Search

Allergen molecules (synonyms: single allergens, allergen components) open up new horizons for the targeted allergen-specific diagnostics of immunoglobulin E (IgE) in singleplex determination. The following rationales support the targeted use of allergen molecules and, more importantly, improve test properties: (1) increased test sensitivity ("analytical sensitivity"), particularly when important allergens are under-represented or lacking in the extract; (2) improved test selectivity (analytical specificity), particularly when the selected IgE repertoire against an allergen yields additional information on: (a) potential risk, (b) possible cross-reactivity, or (c) primary (species-specific) sensitization. However, the appropriate indication for the use of single allergens can only be established on a case-by-case basis (depending on the clinical context and previous history) and in an allergen-specific manner (depending on the allergen source and the single allergens available), rather than in a standardized way. Numerous investigations on suspected food allergy, insect venom allergy, or sensitization to respiratory allergens have meanwhile demonstrated the successful use of defined molecules for allergen-specific singleplex IgE diagnosis. Specific IgE to single allergens is limited in its suitability to predict the clinical relevance of sensitivity on an individual basis. In food allergies, one can at best identify the relative risk of a clinical reaction on the basis of an IgE profile, but no absolutely reliable prediction on (future) tolerance can be made. Ultimately, the clinical relevance of all IgE findings depends on the presence of corresponding symptoms and can only be assessed on an individual basis (previous history, symptom log, and provocation testing with the relevant allergen source where appropriate). Thus, also in molecular allergology, the treating physician and not the test result should determine the clinical relevance of diagnostic findings., Electronic Supplementary Material: Supplementary material is available for this article at 10.1007/s40629-015-0067-z and is accessible for authorized users.

The availability of single allergens and their use in microarray technology enables the simultaneous determination of specific IgE (sIgE) to a multitude of different allergens (> 100) in a multiplex procedure requiring only minute amounts of serum. This allows extensive individual sensitization profiles to be determined from a single analysis. Combined with a patient's medical history, these profiles simplify identification of cross-reactivity; permit a more accurate estimation of the risk of severe reactions; and enable the indication for specific immunotherapy to be more precisely established, particularly in cases of polysensitization. Strictly speaking, a multiplex assay is not a single test, but instead more than 100 simultaneous tests. This places considerable demands on the production, quality assurance, and interpretation of data. The following chapter describes the multiplex test systems currently available and discusses their characteristics. Performance data are presented and the sIgE values obtained from multiplex and singleplex assays are compared. Finally, the advantages and limitations of molecular allergy diagnostics using multiplex assays in clinical routine are discussed, and innovative possibilities for clinical research are described. The multiplex diagnostic tests available for clinical routine have now become well established. The interpretation of test results is demanding, particularly since all individual results need to be checked for their plausibility and clinical relevance on the basis of previous history (patient history, clinical symptoms, challenge test results). There is still room for improvement in certain areas, for example with respect to the overall test sensitivity of the method, as well as the availability and quality of particular allergens. The current test systems are just the beginning of a continuous development that will influence and most likely change clinical allergology in the coming years.

Allergic reactions to peanut ( Arachis hypogaea , Ara h) are caused by immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated sensitizations to various proteins. The stability and relative proportion of these proteins in peanut determine the risk of hazardous reactions. Hazardous sensitization to seed storage proteins [S2 albumins (Ara h 2, 6 and 7) > other seed storage proteins (Ara 1 and 3) > oleosins (Ara h 10 and 11)] are distinct from sensitizations to lipid transfer protein (Ara h 9) with moderate risk or cross-sensitizations to Bet v 1-homologous PR-10 protein (Ara h 8) and to profilin (Ara h 5) with low risk. A specific IgE test, e.g. to Ara h 2 in the case of suspected systemic reaction, or where this should be ruled out, can facilitate easier risk assessment. Results, however, are only relevant in the presence of corresponding clinical symptoms. IgE sensitization to peanut extract without hazardous reactions is often caused in this part of the world by Bet v 1-related cross reactions (in birch pollen allergy sufferers), cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants (CCD) or profilin sensitizations. In the case of doubt, clinical relevance can only be established by means of oral challenge, particularly since not all peanut allergens (e. g., oleosins) are available as yet for diagnostic purposes.

