Acupuncture and its effect on cytokine and chemokine profiles in seasonal allergic rhinitis: a preliminary three-armed, randomized, controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Numerous studies have demonstrated effectiveness for acupuncture in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). However, the underlying mechanism remains still unclear. METHODS: 29 SAR patients were recruited from a large randomized, controlled trial investigating the efficacy of acupuncture in SAR. 16 patients were treated by acupuncture plus rescue medication (RM, cetirizine), 6 patients received sham acupuncture plus RM and 8 patients RM alone over 8 weeks. Patients were blinded to the allocation to real or sham acupuncture. At baseline and different time-points during intervention, plasma and nasal concentration of mediators of various biological functions were determined in addition to validated disease-specific questionnaires. RESULTS: The concentration of biomarkers related to the Th1-, Th2-, and Treg-cluster was not changed in patients who received acupuncture, in neither plasma nor nasal fluid. However, with respect to eotaxin and some unspecific pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL-1b, IL-8, IP-10, MIP-1b, MCP-1), acupuncture led to a, partially significantly, lower nasal concentration than sham acupuncture or RM. Furthermore, the nasal symptom score was significantly reduced in patients only after real acupuncture. CONCLUSION: In SAR, acupuncture reduces the intranasal unspecific inflammation, but does not seem to act immunologically on the Th1-Th2-imbalance.

Relevance of Major Allergens in Weed Pollen Allergy.

INTRODUCTION: Weed pollen allergy is an important and in prevalence increasing cause of pollinosis in Europe and across the world. In this study we focus on the value of common diagnostic tools for detection of a sensitization to mugwort and English plantain, especially with regard to the clinical relevance of the sensitization. METHODS: Eighty weed pollen sensitized patients (41 to mugwort and 39 to English plantain) were assessed retrospectively regarding their clinical anamnesis, in-vivo tests (skin prick test [SPT] and allergen specific provocation) and in-vitro tests (immunoglobulin E [IgE] reactivity to purified natural allergen extract and specific allergen components in serum). RESULTS: 85% of mugwort and 83% of English plantain sensitizations could be diagnosed by SPT alone. Distinction between allergic and non-allergic patients could be made with clinical challenges solely. IgE serology revealed IgE antibodies against the native pollen extracts for mugwort in 98% and for English plantain in 90% of patients. Detection of major allergens nArt v 1, nArt v 3 and Pla l 1 did not add accuracy to the diagnosis. A vast majority of the weed pollen allergic patients was sensitized to >1 allergen. Minor allergens were found to be of less importance. CONCLUSION: The exact diagnosis of weed pollen allergy can be challenging due to confounding components in anamnesis and diagnostic tests. IgE-serology does not delineate allergic from sensitized patients. Component resolved diagnostics (CRD) can confirm, but not replace, extract based diagnostic methods, such as SPT, provocation tests or serology to native extracts. Hence, these are the gold standard diagnostic tools in weed pollen allergy up to now.

The Clinical Impact of Bet v 6 in Birch Pollen-Sensitized Patients.

BACKGROUND: Bet v 6, a minor birch pollen allergen, is commercially available for allergen-specific IgE antibody testing. However, there is hardly any literature on the clinical impact of Bet v 6. The aim of the present study was to analyze if testing specific IgE against Bet v 6 can add valuable benefit to the standard diagnostics of birch pollen-sensitized patients, especially in patients with unknown sensitization-eliciting allergens. METHODS: Birch pollen-sensitized patients with missing IgE reactivity against Bet v 1, 2, and 4 were tested for specific IgE antibodies against Bet v 6. For comparison, an equal number of randomly selected patients with birch pollen sensitization, regardless of their individual sensitization patterns, were tested for specific anti-Bet v 6. RESULTS: Of 57 cases with missing reactivity against the standard birch pollen allergens, 2 patients were positive for Bet v 6. In the representative sample, 3 patients showed specific IgE against Bet v 6 - resulting in a total prevalence of 5%. None of the Bet v 6-positive patients showed allergic symptoms after exposure to birch pollen or an oral allergy syndrome. An increased prevalence of asthma and a higher degree of sensitization were the only distinctive clinical features in Bet v 6-positive patients. CONCLUSIONS: Among birch pollen-sensitized patients, the prevalence of specific IgE against Bet v 6 is low. Further, sensitization to Bet v 6, which shows characteristics of a panallergen, remains clinically silent. Therefore, determination of anti-Bet v 6 is not considered useful in the clinical routine.

Clinical Relevance of IgE to Profilin and/or Polcalcin in Pollen-Sensitized Patients.

BACKGROUND: Component-resolved diagnostics is gaining importance in allergy diagnostics. Allergen extracts contain components with different rates of prevalence and clinical relevance, which can be subdivided at molecular level into major and minor allergens. Clinical complaints are usually triggered by major allergens, while the role of sensitization to the panallergens profilin and polcalcin still remains unclear. METHODS: Eighty-six patients from southern Bavaria with sensitization to the panallergens profilin (Bet v 2/Phl p 12) and/or polcalcin (Bet v 4/Phl p 7) were examined in regard to their sensitization to the 4 main botanic denominations Betulaceae, Oleaceae, Poaceae and Asteraceae by skin prick test and measurement of specific immunoglobulin E antibodies to natural allergen extracts as well as major allergen components rPhl p 1/5, rBet v 1, rOle e 1 and nArt v 1. Sensitization was rated as clinically relevant or irrelevant depending on anamnesis or intranasal allergen challenge. RESULTS: Regarding the 4 botanic denominations, there was no significant difference in the incidence of sensitization to the panallergens profilin, polcalcin or both. The sensitization pattern does not alter when subdividing the cohort into clinically relevant and silent sensitization. We did not find clinically symptomatic sensitization to panallergens without cosensitization to a major allergen. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that sole sensitization to panallergens seems to have no clinical relevance in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. Clinical complaints seem to be triggered manly by major allergens. Thus, component-resolved allergy diagnostics is crucial in the diagnosis and treatment of polysensitized patients.

