Diagnosis and treatment of Hymenoptera venom allergy: S2k Guideline of the German Society of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI) in collaboration with the Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Berufs- und Umweltdermatologie e.V. (ABD), the Medical Association of German Allergologists (AeDA), the German Society of Dermatology (DDG), the German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery (DGHNOKC), the German Society of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (DGKJ), the Society for Pediatric Allergy and Environmental Medicine (GPA), German Respiratory Society (DGP), and the Austrian Society for Allergy and Immunology (ÖGAI).

Hymenoptera venom (HV) is injected into the skin during a sting by Hymenoptera such as bees or wasps. Some components of HV are potential allergens and can cause large local and/or systemic allergic reactions (SAR) in sensitized individuals. During their lifetime, ~ 3% of the general population will develop SAR following a Hymenoptera sting. This guideline presents the diagnostic and therapeutic approach to SAR following Hymenoptera stings. Symptomatic therapy is usually required after a severe local reaction, but specific diagnosis or allergen immunotherapy (AIT) with HV (VIT) is not necessary. When taking a patient's medical history after SAR, clinicians should discuss possible risk factors for more frequent stings and more severe anaphylactic reactions. The most important risk factors for more severe SAR are mast cell disease and, especially in children, uncontrolled asthma. Therefore, if the SAR extends beyond the skin (according to the Ring and Messmer classification: grade > I), the baseline serum tryptase concentration shall be measured and the skin shall be examined for possible mastocytosis. The medical history should also include questions specific to asthma symptoms. To demonstrate sensitization to HV, allergists shall determine concentrations of specific IgE antibodies (sIgE) to bee and/or vespid venoms, their constituents and other venoms as appropriate. If the results are negative less than 2 weeks after the sting, the tests shall be repeated (at least 4 - 6 weeks after the sting). If only sIgE to the total venom extracts have been determined, if there is double sensitization, or if the results are implausible, allergists shall determine sIgE to the different venom components. Skin testing may be omitted if in-vitro methods have provided a definitive diagnosis. If neither laboratory diagnosis nor skin testing has led to conclusive results, additional cellular testing can be performed. Therapy for HV allergy includes prophylaxis of reexposure, patient self treatment measures (including use of rescue medication) in the event of re-stings, and VIT. Following a grade I SAR and in the absence of other risk factors for repeated sting exposure or more severe anaphylaxis, it is not necessary to prescribe an adrenaline auto-injector (AAI) or to administer VIT. Under certain conditions, VIT can be administered even in the presence of previous grade I anaphylaxis, e.g., if there are additional risk factors or if quality of life would be reduced without VIT. Physicians should be aware of the contraindications to VIT, although they can be overridden in justified individual cases after weighing benefits and risks. The use of ß-blockers and ACE inhibitors is not a contraindication to VIT. Patients should be informed about possible interactions. For VIT, the venom extract shall be used that, according to the patient's history and the results of the allergy diagnostics, was the trigger of the disease. If, in the case of double sensitization and an unclear history regarding the trigger, it is not possible to determine the culprit venom even with additional diagnostic procedures, VIT shall be performed with both venom extracts. The standard maintenance dose of VIT is 100 µg HV. In adult patients with bee venom allergy and an increased risk of sting exposure or particularly severe anaphylaxis, a maintenance dose of 200 µg can be considered from the start of VIT. Administration of a non-sedating H1-blocking antihistamine can be considered to reduce side effects. The maintenance dose should be given at 4-weekly intervals during the first year and, following the manufacturer's instructions, every 5 - 6 weeks from the second year, depending on the preparation used; if a depot preparation is used, the interval can be extended to 8 weeks from the third year onwards. If significant recurrent systemic reactions occur during VIT, clinicians shall identify and as possible eliminate co-factors that promote these reactions. If this is not possible or if there are no such co-factors, if prophylactic administration of an H1-blocking antihistamine is not effective, and if a higher dose of VIT has not led to tolerability of VIT, physicians should should consider additional treatment with an anti IgE antibody such as omalizumab as off lable use. For practical reasons, only a small number of patients are able to undergo sting challenge tests to check the success of the therapy, which requires in-hospital monitoring and emergency standby. To perform such a provocation test, patients must have tolerated VIT at the planned maintenance dose. In the event of treatment failure while on treatment with an ACE inhibitor, physicians should consider discontinuing the ACE inhibitor. In the absence of tolerance induction, physicians shall increase the maintenance dose (200 µg to a maximum of 400 µg in adults, maximum of 200 µg HV in children). If increasing the maintenance dose does not provide adequate protection and there are risk factors for a severe anaphylactic reaction, physicians should consider a co-medication based on an anti-IgE antibody (omalizumab; off-label use) during the insect flight season. In patients without specific risk factors, VIT can be discontinued after 3 - 5 years if maintenance therapy has been tolerated without recurrent anaphylactic events. Prolonged or permanent VIT can be considered in patients with mastocytosis, a history of cardiovascular or respiratory arrest due to Hymenoptera sting (severity grade IV), or other specific constellations associated with an increased individual risk of recurrent and/or severe SAR (e.g., hereditary α-tryptasemia). In cases of strongly increased, unavoidable insect exposure, adults may receive VIT until the end of intense contact. The prescription of an AAI can be omitted in patients with a history of SAR grade I and II when the maintenance dose of VIT has been reached and tolerated, provided that there are no additional risk factors. The same holds true once the VIT has been terminated after the regular treatment period. Patients with a history of SAR grade ≥ III reaction, or grade II reaction combined with additional factors that increase the risk of non response or repeated severe sting reactions, should carry an emergency kit, including an AAI, during VIT and after regular termination of the VIT.

