Search

Submitted by (omml@ubi.pt) on 2021-07-05T10:47:24Z No. of bitstreams: 1 2021_Bousquet J_A_COVID anaphylaxis.pdf: 12561118 bytes, checksum: 2f801ee76ad2cb3cbdaa02ffabea8e09 (MD5) Approved for entry into archive by Pessoa (pfep@ubi.pt) on 2021-07-05T10:49:11Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 2021_Bousquet J_A_COVID anaphylaxis.pdf: 12561118 bytes, checksum: 2f801ee76ad2cb3cbdaa02ffabea8e09 (MD5) Rejected by Pessoa (pfep@ubi.pt), reason: Rever os nomes dos autores. Depois da correção é só voltar a submeter. on 2021-07-05T10:54:19Z (GMT) Submitted by (omml@ubi.pt) on 2021-07-05T11:52:24Z No. of bitstreams: 1 2021_Bousquet J_A_COVID anaphylaxis.pdf: 12561118 bytes, checksum: 2f801ee76ad2cb3cbdaa02ffabea8e09 (MD5) Approved for entry into archive by Pessoa (pfep@ubi.pt) on 2021-07-05T13:34:51Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 2021_Bousquet J_A_COVID anaphylaxis.pdf: 12561118 bytes, checksum: 2f801ee76ad2cb3cbdaa02ffabea8e09 (MD5) Approved for entry into archive by Pessoa (pfep@ubi.pt) on 2021-07-05T13:35:49Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 2021_Bousquet J_A_COVID anaphylaxis.pdf: 12561118 bytes, checksum: 2f801ee76ad2cb3cbdaa02ffabea8e09 (MD5) Made available in DSpace on 2021-07-05T13:35:49Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 2021_Bousquet J_A_COVID anaphylaxis.pdf: 12561118 bytes, checksum: 2f801ee76ad2cb3cbdaa02ffabea8e09 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2021-04-02 info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Hymenoptera venom allergy ranks among the top three causes of anaphylaxis worldwide, and approximately one-quarter of sting-induced reactions are classified as severe. Fatal sting reactions are exceedingly rare, but certain factors may entail a considerably higher risk. Delayed administration of epinephrine and upright posture are situational risk factors which may determine an unfavorable outcome of the acute anaphylactic episode and should be addressed during individual patient education. Systemic mastocytosis and senior age are major, unmodifiable long-term risk factors and thus reinforce the indication for venom immunotherapy. Vespid venom allergy and male sex likewise augment the risk of severe or even fatal reactions. Further studies are required to assess the impact of specific cardiovascular comorbidities. Available data regarding potential effects of beta-blockers and/or ACE inhibitors in coexisting venom allergy are inconclusive and do not justify recommendations to discontinue guideline-directed antihypertensive treatment. The absence of urticaria/angioedema during sting-induced anaphylaxis is indicative of a severe reaction, serum tryptase elevation, and mast cell clonality. Determination of basal serum tryptase levels is an established diagnostic tool for risk assessment in Hymenoptera venom-allergic patients. Measurement of platelet-activating factor acetylhydrolase activity represents a complementary approach but is not available for routine diagnostic use.

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) has been in use for the treatment of allergic disease for more than 100 years. Asthma treatment relies mainly on corticosteroids and other controllers recommended to achieve and maintain asthma control, prevent exacerbations, and improve quality of life. AIT is underused in asthma, both in children and in adults. Notably, patients with allergic asthma not adequately controlled on pharmacotherapy (including biologics) represent an unmet health need. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology has developed a clinical practice guideline providing evidence-based recommendations for the use of house dust mites (HDM) AIT as add-on treatment for HDM-driven allergic asthma. This guideline was developed by a multi-disciplinary working group using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. HDM AIT was separately evaluated by route of administration and children and adults: subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual AIT (SLIT), drops, and tablets. Recommendations were formulated for each. The important prerequisites for successful treatment with HDM AIT are (a) selection of patients most likely to respond to AIT and (b) use of allergen extracts and desensitization protocols of proven efficacy. To date, only AIT with HDM SLIT-tablet has demonstrated a robust effect in adults for critical end points (exacerbations, asthma control, and safety). Thus, it is recommended as an add-on to regular asthma therapy for adults with controlled or partially controlled HDM-driven allergic asthma (conditional recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). HDM SCIT is recommended for adults and children, and SLIT drops are recommended for children with controlled HDM-driven allergic asthma as the add-on to regular asthma therapy to decrease symptoms and medication needs (conditional recommendation, low-quality evidence).

Background Birch pollen is an important elicitor of respiratory allergy. The major allergen, Bet v 1, binds IgE exclusively via conformational epitopes. Objective To identify Bet v 1-specific epitope repertoires of IgE and IgG from birch pollen-allergic and non-allergic subjects. Methods Chimeric proteins were created by grafting individual epitope-sized, contiguous surface patches of Bet v 1 onto a non-allergenic structural homologue and expressed in Escherichia coli. Binding of IgE, IgG1 and IgG4 from sera of 30 birch pollen-allergic and 11 non-allergic subjects to Bet v 1, 13 chimeric proteins and four bacterial Bet v 1 homologues were measured by ELISA. The proportion of epitope-specific in total Bet v 1-specific IgE and the cross-reactivity of Bet v 1-specific IgE with bacterial homologues were determined by competitive ELISA. Results Thirteen soluble, correctly folded chimeric proteins were produced. IgE from 27/30 birch pollen-allergic patients bound to 1-12 chimeric proteins (median 4.0) with patient-specific patterns. Three chimeras binding IgE from the majority of sera were identified, whose pgrafted patches overlapped with previously published epitopes. Patterns of IgG1 and IgG4 binding to the chimeric proteins did not correspond to the binding patterns of IgE. Sera of 19/30 birch pollen-allergic patients contained low amounts of IgE to bacterial homologues. Bacterial proteins were able to partially inhibit IgE binding to Bet v 1. Conclusion Epitopes recognized by Bet v 1-specific antibodies from birch pollen-allergic patients are specific to each patient and differ between IgE, IgG1 and IgG4.

