Inhalant Allergy Research Articles

Allergies to Allergens from Cats and Dogs: A Review and Update on Sources, Pathogenesis, and Strategies

Inhalation allergies caused by cats and dogs can lead to a range of discomforting symptoms, such as rhinitis and asthma, in humans. With the increasing popularity of and care provided to these companion animals, the allergens they produce pose a growing threat to susceptible patients’ health. Allergens from cats and dogs have emerged as significant risk factors for triggering asthma and allergic rhinitis worldwide; however, there remains a lack of systematic measures aimed at assisting individuals in recognizing and preventing allergies caused by these animals. This review provides comprehensive insights into the classification of cat and dog allergens, along with their pathogenic mechanisms. This study also discusses implementation strategies for prevention and control measures, including physical methods, gene-editing technology, and immunological approaches, as well as potential strategies for enhancing allergen immunotherapy combined with immunoinformatics. Finally, it presents future prospects for the prevention and treatment of human allergies caused by cats and dogs. This review will improve knowledge regarding allergies to cats and dogs while providing insights into potential targets for the development of next-generation treatments.

Occupational asthma in the salmon processing industry: a case series

ObjectivesExposure to bioaerosols in salmon processing workers is associated with occupational asthma. IgE-mediated allergy and other disease mechanisms may be involved in airway inflammation and obstruction. Knowledge about disease burden,...

Exploring Side Effects of Sublingual Immunotherapy: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objective: Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has emerged as a potentially safe and convenient option for allergen immunotherapy for patients with inhalant allergy. Larger studies on the overall side effects and severe reactions anaphylaxis are still lacking. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Setting: Author's review was completed in the University of Texas Medical Branch. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective clinical trials focusing on SLIT safety published from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2021, was conducted. Results: Twenty-six studies were included with analysis of 7827 patients, representing over 2.7 million SLIT doses. All studies focused on single-antigen immunotherapy. The mean duration of treatment was 11.54 months. Local side effects were present in 40.83% of patients [95% confidence interval (CI) 24.78-57.96]. Systemic side effects were encountered in 1.09% of SLIT patients (95% CI 0.57-1.78). Anaphylaxis was reported in 0.13% of patients (95% CI 0.06-0.22). Discontinuation rates due to side effects were low, at 4.32% of patients (95% CI 3.28-5.49). Conclusion: This meta-analysis shows that single-antigen SLIT is well-tolerated, with overall low rates of systemic side effects including anaphylaxis. Although there is a high rate of minor local side effect, the treatment attrition during the first year is low. With growing allergy burden worldwide, SLIT is a convenient and economically feasible option for immunotherapy. Further work is needed to evaluate long-term safety and efficacy of single as well as multi-antigen SLIT, including quality of life assessments.

Optimizing Identification of Allergic Sensitization to Seasonal Inhalant Allergens in the USA: Implications for Constructing Optimal Panels to Evaluate Patients with Allergy

Introduction: While a specific number and type of antigens are recognized to detect perennial inhalant allergies, the optimal number and combination of allergens to reliably identify seasonal allergic sensitization is unclear due to limited national data. This study analyzed aeroallergen testing data from a large US clinical reference laboratory to provide guidance for optimizing seasonal allergen test selection. Methods: The 2019 serum IgE tests for seasonal inhalant allergens were identified from the Quest Diagnostics database. Patients with results for at least 1 of 31 seasonal allergens across 4 allergen classes (11 trees, 7 weeds, 5 grasses, and 8 molds) were analyzed. A step-by-step conditional approach was employed to determine the minimum number and species of allergens needed to identify at least 98% of sensitized patients for each class. Results: Of 88,042 patients tested for ≥1 seasonal allergen, 1.5%, 1.8%, 1.3%, and 1.6% were tested for all trees, weeds, grasses, and molds, respectively. Of those tested for all allergens within a class, 40.4%, 38.6%, 29.5%, and 21.2% were sensitized to at least one tree, weed, grass, or mold allergen, respectively. Identification of ≥98% of sensitized patients within a class required 8 allergens for trees (mountain cedar, maple box elder, walnut, white ash, elm, birch, cottonwood, and hickory/pecan), 5 for weeds (common ragweed short, rough pigweed, English plantain, lamb's quarters/goosefoot, and Russian thistle), 3 for grasses (June/Kentucky blue grass, Johnson grass, and Bermuda grass), and 7 for molds (Alternaria alternata, Aspergillus fumigatus, Mucor racemosus, Epicoccum purpurascens, Penicillium notatum, Helminthosporium halodes, and Fusarium moniliforme). Conclusion: A minimum of 23 antigens is required to optimally detect sensitization to four classes of seasonal allergens (i.e., ≥98% identification). The addition of these allergens to unique perennial allergens (cat, dog, mouse, cockroach, and 2 dust mite species) results in a comprehensive elucidation of inhalant allergen sensitization. This knowledge provides a pivotal guide for clinical laboratories as they construct allergen panels to optimize diagnostic yield.