Guideline for allergological diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity reactions: S2k Guideline of the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI) in cooperation with the German Dermatological Society (DDG), the Association of German Allergologists (ÄDA), the German Society for Pediatric Allergology (GPA), the German Contact Dermatitis Research Group (DKG), the German Society for Pneumology (DGP), the German Society of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, the Austrian Society of Allergology and Immunology (ÖGAI), the Austrian Society of Dermatology and Venereology (ÖGDV), the German Academy of Allergology and Environmental Medicine (DAAU), and the German Documentation Center for Severe Skin Reactions (dZh).

Not available.

Real-life evaluation of molecular multiplex IgE test methods in the diagnosis of pollen associated food allergy.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis of food allergies is challenging, as combining information from specific IgE (sIgE)-sensitization pattern and skin prick tests (SPTs) with clinical history is necessary for a personalized management of allergic patients. The aim of this study was to compare two molecular tests, the ImmunoCAP ISAC (ISAC) and the Allergy Explorer, version 2 (ALEX2 ) in the context of pollen food syndrome (PFS) diagnosis in a real-life scenario, to assess the benefit of multiplex testing in PFS patients. METHODS: Diagnosis of food allergy was performed in 53 patients. Allergen-sIgE concentrations were measured with ISAC and ALEX2 . Results for sIgE were statistically compared with each other, with SPT results and with clinical presentation of the patients. RESULTS: Using ISAC as reference test for sIgE measurements, the average sensitivity of ALEX2 for PR-10 allergens was 83.2% and the average specificity 88.0%. If only low sIgE concentrations were included, the sensitivity was 60.8% and the specificity 91.1%. Apple and hazelnut sensitizations were confirmed in most patients by concordance of sIgE and SPT results. Significant correlations were shown between clinical symptoms and Mal d 1- and Gly m 4-sIgE levels measured by both tests and for Cor a 1-sIgE levels measured by ALEX2 . In eight patients, profilin related symptoms were supported by Hev b 8-sensitization. CONCLUSION: Multiplex testing is beneficial to understand patient-specific individual sensitization profiles and to providing personalized management recommendations. In the future, custom-designed test kits might enable reducing costs of multiplex testing for specific patient groups without compromising the diagnostic value.

