EAACI Molecular Allergology User's Guide 2.0

Since the discovery of immunoglobulin E (IgE) as a mediator of allergic diseases in 1967, our knowledge about the immunological mechanisms of IgE-mediated allergies has remarkably increased. In addition to understanding the immune response and clinical symptoms, allergy diagnosis and management depend strongly on the precise identification of the elicitors of the IgE-mediated allergic reaction. In the past four decades, innovations in bioscience and technology have facilitated the identification and production of well-defined, highly pure molecules for component-resolved diagnosis (CRD), allowing a personalized diagnosis and management of the allergic disease for individual patients. The first edition of the "EAACI Molecular Allergology User's Guide" (MAUG) in 2016 rapidly became a key reference for clinicians, scientists, and interested readers with a background in allergology, immunology, biology, and medicine. Nevertheless, the field of molecular allergology is moving fast, and after 6 years, a new EAACI Taskforce was established to provide an updated document. The Molecular Allergology User's Guide 2.0 summarizes state-of-the-art information on allergen molecules, their clinical relevance, and their application in diagnostic algorithms for clinical practice. It is designed for both, clinicians and scientists, guiding health care professionals through the overwhelming list of different allergen molecules available for testing. Further, it provides diagnostic algorithms on the clinical relevance of allergenic molecules and gives an overview of their biology, the basic mechanisms of test formats, and the application of tests to measure allergen exposure.

Sensitisation to Pollen Allergens in Children and Adolescents of Different Ancestry Born and Living in the Same Area

Background

Allergy can start at early ages, with genetic and environmental factors contributing to its development.

Aim

The study aimed to describe the pattern of sensitisation and allergy in children and adolescents of Spanish versus Moroccan ancestry but born in the same rural area of Spain.

Methods

Participants were children and adolescents (3–19 years) of Spanish or Moroccan descent, born in Blanca, Murcia (Spain). A detailed questionnaire was completed, and skin prick tests were performed to assess reactions to the most prevalent pollen allergens (O. europaea, P. pratense, S. kali, C. arizonica, P. acerifolia, A. vulgaris and P. judaica) plus molecular components Ole e 1 and Ole e 7. The association with ancestry was verified by studying participants’ parents.

Results

The study included 693 participants: 48% were aged 3–9 years and 52%, 10–19 years; 80% were of Spanish descent and 20% of Moroccan descent. Sensitisation to Olea europaea, Phleum pratense, Salsola kali and Cupressus arizonica were slightly higher in the Spanish group. The only significant differences were observed in sensitisation to Ole e 1 (p=0.02). Rhinitis, conjunctivitis, and rhinitis plus asthma were significantly higher in the Spanish group (p=0.03, p=0.02, p=0.007, respectively). The sensitisation pattern differed between Spanish and Moroccan parents, and between Moroccan parents and their children, but not between Spanish parents and their children.

Conclusion

Both environment and ancestry may influence sensitisation and symptoms. Although the environment seems to have a stronger influence, other factors may contribute to the differences in prevalence and in the clinical entities in people of Spanish versus Moroccan descent.

Rosaceae food allergy: a review

This review provides a global overview on Rosaceae allergy and details the particularities of each fruit allergy induced by ten Rosaceae species: almond/peach/cherry/apricot/plum (Amygdaleae), apple/pear (Maleae), and raspberry/blackberry/strawberry (Rosoideae). Data on clinical symptoms, prevalence, diagnosis, and immunotherapies for the treatment of Rosaceae allergy are herein stated. Allergen molecular characterization, cross-reactivity/co-sensitization phenomena, the impact of food processing and digestibility, and the methods currently available for the Rosaceae detection/quantification in foods are also described. Rosaceae allergy has a major impact in context to pollen-food allergy syndrome (PFAS) and lipid transfer protein (LTP) allergies, being greatly influenced by geography, environment, and presence of cofactors. Peach, apple, and almond allergies are probably the ones most affecting the quality of life of the allergic-patients, although allergies to other Rosaceae fruits cannot be overlooked. From patients' perspective, self-allergy management and an efficient avoidance of multiple fruits are often difficult to achieve, which might raise the risk for cross-reactivity and co-sensitization phenomena and increase the severity of the induced allergic responses with time. At this point, the absence of effective allergy diagnosis (lack of specific molecular markers) and studies advancing potential immunotherapies are some gaps that certainly will prompt the progress on novel strategies to manage Rosaceae food allergies.

Phenotypes and Endotypes of Peach Allergy: What Is New?

Peach allergy is emerging as a common type of fresh-fruit allergy in Europe, especially in the Mediterranean area. The clinical manifestations of peach allergy tend to have a peculiar geographical distribution and can range from mild oral symptoms to anaphylaxis, depending on the allergic sensitization profile. The peach allergen Pru p 7, also known as peamaclein, has recently been identified as a marker of peach allergy severity and as being responsible for peculiar clinical features in areas with high exposure to cypress pollen. This review addresses the latest findings on molecular allergens for the diagnosis of peach allergy, the clinical phenotypes and endotypes of peach allergy in adults and children, and management strategies, including immunotherapy, for peach allergy.

