Diagnostic relevance of IgE sensitization profiles to eight recombinant Phleum pratense molecules.

BACKGROUND: Grass pollen-related seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (SARg) is clinically heterogeneous in severity, comorbidities, and response to treatment. The component-resolved diagnostics disclosed also a high heterogeneity at molecular level. Our study aimed at analyzing the characteristics of the IgE sensitization to Phleum pratense molecules and investigating the diagnostic relevance of such molecules in childhood. METHODS: We examined 1120 children (age 4-18 years) with SARg. Standardized questionnaires on atopy were acquired through informatics platform (AllergyCARD™). Skin prick tests were performed with pollen extracts. Serum IgE to airborne allergens and eight P. pratense molecules (rPhl p 1, rPhl p 2, rPhl p 4, rPhl p 5b, rPhl p 6, rPhl p 7, rPhl p 11, rPhl p 12) were tested by ImmunoCAP FEIA. RESULTS: The analysis of IgE responses against eight P. pratense molecules showed 87 profiles. According to the number of molecules recognized by IgE, the more complex profiles were characterized by higher serum total IgE, higher grass-specific serum IgE, and higher number and degree of sensitization to pollens. The most frequent IgE sensitization profile was the monomolecular Phl p 1. Sensitization to Phl p 7 was a reliable biomarker of asthma, whereas Phl p 12 of oral allergy syndrome. Sensitization to Phl p 7 was associated with a higher severity of SARg, and complex profiles were associated with longer disease duration. CONCLUSIONS: In a large pediatric population, the complexity of IgE sensitization profiles against P. pratense molecules is related to high atopic features although useless for predicting the clinical severity. The detection of serum IgE to Phl p 1, Phl p 7, and Phl p 12 can be used as clinical biomarkers of SARg and comorbidities. Further studies in different areas are required to test the impact of different IgE molecular profiles on AIT response.

Perioperative allergy: clinical manifestations.

Adverse drug reactions or side effects are usually expected, dose dependent, and occur at therapeutic doses. Anaphylactic and anaphylactoid reactions are unexpected and dose independent and can occur at the first exposure to drugs used during anesthesia. Perioperative anaphylaxis is a severe and rapid clinical condition that can be lethal even in previously healthy patients. The initial diagnosis of anaphylaxis is presumptive. A precise identification of the drug responsible for the adverse reaction is more difficult to establish in the case of anaphylactoid reaction because the adverse reaction could result from additive side effects of different drugs injected simultaneously. The timing of the reaction in relation to events, e.g. induction, start of surgery, administration of other drugs, i.v. fluids, is essential for the diagnosis. Generally, reactions are predominant in the induction and recovery phases, and manifested mainly as cutaneous symptoms. Reactions to drugs coincide with the phases when they are administered. Reactions to antibiotics are more frequent in the induction phase, to neuromuscular agents in the initiation and maintenance phases and to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents in the recovery phase. The differential diagnosis of any adverse reaction during or following anesthesia should include the possibility of anaphylaxis.

Perioperative allergy: therapy.

Perioperative allergic reactions manifest in various ways. The majority of systemic reactions occur during anesthesia within minutes of intravenous induction; however, agents which are administered via other routes may cause reactions after more than 15 minutes. Anaphylaxis during anesthesia may present in many different ways and the signs and symptoms, which do not vary from those of anaphylactic reactions in general, may be masked by hypovolemia, light, deep anesthesia or extensive regional blockade. Recommendations for treatment are based on available evidence in the literature. A treatment algorithm is suggested, with emphasis on the incremental titration of adrenaline and fluid therapy as first-line treatment. Increased focus on this subject will hopefully lead to prompt diagnosis and rapid, correct treatment.

[Human papillomavirus vaccination. Consensus Conference in pediatric age]. / La vaccinazione verso il papillomavirus umano. Consensus Conference dell'area pediatrica.

Genital human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is the most common sexually transmitted infection worldwide. Spontaneous clearance of HPV infection occurs in most cases, but chronic infection with high risk genotypes is associated with the development of cervical cancer. In particular, HPV 16 and 18 are responsible for 70% of cancers of the cervix and, in variable proportions, for cancers of the vagina, vulva, anus, penis and oropharinx. Low risk HPV genotypes, such as HPV 6 and 11, cause genital warts. Two prophylactic vaccines using virus like particles (VLPs) of L1 capside protein of HPV 16 and 18 have been developed. Of these, one also containing VLPs of HPV 6 and 11, has been approved by FDA, EMEA and AIFA for use in 9-26 year-old females. Large scale studies have shown that these vaccines are safe, well tolerated, elicits high levels of neutralizing antibodies, prevent chronic HPV infections due to genotypes present in the vaccine, and associated cervical lesions (and genital wars for the quadrivalent vaccine). To be effective the vaccines should be given prior to sexual debut. In Italy, the vaccination will be offered to 12 year-old girls. This article is the result of a targeted Consensus Conference by a panel of experts, which reviews the cornerstones of HPV infection, its association with cervical cancer, the advances in prophylactic vaccines, and the primary role of the paediatrician for the optimal adoption of this new preventive strategy.