Background There is controversy whether taking beta-blockers or ACE inhibitors (ACEI) is a risk factor for more severe systemic insect sting reactions (SSR) and whether it increases the number or severity of adverse events (AE) during venom immunotherapy (VIT). Methods in this open, prospective, observational, multicenter trial, we recruited patients with a history of a SSR and indication for VIT. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate whether patients taking beta-blockers or ACEI show more systemic AE during VIT compared to patients without such treatment. Results in total, 1,425 patients were enrolled and VIT was performed in 1,342 patients. of all patients included, 388 (27.2%) took antihypertensive (AHT) drugs (10.4% took beta-blockers, 11.9% ACEI, 5.0% beta-blockers and ACEI). Only 5.6% of patients under AHT treatment experienced systemic AE during VIT as compared with 7.4% of patients without these drugs (OR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.43-1.22, p = 0.25). The severity of the initial sting reaction was not affected by the intake of beta-blockers or ACEI (OR: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.89-1.46, p = 0.29). in total, 210 (17.7%) patients were re-stung during VIT and 191 (91.0%) tolerated the sting without systemic symptoms. of the 19 patients with VIT treatment failure, 4 took beta-blockers, none an ACEI. Conclusions This trial provides robust evidence that taking beta-blockers or ACEI does neither increase the frequency of systemic AE during VIT nor aggravate SSR. Moreover, results suggest that these drugs do not impair effectiveness of VIT. (Funded by Medical University of Graz, Austria; Clinicaltrials.gov number, NCT04269629)., Medizinische Universitat Graz Funding Source: Medline

The placebo (Latin "I will please") effect commonly occurs in clinical trials. The psychological and physiological factors associated with patients' expectations about a treatment's positive and negative effects have yet to be well characterized, although a functional prefrontal cortex and intense bidirectional communication between the central nervous system and the immune system appear to be prerequisites for a placebo effect. The use of placebo raises certain ethical issues, especially if patients in a placebo group are denied an effective treatment for a long period of time. The placebo effect appears to be relatively large (up to 77%, relative to pretreatment scores) in controlled clinical trials of allergen immunotherapy (AIT), such as the pivotal, double-blind, placebo-controlled (DBPC) randomized clinical trials currently required by regulatory authorities worldwide. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) therefore initiated a Task Force, in order to better understand the placebo effect in AIT and its specific role in comorbidities, blinding issues, adherence, measurement time points, variability and the natural course of the disease. In this Position Paper, the EAACI Task Force highlights several important topics regarding the placebo effect in AIT such as a) regulatory aspects, b) neuroimmunological and psychological mechanisms, c) placebo effect sizes in AIT trials, d) methodological limitations in AIT trial design and e) potential solutions in future AIT trial design. In conclusion, this Position Paper aims to examine the methodological problem of placebo in AIT from different aspects and also to highlight unmet needs and possible solutions for future trials. ispartof: ALLERGY vol:76 issue:3 pages:629-647 ispartof: location:Denmark status: published

BACKGROUND:Large local reactions (LLR) to Hymenoptera stings were considered as IgE-mediated late-phase inflammatory reactions. However, in older studies, most patients with LLR were skin test positive, but only around 50% had detectable sIgE determined by the RAST system. METHODS:Data of 620 patients were evaluated retrospectively: 310 patients who suffered from LLR and 310 patients with previous systemic sting reactions (SSR). We aimed to clarify if sIgE can generally be detected by the CAP system in patients with LLR; sIgE levels and clinical parameters were compared between patients with LLR and SSR. RESULTS:Positive sIgE levels were detected in 80.7% of patients with LLR, and in 95.2% of patients with SSR (p20cm, with a mean duration of seven days. In only 2.9% of patients, LLRs occurred after stings on the trunk, while 14.8% of SSR resulted from stings on this site (p

The allergist's community has recently celebrated 100 year of Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT). Unfortunately the implemention of this treatment is still impaired by some challenges. With the diversity of definitions, methodology and different allergen products used, research studies have produced conflicting outcomes. This has resulted in confusion about the benefits and risks of AIT amongst policymakers and professionals, as well as in the variable availability of AIT products, regulation and reimbursement policies globally. In 2015 EAACI initiated the AIT Guidelines project as part of the Presidential plan in order to settle the controversies. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Food allergy can result in considerable morbidity, impairment of quality of life, and healthcare expenditure. There is therefore interest in novel strategies for its treatment, particularly food allergen immunotherapy (FA-AIT) through the oral (OIT), sublingual (SLIT), or epicutaneous (EPIT) routes. This Guideline, prepared by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) Task Force on Allergen Immunotherapy for IgE-mediated Food Allergy, aims to provide evidence-based recommendations for active treatment of IgE-mediated food allergy with FA-AIT. Immunotherapy relies on the delivery of gradually increasing doses of specific allergen to increase the threshold of reaction while on therapy (also known as desensitization) and ultimately to achieve post-discontinuation effectiveness (also known as tolerance or sustained unresponsiveness). Oral FA-AIT has most frequently been assessed: here, the allergen is either immediately swallowed (OIT) or held under the tongue for a period of time (SLIT). Overall, trials have found substantial benefit for patients undergoing either OIT or SLIT with respect to efficacy during treatment, particularly for cow's milk, hen's egg, and peanut allergies. A benefit post-discontinuation is also suggested, but not confirmed. Adverse events during FA-AIT have been frequently reported, but few subjects discontinue FA-AIT as a result of these. Taking into account the current evidence, FA-AIT should only be performed in research centers or in clinical centers with an extensive experience in FA-AIT. Patients and their families should be provided with information about the use of FA-AIT for IgE-mediated food allergy to allow them to make an informed decision about the therapy.