Sensitization to Food and Aero-Allergens in Children with Coeliac Disease Assessed with the Use of a Multiplex Molecular Diagnostic Technique

(1) Background. Coeliac disease (CD) often co-occurs with autoimmune conditions or genetic syndromes, but there are few studies on the co-existence of CD and immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated allergies. The purpose of this study was to assess sensitization to food and aero-allergens in pediatric patients with CD. (2) Methods. A multiplex ALEX®2 test was used to determine specific IgEs (sIgEs). (3) Results. The study included 108 children newly diagnosed with CD. Allergen extract- and/or allergen molecule-sIgEs were detected in 49.1% of children. Most children (41.5%) were sensitized to both inhalant and food allergens. The three most common aero-allergens (timothy pollen, ryegrass, silver birch) were molecules Phl p 1, Lol p 1, and Bet v 1. The most common food allergens (hazelnut, apple, and peanut) were Cor a 1, Mal d 1, and Ara h 8 molecules of the PR-10 subfamily. Patients were not sensitized to cereal allergens containing gluten. Spearman’s rank correlation analysis of sensitized patients showed a significant positive relationship (r = 0.31) between the patients’ age and the occurrence of positive sIgEs (≥0.3 kUA/L) for inhalant allergen molecules (p = 0.045). In sensitized patients, mainly symptoms of inhalant allergy were observed, such as hay fever, conjunctivitis, and bronchial asthma. (4) Conclusions. The current study indicates the co-occurrence of IgE sensitization to food and inhalant allergens in children with CD. The study highlights the need to take a closer look at the diagnosis of IgE-mediated allergy in patients with CD, which may help in their care and lead to a better understanding of the relationship between CD and IgE-mediated allergy.

Clinical efficacy of Dermatophagoides farina drops on allergic rhinitis in children sensitized by dust mites combined with different allergens

ObjectiveThis study aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) using standardized dermatophagoides farina drops for the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) in children sensitized to dust mites combined with different allergens. The findings contribute to establishing a preliminary foundation for future in-depth studies on AR treatment. MethodsA total of 152 AR children undergoing SLIT were categorized into two groups based on serological test results: the inhalation group (dust mite combined with inhalation allergy) and the ingestion group (dust mite combined with ingestion allergy). The clinical efficacy and safety were evaluated by assessing the total nasal symptoms score (TNSS), total medication scores (TMS), visual analog scale scores (VAS scores), and the incidence of adverse reactions before treatment and after two years of treatment. ResultsAfter two years of treatment, TNSS, TMS, and VAS scores significantly improved compared to pre-treatment values in both the inhalation and ingestion groups (p < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in efficacy between the two groups after two years of treatment (p > 0.05). During the treatment period, only 15 cases (10.9 %, 9 cases in the inhalation group and 6 cases in the ingestion group) experienced mild adverse reactions. There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups (p > 0.05). ConclusionSLIT using standardized dermatophagoides farina drops demonstrates long-term efficacy in children with AR, regardless of whether they belong to the inhalation or ingestion group, without significant differences in treatment outcomes.

Allergen Immunotherapy in combination with biologicals for inhalant allergy: what do we really know?

Allergen Immunotherapy in combination with biologicals for inhalant allergy: what do we really know?