Guideline on diagnostic procedures for suspected hypersensitivity to beta-lactam antibiotics: Guideline of the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI) in collaboration with the German Society of Allergology (AeDA), German Society for Pediatric Allergology and Environmental Medicine (GPA), the German Contact Dermatitis Research Group (DKG), the Austrian Society for Allergology and Immunology (ÖGAI), and the Paul-Ehrlich Society for Chemotherapy (PEG).

This guideline on diagnostic procedures for suspected beta-lactam antibiotic (BLA) hypersensitivity was written by the German and Austrian professional associations for allergology, and the Paul-Ehrlich Society for Chemotherapy in a consensus procedure according to the criteria of the German Association of Scientific Medical Societies. BLA such as penicillins and cephalosporins represent the drug group that most frequently triggers drug allergies. However, the frequency of reports of suspected allergy in patient histories clearly exceeds the number of confirmed cases. The large number of suspected BLA allergies has a significant impact on, e.g., the quality of treatment received by the individual patient and the costs to society as a whole. Allergies to BLA are based on different immunological mechanisms and often manifest as maculopapular exanthema, as well as anaphylaxis; and there are also a number of less frequent special clinical manifestations of drug allergic reactions. All BLA have a beta-lactam ring. BLA are categorized into different classes: penicillins, cephalosporins, carbapenems, monobactams, and beta-lactamase inhibitors with different chemical structures. Knowledge of possible cross-reactivity is of considerable clinical significance. Whereas allergy to the common beta-lactam ring occurs in only a small percentage of all BLA allergic patients, cross-reactivity due to side chain similarities, such as aminopenicillins and aminocephalosporins, and even methoxyimino cephalosporins, are more common. However, the overall picture is complex and its elucidation may require further research. Diagnostic procedures used in BLA allergy are usually made up of four components: patient history, laboratory diagnostics, skin testing (which is particularly important), and drug provocation testing. The diagnostic approach - even in cases where the need to administer a BLA is acute - is guided by patient history and risk - benefit ratio in the individual case. Here again, further studies are required to extend the present state of knowledge. Performing allergy testing for suspected BLA hypersensitivity is urgently recommended not only in the interests of providing the patient with good medical care, but also due to the immense impact of putative BLA allergies on society as a whole.

Guideline for the diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity reactions: S2K-Guideline of the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI) and the German Dermatological Society (DDG) in collaboration with the Association of German Allergologists (AeDA), the German Society for Pediatric Allergology and Environmental Medicine (GPA), the German Contact Dermatitis Research Group (DKG), the Swiss Society for Allergy and Immunology (SGAI), the Austrian Society for Allergology and Immunology (ÖGAI), the German Academy of Allergology and Environmental Medicine (DAAU), the German Center for Documentation of Severe Skin Reactions and the German Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Products (BfArM).

Drug hypersensitivity reactions are unpredictable adverse drug reactions. They manifest either within 1-6 h following drug intake (immediate reactions) with mild to life-threatening symptoms of anaphylaxis, or several hours to days later (delayed reactions), primarily as exanthematous eruptions. It is not always possible to detect involvement of the immune system (allergy). Waiving diagnostic tests can result in severe reactions on renewed exposure on the one hand, and to unjustified treatment restrictions on the other. With this guideline, experts from various specialist societies and institutions have formulated recommendations and an algorithm for the diagnosis of allergies. The key principles of diagnosing allergic/hypersensitivity drug reactions are presented. Where possible, the objective is to perform allergy diagnostics within 4 weeks-6 months following the reaction. A clinical classification of symptoms based on the morphology and time course of the reaction is required in order to plan a diagnostic work-up. In the case of typical symptoms of a drug hypersensitivity reaction and unequivocal findings from validated skin and/or laboratory tests, a reaction can be attributed to a trigger with sufficient confidence. However, skin and laboratory tests are often negative or insufficiently reliable. In such cases, controlled provocation testing is required to clarify drug reactions. This method is reliable and safe when attention is paid to indications and contraindications and performed under appropriate medical supervision. The results of the overall assessment are discussed with the patient and documented in an "allergy passport" in order to ensure targeted avoidance in the future and allow the use of alternative drugs where possible.

