased funding.
International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: rhinosinusitis 2021
Orlandi, Richard R. , Kingdom, Todd T. , Smith, Timothy L. , Bleier, Benjamin S. , DeConde, Adam S., Luong, Amber , Poetker, David M., Welch, Kevin C. , Wise, Sarah K. , Adappa, Nithin D. , Anselmo‐Lima, Wilma Terezinha , Bachert, Claus , Baroody, Fuad M. , Batra, Pete S., Bernal‐Sprekelsen, Manuel , Bhattacharyya, Neil , Chang, Eugene H., Chowdhury, Naweed I. , Citardi, Martin J. , Cohen, Noah , Conley, David B. , DelGaudio, John M. , Desrosiers, Martin , Douglas, Richard , Eloy, Jean Anderson , Gray, Stacey T. , Gudis, David A. , Hamilos, Daniel L. , Han, Joseph K., Harvey, Richard J. , Hellings, Peter W. , Hopkins, Claire , Hwang, Peter H. , Javer, Amin R. , Kennedy, David W. , Kern, Robert C. , Lee, Heung‐Man , Lee, Jivianne T. , Levy, Joshua M. , Lin, Sandra Y. , Lund, Valerie, McMains, Kevin C. , Metson, Ralph, Naclerio, Robert M. , Oakley, Gretchen M. , Otori, Nobuyoshi , Parikh, Sanjay R., Patel, Zara M. , Peters, Anju T. , Philpott, Carl , Roh, Hwan‐Jung , Rudmik, Luke , Sacks, Raymond , Schlosser, Rodney J. , Sedaghat, Ahmad R. , Senior, Brent A. , Sindwani, Raj , Smith, Kristine A. , Stewart, Michael G. , Suh, Jeffrey D. , Tan, Bruce K. , Drunen, Cornelis M. van , Woodworth, Bradford A. , Wormald, Peter‐John , Wright, Erin D. , Yan, Carol H. , Zhang, Luo , Zhou, Bing , Chang, Michael T. , Bleier, Benjamin , Alt, Jeremiah A , Beswick, Daniel , Eloy, Jean Anderson , Gudis, David A , Holbrook, Eric H , Hopkins, Claire , Javer, Amin R , Jiang, Rong-San , Lal, Devyani , Lee, Heung-Man , Levy, Joshua M , Patel, Zara , Philpott, Carl , Ramakrishnan, Vijay R , Smith, Kristine , Yan, Carol , Zhang, Luo , Schlosser, Rodney J , Harvey, Richard J , Hwang, Peter H , Chang, Michael T , Soler, Zachary M. , Adappa, Nithin D. , Alt, Jeremiah A. , Beswick, Daniel M. , Chandra, Rakesh Kumar , Chang, Eugene H., Chiu, Alexander G. , Cohen, Noam A., Fokkens, Wytske Johanna , Holbrook, Eric H. , Laidlaw, Tanya M. , Lal, Devyani , Lane, Andrew P , Mullol, Joaquim , Passàli, Desiderio , Psaltis, Alkis J. , Ramanathan, Murugappan , Snidvongs, Kornkiat , Turner, Justin H. , Voegels, Richard Louis , Wang, De Yun

International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology | November 25, 2020 | Volume: 11 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 213-739

10.1002/alr.22741 Get It

I. Executive Summary Background The 5 years since the publication of the first International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Rhinosinusitis (ICAR‐RS) has witnessed foundational progress in our understanding and treatment of rhinologic disease. These advances are reflected within the more than 40 new topics covered within the ICAR‐RS‐2021 as well as updates to the original 140 topics. This executive summary consolidates the evidence‐based findings of the document. Methods ICAR‐RS presents over 180 topics in the forms of evidence‐based reviews with recommendations (EBRRs), evidence‐based reviews, and literature reviews. The highest grade structured recommendations of the EBRR sections are summarized in this executive summary. Results ICAR‐RS‐2021 covers 22 topics regarding the medical management of RS, which are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Additionally, 4 topics regarding the surgical management of RS are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Finally, a comprehensive evidence‐based management algorithm is provided. Conclusion This ICAR‐RS‐2021 executive summary provides a compilation of the evidence‐based recommendations for medical and surgical treatment of the most common forms of RS.