Structural homology of mite profilins to plant profilins is not indicative of allergic cross-reactivity.

Structural and allergenic characterization of mite profilins has not been previously pursued to a similar extent as plant profilins. Here, we describe structures of profilins originating from Tyrophagus putrescentiae (registered allergen Tyr p 36.0101) and Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (here termed Der p profilin), which are the first structures of profilins from Arachnida. Additionally, the thermal stabilities of mite and plant profilins are compared, suggesting that the high number of cysteine residues in mite profilins may play a role in their increased stability. We also examine the cross-reactivity of plant and mite profilins as well as investigate the relevance of these profilins in mite inhalant allergy. Despite their high structural similarity to other profilins, mite profilins have low sequence identity with plant and human profilins. Subsequently, these mite profilins most likely do not display cross-reactivity with plant profilins. At the same time the profilins have highly conserved poly(l-proline) and actin binding sites.

Method to develop a regional guide for the allergenic potential of tree pollen

Allergic rhinitis, caused by airborne pollen, is a common disease with a great impact on the quality of life for patients and high costs for society. Prevention of high pollen concentrations in the air is relevant for creating a safe environment for allergic patients. Due to climate change, the heat in cities during the summer is a recurring problem. The local climate can be improved by using the cooling properties of trees, providing shade and cooling by evapotranspiration. When deciding which tree species will be planted, it is important to take into account the allergenicity of the pollen that the tree produces. Available guides, used all over the world, on the allergenicity of pollen are very divers in content and interpretation and not applicable for the Netherlands. In this study a method is described to develop a guide for the allergenic potential of tree pollen in a region, in this case the Netherlands.For the most common tree species in the Netherlands the scientific knowledge on the allergenicity of the pollen was collected, followed by an inventory on regional pollen abundance. Subsequently, the sensitization pattern in a patient group with possible inhalation allergy was analyzed. Based on these data allergenicity of the tree pollen was classified into five classes. Eight tree species/genera of the 61 most planted tree species in the Netherlands are considered to have a very strong to moderate allergenic potential. We propose to use this methodology to develop regional-specific guides classifying the allergenic potential of tree pollen.

Endoscopic and Radiologic Central Compartment Disease as Predictors of Perennial Inhalant Allergen Sensitization in Chronic Rhinosinusitis.

Central compartment atopic disease (CCAD) is a recently described variant of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) strongly associated with atopy. The association between central compartment disease (CCD) and inhalant allergy is not well established in South-East Asia, where perennial allergic rhinitis is common. The primary objective was to evaluate endoscopic and radiologic CCD as predictors of perennial allergen sensitization in primary CRS. The secondary objective was to compare clinical characteristics of CCAD with other CRS subtypes (CRSwNP and CRSsNP). A retrospective study of consecutive patients with primary CRS who underwent endoscopic sinus surgery at our institution was performed. Allergen sensitization was confirmed by skin or serum testing. Endoscopy records and computed tomography scans of paranasal sinuses were reviewed for CCD. The diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic and radiologic CCD in predicting atopy was calculated. There were 104 patients (43 CCAD, 30 CRSwNP and 31 CRSsNP). Endoscopic CCD was significantly associated with aeroallergen sensitization (odds ratio (OR) 3.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.65-9.67, P = 0.002). Endoscopic CCD predicted atopy with 57% sensitivity, 72% specificity, 69% positive predictive value and positive likelihood ratio of 2.05. Radiologic CCD was not associated with aeroallergen sensitization (OR 0.728, 95%CI 0.292-1.82, P = 0.496). There were more CCAD patients who reported hyposmia (86% vs 42%, P < 0.001) and had anosmia on olfactory testing than CRSsNP (65% vs 14%, P = 0.015). The prevalence of atopy was significantly higher in CCAD than CRSwNP and CRSsNP (70% vs 37% and 42%, P = 0.015 and P = 0.05, respectively). Median serum total immunoglobulin E was higher in CCAD (283 IU/ml) and CRSwNP (127 IU/ml) than CRSsNP (27 IU/ml, P = 0.006 and P = 0.042, respectively). Endoscopic CCD was a better predictor of inhalant allergy than radiologic CCD in primary CRS, in a locale of perennial allergic rhinitis.

