Polysensitized Patients Research Articles

Dupilumab as Therapeutic Option in Polysensitized Atopic Dermatitis Patients Suffering from Food Allergy.

IgE-mediated food allergy is characterized immunologically by a type 1 immune response triggered upon exposure to specific foods and clinically by a broad range of manifestations and variable severity. Our understanding of food allergy within the allergic march of atopic dermatitis (AD) is still incomplete despite the related risk of unpredictable and potentially severe associated reactions such as anaphylactic shock. The aim of this pilot study was to investigate the effects of dupilumab, an IL-4/IL-13 monoclonal antibody approved for AD, on the allergic sensitization profile of patients with AD and type 1 hypersensitivity-related comorbidities, including oral allergy syndrome, anaphylaxis, and gastrointestinal disorders. We conducted an observational pilot study with a longitudinal prospective design, enrolling 20 patients eligible for treatment with dupilumab. Laboratory exams for total serum IgE, specific IgE, and molecular allergen components were performed at baseline and after 16 weeks of therapy. Our results demonstrate a statistically significant decrease in molecular components, specific IgE for trophoallergens, and specific IgE for aeroallergens following treatment with dupilumab. We suggest that modulating type 2 immunity may decrease IgE-mediated responses assessed with laboratory exams and therefore could minimize allergic symptoms in polysensitized patients. Upcoming results of randomized controlled trials investigating dupilumab in food allergy are highly anticipated to confirm its potential effect in the treatment of IgE-mediated food allergies.

Enhancing quality of life with 3-year course of sublingual immunotherapy for house dust mite-induced allergic rhinitis: An observational prospective study in real-life settings

PurposeThis prospective study aims to provide further supportive evidence by assessing the sustained effectiveness and safety of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) using a vaccine containing house dust mite (HDM) extracts in patients diagnosed with allergic rhinitis (AR) with/without conjunctivitis (AR/C). Materials and methodsAR/C patients (n = 111, SLIT group: 57, control group: 54) allergic to HDM were treated with standardized SLIT drops or symptomatic drugs from October to December in 2020. The patients were directed by the investigators to attend annual hospital visits for the assessment of various parameters including the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ), visual analog scale (VAS), total nasal symptom score (TNSS), total ocular symptom score (TOSS) and total medication score (TMS). During the study period, all participants were mandated to maintain comprehensive records of any adverse events (AEs) on diary cards, which were then communicated to the investigators via telephone. ResultsAt baseline (2020), TNSS, TOSS, TMS, VAS, and RQLQ scores were comparable between SLIT and control groups (P > 0.05). After one year of treatment (2021), significant reduction in all scores compared to the baseline for both groups (P < 0.001). At the end of the second year of treatment (2022), TNSS and RQLQ score in the SLIT group continued to decrease significantly compared to 2021 (P < 0.05). In the third year (2023), the control group showed a rebound in TNSS, TOSS, TMS, and RQLQ scores, significant differences compared to 2022 or 2021 (P < 0.05). Besides, the SLIT group had significantly lower scores across all domains of RQLQ compared to the control group (P < 0.001). Symptomatic treatment influenced the scores of Nasal Symptoms, Eye Symptoms, Practical Problems, and Emotions domains significantly in 2023 compared to 2021 or 2022 (P < 0.05). Within the SLIT group, no significant differences in TNSS, TMS, VAS, and RQLQ scores were observed between monosensitized and polysensitized patients throughout the three years of treatment (P > 0.05). All AEs were mild to moderate. ConclusionThe 3-year course of HDM-SLIT has shown significant therapeutic efficacy and a favorable safety profile in patients with AR/C. Importantly, our study presents initial evidence suggesting that the greater impact of AR/C on quality of life (QoL) may primarily stem from nasal symptoms, eye symptoms, practical issues, and emotional well-being.

Selection of allergen extract for immunotherapy in polysensitized allergic rhinitis patients.

