Effectiveness of alpine climate treatment for children with difficult to treat atopic dermatitis: Results of a pragmatic randomized controlled trial (DAVOS trial).

BACKGROUND: Alpine climate treatment has historically been used in Europe to treat atopic dermatitis (AD), but no randomized trials have been conducted to provide evidence for its effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the long-term effectiveness of alpine climate treatment for children with difficult to treat AD. MATERIALS & METHODS: A pragmatic, open, randomized controlled trial was conducted. Children diagnosed with AD that was considered difficult to treat, aged between 8 and 18 years and willing to be treated in Switzerland were randomized to a six-week personalized integrative multidisciplinary treatment period in a clinical setting in the alpine climate (Switzerland) or an outpatient setting in moderate maritime climate (Netherlands). Study assessments were conducted at the Wilhelmina Children's Hospital; an electronic portal was used for the collection of questionnaire data. Primary outcomes were disease activity (SAEASI), quality of life (CDLQI) and catastrophizing thoughts (JUCKKI/JU) 6 months after intervention. Other assessments were immediately and 6 weeks after intervention. Subgroup analyses concerned asthma-related outcomes. Children were randomly assigned to either the intervention or control group using a covariate adaptive randomization method, taking age and asthma diagnosis into account. Children, parents and healthcare professionals involved in treatment were not blinded to group assignment. Data were analysed according to intention-to-treat with linear mixed-effects models for continuous outcomes. The trial is registered at Current Controlled Trials ISCRTN88136485. RESULTS: Between 14 September 2010 and 30 September 2014, 88 children were enrolled in the trial, 84 children were randomized (41 assigned to intervention, 43 to control) of whom 77 completed the intervention (38 of 41 (93%) intervention, 39 of 43 (91%) control) and 74 completed follow-up (38 of 41 (93%) intervention, 36 of 43 (84%) control). Six months after intervention there were no significant differences between the groups on disease activity (SAEASI mean difference -3.4 (95%CI -8.5 to 1.7)), quality of life (CDLQI mean difference -0.3 (95%CI -2.0 to 1.4)) and catastrophizing thoughts (JUCCKI/JU subscale mean difference -0.7 (95%CI -1.4 to -0.0)). Immediately and 6 weeks after intervention, disease activity and quality of life were significantly different in favour of alpine climate treatment. Mean differences on SAEASI were -10.1 (95%CI -14.5 to -5.8) and -8.4 (95%CI -12.2 to -4.6) and on CDLQI -1.9 (95%CI -3.3 to -0.5) and -1.5 (95%CI -2.8 to -0.3) immediately and 6 weeks after the intervention, respectively. There were no long-term differences on asthma-related outcomes. Five serious adverse events occurred during the study period, which were not thought to be related to the treatment. CONCLUSIONS & CLINICAL RELEVANCE: For children with difficult to treat AD, there was no additional long-term benefit of alpine climate treatment, in contrast to the short-term, compared to an outpatient treatment programme in moderate maritime climate, using a personalized integrative multidisciplinary treatment approach.

Peanut allergy is common among hazelnut-sensitized subjects but is not primarily the result of IgE cross-reactivity.

BACKGROUND: Hazelnut and peanut are botanically unrelated foods, but patients are often sensitized and allergic to both, for reasons that are not well understood. METHODS: To investigate molecular cosensitization and cross-reactivity to peanut in hazelnut-sensitized individuals, children (n = 81) and adults (n = 80) were retrospectively selected based on sensitization to hazelnut. IgE to hazelnut extract, Cor a 1, 8, 9 and 14, to peanut extract, Ara h 1, 2, 3, 8 and 9, and to Bet v 1 was determined by ImmunoCAP. Allergy to hazelnut and peanut was established by DBPCFC and/or detailed clinical history. Patients were either tolerant or displayed subjective or objective symptoms to either food. IgE cross-reactivity between hazelnut and peanut storage proteins was assessed by reciprocal ImmunoCAP inhibition experiments. RESULTS: Of the 161 hazelnut-sensitized subjects, 109 (68%) were also sensitized to peanut, and 73 (45%) had clinical expression of allergy to peanut that was not associated with the presence or severity of hazelnut allergy. Instead, it was associated with IgE reactivity to peanut storage proteins, in particular Ara h 2. No cross-reactivity could be detected between Ara h 2 and Cor a 14, and 2 of 13 subjects displayed extensive cross-reactivity between 11S globulins; in plasma of both individuals, Ara h 3 almost completely inhibited IgE binding to Cor a 9. CONCLUSIONS: Peanut allergy is not primarily the result of IgE cross-reactivity to hazelnut storage proteins. IgE to Cor a 14 and Ara h 2 may serve as useful markers of primary sensitization to hazelnut and peanut, respectively.

