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.

111 years of allergen-immunotherapy: A long and successful history of the only available disease-modifier in allergic diseases.

The great milestones in medicine almost always have their precursors, which help the great event to break through. So it was with allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) and the great work of Noon and Freeman and their world-renowned publication in 1911. In this article, we want to outline AIT's long journey, from early attempts to achieve tolerance to allergens in the environment. Many very different methods were used; from homeopathy to the use of recombinant allergens. Initially, the allergen extracts were given only subcutaneously, but then also through other routes, such as nasal, rectal, intradermal, epicutaneous, in lymph nodes, or oral. It was the great merit of Bill Franklin, whom many of us still experienced as active participants in congresses, to point out that the effect of AIT must be documented not only by clinical observation but in a controlled form including placebo injections. AIT was thus transferred to evidence-based medicine, which we successfully apply today. We would like to express our gratitude to Bill Franklin himself and all others involved in the development of AIT with this summary of 111 years of immunotherapy.

Severe allergic reactions after COVID-19 vaccination with the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine in Great Britain and USA: Position statement of the German Allergy Societies: Medical Association of German Allergologists (AeDA), German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI) and Society for Pediatric Allergology and Environmental Medicine (GPA).

Two employees of the National Health Service (NHS) in England developed severe allergic reactions following administration of BNT162b2 vaccine against COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019). The British SmPC for the BNT162b2 vaccine already includes reference to a contraindication for use in individuals who have had an allergic reaction to the vaccine or any of its components. As a precautionary measure, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has issued interim guidance to the NHS not to vaccinate in principle in "patients with severe allergies". Allergic reactions to vaccines are very rare, but vaccine components are known to cause allergic reactions. BNT162b2 is a vaccine based on an mRNA embedded in lipid nanoparticles and blended with other substances to enable its transport into the cells. In the pivotal phase III clinical trial, the BNT162b2 vaccine was generally well tolerated, but this large clinical trial, used to support vaccine approval by the MHRA and US Food and Drug Administration, excluded individuals with a "history of a severe adverse reaction related to the vaccine and/or a severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis) to a component of the study medication". Vaccines are recognized as one of the most effective public health interventions. This repeated administration of a foreign protein (antigen) necessitates a careful allergological history before each application and diagnostic clarification and a risk-benefit assessment before each injection. Severe allergic reactions to vaccines are rare but can be life-threatening, and it is prudent to raise awareness of this hazard among vaccination teams and to take adequate precautions while more experience is gained with this new vaccine.

Allergen immunotherapy in the current COVID-19 pandemic: A position paper of AeDA, ARIA, EAACI, DGAKI and GPA: Position paper of the German ARIA GroupA in cooperation with the Austrian ARIA GroupB, the Swiss ARIA GroupC, German Society for Applied Allergology (AEDA)D, German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI)E, Society for Pediatric Allergology (GPA)F in cooperation with AG Clinical Immunology, Allergology and Environmental Medicine of the DGHNO-KHCG and the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI)H.

No abstract available.

Out-of-pocket Costs for Individuals with Atopic Eczema: A Cross-sectional Study in Nine European Countries.

Atopic eczema (AE) is one of the most common non-communicable inflammatory skin diseases, and has a huge socioeconomic impact. Studies on the everyday economic impact of AE on patients, however, are limited. To estimate the annual extra out-of-pocket spending due to AE among patients in Europe, a cross-sectional study using computer-assisted phone interviewing of patients with AE was performed in 9 European countries. A total of 1,189 patients (56% women) with AE, who were either eligible for, or on, systemic treatment, participated in the study between October 2017 and March 2018. Mean extra spending on everyday necessities was €927 per patient per year for healthcare expenses, and this figure was slightly, but not statistically significantly, influenced by the severity of AE. Emollients and moisturizers accounted for the highest monthly costs, followed by medication that was not reimbursed, doctors' and hospital costs. AE-related out-of-pocket costs pose a substantial burden for affected individuals, are higher than in other chronic diseases, and should always be included in economic assessments of the impact of this disease.

Safety and efficacy of immunotherapy with the recombinant B-cell epitope-based grass pollen vaccine BM32.