Aim: Toevaluate the criteria used by allergists in selecting an immunotherapy extract (allergen immunotherapy [AIT]-extract) in rhinitis patients with polysensitization. Methods: First, a cross-sectional study was carried out by evaluating different factors that influence the medical choice of AIT-extract. Second, a literature review was performed by evaluating the diagnostic performance of atopy tests. Results: A total of 419 patients were included (84 children, 149 adolescents and 186 adults). Anamnesis, atopy tests and exposure to pets were the main factors for choosing the AIT extract. The sensitivity and specificity of atopy tests were high for Dermatophagoides spp., (>80%), moderate for pets (60%) and indeterminate for Blomia tropicalis. Conclusion: NCTs could be necessary for AIT-extract selection in polysensitized allergic rhinitis patients.

Levels of IgE sensitization drive symptom thresholds in allergic rhinitis

BackgroundAllergic rhinitis (AR) is a common respiratory disease encompassing a variety of phenotypes. Patients can be sensitized to 1 or more allergens. There are indications that polysensitization is associated with more severe disease. However, the extent to which the level of sensitization is associated with clinical disease variability, underlying the distinct nature of AR from AR+ conjunctivitis or AR+ asthma, is not known. ObjectiveTo evaluate phenotypical differences between monosensitized and polysensitized patients with AR and to quantify their symptomatic variability. MethodsA total of 565 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of AR were included in this cross-sectional study. Of those, 155 were monosensitized and 410 were polysensitized. Interactions between sensitization levels and the reporting of different symptoms of AR and co-morbidities, disease duration, and impact were assessed. Furthermore, patients were stratified into monosensitized, oligosensitized, and polysensitized to assess whether the effect of sensitization on the phenotype was ranked. ResultsPolysensitized patients reported itchy eyes significantly more often (P = .001) and had a higher number of ocular (P = .005), itch-related (P = .036), and total symptoms (P = .007) than monosensitized patients. In addition, polysensitized adults and children more often reported wheeze (P = .015) and throat-clearing (P = .04), respectively. Polysensitization was associated with more burdensome AR based on a visual analog scale (P = .005). Increased sensitization level was reflected in more itchy eyes, a higher number of ocular, itch-related, and total number of symptoms, and disease burden. ConclusionWith an increasing number of sensitizations, patients with AR experience an increased diversity of symptoms. Multimorbidity-related symptoms increase with sensitization rank, suggesting organ-specific thresholds.

Polysensitization in the Spanish Contact Dermatitis Registry (REIDAC): A 2019-2022 prospective study with cluster and network analysis.

There is still limited clinical-practice data on specific clinical and patch test features, as well as on allergen clusters in polysensitization (PS). To determine the frequency, relevance, symptoms duration and risk factors in polysensitized patients and to assess possible allergen aggregation. Prospective multicentric study (January 2019-December 2022) conducted in setting of the Spanish Contact Dermatitis Register (REIDAC). Clinical and patch test data of polysensitized and oligosensitized patients were compared, and risk factors of PS were investigated with logistic multivariate regression. Unsupervised hierarchical clustering and network analysis were used to study allergen aggregation in PS. A total of 10,176 patients were analysed. PS was found in 844 (8.3%). Current relevance was significantly higher in polysensitized patients (p < 0.01). Risk factors for PS were atopic dermatitis (OR: 1.58, 95% CI: 1.24-2.02), age (≥60 years vs. ≤24 years, OR: 1.75, 95% CI: 1.25-2.44) and some special locations (legs vs. face OR: 1.54, 95% CI: 1.05-2.25, hands vs. face OR: 1.46, 95% CI:1.15-1.85, arms vs. face OR: 1.49, 95% CI:1.01-2.20, trunk vs. face OR: 1.40, 95% CI:1.06-1.85). Cluster and network analyses revealed specific-allergen clusters and significant associations, including allergens belonging to metals group, fragrances and botanicals group, topical drugs group, rubber allergens and biocides. This study confirms that PS is structured by discernible patterns of specific-allergen clusters and reinforces significant allergen associations in PS. Cross-reactivity and/or concomitant sensitization could explain the formation of allergen clusters in PS.

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.

