Eosinophilic esophagitis as a side-effect of allergen immunotherapy: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Summary: Background. Sensitization to food and airborne allergens is common in the majority of patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Although there is not a direct cause-effect relationship of IgE-mediated allergy with the pathogenesis of EoE, there is a growing evidence that oral desensitization to food and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) may induce the development of EoE as an adverse effect. As part of the 'EoE and Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT)' Task Force funded by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), a systematic approach will be followed to review the evidence from the published scientific literature on the development of EoE in children and adults under any type of AIT. Methods. This systematic review will be carried out following the PRISMA statement guidelines. Studies will be assessed for inclusion in the review according to the Population-Interventions-Comparators-Outcomes (PICO) criteria. Results. Expected outcomes will provide evidence on the AIT-EoE development connection. Conclusions. The findings from this review will be used as a reference to provide useful guidelines for physicians treating patients with EoE and/or are practicing AIT.

An EAACI task force report: recognising the potential of the primary care physician in the diagnosis and management of drug hypersensitivity.

Adverse drug reactions include drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs), which can be immunologically mediated (allergy) or non-immunologically mediated. The high number of DHRs that are unconfirmed and often self-reported is a frequent problem in daily clinical practice, with considerable impact on future prescription choices and patient health. It is important to distinguish between hypersensitivity and non-hypersensitivity reactions by adopting a structured diagnostic approach to confirm or discard the suspected drug, not only to avoid life-threatening reactions, but also to reduce the frequent over-diagnosis of DHRs. Primary care physicians are often the first point of contact for the sufferer of a reaction, as such they have a key role in deciding whether to discard the diagnosis or send the patient for further investigation. In this review, we highlight the importance of diagnosing DHRs, analysing in detail the role of primary care physicians. We describe the common patterns of DHRs and signs of its progression, as well as the indications and contraindications for referring the patient to an allergist. The diagnostic process is described and the possible tests are discussed, which often depend on the drug involved and the type of DHR suspected. We also describe recommendations regarding the avoidance of medication suspected to have caused the reaction and the use of alternatives.

Quality of life is significantly impaired in nonallergic rhinitis patients.

BACKGROUND: In contrast to the well-known significant impairment of quality of life (QoL) in allergic rhinitis (AR), the degree of impairment in QoL in nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) remained unknown for a long time, due to a lack of a validated questionnaire to assess QoL in the NAR patient group. In this study, a validation of the mini-RQLQ questionnaire in NAR patients was performed, followed by an assessment of QoL in NAR patients compared to AR and healthy controls. Secondly, use of medication and treatment satisfaction in AR and NAR was assessed. METHODS: The study was an observational cohort study in 287 AR and 160 NAR patients. Patients with symptoms of rhinitis were recruited from a tertiary care outpatient clinic of the Otorhinolaryngology Department. Allergic rhinitis (AR) was defined as one or more positive results on skin prick testing and clinically relevant symptoms of rhinitis related to their sensitization. Nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) was defined as clinically relevant symptoms of rhinitis but without positive results on skin prick testing. The mini-RQLQ was successfully validated in this study for NAR patients. RESULTS: Quality of life (QoL) in NAR patients was equally-and for some aspects even more-impaired compared to AR. More than half of both AR and NAR patients were unsatisfied with treatment. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate a significant impairment in both AR and NAR patients in their QoL combined with a low treatment satisfaction, emphasizing the need for adequate treatment, especially in the NAR patient group.

Clinical approach on challenge and desensitization procedures with aspirin in patients with ischemic heart disease and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug hypersensitivity.

BACKGROUND: Hypersensitivity to acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) constitutes a serious problem for subjects with coronary artery disease. In such subjects, physicians have to choose the more appropriate procedure between challenge and desensitization. As the literature on this issue is sparse, this study aimed to establish in these subjects clinical criteria for eligibility for an ASA challenge and/or desensitization. METHODS: Collection and analysis of data on ASA challenges and desensitizations from 10 allergy centers, as well as consensus among the related physicians and an expert panel. RESULTS: Altogether, 310 subjects were assessed; 217 had histories of urticaria/angioedema, 50 of anaphylaxis, 26 of nonimmediate cutaneous eruptions, and 17 of bronchospasm related to ASA/nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) intake. Specifically, 119 subjects had index reactions to ASA doses lower than 300 mg. Of the 310 subjects, 138 had an acute coronary syndrome (ACS), 101 of whom underwent desensitizations, whereas 172 suffered from a chronic ischemic heart disease (CIHD), 126 of whom underwent challenges. Overall, 163 subjects underwent challenges and 147 subjects underwent desensitizations; 86 of the latter had index reactions to ASA doses of 300 mg or less. Ten subjects reacted to challenges, seven at doses up to 500 mg, three at a cumulative dose of 110 mg. The desensitization failure rate was 1.4%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stable CIHD and histories of nonsevere hypersensitivity reactions to ASA/NSAIDs, an ASA challenge is advisable. Patients with an ACS and histories of hypersensitivity reactions to ASA, especially following doses lower than 100 mg, should directly undergo desensitization.