Background: The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is in the process of developing the EAACI Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) for the management of insect venom allergy. To inform this process, we sought to assess the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of AIT in the management of insect venom allergy.Methods: We undertook a systematic review, which involved searching 15 international biomedical databases for published and unpublished evidence. Studies were independently screened and critically appraised using established instruments. Data were descriptively summarized and, where possible meta-analysed.Results: Our searches identified a total of 16,917 potentially eligible studies of which 17 satisfied our inclusion criteria. The available evidence was limited both in volume and quality, but suggested that venom immunotherapy (VIT) could substantially reduce the risk of subsequent severe systemic sting reactions (OR=0.08, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.26); meta-analysis showed that it also improved disease specific quality of life (risk difference=1.41, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.79). Adverse effects were experienced in both the build-up and maintenance phases, but most were mild with no fatalities being reported. The very limited evidence found on modeling cost-effectiveness suggested that VIT was likely to be cost-effective in those at high risk of repeated systemic sting reactions and/or impaired quality of life.Conclusions: The limited available evidence suggested that VIT is effective in reducing severe subsequent systemic sting reactions and in improving disease specific quality of life. VIT proved to be safe and no fatalities were recorded in the studies included in this review. The cost-effectiveness of VIT needs to be established.

Diagnosis of Hymenoptera venom allergy (HVA) is straightforward in the majority of patients, but can be challenging in double positive and test negative patients. Test results sometimes can be confusing as patients with high skin test reactivity and high specific IgE (sIgE) levels are not at risk for severe systemic sting reactions (SSR), and conversely, patients with weakly positive or even negative tests can experience severe SSR. Venom immunotherapy (VIT) is safe, highly effective, and recommended in patients with moderate to severe SSR and in patients with SSR confined to generalized skin symptoms if quality of life is impaired.

Background Recommendations on contraindications to allergen immunotherapy (AIT) have been independently developed by National and International Societies/Academies. AIT contraindications are mainly based on case reports, case-series, or experts’ opinion, while evidence-based information is limited. The aim of the present review was to describe existing guidelines on contraindications to AIT and to highlight differences between them. Main body An extended review of the literature regarding contraindications to AIT for respiratory allergy and venom hypersensitivity was performed. Furthermore, Societies and Academies registered in the World Allergy Organization and EAACI databases, were asked for additional information. Only AIT guidelines published under official auspicies were included. A large heterogeneity among the various recommendations on contraindications was registered. Common contraindications to most of the guidelines were: lack of adherence, pregnancy before the start of AIT, the use of beta-blockers, certain age groups, uncontrolled asthma, autoimmune diseases and malignancies. Conclusion As new data arise, revisions might soon be needed allowing AIT in the cases of patients treated with ACE inhibitors and beta-blockers, in elderly patients and in patients with concomitant autoimmune diseases and neoplasias in remission. The decision to prescribe AIT is always tailor-made, balancing risk vs benefit. Creating globally accepted guidelines would help Allergologists in their decision making.

The seventh "Future of the Allergists and Specific Immunotherapy (FASIT)" workshop held in 2019 provided a platform for global experts from academia, allergy clinics, regulatory authorities and industry to review current developments in the field of allergen immunotherapy (AIT). Key domains of the meeting included the following: (a) Biomarkers for AIT and allergic asthma; (b) visions for the future of AIT; (c) progress and data for AIT in asthma and the updates of GINA and EAACI Asthma Guidelines (separated for house dust mite SCIT, SLIT tablets and SLIT drops; patient populations) including a review of clinically relevant endpoints in AIT studies in asthma; (d) regulatory prerequisites such as the "Therapy Allergen Ordinance" in Germany; (e) optimization of trial design in AIT clinical research; (f) challenges planning and conducting phase III (field) studies and the future role of Allergen Exposure Chambers (AEC) in AIT product development from the regulatory point of view. We report a summary of panel discussions of all six domains and highlight unmet needs and possible solutions for the future. ispartof: ALLERGY vol:74 pages:3-25 ispartof: location:Denmark status: published

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a proven therapeutic option for the treatment of allergic rhinitis and/or asthma. Many guidelines or national practice guidelines have been produced but the evidence-based method varies, many are complex and none propose care pathways. This paper reviews care pathways for AIT using strict criteria and provides simple recommendations that can be used by all stakeholders including health professionals. The decision to prescribe AIT for the patient should be individualized and based on the relevance of the allergens, the persistence of symptoms despite appropriate medications according to guidelines as well as on the availability of good-quality and efficacious extracts. Allergen extracts cannot be regarded as generics. Immunotherapy is selected by specialists for stratified patients. There are no currently available validated biomarkers that can predict AIT success. In adolescents and adults, AIT should be reserved for patients with moderate/severe rhinitis or for those with moderate asthma who, despite appropriate pharmacotherapy and adherence, continue to exhibit exacerbations that appear to be related to allergen exposure, except in some specific cases. Immunotherapy may be even more advantageous in patients with multimorbidity. In children, AIT may prevent asthma onset in patients with rhinitis. mHealth tools are promising for the stratification and follow up of patients. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Adequate quality is essential for any medicinal product to be eligible for marketing. Quality includes verification of the identity, content and purity of a medicinal product in combination with a specified production process and its control. Allergen products derived from natural sources require particular considerations to ensure adequate quality. Here, we describe key aspects of the documentation on manufacturing and quality aspects for allergen immunotherapy products in the European Union and the United States. In some key parts, requirements in these areas are harmonized while other fields are regulated separately between both regions. Essential differences are found in the use of Reference Preparations, or the requirement to apply standardized assays for potency determination. Since the types of products available are different in specific regions, regulatory guidance for such products may also be available in one specific region only, such as for allergoids in the European Union. Region-specific issues and priorities are a result of this. As allergen products derived from natural sources are inherently variable in their qualitative and quantitative composition, these products present special challenges to balance the variability and ensuring batch-to-batch consistency. Advancements in scientific knowledge on specific allergens and their role in allergic disease will consequentially find representation in future regulatory guidelines. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (AR) is an allergic disorder of the nose and eyes affecting about a fifth of the general population. Symptoms of AR can be controlled with allergen avoidance measures and pharmacotherapy. However, many patients continue to have ongoing symptoms and an impaired quality of life; pharmacotherapy may also induce some side-effects. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) represents the only currently available treatment that targets the underlying pathophysiology and it may have a disease modifying effect. Either the subcutaneous (SCIT) or sublingual (SLIT) routes may be used. This Guideline has been prepared by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology's (EAACI) Taskforce on AIT for AR and is part of the EAACI presidential project "EAACI Guidelines on Allergy Immunotherapy". It aims to provide evidence-based clinical recommendations and has been informed by a formal systematic review and meta-analysis. Its generation has followed the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) approach. The process included involvement of the full range of stakeholders. In general, broad evidence for the clinical efficacy of AIT for AR exists but a product-specific evaluation of evidence is recommended. In general, SCIT and SLIT are recommended for both seasonal and perennial AR for its short term benefit. The strongest evidence for long-term benefit is documented for grass AIT (especially for the grass-tablets) where long-term benefit is seen. To achieve long-term efficacy, it is recommended that a minimum of 3 years of therapy is used. Many gaps in the evidence base exist, particularly around long-term benefit and use in children. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

