New light on an old syndrome: Role of Api g 7 in mugwort pollen-related celery allergy.

BACKGROUND: Celery root is known to cause severe allergic reactions in patients sensitized to mugwort pollen. OBJECTIVE: We studied clinically well-characterized patients with celery allergy by IgE testing with a comprehensive panel of celery allergens to disentangle the molecular basis of what is known as the celery-mugwort syndrome. METHODS: Patients with suspected food allergy to celery underwent a standardized interview. Main inclusion criteria were a positive food challenge with celery or an unambiguous case history of severe anaphylaxis. IgE to celery allergens (rApi g 1.01, rApi g 1.02, rApi g 2, rApi g 4, nApi g 5, rApi g 6, rApi g 7) and to mugwort allergens (rArt v 1, rArt v 3, rArt v 4) were determined. IgE levels ≥0.35 kUA/L were regarded positive. RESULTS: Seventy-nine patients with allergy to celery were included. Thirty patients had mild oral or rhinoconjunctival symptoms, and 49 had systemic reactions. Sixty-eight percent had IgE to celery extract, 80% to birch pollen, and 77% to mugwort pollen. A combination of Api g 1.01, 1.02, 4, 5, and 7 increased the diagnostic sensitivity for celery allergy to 92%. The lipid transfer proteins Api g 2 and Api g 6 were not relevant in our celery-allergic population. IgE to Api g 7, detected in 52% of patients, correlated closely (r = 0.86) to Art v 1 from mugwort pollen. Eleven of 12 patients with monosensitization to Api g 7 were IgE negative to celery extract. The odds ratio for developing a severe anaphylactic reaction rather than only mild oral symptoms was about 6 times greater (odds ratio, 5.87; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-32.0; P = .0410) for Api g 7-sensitized versus -nonsensitized subjects. CONCLUSION: There is an urgent need for routine diagnostic tests to assess sensitization to Api g 7, not only to increase test sensitivity but also to identify patients at risk of a severe allergic reaction to celery.

Targeting Ara h 2 with human-derived monoclonal antibodies prevents peanut-induced anaphylaxis in mice.

BACKGROUND: Peanut allergy is a type-I hypersensitivity immune reaction mediated by the binding of peanut allergens to IgE-FcεRI complexes on mast cells and basophils and by their subsequent cellular degranulation. Of all major peanut allergens, Ara h 2 is considered the most anaphylactic. With few options but allergen avoidance, effective treatment of allergic patients is needed. Passive immunotherapy (herein called PIT) based on prophylactic administration of peanut-specific monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) may present a promising treatment option for this under-served disease. METHOD: Fully human recombinant anti-peanut IgG mAbs were tested in mice sensitized to peanut allergen extract. Allergic mice received intravenous immunotherapy with anti-peanut Ara h 2-specific IgG1 or IgG4 mAbs cocktails, and were then challenged by a systemic injection of high-dose peanut allergen extract. The protection from allergic anaphylaxis was measured by monitoring the core body temperature. RESULTS: PIT with peanut-specific mAbs was associated with a significant and dose-dependent reduction of anaphylactic reactions in peanut-sensitized mice challenged with peanut allergen extract. Complete protection was observed at doses approximately 0.3-0.6 mg mAbs. Mixtures of mAbs were more effective than single mAbs, and effective treatment could be obtained with mAbs of both IgG1 and IgG4 subclasses. The therapeutic effect of anti-Ara h 2 mAbs was based on allergen neutralization and independent of the Fcγ receptor and mast-cell inhibition. CONCLUSION: This is the first report that shows that human-derived anti-peanut mAbs can prevent allergic anaphylaxis in mice. The study demonstrates that neutralizing allergenic epitopes on Ara h 2 by mAbs may represent a promising treatment option in peanut-allergy.

EAACI guidelines on the diagnosis of IgE-mediated food allergy.

This European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology guideline provides recommendations for diagnosing IgE-mediated food allergy and was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. Food allergy diagnosis starts with an allergy-focused clinical history followed by tests to determine IgE sensitization, such as serum allergen-specific IgE (sIgE) and skin prick test (SPT), and the basophil activation test (BAT), if available. Evidence for IgE sensitization should be sought for any suspected foods. The diagnosis of allergy to some foods, such as peanut and cashew nut, is well supported by SPT and serum sIgE, whereas there are less data and the performance of these tests is poorer for other foods, such as wheat and soya. The measurement of sIgE to allergen components such as Ara h 2 from peanut, Cor a 14 from hazelnut and Ana o 3 from cashew can be useful to further support the diagnosis, especially in pollen-sensitized individuals. BAT to peanut and sesame can be used additionally. The reference standard for food allergy diagnosis is the oral food challenge (OFC). OFC should be performed in equivocal cases. For practical reasons, open challenges are suitable in most cases. Reassessment of food allergic children with allergy tests and/or OFCs periodically over time will enable reintroduction of food into the diet in the case of spontaneous acquisition of oral tolerance.

