Guideline on allergen immunotherapy in IgE-mediated allergic diseases: S2K Guideline of the German Society of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI), Society of Pediatric Allergology and Environmental Medicine (GPA), Medical Association of German Allergologists (AeDA), Austrian Society of Allergology and Immunology (ÖGAI), Swiss Society for Allergology and Immunology (SSAI), German Dermatological Society (DDG), German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery (DGHNO-KHC), German Society of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (DGKJ), Society of Pediatric Pulmonology (GPP), German Respiratory Society (DGP), German Professional Association of Otolaryngologists (BVHNO), German Association of Paediatric and Adolescent Care Specialists (BVKJ), Federal Association of Pneumologists, Sleep and Respiratory Physicians (BdP), Professional Association of German Dermatologists (BVDD).

Not available.

Standardisation of allergen products: 4. Validation of a candidate European Pharmacopoeia standard method for quantification of major grass pollen allergen Phl p 5.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the BSP090 project is the establishment of European Pharmacopoeia Chemical Reference Substances (CRSs) in combination with corresponding standard ELISA methods for quantification of major allergens in allergen products. Here, we present data of a Phl p 5-specific sandwich ELISA that proved suitable for the quantification of Phl p 5, one of the major Timothy grass (Phleum pratense) pollen allergens. METHODS: A Phl p 5-specific ELISA system was assessed with respect to accuracy, precision, inter-assay (within laboratory) and inter-laboratory variations, in a ring trial including 14 laboratories in Europe and the USA. Model samples containing recombinant Phl p 5a CRS as well as native grass pollen extracts were analysed. Each participant was instructed to perform at least one preliminary assay to familiarise with the protocol, followed by three independent assays. RESULTS: The candidate standard ELISA proved suitable to quantify recombinant and native Phl p 5 with satisfactory precision (93% of results within ±30% acceptance range). Inter-assay variation (max. GCV 24%) and especially inter-laboratory variation (max. GCV 13%) showed conclusive results. When assessing accuracy by means of recovery of recombinant spikes from a grass pollen extract matrix, similarly satisfactory spike recovery results were observed for the two spikes with higher concentrations (all within ±30% acceptance range), whereas recovery of the lowest concentration spike was slightly poorer with mean results of six laboratories exceeding acceptance range. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the collaborative study results, the assessed Phl p 5-specific immunoassay is appropriate to be proposed as European Pharmacopoeia standard method.

Technical standards in allergen exposure chambers worldwide - an EAACI Task Force Report.

Allergen exposure chambers (AECs) can be used for controlled exposure to allergenic and non-allergenic airborne particles in an enclosed environment, in order to (i) characterize the pathological features of respiratory diseases and (ii) contribute to and accelerate the clinical development of pharmacological treatments and allergen immunotherapy for allergic disease of the respiratory tract (such as allergic rhinitis, allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, and allergic asthma). In the guidelines of the European Medicines Agency for the clinical development of products for allergen immunotherapy (AIT), the role of AECs in determining primary endpoints in dose-finding Phase II trials is emphasized. Although methodologically insulated from the variability of natural pollen exposure, chamber models remain confined to supporting secondary, rather than primary, endpoints in Phase III registration trials. The need for further validation in comparison with field exposure is clearly mandated. On this basis, the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) initiated a Task Force in 2015 charged to gain a better understanding of how AECs can generate knowledge about respiratory allergies and can contribute to the clinical development of treatments. Researchers working with AECs worldwide were asked to provide technical information in eight sections: (i) dimensions and structure of the AEC, (ii) AEC staff, (iii) airflow, air processing, and operating conditions, (iv) particle dispersal, (v) pollen/particle counting, (vi) safety and non-contamination measures, (vii) procedures for symptom assessments, (viii) tested allergens/substances and validation procedures. On this basis, a minimal set of technical requirements for AECs applied to the field of allergology is proposed.

Development and in-house validation of an allergen-specific ELISA for quantification of Bet v 4 in diagnostic and therapeutic birch allergen products.

Birch (Betula) pollen is a major cause of allergy in northern and central Europe. The allergenic potency of products for diagnosis and therapy of birch pollen allergy is adjusted nearly exclusively to the major birch pollen allergen Bet v 1. Although every fifth patient is additionally sensitized to Bet v 4, both content and variability of this minor allergen in birch allergen products remain unclear due to a lack of simple and cost-effective quantitative methods. This study aimed to develop and in-house validate the first Bet v 4-specific sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Based on a murine monoclonal antibody in combination with a polyclonal rabbit antiserum, the ELISA proved to be highly sensitive, with a lower limit of quantification of 30 pg/ml Bet v 4. After confirmation of satisfactory accuracy, reproducibility, and robustness, the ELISA was utilized to quantify Bet v 4 in 30 authorized birch allergen products. The allergen was detected in all samples tested, ranging from 0.2 to 4.4 µg/ml. No significant correlation of Bet v 4 was found with the respective amount of Bet v 1. In contrast to Bet v 1, also no correlation of Bet v 4 with total protein content or total allergenic activity could be observed. Thus, it seems presently unfeasible to base birch allergen product standardization additionally on Bet v 4. In light of these results, the continuous monitoring of Bet v 4 in birch allergen products with the presented ELISA will provide a basis for the understanding of the clinical relevance of minor allergens.