Spectra of sensitization to aeroallergens in patients with allergy from the upper chirchik district of the Republic of Uzbekistan

BACKGROUND: Allergic airway diseases caused by hypersensitivity to aeroallergens are the most common manifestation of atopy in children and adults. However, sensitization in the population primarily depends on the allergenic composition of the air environment. Identification of sensitization is a prerequisite for successful treatment of allergic diseases, although the structure of sensitization may have regional characteristics.&#x0D; AIM: To study the spectrum of sensitization in people with allergic diseases, namely, allergic rhinitis, bronchial asthma of varying severity, and atopic dermatitis, in the Upperchirchik district of the Tashkent region, which is characterized by a long period of flowering of weeds (wormwood, saltwort, and quinoa, from the end of August to the end of November), cereals (timothy, foxtail, rye, and bluegrass), and herbs (from the end of February to the end of July); the duration of flowering is associated with the peculiarities of climatic and geographic conditions.&#x0D; MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January to May 2022, a clinical and allergological examination was conducted on 100 patients with allergic diseases; of these, 38 were children aged 2–18 years (including 20 children with allergic rhinitis, 12 with bronchial asthma, 6 with atopic dermatitis) and 62 were adults (including 32 patients with allergic rhinitis, 13 with bronchial asthma, 17 with atopic dermatitis). To study the total IgE in the blood serum, allergen-specific IgE and standard diagnostic allergens were used for skin testing.&#x0D; RESULTS: Among all examined patients, the most frequent were intermittent and persistent forms of allergic rhinitis in 52 (52%), bronchial asthma in 25 (25%), atopic dermatitis in 23 (23%), combination of allergic rhinitis + bronchial asthma in 13 (13%), allergic rhinitis + atopic dermatitis in 12 (12%), and atopic dermatitis + bronchial asthma in 9 (9%) patients. Combined sensitization to pollen and household and food allergens was detected in 90% of the patients, monosensitization to allergens of cereal grasses (meadow Timothy and meadow bluegrass) in 6% and to allergens of weeds (wormwood and quinoa) in 4%. Sensitization to house dust (h1) was detected in 29 children and 51 adults. The frequency of sensitization to food allergens was higher in children than in adults: to cow’s milk allergens in 28.9% of children and 8.1% of adults; to egg allergens in 44.7% of children and 24.2% of adults; and to nut allergens in 38.7% of children and 34.2% of adults.&#x0D; CONCLUSION: The spectrum of sensitization to allergens in patients with allergic diseases in the Upperchirchik district of the Tashkent region is characterized by a predominance of sensitization to pollens and household allergens in children and adults, with a significant proportion of polysensitized patients in all age groups.

Efficacy and safety of simultaneous multiple food sublingual immunotherapy in polysensitized food allergic pediatric patients

Efficacy and safety of simultaneous multiple food sublingual immunotherapy in polysensitized food allergic pediatric patients

Immune Cell Alterations and PI3K-PKB Pathway Suppression in Patients with Allergic Rhinitis Undergoing Sublingual Immunotherapy.

Our prior clinical study assessed the efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) with standardized Dermatophagoides farina drops on patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) while analyzing the characteristics of adverse reactions. This study was conducted to evaluate the immune cell composition alterations in AR patients before and after SLIT, and to comprehensively investigate the role and changes of antigen-specific immune cells associated with treatment efficacy. A total of 68 AR patients who completed 12months of SLIT were included in the study. Before the trial's initiation and after 1year of SLIT, 10ml of venous blood was collected. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were isolated using the Ficoll gradient method. The mRNA transcriptome was analyzed using an Affymetrix microarray. The proportions of 22 immune cell types were calculated via the CIBERSORTx platform. Correlations between each immune cell type and SLIT were analyzed. PI3K-PKB pathway dysregulation were analyzed using quantitative PCR and Western blot. Flow cytometry was utilized to assess the percentages of Th1 and Th2 cells. Mono-sensitized AR patients exhibited marked increases in plasma cells, activated memory T cells, regulatory T cells, and activated dendritic cells, while experiencing decreased neutrophils and resting dendritic cells. In poly-sensitized AR patients, the most notable change was an increase in regulatory T cells, coupled with decreased T follicular helper cells, resting dendritic cells, and activated mast cells. These findings indicated that SLIT reshaped immune cell profiles in AR patients, and, notably, the specific changes differed between mono-sensitized and poly-sensitized individuals. Furthermore, SLIT appeared to shift the immune response towards a Th2 decrease profile in both groups. Importantly, suppression of the PI3K-PKB pathway was evidenced as inhibition of PKB phosphorylation and the decrease of glycogen synthase kinase 3 β (GSKβ) and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) expression after SLIT. Our study has demonstrated that SLIT treatment led to distinct changes in immune cell profiles between mono-sensitized and poly-sensitized AR patients. Furthermore, SLIT appeared to reduce a Th2 immune response, highlighting its efficacy in AR treatment. Importantly, the study revealed the suppression of the PI3K-PKB pathway, shedding light on the immunological mechanisms underlying SLIT's effectiveness.