Allergen-specific immunotherapy for allergic asthma: What’s new?

Allergen-specific immunotherapy for inhalant allergies, using allergen extracts of proven value, is highly effective in selected patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and allergic asthma. Both subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) have been shown to modify the underlying cause of the disease, with long-term clinical benefits that persist for years after their discontinuation. Real-world studies have confirmed the long-term efficacy of allergen immunotherapy in allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma and shown a reduction in the incidence of lower respiratory tract infections. Sublingual house dust mite (HDM) immunotherapy has been suggested to improve innate antiviral immunity—a likely explanation for this finding. Based on robust randomized controlled trials, the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guideline has incorporated the use of SILT for the treatment of adults with HDM-driven asthma and concomitant AR, with sub-optimal control, regardless of the use of low-to-high doses of inhaled corticosteroids, as long as the patient’s forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) is &gt; 70%.

Executive Summary of Clinical Practice Guideline on Immunotherapy for Inhalant Allergy.

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the therapeutic exposure to an allergen or allergens selected by clinical assessment and allergy testing to decrease allergic symptoms and induce immunologic tolerance. Inhalant AITis administered to millions of patients for allergic rhinitis (AR) and allergic asthma (AA) and is most commonly delivered as subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Despite its widespread use, there is variability in the initiation and delivery of safe and effective immunotherapy, and there are opportunities for evidence-based recommendations for improved patient care. The purpose of this clinical practice guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities and provide clinicians trustworthy, evidence-based recommendations regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. Specific goals of the guideline are to optimize patient care, promote safe and effective therapy, reduce unjustified variations in care, and reduce risk of harm. The target patients for the guideline are any individuals aged 5 years and older with AR, with or without AA, who are either candidates for immunotherapy or treated with immunotherapy for their inhalant allergies. The target audience is all clinicians involved in the administration of immunotherapy. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence-based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the guideline development group. It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. The statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experience and assessment of individual patients. The guideline development group made a strong recommendation that (Key Action Statement [KAS] 10) the clinician performing allergy skin testing or administering AIT must be able to diagnose and manage anaphylaxis. The guideline development group made recommendations for the following KASs: (KAS 1) Clinicians should offer or refer to a clinician who can offer immunotherapy for patients with AR with or without AA if their patients' symptoms are inadequately controlled with medical therapy, allergen avoidance, or both, or have a preference for immunomodulation. (KAS 2A) Clinicians should not initiate AIT for patients who are pregnant, have uncontrolled asthma, or are unable to tolerate injectable epinephrine. (KAS 3) Clinicians should evaluate the patient or refer the patient to a clinician who can evaluate for signs and symptoms of asthma before initiating AIT and for signs and symptoms of uncontrolled asthma before administering subsequent AIT. (KAS 4) Clinicians should educate patients who are immunotherapy candidates regarding the differences between SCIT and SLIT (aqueous and tablet) including risks, benefits, convenience, and costs. (KAS 5) Clinicians should educate patients about the potential benefits of AIT in (1) preventing new allergen sensitization, (2)reducing the risk of developing AA, and (3) altering the natural history of the disease with continued benefit after discontinuation of therapy. (KAS 6) Clinicians who administer SLIT to patients with seasonal AR should offer pre- and co-seasonal immunotherapy. (KAS 7) Clinicians prescribing AIT should limit treatment to only those clinically relevant allergens that correlate with the patient's history and are confirmed by testing. (KAS 9) Clinicians administering AIT should continue escalation or maintenance dosing when patients have local reactions to AIT. (KAS 11) Clinicians should avoid repeat allergy testing as an assessment of the efficacy of ongoing AIT unless there is a change in environmental exposures or a loss of control of symptoms. (KAS 12) For patients who are experiencing symptomatic control from AIT, clinicians should treat for a minimum duration of 3 years, with ongoing treatment duration based on patient response to treatment. The guideline development group offered the following KASs as options: (KAS 2B) Clinicians may choose not to initiate AIT for patients who use concomitant beta-blockers, have a history of anaphylaxis, have systemic immunosuppression, or have eosinophilic esophagitis (SLIT only). (KAS 8) Clinicians may treat polysensitized patients with a limited number of allergens.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Immunotherapy for Inhalant Allergy.