Effect of acupuncture on allergen-induced basophil activation in patients with atopic eczema:a pilot trial.

OBJECTIVE AND METHODS: The crucial symptom of atopic eczema is itch. Acupuncture has been shown to exhibit a significant effect on experimental itch; however, studies focusing on clinical itch in atopic eczema and corresponding mechanisms are lacking. The study design was a unicenter, single-blinded (observer), prospective, randomized clinical pilot trial with an additional experimental part. In 10 patients with atopic eczema, we investigated the effect of acupuncture treatment (n = 5) compared to no treatment (n = 5) on itch intensity and in vitro basophil CD63 expression upon allergen stimulation (house dust mite and timothy grass pollen) in a pilot trial. RESULTS: Mean itch intensity in a visual analog scale was rated significantly lower in the acupuncture group (-25% ± 26% [day 15-day 0]; -24% ± 31% [day 33-day 0]) than in the control group (15% ± 6% [day 15-day 0]; 29% ± 9% [day 33-day 0]). From day 0 (before treatment) to day 15 (after 5 acupuncture treatments) as well as day 33 (after 10 acupuncture treatments), the acupuncture group showed less CD63 positive basophils than the control group regarding stimulation with house dust mite and grass pollen allergen at various concentrations (5 ng/mL, 1 ng/mL, 0.5 ng/mL, or 0.25 ng/mL). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show a reduction of itch intensity and of in vitro allergen-induced basophil activation in patients with atopic eczema after acupuncture treatment. Reducing basophil activation can be a further tool in investigating the mechanisms of action of acupuncture in immunoglobulin E-mediated allergy. Due to the limited number of patients included in our pilot trial, further studies are needed to strengthen the hypothesis.

Anaphylactic reactions to local anesthetics.

Local anesthetics (LA) are common elicitors of adverse reactions and the clinical symptoms often correspond to anaphylaxis with tachycardia, hypotension and subjective feelings of weakness, heat or vertigo. The pathomechanism of immediate hypersensitivity reactions to LA is largely unknown -they are commonly regarded as 'pseudo-allergic' or 'non-immune type' anaphylaxis. Immunologically mediated reactions have rarely been observed with positive skin prick tests. Other ingredients in LA preparations have to be considered as elicitors, e.g. preservatives like benzoates or sulfites or latex contaminants in injection bottles. Practical management of patients with a history of LA reaction includes a careful allergy history, skin-prick and intradermal tests. Undiluted LA solutions may elicit false-positive intradermal test reactions. If prick and intradermal tests are negative, the procedure of subcutaneous provocation testing is applied in a placebo-controlled manner. When patients are constantly reacting to placebo, a regimen of 'reverse placebo provocation' with injection of a LA (verum) is applied while the patient is informed about receiving placebo in order to 'rule out psychosomatic involvement'. With this regimen it is possible to eliminate anxiousness and fear, and the patient has proof that he has tolerated the respective LA substance.

Allergen cleavage by effector cell-derived proteases regulates allergic inflammation.

The key event of allergic inflammation, allergen-induced crosslinking of mast cell-bound IgE antibodies, is accompanied by release of inflammatory mediators, cytokines, and proteases, in particular beta-tryptase. We provide evidence that protease-mediated cleavage of allergens represents a mechanism that regulates allergen-induced mast cell activation. When used in molar ratios as they occur in vivo, purified beta-tryptase cleaved major grass and birch pollen allergens, resulting in defined peptide fragments as mapped by mass spectrometry. Tryptase-cleaved allergens showed reduced IgE reactivity and allergenic activity. The biological relevance is demonstrated by the fact that lysates from activated human mast cells containing tryptase levels as they occur in vivo cleaved allergens. Additionally, protamine, an inhibitor of heparin-dependent effector cell proteases, augmented allergen-induced release of mediators from effector cells. Protease-mediated allergen cleavage may represent an important mechanism for terminating allergen-induced effector cell activation.