Predictor of clinical response to subcutaneous immunotherapy with dust mites in polysensitized allergic rhinitis patients

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of 1-year subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) with dust mites in polysensitized allergic rhinitis (AR) patients and to analyze the serological markers associated with clinical response. Methods: A retrospective analysis of data from 69 polysensitized AR patients who completed 1-year SCIT with dust mites from Oct 2020 to Mar 2022 in Shandong Provincial ENT Hospital was conducted. The median patient age was 21 years, including 41 males and 28 females. The changes in symptoms and serum IgE, IgG4 assessed before and after treatment were evaluated. The differences in serological markers between effective and ineffective groups were analyzed. Multivariate regression analysis was used to investigate the predictors of clinical response. SPSS 22.0 software was used for data processing. Results: After immunotherapy, there was a significant reduction in symptom scores and a substantial improvement in the quality of life of polysensitized AR patients (all P<0.001). Dust mite specific IgG4 (sIgG4) significantly increased and dust mite specific IgE (sIgE)/sIgG4 significantly decreased (all P<0.05). sIgE, total IgE (tIgE), sIgE/tIgE and sIgE/sIgG4 were significantly lower in ineffective group than effective group (all P<0.05). The clinical response of SCIT related only to dust mite sIgE (r=0.29, P=0.036), and sIgE≥53.86 kU/L had the best sensitivity (77.78%) and specificity (57.89%) to predict effective SCIT in polysensitized AR patients. Conclusions: One-year dust mite SCIT is effective for polysensitized AR patients. Pre-treatment serum dust mite sIgE≥53.86 kU/L may play a role in predicting clinical response of dust mite SCIT in polysensitized AR patients.

Characterization of clinical features of monosensitized and polysensitized allergic rhinitis patients with pollen allergy

Objectives: The present study evaluates the prevalence of monosensitization and polysensitization in patients with pollen-hypersensitive moderate-to-severe persistent allergic rhinitis (AR), and determines the clinical characteristics of the two phenotypes. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 160 patients with moderate-to-severe persistent AR among the 3,699 patients who presented to allergy outpatient clinics who were found to have hypersensitivity to pollen based on a skin prick test and/or allergen-specific IgE positivity. The patients were divided into two groups: monosensitized (hypersensitivity to pollen alone), and polysensitized (hypersensitivity to pollen and other allergens). Both groups were evaluated for allergen hypersensitivity, symptoms of AR, symptom frequency and comorbidities related to AR. Results: Of the 160 patients, 83 (51.9%) were monosensitized and 77 (48.1%) were polysensitized. The mean age was 29.5 ± 10.7 yeasrs and 28.3 ± 8.3 years, respectively and the female-to-male ratio was 42/41 and 47/30 in the two groups. Nasal congestion was remarkably more common in the polysensitized patients than in the monosensitized patients (p = 0.01). Hypersensitivity to weed mix and Cupressus arizonica pollen identified with a skin prick test was significantly more common in the polysensitized patients than in the monosensitized patients (p = 0.03 and p = 0.01, respectively). The two groups were similar in terms of the prevalence of asthma and other comorbidities related to rhinitis (p = 0.78). Conclusions: In this single-center study, the rates of monosensitization and polysensitization were found to be similar in patients with pollen-hypersensitive moderate-to-severe AR, and the clinical characteristics of the polysensitized phenotype were different from those of the monosensitized phenotype.