Alpine climate treatment of atopic dermatitis: a systematic review.

Climate therapy has been used for decades in the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD), but evidence of its effectiveness has not yet been assessed systematically. A systematic literature search in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane library was performed to identify all original studies concerning alpine climate treatment. The risk of bias of individual studies was assessed following the Cochrane Handbook, and level of evidence was rated using GRADE guidelines. Fifteen observational studies were included concerning 40 148 patients. Four studies concerning 2670 patients presented follow-up data over a period of 1 year. Disease activity decreased in the majority of patients during treatment (96% of n = 39 006) and 12-month follow-up (64% of n = 2670). Topical corticosteroid use could often be reduced or stopped during treatment (82% of n = 1178) and during 12-month follow-up (72% of n = 3008). Quality assessment showed serious study limitations, therefore resulting in a very low level of evidence for the described outcomes. Randomized controlled trials designed with a follow-up period including well-defined patient populations, detailed description and measurement of applied interventions during climate therapy and using validated outcomes including cost-effectiveness parameters, are required to improve the evidence for alpine climate therapy as an effective treatment for patients with AD.

Home ultraviolet B phototherapy for psoriasis: discrepancy between literature, guidelines, general opinions and actual use. Results of a literature review, a web search, and a questionnaire among dermatologists.

BACKGROUND: Home ultraviolet B (UVB) phototherapy is a debated treatment. It is currently being prescribed for patients with psoriasis, although literature on the subject is scarce. Despite the apparent contradiction between clinical practice and literature, no systematic study of either has been conducted. OBJECTIVES: To assess and compare the available publications and guidelines about home UVB phototherapy for psoriasis with the actual opinions and use of this therapy. METHODS: The literature and guidelines were searched using databases, search engines and e-mail. A postal survey of 343 Dutch dermatologists and 142 dermatologists from 32 other countries was carried out; 255 and 102 dermatologists respectively responded. Outcome measures were the reported advantages, drawbacks and prescription rates of home UVB phototherapy. RESULTS: Fourteen publications (nonrandomized) and six guidelines concerning home UVB phototherapy for psoriasis were identified. Most were reticent about the use of this treatment. Publications describing nonclinical research (7/14) reported most of the drawbacks mentioned (24/31). Home UVB phototherapy was prescribed to 5% (median) of all patients with psoriasis in The Netherlands who required UVB. However, 28% (68/244) of the Dutch dermatologists prescribed home UVB in 20 to 100% of their cases. Dermatologists from other countries reported that 0-10% of UVB treatments were offered at home. For both Dutch and other dermatologists, the most important reasons for prescribing home UVB concerned time and travel distance (80%, i.e. 163 of 205 and 75%, i.e. 33 of 44). Therapy-related drawbacks (such as poor service and equipment) were the objections mentioned most often (55%, i.e. 103 of 186 and 63%, i.e. 57 of 91). Concerns about the medicolegal liability of home UVB were rarely expressed by individual respondents, but frequently mentioned in the various reports. CONCLUSIONS: A discrepancy exists between the actual use of home UVB phototherapy and the general opinions found in publications. The treatment is prescribed for a considerable number of patients despite the fact that literature and guidelines advise caution. Personal and nonevidence-based opinions on this therapy are widespread while randomized clinical studies have thus far not been conducted.

Severe allergy to sharon fruit caused by birch pollen.