Allergenic Properties and Molecular Characteristics of PR-1 Proteins

Only a small fraction of proteins in plants and animals are classified as allergens. The allergenic properties are frequently attributed to certain functional characteristics of the proteins, such as a role in the plant defense against biotic and abiotic stress, to achieve the systematic acquired resistance. In line with this, eight members out of 17 functional pathogenesis-related (PR) protein families have been characterized as allergens. The present review summarizes the molecular features and allergenic significance of allergens of the PR-1 family. Not many allergens have been identified as belonging to this protein family, with most of them having a pollen origin, like mugwort or Bermuda grass. Molecular and structural features of allergenic PR-1 proteins are discussed and attributed to their IgE-reactive properties, clinical manifestation, and cross-reactivity among different foods and inhalants.

Skin Testing With Peach Peel Extract Versus Serum IgE to Pru p 3 as a Stronger Predictor of Peach-Induced Anaphylaxis

The most important peach fruit allergen is Pru p 3, followed by Pru p 1, Pru p 4, and Pru p 7. We aimed to assess their role in subjects with peach fruit-induced allergy (anaphylaxis and OAS) and compare skin prick tests (SPT) vs. specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) for predicting anaphylaxis. We also selected a control group. SPT included prevalent inhalant and plant food allergens plus peach peel extract. The sIgE to Pru p 1, Pru p 3, Pru p 4, and Pru p 7 were quantified. Compared with controls (n = 42), cases (n = 41) were younger (P = 0.003), more frequently female (P < 0.05) and had higher SPT positivity to peach peel (44% vs. 2.4%, P < 0.0001). There were significant differences in sensitization to several pollens: Olea europaea, Artemisia vulgaris, Prunus persica, Platanus acerifolia (all P < 0.001); and fruits: apple (P < 0.04), peanut (P < 0.002), tomato (P < 0.005), and melon (P < 0.05). Pru p 3 sIgE was detected in 61% of all cases (85% anaphylaxis and 38% OAS; P < 0.01 each) and 5% of controls (P < 0.001). Pru p 4 sIgE was present in 19% of cases and 7% of controls. The sIgE to Pru p 1 and Pru p 7 were not found. The odds ratio to predict anaphylaxis for peach peel SPT was 113 (confidence interval [CI], 20–613; P < 0.0001); for sIgE to Pru p 3, 22 (CI, 5.3–93; P < 0.0001); and for SPT positivity to selected plant food allergens, 5 (CI, 1–19; P < 0.05). In our study group, SPT with peel peach extract was a better predictor of anaphylaxis than Pru p 3 sIgE or other variables considered. The role of sIgE to Pru p 1, Pru p 4, and Pru p 7 seemed negligible.

Subjects develop tolerance to Pru p 3 but respiratory allergy to Pru p 9: A large study group from a peach exposed population

Peach tree allergens are present in fruit, pollen, branches, and leaves, and can induce systemic, respiratory, cutaneous, and gastrointestinal symptoms. We studied the capacity of peach fruit/Pru p 1, Pru p 3, Pru p 4, Pru p 7 and peach pollen/Pru p 9 for inducing symptoms following oral or respiratory exposure in a large group of subjects. We included 716 adults (aged 21 to 83 y.o.) exposed to peach tree pollen and fruit intake in the study population. Participants completed a questionnaire and were skin tested with a panel of inhalant and food allergens, including peach tree pollen, Pru p 9 and peach fruit skin extract. Immunoglobulin E antibodies (SIgE) to Pru p 1, Pru p 3, Pru p 4 and Pru p 7 were quantified. Sensitised subjects underwent oral food challenge with peach fruit and nasal provocation test with peach tree pollen and Pru p 9. The prevalence of sensitisation to peach fruit was 5% and most of these had SIgE to Pru p 3, with a very low proportion to Pru p 4 SIgE and no SIgE to Pru p 1 and Pru p 7. In only 1.8%, anaphylaxis was the clinical entity induced. Cases with positive skin tests to peach and SIgE to Pru p 3 presented a good tolerance after oral challenge with peach fruit. The prevalence of skin sensitisation to peach tree pollen was 22%, with almost half recognising Pru p 9. This induced respiratory symptoms in those evaluated by nasal provocation. In a large population group exposed to peach fruit and peach tree pollen, most individuals were tolerant, even in those with SIgE to Pru p 3. A positive response to Pru p 9 was associated with respiratory allergy.

Prunus persica 9, a new occupational allergen from peach tree pollen involved in rhinitis and asthma

OBJECTIVES

Several studies have described peach tree (PT) as an occupational allergen. The aim of this work was to assess the effect of Prunus persica 9 (Pru p 9), a recently identified allergen from PT pollen, in exposed workers.

METHODS

The study included people who reported respiratory symptoms after handling PT in orchards during the flowering period (Blanca village, Murcia region, south-east Spain). After completing a detailed questionnaire, participants underwent skin prick test (SPT) and nasal provocation test (NPT). The IgE response was analysed by SDS-PAGE and immunoblotting assays.

RESULTS

A total of 21 cases were included (mean age 45 years; 57% women). Most were polysensitised to common pollens, although one person was sensitised only to PT pollen. All cases had a positive SPT to this pollen, and 43% also to Pru p 9. All participants reported having rhinitis, and six participants reported having also asthma. Immunoblotting showed a heterogeneous IgE pattern for several proteins, with Pru p 9 recognised in nine cases. Most participants sensitised to PT pollen and Pru p 9 had positive NPTs, while those who were not sensitised to Pru p 9 tested negative.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrate for the first time that Pru p 9, an allergen from PT pollen, can induce respiratory symptoms following occupational exposure. This must be considered a relevant allergen when people working with PT cultivars develop respiratory symptoms.