Shrimp sensitization in house dust mite allergic patients

Shrimp tropomyosin has a similar structure to house dust mite (HDM) tropomyosin. In this research, 232 adult patients with symptoms of persistent allergic rhinitis were randomly selected. In the group, 59% were sensitized to Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus and 57.8% to Dermatophagoides farinae. In total, 128 (55.2%) patients were sensitized to both HDM species and 143 (61.6%) to at least one. Slightly over a quarter (25.4%) of patients were sensitized to shrimp. Of the 35 shrimp-sensitized patients, the sensitization to Der p 10 and Pen a 1 was found in 11 cases (31.4%). There was a strong correlation between IgE Pen a 1 and IgE Der p 10 concentrations. The results indicate that there are other allergens responsible for a high incidence of shrimp sensitization in HDM-sensitized patients. A high convergence of Der p 10 and Pen a 1 levels may indicate that the determination of just one of the above is reasonable.

Food-dependent, exercise-induced anaphylaxis in a patient allergic to peach

Determining the single factor that triggered anaphylactic shock can be challenging. We present an interesting case of a 25-year-old female patient with recurrent anaphylactic reactions developing after eating various foods, particularly in presence of co-factors of allergic reactions. Symptoms occurred after consumption of various kinds of foods - peach, pancakes with cottage cheese and fruit, a meal from a Chinese restaurant - all eaten on other occasions without symptoms. During diagnosis, skin prick tests were negative for all tested allergen extracts (both inhalatory and food) from Allergopharma. Prick by prick tests were positive for the peach - wheal diameter - 6 mm, nectarine - 4 mm (histamine 4 mm, negative control 0 mm). Increased levels of asIgE were found for allergens of peach (0.55 kU/L).Open challenge test with one mid-size peach combined with the physical exercise challenge test was positive. ImmunoCAP ISAC test indicated increased levels of IgE specific for the lipid transfer protein (LTP) for walnut (nJug r 3), peach (Pru p 3), wheat (rTri a 14) and plane tree (rPla a 3). The patient was diagnosed with food-dependent, exercise-induced anaphylaxis associated with an allergy to lipid transport proteins (LTPs).

Anaphylactic reaction in patient allergic to mango

Background

An allergy to mango is extremely rare. The antigenic composition of the fruit is not fully known. Profilin from mango has a structure similar to birch tree profiling: it is responsible for cross-reactions between mango and pear, apple, and peach. A panallergen with a structure similar to mugwort defensin (Art v 1) which cross-reacts with celery, carrot, peanuts, pepper, aniseed, and caraway has been previously described.

Case study

A female patient, 30 years old, was admitted in February 2017 because of recurrent allergic reactions following consumption of various foods. The most severe allergic reaction in the patient’s life occurred after eating a mango fruit. Within several minutes the patient developed a generalised urticaria, followed by facial oedema, strong stomach pain and watery diarrhoea. The diagnostics involved skin tests with a set of inhalatory and food allergens, including native skin tests. The patient also experienced symptoms of recurrent, generalized urticaria in connection with consumption of various types of food, especially complex dishes containing many different ingredients. Additionally, an interview revealed that the patient was experiencing symptoms of the oral allergy syndrome after ingesting various fruit and vegetables, especially during late summer and fall. Diagnostics was extended by determining the levels of IgE specific for allergen components, using the ImmunoCap ISAC method. In order to confirm the occurence of a cross-reaction between mugwort and mango allergens, we performed the inhibition test of IgE specific for mugwort using a mango allergen extract and ImmunoCap matrix.

Results

Skin prick tests (SPT) were positive for allergens of grass 7 mm; weeds 8 mm; cat’s fur 5 mm; mugwort 6 mm. SPT were also positive for mango. The level of specific IgE was increased for allergens of mugwort, grass, celery, pepper, carrot, mango, banana, peach, and apple. The ImmunoCap ISAC test demonstrated a high level of specific IgE rPhl p 1 (timothy grass) and Art v 1 (mugwort). We also performed the IgE inhibition test using both mango extract and ImmunoCap matrix and confirmed a cross-reaction with Art v 1 in the pathogenesis of symptoms observed in the patient.

Conclusions

An anaphylactic reaction to consumed mango, resulting from cross-allergy with mugwort Art v 1 was diagnosed in the patient. Acute urticarial in this case is a manifestation of IgE-mediated food allergy. During in vitro diagnostic procedures we found an elevated concentration of IgE specific to several food allergens (including celery, peppers, carrot, banana, peach, apple, shrimp). The elimination diet removing allergens the patient was allergic to was recommended. Considering the anaphylactic reaction the patient was instructed to carry a rescue set composed of an adrenaline autosyringe, steroids, and antihistamines.