BACKGROUND: Allergy to sharon fruit (persimmon) has been only rarely reported. Cross-reactivity with pollen (profilin and Bet v 6) appeared to be involved, but Bet v 1 has not been implicated previously. OBJECTIVE: It is our aim to identify whether Bet v 1 sensitization is linked to sharon fruit allergy. METHODS: Two patients with a reaction upon first exposure to sharon fruit were included in the study, as well as 7 patients with birch-pollen-related apple allergy. Sensitivity was assessed by skin prick testing (SPT), a radio-allergosorbent test (RAST) and immunoblotting. RAST analysis was performed for Bet v 1, Bet v 2 and Bet v 6. Cross-reactivity was evaluated by RAST and immunoblot inhibitions. Biological activity of IgE was measured by basophil histamine release. Sharon fruit allergy was evaluated by double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) or open challenge (OC). RESULTS: Both sharon-fruit-allergic patients demonstrated positive reactions in the RAST (8.6 and 6.2 IU/ml, respectively) and SPT (wheal area 37 and 36 mm2). Sharon fruit allergy was confirmed by DBPCFC in 1 patient. The second patient refused a challenge because of the severe initial reaction. Sera from both patients were reactive to Bet v 1 and Bet v 6, which was cross-reactive with sharon fruit by inhibition assays. The patient with the severest reactions was reactive to profilin on immunoblotting. However, profilin did not induce significant histamine release, nor did Bet v 6. Bet v 1 induce approximately 60% histamine release. An OC with sharon fruit in 7 patients allergic to birch pollen and apple, who had not eaten sharon fruit previously, was positive in 6/7 cases. CONCLUSIONS: Birch-pollen-related allergy to sharon fruit is mediated by the known cross-reactive pollen allergens including Bet v 1 and may become more of a problem should sharon fruit consumption increase.

Allergy to jackfruit: a novel example of Bet v 1-related food allergy.

BACKGROUND: Jackfruit allergy has been reported just once. It is unknown whether this food allergy is caused by direct sensitization or cross-sensitization to pollen allergens. OBJECTIVE: Establish whether jackfruit allergy is linked to birchpollen allergy. METHODS: Two jackfruit allergic patients and five patients with birchpollen-related apple allergy were recruited. Sensitization to pollen and plant foods was assessed by skin prick test (SPT), radio-allergosorbent test (RAST) and immunoblot. RAST analysis was performed for Bet v 1 and Mal d 1. Cross-reactivity was evaluated by RAST and immunoblot-inhibition. Biological activity of immunoglobulin E (IgE) was measured by basophil histamine release. Allergy to jackfruit was evaluated by double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) or open challenge (OC). RESULTS: In both patients DBPCFC confirmed the reported jackfruit allergy. SPT was 41 and 27 mm2 and specific IgE to jackfruit was 5.9 and 0.8 IU/ml, respectively. Immunoblot analysis revealed IgE reactivity at Mr of approximately 17 kDa. The Bet v 1-related nature of this allergen in jackfruit was demonstrated by RAST and immunoblot inhibition. To assess whether jackfruit allergy might be common in patients with combined birchpollen-fruit allergy, five such patients underwent an OC with jackfruit. All five had OA-like symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Jackfruit allergy can be added to the list of birchpollen-related food allergies. Increased consumption of this fruit will result in a rise in allergic reactions.

Efficacy of birch-pollen immunotherapy on cross-reactive food allergy confirmed by skin tests and double-blind food challenges.

BACKGROUND: The effect of birch-pollen immunotherapy (IT) on cross-reactive food allergies is controversial. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of birch-pollen IT on apple allergy and to evaluate recombinant allergens and double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFCs) as monitoring tools. METHODS: Twenty-five adult birch-pollen- and apple-allergic patients were randomly divided into two groups, either receiving birch-pollen IT or symptomatic drugs only. IgE and IgG4 antibodies against birch pollen, apple, natural Bet v 1 and Mal d 1 were measured. In addition, skin prick tests (SPT) were performed using recombinant Bet v 1 (rBet v 1) and Mal d 1 (rMal d 1). Clinical outcome was evaluated by DBPCFC. CD4(+)CD25(+) regulatory T cells (Tregs) were isolated from peripheral blood and tested in functional assays. RESULTS: Birch-pollen IT resulted in a significant decrease of SPT reactivity for rBet v 1 (30-fold) and rMal d 1 (10-fold) already after 3 months. IgG4 antibodies were potently induced against Bet v 1, displaying cross-reactivity to Mal d 1. Visual analogue scale scores decreased >10-fold in 9/13 patients of the IT group, with three patients converting to negative. In the control group, no decrease was observed. Birch-pollen IT did not lead to detectable changes in the number or function of the CD4(+)CD25(+) Tregs. CONCLUSIONS: This trial supports the claims that birch-pollen IT also decreases allergy to foods containing Bet v 1-homologous allergens. Recombinant allergens and DBPCFCs have proven to be useful tools for monitoring the effect of birch-pollen IT on linked food allergies.

[Immunology in medical practice. V. Constitutional eczema]. / Immunologie in de medische praktijk. V. Constitutioneel eczeem.