BackgroundCurrently available tests are unable to distinguish between asymptomatic sensitization and clinically relevant Hymenoptera venom allergy. A reliable serological marker to monitor venom immunotherapy (VIT) does also not exist. Our aim was to find reliable serological markers to predict tolerance to bee and vespid stings. MethodsWe included 77 asymptomatically sensitized subjects, 85 allergic patients with acute systemic sting reactions, and 61 allergic patients currently treated with VIT. Levels of sIgE and sIgG(4) to bee and vespid venom, rApi m 1, and rVes v 5 were measured immediately after allergic sting reactions or before sting challenges and 4 weeks later. All sting challenges were tolerated. The inhibitory activity was determined using BAT inhibition and ELIFAB assay. ResultsMedian sIgG(4) levels were 96-fold higher in VIT patients (P < .001) while sIgE/sIgG(4) ratios were consistently lower (P < .001). The ELIFAB assay was paralleled by low sIgE/sIgG(4) ratios in VIT patients, showing markedly higher allergen-blocking capacity (P < .001). An almost complete inhibition of the basophil response was seen in all patients treated with vespid venom, but not in those treated with bee venom. Four weeks after the sting, sIgE and sIgG(4) levels were increased in allergic and asymptomatically sensitized patients, but not in VIT patients. ConclusionImmunological responses after stings varied in bee and vespid venom-allergic patients. In patients under VIT, sIgE and sIgG(4) remained completely stable after sting challenges. Monitoring VIT efficacy was only possible in vespid venom allergy, and the sIgG(4) threshold for rVes v 5 had the highest sensitivity to confirm tolerance. The BAT inhibition test was the most reliable tool to confirm tolerance on an individual basis.

The accurate assessment and communication of the severity of acute allergic reactions is important to patients, clinicians, researchers, the food industry, public health and regulatory authorities. Severity has different meanings to different stakeholders with patients and clinicians rating the significance of particular symptoms very differently. Many severity scoring systems have been generated, most focusing on the severity of reactions following exposure to a limited group of allergens. They are heterogeneous in format, none has used an accepted developmental approach and none has been validated. Their wide range of outcome formats has led to difficulties with interpretation and application. Therefore there is a persisting need for an appropriately developed and validated severity scoring system for allergic reactions that works across the range of allergenic triggers and addresses the needs of different stakeholder groups. We propose a novel approach to develop and then validate a harmonized scoring system for acute allergic reactions, based on a data-driven method that is informed by clinical and patient experience and other stakeholders' perspectives. We envisage two formats: (i) a numerical score giving a continuum from mild to severe reactions that is clinically meaningful and is useful for allergy healthcare professionals and researchers; and (ii) a three grade based ordinal format that is simple enough to be used and understood by other professionals and patients. Testing of reliability and validity of the new approach in a range of settings and populations will allow eventual implementation of a standardized scoring system in clinical studies and routine practice. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Regulatory approaches for allergen immunotherapy (AIT) products and the availability of high-quality AIT products are inherently linked to each other. While allergen products are available in many countries across the globe, their regulation is very heterogeneous. First, we describe the regulatory systems applicable for AIT products in the European Union (EU) and in the United States (US). For Europe, a depiction of the different types of relevant procedures, as well as the committees involved, is provided and the fundamental role of national agencies of the EU member states in this complex and unique network is highlighted. Furthermore, the regulatory agencies from Australia, Canada, Japan, Russia, and Switzerland provided information on the system implemented in their countries for the regulation of allergen products. While AIT products are commonly classified as biological medicinal products, they are made available by varying types of procedures, most commonly either by obtaining a marketing authorization or by being distributed as named patient products. Exemptions from marketing authorizations in exceptional cases, as well as import of allergen products from other countries, are additional tools applied by countries to ensure availability of needed AIT products. Several challenges for AIT products are apparent from this analysis and will require further consideration.