Recurrent anaphylaxis in patient allergic to eggplant - a Lipid transfer protein (LTP) syndrome

Eggplant allergy is rare and most of the previously described reactions were mild. In this case report, we present an interesting case of a 27-year-old male who experienced symptoms of anaphylaxis (shortness of breath, and swelling of the face, lips and tongue, which was followed by hypotension, tachycardia of 140/min and a sudden loss of consciousness) several minutes after eating a dish containing backed eggplant. Previously, the patient had experienced symptoms of allergy after eating different types of food, such as salad and chicken in spices. The symptoms were enhanced by co-factors. They were heterogeneous, ranging from oral symptoms to anaphylactic shock. During the diagnostic pathway, skin prick tests (SPTs) were positive to grass and cat. Prick by prick skin tests were positive for eggplant, both cooked and fresh. In ImmunoCap ISAC, IgE specific to rPhl p 1 (1.7 ISU-E), rCan f 5 (1,2 ISU-E), Fel d 1 (9.6 ISU-E ) and LTPs - nJug r 3 (0.5 ISU-E), rPru p 3 (0.6 ISU-E), rPla a 3 (1.3 ISU-E) were found. Based on the clinical pattern of the disease and the results of component resolved diagnosis, we suspect that this complex case of anaphylaxis may be gathered with LTP syndrome.

Analysis of feline and canine allergen components in patients sensitized to pets

BACKGROUND

Component resolved allergen diagnosis allows for a precise evaluation of the sensitization profiles of patients sensitized to felines and canines. An accurate interpretation of these results allows better insight into the evolution of a given patients sensitizations, and allows for a more precise evaluation of their prognoses.

METHODS

70 patients (42 women and 28 men, aged 18-65, with the average of 35.5) with a positive feline or canine allergy diagnosis were included in the research group. 30 patients with a negative allergy diagnosis were included in the control group. The total IgE levels of all patients with allergies as well as their allergen-specific IgE to feline and canine allergens were measured. Specific IgE levels to canine (Can f 1, Can f 2, Can f 3, Can f 5) and feline (Fel d 1, Fel d 2, Fel d 4) allergen components were also measured with the use of the ImmunoCap method.

RESULTS

Monosensitization for only one canine or feline component was found in 30% of patients. As predicted, the main feline allergen was Fel d 1, which sensitized as many as 93.9% of patients sensitized to felines. Among 65 patients sensitized to at least one feline component, for 30 patients (46.2%) the only sensitizing feline component was Fel d 1. Only 19 patients in that group (63.3%) were not simultaneously sensitized to dogs and 11 (36.7%), the isolated sensitization to feline Fel d 1 notwithstanding, displayed concurrent sensitizations to one of the canine allergen components. Fel d 4 sensitized 49.2% of the research group.64.3% of patients sensitized to canine components had heightened levels of specific IgE to Can f 1. Monosensitization in that group occurred for 32.1% of the patients. Sensitization to Can f 5 was observed among 52.4% of the patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Concurrent sensitizations to a few allergic components, not only cross-reactive but also originating in different protein families, are a significant problem for patients sensitized to animals.

Analysis of feline and canine allergen components in patients sensitized to pets

Background

Component resolved allergen diagnosis allows for a precise evaluation of the sensitization profiles of patients sensitized to felines and canines. An accurate interpretation of these results allows better insight into the evolution of a given patients sensitizations, and allows for a more precise evaluation of their prognoses.

Methods

70 patients (42 women and 28 men, aged 18–65, with the average of 35.5) with a positive feline or canine allergy diagnosis were included in the research group. 30 patients with a negative allergy diagnosis were included in the control group. The total IgE levels of all patients with allergies as well as their allergen-specific IgE to feline and canine allergens were measured. Specific IgE levels to canine (Can f 1, Can f 2, Can f 3, Can f 5) and feline (Fel d 1, Fel d 2, Fel d 4) allergen components were also measured with the use of the ImmunoCap method.

Results

Monosensitization for only one canine or feline component was found in 30% of patients. As predicted, the main feline allergen was Fel d 1, which sensitized as many as 93.9% of patients sensitized to felines. Among 65 patients sensitized to at least one feline component, for 30 patients (46.2%) the only sensitizing feline component was Fel d 1. Only 19 patients in that group (63.3%) were not simultaneously sensitized to dogs and 11 (36.7%), the isolated sensitization to feline Fel d 1 notwithstanding, displayed concurrent sensitizations to one of the canine allergen components. Fel d 4 sensitized 49.2% of the research group.64.3% of patients sensitized to canine components had heightened levels of specific IgE to Can f 1. Monosensitization in that group occurred for 32.1% of the patients. Sensitization to Can f 5 was observed among 52.4% of the patients.

Conclusions

Concurrent sensitizations to a few allergic components, not only cross-reactive but also originating in different protein families, are a significant problem for patients sensitized to animals.