BACKGROUND: BM32 is a grass pollen allergy vaccine based on recombinant fusion proteins consisting of nonallergenic peptides from the IgE-binding sites of the 4 major grass pollen allergens and the hepatitis B preS protein. OBJECTIVE: We sought to study the safety and clinical efficacy of immunotherapy (allergen immunotherapy) with BM32 in patients with grass pollen-induced rhinitis and controlled asthma. METHODS: A double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter allergen immunotherapy field study was conducted for 2 grass pollen seasons. After a baseline season, subjects (n = 181) were randomized and received 3 preseasonal injections of either placebo (n = 58) or a low dose (80 µg, n = 60) or high dose (160 µg, n = 63) of BM32 in year 1, respectively, followed by a booster injection in autumn. In the second year, all actively treated subjects received 3 preseasonal injections of the BM32 low dose, and placebo-treated subjects continued with placebo. Clinical efficacy was assessed by using combined symptom medication scores, visual analog scales, Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaires, and asthma symptom scores. Adverse events were graded according to the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. Allergen-specific antibodies were determined by using ELISA, ImmunoCAP, and ImmunoCAP ISAC. RESULTS: Although statistical significance regarding the primary end point was not reached, BM32-treated subjects, when compared with placebo-treated subjects, showed an improvement regarding symptom medication, visual analog scale, Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire, and asthma symptom scores in both treatment years. This was accompanied by an induction of allergen-specific IgG without induction of allergen-specific IgE and a reduction in the seasonally induced increase in allergen-specific IgE levels in year 2. In the first year, more grade 2 reactions were observed in the active (n = 6) versus placebo (n = 1) groups, whereas there was almost no difference in the second year. CONCLUSIONS: Injections of BM32 induced allergen-specific IgG, improved clinical symptoms of seasonal grass pollen allergy, and were well tolerated.

Visual analogue scales (VAS): Measuring instruments for the documentation of symptoms and therapy monitoring in cases of allergic rhinitis in everyday health care: Position Paper of the German Society of Allergology (AeDA) and the German Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI), ENT Section, in collaboration with the working group on Clinical Immunology, Allergology and Environmental Medicine of the German Society of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery (DGHNOKHC).

BACKROUND: Visual analogue scales (VAS) are psychometric measuring instruments designed to document the characteristics of disease-related symptom severity in individual patients and use this to achieve a rapid (statistically measurable and reproducible) classification of symptom severity and disease control. VAS can also be used in routine patient history taking and to monitor the course of a chronic disease such as allergic rhinitis (AR). More specifically, the VAS has been used to assess effectiveness of AR therapy in real life, both in intermittent and persistent disease. METHODS: This position paper takes a detailed look at the historical development of VAS and its method-specific principles. Particular focus is put on aspects of practical application in daily routine and on a critical discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of the individual methods. RESULTS: VAS are well validated for the measurement of AR symptoms and correlate well with the ARIA (allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma) severity classification and also correlated well with rTNSS and RQLQ. Moreover, several treatment studies on AR have used VAS as an evaluation parameter. Thanks to the use of new (real-life and real-time) communication technologies, such as smartphone apps, Discussion: VAS can be used relatively simply and highly effectively to assess disease control. The VAS lends itself very well to digitization and has now been incorporated into a smartphone app (called Allergy Diary) to assess AR control and direct treatment decisions as part of an AR clinical decision support system (CDSS). MASK Rhinitis has developed this app, which is currently available in 15 different languages.

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.

Optimizing of the basophil activation test: Comparison of different basophil identification markers.

BACKGROUND: Flowcytometric identification of basophils is a prerequisite for measuring activation of basophils with IgE-dependent or IgE-independent stimuli. Aim of this study was to compare different marker combinations in a simultaneous multicolor flowcytometric measurement. METHODS: Ten patients with a grass pollen allergy and three controls were included in the study. Basophilic cells were gated by using anti-CCR3, anti-IgE, anti-CRTH2, anti-CD203c, and anti-CD3. Cells were activated by a monoclonal anti-FcεRI antibody, N-formyl-methionyl-leucyl-phenylalanine (fMLP), and the allergen extract Phleum pratense. The activation marker anti-CD63 was used. RESULTS: The highest relative number of basophils was found with anti-CCR3+ cells, anti-IgE+ and anti-IgE+ /anti-CD203c+ cells, the lowest with CRTH2+/CD203c+/CD3- cells. A very good and good concordance of CCR3+ cells was seen with CCR3+/CD3- cells and CRTH2+/CD203c+/CD3- cells in all experiments. The contamination of the CCR3+ population with CD3+ cells and the contamination of the IgE+-population with CCR3- cells and CD203- cells were the lowest compared to all other marker combinations. CONCLUSIONS: As the highest relative number of basophils was identified by anti-CCR3 followed by the anti-IgE and anti-IgE/antiCD203c positive population in most cases, these markers can generally be recommended for identification of basophils. If a basophil population with very high purity is needed, anti-IgE should be chosen.