Allergic diseases are common and frequently coexist. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a disease-modifying treatment for IgE-mediated allergic disease with effects beyond cessation of AIT that may include important preventive effects. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) has developed a clinical practice guideline to provide evidence-based recommendations for AIT for prevention of i) development of allergic comorbidities in those with established allergic diseases, ii) development of first allergic condition and iii) allergic sensitization. This guideline has been developed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE II) framework, which involved a multi-disciplinary expert working group, a systematic review of the underpinning evidence and external peer-review of draft recommendations. Our key recommendation is that a three year course of subcutaneous or sublingual AIT can be recommended for children and adolescents with moderate to severe allergic rhinitis (AR) triggered by grass/birch pollen allergy to prevent asthma for up to two years post-AIT in addition to its sustained effect on AR symptoms and medication. Some trial data even suggest a preventive effect on asthma symptoms and medication more than two years post AIT. We need more evidence concerning AIT for prevention in individuals with AR triggered by house dust mites or other allergens and for the prevention of allergic sensitization, the first allergic disease or for prevention of allergic co-morbidities in those with other allergic conditions. Evidence for the preventive potential of AIT as disease modifying treatment exists but there is an urgent need for more high-quality clinical trials. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Prostaglandin E2 (PGE2 ) protects against allergic responses via binding to prostanoid receptor EP4, which inhibits eosinophil migration in a PI3K/PKC-dependent fashion. The phosphoinositide-dependent protein kinase 1 (PDK1) is known to act as a downstream effector in PI3K signaling and has been implicated in the regulation of neutrophil migration. Thus, here we elucidate whether PDK1 mediates inhibitory effects of E-type prostanoid receptor 4 (EP4) receptors on eosinophil function. Therefore, eosinophils were isolated from human peripheral blood or differentiated from mouse BM. PDK1 signaling was investigated in shape change, chemotaxis, CD11b, respiratory burst, and Ca(2+) mobilization assays. The specific PDK1 inhibitors BX-912 and GSK2334470 prevented the inhibition by prostaglandin E2 and the EP4 agonist ONO-AE1-329. Depending on the cellular function, PDK1 seemed to act through PI3K-dependent or PI3K-independent mechanisms. Stimulation of EP4 receptors caused PDK1 phosphorylation at Ser396 and induced PI3K-dependent nuclear translocation of PDK1. EP4-induced inhibition of shape change and chemotaxis was effectively reversed by the Akt inhibitor triciribine. In support of this finding, ONO-AE1-329 induced a PI3K/PDK1-dependent increase in Akt phosphorylation. In conclusion, our data illustrate a critical role for PDK1 in transducing inhibitory signals on eosinophil effector function. Thus, our results suggest that PDK1 might serve as a novel therapeutic target in diseases involving eosinophilic inflammation.

PURPOSE: The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) has produced Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT). We sought to gauge the preparedness of primary care to participate in the delivery of AIT in Europe.METHODS: We undertook a mixed-methods, situational analysis. This involved a purposeful literature search, and two surveys: one to primary care clinicians and the other to a wider group of stakeholders across Europe.RESULTS: The 10 papers identified all pointed out gaps or deficiencies in allergy care provision in primary care. The surveys also highlighted similar concerns, particularly in relation to concerns about lack of knowledge, skills, infrastructural weaknesses, reimbursement policies and communication with specialists as barriers to evidence-based care. Almost all countries (92%) reported the availability of AIT. In spite of that, only 28% and 44% of the countries reported the availability of guidelines for primary care physicians and specialists, respectively. Agreed pathways between specialists and primary care physicians were reported as existing in 32-48% of countries. Reimbursement appeared to be an important barrier as AIT was only fully reimbursed in 32% of countries. Additionally, 44% of respondents considered accessibility to AIT and 36% stating patient costs were barriers.CONCLUSIONS: Successful working with primary care providers is essential to scaling-up AIT provision in Europe, but to achieve this the identified barriers must be overcome. Development of primary care interpretation of guidelines to aid patient selection, establishment of disease management pathways and collaboration with specialist groups are required as a matter of urgency. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Hymenoptera venom allergy is a potentially life-threatening allergic reaction following a honeybee, vespid or ant sting. Systemic allergic sting reactions have been reported in up to 7.5% of adults and up to 3.4% of children. They can be mild and restricted to the skin or moderate-to-severe with a risk of life-threatening anaphylaxis. Patients should carry an emergency kit containing an adrenaline autoinjector, H1 -antihistamines, and corticosteroids depending on the severity of their previous sting reaction(s). The only treatment to prevent further systemic sting reactions is venom immunotherapy. This guideline has been prepared by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology's (EAACI) Taskforce on Venom Immunotherapy as part of the EAACI Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy initiative. The guideline aims to provide evidence-based recommendations for the use of venom immunotherapy, has been informed by a formal systematic review and meta-analysis and produced using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) approach. The process included representation from a range of stakeholders. Venom immunotherapy is indicated in venom allergic children and adults to prevent further moderate to severe systemic sting reactions. Venom immunotherapy is also recommended in adults with only generalized skin reactions as it results in significant improvements in quality of life compared to carrying an adrenaline auto-injector. This guideline aims to give practical advice on performing venom immunotherapy. Key sections cover general considerations before initiating venom immunotherapy, evidence-based clinical recommendations, risk factors for adverse events and for relapse of systemic sting reaction, and a summary of gaps in the evidence. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

For many years, only the major allergen rApi m 1 has been available on the ImmunoCAP system for routine diagnosis of bee venom (BV) allergy. Now, there are five components available, and we aimed to detect the sensitivity and specificity of rApi m 1, 2, 3, 5, and 10 in BV-allergic patients. We further evaluated the sensitivity of rApi m 1 and 2 of an alternative platform and investigated possible differences in the sensitization profile between monosensitization and clinically relevant double sensitization. Analysis of the whole panel of BV allergens of the CAP system still resulted in a lower sensitivity than analysis of the combination of rApi m 1 and 2 of the Immulite (71.6% vs 85.8%). Sensitization rate of rApi m 5 was more than doubled in double-sensitized patients, while there was no difference for rApi m 2. The benefit of the commercially available panel of BV components is questionable, due to the insufficient sensitivity and still unavailable important cross-reacting allergens.

Unfortunately this article [1] was published with an error in the Funding section. The BM4SIT project is not acknowledged. This section should be corrected to the below: Funding EAACI and the BM4SIT project (Grant Number 601763) in the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme FP7.

This review presents the current trends in anaphylaxis management discussed at the fourth International Network for Online-Registration of Anaphylaxis (NORA) conference held in Berlin in April 2017. Current data from the anaphylaxis registry show that Hymenoptera venom, foods, and pharmaceutical drugs are still among the most frequent triggers of anaphylaxis. Rare triggers include chicory, cardamom, asparagus, and goji berries. A meta-analysis on recent trends in insect venom anaphylaxis demonstrated for the first time that, although data on the efficacy of insect venom immunotherapy is limited, the occurrence of severe reactions upon repeated sting events can be prevented and patients’ quality of life improved. Molecular diagnostics of insect venom anaphylaxis have significantly improved diagnostic sensitivity and specificity. Self-treatment of anaphylaxis is of great importance. Recent data from the anaphylaxis registry show an increase (from 23% in 2012 to 29% in 2016) in the use of adrenaline as recommended in the guidelines. A survey on the implementation of guidelines conducted among the centers reporting to the anaphylaxis registry highlights the extent to which the guideline has been perceived and implemented. Reports on a variety of cases in the anaphylaxis registry illustrate the diversity of this potentially life-threatening reaction. Component-resolved diagnostics can help to specify sensitization profiles in anaphylaxis, particularly in terms of the risk for severe reactions. Recent studies on anaphylaxis awareness show that training methods are effective; nevertheless, target groups and learning methods need to undergo further scientific investigation in coming years.

