Continuous apple consumption induces oral tolerance in birch-pollen-associated apple allergy.

BACKGROUND: Patients with birch pollen allergy (major allergen: Bet v 1) have often an associated oral allergy syndrome (OAS) to apple, which contains the cross-reactive allergen Mal d 1. As successful birch pollen immunotherapy does not consistently improve apple related OAS symptoms, we evaluated whether regular apple consumption has an effect on OAS and immune parameters of Mal d 1 or Bet v 1 allergy. METHODS: A total of 40 patients with a clear history of birch pollen rhinoconjunctivitis and associated OAS to apple were included in an open, randomized, controlled clinical trial: 27 patients consumed daily defined amount of apple (1-128 g), doubling the amount every two to three weeks, while 13 patients remained untreated. Primary endpoint was the proportion of patients that achieved tolerance to at least 128 g of apple at the end of the study after 8 months. Exploratory endpoints were questionnaire about cross-reactive food and pollen allergy symptoms, conjunctival provocation test with birch pollen and Bet v 1, and in vitro tests (tIgE, sIgE, and IgG4 to Mal d 1 and Bet v 1; basophil activation test with both allergens). RESULTS: Seventeen of 27 patients in active group and none of 13 patients in control group (P = 0.0001) could tolerate a whole apple after the intervention. However, differences in endpoints reflecting systemic immune reactivity did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: In patients with OAS to apple, tolerance can be safely induced with slowly, gradually increasing consumption of apple. However, the observation of a relapse after discounting of apple consumption and absence of immunologic changes suggest that induced tolerance is only transient.

Robust expression of CCR3 as a single basophil selection marker in flow cytometry.

BACKGROUND: Basophil activation tests (BAT) rely on different combinations of basophil selection and activation markers. Whereas activation markers, especially CD63, are widely validated, the most suitable and robust marker for basophil selection is still a matter of debate. AIMS: Comparison of cell surface expression of two commonly used basophil selection markers (IgE, CD123/HLA-DR) with CCR3 in an unselected group of atopic and nonatopic donors in resting and activated basophils. METHODS: EDTA blood of 94 healthy adults, about half of them atopic by history, was analyzed using two different staining strategies: anti-CD123-PE/anti-HLA-DR-PerCP/anti-lin1-FITC and anti-IgE-FITC/anti-CD3-PerCP/anti-CCR3-PE. Additionally 40 pollen-allergic patients were recruited for the assessment of CCR3 expression after basophil activation. RESULTS: In resting basophils, cell surface expression of the three basophil selection markers was most constant for CCR3. IgE gating strategy showed the highest variation and up to 80% of nonbasophils in the selected gate in certain donors. During basophil activation, a shift of the mean fluorescence intensity for CCR3 toward the lower third of the CCR3-positive population could be demonstrated, but neither were CCR3-positive cells significantly lost for further analysis nor was differentiation between CCR3-positive and CCR3-negative cell populations hampered by this shift. CONCLUSIONS: CCR3 is a stable and highly expressed basophil selection marker, independent of the atopic background or basophil activation state and allows an accurate identification of basophils without need of a second marker. The basophil markers CD123/HLA-DR and IgE showed significantly higher interindividual variability in cell surface expression and are therefore less suited as selection markers.

Effect of natural seasonal pollen exposure and repeated nasal allergen provocations on elevation of exhaled nitric oxide.

BACKGROUND: Exhaled nitric oxide (FENO) is a marker for allergic airway inflammation. We wondered whether in patients with intermittent allergic rhinitis only (i) natural pollen exposure and (ii) artificial pollen exposure by repeated nasal allergen provocations may lead to an elevation of FENO. METHODS: In two prospective studies, we compared the FENO of nonatopic controls with the FENO of nonasthmatic individuals with mild intermittent rhinitis to tree and/or grass pollen. Study I: 13 atopic individuals and seven controls had measurements of FENO, blood eosinophils and eosinophilic cationic protein (ECP) before, during and after pollen season. Study II: 16 atopic individuals and 12 controls had nasal allergen provocations on four following days out of pollen season, with daily measurements of FENO before, 2 and 6 h after provocation, and determination of blood eosinophils, ECP and FEV1 at baseline, on days 5 and 10-12. RESULTS: Natural pollen exposure (study I) caused a significant elevation of FENO in allergic individuals. Nasal allergen provocations (study II) did not elicit a statistically significant rise neither of FENO nor of blood eosinophils between baseline and day 5. However, a subgroup of four individuals with a rise of blood eosinophils during nasal allergen provocations showed also a rise of FENO. CONCLUSIONS: We suppose that in allergic rhinitis a concomitant reaction of the bronchial system is dependent on a strong local inflammation leading to a generalized immune stimulation.

[Intolerance as consequence of hyperreactivity]. / Unverträglichkeit als Folge einer Hyperreaktivität.