The present guideline (S2k) on allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) was established by the German, Austrian and Swiss professional associations for allergy in consensus with the scientific specialist societies and professional associations in the fields of otolaryngology, dermatology and venereology, pediatric and adolescent medicine, pneumology as well as a German patient organization (German Allergy and Asthma Association; Deutscher Allergie- und Asthmabund, DAAB) according to the criteria of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften, AWMF). AIT is a therapy with disease-modifying effects. By administering allergen extracts, specific blocking antibodies, toler-ance-inducing cells and mediators are activated. These prevent further exacerbation of the allergen-triggered immune response, block the specific immune response and attenuate the inflammatory response in tissue. Products for SCIT or SLIT cannot be compared at present due to their heterogeneous composition, nor can allergen concentrations given by different manufacturers be compared meaningfully due to the varying methods used to measure their active ingredients. Non-modified allergens are used for SCIT in the form of aqueous or physically adsorbed (depot) extracts, as well as chemically modified allergens (allergoids) as depot extracts. Allergen extracts for SLIT are used in the form of aqueous solutions or tablets. The clinical efficacy of AIT is measured using various scores as primary and secondary study endpoints. The EMA stipulates combined symptom and medication scores as primary endpoint. A harmonization of clinical endpoints, e. g., by using the combined symptom and medication scores (CSMS) recommended by the EAACI, is desirable in the future in order to permit the comparison of results from different studies. The current CONSORT recommendations from the ARIA/GA2LEN group specify standards for the evaluation, presentation and publication of study results. According to the Therapy allergen ordinance (TAV), preparations containing common allergen sources (pollen from grasses, birch, alder, hazel, house dust mites, as well as bee and wasp venom) need a marketing authorization in Germany. During the marketing authorization process, these preparations are examined regarding quality, safety and efficacy. In the opinion of the authors, authorized allergen preparations with documented efficacy and safety, or preparations tradeable under the TAV for which efficacy and safety have already been documented in clinical trials meeting WAO or EMA standards, should be preferentially used. Individual formulations (NPP) enable the prescription of rare allergen sources (e.g., pollen from ash, mugwort or ambrosia, mold Alternaria, animal allergens) for specific immunotherapy. Mixing these allergens with TAV allergens is not permitted. Allergic rhinitis and its associated co-morbidities (e. g., bronchial asthma) generate substantial direct and indirect costs. Treatment options, in particular AIT, are therefore evaluated using cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analyses. From a long-term perspective, AIT is considered to be significantly more cost effective in allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma than pharmacotherapy, but is heavily dependent on patient compliance. Meta-analyses provide unequivocal evidence of the efficacy of SCIT and SLIT for certain allergen sources and age groups. Data from controlled studies differ in terms of scope, quality and dosing regimens and require product-specific evaluation. Therefore, evaluating individual preparations according to clearly defined criteria is recommended. A broad transfer of the efficacy of certain preparations to all preparations administered in the same way is not endorsed. The website of the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (www.dgaki.de/leitlinien/s2k-leitlinie-sit; DGAKI: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Allergologie und klinische Immunologie) provides tables with specific information on available products for AIT in Germany, Switzerland and Austria. The tables contain the number of clinical studies per product in adults and children, the year of market authorization, underlying scoring systems, number of randomized and analyzed subjects and the method of evaluation (ITT, FAS, PP), separately given for grass pollen, birch pollen and house dust mite allergens, and the status of approval for the conduct of clinical studies with these products. Strong evidence of the efficacy of SCIT in pollen allergy-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis in adulthood is well-documented in numerous trials and, in childhood and adolescence, in a few trials. Efficacy in house dust mite allergy is documented by a number of controlled trials in adults and few controlled trials in children. Only a few controlled trials, independent of age, are available for mold allergy (in particular Alternaria). With regard to animal dander allergies (primarily to cat allergens), only small studies, some with methodological deficiencies are available. Only a moderate and inconsistent therapeutic effect in atopic dermatitis has been observed in the quite heterogeneous studies conducted to date. SCIT has been well investigated for individual preparations in controlled bronchial asthma as defined by the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2007 and intermittent and mild persistent asthma (GINA 2005) and it is recommended as a treatment option, in addition to allergen avoidance and pharmacotherapy, provided there is a clear causal link between respiratory symptoms and the relevant allergen. The efficacy of SLIT in grass pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis is extensively documented in adults and children, whilst its efficacy in tree pollen allergy has only been shown in adults. New controlled trials (some with high patient numbers) on house dust mite allergy provide evidence of efficacy of SLIT in adults. Compared with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, there are only few studies on the efficacy of SLIT in allergic asthma. In this context, newer studies show an efficacy for SLIT on asthma symptoms in the subgroup of grass pollen allergic children, adolescents and adults with asthma and efficacy in primary house dust mite allergy-induced asthma in adolescents aged from 14 years and in adults. Aspects of secondary prevention, in particular the reduction of new sensitizations and reduced asthma risk, are important rationales for choosing to initiate treatment early in childhood and adolescence. In this context, those products for which the appropriate effects have been demonstrated should be considered. SCIT or SLIT with pollen or mite allergens can be performed in patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis using allergen extracts that have been proven to be effective in at least one double-blind placebo-controlled (DBPC) study. At present, clinical trials are underway for the indication in asthma due to house dust mite allergy, some of the results of which have already been published, whilst others are still awaited (see the DGAKI table "Approved/potentially completed studies" via www.dgaki.de/Leitlinien/s2k-Leitlinie-sit (according to www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu)). When establishing the indication for AIT, factors that favour clinical efficacy should be taken into consideration. Differences between SCIT and SLIT are to be considered primarily in terms of contraindications. In individual cases, AIT may be justifiably indicated despite the presence of contraindications. SCIT injections and the initiation of SLIT are performed by a physician experienced in this type of treatment and who is able to administer emergency treatment in the case of an allergic reaction. Patients must be fully informed about the procedure and risks of possible adverse events, and the details of this process must be documented (see "Treatment information sheet"; available as a handout via www.dgaki.de/Leitlinien/s2k-Leitlinie-sit). Treatment should be performed according to the manufacturer's product information leaflet. In cases where AIT is to be performed or continued by a different physician to the one who established the indication, close cooperation is required in order to ensure that treatment is implemented consistently and at low risk. In general, it is recommended that SCIT and SLIT should only be performed using preparations for which adequate proof of efficacy is available from clinical trials. Treatment adherence among AIT patients is lower than assumed by physicians, irrespective of the form of administration. Clearly, adherence is of vital importance for treatment success. Improving AIT adherence is one of the most important future goals, in order to ensure efficacy of the therapy. Severe, potentially life-threatening systemic reactions during SCIT are possible, but - providing all safety measures are adhered to - these events are very rare. Most adverse events are mild to moderate and can be treated well. Dose-dependent adverse local reactions occur frequently in the mouth and throat in SLIT. Systemic reactions have been described in SLIT, but are seen far less often than with SCIT. In terms of anaphylaxis and other severe systemic reactions, SLIT has a better safety profile than SCIT. The risk and effects of adverse systemic reactions in the setting of AIT can be effectively reduced by training of personnel, adhering to safety standards and prompt use of emergency measures, including early administration of i. m. epinephrine. Details on the acute management of anaphylactic reactions can be found in the current S2 guideline on anaphylaxis issued by the AWMF (S2-AWMF-LL Registry Number 061-025). AIT is undergoing some innovative developments in many areas (e. g., allergen characterization, new administration routes, adjuvants, faster and safer dose escalation protocols), some of which are already being investigated in clinical trials. Cite this as Pfaar O, Bachert C, Bufe A, Buhl R, Ebner C, Eng P, Friedrichs F, Fuchs T, Hamelmann E, Hartwig-Bade D, Hering T, Huttegger I, Jung K, Klimek L, Kopp MV, Merk H, Rabe U, Saloga J, Schmid-Grendelmeier P, Schuster A, Schwerk N, Sitter H, Umpfenbach U, Wedi B, Wöhrl S, Worm M, Kleine-Tebbe J. Guideline on allergen-specific immunotherapy in IgE-mediated allergic diseases - S2k Guideline of the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI), the Society for Pediatric Allergy and Environmental Medicine (GPA), the Medical Association of German Allergologists (AeDA), the Austrian Society for Allergy and Immunology (ÖGAI), the Swiss Society for Allergy and Immunology (SGAI), the German Society of Dermatology (DDG), the German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery (DGHNO-KHC), the German Society of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (DGKJ), the Society for Pediatric Pneumology (GPP), the German Respiratory Society (DGP), the German Association of ENT Surgeons (BV-HNO), the Professional Federation of Paediatricians and Youth Doctors (BVKJ), the Federal Association of Pulmonologists (BDP) and the German Dermatologists Association (BVDD). Allergo J Int 2014;23:282-319.