Drug allergy passport and other documentation for patients with drug hypersensitivity - An ENDA/EAACI Drug Allergy Interest Group Position Paper.

The strongest and best-documented risk factor for drug hypersensitivity (DH) is the history of a previous reaction. Accidental exposures to drugs may lead to severe or even fatal reactions in sensitized patients. Preventable prescription errors are common. They are often due to inadequate medical history or poor risk assessment of recurrence of drug reaction. Proper documentation is essential information for the doctor to make sound therapeutic decision. The European Network on Drug Allergy and Drug Allergy Interest Group of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology have formed a task force and developed a drug allergy passport as well as general guidelines of drug allergy documentation. A drug allergy passport, a drug allergy alert card, a certificate, and a discharge letter after medical evaluation are adequate means to document DH in a patient. They are to be handed to the patient who is advised to carry the documentation at all times especially when away from home. A drug allergy passport should at least contain information on the culprit drug(s) including international nonproprietary name, clinical manifestations including severity, diagnostic measures, potential cross-reactivity, alternative drugs to prescribe, and where more detailed information can be obtained from the issuer. It should be given to patients only after full allergy workup. In the future, electronic prescription systems with alert functions will become more common and should include the same information as in paper-based documentation.

Eosinophilic esophagitis is characterized by a non-IgE-mediated food hypersensitivity.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic disease characterized clinically by symptoms of esophageal dysfunction and histologically by eosinophil-predominant inflammation. EoE is frequently associated with concomitant atopic diseases and immunoglobulin E (IgE) sensitization to food allergens in children as well as to aeroallergens and cross-reactive plant allergen components in adults. Patients with EoE respond well to elemental and empirical food elimination diets. Recent research has, however, indicated that the pathogenesis of EoE is distinct from IgE-mediated food allergy. In this review, we discuss the individual roles of epithelial barrier defects, dysregulated innate and adaptive immune responses, and of microbiota in the pathogenesis of EoE. Although food has been recognized as a trigger factor of EoE, the mechanism by which it initiates or facilitates eosinophilic inflammation appears to be largely independent of IgE and needs to be further investigated. Understanding the pathogenic role of food in EoE is a prerequisite for the development of specific diagnostic tools and targeted therapeutic procedures.

Genetic variants associated with drugs-induced immediate hypersensitivity reactions: a PRISMA-compliant systematic review.

Drug hypersensitivity includes allergic (AR) and nonallergic reactions (NARs) influenced by genetic predisposition. We performed a systematic review of genetic predictors of IgE-mediated AR and NAR with MEDLINE and PubMed search engine between January 1966 and December 2014. Among 3110 citations, the search selected 53 studies, 42 of which remained eligible. These eligible studies have evaluated genetic determinants of immediate reactions (IR) to beta-lactams (n = 19), NAR against aspirin (n = 12) and other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (n = 8), and IR to biologics (n = 3). We reported two genomewide association studies and four case-control studies on candidate genes validated by replication. Genes involved in IR to beta-lactams belonged to HLA type 2 antigen processing, IgE production, atopy, and inflammation, including 4 genes validated by replications, HLA-DRA, ILR4, NOD2, and LGALS3. Genes involved in NAR to aspirin belonged to arachidonic acid pathway, membrane-spanning 4A gene family, histamine production pathway, and pro-inflammatory cytokines, while those involved in NAR to all NSAIDs belonged to arachidonic acid pathway and HLA antigen processing pathway. ALOX5 was a common predictor of studies on NAR to both aspirin and NSAIDs. Although these first conclusions could be drawn, this review highlights also the lack of reliable data and the need for replicating studies in contrasted populations, taking into account worldwide allele frequencies, gene-gene interactions, and contrasted situations of environmental exposure.

Drug hypersensitivity in children: report from the pediatric task force of the EAACI Drug Allergy Interest Group.