Background New diagnostic tools such as the basophil activation test (BAT) and component-resolved diagnosis (CRD) are promising for hymenoptera venom or food allergy. A clear benefit for inhalant allergens has not yet been shown. Our aim was to compare new and established tests for grass pollen allergy. Methods Forty-nine patients with grass pollen allergy and 47 controls were prospectively enrolled in the study. A symptom score was calculated for each patient. Conjunctival provocation tests (CPT), skin prick tests (SPT), BAT, and sIgE determination including CRD were performed. Sensitivity and specificity were compared and results were correlated with the symptom score. Results Single determination of sIgE to rPhl p 1 showed the best balance between sensitivity (98%) and specificity (92%). Use of additional components, such as rPhl p 2 and 5, did not increase sensitivity. Generally, sensitivity of tests was high: SPT 100%, ISAC-112 100%, sIgE to timothy grass 98%, BAT 98%, ISAC-103 84%, and CPT 83%. Specificity ranged from 79% (SPT) to 96% (CPT). All test results and calculated values (e.g. ratio sIgE/tIgE) did not correlate with symptom severity. Asymptomatic sensitization to timothy grass in controls was rare in the CAP (11%) and predominantly due to Phl p 1 sensitization. Conclusion rPhl p 1 was sufficient to diagnose grass pollen allergy, and sIgE patterns were the same in symptomatically and asymptomatically sensitized subjects. The testing of multiple components was of minor importance, and no test correlated with symptom severity.

Stings in the head region are considered to be a risk factor for severe systemic reactions to hymenoptera stings. We supposed that stings in skin areas, which are well supplied with blood, lead to more severe reactions and tested our hypothesis in 847 patients with confirmed hymenoptera venom allergy. However, symptom severity was independent from sting site: only 16.3% of patients with severe reactions were stung on the head (P = 0.017). But we confirmed age > 40 years (P < 0.001) as well as elevated basal tryptase levels (P = 0.001) as risk factors. Taking antihypertensive drugs seemed to have an influence: 41.7% of patients taking antihypertensive drugs experienced a severe reaction compared to 29.5% of patients, not taking such drugs (P = 0.019). However, considering patients' age in regression analysis, taking antihypertensive drugs had no effect on symptom severity (P = 0.342). Importantly, in most patients with severe reactions, cutaneous signs were absent (P < 0.001).

An anaphylactic reaction due to a Hymenoptera sting is a clinical emergency, and patients, their caregivers as well as all healthcare professionals should be familiar with its recognition and acute management. This consensus report has been prepared by a European expert panel of the EAACI Interest Group of Insect Venom Hypersensitivity. It is targeted at allergists, clinical immunologists, internal medicine specialists, pediatricians, general practitioners, emergency department doctors, and any other healthcare professional involved. The aim was to report the scientific evidence on self-medication of anaphylactic reactions due to Hymenoptera stings, to inform healthcare staff about appropriate patient self-management of sting reactions, to propose indications for the prescription of an adrenaline auto-injector (AAI), and to discuss other forms of medication. First-line treatment for Hymenoptera sting anaphylaxis is intramuscular adrenaline. Prescription of AAIs is mandatory in the case of venom-allergic patients who suffer from mast cell diseases or with an elevated baseline serum tryptase level and in untreated patients with a history of a systemic reaction involving at least two different organ systems. AAI prescription should also be considered in other specific situations before, during, and after stopping venom immunotherapy.

BackgroundThe European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is in the process of developing the EAACI Guidelines for Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) for the Management of Insect Venom Allergy. We seek to critically assess the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of AIT in the management of insect venom allergy.MethodsWe will undertake a systematic review, which will involve searching international biomedical databases for published, in progress and unpublished evidence. Studies will be independently screened against pre-defined eligibility criteria and critically appraised using established instruments. Data will be descriptively and, if possible and appropriate, quantitatively synthesised.DiscussionThe findings from this review will be used to inform the development of recomendations for EAACI’s Guidelines on AIT.

Allergic diseases often occur early in life and persist throughout life. This life-course perspective should be considered in allergen immunotherapy. In particular it is essential to understand whether this al treatment may be used in old age adults. The current paper was developed by a working group of AIRWAYS integrated care pathways for airways diseases, the model of chronic respiratory diseases of the European Innovation Partnership on active and healthy ageing (DG CONNECT and DG Santé). It considered (1) the political background, (2) the rationale for allergen immunotherapy across the life cycle, (3) the unmet needs for the treatment, in particular in preschool children and old age adults, (4) the strategic framework and the practical approach to synergize current initiatives in allergen immunotherapy, its mechanisms and the concept of active and healthy ageing. ispartof: Clinical and Translational Allergy vol:6 issue:1 pages:41-47 ispartof: location:England status: published

Enhanced eosinophil trafficking from bone marrow to the tissue is a hallmark of allergic diseases. We have shown previously that PGI2 markedly attenuates the locomotion of human eosinophils in vitro. Here, we set out to determine the effect of PGI2 on the trafficking of bone marrow eosinophils in the guinea pig. Shape change of bone marrow eosinophils was determined by flow cytometry, and chemotaxis assays were performed using a transwell migration system. Eosinophil release from bone marrow of guinea pigs was investigated in the isolated, perfused hind-limb preparation. We found that PGI2 prevented the mobilization of eosinophils from bone marrow and attenuated the shape change and chemotactic responses of bone marrow eosinophils. These effects were mimicked by iloprost and were prevented by the IP antagonist CAY10441 and the adenylyl cyclase inhibitor SQ22536. Immunohistochemical staining of bone marrow confirmed the expression of IPs by bone marrow eosinophils. The rate-limiting enzyme of PGI2 formation, PGIS, was found in large mononuclear cells. These data show that IP activation negatively modulates the mobilization and locomotion of bone marrow eosinophils and might therefore also protect against exaggerated recruitment of eosinophils to inflammatory sites.

