Search

The eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) is a chronic immune/antigen disorder of the oesophagus clinically characterized by dysphagia and pathologically by mucosa eosinophilic infiltration. Th2-type allergic reactions are considered having important roles in the aetiopathogenesis of EoE. Avoidance of food allergens, administration of steroidal anti-inflammatory medications and dilation of the oesophagus are the most important treatments. 'Systemic nickel allergy syndrome' (SNAS) interests about 20% of patients with nickel contact allergy which could present systemic cutaneous manifestations (urticaria, oedema, etc.) and also respiratory and digestive symptoms (meteorism, abdominal pain, diarrhoea, etc.). In the literature, it is demonstrated that nickel oral immunotherapy is effective in reducing symptoms of SNAS and in modulating inflammatory parameters. We describe the case of a 48-year-old woman suffering from EoE not responsive to the topical steroid administration and diagnosis of SNAS. The patient started nickel oral desensitization according to the literature protocol continuing nickel-free diet. After 1 year from the beginning of the treatment, during the maintenance dose (500 ng three times a week), she decreased gradually the dosage of immunotherapy and reintroduced all the culprit foods. After the immunotherapy interruption, during the free diet, she repeated the oesophagogastroscopy with a complete macroscopic and histological resolution. We showed the first case of an EoE in a patient affected by SNAS responsive to the nickel-free diet and the oral immunotherapy.

House dust mites (HDM) area major cause of respiratory allergy and of perennial asthmaworldwide. 32 allergens for Dermatophagoidesfarinae(D2) and 21 for Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus(D1) have been detectedso farand novel allergens are still being reported(1). Der p 23, a gut-derived peritrophin present in the outer membrane of mite feces (2),has been recognized as a major allergen (2,3).Der p 1, Der p 2, Der p 23, and Der p 10(tropomyosin)are theonly allergens currently available for the component-resolved diagnosis of HDMallergyon ImmunoCAP.The clinical relevance of Der p 23 is only partially defined, and the prevalence and relevance of the exclusive sensitization to allergensother than groups1, 2, 10, and 23 has received little attention so far. We addressed these aspects ina large multicenter study.

Introduction: The first therapeutic choice for food allergy is avoidance of the responsible food, but when this approach is not possible, specific oral desensitization could be considered as a good alternative. It is not clear yet whether the acquired tolerance is transient or persistent. Aim: We report on a subset of 13 patients of a larger study, treated successfully with specific oral tolerance induction who experienced secondary loss of tolerance after a period of allergen avoidance. Material and methods: Thirteen patients affected by IgE-mediated food allergy: to cow milk (3 patients), to hen egg (3 patients), to cod fish (2 patients), to peanuts (1 patient) and to corn (1 patient) confirmed by a complete allergological workup and a double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC), were treated with sublingual-oral desensitization. After the interruption of the maintenance phase, the laboratory tests were performed and 12 of 13 patients underwent DBPCFC. Results: Oral specific desensitization was completed successfully in all the 13 reported patients. At different times after the end of treatment, they decided, on their own initiative, to stop the ingestion of incriminated food. A new food allergen re-exposure caused adverse reactions in 12 of 13 patients. The detection of specific IgE and IgG4 during the period of allergen avoidance showed an increase in or a stable level of specific IgE and a decrease in specific IgG4 in 8 patients. Conclusions: According to our experience, the tolerance obtained through the desensitizing treatment is transient and so the regular allergen intake is necessary for its maintenance.

N/A

Introduction: The only etiological and decisive therapy, able to influence the natural history of latex allergy is the specific desensitization. Aim: To verify the clinical efficacy and immunological changes determined by latex sublingual immunotherapy in allergic patients who underwent this treatment for at least 3 years. Material and methods: We enrolled 76 patients (16 males and 60 females, mean age 34 years old) with evidence of a natural rubber latex allergy. To assess the effectiveness of the immunotherapy we performed a latex skin prick test, specific IgE and IgG4 and challenge tests before and after at least 3 years of desensitization. Results: We observed a reduction in the mean diameter of the wheal area at the skin prick test and a decrease in latex specific IgE while no significant changes of latex IgG4 values were found. Moreover a reduction of symptoms and scores at the provocation tests were remarked. Conclusions: Although the primary prevention (which still remains the gold standard treatment for patients suffering from the latex allergy) sublingual immunotherapy can be offered with efficacy in addition to symptomatic treatment to selected patients.