Many patients complain about hyperreactivity of the skin or mucosal membranes, whereby rather harmless "triggers" lead to exaggerated reactions like running nose, bronchospasm, urticaria, etc. Most of these hyperreactivities have an underlying inflammation. It is important not to focus only on the triggers, but to look for the agent causing the inflammation and to avoid/treat it: elimination of the cause also eliminates the hyperreactivity. Four examples are presented where this cause--trigger model of hyperreactivity is illustrated (exercise induced asthma, pollen associated food allergy, flare-up reactions in drug allergy and hyperreactivity in chronic urticaria).

The butterbur extract petasin has no effect on skin test reactivity induced by different stimuli: a randomized, double-blind crossover study using histamine, codeine, methacholine, and aeroallergen solutions.

BACKGROUND: Petasin (Ze 339) was recently introduced on the market as a potent herbal antiallergic drug for treatment of respiratory allergies such as hay fever. Few clinical studies have been performed so far addressing the clinical effectiveness of Ze 339. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the antiallergic properties of Ze 339 using skin prick tests with different stimuli, such as codeine, histamine, methacholine, and a relevant inhalant allergen. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was performed in which Ze 339 was compared to acrivastine, a short-acting antihistamine, in 8 patients with respiratory allergy and in 10 nonatopic, healthy volunteers. Antiallergic activity of Ze 339 was determined by analyzing inhibitory potency in skin prick tests with codeine, histamine, methacholine, and an inhalant allergen. Wheal-and-flare reactions were assessed 90 minutes after a double dose of Ze 339, acrivastine, or placebo. An interval of at least 3 days was left between the skin tests. RESULTS: Acrivastine was identified as the only substance that significantly inhibited skin test reactivity to all solutions analyzed in all study subjects. In contrast, no significant inhibition could be demonstrated for Ze 339 with any test solution. Moreover, the results of Ze 339 did not differ significantly from placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In this study we found no antiallergic, particularly antihistaminic, effect of Ze 339 in skin tests using a variety of stimuli often used to evaluate immediate skin test reactivity. The mechanism by which Ze 339 is effective in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis still needs to be elucidated.

Effect of tree pollen specific, subcutaneous immunotherapy on the oral allergy syndrome to apple and hazelnut.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of specific immunotherapy (SIT) in pollen allergy is well established. However, its effect on pollen associated food allergy particularly the oral allergy syndrome (OAS) is not definitely ascertained. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this controlled prospective study was to investigate whether SIT with tree pollen, mainly birch, has an effect on OAS induced by apple or hazelnut in birch pollen-allergic individuals. METHODS: Twenty-seven birch pollen-allergic subjects with OAS induced by apple or hazelnut underwent open oral provocation tests (OPT) with increasing doses (1 to 128 g) of fresh apple or ground hazelnut 1 year apart. Fifteen of 27 subjects were treated with SIT and 12 were not. Skin-prick test with birch pollen, apple and hazelnut, and specific serum IgE, IgG and IgG4 to rBet v 1, apple and hazelnut were determined. RESULTS: Thirteen of 15 (87%) SIT-treated subjects could eat significantly (P <0.001) more of apple or hazelnut without any symptoms/signs. The average tolerated quantity increased from 12.6 to 32.6 g apple after 1 year in this group. In contrast, only one of 12 (8%) individuals without SIT was able to consume a higher amount without symptoms. On evaluating laboratory parameters, only IgG4 antibodies to rBet v 1 were found to be significantly (P <0.01) increased in the SIT-treated group after 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: The study shows that SIT with extracts containing birch pollen has a positive impact on OAS to apple or hazelnut in birch pollen-allergic individuals. In spite of this outcome, the amount of apple/hazelnut tolerated is still small. Thus, the effect of SIT on the patients' management of OAS remains limited.

Boletus edulis: a digestion-resistant allergen may be relevant for food allergy.

BACKGROUND: Fungal components can cause allergic symptoms either through inhalation, ingestion or contact. Whereas respiratory allergy is thought to be induced by spores, allergic reactions following ingestion are attributed to other parts of the mushroom. Reports of food-related allergic reactions due to the edible mushroom Boletus edulis have occasionally been reported. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to investigate whether separate allergens may be detected in alimentary allergy to Boletus edulis. METHODS: Sera of two subjects, one with recurrent anaphylaxis and the other with a predominantly oral allergy syndrome following ingestion of Boletus edulis, have been analysed by a time-course digestion assay using simulated gastric fluid and by SDS-PAGE immunoblotting. Sera of four Boletus edulis skin prick test-negative subjects and all without clinical symptoms to ingested Boletus edulis served as controls. RESULTS: In lyophilized Boletus edulis extract, at least four water-soluble proteins were detected, the most reactive at 55 kDa and at 80 kDa. Following the time-course digestion assay, IgE binding was found to a 75-kDa protein, but only if the sera of the subject with recurrent anaphylaxis was used. CONCLUSION: The data indicate that Boletus edulis can cause an IgE-mediated food allergy due to a digestion-stabile protein at 75 kDa. No IgE immune response to this protein was detected in the serum of a subject with respiratory allergy and oral allergy syndrome to Boletus edulis nor in control sera.

