Evaluation of subcutaneous immunotherapy with birch pollen extract for pollen-food allergy syndrome

Subcutaneous Immunotherapy of Food Allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

While there are compelling arguments for developing subcutaneous allergen-specific immunotherapy for alleviation of food allergies, there is a limited number of studies in the public domain. The review seeks to present the approaches taken, to explain the paucity of studies, and to identify new roads for development.

RECENT FINDINGS

A literature search revealed clinical trials of immunotherapy of food allergies to fish and peanut, but studies had limited patient numbers, short treatment courses and follow-up periods. Indications, but no clearcut effects, were seen with both classical allergen extracts and hypo-allergenic preparations. A special case is the influence on cross-reactive food allergies, when subcutaneously administered birch-pollen extracts are used for treatment of birch pollen hayfever and/or asthma. Again indications, but no convincing efficacy has been registered. Newer developments include recombinant hypoallergens and DNA-technologies. Subcutaneous immunotherapy for food allergies has not matured to provide clinically relevant treatment opportunities.

Cross-reactive epitopes and their role in food allergy

Allergenic cross-reactivity among food allergens complicates the diagnosis and management of food allergy. This can result in many patients being sensitized (having allergen-specific IgE) to foods without exhibiting clinical reactivity. Some food groups such as shellfish, fish, tree nuts, and peanuts have very high rates of cross-reactivity. In contrast, relatively low rates are noted for grains and milk, whereas many other food families have variable rates of cross-reactivity or are not well studied. Although classical cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants are clinically not relevant, α-Gal in red meat through tick bites can lead to severe reactions. Multiple sensitizations to tree nuts complicate the diagnosis and management of patients allergic to peanut and tree nut. This review discusses cross-reactive allergens and cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants in the major food groups, and where available, describes their B-cell and T-cell epitopes. The clinical relevance of these cross-reactive B-cell and T-cell epitopes is highlighted and their possible impact on allergen-specific immunotherapy for food allergy is discussed.

Utility of the Basophil Activation Test Using Gly m 4, Gly m 5 and Gly m 6 Molecular Allergens for Characterizing Anaphylactic Reactions to Soy

There are two major clinically described forms of IgE-dependent soy allergy: (i) a primary dietary form, linked to sensitization against soy storage proteins Gly m 5 and Glym 6, and (ii) a form included in birch-soy syndromes linked to Gly m 4, a PR-10-like allergen. This second form sometimes causes severe systemic reactions, even anaphylaxis, especially on consuming certain forms of soy such as soymilks or smoothies. Skin prick tests and specific IgE assays against soy whole extracts lack sensitivity. Assays of anti-Gly m 4, Gly m 5 and Gly m 6 specific IgEs have been developed to overcome this obstacle, but they unfortunately lack specificity, especially for anti-Gly m 4. We hypothesized that the basophil activation test (BAT) using molecular soy allergens Gly m 4, Gly m 5 and Gly m 6 would both remedy the lack of sensitivity of other tests and offer, through its mechanistic contribution, greater specificity than the assay of anti-Gly m 4 specific IgEs. This would enable the two types of soy allergy to be separately identified. In a characteristic clinical example of PR-10-induced anaphylactic reaction after consuming soymilk, we report preliminary results of Gly m 4-exclusive positivity of BAT supporting our hypothesis. It will be necessary to confirm these results on more patients in subsequent studies, and to specify the place of the BAT in an overall diagnostic strategy. Meanwhile, soy BAT using molecular allergens is a promising diagnostic tool for soy allergy and probably also for follow-up in specific immunotherapies.

Cross-Reacting Carbohydrate Determinants Inhibitor Can Improve the Diagnostic Accuracy in Pollen and Food Allergy

Background

Cross-reacting carbohydrate determinants (CCD) exist in some pollen and food allergens, but they do not contribute to allergic symptoms. However, CCD can induce specific IgE (sIgE) production and may lead to incorrect allergen diagnosis and treatment. CCD inhibitor is a specific antibody adsorbent which can preclude CCD from binding to sIgE. Currently, the data of CCD inhibition in allergen sIgE test are limited.

Methods

The allergic patients with positive skin prick reactions to two or more pollen and/or food allergen extracts were included in our study. Their sera were obtained and sIgE was tested with an allergen panel that included 29 single and mixed allergens (MEDIWISS Analytic GmbH, China) before and after CCD inhibition. The changes of sIgE against these allergens and the correlations of sIgEs to clinical symptoms were analyzed.

Results

A total of 44 patients were included and 36 (81.82%) of those were multi-sensitized to house dust mites and pollen allergens based on skin prick tests. The sIgE levels and positive rates against most pollen and food allergens were significantly lower after CCD inhibition. The sIgE levels of pollen were positively correlated to those of food allergens before CCD inhibition. However, these correlations were weakened or no longer existed after CCD inhibition. The sIgE against pollen and food allergens showed significantly higher consistency with clinical symptoms after CCD inhibition.

Conclusion

Cross-sensitization caused by CCD is widespread in pollen and food. CCD inhibition test can improve the diagnostic accuracy of pollen and food allergy.

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.