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the therapeutic exposure to an allergen or allergens selected by clinical assessment and allergy testing to decrease allergic symptoms and induce immunologic tolerance. Inhalant AITis administered to millions of patients for allergic rhinitis (AR) and allergic asthma (AA) and is most commonly delivered as subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Despite its widespread use, there is variability in the initiation and delivery of safe and effective immunotherapy, and there are opportunities for evidence-based recommendations for improved patient care. The purpose of this clinical practice guideline (CPG) is to identify quality improvement opportunities and provide clinicians trustworthy, evidence-based recommendations regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. Specific goals of the guideline are to optimize patient care, promote safe and effective therapy, reduce unjustified variations in care, and reduce the risk of harm.The target patients for the guideline are any individuals aged 5 years and older with AR, with or without AA, who are either candidates for immunotherapy or treated with immunotherapy for their inhalant allergies. The target audience is all clinicians involved in the administration of immunotherapy. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence-based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the guideline development group (GDG). It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. The statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experience and assessment of individual patients. The GDG made a strong recommendation that (Key Action Statement [KAS] 10) the clinician performing allergy skin testing or administering AIT must be able to diagnose and manage anaphylaxis. The GDG made recommendations for the following KASs: (KAS 1) Clinicians should offer or refer to a clinician who can offer immunotherapy for patients with AR with or without AA if their patients'symptoms are inadequately controlled with medical therapy, allergen avoidance, or both, or have a preference for immunomodulation. (KAS 2A) Clinicians should not initiate AIT for patients who are pregnant, have uncontrolled asthma, or are unable to tolerate injectable epinephrine. (KAS 3) Clinicians should evaluate the patient or refer the patient to a clinician who can evaluate for signs and symptoms of asthma before initiating AIT and for signs and symptoms of uncontrolled asthma before administering subsequent AIT. (KAS 4) Clinicians should educate patients who are immunotherapy candidates regarding the differences between SCIT and SLIT (aqueous and tablet) including risks, benefits, convenience, and costs. (KAS 5) Clinicians should educate patients about the potential benefits of AIT in (1) preventing new allergen sensitizations, (2) reducing the risk of developing AA, and (3) altering the natural history of the disease with continued benefit after discontinuation of therapy. (KAS 6) Clinicians who administer SLIT to patients with seasonal AR should offer pre- and co-seasonal immunotherapy. (KAS 7) Clinicians prescribing AIT should limit treatment to only those clinically relevant allergens that correlate with the patient's history and are confirmed by testing. (KAS 9) Clinicians administering AIT should continue escalation or maintenance dosing when patients have local reactions (LRs) to AIT. (KAS 11) Clinicians should avoid repeat allergy testing as an assessment of the efficacy of ongoing AIT unless there is a change in environmental exposures or a loss of control of symptoms. (KAS 12) For patients who are experiencing symptomatic control from AIT, clinicians should treat for a minimum duration of 3 years, with ongoing treatment duration based on patient response to treatment. The GDG offered the following KASs as options: (KAS 2B) Clinicians may choose not to initiate AIT for patients who use concomitant beta-blockers, have a history of anaphylaxis, have systemic immunosuppression, or have eosinophilic esophagitis (SLIT only). (KAS 8) Clinicians may treat polysensitized patients with a limited number of allergens.

Plain Language Summary: Immunotherapy for Inhalant Allergy.

The plain language summary explains allergen immunotherapy to patients, families, and caregivers. The summary is for patients aged 5 years and older who are experiencing symptoms from inhalant allergies and are considering immunotherapy as a treatment option. It is based on the 2024 "Clinical Practice Guideline: Immunotherapy for Inhalant Allergy." This plain language summary is a companion publication to the full guideline, which provides greater detail for health care providers. Guidelines and their recommendations may not apply to every patient, but they can be used to find best practices and quality improvement opportunities.