Environmental exposure chambers in allergen immunotherapy trials: Current status and clinical validation needs.

As required by the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration for pivotal trials involving allergen immunotherapy (AIT) products, clinical efficacy assessment is currently based on double-blind, placebo-controlled field studies with natural allergen exposure during the allergen season. However, this study design is associated with several drawbacks, such as the high variability of allergen exposure in different trial sites or seasons and the presence of confounding environmental factors. On the contrary, environmental exposure chambers (EECs) aim to operate with a stable and reproducible allergen exposure under highly standardized environmental conditions. Technical validation parameters for different EECs worldwide have been published by several groups. However, full clinical validation of EEC study outcomes is required for their classification as an appropriate alternative to natural allergen exposure for AIT product efficacy assessment. Some clinical validation parameters have already been addressed for EEC units. The reliability of provoked symptoms in repeated EEC sessions is high, but the predictive power of EEC settings for the clinical response on natural exposure and the impact of seasonal priming on test results still have to be validated systematically, as does the inter-EEC variability. Thus the authors recommend a continued in-depth validation of EECs to exploit the potential of this technology for future AIT product development.

Guideline on allergen-specific immunotherapy in IgE-mediated allergic diseases: S2k Guideline of the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI), the Society for Pediatric Allergy and Environmental Medicine (GPA), the Medical Association of German Allergologists (AeDA), the Austrian Society for Allergy and Immunology (ÖGAI), the Swiss Society for Allergy and Immunology (SGAI), the German Society of Dermatology (DDG), the German Society of Oto- Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery (DGHNO-KHC), the German Society of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (DGKJ), the Society for Pediatric Pneumology (GPP), the German Respiratory Society (DGP), the German Association of ENT Surgeons (BV-HNO), the Professional Federation of Paediatricians and Youth Doctors (BVKJ), the Federal Association of Pulmonologists (BDP) and the German Dermatologists Association (BVDD).