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.

Risk factors for severe reactions in food allergy: Rapid evidence review with meta-analysis.

This rapid review summarizes the most up to date evidence about the risk factors for severe food-induced allergic reactions. We searched three bibliographic databases for studies published between January 2010 and August 2021. We included 88 studies and synthesized the evidence narratively, undertaking meta-analysis where appropriate. Significant uncertainties remain with respect to the prediction of severe reactions, both anaphylaxis and/or severe anaphylaxis refractory to treatment. Prior anaphylaxis, an asthma diagnosis, IgE sensitization or basophil activation tests are not good predictors. Some molecular allergology markers may be helpful. Hospital presentations for anaphylaxis are highest in young children, yet this age group appears at lower risk of severe outcomes. Risk of severe outcomes is greatest in adolescence and young adulthood, but the contribution of risk taking behaviour in contributing to severe outcomes is unclear. Evidence for an impact of cofactors on severity is lacking, although food-dependent exercise-induced anaphylaxis may be an exception. Some medications such as beta-blockers or ACE inhibitors may increase severity, but appear less important than age as a factor in life-threatening reactions. The relationship between dose of exposure and severity is unclear. Delays in symptom recognition and anaphylaxis treatment have been associated with more severe outcomes. An absence of prior anaphylaxis does not exclude its future risk.

The international EAACI/GA²LEN/EuroGuiDerm/APAAACI guideline for the definition, classification, diagnosis, and management of urticaria.

This update and revision of the international guideline for urticaria was developed following the methods recommended by Cochrane and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group. It is a joint initiative of the Dermatology Section of the European Academy of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA²LEN) and its Urticaria and Angioedema Centers of Reference and Excellence (UCAREs and ACAREs), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF; EuroGuiDerm), and the Asia Pacific Association of Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology with the participation of 64 delegates of 50 national and international societies and from 31 countries. The consensus conference was held on 3 December 2020. This guideline was acknowledged and accepted by the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS). Urticaria is a frequent, mast cell-driven disease that presents with wheals, angioedema, or both. The lifetime prevalence for acute urticaria is approximately 20%. Chronic spontaneous or inducible urticaria is disabling, impairs quality of life, and affects performance at work and school. This updated version of the international guideline for urticaria covers the definition and classification of urticaria and outlines expert-guided and evidence-based diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for the different subtypes of urticaria.

Proposal of 0.5 mg of protein/100 g of processed food as threshold for voluntary declaration of food allergen traces in processed food-A first step in an initiative to better inform patients and avoid fatal allergic reactions: A GA²LEN position paper.

BACKGROUND: Food anaphylaxis is commonly elicited by unintentional ingestion of foods containing the allergen above the tolerance threshold level of the individual. While labeling the 14 main allergens used as ingredients in food products is mandatory in the EU, there is no legal definition of declaring potential contaminants. Precautionary allergen labeling such as "may contain traces of" is often used. However, this is unsatisfactory for consumers as they get no information if the contamination is below their personal threshold. In discussions with the food industry and technologists, it was suggested to use a voluntary declaration indicating that all declared contaminants are below a threshold of 0.5 mg protein per 100 g of food. This concentration is known to be below the threshold of most patients, and it can be technically guaranteed in most food production. However, it was also important to assess that in case of accidental ingestion of contaminants below this threshold by highly allergic patients, no fatal anaphylactic reaction could occur. Therefore, we performed a systematic review to assess whether a fatal reaction to 5mg of protein or less has been reported, assuming that a maximum portion size of 1kg of a processed food exceeds any meal and thus gives a sufficient safety margin. METHODS: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched until 24 January 2021 for provocation studies and case reports in which one of the 14 major food allergens was reported to elicit fatal or life-threatening anaphylactic reactions and assessed if these occurred below the ingestion of 5mg of protein. A Delphi process was performed to obtain an expert consensus on the results. RESULTS: In the 210 studies included, in our search, no reports of fatal anaphylactic reactions reported below 5 mg protein ingested were identified. However, in provocation studies and case reports, severe reactions below 5 mg were reported for the following allergens: eggs, fish, lupin, milk, nuts, peanuts, soy, and sesame seeds. CONCLUSION: Based on the literature studied for this review, it can be stated that cross-contamination of the 14 major food allergens below 0.5 mg/100 g is likely not to endanger most food allergic patients when a standard portion of food is consumed. We propose to use the statement "this product contains the named allergens in the list of ingredients, it may contain traces of other contaminations (to be named, e.g. nut) at concentrations less than 0.5 mg per 100 g of this product" for a voluntary declaration on processed food packages. This level of avoidance of cross-contaminations can be achieved technically for most processed foods, and the statement would be a clear and helpful message to the consumers. However, it is clearly acknowledged that a voluntary declaration is only a first step to a legally binding solution. For this, further research on threshold levels is encouraged.