Reduced in vivo allergenicity of Bet v 1d isoform, a natural component of birch pollen.

BACKGROUND: The major allergen of birch pollen, Bet v 1, is present in structurally slightly different isoforms. It has been postulated that certain isoforms show a distinct ability to bind birch pollen-specific IgE, although the T-cell response remains similar. OBJECTIVE: We verified the hypothesis of a distinct allergenicity but similar T-cell immunogenicity of 2 isoforms in birch pollen-allergic subjects by in vivo tests and an in vitro assay for T-cell stimulation. METHODS: Forty-eight birch pollen-allergic, 11 grass pollen-allergic, and 10 nonatopic control individuals were tested with 10-fold increasing concentrations (0.01 to 10.0 microg/mL) of recombinant (r) Bet v 1a and rBet v 1d by skin prick test (SPT), intradermal test (IDT), and conjunctival provocation test (CPT). An allergen-specific proliferation assay was performed on 21 patients with the 2 recombinant and the natural birch pollen allergens. RESULTS: In each test system only birch pollen-allergic subjects but no controls reacted to the recombinant allergens. A positive in vivo response to 10 microg/mL of rBet v 1a was observed in 21 of 48 by SPT, in 48 of 48 by IDT, and in 33 of 48 by CPT. In contrast, the IDT response to 10 microg/mL of rBet v 1d was reduced by a factor of 100 because it was equivalent to the response to 0.1 microg/mL of rBet v 1a. rBet v 1d failed to elicit a positive reaction in SPT and CPT. The proliferative response of T cells was similar for both recombinant isoforms because 8 of 21 individuals reacted to rBet v 1a and 6 of 21 to rBet v 1d. Only 1 subject had a positive reaction to rBet v 1d alone. CONCLUSION: The natural isoforms rBet v 1a and rBet v 1d differ in their ability to bind IgE but are similar in their immunogenicity for T cells. Thus rBet v 1d might be a promising candidate for use in immunotherapy of birch pollen-allergic individuals.

Functional expression of the eotaxin receptor CCR3 in T lymphocytes co-localizing with eosinophils.

BACKGROUND: The chemokine eotaxin is produced at sites of allergic inflammation, binds selectively to the chemokine receptor CCR3 and attracts eosinophil and basophil leukocytes, which express high numbers of this receptor. Responses of T lymphocytes to eotaxin have not been reported so far. We have investigated the expression of CCR3 in T lymphocytes and analysed the properties and in vivo distribution of T lymphocytes expressing this receptor. RESULTS: In search of chemokine receptors with selective expression in T lymphocytes, we have isolated multiple complementary DNAs (cDNAs) encoding CCR3 from a human CD4+ T-cell cDNA library. T-lymphocyte clones with selectivities for protein and non-protein antigens were analysed for expression of CCR3 and production of Th1- and Th2-type cytokines. Of 13 clones with surface CCR3, nine secreted enhanced levels of interleukin-4 and/or interleukin-5, indicating that CCR3 predominates in Th2-type lymphocytes. CCR3+ T lymphocytes readily migrated in response to eotaxin, and showed the characteristic changes in cytosolic free calcium. Immunostaining of contact dermatitis, nasal polyp and ulcerative colitis tissue showed that CCR3+ T lymphocytes are recruited together with eosinophils and, as assessed by flow cytometry, a large proportion of CD3+ cells extracted from the inflamed skin tissue were CCR3+. By contrast, CCR3+ T lymphocytes were absent from tissues that lack eosinophils, as demonstrated for normal skin and rheumatoid arthritis synovium. CONCLUSIONS: We show that T lymphocytes co-localizing with eosinophils at sites of allergic inflammation express CCR3, suggesting that eotaxin/CCR3 represents a novel mechanism of T-lymphocyte recruitment. These cells are essential in allergic inflammation, as mice lacking mature T lymphocytes were insensitive to allergen challenge. Surface CCR3 may mark a subset of T lymphocytes that induce eosinophil mobilization and activation through local production of Th2-type cytokines.

Influence of bee venom immunotherapy on degranulation and leukotriene generation in human blood basophils.