The present guideline (S2k) on allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) was established by the German, Austrian and Swiss professional associations for allergy in consensus with the scientific specialist societies and professional associations in the fields of otolaryngology, dermatology and venereology, pediatric and adolescent medicine, pneumology as well as a German patient organization (German Allergy and Asthma Association; Deutscher Allergie- und Asthmabund, DAAB) according to the criteria of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften, AWMF). AIT is a therapy with disease-modifying effects. By administering allergen extracts, specific blocking antibodies, toler-ance-inducing cells and mediators are activated. These prevent further exacerbation of the allergen-triggered immune response, block the specific immune response and attenuate the inflammatory response in tissue. Products for SCIT or SLIT cannot be compared at present due to their heterogeneous composition, nor can allergen concentrations given by different manufacturers be compared meaningfully due to the varying methods used to measure their active ingredients. Non-modified allergens are used for SCIT in the form of aqueous or physically adsorbed (depot) extracts, as well as chemically modified allergens (allergoids) as depot extracts. Allergen extracts for SLIT are used in the form of aqueous solutions or tablets. The clinical efficacy of AIT is measured using various scores as primary and secondary study endpoints. The EMA stipulates combined symptom and medication scores as primary endpoint. A harmonization of clinical endpoints, e. g., by using the combined symptom and medication scores (CSMS) recommended by the EAACI, is desirable in the future in order to permit the comparison of results from different studies. The current CONSORT recommendations from the ARIA/GA2LEN group specify standards for the evaluation, presentation and publication of study results. According to the Therapy allergen ordinance (TAV), preparations containing common allergen sources (pollen from grasses, birch, alder, hazel, house dust mites, as well as bee and wasp venom) need a marketing authorization in Germany. During the marketing authorization process, these preparations are examined regarding quality, safety and efficacy. In the opinion of the authors, authorized allergen preparations with documented efficacy and safety, or preparations tradeable under the TAV for which efficacy and safety have already been documented in clinical trials meeting WAO or EMA standards, should be preferentially used. Individual formulations (NPP) enable the prescription of rare allergen sources (e.g., pollen from ash, mugwort or ambrosia, mold Alternaria, animal allergens) for specific immunotherapy. Mixing these allergens with TAV allergens is not permitted. Allergic rhinitis and its associated co-morbidities (e. g., bronchial asthma) generate substantial direct and indirect costs. Treatment options, in particular AIT, are therefore evaluated using cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analyses. From a long-term perspective, AIT is considered to be significantly more cost effective in allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma than pharmacotherapy, but is heavily dependent on patient compliance. Meta-analyses provide unequivocal evidence of the efficacy of SCIT and SLIT for certain allergen sources and age groups. Data from controlled studies differ in terms of scope, quality and dosing regimens and require product-specific evaluation. Therefore, evaluating individual preparations according to clearly defined criteria is recommended. A broad transfer of the efficacy of certain preparations to all preparations administered in the same way is not endorsed. The website of the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (www.dgaki.de/leitlinien/s2k-leitlinie-sit; DGAKI: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Allergologie und klinische Immunologie) provides tables with specific information on available products for AIT in Germany, Switzerland and Austria. The tables contain the number of clinical studies per product in adults and children, the year of market authorization, underlying scoring systems, number of randomized and analyzed subjects and the method of evaluation (ITT, FAS, PP), separately given for grass pollen, birch pollen and house dust mite allergens, and the status of approval for the conduct of clinical studies with these products. Strong evidence of the efficacy of SCIT in pollen allergy-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis in adulthood is well-documented in numerous trials and, in childhood and adolescence, in a few trials. Efficacy in house dust mite allergy is documented by a number of controlled trials in adults and few controlled trials in children. Only a few controlled trials, independent of age, are available for mold allergy (in particular Alternaria). With regard to animal dander allergies (primarily to cat allergens), only small studies, some with methodological deficiencies are available. Only a moderate and inconsistent therapeutic effect in atopic dermatitis has been observed in the quite heterogeneous studies conducted to date. SCIT has been well investigated for individual preparations in controlled bronchial asthma as defined by the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2007 and intermittent and mild persistent asthma (GINA 2005) and it is recommended as a treatment option, in addition to allergen avoidance and pharmacotherapy, provided there is a clear causal link between respiratory symptoms and the relevant allergen. The efficacy of SLIT in grass pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis is extensively documented in adults and children, whilst its efficacy in tree pollen allergy has only been shown in adults. New controlled trials (some with high patient numbers) on house dust mite allergy provide evidence of efficacy of SLIT in adults. Compared with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, there are only few studies on the efficacy of SLIT in allergic asthma. In this context, newer studies show an efficacy for SLIT on asthma symptoms in the subgroup of grass pollen allergic children, adolescents and adults with asthma and efficacy in primary house dust mite allergy-induced asthma in adolescents aged from 14 years and in adults. Aspects of secondary prevention, in particular the reduction of new sensitizations and reduced asthma risk, are important rationales for choosing to initiate treatment early in childhood and adolescence. In this context, those products for which the appropriate effects have been demonstrated should be considered. SCIT or SLIT with pollen or mite allergens can be performed in patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis using allergen extracts that have been proven to be effective in at least one double-blind placebo-controlled (DBPC) study. At present, clinical trials are underway for the indication in asthma due to house dust mite allergy, some of the results of which have already been published, whilst others are still awaited (see the DGAKI table "Approved/potentially completed studies" via www.dgaki.de/Leitlinien/s2k-Leitlinie-sit (according to www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu)). When establishing the indication for AIT, factors that favour clinical efficacy should be taken into consideration. Differences between SCIT and SLIT are to be considered primarily in terms of contraindications. In individual cases, AIT may be justifiably indicated despite the presence of contraindications. SCIT injections and the initiation of SLIT are performed by a physician experienced in this type of treatment and who is able to administer emergency treatment in the case of an allergic reaction. Patients must be fully informed about the procedure and risks of possible adverse events, and the details of this process must be documented (see "Treatment information sheet"; available as a handout via www.dgaki.de/Leitlinien/s2k-Leitlinie-sit). Treatment should be performed according to the manufacturer's product information leaflet. In cases where AIT is to be performed or continued by a different physician to the one who established the indication, close cooperation is required in order to ensure that treatment is implemented consistently and at low risk. In general, it is recommended that SCIT and SLIT should only be performed using preparations for which adequate proof of efficacy is available from clinical trials. Treatment adherence among AIT patients is lower than assumed by physicians, irrespective of the form of administration. Clearly, adherence is of vital importance for treatment success. Improving AIT adherence is one of the most important future goals, in order to ensure efficacy of the therapy. Severe, potentially life-threatening systemic reactions during SCIT are possible, but - providing all safety measures are adhered to - these events are very rare. Most adverse events are mild to moderate and can be treated well. Dose-dependent adverse local reactions occur frequently in the mouth and throat in SLIT. Systemic reactions have been described in SLIT, but are seen far less often than with SCIT. In terms of anaphylaxis and other severe systemic reactions, SLIT has a better safety profile than SCIT. The risk and effects of adverse systemic reactions in the setting of AIT can be effectively reduced by training of personnel, adhering to safety standards and prompt use of emergency measures, including early administration of i. m. epinephrine. Details on the acute management of anaphylactic reactions can be found in the current S2 guideline on anaphylaxis issued by the AWMF (S2-AWMF-LL Registry Number 061-025). AIT is undergoing some innovative developments in many areas (e. g., allergen characterization, new administration routes, adjuvants, faster and safer dose escalation protocols), some of which are already being investigated in clinical trials. Cite this as Pfaar O, Bachert C, Bufe A, Buhl R, Ebner C, Eng P, Friedrichs F, Fuchs T, Hamelmann E, Hartwig-Bade D, Hering T, Huttegger I, Jung K, Klimek L, Kopp MV, Merk H, Rabe U, Saloga J, Schmid-Grendelmeier P, Schuster A, Schwerk N, Sitter H, Umpfenbach U, Wedi B, Wöhrl S, Worm M, Kleine-Tebbe J. Guideline on allergen-specific immunotherapy in IgE-mediated allergic diseases - S2k Guideline of the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI), the Society for Pediatric Allergy and Environmental Medicine (GPA), the Medical Association of German Allergologists (AeDA), the Austrian Society for Allergy and Immunology (ÖGAI), the Swiss Society for Allergy and Immunology (SGAI), the German Society of Dermatology (DDG), the German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery (DGHNO-KHC), the German Society of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (DGKJ), the Society for Pediatric Pneumology (GPP), the German Respiratory Society (DGP), the German Association of ENT Surgeons (BV-HNO), the Professional Federation of Paediatricians and Youth Doctors (BVKJ), the Federal Association of Pulmonologists (BDP) and the German Dermatologists Association (BVDD). Allergo J Int 2014;23:282-319.

