RESUMEN
Introduction: Shellfish allergy is an important cause of food allergies worldwide. Both in vivo and in vitro diagnostics failure nowadays is caused by the poor quality of the extracts associated with the scarce availability of allergenic molecules in the market. It is known that not all patients with shellfish allergies experience adverse reactions to mollusks. It is still unclear how to detect and diagnose these patients correctly. Aim: To investigate the features of shrimp-allergic patients either reactive or tolerant to mollusks, with the currently available diagnostic methods. Methods: Nineteen centers, scattered throughout Italy, participated in the real-life study, enrolling patients allergic to shrimp with or without associated reactions to mollusks. Patients underwent skin tests using commercial extracts or fresh raw and cooked shrimp and mollusks, and IgE reactivity to currently available allergenic extracts and molecules was measured in vitro. Results: Two hundred and forty-seven individuals with a self reported adverse reactions to shrimp participated in the study; of these 47.8% reported an adverse reaction to mollusks ingestion (cephalopod and/or bivalve). Neither of the tests used, in vivo nor in vitro, was able to detect all selected patients. Accordingly, a great heterogeneity of results was observed: in vivo and in vitro tests agreed in 52% and 62% of cases. Skin tests were able to identify the mollusk reactors (p < 0.001), also using fresh cooked or raw food (p < 0.001). The reactivity profile of mollusk reactors was dominated by Pen m 1, over Pen m 2 and Pen m 4 compared to tolerant subjects, but 33% of patients were not detected by any of the available molecules. Overall, a higher frequency of IgE rectivity to shrimp was recorded in northern Italy, while mollusk reactivity was more frequent in the center-south. Conclusion: The current diagnostic methods are inadequate to predict the cross-reactivity between crustaceans and mollusks. The detection of mollusks hypersensitivity should still rely on skin tests with fresh material. The exclusion of mollusks from shrimp allergic patients' diets should occur when clinical history, available diagnostic instruments, and/or tolerance tests support such a decision.
RESUMEN
Background: Peanut allergy has not been well characterized in Italy. Objective: Our aim was to better define the clinical features of peanut allergy in Italy and to detect the peanut proteins involved in allergic reactions. Methods: A total of 22 centers participated in a prospective survey of peanut allergy over a 6-month period. Clinical histories were confirmed by in vivo and/or in vitro diagnostic means in all cases. Potential risk factors for peanut allergy occurrence were considered. Levels of IgE to Arachis hypogea (Ara h) 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, and 9 and profilin were measured. Results: A total of 395 patients (aged 2-80 years) were enrolled. Of the participants, 35% reported local reactions, 38.2% reported systemic reactions, and 26.6% experienced anaphylaxis. The sensitization profile was dominated by Ara h 9 (77% of patients were sensitized to it), whereas 35% were sensitized to pathogenesis-related protein 10 (PR-10) and 26% were sensitized to seed storage proteins (SSPs). Sensitization to 2S albumins (Ara h 2 and Ara h 6) or lipid transfer protein (LTP) was associated with the occurrence of more severe symptoms, whereas profilin and PR-10 sensitization were associated with milder symptoms. Cosensitization to profilin reduced the risk of severe reactions in both Ara h 2- and LTP-sensitized patients. SSP sensitization prevailed in younger patients whereas LTP prevailed in older patients (P < .01). SSP sensitization occurred mainly in northern Italy, whereas LTP sensitization prevailed in Italy's center and south. Atopic dermatitis, frequency of peanut ingestion, peanut consumption by other family members, or use of peanut butter did not seem to be risk factors for peanut allergy onset. Conclusions: In Italy, peanut allergy is rare and dominated by LTP in the country's center and south and by SSP in the north. These 2 sensitizations seem mutually exclusive. The picture differs from that in Anglo-Saxon countries.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Omalizumab is indicated for the treatment of patients affected by chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) refractory to antihistamines. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy, safety, and recurrence of symptoms in a real-life experience of omalizumab as an add-on therapy for H1-antihistamine-refractory CSU patients (refractory CSU). METHODS: A retrospective review of the clinical records of all refractory CSU treated with omalizumab at our dermatology center from June 2014 to April 2017 was performed. Patients previously treated with second-generation antihistamines at a fourfold increased dose without clinical responses at 4 weeks of treatment were selected. Omalizumab was administered at a single dosage of 300 mg every 4 weeks for 6 months. Disease severity was assessed using the 7-day Urticaria Activity Score (UAS7). RESULTS: Eighteen patients (14 women; mean age 51 years, range 25-74) were enrolled. Mean UAS7 at baseline was 27.3 (range 15-38). Symptoms improved in all patients at 4 weeks (UAS7 = 16.1, range 0-36). Treatment was completed in 17 patients (94.4%), and among these, a complete response (UAS7 = 0) was registered in 10 patients (58.8%). Adverse events included thrombocytopenia in 1 patient (5.6%) at 16 weeks; therapy was suspended after 20 weeks and the complication was resolved, resulting in a freedom from major adverse events of 94.4%. Symptom recurrence occurred in 3 patients (17.6%) at 4, 5, and 7 months from the end of the primary therapy. Retreatment with omalizumab was successful without any adverse effects. Mean follow-up was 9.5 months (range 1-28). CONCLUSION: Add-on omalizumab therapy for refractory CSU in a real-life setting seems to be effective and safe with a relatively low incidence of symptom recurrence. Further research should investigate personalized omalizumab treatment dosages and administration intervals, and the identification of biomarkers for future treatment algorithms.