Prévalence de l’hyperréactivité bronchique au cours des rhinites

BackgroundChronic rhinitis is a real public health problem. Furthermore, it was observed that several patients with chronic rhinitis and without clinical signs of asthma had bronchial hyperreactivity (BHR). This suggests that rhinitis is a risk factor for asthma. The aim of this study was to study the prevalence of BHR in chronic rhinitis and to determine the risk factors for this BHR. MethodsThis was a cross-sectional, prospective, descriptive and analytical study done in pneumo-allergology department of the military hospital of Tunis, collecting 80 patients with chronic rhinitis and for whom a bronchial provocation test with methacholine was performed. ResultsThe median age of patients was 32 years with a sex ratio of 1.2. Twenty-four percent were daily smokers. Forty percent of patients with chronic rhinitis had BHR. BHR was more present in patients with allergic rhinitis than patients with non allergic rhinitis (P<0.001).BHR was moderate to severe (PD20<600μg) in 40% of cases and mild (PD20≥600μg) in 60% of cases. A BHR was observed in 23% of men and 18% of women (P=0.854). Forty percent of patients with allergic rhinitis and monosensitization had BHR versus 11% for polysensitized patients (P=0.002). Furthermore, the type of sensitization (mono or polysensitized) is the only independent factor associated with HRB in patients with rhinitis. ConclusionThis study highlights the close link between the upper and lower airways and the role of certain factors that are more frequently associated with BHR, such as the allergic origin of rhinitis and the type of sensitization.

Would the choice of multiplex platform impact the management of the allergic patient? A first approach focusing on LTPs.

In the Mediterranean area, patients with LTP syndrome who are sensitized to multiple allergens are often tested for sIgE using multiplex platforms. The results obtained from different commercial platforms are not interchangeable, so it is important to compare and validate the platform selected for use. The objective of this study is to compare and validate the performance of the ImmunoCAP ISAC E112i and the macroarray ALEX2 in our daily practice. From August 2021 to March 2022, we tested 20 random serum samples from polysensitized patients using the ALEX2 test (MADx) and ImmunoCAP tIgE and ISAC E112i (Thermo Fisher Scientific). We compared the total IgE (tIgE) and sIgE levels for shared allergens. The heatmap generally showed more intense results for ISAC. The overall correlation was good, but some exceptions were noted. The main discrepancies were found for Ole e 7, which was positive for 11 patients in ISAC but negative for all patients in ALEX2, and for nut LTPs, for which ISAC showed a threefold higher detection rate for Ara h 9 and a fivefold higher detection rate for Cor a 8 and Jug r 3 compared to ALEX2. The regression model showed no interchangeability of tIgE results. Despite our small sample size and the complexity of comparing a quantitative and a semi-quantitative platform, our results suggest that patient diagnosis and management can be influenced by the platform used. Therefore, our findings must be taken into consideration when choosing a platform to use for some profiles of LTP-polysensitized patients, even though more data is needed.

Beyond ARIA: Will e-diaries replace retrospective questionnaires in measuring the severity of allergic rhinitis in clinical research and daily practice?

Retrospective questionnaires are used since decades to assess the severity and/or control of allergic diseases. Applications on smartphones have recently facilitated the use of prospective clinical diaries, based on questionnaires filled every day by the patient. Once limited to clinical trials, these e-diaries, based on validated disease control scores and visual analogue scales, permit a quantitative day-by-day measure free of recall bias. Given the advantages of this procedure, its use could be extended to the daily clinical practice. E-diaries may facilitate (1) a more precise identification of the culprit allergen in the diagnostic work-up of poly-sensitized patients, (2) the stratification of patients for treatment, (3) the follow-up of the patients under treatment for optimized shared decision-making, and (4) a careful assessment of preventive therapies. While a few apps are being used in scientific studies, consensus on their use in daily practice should be reached and guidelines for specialists should be elaborated by scientific associations.

Clinical efficacy in one-year treatment with Artemisia annua-SLIT drops in monosensitized and polysensitized individuals

PurposeSeasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (SARC) caused by Artemisia seriously affects patients' quality of life in northern China. This study aimed to estimate further the efficacy and safety of a one-year course of Artemisia annua-sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) on SARC patients. Materials and methodsThis was an open-label, randomized, controlled, single-centre study involving 150 SARC patients induced by Artemisia, randomized to SLIT group (n = 75, SLIT along with pharmacotherapy) or control group (n = 75, pharmacotherapy only). According to the skin prick test (SPT) results, the SLIT group was divided into monosensitized and polysensitized groups to analyze the influence of sensitization status on the efficacy of Artemisia annua-SLIT. The clinical indicators of this study were total rhinoconjunctivitis symptom score (TRSS), total medication score (TMS), combined scores of medication and rhinoconjunctivitis symptom (CSMRS), and score of visual analog scale (VAS). Safety was evaluated by the occurrence of adverse events (AEs). Daily administration of the drops was recorded in diaries by the patients. ResultsAfter nearly one year of treatment and follow-ups, there was a significant decline in TRSS, TMS, CSMRS, and VAS from the baseline scores in the SLIT group (p < 0.001). However, as pollen counts increased in 2022, indicators above in the control group increased significantly during the peak pollen phase (PPP) in 2022 grass pollen season (GPS) compared to the baseline. Meanwhile, we found no significant difference in TRSS, TMS, CSMRS, and VAS between the monosensitized and polysensitized groups (p > 0.05). Moreover, the result indicated that the clinical improvement in TRSS, TMS, CSMRS, and VAS was still observed in polysensitized patients who were allergic to Artemisia pollen and sensitized to house dust mite (HDM) (n = 15) in PPP of 2022, compared to the baseline value (p < 0.001). ConclusionArtemisia annua-SLIT was proven effective, tolerable and safe in patients with SARC after nearly one year of treatment, whether monosensitization or polysensitization.

Efficacy and safety of Artemisia annua sublingual immunotherapy in patients with seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis over two pollen seasons.

This study investigates the efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) with A. annua allergens in patients with seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis over two pollen seasons. Seventy patients with moderate-severe seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis were divided evenly into the SLIT and control groups. The SLIT last from 3months before the summer-autumn pollen season in 2021 till the end of the summer-autumn pollen season in 2022. The daily individual symptom score, total rhinoconjunctivitis symptom score (dTRSS), total medication score (dTMS), combined score of medication and rhinoconjunctivitis symptom (dCSMRS), visual analog scale (VAS) score, and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated. The average pollen concentration in 2022 was twice that previous two-year during the pollen season. Fifty-six patients completed treatments (SLIT group: 29, control group: 27). Compared with baseline, the individual symptoms, dTRSS, dTMS, dCSMRS, and VAS scores of SLIT group declined in 2021. After 16months of SLIT, all efficacy indexes in 2022 were still lower than baseline and equivalent to those in 2021. In control group, the efficacy indexes in 2022 were higher than that in 2020 and 2021. The efficacy indexes of SLIT group were lower than those of control group in 2021 and 2022. SLIT is effective for both mono- and poly-sensitized patients. AEs incidence in SLIT group was 82.7% without severe AEs. The A. annua-SLIT can obtain efficacy and safety over two pollen seasons for patients with moderate-severe seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.

Factors predicting the outcome of allergen-specific nasal provocation test in children with grass pollen allergic rhinitis.

Nasal provocation testing (NPT) is a reference methodology to identify the culprit allergen in patients with allergic rhinitis. Selecting the right allergen for NPT is particularly difficult in poly-sensitized patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). Predictors of NPT outcomes may facilitate the proper use of this test or even substitute it. To identify predictors of grass pollen NPT outcome from an array of clinical data, e-diary outcomes, and allergy test results in poly-sensitized pediatric patients with SAR. Poly-sensitized, SAR patients with grass pollen allergy, participating in the @IT.2020 pilot project in Rome and Pordenone (Italy), participated in a baseline (T0) visit with questionnaires, skin prick testing (SPT), and blood sampling to measure total (ImmunoCAP, TFS, Sweden) and specific IgE antibodies to grass pollen extracts and their major allergenic molecules (ESEP, Euroimmun Labordiagnostika, Germany). During the pollen season, patients filled the AllergyMonitor® e-diary app measuring their symptoms, medication intake, and allergy-related well-being via the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). After the pollen season (T1), patients answered clinical questionnaires and underwent a nasal provocation test (NPT) with grass pollen extract. We recruited 72 patients (age 14.3 ± 2.8 years, 46 males) sensitized to grass and/or other pollens, including olive (63; 87.5%) and pellitory (49; 68.1%). Patients positive to grass pollen NPT (61; 84.7%), compared to the negative ones, had worse VAS values in the e-diary, larger SPT wheal reactions, and higher IgE levels, as well as specific activity to timothy and Bermuda grass extracts, rPhl p 5 and nCyn d 1. A positive NPT to grass pollen was predicted by an index combining the specific activity of IgE towards Phl p 5 and Cyn d 1 (AUC: 0.82; p < 0.01; best cut-off ≥7.25%, sensitivity 70.5%, specificity: 90.9%). VAS results also predicted NPT positivity, although with less precision (AUC: 0.77, p < 0.01; best cut-off ≥7, sensitivity: 60.7%, specificity: 81.8%). An index combining the specific activity of IgE to rPhl p 5 and nCyn d 1 predicted with moderate sensitivity and high specificity the outcome of a grass pollen NPT in complex, poly-sensitized pediatric patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Further studies are needed to improve the index sensitivity and to assess its usefulness for NPT allergen selection or as an alternative to this demanding test procedure.