When questioned, about 10% of the parents report suspected hypersensitivity to at least one drug in their children. However, only a few of these reactions can be confirmed as allergic after a diagnostic workup. There is still a lack of knowledge on drug hypersensitivity (DH) epidemiology, clinical spectrum, and appropriate diagnostic methods particularly in children. Meanwhile, the tools used for DH management in adults are applied also for children. Whereas this appears generally acceptable, some aspects of DH and management differ with age. Most reactions in children are still attributed to betalactams. Some manifestations, such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-associated angioedema and serum sickness-like reactions, are more frequent among young patients as compared to adults. Risk factors such as viral infections are particularly frequent in children, making the diagnosis challenging. The practicability and validity of skin test and other diagnostic procedures need further assessment in children. This study presents an up-to-date review on epidemiology, clinical spectrum, diagnostic tools, and current management of DH in children. A new general algorithm for the study of these reactions in children is proposed. Data are presented focusing on reported differences between pediatric and adult patients, also identifying unmet needs to be addressed in further research.

Phenotype standardization of angioedema in the head and neck region caused by agents acting on the angiotensin system.

Angioedema is a potentially life-threatening adverse reaction to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers. To study the genetic etiology of this rare adverse event, international consortia and multicenter recruitment of patients are needed. To reduce patient heterogeneity, we have standardized the phenotype. In brief, it comprises swelling in the head and neck region that first occurs during treatment. It should not coincide with urticaria or have another likely cause such as hereditary angioedema.

Birch pollen sensitization with cross-reactivity to food allergens predominates in adults with eosinophilic esophagitis.

EoE patients show variable sensitization patterns to food and aeroallergens. The value of allergy testing in adult EoE patients is unclear. Component-resolved diagnosis (CRD) may offer additional insights into sensitization patterns. The aim of this study was to characterize sensitization patterns in adult EoE patients using CRD. Serum from 76 patients (17 female), age 38.6 ± 1.5 years, was analyzed for reactivity to 112 different allergen components using an immuno-solid-phase allergen chip (ISAC). We observed any sensitization in 59 patients (78%), of which 54 patients were polysensitized. Aeroallergen sensitization, mostly against components of grass or tree pollen, or house dust mite, was observed in 74% of the patients. Birch pollen (rBet v 1) sensitization with cross-reactivity to food allergen components was observed in 30 patients (39%). In conclusion, food sensitizations in EoE patients are mainly caused by cross-reactivity to food allergens after primary birch pollen sensitization. Pollen and food sensitizations may cause or maintain esophageal inflammation in EoE patients. CRD provides more insight into sensitization patterns, identifies additional food allergen sensitizations and might be useful to direct dietary therapy in EoE.

Nasal hyper-reactivity is a common feature in both allergic and nonallergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Nasal hyper-reactivity is an increased sensitivity of the nasal mucosa to various nonspecific stimuli. Both allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) patients can elicit nasal hyper-reactivity symptoms. Differences in the prevalence or type of nasal hyper-reactivity in AR and NAR patients are largely unknown. In this study, we quantitatively and qualitatively assessed nasal hyper-reactivity in AR and NAR. METHODS: In the first part, an analysis of a prospectively collected database was performed to reveal patient-reported symptoms of hyper-reactivity. In the second part, cold dry air provocation (CDA) was performed as a hyper-reactivity measure in AR and NAR patients and healthy controls, and symptoms scores, nasal secretions and peak nasal inspiratory flow were measured. Comparisons were made between AR and NAR patients in both studies. RESULTS: The database analysis revealed high hyper-reactivity prevalence in AR (63.4%) and NAR (66.9%). There were no differences between AR and NAR in terms of the number or type of hyper-reactivity stimuli. Hyper-reactivity to physical stimuli did not exclude a response to chemical stimuli, or vice versa. CDA provocation resulted in a significant increase in rhinitis symptoms and the amount of nasal secretions in AR and NAR patients, but not in controls. CONCLUSIONS: We found no quantitative or qualitative differences in nasal hyper-reactivity between AR and NAR patients. It is not possible to differentiate NAR subpopulations based on physical or chemical stimuli.

Skin test concentrations for systemically administered drugs -- an ENDA/EAACI Drug Allergy Interest Group position paper.

Skin tests are of paramount importance for the evaluation of drug hypersensitivity reactions. Drug skin tests are often not carried out because of lack of concise information on specific test concentrations. The diagnosis of drug allergy is often based on history alone, which is an unreliable indicator of true hypersensitivity.To promote and standardize reproducible skin testing with safe and nonirritant drug concentrations in the clinical practice, the European Network and European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) Interest Group on Drug Allergy has performed a literature search on skin test drug concentration in MEDLINE and EMBASE, reviewed and evaluated the literature in five languages using the GRADE system for quality of evidence and strength of recommendation. Where the literature is poor, we have taken into consideration the collective experience of the group.We recommend drug concentration for skin testing aiming to achieve a specificity of at least 95%. It has been possible to recommend specific drug concentration for betalactam antibiotics, perioperative drugs, heparins, platinum salts and radiocontrast media. For many other drugs, there is insufficient evidence to recommend appropriate drug concentration. There is urgent need for multicentre studies designed to establish and validate drug skin test concentration using standard protocols. For most drugs, sensitivity of skin testing is higher in immediate hypersensitivity compared to nonimmediate hypersensitivity.