Constitutional eczema (late atopic dermatitis) is a frequent condition: some 30% of the skin diseases seen by the GP involve constitutional eczema. A number of links with (external) factors have meanwhile been established. Patients with constitutional eczema often suffer from food allergy (over 60% of the children with the eczema) and many are allergic to airborne allergens (especially housedust mite allergen). The skin of patients with constitutional eczema has a diminished barrier function against irritants (soaps, acids, bases, water, detergents, biological juices (fruit, meat, fish, vegetables). In 90% of the patients with constitutional eczema the skin contains colonies of Staphylococcus aureus (in 5% of people without eczema). S. aureus can influence the eczema through exoantigens (so-called superantigens) and through conventional antigens that may evoke an IgE-mediated immune response. Emotional stress may influence the eczema. The close anatomical relationship between mast cells and nerve endings and between Langerhans cells and nerve endings suggest that the autonomous nervous system can modulate the immune system of the skin and consequently, the eczema. These factors should be taken into account in the treatment: reduction of exposure to food and airborne allergens and to irritants, treatment and prevention of S. aureus infections and psychological support. New therapies include cyclosporine, autologous IgG antigen complexes and phototherapy.

Evaluation of variables influencing the outcome of the atopy patch test.

BACKGROUND: The number of positive atopy patch test (APT) results in patients with atopic eczema (AE) varies in different studies, probably because of different test techniques. Variables that may influence the outcome of the APT were evaluated. METHODS: APTs were performed in 84 patients with AE, 30 control patients with atopic disease, and 85 healthy volunteers, with house dust mite and grass pollen allergens in concentrations of 100, 1000, 10,000, and 100,000 allergenic units/ml. The influence of 0, 10, or 20 tape strippings was investigated. The tests were performed on the back and/or the antecubital fossa and evaluated after 20 minutes and 24, 48, and 72 hours. In all patients the total and specific serum IgE levels were measured. RESULTS: The maximal number of positive APT results were obtained under the following conditions: an allergen concentration equal to 10,000 allergenic units/ml, 10 tape strippings and readings at 24 and 48 hours. Positive APT results were observed in five of 30 control patients with atopic disease and in none of 85 healthy volunteers. Statistically significantly higher total and allergen-specific serum IgE levels were found in the group of patients with AE with positive APT results. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend the previously described conditions to get an optimal method for APT. The correlation between the APT and the total and specific serum IgE suggests an important role for IgE in the reaction mechanism behind the APT.

The involvement of eosinophils in the patch test reaction to aeroallergens in atopic dermatitis: its relevance for the pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis.

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is considered a T-cell mediated disease. Activated T-cells, mainly of the CD4-subtype, are abundantly present in lesional AD skin. Although not many intact eosinophils are present, deposits of eosinophil derived major-basic-protein (MBP) and eosinophil-cationic-protein (ECP) suggest eosinophil involvement. After patch testing AD patients with aeroallergens, an eczematous reaction develops after 24-48 hr at the site of application. This patch test reaction shows macroscopic resemblance to lesional AD skin and does not take place in normal individuals, asthma and allergic rhinitis patients. Lymphocytes together with eosinophils infiltrate into the dermis 2-6 hr after allergen application. Twenty-four to forty-eight hours after patch testing, eosinophils are in an activated state since they release ECP (being EG2-positive). At this point in time eosinophils have also infiltrated the epidermis. Here they are EG2-negative. Forty-eight to seventy-two hours after patch testing the eczematous reaction decreases. This coincides with disappearance of eosinophils from both the dermis and the epidermis; then, a dendritic staining pattern can be observed in the epidermis with anti-eosinophil peroxidase. Thus, eosinophils infiltrate the dermis and epidermis after patch testing AD patients with aeroallergens and release part of their granular constituents. Recent in vitro investigations revealed that eosinophils from the circulation of AD patients react more powerfully in in vitro test systems such as chemiluminescence, chemotaxis and endothelial adherence and transmigration. It is very likely that this activated (= primed) state is caused by the influence of lymphocyte-derived cytokines like IL-3, IL-5 and GM-CSF, since activated lymphocytes in the circulation (and tissue) may release these cytokines. The primed state of the eosinophils may facilitate tissue infiltration. The subsequent activation of eosinophils within the tissue leading to mediator release and the function of these mediators need to be further elucidated. The close similarity between the cellular events after a patch test reaction to aeroallergens in AD patients and those present in lesional AD skin suggests that the patch test reaction may be a helpful in vivo model to study the pathogenesis of AD. The prominent involvement of lymphocytes and eosinophils in this reaction also suggests some similarity with late phase reactions (LPR) observed in the skin after intracutaneous allergen challenge.