A large proportion of immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated food allergies in older children, adolescents and adults are caused by cross-reactive allergenic structures. Primary sensitization is most commonly to inhalant allergens (e.g. Bet v 1, the major birch pollen allergen). IgE can be activated by various cross-reactive allergens and lead to a variety of clinical manifestations. In general, local and mild - in rare cases also severe and systemic - reactions occur directly after consumption of the food containing the cross-reactive allergen (e. g. plant-derived foods containing proteins of the Bet v 1 family). In clinical practice, sensitization to the primary responsible inhalant and/or food allergen can be detected by skin prick tests and/or in vitro detection of specific IgE. Component-based diagnostic methods can support clinical diagnosis. For individual allergens, these methods may be helpful to estimate the risk of systemic reactions. Confirmation of sensitization by oral provocation testing is important particulary in the case of unclear case history. New, as yet unrecognized allergens can also cause cross-reactions. The therapeutic potential of specific immunotherapy (SIT) with inhalant allergens and their effect on pollen-associated food allergies is currently unclear: results vary and placebo-controlled trials will be necessary in the future. Pollen allergies are very common. Altogether allergic sensitization to pollen and cross-reactive food allergens are very common in our latitudes. The actual relevance has to be assessed on an individual basis using the clinical information. Cite this as Worm M, Jappe U, Kleine-Tebbe J, Schäfer C, Reese I, Saloga J, Treudler R, Zuberbier T, Wassmann A, Fuchs T, Dölle S, Raithel M, Ballmer-Weber B, Niggemann B, Werfel T. Food allergies resulting from immunological cross-reactivity with inhalant allergens. Allergo J Int 2014; 23: 1-16 DOI 10.1007/s40629-014-0004-6 .

Background: The current maintenance dose (10,000 AUeq/monthly) of a subcutaneous allergoid for house dust mite (HDM) immunotherapy has previously shown significant clinical efficacy in patients with HDM induced allergic rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis. In order to comply with the 2009 EMA guidelines on immunotherapy products, a study was conducted to evaluate the safety, tolerability and short-term treatment effects of up-dosing regimens with high doses (up to 40,000 AUeq) of allergoid HDM immunotherapy., Methods: In total 48 patients with HDM-allergic rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis (29 M/19 F; 18-53 years) were included and enrolled into one of three up-dosing regimens (1:4:4): 1) a regular regimen with up-dosing to 40,000 AUeq followed by two maintenance doses (total duration 17 weeks), 2) an intermediate regimen (14 weeks) or 3) a fast regimen (11 weeks). Safety and tolerability were evaluated by monitoring of early and late local reactions and systemic reactions. In addition, short-term effects were assessed by conjunctival provocation test (CPT) and levels of serum allergen-specific IgE, IgG and IgG4., Results: Thirty-nine patients completed the study according to protocol. No early local reactions occurred. Late local reactions (LLR) were observed in 12% of the injections. In total, 31 systemic reactions, all grade 1, were reported of which two needed oral antihistamine treatment. No grade 2 or higher systemic reactions were observed. Six patients (15%) did not reach the highest dose due to LLR and/or systemic reactions needing antihistamines (20% in the regular regimen, 16% in the intermediate regimen and 13% in the fast regimen). At the end of the study, an improvement in the CPT was observed in 82.1% of patients, indirectly indicating an early treatment effect at the current dose and higher doses. In addition, IgG4 immunoglobulin levels were significantly increased in all groups following treatment., Conclusions: In this open-label study, allergoid HDM immunotherapy in doses up to 40,000 AUeq was generally well tolerated and no clinically relevant safety issues were identified. In the safety aspects of the three up-dosing regimens no clinically relevant differences were encountered. Therefore, these dose ranges and up-dosing regimens can be safely included in future dose-finding efficacy studies.

In less than half a century, allergy, originally perceived as a rare disease, has become a major public health threat, today affecting the lives of more than 60 million people in Europe, and probably close to one billion worldwide, thereby heavily impacting the budgets of public health systems. More disturbingly, its prevalence and impact are on the rise, a development that has been associated with environmental and lifestyle changes accompanying the continuous process of urbanization and globalization. Therefore, there is an urgent need to prioritize and concert research efforts in the field of allergy, in order to achieve sustainable results on prevention, diagnosis and treatment of this most prevalent chronic disease of the 21st century.The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is the leading professional organization in the field of allergy, promoting excellence in clinical care, education, training and basic and translational research, all with the ultimate goal of improving the health of allergic patients. The European Federation of Allergy and Airways Diseases Patients' Associations (EFA) is a non-profit network of allergy, asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disorder (COPD) patients' organizations. In support of their missions, the present EAACI Position Paper, in collaboration with EFA, highlights the most important research needs in the field of allergy to serve as key recommendations for future research funding at the national and European levels.Although allergies may involve almost every organ of the body and an array of diverse external factors act as triggers, there are several common themes that need to be prioritized in research efforts. As in many other chronic diseases, effective prevention, curative treatment and accurate, rapid diagnosis represent major unmet needs. Detailed phenotyping/endotyping stands out as widely required in order to arrange or re-categorize clinical syndromes into more coherent, uniform and treatment-responsive groups. Research efforts to unveil the basic pathophysiologic pathways and mechanisms, thus leading to the comprehension and resolution of the pathophysiologic complexity of allergies will allow for the design of novel patient-oriented diagnostic and treatment protocols. Several allergic diseases require well-controlled epidemiological description and surveillance, using disease registries, pharmacoeconomic evaluation, as well as large biobanks. Additionally, there is a need for extensive studies to bring promising new biotechnological innovations, such as biological agents, vaccines of modified allergen molecules and engineered components for allergy diagnosis, closer to clinical practice. Finally, particular attention should be paid to the difficult-to-manage, precarious and costly severe disease forms and/or exacerbations. Nonetheless, currently arising treatments, mainly in the fields of immunotherapy and biologicals, hold great promise for targeted and causal management of allergic conditions. Active involvement of all stakeholders, including Patient Organizations and policy makers are necessary to achieve the aims emphasized herein.