Background: The basophil activation test (BAT) based on CD203c upregulation has been validated as a reliable tool for the diagnosis of IgE-mediated allergies. Nevertheless, CD203c-based BAT is hardly comparable with that of CD63-based tests, as the mechanisms of CD203c versus CD63 induction differ considerably. The aim of the present study was to identify potent influencing factors of the CD203cbased BAT and to emphasize differences between CD63 and CD203c detection. Methods: CD203c-based BAT was determined in 82 healthy controls and in 79 allergic patients. The effects of interleukin (IL)-3 and degranulation enhancing substances were investigated and compared with CD63 upregulation. Furthermore, the influence of different storage conditions and incubation times was evaluated and the impact of antiallergic drugs on the test results was assessed. Results: CD203c and CD63 expression was rapidly upregulated reaching a maximum after 20–30 min. Basophil CD203c upregulation assayed after storage times up to 48 h declined already after 4 h. IL-3 treatment increased CD203c and CD63 baseline levels and decreased basophil CD203c responses in a dose-dependent manner. In contrast, cytochalasin B and latrunculin B did not affect CD203c responses but decreased CD63-based BAT. Finally, therapeutic concentrations of dimetindene and desloratadine did not affect CD203c upregulation. Conclusion: CD203c-based basophil activation test should be performed preferentially within 4 h after taking the blood samples. Priming and degranulation-enhancing factors are not required for CD203cbased BAT. In contrast to skin testing, CD203c-based BAT can be performed in patients undergoing antiallergic treatment. V C 2010 International Clinical Cytometry Society

Background: The basophil activation test (BAT) is a widely validated and reliable tool especially for the diagnosis of hymenoptera venom allergy. Nevertheless, several pitfalls have to be considered and outcomes may differ because of diverse in-house protocols and commercially available kits. We aimed to identify the factors that may influence results of the CD63-based BAT. Methods: Basophil responses to monoclonal anti-IgE (clone E124.2.8) and bee and wasp venom were determined by BAT based on CD63. The effect of stimulating factors such as, IL-3, cytochalasin B and prewarming of the samples was investigated. Furthermore, we compared two different flow cytometer systems and evaluated the influence of storage time, different staining protocols and anti-allergic drugs on the test results. Results: Interleukin-3 enhanced the reactivity of basophils at 300 pM, but not at 75 and 150 pM. Prewarming of samples and reagents did not affect basophil reactivity. CD63 expression assayed after storage time of up to 48 h showed that basophil reactivity already started to decline after 4 h. Basophils stained with HLA-DR-PC5 and CD123-PE antibodies gated as HLA-DRneg/CD123pos cells showed the highest reactivity. No effect on test outcomes was observed at therapeutic doses of dimetindene and desloratadine. Finally, slight differences in the percentage of activated basophils, depending on the cytometer system used, were found. Conclusion: Basophil activation test should be performed as early as possible after taking the blood sample, preferably within 4 h. In contrast to the skin test, BAT can be performed in patients undergoing treatment with antihistamines. For reasons of multiple influencing factors, BAT should be performed only at validated laboratories.

The accumulation of eosinophils in lung tissue is a hallmark of asthma, and it is believed that eosinophils play a crucial pathogenic role in allergic inflammation. Prostaglandin (PG) E2 exerts anti-inflammatory and bronchoprotective mechanisms in asthma, but the underlying mechanisms have remained unclear. In this study we show that PGE2 potently inhibits the chemotaxis of purified human eosinophils toward eotaxin, PGD2, and C5a. Activated monocytes similarly attenuated eosinophil migration, and this was reversed after pretreatment of the monocytes with a cyclooxygenase inhibitor. The selective E-prostanoid (EP) 2 receptor agonist butaprost mimicked the inhibitory effect of PGE2 on eosinophil migration, whereas an EP2 antagonist completely prevented this effect. Butaprost, and also PGE2, inhibited the C5a-induced degranulation of eosinophils. Moreover, selective kinase inhibitors revealed that the inhibitory effect of PGE2 on eosinophil migration depended upon activation of PI3K and protein kinase C, but not cAMP. In animal models, the EP2 agonist butaprost inhibited the rapid mobilization of eosinophils from bone marrow of the in situ perfused guinea pig hind limb and prevented the allergen-induced bronchial accumulation of eosinophils in OVA-sensitized mice. Immunostaining showed that human eosinophils express EP2 receptors and that EP2 receptor expression in the murine lungs is prominent in airway epithelium and, after allergen challenge, in peribronchial infiltrating leukocytes. In summary, these data show that EP2 receptor agonists potently inhibit eosinophil trafficking and activation and might hence be a useful therapeutic option in eosinophilic diseases.

Background: The detection of specific serum immunoglobulin E (sIgE) to Hymenoptera venoms is an established diagnostic tool to diagnose insect venom hypersensitivity. However, the specificity of sIgE detection is a debated issue. Methods: In 145 subjects, total IgE (tIgE) and sIgE to Hymenoptera venoms as well as sIgE to rapeseed as a marker of cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants were measured. In addition, an atopy score was determined for each patient. We looked for a possible association between tIgE and the presence of sIgE in subjects with a negative history of large local or systemic reactions to insect stings. Results: Fifteen of 65 subjects (23.1%) with low levels of tIgE (Conclusion: Specific antibodies are frequently seen in individuals with high tIgE, but appear to be largely irrelevant in clinical terms. This might lead to misdiagnosis in persons with an inconclusive sting history.