The Occurrence of Atopy in Patients with Isolated Spontaneous Mast Cell (or Nonallergic) Angioedema.

Isolated mast cell angioedema (MC-AE) can be divided into allergic and nonallergic (spontaneous) forms. The former is often associated with food, Hymenoptera venoms or drug allergies. This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between the occurrence of atopic diseases and the risk of angioedema. A retrospective study analyzed 304 patients with confirmed MC-AE and 1066 controls. All were analyzed for allergic asthma (AA), atopic dermatitis (AD) and allergic rhinitis (AR) based on ICD-10 codes. In addition, total IgE and peripheral eosinophilia were calculated. The analyzed atopic diseases were more frequent in the group of patients diagnosed with MC-AE than in the controls: 78 (25.7%) vs. 173 (16.2%) for p < 0.01. Patients diagnosed with AD had a higher risk of MC-AE (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.48,) similar to those diagnosed with AR (HR = 1.51). However, in patients with two or three atopic comorbidities, the risk increased significantly to HR = 2.45 or HR = 4.1, respectively. There was a positive correlation between the serum total IgE concentration or eosinophilia and the risk of angioedema (p < 0.01). Patients with MC-AE had a more frequent occurrence of atopic diseases associated with inhalant allergies. This risk increased in patients with IgE-mediated polymorphic disease.

Analysis of Artemisia pollen season in selected cities of Poland in 2022

Artemisia pollen is an important source of allergens responsible for inhalant allergy symptoms in late summer. The aim of this study was to compare the characteristics of the Artemisia pollen season in 2022 in selected cities located in different regions of Poland: Bialystok, Cracow, Lublin, Olsztyn, Opole, Piotrków Trybunalski, Sosnowiec, Szczecin, Warsaw and Wroclaw. Pollen concentrations were recorded using the volumetric method with a Hirst-type sampler operating in continuous volumetric mode. The beginning of Artemisia pollen season was in the second half of July in all monitored cities, and the end of the season at the latest at the end of the first half of September (14th in Piotrkow Trybunalski). The average length of the pollen season, determined with the 98% method, was 45 days. In all cities, maximum daily pollen concentrations were recorded in the first half of August, with Cracow, Lublin, Olsztyn, Sosnowiec and Warsaw in the first decade of the month. The highest daily concentration was recorded in Opole (78 pollen/m3), followed by Szczecin (72 pollen/m3). The average SPI for the Artemisia season was 486.7. Artemisia pollen production in analyzed cities in 2022 was lower than in years 2018–2020.

Prevalence and Risk Factors for IgE and IgG Cow's Milk Protein Allergies in Saudi Arabia.

Cow's milk protein allergies (CMPAs) particularly occur in infancy and early childhood due to an immunological allergic reaction to milk proteins. This issue is increasing in Saudi Arabia and requires research to improve health status and provide alternatives. Our study aims to investigate the important aspects of immunoglobulin E(IgE) and IgG CMPA in Saudi Arabia regarding its prevalence and association with demographic and health-related factors in both adult and pediatric populations. A descriptive retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted on 376 patients, comprising 314 adults aged between 19 and 86 years, and 62 pediatric patients aged between one and 12 years. The study focused on individuals who attended a private medical center in Jeddah city over the past five years. Laboratory results for food allergy of IgE and IgG tests, including cow's milk proteins (CMPs), serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD), specific IgE inhalant allergy results, and other health-related factors were collected from an electronic record system. Results have shown that casein was the most common sensitizing allergen of CMPs in adults, whereas α-lactalbumin was the most common sensitizing allergen in pediatrics. The most frequent sensitizing allergen in IgG CMP was cow's milk in 54/92 (58.7%) adults, followed by cow's sour milk products 41 (44.6%). Cow's milk was the most common sensitizing allergen in 20/20 (100%) children. The rate of CMPA was significantly higher in children younger than five years old (P =0.003), while children who interacted with pets had a marginal significantly reduced rate (P = 0.054). Thus, cow's milk is the most sensitizing allergen in IgG CMPs in adults and pediatrics.