Allergy today is a public health concern of pandemic proportions, affecting more than 150 million people in Europe alone. In view of epidemiological trends, the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) predicts that within the next few decades, more than half of the European population may at some point in their lives experience some type of allergy.Not only do allergic patients suffer from a debilitating disease, with the potential for major impact on their quality of life, career progression, personal development and lifestyle choices, but they also constitute a significant burden on health economics and macroeconomics due to the days of lost productivity and underperformance. Given that allergy triggers, including urbanization, industrialization, pollution and climate change, are not expected to change in the foreseeable future, it is imperative that steps are taken to develop, strengthen and optimize preventive and treatment strategies.Allergen specific immunotherapy is the only currently available medical intervention that has the potential to affect the natural course of the disease. Years of basic science research, clinical trials, and systematic reviews and meta-analyses have convincingly shown that allergen specific immunotherapy can achieve substantial results for patients, improving the allergic individuals' quality of life, reducing the long-term costs and burden of allergies, and changing the course of the disease. Allergen specific immunotherapy not only effectively alleviates allergy symptoms, but it has a long-term effect after conclusion of the treatment and can prevent the progression of allergic diseases.Unfortunately, allergen specific immunotherapy has not yet received adequate attention from European institutions, including research funding bodies, even though this could be a most rewarding field in terms of return on investments, translational value and European integration and, a field in which Europe is recognized as a worldwide leader. Evaluation and surveillance of the full cost of allergic diseases is still lacking and further progress is being stifled by the variety of health systems across Europe. This means that the general population remains unaware of the potential use of allergen specific immunotherapy and its potential benefits.We call upon Europe's policy-makers to coordinate actions and improve individual and public health in allergy by:Promoting awareness of the effectiveness of allergen specific immunotherapyUpdating national healthcare policies to support allergen specific immunotherapyPrioritising funding for allergen specific immunotherapy researchMonitoring the macroeconomic and health economic parameters of allergyReinforcing allergy teaching in medical disciplines and specialtiesThe effective implementation of the above policies has the potential for a major positive impact on European health and well-being in the next decade.

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (SIT, desensitization) is applied monthly with subcutaneous injections (SCIT) or sublingually (SLIT) with droplets or tablets on a daily basis. Numerous immunological changes during SIT induce long-lasting tolerance. Efficacy has been demonstrated by a number of controlled studies for insect venom hypersensitivity (SCIT), allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (SCIT, SLIT particularly in grass pollen allergy), and allergic asthma (SCIT > SLIT). SIT is indicated in children and adults with severe allergic reactions from insect venoms (e.g., bee, wasp) or cumbersome symptoms from pollen, house dust mites or mold allergens and proven immediated-type allergy. Contraindications must be considered individually. SIT is performed for 3 years, in case of venom allergy 3-5 years. Severe systemic reactions are rare after SCIT. After SLIT rather local allergic symptoms of short duration occur in the mouth and throat. At present, the number prescriptions for SIT has decreased due to inadequate reimbursement of allergy-related services (diagnostics, therapies, monitoring). In the future, inferior medical care of allergic patients in Germany is expected, who until now have benefited from the preventive effects of SIT (reduced risk of developing asthma and new allergic sensitizations).

Background: A subgroup of patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CU) exhibits IgE antibodies directed against autoantigens, such as thyroperoxidase (TPO). We conducted this study to investigate whether such patients with CU with IgE against TPO benefit from treatment with omalizumab, a humanized anti-IgE mAb licensed for the treatment of severe persistent allergic (IgE-mediated) asthma., Objectives: We sought to assess the efficacy of omalizumab treatment in patients with CU with IgE autoantibodies against TPO., Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study patients with CU (male/female, 18-70 years of age) with IgE autoantibodies against TPO who had persistent symptoms (wheals and pruritus) despite standard antihistamine therapy were randomized to receive either omalizumab (75-375 mg, dose determined by using the approved asthma dosing table) or placebo subcutaneously once every 2 or 4 weeks for 24 weeks. The primary end point was the change from baseline in mean weekly urticaria activity score after 24 weeks of treatment, as calculated from patients' diaries. The safety and tolerability of omalizumab were also assessed., Results: Of the 49 randomized patients (omalizumab, n = 27; placebo, n = 22), 42 completed the study. At week 24, patients demonstrated a mean reduction in the weekly urticaria activity score from baseline of 17.8 with omalizumab and 7.9 with placebo (P = .0089). Complete protection from wheal development was observed in 19 (70.4%) patients in the omalizumab group compared with only 1 (4.5%) patient in the placebo group. The rate of adverse events was similar in both groups., Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that omalizumab is an effective treatment option for patients with CU with IgE autoantibodies against TPO who are refractory to conventional treatment., (Copyright © 2011 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Various clinical outcome measures are commonly applied in clinical trials on specific immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis with or without asthma to provide evidence of its clinical efficacy. These "primary endpoints" measure clinical symptoms as well as the use for concomitant medication. "Secondary outcome endpoints" are represented by health-related quality of life (HRQoL), "well-days," provocation-tests, in vitro tests and others. This article reviews different methods assessing the clinical outcome of trials on both subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy, and highlights potential advantages and drawbacks of each method., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Allergic sensitization to cat allergens is common and represents a major risk factor for asthma. Specific immunotherapy (SIT) is effective but cumbersome and associated with IgE-dependent adverse events. Immunotherapy targeting allergen-specific T cells, with synthetic peptides representing T-cell epitopes, might improve safety and reduce the duration of treatment., Objective: We sought to define major T-cell epitopes of Fel d 1 for peptide immunotherapy, generate a peptide vaccine, and evaluate its safety and tolerability in subjects with cat allergy., Methods: We determined the binding affinities of Fel d 1 peptides for 10 commonly expressed HLA-DR molecules. Functionally immunodominant peptides were identified by means of proliferation and cytokine secretion. Histamine-releasing activity was assessed, and a peptide vaccine was formulated. Safety and tolerability were evaluated in a dose-ranging phase IIa clinical trial., Results: MHC-binding sequences were identified throughout Fel d 1. Some regions contained multiple overlapping T-cell epitopes that bound multiple MHC molecules. Immunodominant sequences were identified on the basis of proliferative and cytokine (IFN-γ, IL-10, and IL-13) responses. Cat allergen extract, but not peptides, induced histamine release in blood basophils. A single administration of peptide vaccine was safe and well tolerated. The dose of vaccine resulting in the greatest inhibition of the late-phase skin response to intradermal whole allergen challenge was 3 nmol., Conclusions: Fel d 1 contains multiple overlapping MHC-binding motifs. A peptide vaccine comprising the immunodominant regions of the allergen was safe and well tolerated when given to subjects with cat allergy as a single dose. The dose of vaccine resulting in the greatest reduction in late-phase skin response was defined for future clinical development., (Copyright © 2010 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Inappropriate test methods are increasingly utilized to diagnose allergy. They fall into two categories: I. Tests with obscure theoretical basis, missing validity and lacking reproducibility, such as bioresonance, electroacupuncture, applied kinesiology and the ALCAT-test. These methods lack both the technical and clinical validation needed to justify their use. II. Tests with real data, but misleading interpretation: Detection of IgG or IgG4-antibodies or lymphocyte proliferation tests to foods do not allow to separate healthy from diseased subjects, neither in case of food intolerance, allergy or other diagnoses. The absence of diagnostic specificity induces many false positive findings in healthy subjects. As a result unjustified diets might limit quality of life and lead to malnutrition. Proliferation of lymphocytes in response to foods can show elevated rates in patients with allergies. These values do not allow individual diagnosis of hypersensitivity due to their broad variation. Successful internet marketing, infiltration of academic programs and superficial reporting by the media promote the popularity of unqualified diagnostic tests; also in allergy. Therefore, critical observation and quick analysis of and clear comments to unqualified methods by the scientific medical societies are more important than ever.