Pre-seasonal immunotherapy is effective in both monosensitized and polysensitized patients with allergic rhinitis.

Background. The effectiveness of pre-seasonal allergoid immunotherapy in polysensitized patients are not well-known. The aim of the present study was to compare the clinical efficacy and immunological changes of pre-seasonal allergoid immunotherapy in mono and polysensitized patients with grass pollen allergy. Methods. Fourty six patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis undergoing pre-seasonal grass pollen immunotherapy and 28 cases followed by conventional drug treatment were included. These groups were divided into monosensitized and polysensitized ones. All patients were followed between March-September with symptom-medication scores, and visual analogue scale (VAS). The quality of life was assessed using the Mini-RQLQ questionnaire. Phleum pratense (Phl p) specific IgE and IgG4 (UNI-CAP 100, Phadia) measurements were performed before and after 7 weeks of immunotherapy. Results. In the immunotherapy group, 15th weekly symptom-medication scores and VAS scores between May and August were found to be significantly lower than those in the control group (p < 0.05). Phl p specific IgE and IgG4 levels were significantly higher after immunotherapy compared to those before immunotherapy (p = 0.001). Furthermore, Phl p specific IgG4 levels after immunotherapy were also significantly higher than in the control group (p = 0.001). Improvements in activities-practical problems and non-nose/eye symptoms quality of life scores were significantly different between two groups (p < 0.05). There was no difference in terms of clinical and immunological parameters in mono- and polysensitized patients (p > 0.05). Conclusions. This study indicates that clinical improvement with pre-seasonal grass pollen immunotherapy is accompanied by important increase in specific IgG4 blocking antibodies. Furthermore, a single-allergen immunotherapy can lead to similar clinical efficacy and immunological changes in polysensitized as well as monosensitized patients with grass pollen allergy.

INMUNOCAT study: The impact of molecular diagnosis on immunotherapy prescription in pollen polysensitized patients from Catalonia.

Recognition of specific allergens triggering immune response is key for the appropriate prescription of allergen-specific immunotherapy (SIT). This study aimed at evaluating the impact of using the commercially available microarray ImmunoCAPTM ISAC 112 (Thermo Fisher Scientific) on the etiological diagnosis and SIT prescription compared to the conventional diagnostic methods in patients with allergic rhinitis/rhinoconjunctivitis and/or asthma. 300 patients with respiratory allergic disease, sensitized to three or more pollen aeroallergens from different species, as assessed by a skin prick test (SPT) and specific IgE assays (sIgE), were included in this multicentric, prospective observational study. SPT and a blood test were performed to all patients. Total serum IgE and sIgE (ImmunoCAPTM) for allergens found positive in the SPT and sIgE allergen components (ImmunoCAPTM ISAC 112) were measured. According to SPT results, the most prevalent pollen sensitizers in our population were Olea europaea followed by grass, Platanus acerifolia and Parietaria judaica. The molecular diagnosis (MD) revealed Ole e 1 as the most prevalent pollen sensitizer, followed by Cup a 1, Phl p 1, Cyn d 1, Par j 2, Pla a 1, 2, and 3 and Phl p 5. Immunotherapy prescription changed, due to MD testing, in 51% of the cases, with an increase of prescription of SIT from 39% to 65%. The identification of the allergen eliciting the respiratory disease is essential for a correct immunotherapy prescription. The advances in allergen characterization using methods, such as the commercial microarray ImmunoCAPTM ISAC 112, can help clinicians to improve SIT prescription.