Development and in-house validation of allergen-specific ELISA tests for the quantification of Dau c 1.01, Dau c 1.02 and Dau c 4 in carrot extracts (Daucus carota).

Even though carrot allergy is common in Europe, the amount of different allergens in carrots is still unknown due to a lack of methods for quantitative allergen measurements. The current study aimed at the development of quantitative ELISA tests for the known carrot allergens, namely Dau c 1.01, Dau c 1.02, and Dau c 4 in pure carrot extracts. Monoclonal antibodies targeting the major carrot allergen isoforms Dau c 1.01 and Dau c 1.02 were generated and combined in sandwich ELISA with rabbit antisera against Api g 1, the celery homologue of Dau c 1. A competitive ELISA for the carrot profilin Dau c 4 was based on a polyclonal rabbit antiserum. The three ELISA tests were allergen-specific and displayed detection limits between 0.4 and 6 ng allergen/ml of carrot extract. The mean coefficient of variation (CV) as a means of intraassay variability of the Dau c 1.01, Dau c 1.02 and Dau c 4 ELISA tests was 8.1%, 6.9%, and 11.9%, and the mean interassay CV 13.3%, 37.1% and 15.6%, respectively. Target recovery ranged between 93 and 113%. In conclusion, the specific, accurate and reproducible quantification of three important carrot allergens may help to identify less allergenic carrot varieties, as well as to standardize the amount of allergens in extracts used for carrot allergy diagnosis.

Monoclonal IgE antibodies against birch pollen allergens: novel tools for biological characterization and standardization of allergens.

BACKGROUND: IgE antibodies are key players in immediate hypersensitivity reactions. Allergen characterization and standardization is usually based on the sera of allergic patients, whereas monoclonal IgE antibodies specific for clinically relevant allergens are very rare. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to establish IgE mAbs specific for birch pollen allergens, because these are important inhalant allergens. METHODS: IgE-producing hybridomas were identified by using the highly sensitive rat basophilic leukemia cell mediator release assay with enhanced allergen stimulation by additional cross-linking with birch pollen-specific IgG antibodies. The obtained IgE mAbs were characterized by immunologic methods and by cDNA sequencing. RESULTS: Seven IgE mAbs specific for the birch pollen allergens Bet v 1 or Bet v 6 were obtained and were all biologically active in mast cell-based assays. Mediator release experiments with mAb combinations indicated that 2 different epitope regions were recognized on Bet v 1, whereas the 2 Bet v 6-specific mAbs bound to the same epitope region. After sensitization of rat basophilic leukemia cells with IgE mAbs, different amounts of Bet v 1 or Bet v 6 were detected in commercial diagnostic allergen reagents, whereas sensitization with polyclonal IgE resulted in similar allergenic potency of all products. CONCLUSIONS: IgE mAbs represent promising novel tools for allergen characterization and component-resolved standardization of allergen extracts.