The following guideline of the "Arbeitsgruppe Nahrungsmittelallergie der DGAKI" (Task Force on Food Allergy of the German Society of Allergology and Clinical Immunology) and the ADA ("Arzteverband Deutscher Allergologen", Medical Association of German Allergologists) and the GPA (German Society of Pediatric Allergology) summarizes the approach to be taken when food allergy is suspected in patients with atopic dermatitis (neurodermatitis, atopic eczema). The problem is clinically relevant because many patients assume that allergic reactions against foods are responsible for triggering or worsening their eczema. It is important to identify those patients who will benefit from an elimination diet but also to avoid unnecessary diets. Elimination diets (especially in early childhood) are associated with the risk of malnutrition and additional emotional stress for the patients. The gold standard for the diagnosis of food-dependent reactions is to perform placebo-controlled, double-blind oral food challenges because specific IgE, prick tests and history often do not correlate with clinical reactivity. This is particularly true in the case of delayed eczematous skin reactions. Diagnostic elimination diets should be used before an oral provocation test. If multiple sensitizations against foods are discovered in a patient, an oligoallergenic diet and a subsequent stepwise supplementation of the nutrition should be performed. If a specific food is suspected of triggering food allergy, oral provocation should be performed after a diagnostic elimination diet. As eczema-tous skin reactions may develop slowly (i. e. within one or two day), the skin be inspected the day after the provocation test and that a repetitive test be performed if the patient has not reacted to a given food on the first day of oral provocation. The guideline discusses various clinical situations for patients with atopic dermatitis to facilitate differentiated diagnostic procedures.

Chronic urticaria, recurrent angioedema and non-allergic asthma have all been associated with pseudoallergic reactions to food ingredients. For atopic dermatitis and diseases of the gastrointestinal tract, this association is controversial. Pseudoallergic reactions can be elicited by additives as well as by natural food ingredients. An altered histamine metabolism may be associated with pseudoallergy. Acute urticaria or a short episode of angioedema is not an indication for exhaustive evaluation. If basic diagnostic screening is negative in chronic urticaria, a low-pseudoallergen diet can be considered. Skin and serological tests are not objective diagnostic parameters for pseudoallergic reactions. The severity of symptoms should be documented while the patient is on a low-pseudoaller-gen diet. Oral provocation with additives leads to reproducible symptoms only in a few cases. Therefore, if a low-pseudoallergen diet brings improvement, the patient is then exposed to a pseudoallergen-rich "super meal". After a positive reaction to the "super meal" the challenge with additives takes place in the form of collective group exposition. When the patient has asthma or a history of anaphylac-toid reactions, testing with individual substances in carefully increasing dosages is required. The suspicion of adverse reactions against histamine can be confirmed by a challenge with histamine dihydrochloride. In the case of respiratory symptoms, provocation by inhalation should be considered. Objectifying symptoms especially in gastrointestinal diseases is mandatory and should include double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge, if possible.

Skin testing has a central role in the diagnosis of food allergy. Prick testing is well- established as a routine diagnostic tool. Nonetheless, unstable allergens and the lack of standardized extracts create difficulties in the identification of sensitization to foods in patients with suspected food allergy. Therefore prick-to-prick tests with native (raw, fresh) foods are still recommended. The indications and contraindications are the same as those of routine skin testing in clinical allergology. We recommend a careful and restricted application of skin tests in patients with a history of severe anaphylaxis to foods.

Background: Omalizumab is an established add-on therapy efficacious in allergic diseases with additional anti-inflammatory activity in the treatment of asthma. The evaluation of responders to anti-IgE treatment is critical to maximize benefit/risk/cost ratio. The aim of the study was to monitor the efficacy of anti-IgE treatment by ex vivo basophil histamine release., Methods: Seventeen patients with allergic asthma were enrolled and received omalizumab at a dose of > or =0.016 mg/kg/IgE every 4 weeks. Histamine release from basophils was evaluated fluorometrically after dose-dependent allergen challenge at baseline and after 16 weeks of treatment. Maximal histamine release and cellular sensitivity to the allergen were calculated. Clinical measurements consisted of body plethysmography, skin prick test, beta2-agonist usage, serum free IgE levels, peripheral eosinophils and investigator ratings of global evaluation of treatment effectiveness., Results: Maximal histamine release and cellular sensitivity to the allergen were significantly decreased in the omalizumab group compared to placebo. These changes were accompanied by significant changes in the clinical markers airway resistance, beta-agonist usage, skin prick test wheal area and investigator ratings of global evaluation of treatment effectiveness., Conclusions: Omalizumab therapy decreases basophil histamine release and cellular sensitivity with high effectivity of 95.8% (median). The decline of ex vivo basophil responses does not always parallel individual clinical improvement. Basophil-based stimulation tests should be further evaluated before being regarded as useful parameters monitoring omalizumab therapy., (Copyright 2007 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Allergen specific immunotherapy (SIT) is the only potentially curative treatment of IgE mediated allergic diseases. To ensure its effective use, many requirements must be met before and during therapy. Before starting immunotherapy, informed consent should be obtained, along with the consideration of the indications and contraindications. SIT should be prescribed and administered only by physicians with experience in allergic disease who are qualified to manage severe anaphylactic reactions. The clinical symptoms and the age of the patients determine the route of application, choice of allergen extracts and the duration of treatment. Numerous products and protocols facilitate an individualised therapy.

Background: Omalizumab is a recombinant monoclonal anti-IgE antibody with proven efficacy in allergic diseases and further anti-inflammatory potency in the treatment of asthma., Objectives: To explore the anti-inflammatory mechanism of omalizumab, we investigated the induction of immunologic changes leading to eosinophil apoptosis and examined T-lymphocyte cytokine profiles in patients with allergic asthma., Methods: Nineteen patients with allergic asthma were enrolled and received omalizumab at a dose of at least 0.016 mg/kg/IgE (IU/mL) every 4 weeks. Peripheral eosinophils and T-lymphocyte cytokine profiles were evaluated by fluorescence-activated cell sorting before treatment (baseline), at 12 weeks of treatment, and 12 weeks after discontinuation of treatment with omalizumab or placebo., Results: Markers of eosinophil apoptosis (Annexin V) were significantly increased in omalizumab recipients compared with placebo, whereas no changes in markers of necrosis (7-amino-actinomycin) or eosinophil activation CD69 or Fas receptor (CD95) were detected. GM-CSF+ lymphocytes were reduced in omalizumab recipients compared with placebo. Fewer IL-2+ and IL-13+ lymphocytes were evident in omalizumab recipients than in the placebo group. There were no significant differences in IL-5, IFN-gamma, or TNF-alpha between the omalizumab and placebo groups., Conclusion: These findings provide further evidence that omalizumab has additional anti-inflammatory activity demonstrated by induction of eosinophil apoptosis and downregulation of the inflammatory cytokines IL-2 and IL-13. Further studies are needed to determine the underlying mechanisms., Clinical Implications: These findings support the critical role of IgE in the regulation of inflammation in allergic asthma: influencing the inflammation is the key to control the more severe type of asthma.

