Estimating the Risk of Severe Peanut Allergy Using Clinical Background and IgE Sensitization Profiles.

Background: It is not well-understood why symptom severity varies between patients with peanut allergy (PA). Objective: To gain insight into the clinical profile of subjects with mild-to-moderate and severe PA, and investigate individual and collective predictive accuracy of clinical background and IgE to peanut extract and components for PA severity. Methods: Data on demographics, patient history and sensitization at extract and component level of 393 patients with probable PA (symptoms ≤ 2 h + IgE sensitization) from 12 EuroPrevall centers were analyzed. Univariable and penalized multivariable regression analyses were used to evaluate risk factors and biomarkers for severity. Results: Female sex, age at onset of PA, symptoms elicited by skin contact with peanut, family atopy, atopic dermatitis, house dust mite and latex allergy were independently associated with severe PA; birch pollen allergy with mild-to-moderate PA. The cross-validated AUC of all clinical background determinants combined (0.74) was significantly larger than the AUC of tests for sensitization to extract (0.63) or peanut components (0.54-0.64). Although larger skin prick test wheal size, and higher IgE to peanut extract, Ara h 1 and Ara h 2/6, were associated with severe PA, and higher IgE to Ara h 8 with mild-to-moderate PA, addition of these measurements of sensitization to the clinical background model did not significantly improve the AUC. Conclusions: Models combining clinical characteristics and IgE sensitization patterns can help establish the risk of severe reactions for peanut allergic patients, but clinical background determinants are most valuable for predicting severity of probable PA in an individual patient.

Walnut Allergy Across Europe: Distribution of Allergen Sensitization Patterns and Prediction of Severity.

BACKGROUND: Walnut allergy is common across the globe, but data on the involvement of individual walnut components are scarce. OBJECTIVES: To identify geographical differences in walnut component sensitization across Europe, explore cosensitization and cross-reactivity, and assess associations of clinical and serological determinants with severity of walnut allergy. METHODS: As part of the EuroPrevall outpatient surveys in 12 European cities, standardized clinical evaluation was conducted in 531 individuals reporting symptoms to walnut, with sensitization to all known walnut components assessed in 202 subjects. Multivariable Lasso regression was applied to investigate predictors for walnut allergy severity. RESULTS: Birch-pollen-related walnut sensitization (Jug r 5) dominated in Northern and Central Europe and lipid transfer protein sensitization (Jug r 3) in Southern Europe. Profilin sensitization (Jug r 7) was prominent throughout Europe. Sensitization to storage proteins (Jug r 1, 2, 4, and 6) was detected in up to 10% of subjects. The walnut components that showed strong correlations with pollen and other foods differed between centers. The combination of determinants best predicting walnut allergy severity were symptoms upon skin contact with walnut, atopic dermatitis (ever), family history of atopic disease, mugwort pollen allergy, sensitization to cat or dog, positive skin prick test result to walnut, and IgE to Jug r 1, 5, 7, or carbohydrate determinants (area under the curve = 0.81; 95% CI, 0.73-0.89). CONCLUSIONS: Walnut-allergic subjects across Europe show clear geographical differences in walnut component sensitization and cosensitization patterns. A predictive model combining results from component-based serology testing with results from extract-based testing and information on clinical background allows for good discrimination between mild to moderate and severe walnut allergy.

Hazelnut allergy across Europe dissected molecularly: A EuroPrevall outpatient clinic survey.

BACKGROUND: Hazelnut allergy is birch pollen-driven in Northern/Western Europe and lipid transfer protein-driven in Spain and Italy. Little is known about other regions and other allergens. OBJECTIVE: Establishing a molecular map of hazelnut allergy across Europe. METHODS: In 12 European cities, subjects reporting reactions to hazelnut (n = 731) were evaluated and sensitization to 24 foods, 12 respiratory allergen sources, and latex was tested by using skin prick test and ImmunoCAP. A subset (124 of 731) underwent a double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge to hazelnut. Sera of 423 of 731 subjects were analyzed for IgE against 7 hazelnut allergens and cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants by ImmunoCAP. RESULTS: Hazelnut allergy was confirmed in 70% of those undergoing double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges. Birch pollen-driven hazelnut sensitization (Cor a 1) dominated in most cities, except in Reykjavik, Sofia, Athens, and Madrid, where reporting of hazelnut allergy was less frequent anyhow. In Athens, IgE against Cor a 8 dominated and strongly correlated with IgE against walnut, peach, and apple and against Chenopodium, plane tree, and mugwort pollen. Sensitization to seed storage proteins was observed in less than 10%, mainly in children, and correlated with IgE to nuts, seeds, and legumes. IgE to Cor a 12, observed in all cities (10% to 25%), correlated with IgE to nuts, seeds, and pollen. CONCLUSIONS: In adulthood, the importance of hazelnut sensitization to storage proteins, oleosin (Cor a 12), and Cor a 8 is diluted by the increased role of birch pollen cross-reactivity with Cor a 1. Cor a 8 sensitization in the Mediterranean is probably driven by diet in combination with pollen exposure. Hazelnut oleosin sensitization is prevalent across Europe; however, the clinical relevance remains to be established.

The effect of challenge method on sensitivity and reactivity to adenosine 5'-monophosphate in subjects with suspected asthma.

BACKGROUND: The following two methods of inhalation challenge have been used to determine the airway responsiveness: the tidal-breathing method; and the dosimeter method. The objective of the study was to determine the influence of the challenge method on the response to adenosine 5'-monophosphate (AMP). METHODS: This study measured airway responsiveness to AMP by dosimeter and tidal-breathing methods in 25 subjects with suspected asthma. The two AMP challenges were conducted in random order, on separate days, at the same time of day, at intervals of 1 to 5 days. Concentration-response curves were characterized by the provocative concentration of a substance causing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PC20) and slope. RESULTS: The dosimeter PC20 values were significantly higher than the tidal-breathing PC20 values, with geometric mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) values of 50.35 mg/mL (95% CI, 19.50 to 129.72 mg/mL) and 28.97 mg/mL (95% CI, 11.99 to 69.98 mg/mL; p = 0.02), respectively. The mean difference in the PC20 values obtained with each method was 0.80 doubling concentrations (95% CI, 0.16 to 1.44 doubling concentrations). The mean values for the slope were 17.0%/log mg/mL (95% CI, 12.5 to 21.5 mg/mL) with the tidal breathing method and 13.8%/log mg/mL (95% CI, 9.0 to 18.7 mg/mL; p = 0.03) with the dosimeter. CONCLUSIONS: The tidal-breathing method produces AMP PC20 values that are significantly lower than the dosimeter method and slope values that are significantly higher than the dosimeter method. These data suggest that the results obtained with each method of testing may not be comparable.