Development and validation of the food allergy severity score.

BACKGROUND: The heterogeneity and lack of validation of existing severity scores for food allergic reactions limit standardization of case management and research advances. We aimed to develop and validate a severity score for food allergic reactions. METHODS: Following a multidisciplinary experts consensus, it was decided to develop a food allergy severity score (FASS) with ordinal (oFASS) and numerical (nFASS) formats. oFASS with 3 and 5 grades were generated through expert consensus, and nFASS by mathematical modeling. Evaluation was performed in the EuroPrevall outpatient clinic cohort (8232 food reactions) by logistic regression with request of emergency care and medications used as outcomes. Discrimination, classification, and calibration were calculated. Bootstrapping internal validation was followed by external validation (logistic regression) in 5 cohorts (3622 food reactions). Correlation of nFASS with the severity classification done by expert allergy clinicians by Best-Worst Scaling of 32 food reactions was calculated. RESULTS: oFASS and nFASS map consistently, with nFASS having greater granularity. With the outcomes emergency care, adrenaline and critical medical treatment, oFASS and nFASS had a good discrimination (receiver operating characteristic area under the curve [ROC-AUC]>0.80), classification (sensitivity 0.87-0.92, specificity 0.73-0.78), and calibration. Bootstrapping over ROC-AUC showed negligible biases (1.0 × 10-6 -1.23 × 10-3 ). In external validation, nFASS performed best with higher ROC-AUC. nFASS was strongly correlated (R 0.89) to best-worst scoring of 334 expert clinicians. CONCLUSION: FASS is a validated and reliable method to measure severity of food allergic reactions. The ordinal and numerical versions that map onto each other are suitable for use by different stakeholders in different settings.

Contact sensitization to essential oils: IVDK data of the years 2010-2019.

BACKGROUND: Essential oils (EOs) are widely used in cosmetics, perfumes, massage fluids, aroma therapy and natural medicine. Some EOs contain contact sensitizers. OBJECTIVES: To describe the frequency of sensitization to EOs in dermatitis patients presenting in skin clinics including concomitant reactions, to evaluate the EO patch test preparations and to identify patient groups with an increased risk of EO sensitization. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of data from the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK), 2010-2019. RESULTS: Twelve EOs were patch tested in an aimed manner in 10 930 patients, of whom 908 (8.3%) reacted to at least 1 EO. Only 6 EOs elicited more than 1% positive patch test reactions: ylang ylang (I + II) oil (3.9%), lemongrass oil (2.6%), jasmine absolute (1.8%), sandalwood oil (1.8%), clove oil (1.6%) and neroli oil (1.1%). Concomitant reactions among EOs or to EOs and fragrances were frequent. Among EO-positive patients, women, leg dermatitis patients, patients aged 40 years or more, masseurs and cosmeticians were over-represented. CONCLUSIONS: Sensitization to EOs occurs, albeit infrequently in most cases. Masseurs and cosmeticians have an increased risk of sensitization to EOs.

Predicting food allergy: The value of patient history reinforced.

BACKGROUND: EAACI guidelines emphasize the importance of patient history in diagnosing food allergy (FA) and the need for studies investigating its value using standardized allergy-focused questionnaires. OBJECTIVE: To determine the contribution of reaction characteristics, allergic comorbidities and demographics to prediction of FA in individuals experiencing food-related adverse reactions. METHODS: Adult and school-age participants in the standardized EuroPrevall population surveys, with self-reported FA, were included. Penalized multivariable regression was used to assess the association of patient history determinants with "probable" FA, defined as a food-specific case history supported by relevant IgE sensitization. RESULTS: In adults (N = 844), reproducibility of reaction (OR 1.35 [95% CI 1.29-1.41]), oral allergy symptoms (OAS) (4.46 [4.19-4.75]), allergic rhinitis (AR) comorbidity (2.82 [2.68-2.95]), asthma comorbidity (1.38 [1.30-1.46]) and male sex (1.50 [1.41-1.59]) were positively associated with probable FA. Gastrointestinal symptoms (0.88 [0.85-0.91]) made probable FA less likely. The AUC of a model combining all selected predictors was 0.85 after cross-validation. In children (N = 670), OAS (2.26 [2.09-2.44]) and AR comorbidity (1.47 [CI 1.39-1.55]) contributed most to prediction of probable FA, with a combined cross-validation-based AUC of 0.73. When focusing on plant foods, the dominant source of FA in adults, the pediatric model also included gastrointestinal symptoms (inverse association), and the AUC increased to 0.81. CONCLUSIONS: In both adults and school-age children from the general population, reporting of OAS and of AR comorbidity appear to be the strongest predictors of probable FA. Patient history particularly allows for good discrimination between presence and absence of probable plant FA.