Sunflower seed allergy

Sunflower seeds are a rare source of allergy, but several cases of occupational allergies to sunflowers have been described. Sunflower allergens on the whole, however, still await precise and systematic description. We present an interesting case of a 40-year-old male patient, admitted to hospital due to shortness of breath and urticaria, both of which appeared shortly after the patient ingested sunflower seeds. Our laryngological examination revealed swelling of the pharynx with retention of saliva and swelling of the mouth and tongue. During diagnostics, 2 months later, we found that skin prick tests were positive to mugwort pollen (12/9 mm), oranges (6/6 mm), egg protein (3/3 mm), and hazelnuts (3/3 mm). A native prick by prick test with sunflower seeds was strongly positive (8/5 mm). Elevated concentrations of specific IgE against weed mix (inc. lenscale, mugwort, ragweed) allergens (1.04 IU/mL), Artemisia vulgaris (1.36 IU/mL), and Artemisia absinthium (0.49 IU/mL) were found. An ImmunoCap ISAC test found an average level of specific IgE against mugwort pollen allergen component Art v 1 - 5,7 ISU-E, indicating an allergy to mugwort pollen and low to medium levels of specific IgE against lipid transfer proteins (LTP) found in walnuts, peanuts, mugwort pollen, and hazelnuts. Through the ISAC inhibition test we proved that sunflower seed allergen extracts contain proteins cross-reactive with patients' IgE specific to Art v 1, Art v 3, and Jug r 3. Based on our results and the clinical pattern of the disease we confirmed that the patient is allergic to mugwort pollen and that he had an anaphylactic reaction as a result of ingesting sunflower seeds. We suspected that hypersensitivity to sunflower LTP and defensin-like proteins, both cross-reactive with mugwort pollen allergens, were the main cause of the patient's anaphylactic reaction.

Expression of IL-17A concentration and effector functions of peripheral blood neutrophils in food allergy hypersensitivity patients

Lymphocytes Th17 and other types of immune system cells produce IL17. By induction of cytokines and chemokines, the IL17 cytokine is involved in mechanisms of allergic reaction with participation of neutrophil granulocytes. It affects activation, recruitment, and migration of neutrophils to the tissues, regulating inflammatory reaction intensity. Excited neutrophils secrete inter alia elastase and reactive oxygen species (ROS)--significant mediators of inflammation process responsible for tissues damage.The aim of the study was to evaluate the concentrations of serum interleukin 17A, serum neutrophil elastase, and ROS production by neutrophils in patients with food allergy.The study included 30 patients with food allergy diagnosed based on interview, clinical symptoms, positive SPT, placebo controlled double-blind oral provocation trial, and the presence of asIgE in blood serum against selected food allergens using fluoro-immuno-enzymatic method FEIA UNICap 100. The control group consisted of 10 healthy volunteers. The concentrations of IL17A were determined in all patients using ELISA method with eBioscience kits, and elastase using BenderMed Systems kits. Chemiluminescence of non-stimulated neutrophils was evaluated using luminol-dependent kinetic method for 40 min on Luminoskan (Labsystems luminometer).The results of serum IL-17A concentrations and the values of chemiluminescence obtained by non-activated neutrophils, as well as elastase concentrations, were higher in patients with food allergic hypersensitivity compared to healthy volunteers.This study demonstrates a significance of IL-17A and activated neutrophil granulocytes in the course of diseases with food allergic hypersensitivity.

Macroscopic picture of gastric mucosa in endoscopic examination of patients with chronic gastritis and food allergy

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the study was to evaluate the difference in macroscopic picture of the stomach in patients with food allergy and in non-atopic patients with H. pylori infection.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In the study, patients with atopic diathesis, suffering from dyspepsia or abdominal pain were analysed. The study group included 72 women aged 16-57 years (mean age 36.5 years) and 38 men aged 16 and 60 years (mean age 34.4 years). Control group was formed of 40 patients without atopy (13 men and 27 women, aged 18-56 years--mean age 34.8 years), with endoscopically and histologically confirmed gastritis. All the patients underwent endoscopy of upper gastrointestinal tract with the use of fiberoscope GIF-E OLYMPUS and video endoscopy monitor OEV 203 OLYMPUS (Japan). The following features of gastritis were considered in endoscopic assessment: oedema, reddening and fragility of mucous membrane, spotted and macular exudate, flat and raised erosions, proliferation and atrophy of mucosal folds, vascular network, intramural extravasation, mucosal structure. The results obtained were verified statistically with chi-squared independence tests for 2 x 2 tables.

CONCLUSIONS

Statistical analysis of the incidence of these signs of inflammation in patients with food allergy did not show significant differences in relation to subjects with non-atopic gastritis.

[The frequency of atopy in lung cancer patients]

The controversial opinions on adverse correlation between atopy and incidence of lung cancer made us to undertake the research in that field in patients, treated in Department of Lung Diseases of University School of Medicine in Bydgoszcz. In 45 histologically diagnosed lung cancer patients in III and IV stage of the disease the tendency to atopy was assessed. In above mentioned patients the serum level of total IgE, the number of eosinophyls in peripheral blood and skin tests with popular allergens such as: home-dust, feather, grass particles, fungus and mould. It was established, that atopy in 25% of lung cancer patients was observed. That percents similar in persons without cancer burden. These findings suggest, that pathologically increased immunologic reactions, observed in atopic patients do not protect from lung cancer. From the other hand, the results of these examinations suggest also, that depressions of immunologic reactions, connected with lung cancer are selective in their nature.