Detection of specific IgE for Hymenoptera venoms and skin tests are well established diagnostic tools for the diagnosis of insect venom hypersensitivity. The aim of our study was to analyze the effect of total IgE levels on the outcome of generalized anaphylactic reactions after a Hymenoptera sting.Two hundred and twenty patients allergic to bee, wasp, or European hornet venom were included in the study. Their specific and total IgE levels, serum tryptase levels, skin tests, and sting history were analyzed.In patients with mild reactions (grade I, generalized skin symptoms) we observed higher total IgE levels (248.0 kU/l) compared to patients with moderate reactions (grade II, moderate pulmonary, cardiovascular, or gastrointestinal symptoms; 75.2 kU/l) and severe reactions (grade III, bronchoconstriction, emesis, anaphylactic shock, or loss of consciousness; 56.5 kU/l; P0.001). Accordingly, 25% of the patients with low levels of total IgE (50 kU/l), but no individual with total IgE levels250 kU/l, developed loss of consciousness (P = 0.001). Additionally, specific IgE levels were related to total IgE levels: Specific IgE levels increased from 1.6 to 7.1 kU/l in patients with low (50 kU/l) and high (250 kU/l) total IgE levels, respectively (P0.001). Specific IgE levels correlated inversely to the clinical reaction grades, however, this trend was not statistically significant (P = 0.083).Patients with Hymenoptera venom allergy and high levels (250 kU/l) of total IgE, predominantly develop grade I and grade II reactions and appear to be protected from grade III reactions. However, this hypothesis should be confirmed by extended studies with sting challenges.

Background Patients with elevated basal tryptase (sBT) >15 μg/l and anaphylaxis may have an underlying mastocytosis. A monoclonal mast cell activation syndrome with aberrant mast cells (MC) at extracutaneous sites has been described in patients with severe hypotension or anaphylaxis. Methods As MC in patients with elevated sBT might be altered in the skin as well, we studied MC in normal neck skin in anaphylaxis and urticaria patients with elevated sBT. Results A mean of 93.1 (SD 19.1) MC/mm² was counted in normal neck skin in 14 patients with anaphylaxis, 84.0 (SD 13.6) in seven patients with urticaria, 142.0 (SD 24.0) in two patients with eczema, 124.4 (SD 43.2) in five patients with systemic mastocytosis (SM) in comparison with autopsy skin (39.1 MC/mm², SD 12.4). In five of 14 (35.7%) of the anaphylaxis and three of five (60%) SM patients more than 25% of MC were spindle shaped and expressed CD25 antigen. Conclusions We could show for the first time that the normal skin can harbour clonal MC in anaphylaxis patients. Analogous to the criteria for mastocytosis, we suggest a skin score criteria including an elevated number of MC, spindle shape, CD25 expression, c-Kit mutation and sBT values >20 μg/l. In patients with anaphylaxis and elevated sBT, skin should be biopsied and, as with the approach for mastocytosis diagnosis in the bone marrow, MC should be analysed for their number, clonality and c-Kit mutation. This approach should be confirmed in further studies. Patients with aberrant skin MC should be handled as mastocytosis patients.

Background 5-Oxo-6,8,11,14-eicosatetraenoic acid (5-oxo-ETE) is a chemoattractant for eosinophils and neutrophils, and the messenger RNA for its receptor, the oxo-eicosatetraenoic acid receptor (OXE), has been detected in several tissues. Objectives This study aimed at clarifying the role of 5-oxo-ETE in the regulation of basophil function. Methods Basophil responses were determined in assays of flow-cytometric shape change, Ca 2+ flux, chemotaxis, and histamine release. Messenger RNA for OXE was detected by real-time PCR. Results We observed that human eosinophils were 3 to 10 times more sensitive to 5-oxo-ETE than neutrophils in flow-cytometric shape change and Ca 2+ flux assays, as estimated from the half-maximal responses of the cells. Basophils responded to 5-oxo-ETE in the shape change assay with a sensitivity similar to that of eosinophils. 5-Oxo-ETE was a weak inducer of Ca 2+ flux in basophils and did not cause histamine release but was a highly effective chemoattractant for basophils in the low nanomolar concentration range in a pertussis toxin–sensitive manner. In agreement with these functional studies, the messenger RNA for the 5-oxo-ETE receptor, OXE, was detectable in basophils as in monocytes, eosinophils, and neutrophils, but not in fibroblasts. Specimens from sinus mucosa, tonsils, and adenoids also contained detectable levels of messenger RNA for OXE. Conclusion Our data suggest that 5-oxo-ETE is potentially involved in the regulation of basophil recruitment and might hence be a useful therapeutic target in atopic disease.

Background Little is known about the mechanisms that regulate the selective recruitment of basophils to sites of allergic inflammation. Objective Here we examine the role of stem cell factor (SCF) in the regulation of basophil function. Methods Human basophils were isolated from peripheral blood, and their migration was investigated in chemotaxis assays. Apoptosis was detected by means of annexin V and propidium iodide staining. The expression of cell-surface molecules was measured by means of flow cytometry. Results SCF amplified the chemotactic responsiveness of human peripheral blood basophils to the chemoattractants eotaxin, monocyte chemotactic protein 2 and macrophage inflammatory protein 1α, and C5a, without being chemotactic or chemokinetic by itself. SCF synergized with chemoattractants in causing basophil upregulation of the integrin CD11b, and this effect was inhibited by a c-kit antibody, the tyrosine kinase inhibitor imatinib mesylate (STI-571), and a phosphatidylinositol 3 kinase inhibitor but not by inhibitors of p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase or mitogen-activated protein kinase/extracellular signal–regulated kinase kinase. Basophils bound fluorescence-labeled SCF and expressed its receptor, c-kit, which was markedly upregulated in culture for 24 to 48 hours in the presence of IL-3. Moreover, SCF prolonged basophil survival in concert with IL-3 by delaying apoptosis. These effects of SCF were selective for basophils because chemotaxis and CD11b upregulation of eosinophils or neutrophils were unchanged. Conclusion SCF might be an important selective modulator of basophil function through a phosphatidylinositol 3 kinase–dependent pathway.