Defining the role of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and allergic asthma is hampered for various reasons: Heterogeneity in study designs, different allergen extracts and dosages, imperfect assessment strategies and partially inconclusive results. A number of questions need to be addressed before replacing subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) by the sublingual route: Ideal dose, treatment duration, magnitude of improvement, modification of the immune response, long-term and preventive effects. At present, SLIT might be used in adults with pollen related rhinoconjunctivitis, particularly if SCIT is not suitable for the patient (i.e. systemic effects). Only few data support SLIT for house dust mite allergy or bronchial asthma. Due to a lack of convincing results SLIT for children should only be applied in controlled studies and not in the daily routine. A more substantiated and conclusive judgment of SLIT is possibly warranted in a few years, when more studies with larger patient groups have addressed open questions concerning SLIT.

Background: Local and systemic reactions can occur after bites of Argas reflexus (Argas), a soft tick parasitizing pigeons., Objective: Risk assessment of IgE-mediated sensitizations and systemic reactions after Argas bites., Methods: Case histories, skin prick tests (SPTs) with a whole-body extract of Argas containing major allergen Arg r 1, and common inhalants and specific IgE measurements were obtained from 148 subjects who had had Argas bites and 20 volunteers as a control group., Results: Systemic reactions (urticaria, angioedema, dyspnea, cardiovascular dysregulation, unconsciousness) were reported in 12 of 148 (8%); 146 of 148 (99%) had local reactions. Atopy was found in 37 of 146 (25%) with local reactions and 3 of 12 (25%) with systemic reactions. SPT to Argas was positive in 24 of 148 (16%) with a high proportion of atopics 10 of 24 (42%); specific IgE to Argas was detectable in 12 of 135 (8% of 148) with moderate concordance to systemic reactions. No positive SPT or specific IgE results to Argas were obtained in the control group. Immunoblotting of 23 sera revealed an IgE-binding protein in 19 of 23 sera (82%) at 22 kd, indicating a major allergen of Argas., Conclusion: Severe anaphylactic reactions were infrequently (approximately 8%) found after bites of the soft tick Argas reflexus. Atopy is a risk factor for skin sensitizations to Argas, but not for systemic reactions after bites by Argas. Using a whole-body extract of Argas, diagnosis through SPT and specific IgE is hampered by false-negative and irrelevant positive results, particularly in atopy.

Human basophils are important tools for studying immediate-type hypersensitivity reactions since they release a variety of mediators (e.g., histamine, leukotriene C4, IL-4 and IL-13) following allergen triggering. Several diagnostic tools have been introduced that measure either leukotriene production or the upregulation of surface markers (CD63 and CD203c) from these cells after antigen stimulation. However, a broad variability in basophil activity exists between different basophil donors and different antigens within one donor. This manifests itself in terms of their reactivity (maximum secretory response), based on the intracellular signaling of the basophils studied, and in terms of their sensitivity. The latter is governed by the number of IgE receptors per basophil, the ratio of antigen-specific IgE to total IgE, and by the number of cell surface antigen-specific IgE molecules for half-maximal responses, termed 'intrinsic sensitivity'. These variables give rise to shifts in the dose-response curves which, in a diagnostic setting where only a single antigen concentration is employed, may produce false-negative data. Thus, in order to meaningfully utilize the current basophil activation tests for diagnostic purposes, each allergen should be pre-evaluated separately in order to determine a suitable stimulation range. Additionally, anti-IgE or anti-FcepsilonRIalpha antibodies should serve as positive controls, bearing in mind that 10-20% of basophil donors are not responsive to IgE-mediated stimulation. Diagnostic studies using CD63 or CD203c in hymenoptera, food and drug allergy are critically discussed. Basophil-based tests are indicated for allergy testing in selected cases but should only be performed by experienced laboratories., (Copyright (c) 2006 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Immediate symptoms caused by allergens without previous primary sensitization are commonly based on cross-reactive IgE antibodies. They are responsible for pollen-associated food allergies, i.e., fruit allergy in cases of birch pollen allergy or allergy to celery and spices in cases of mugwort pollen allergy. Similar structures between the major allergen of birch pollen (Bet v 1) and a variety of pathogenesis-related proteins from the same family (PR-10), abundant in hazelnuts, fruits, and vegetables, have been well established. Other candidates are profilins, ubiquitous panallergens with little clinical relevance, and stable lipid transfer proteins, responsible for systemic reactions predominantly in Mediterranean countries. Depending on stability, dose, and resorption of these proteins, clinical symptoms are limited to the oro-pharyngeal cavity or develop systemically far from the site of allergen exposure. Clinical diagnosis is based on a positive case history with corresponding allergic sensitization to pollen allergens. Targeted skin testing with native products (i.e., prick to prick test with fresh fruits) appears to be superior for unstable allergens compared to commercial extracts. Individuals should be familiar with cross-reactive patterns; however, allergen avoidance is only recommended in cases of clinical symptoms.

Background: Anaphylactic reactions to soy products have been attributed to stable class 1 food allergens., Objective: IgE- mediated reactions to a soy-containing dietary food product in patients allergic to birch pollen were investigated., Methods: Detailed case histories were taken from 20 patients. Their sera were analyzed for IgE (UniCAP) specific for birch, grass, mugwort, the recombinant birch allergens rBet v 1 and rBet v2, and soy protein. Extracts from birch pollen, soy isolate, rBet v 1, and the recombinant PR-10 soy protein rSAM22 were coupled to paper disks or nitrocellulose for IgE measurements (enzyme allergosorbent test) or Western blot analysis. Enzyme allergosorbent testing, Western blot inhibition, and histamine release studies were performed with the same allergens., Results: Most patients (17/20) experienced facial, oropharyngeal, and/or systemic allergic symptoms within 20 minutes after ingesting the soy product for the first time. Birch pollen allergy (16/20) was common, along with oral allergy syndrome to apple (12/20) or hazelnut (11/20). IgE levels to birch and Bet v 1 but not to other inhalants were high in 18 of 20 patients. Significant IgE binding to rSAM22 occurred in 17 of 20 patients. Blot experiments with the soy isolate revealed IgE-binding bands at 17 kd (15/20), 22 kd (1/20), and 35 to 38 kd (2/20); the former was inhibited by preincubation of the sera with rBet v 1 or rSAM22. Birch extract and soy isolate, rBet v 1, and rSAM22 induced dose-dependent histamine release in the nanomolar range., Conclusion: Immediate-type allergic symptoms in patients with birch pollen allergy after ingestion of soy protein-containing food items can result from cross-reactivity of Bet v 1 -specific IgE to homologous pathogenesis-related proteins, particularly the PR-10 protein SAM22.