History of allergy in the middle ages and renaissance.

In the Middle Ages little innovative medical literature came from Western Europe. The Greek-Roman tradition with the scriptures of Hippocrates and Galenos was preserved in Byzantium and then in the Middle East by Arabic medicine; it then returned to Europe in Latin translations mostly made in Italy and Spain. There were innovative developments in Arabic medicine also with regard to the history of allergy, especially with the first description of 'rose fever', which is described as very similar in symptomatology to hay fever. Under Arabic influence, the first medical university in Salerno was famous for its well-known text Tacuinum sanitatis in which a description of asthma can be found. With the beginning of renaissance new developments were also registered in Europe, with new observations and a new way of thinking.

Acupuncture for allergic disease therapy--the current state of evidence.

This review summarizes current evidence for acupuncture treatment of allergies. Several randomized controlled trials have demonstrated a specific effect of acupuncture for allergic rhinitis; while a few studies have shown positive effects for atopic dermatitis, asthma and itch. Specifically for allergic rhinitis and asthma, acupuncture may be cost-effective in terms of money spent per quality-of-life gained. Acupuncture plays an increasingly important role as an evidence-based therapy for allergy relief and can be recommended as adjunct therapy for allergic rhinitis. Future randomized controlled trials need to further explore acupuncture efficacy for the treatment of itch, atopic dermatitis and asthma. More experimental research is also needed to investigate mechanisms of action underlying acupuncture for allergy relief.

The brain circuitry mediating antipruritic effects of acupuncture.

Itch is an aversive sensory experience and while systemic therapies, such as acupuncture, have shown promise in alleviating itch in patients suffering from chronic itch, their antipruritic mechanisms are unknown. As several lines of evidence implicate brain-focused mechanisms, we applied functional magnetic resonance imaging and our validated temperature-modulation itch model to evaluate the underlying brain circuitry supporting allergen-induced itch reduction in atopic dermatitis patients by acupuncture, antihistamine, and respective placebo treatments. Brain response to allergen itch demonstrated phase dependency. During an increasing itch phase, activation was localized in anterior insula and striatum, regions associated with salience/interoception and motivation processing. Once itch reached peak plateau, robust activation was noted in prefrontal cognitive and premotor areas. Acupuncture reduced itch and itch-evoked activation in the insula, putamen, and premotor and prefrontal cortical areas. Neither itch sensation nor itch-evoked brain response was altered following antihistamine or placebo acupuncture. Greater itch reduction following acupuncture was associated with greater reduction in putamen response, a region implicated in motivation and habitual behavior underlying the urge to scratch, specifically implicating this region in acupuncture's antipruritic effects. Understanding brain circuitry underlying itch reduction following acupuncture and related neuromodulatory therapies will significantly impact the development and applicability of novel therapies to reduce an itch.

High environmental ozone levels lead to enhanced allergenicity of birch pollen.

BACKGROUND: Evidence is compelling for a positive correlation between climate change, urbanisation and prevalence of allergic sensitisation and diseases. The reason for this association is not clear to date. Some data point to a pro-allergenic effect of anthropogenic factors on susceptible individuals. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of urbanisation and climate change on pollen allergenicity. METHODS: Catkins were sampled from birch trees from different sites across the greater area of Munich, pollen were isolated and an urbanisation index, NO2 and ozone exposure were determined. To estimate pollen allergenicity, allergen content and pollen-associated lipid mediators were measured in aqueous pollen extracts. Immune stimulatory and modulatory capacity of pollen was assessed by neutrophil migration assays and the potential of pollen to inhibit dendritic cell interleukin-12 response. In vivo allergenicity was assessed by skin prick tests. RESULTS: The study revealed ozone as a prominent environmental factor influencing the allergenicity of birch pollen. Enhanced allergenicity, as assessed in skin prick tests, was mirrored by enhanced allergen content. Beyond that, ozone induced changes in lipid composition and chemotactic and immune modulatory potential of the pollen. Higher ozone-exposed pollen was characterised by less immune modulatory but higher immune stimulatory potential. CONCLUSION: It is likely that future climate change along with increasing urbanisation will lead to rising ozone concentrations in the next decades. Our study indicates that ozone is a crucial factor leading to clinically relevant enhanced allergenicity of birch pollen. Thus, with increasing temperatures and increasing ozone levels, also symptoms of pollen allergic patients may increase further.