Gelatin, a collagen protein obtained from cow and pig bones and fish skin is widely used, by the hydrolysis of collagen, in food preparations (sweets, yoghurt, etc.) and as a stabilizer in the pharmaceutical industry. In particular it could be found as an ingredient of drug capsules, plasma expanders, vaccines and plasma substitutes. Systemic allergic reactions to gelatin-containing vaccines and drugs have been proven by anti-gelatin IgE assay [1–3] and by the Basophil Activation Test (BAT) [4]. Bovine gelatin sensitization is commonly associated with cow milk allergy and beef allergy [5]. We report the case of a 14-year-old patient affected by cow’s milk allergy, who experienced lip paraesthesia, generalized itching and dyspnoea with bronchospasm after the ingestion of lyophilised ebastine; the reaction was handled in the emergency room with intramuscular and aerosolized epinephrine, systemic corticosteroids and antihistamines.

The role of profilin as an allergen has long been questioned. The capacity of profilin to induce respiratory symptoms has recently been demonstrated; moreover, over 50% of patients sensitized to profilin experienced symptoms after the ingestion of plant-derived foods, suggesting that profilin should be considered as a clinically relevant food allergen.We describe the cases of seven allergic patients with oral allergy syndrome and other adverse reactions after eating plant-derived food, that have been undergone to profilin desensitization treatment.The protocol started with a drop of profilin solution (50 µg/mL) diluted 1:1018 in water until the highest dose of 10 drops of undiluted solution three times a week. At the end of the treatment we observed a decreased mean diameter of profilin wheal in skin prick test (SPT) in five of the seven participants and in profilin specific IgE values in six patients that repeated the test. Regarding basophil activation test (BAT) and the detection of IgG4, we do not have significant results because the tests have to be repeated in some patients. Regarding the double-blind placebo-controlled challenges, after about 10 months of induction phase all the patients showed tolerance to several foods that they previously did not tolerate.Moreover, the immunotherapy with profilin has proved to be safe because no serious adverse events have been reported in our patients.In summary, the results of this exploratory study of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for profilin allergy show that it can be a promising therapeutic option that could modify the clinical reactivity of the patients to the intake of plant-derived food.

Objective: The quantification of basophil activation by flow cytometry is a useful tool for the assessment of immediate-type responses to food allergens and the prediction of clinical tolerance in food allergy patients. The aim of this study is to investigate how the analysis of allergen-induced CD63 up-regulation by flow cytometry can be effective in monitoring the acquisition of clinical tolerance by specific oral desensitization in food allergy. To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine this topic. Materials and methods: Three male patients affected by cow’s milk allergy underwent successful oral desensitization to cow’s milk. In order to monitor the acquired clinical tolerance that occurred after treatment, we performed laboratory tests for total and specific IgE, specific IgG4 and the Basophil Activation Test (BAT) both at baseline and at the end of the desensitization protocol. Results: Using a fluorescent enzyme immunoassay, the comparison of specific cow’s milk antibodies before and after treatment showed a decrease of specific IgE levels, without reaching normal values, and an increase of specific IgG4 levels. A complete suppression of cow’s milk proteins (a-lactoalbumin, b-lactoglobulin and casein) induced CD63 regulation was observed in all three reported cases. Conclusions: Using flow cytometry, food allergen-specific basophil responses could be monitored in order to identify an acquired tolerance induced by desensitization treatment. Although further studies are needed to develop this important new topic, it was interesting to note that the BAT seemed to be more sensitive and characterized by a close correlation with clinical tolerance.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: 13-Lactams are the most commonly used antibiotics but they can cause hypersensitivity reactions. We sought to estimate cross-reactivity and tolerability of cephalosporins in patients with cell-mediated allergy to penicillins. METHODS: We studied 97 patients with a clinical history of nonimmediate reactions to a penicillin and a positive patch test result to at least 1 of the penicillins tested. All patients also underwent patch testing with several cephalosporins. Patients with a negative patch test to a cephalosporin underwent test dosing in order to assess tolerability. RESULTS: We recorded 129 reactions. The most commonly involved drugs were aminopenicillins, and the most widely reported symptoms were delayed urticaria and maculopapular exanthema. Seventeen patients had positive patch test results for cephalosporins, mostly for cephalexin (n=10), cefaclor (n=9), and cefuroxime axetil (n=5). All the patients-except 4 who experienced an exanthema after the challenge test with cephalexin-tolerated a therapeutic dose of the cephalosporin tested without any adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that cross-reactivity between penicillins and cephalosporins may be as high as 10.9% for first-generation cephalosporins and 1.1% for third-generation cephalosporins, possibly due to the involvement of similar side chains. Patch tests are a useful diagnostic tool to assess cross-reactivity, but a graded challenge is mandatory because a negative patch test does not always mean tolerability.