IgE reactivity patterns in patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis to ragweed and mugwort pollens.

BACKGROUND: Differential diagnosis between ragweed and mugwort pollen allergy represents a large clinical problem in areas where both plants are present. The aim of this study was to investigate ragweed- and mugwort-sensitized patients to identify specific IgE reactivity profiles. Results were correlated to clinical findings such as medical history and health-related quality of life (HRQL). METHODS: Seventy-four patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis between July and October were examined and underwent in vivo tests (skin-prick test [SPT] and nasal provocation). Sera were evaluated for IgE reactivity to mugwort and ragweed pollen extracts, major (Art v 1; Amb a 1) and minor (profilin and calcium-binding protein) allergens. HRQL was evaluated using a standardized questionnaire. RESULTS: Seventy-one patients revealed positive SPT reactivity against mugwort and 60 patients against ragweed extracts. Of these patients, 74 revealed IgE antibodies against mugwort extracts, whereas anti-Art v 1 antibodies were detectable in 50 individuals. Fifty-five patients showed IgE antibodies against natural ragweed extracts; anti-Amb v 1 antibodies were detected in six cases only. Using standardized clinical history and HRQL questionnaires we were not able to detect any differences within different reactivity patterns. CONCLUSION: Within the investigated population of 74 weed-allergic patients the prevalence of true mugwort and ragweed sensitization can be calculated as 68 and 8%. High prevalence of ragweed sensitization when testing with full extracts can be explained by cross-reactivity between other weeds, e.g., mugwort rather than cosensitization. Differences in medical history and HRQL between different reactivity patterns were not detectable.

Recombinant marker allergens in diagnosis of patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis to tree and grass pollens.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate recombinant marker allergens in patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis to tree and grass pollens. METHODS: Sera of 260 tree pollen- and 282 grass pollen-allergic patients were analyzed. Bet v 1 and Phl p 1/p 5 were used as marker allergens for allergies to pollen from birch and grasses. Profilin (Bet v 2 and Phl p 12) and calcium-binding protein (Bet v 4 and Phl p 7) were used as markers for polysensitization. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-nine (92%) patients tested positive for IgE anti-Bet v 1. All of them were positive for IgE antibodies against natural birch extract (t3), hazel (t4), and alder (t2). Bet v 1 in combination with t3 identified allergies from related trees with a sensitivity of 99.2%. Two hundred fifty-six patients (91%) tested positive for IgE anti-Phl p 1 and/or anti-Phl p 5. All of them were positive for IgE antibodies against natural timothy (g6) and rye (g12) extract. Phl p 1/p 5 and natural timothy extract identified allergies from grasses and rye with a sensitivity of 99.3%. All Patients reacting to the cross-reactive allergens Bet v 2, Phl p 12, Bet v 4, and Phl p 7 were polysensitized. CONCLUSION: Bet v 1 in combination with natural birch pollen extract identifies allergies from related trees with a sensitivity of 99.2%. Phl p 1, Phl p 5, and natural timothy extract identifies allergies from grasses and rye in 99.3%. Reactivity to the allergens Bet v 2, Phl p 12, Bet v 4, and Phl p 7 identifies polysensitization and cross-reactivity.

Recombinant allergen profiles and health-related quality of life in seasonal allergic rhinitis.

We evaluated birch- and timothy-allergic patients for allergen-specific IgE profiles and health-related quality of life (HRQL). We examined 395 patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis against birch or timothy pollen. Sera were analyzed for IgE reactivity to recombinant allergens (Bet v 1, Bet v 2, Bet v 4; Phl p 1/p 5b, Phl p 7, and Phl p 12) and to native pollen extracts (t3 and g6). Subgroup-specific analyses were performed. Patients with cosensitization against structurally unrelated allergens were termed polysensitized. Patients allergic solely to birch or timothy were labeled monosensitized. HRQL was evaluated using an established questionnaire. In patients polysensitized against native birch pollen (n = 233) the prevalence of allergens was 86% for Bet v 1, 15% for Bet v 2, and 5% for Bet v 4. Similar for timothy (n = 256), the prevalence of allergens was 87% rPhl p 1/p 5b, 5% for rPhl p 7, and 14% for rPhl p 12. Values for birch-monosensitized patients (n = 42) were Bet v 1, 100%, and Bet v 2 and Bet v 4, 0%. Values for timothy-monosensitized patients (n = 35) were Phl p 1/p 5b, 100%; rPhl p 7, 0%; and rPhl p 12, 3%. No difference in HRQL existed between patients sensitized solely against major versus minor allergens in birch-allergic patients. Polysensitized cohorts showed sensitization profiles comparable with published data. Monosensitized patients showed IgE against major allergens in 100% of cases. Patients sensitized solely against major or minor allergens showed no differences in HRQL.