Pimecrolimus, a topical calcineurin inhibitor used in the treatment of atopic eczema.

INTRODUCTION: Pimecrolimus , a calcineurin inhibitor, is a non-steroidal treatment option in patients aged ≥ 2 years with mild-to-moderate atopic eczema (AE). It was approved as a viable therapeutic option by the FDA in 2001 and in the European Union a year later in 2002. Calcineurin inhibitors inhibit the synthesis of inflammatory cytokines released from T cells and mast cells. In contrast to corticosteroids, calcineurin inhibitors act specifically on proinflammatory cells. Pimecrolimus shows comparative efficacy to mild topical corticosteroids and a special antipruritic effect. Furthermore, examinations of the systemic absorption of pimecrolimus implicated no systemic immunosuppression. In 2006, the FDA set a black box warning in the packaging materials of pimecrolimus alluding to the risk of skin malignancy or lymphomas due to theoretical consideration. AREAS COVERED: The authors provide a review of pimecrolimus as a treatment for AE. Specifically, the authors present the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic information on pimecrolimus and also review its efficacy. The authors also discuss pimecrolimus' safety and tolerability profile. EXPERT OPINION: Pimecrolimus represents a valuable part of active and proactive therapy in AE. That being said, the long-term safety of topical calcineurin inhibitors remains to be investigated. Given the results from experimental photocarcinogenicity studies, effective sun protection should be employed during the therapy, although an increased risk for skin malignancies and lymphomas was not found in recent studies. Pimecrolimus should be considered as an alternative therapeutic approach in AE treatment management going along with a corticoid-sparing effect.

Acupuncture in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis: a randomized trial.

UNLABELLED: Chinese translation BACKGROUND: Acupuncture is frequently used to treat seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) despite limited scientific evidence. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of acupuncture in patients with SAR. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled multicenter trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00610584) SETTING: 46 specialized physicians in 6 hospital clinics and 32 private outpatient clinics. PATIENTS: 422 persons with SAR and IgE sensitization to birch and grass pollen. INTERVENTION: Acupuncture plus rescue medication (RM) (cetirizine) (n = 212), sham acupuncture plus RM (n = 102), or RM alone (n = 108). Twelve treatments were provided over 8 weeks in the first year. MEASUREMENTS: Changes in the Rhinitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) overall score and the RM score (RMS) from baseline to weeks 7 and 8 and week 16 in the first year and week 8 in the second year after randomization, with predefined noninferiority margins of -0.5 point (RQLQ) and -1.5 points (RMS). RESULTS: Compared with sham acupuncture and with RM, acupuncture was associated with improvement in RQLQ score (sham vs. acupuncture mean difference, 0.5 point [97.5% CI, 0.2 to 0.8 point; P < 0.001]; RM vs. acupuncture mean difference, 0.7 point [97.5% CI, 0.4 to 1.0 point; P < 0.001]) and RMS (sham vs. acupuncture mean difference, 1.1 points [97.5% CI, 0.4 to 1.9 points; P < 0.001]; RM vs. acupuncture mean difference, 1.5 points [97.5% CI, 0.8 to 2.2 points; P < 0.001]). There were no differences after 16 weeks in the first year. After the 8-week follow-up phase in the second year, small improvements favoring real acupuncture over the sham procedure were noted (RQLQ mean difference, 0.3 point [95% CI, 0.03 to 0.6 point; P = 0.032]; RMS mean difference, 1.0 point [95% CI, 0.2 to 1.9 points; P = 0.018]). LIMITATION: The study was not powered to detect rare adverse events, and the RQLQ and RMS values were low at baseline. CONCLUSION: Acupuncture led to statistically significant improvements in disease-specific quality of life and antihistamine use measures after 8 weeks of treatment compared with sham acupuncture and with RM alone, but the improvements may not be clinically significant.