Beta-lactam drugs can induce allergic immune responses due to their antigenic determinants, promoting IgE-binding and anaphylactic reactions to penicillin. We report a case of a 44-year-old woman who experienced several severe systemic reactions after being exposed directly or indirectly to penicillin. An anaphylactic shock occurred after anal installation of her daughter's urine, who had been treated with penicillin. Skin testing revealed immediate type reactions to major and minor determinants of penicillin indicating an IgE-mediated sensitization. In vitro tests showed elevated levels of penicillin specific IgE. Clinical features, difficulties in taking history and test options for patients with IgE-mediated sensitizations are briefly reviewed in the context of the presented case of unexpected reactions to penicillin due to an immediate type hypersensitivity.

Mechanisms of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) are complex inducing numerous immunological effects. Successful AIT is most likely based on a functional switch of and tolerance induction in specific T cells downregulating allergic hypersensitivity and inflammation. Subcutaneous AIT for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and allergic asthma has been successfully assessed in controlled studies with several clinically important allergens (i. e. birch-, grass- and mugwortpollen, dust mites, animal dander) and has shown convincing clinical efficacy. Considered as the only causal treatment besides allergen avoidance at present, AIT can alter the natural course of allergic diseases. Hymenopteravenom hypersensitivity (to bee- and wasp venom) treated with AIT gives the best results compared to AIT with other allergens. AIT is indicated in patients with IgE-mediated sensitizations and corresponding clinical symptoms to allergens, which do not or hardly permit allergen avoidance and which are available as suitable extracts. Decisions about indication and allergen selection should only be made by a physician with certified training or qualified knowledge and skills in allergology. AIT is administered by physicians experienced in this therapy. After addressing tolerability and present status of health the recommended or individually adjusted does is injected and precisely documented, followed by a mandatory waiting period of 30 minutes. Indication for and application of AIT in children are quite similar compared to the treatment of adults. Children tolerate AIT very well and benefit especially from its immunomodulatory effects. Risk factors for and results of unwanted systemic effects can effectively be minimized by training of the staff members involved, adhering to safety standards and immediate emergency treatment. Modified allergens, recombinant proteins and immunomodulatory adjuvants created by basic research are promises for an improved efficacy of AIT with reduced unwanted effects in the future.

About 40-70% of birch pollen allergic patients show allergic symptoms after ingesting or handling raw fruits. Several investigations have indicated a partial immunological identity between birch pollen and stone fruit. To further clarify this association, we investigated 59 patients with allergic symptoms (conjunctivitis, rhinitis, and asthma during the birch pollen season) and 18 nonatopic controls by skin prick test (SPT) and RAST with birch pollen, fresh apple, cherry, and peach as well as freshly prepared fruit extracts. According to a questionnaire dealing with symptoms after ingestion of raw fruits, the subjects were divided into groups with (35 FH+) and without (24 FH-) fruit hypersensitivity. IgE, IgG, IgG1, IgG4, IgA, and IgM binding patterns to birch pollen extracts were performed with 33 sera (12 FH+, 11 FH-, and 10 nonatopic controls) using the immunoblot-technique. Patients with FH+ expressed a significantly stronger sensitization to birch pollen than patients without FH-, as measured by RAST and SPT. Native fruits induced stronger SPT reactions than fruit extracts, and patients with FH+ showed a significantly higher skin index with all fruits and fruit extracts tested. Specific IgE, IgG, IgG1, IgG4, IgM and IgA to birch pollen extracts could be detected by immunoblot in all groups, albeit with different frequencies and intensities. From this data we conclude that fruit hypersensitivity is related more to the 17 kd and 67-85 kd than to the 26-28 kd or 36 kd protein bands of the birch pollen extract. The relationship of specific IgE > IgG > IgM to a single protein band seems to be associated with the development of symptomatic type I allergy.

Patients allergic to birch pollen also exhibit more hypersensitivity reactions to fresh fruits and vegetables than do patients allergic to other pollens. Several investigations have indicated a possible partial immunological identity between birch pollen and fruits. To study this, 23 birch pollen-allergic patients 12 with (FH+) and 11 without (FH-) fruit hypersensitivity and 10 nonatopic controls were examined with self-prepared apple-peel, cherry, and peach extracts by immunoblotting. The self-prepared extracts were characterized by histamine release studies with 20 FH+ birch pollen-allergic patients. Specific IgE, IgG, IgG1, IgG4, IgA, and IgM binding patterns of the fruit extracts presented an individual distribution with at least 1-3 IgE bands at varying molecular weight locations. The FH+ group expressed intense IgE binding to the different extracts compared to the FH- group, and even the control group showed all immunoglobulin classes, though different frequencies and intensities compared to the allergic groups. It seemed that the specific IgE > IgG > IgM relation to a single antigen is important for distinguishing between symptomatic and asymptomatic persons. With this hypothesis we found most IgE with less IgG binding to apple-peel in the region of 22-28 kd and 43-56 kd, cherry: 15-25 kd and 72- > 90 kd and peach 35-41 kd and 66-76 kd, suggesting that these proteins might be important for cross-reactivity with birch pollen and developing fruit hypersensitivity.

We investigated 10 sensitized and 10 nonsensitized workers from a pharmaceutic factory who had been exposed to powdered trypsin, chymotrypsin, bromelain, papain, amylase, and lipase. Ten nonallergic subjects served as a control group. Titrated skin prick tests (SPT), RAST, and immunoblot studies were performed with all six enzymes. SPT reactivity revealed multiple sensitizations to proteolytic enzymes, i.e., papain (specifically sensitized/total number of sensitizations: 9/10), trypsin (8/10), chymotrypsin (8/10), and bromelain (7/10) and appeared to be more frequent and more pronounced than sensitizations to amylase (3/10) or lipase (3/10). The low molecular weight of proteolytic enzymes (20-30 kDa) and their biologic activity might facilitate mucosal penetration more easily and thus-compared to amylase and lipase-permit an immune response and induction of allergic hypersensitivity. Immunoblot studies demonstrated IgG-binding bands in both SPT-positive and -negative workers, indicating exposure to the enzymes, but not in 10 unexposed control subjects. IgE-binding bands of the enzymes were detected only in workers with a positive SPT reaction and/or a positive RAST result. IgG bands were more frequent and the IgG/IgE ratio was increased in workers without allergic complaints compared to symptomatic workers. This might indicate that high levels of specific IgG antibodies to enzymes are associated with an immune response lacking allergic manifestations in spite of IgE-mediated sensitizations to the enzymes. Atopic subjects were at greater risk of developing IgE-mediated sensitization (7/10) and allergic symptoms to enzymes (5/7). However, even without risk of atopy, IgE-mediated hypersensitivity occurred in a few subjects (3/13) exposed to enzymes by inhalation for prolonged periods of time.