The prevalence of individuals allergic to latex, exhibiting cross-hypersensitivity with plant-derived food has been frequently reported as the so-called latex-fruit syndrome. Nonetheless, molecular mechanisms underlying allergy to latex and/or fruit are poorly understood.The aims of this study were to identify candidate genes that may be associated with the pathogenesis of allergy to latex and/or vegetable food, and to assess if similar molecular pathways are involved in both types of hypersensitivity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: DNA microarray analysis was performed to screen the molecular profiles of peripheral blood mononuclear cells isolated from patients with allergy to latex, to fruit, or with latex-fruit syndrome, and from control healthy subjects. RESULTS: Molecular profiling identified an overlapping dataset of genes commonly regulated in all the atopic patients enrolled in this study, suggesting that similar molecular mechanisms are involved in the pathogenesis of allergy to the fruit and/or latex. Several regulators of the innate and acquired immunity reported to polarize the immunological response towards a Th2-mediated immune response were overexpressed in the patients. Evidences suggested that the expression of T-regulatory cells might be defective in allergic patients, as a consequence of a dysregulation of some inflammatory cytokines. Finally, several transcription factors that may be responsible for the Th1/Th2 imbalance were modulated in allergic patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified relevant genes that may help to elucidate the molecular mechanisms underlying allergic disease. Knowledges of critical targets, along with transcription factors regulating gene activity may facilitate the development of new therapeutic options

Statins and fi brates are generally well tolerated. Their side effects are infrequent and include myalgia with consequent increased creatine phosphokinase and hepatotoxicity associated with changes in transaminase levels. No allergic reactions to these medications have been described.

Natural rubber latex allergy (NRL-A) is an international problem of public health. About 50-60% of NRL-A patients may present adverse reactions after ingestion of cross-reacting vegetable foods. This condition, called "Latex-fruit Syndrome", is a matter of research. The aim of our study is to distinguish between clinical/subclinical latex-fruit syndrome and cross-sensitization to latex and food/pollen allergens on the basis of latex recombinant allergens. We studied 51 patients with food hypersensitivity and serological evidence of NRL sensitization. The subjects underwent an accurate allergological evaluation (skin prick test with latex, food and pollen extracts, specific IgE to latex and recombinant allergens, challenge provocation tests). The patients were divided in two groups: group A) 34 patients with clinical and serological latex and fruit/vegetable allergies; group B) 17 patients allergic to fruits/vegetables and/or pollens, with serological, but not clinical NRL-A. All the latex challenge tests resulted positive in group A patients and only two patients of group B presented positive cutaneous challenge tests. Moreover, specific IgE-antibodies were detected to rHev b 5, to rHev b 6.01, to rHev b 6.02 and to rHev b 8 (and other profilins) of group A patients, while in group B we observed a monosensitization to Hev b8, probably linked to a cross-sensitization to pollens and foods. At the present state of knowledge, we need a multi-parametric approach based on a combination of clinical history, diagnostic tests (CRD) and latex challenge tests to make diagnosis of latex-fruit syndrome.

Profilin desensitization in two patients with plant-derived food allergy

The multiple drug intolerance syndrome is a clinical entity characterized by adverse drug reactions to at least three drugs, chemically, pharmacologically and immunogenically unrelated, manifested upon three different occasions, and with negative allergy testing. Symptoms referred by the patients are often subjective, of neurovegetative origin. The aim of the study is to characterize patients suffering from the multiple drug intolerance syndrome from a psychological point of view, and to compare them to healthy subjects. We studied 30 women suffering from the multiple drug intolerance syndrome. All subjects underwent the following psychodiagnostic tests: (1) the State Trait Anxiety Inventory-Form Y, (2) the Zung Self-rating Anxiety Scale, (3) the Zung Self-rating Depression Scale, (4) the Quality of life enjoyment and satisfaction questionnaire, (5) the Minnesota Multiphasic Inventory-2, (6) the Toronto Alexithymia Scale. The study group was compared to 30 healthy women. When compared with the control group, our patients showed: a higher anxiety, a higher grade of depression, this difference was statistically significant (p < 0.01); a high difference (p < 0.01) between the two groups as regards somatic symptoms; a higher grade of alexithymia (p < 0.01); and a worse quality of life, in all the analyzed ambits. These findings clearly demonstrate the importance of psychological symptoms in patients with the multiple drug intolerance syndrome, and show that a complex allergy and psychological work-up is mandatory in the management of these patients.

We present the case of a woman with 'empty sella syndrome' who experienced generalized urticaria after the administration of sodium succinate hydrocortisone in two episodes.