Progressive clinical effects of the combination omalizumab and HDM – allergen immunotherapy in asthma

Objective The combination of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) and omalizumab is used to treat patients at risk of anaphylaxis. There is currently a very little evidence that this combination increases the effectiveness of AIT in patients with inhalant allergies. The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of HDM-SCIT therapy (injection immunotherapy for house dust mites) in combination with omalizumab in treating HDM-induced asthma. Methods This study was a placebo-controlled, randomized, multicenter trial including 82 patients with HDM-driven mild to moderate asthma. Omalizumab alone (A), HDM SCIT + omalizumab (B), SCIT alone (C), or placebo (D) for 24 months were applied. All patients received asthma treatment in accordance with GINA recommendations. The treatment efficacy was defined by a reduction in the daily dose of inhaled steroids (ICS) and a reduction in the number of asthma exacerbations (AX). Results After 24 months of therapy, a statistically significant reduction in the daily doses of ICS in groups A and B was observed (p = 0.021 and p = 0.008). Daily ICS reduction was considerably more significant in group B (p = 0.01). During 24 months of observation, the AX was significantly reduced in all study groups, with the greatest significant difference observed between groups A and B and groups C and D (placebo) as follows: 0.42 patient/per year vs. 0.39 vs. 0.84 vs. 0.91 (p = 0.023). Conclusion The combination of HDM SCIT and omalizumab is significantly and progressively reducing ICS use and AX in a 24-month study. The combination is significantly more effective than the single treatments or placebo.

Evaluation of skin prick location on the forearm using a novel skin prick automated test device.

The skin prick test (SPT) is the gold standard for identifying allergic sensitization in individuals suspected of having an inhalant allergy. Recently, it was demonstrated that SPT using a novel skin prick automated test (SPAT) device showed increased reproducibility and tolerability compared to the conventional SPT, among other benefits. This study aimed to evaluate prick location bias using the novel SPAT device. A total of 118 volunteers were enrolled in this study and underwent SPATs with histamine (nine pricks) and glycerol control (one prick) solutions on the volar side of their forearms. Imaging of the skin reactions was performed using the SPAT device, and the physician determined the longest wheal diameter by visually inspecting the images using a web interface. Prick location bias was assessed along the medial vs. lateral and proximal vs. distal axes of the forearm. In total, 944 histamine pricks were analyzed. Four medial and four lateral histamine pricks were grouped, and wheal sizes were compared. The longest wheal diameters were not significantly different between the medial and lateral prick locations (p = 0.41). Furthermore, the pricks were grouped by two based on their position on the proximal-distal axis of the forearm. No significant difference was observed among the four groups of analyzed prick locations (p = 0.73). The prick location on the volar side of the forearm did not influence wheal size in SPAT-pricked individuals.

Skin Prick Automated Test device offers more reliable allergy test results compared to a manual skin prick test.

The skin prick test (SPT) is the gold standard for identifying allergic sensitization in individuals suspected of inhalant allergy. A novel device, SPAT or Skin Prick Automated Test, that enables more standardized allergy testing has been developed. Previous research has shown reduced intra-subject variability of histamine wheals by SPAT. This study aimed to evaluate within-test agreement (% of patients with consistent test results) to detect sensitization to common inhalant allergens when a SPT is executed automated by SPAT or by manual SPT (SPMT) procedure. The 110 volunteers prospectively enrolled underwent both SPAT and SPMT with 3 pricks of house dust mite, timothy grass and birch, 2 pricks of histamine and 1 prick of glycerol. The proportion of consistent (3x positive â€" 3 x negative) and inconsistent (2x positive/negative â€" 1x positive/negative) test results were analysed. The proportion of inconsistent test results was significantly lower in the SPAT compared to the SPMT group. The delta histamine to control pricks was significantly higher in SPAT compared to SPMT group. Coefficient of variation was lower in SPAT compared to SPMT for house dust mite, timothy grass, birch pollen. Visual analogue scale for discomfort was significantly lower in SPAT compared to SPMT group. SPAT showed a 34% reduction in the number of inconsistent test results compared to manual SPT with common inhalant allergens. Patient experience is significantly improved when an allergy test is performed by SPAT compared to a manual SPT.