Loratadine, a new nonsedating histamine H1-antagonist, has been shown to inhibit immunologic release of inflammatory mediators in addition to its H1-receptor blocking properties. After oral administration, the agent is metabolized primarily to desethoxycarbonyl-loratadine (DCL). The basic piperidine, DCL, is readily soluble in water, whereas the nonbasic urethane, loratadine, is insufficiently soluble in water for some in vitro investigations. Therefore we used the metabolite, DCL, to study its influence on in vitro leukocyte histamine release (LHR) in 24 allergic and 22 nonallergic subjects. IgE-mediated and calcium ionophore A23187-induced LHR were inhibited by DCL in a dose-dependent fashion (values of drug concentration to induce 30% inhibition after stimulation with inhalant antigen, anti-IgE, concanavalin A, and calcium ionophore A23187 were 6, 8, 5, and 11 mumol/L, respectively). Higher concentrations of DCL caused mediator release in all subjects (n = 45, 30 mumol/L DC: 11% +/- 2% LHR, 100 mumol/L DCL: 35% +/- 1% LHR), abolishing any inhibitory effect of the drug. Rapid onset of inhibition by 10 mumol/L DCL was found in kinetic studies (n = 10). The inhibition of anti-IgE-induced histamine secretion was synergistically increased by simultaneous preincubation of DCL with the potent histamine H2-agonist, FRA-19. Additional data indicate that the inhibition of LHR by DCL might involve biochemical events that occur after cellular Ca++ influx because LHR induced by N-formyl-methionyl-leucyl-phenylalanine or the phorbol ester, 12-O-tetradecanoyl phorbol-12-acetate, was not significantly affected by DCL.

Salmeterol, a long-acting beta 2-adrenoceptor agonist, prevents early and late asthmatic responses in atopic asthmatics and inhibits the release of inflammatory mediators from various cells and tissues. We investigated the effect of salmeterol on in vitro basophil histamine release (BHR). Washed basophil leukocytes from allergic (n = 6) and nonallergic subjects (n = 18) were preincubated for 10 min with different concentrations of salmeterol prior to stimulation with antigens (Ag) and anti-IgE for 45 min. BHR was detected by an automated fluorometric assay. If control BHR (without inhibition) reached > or = 30% of the total histamine content, maximal % inhibition (Imax, mean +/- SEM) and the concentration of salmeterol causing 30% inhibition (IC30, geometric mean) were calculated. At concentrations of between 1 and 100 microM salmeterol, concentration-dependent inhibition of release was found for Ag- and anti-IgE-mediated BHR. The Imax of anti-IgE-mediated BHR reached 46 +/- 16% at 30 microM salmeterol. IC30 values were 12 microM for Ag- and 8 microM for anti-IgE-induced BHR. Higher concentrations of salmeterol induced BHR in all subjects (n = 24, 100 microM: 28 +/- 5% BHR), overlapping the inhibitory effect on BHR. Kinetic studies using 30 microM salmeterol (n = 10) showed > 30% inhibition with short preincubation periods (< 10 s). Salbutamol, an older, widely used beta 2-adrenoceptor agonist, had no effect on IgE-mediated BHR (n = 8). We conclude that salmeterol significantly inhibits IgE-mediated histamine release from human leukocytes in the micromolar range.

The rice weevil (Sitophilus oryzae) is known as a stored product pest. Occupants living in a factory used previously as a granary and known to be contaminated by the rice weevil developed rhinitis and asthma. To study the role of the potential insect allergens, extracts were prepared from whole body and a grain dust of the rice and grain weevil (Sitophilus granarius). The extracts were coupled to cyanogen bromide-activated paper disks. Skin prick tests (SPT) were performed using common inhalant allergens as well as the insect allergen preparations. In cases of a positive SPT, specific serum IgE to the insect products was measured. Histamine release studies with peripheral leukocytes (HR) and studies using immunoblot techniques were performed. Fifteen of 39 subjects living in the infested rooms demonstrated positive SPT to the extracts of insect origin. Histamine equivalent wheal size induced by the whole body extract of the rice weevil required 3-160 micrograms protein/mL. Five of 15 subjects (with positive SPTs) had elevated specific IgE-levels to the insect material. RAST-inhibition studies indicated cross allergenicity between rice and grain weevils, and also between the frass of both beetles. Five of 15 subjects were positive in the HR assay (Ag30, allergen concentration for 30% HR for the whole body extract: range, 10(-3) to 400 micrograms protein/mL, maximum release: 26% to 89%). IgE binding was detected after SDS-PAGE by immunoblot techniques at different locations: 35-38, 54, 67, 70, and > 94 kD.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Several phosphodiesterase (PDE) inhibitors with the capacity to inhibit the PDE IV isoenzyme produce dose-dependent inhibition of IgE-mediated histamine release (HR) from human peripheral leukocytes in vitro. Inhibition reached a maximum after 20 min of preincubation (IC30: 6-30 microM, IC50: 30-80 microM). Motapizone--a potent inhibitor of the isoenzyme PDE III--was much less effective, thus giving indirect evidence that PDE IV plays a predominant role in the control of cAMP cleavage in human basophils. The inhibiting effect of PDE-III/IV-selective compounds on IgE-mediated HR did not exceed the action of PDE-IV-selective inhibitors. The inhibition of anti-IgE-induced HR by zardaverine (a PDE-III/IV-inhibiting compound) was synergistically enhanced in the combined presence of forskolin or the recently synthesized histamine H2-agonist FRA 19).

A 25-year-old female developed IgE-mediated sensitization against human recombinant corticotropin-releasing hormone (CRH) with symptoms of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and bronchial asthma. The occupational allergy was proved by positive skin prick test, bronchial provocation, dose-dependent histamine release, RAST measurements with CRH allergen (RAST class 3) and RAST inhibition. Using the immunoblot technique, a single allergen band with a molecular weight of less than 14.4 kD in the range between the isoelectric point 5.2 and 5.7 was detected for the CRH extract. Since no endocrinological and behavioral disorders were found, increased CRH-specific IgE was not able to influence the regulatory control of this neuropeptide. After 18 months of avoiding the occupational CRH exposure allergen-specific histamine release and RAST were negative.