BACKGROUND: Rapid clinical tolerance can be induced over several hours by very fast bee venom immunotherapy (VIT) protocols. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the mechanisms underlying VIT we examined the changes of blood basophil responsiveness during VIT. METHODS: Seven bee venom allergic patients with a history of severe systemic reactions after a bee sting were investigated. A cumulative dose of 111.1 micrograms bee venom (BV) was administered sc over 3.5 h under intensive care conditions according to an ultra-rush protocol. The release of histamine and the formation of leukotrienes in response to BV, major BV allergen Phospholipase A2 (PLA), IgE receptor cross-linking with the use of monoclonal antibodies against IgE and IgE receptor, as well as IgE independent activation in response to C5a were determined in vitro before and after ultra-rush VIT. RESULTS: We demonstrated a decrease of total histamine in peripheral blood leucocytes just after VIT. Histamine release in response to all the stimuli used is not affected by ultra-rush VIT, if expressed as per cent release of total histamine. However, the absolute amount product released in response to stimulation was decreased, particularly with allergen (BV, PLA). We also found a significant reduction of LTC4 formation after VIT in samples stimulated with specific allergen (BV, PLA). CONCLUSION: Blood basophils are a target for VIT, which induces impaired release of both preformed and newly generated mediators. However, we believe the basic mechanisms of rapid clinical tolerance induced by ultra-rush VIT remain to be investigated.

Ultra rush bee venom immunotherapy does not reduce cutaneous weal responses to bee venom and codeine phosphate.

BACKGROUND: The rapid administration of bee venom in cumulative doses exceeding the quantity contained in one bee sting is well tolerated by most of the patients during 3.5 h of ultra-rush bee venom immunotherapy (VIT). The mechanism of this tolerance is unknown. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to verify the hypothesis that either slow mediator depletion of mast cells or blockade of their surface receptor mechanisms by increasing doses of allergen might be the major mechanisms of tolerance induced by ultra-rush VIT. METHODS: Nine bee venom allergic patients with a history of severe systemic reactions after a bee sting, positive skin tests and bee venom specific serum IgE antibodies were treated as follows: on the first day a cumulative dose of 111 micrograms was administered over 3.5 h under intensive care conditions. Further injections were given on day 7, day 21 and thereafter at 4 week intervals. Intradermal tests with codeine phosphate (non-specific mast cell degranulation) and bee venom were performed before the initiation of VIT and 30 min after the last injection on the same day as well as before the subsequent bee venom injections. RESULTS: No significant changes of skin reactivity to both codeine phosphate and bee venom were observed on day 1 (before initiation of VIT and after the last injection on the same day). CONCLUSIONS: Ultra-rush VIT does not induce mediator depletion or surface receptor blockade in skin mast cells.

A cell surface ELISA for the screening of monoclonal antibodies to antigens on viable cells in suspension.

To simplify the screening of monoclonal antibodies to different human T cell surface molecules a live cell enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (cell ELISA) has been established and optimized. The assay was performed in 96-well plates. By using living human T lymphocytes in suspension surface modification by fixation or insolubilization of the cells was avoided. Several parameters influencing sensitivity and specificity were studied. About 150 ng/ml of mouse monoclonal antibodies to cell surface antigens could be detected when using 5 x 10(4) cells per well and a 1/1000 dilution of the anti-mouse IgG-alkaline phosphatase conjugate. This sensitivity permitted the primary screening of cell specific antibodies from hybridoma supernatants. The same detection limit was obtained in flow cytometric analysis. If required, the sensitivity of the cell ELISA could be increased using higher cell numbers and conjugate concentration. When analysing different cell lines with selected antibodies the cell ELISA was found to be as sensitive and specific as the fluorescence assay. The assay was applied to the screening of supernatants from hybridomas developed against human T helper cell clones and the detection of V beta specificities of T cell clones.

Clinical comparison of systemic methylprednisolone acetate versus topical budesonide in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis.

Thirty patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis entered a double blind study comparing budesonide (nasal spray, 400 micrograms/d) and i.m. injection of 80 mg methylprednisolone acetate. Symptoms were assessed over a "run in" period of 3-7 days followed by a treatment period of 3 weeks. Pollen counts were evaluated daily. Both the systemic and topical corticosteroid treatment resulted in a significant improvement of nasal and ocular symptoms and were accompanied by reduced antihistamine intake. A comparison of the two treatments in relation to the pollen count yielded statistically significantly fewer nasal symptoms, such as itching, secretion, and sneezing in the budesonide-treated group. Nasal blockage and ocular symptoms remained unchanged, but the use of eyedrops was significantly reduced in the methylprednisolone-treated group. Side effects of both treatments were mild and the incidence negligible. Methylprednisolone-treated patients had a significantly lower cortisol value after 7 days but still had a normal response to ACTH-stimulation. We conclude that the acute symptoms of allergic rhinitis are at least as well ameliorated by regular topical application of budesonide as by a single injection of methylprednisolone acetate. The accompanying allergic conjunctivitis may require additional treatment.