A case of IgE-mediated allergy and cell-mediated allergy to Seaprose-S in the same patient.

il sistema innunitario è un complesso di cellule e molecole specializzate nella distinzione del self e del non self.

Although co-trimoxazole is a major cause of fixed drug eruption, there are no reports in the literature of desensitization protocols for co-trimoxazole in such patients. We present the case of an 85-year-old woman with a fixed drug eruption to co-trimoxazole. Since she needed co-trimoxazole therapy for treatment of infection of a prosthetic hip by Staphylococcus aureus, she underwent allergy testing with co-trimoxazole and its components sulfamethoxazole and trimethoprim. Allergy tests were all negative and a diagnosis of nonallergic hypersensitivity reaction to co-trimoxazole was made. Based on previous experience, we decided to attempt a desensitization protocol with co-trimoxazole. After 10 days, the patient could receive 800 mg of sulfamethoxazole and 160 mg of trimethoprim twice a day and no adverse reactions were observed. We suggest that desensitization protocols with co-trimoxazole be considered in patients with fixed drug eruption, especially when there are no alternative drugs.

OBJECTIVE: Sublingual immunotherapy represents an efficient therapeutic tool for the management of latex allergic patients. Local and systemic adverse reactions are reported, and risk factors for those reactions are poorly understood. The aim of this study is to compare two different rush induction protocols (2-day and 3-day) in terms of safety and tolerability and effectiveness in reaching the maintenance dose. METHODS: Twenty-three outpatients (F/M = 18:5; 5-64 years of age), with latex allergy were randomly assigned to: Group 1 (2-day) and Group 2 (3-day). Adverse reactions were classified by their type and severity. RESULTS: Twenty-one subjects, 10 from Group 1 and 11 from Group 2, reached the maintenance dose, 70% of them without side effects. Seven adverse events were reported in Group 1: three were local (oral itching) and spontaneously remitted; four were systemic (Grade-2: two reactions; Grade-3: two reactions) and were effectively controlled with drugs. The protocol was interrupted in two cases because of recurrent reactions. No reactions were reported in Group 2. Age, gender, atopy, specific IgE, skin prick tests and sublingual challenge did not seem to influence the risk of side effects significantly. No significant modification of skin tests and specific IgE levels were reported in both groups. The cutaneous test turned negative in 16 patients, eight from Group 1 (80%) and eight from Group 2 (73%). The remaining patients (two from Group 1 and three from Group 2) showed a reduction of latex reactivity, in terms of symptom score (MIS: 2 vs. 0.5 in Group 1, 3 vs. 1 in Group 2). CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the safety of rush induction. The 3-day protocol was better tolerated than the 2-day. Significant risk factors for the occurrence of adverse reactions were not identified. Only the type of protocol but not patient-related parameters seemed predictive of side-effects.

The aim of this paper is to assess in an open prospective pilot case-control study the tolerability, safety and efficacy of an ultra-rush sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) protocol with Vespula venom in wasp allergic patients compared to subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT). Forty-one wasp allergic patients were treated with sublingual (SLIT group) or subcutaneous (SCIT group) ultrarush immunotherapy with Vespula venom extract. All patients underwent skin tests and serum specific IgE and IgG4 detection before enrollment and after 6, 12 and 24 months of immunotherapy. The SLIT group consisted of 21 (6 females and 15 males) patients who received increasing doses of Vespula venom (Aquagen, ALK-Abellò) until the final dose of 30 drops of extract in 3 hours, containing 100,000 SQ-U/ml. The maintenance dose was of 10 drops of pure venom extract 3 times a week, for a total dose of 100,000 SQ-U weekly (corresponding to 100 microgram of venom extract). The SCIT group consisted of 20 patients (16 males and 4 females) who were treated with subcutaneous ultrarush immunotherapy with Vespula venom extract (Pharmalgen, Alk-Abellò). Patients received 101.1 microgram of Vespula venom in 3 hours and were treated with 100 microgram of wasp venom monthly. During the ultrarush sublingual treatment 2 patients (9.5%) experienced mild side-effects. Specific IgE and specific IgG to wasp venom did not show any significant modification. Four patients were field-stung by a wasp during the treatment (for a total of 6 stings). Two patients (3 stings), with a previous clinical history of a grade III and IV reaction, did not experience any reaction. One patient, with a previous grade II reaction, showed a large local reaction. The fourth patient, with a previous grade III reaction, was re-stung twice (after 12 and 24 months) with two systemic reactions (SR) (mild throat constriction). During the ultrarush SCIT phase, 3 (15%) patients experienced side-effects: 2 of them showed a large local reaction and