Utility of desensitisation for allergy to antibiotics.

Immediate-type allergic reactions to medication are potentially life threatening and can hamper the drug therapy of several medical conditions. If no alternative drug treatment is available, a desensitisation procedure may secure the continuation of necessary therapy by inducing a temporal state of tolerance. Desensitisation is only appropriate in case of a strong suspicion of an IgE-mediated allergic reaction. It should be performed by trained clinicians (allergy specialists) in a hospital setting where treatment of a potential anaphylactic reaction can be done without any delay. In this article, literature describing desensitisation procedures for several antibiotics is reviewed.

Reducing the risk of anaphylaxis during anesthesia: 2011 updated guidelines for clinical practice.

These guidelines represent the updated consensus of experts in the field of immediate hypersensitivity reactions occurring during anesthesia. They provide a series of valid, widely accepted, effective, and easily teachable guidelines that are the fruit of current knowledge, research, and experience. The guidelines are based on the findings of international scientific research and have been implemented in France under the auspices of the French Society for Anaesthesia and Intensive Care (Société Française d'Anesthésie et de Réanimation [SFAR]) and the French Society of Allergology (Société Française d'Allergologie [SFA]). The members of the European Network for Drug Allergy approved the guidelines. This paper presents the most relevant clinical implications of the guidelines.

The in vitro diagnosis of drug allergy: status and perspectives.

Adverse drug reactions (ADR) can result from immune-mediated (drug allergy) and nonimmune-mediated mechanisms. In both types of reaction, conclusive diagnosis and appropriate management remain major problems in daily clinical practice. This review summarizes the potentials and shortcomings of the currently available in vitro tests in the diagnosis of immediate (mostly IgE mediated) and nonimmediate (mostly T-cell mediated) drug allergy, particularly quantification of specific IgE, flow-assisted analysis of in vitro activated lymphocytes and basophils and the enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot.

Recommendations for assessing patient-reported outcomes and health-related quality of life in patients with urticaria: a GA(2) LEN taskforce position paper.

The aim of this Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA(2)LEN) consensus report is to provide recommendations and suggestions for assessing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) including health-related quality of life in patients with urticaria. We recommend that PROs should be used both in clinical trials and routine practice for the evaluation of urticaria patients. We suggest that PROs should be considered as the primary outcome of future clinical trials. Two validated and disease-specific instruments for assessing PROs are available, the urticaria activity score (for symptoms) and the chronic urticaria questionnaire on quality of life CU-Q(2)oL. This latter tool, CU-Q(2)oL, is available in many languages and should be preferred, where available, over more generic instruments for assessing urticaria-specific effects on quality of life. CU-Q(2)oL is only suited for the investigation of patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria. Similar instruments for other forms of urticaria have yet to be developed and validated. Also, tools for assessing other chronic spontaneous urticaria PROs besides quality of life and symptoms are needed.

Specific recommendations for PROs and HRQoL assessment in allergic rhinitis and/or asthma: a GA(2)LEN taskforce position paper.

The GA(2)LEN taskforce on Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) published in 2009 a position paper concerning PROS and HRQoL assessment in clinical trials on allergy. Because of the specificity of this topic in asthma and rhinitis, specific recommendations are needed. The aim of this position paper is to define PROs and their meaning in asthma and rhinitis research, explore the available tools to provide criteria for a proper choice, identify patient-related factor which could influence PROs assessment, define specific recommendations for assessment, analysis and results spreading, underline the unexplored areas and unmet needs. PROs assessment is gaining increasing importance, and it must be performed with a rigorous methodological procedure and using validated tools. This approach enables to better understand patient-related factors influencing clinical trials and real-life management outcomes, identify patients subgroups that can benefit from specific treatment and management plan and tailor treatment to address PROs (not only physician-defined targets) to improve asthma and rhinitis management.

Recommendations for assessing patient-reported outcomes and health-related quality of life in clinical trials on allergy: a GA(2)LEN taskforce position paper.

The aim of this Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA(2)LEN) consensus report is to provide recommendations for patient-reported outcomes (PROs) evaluation in clinical trials for allergic diseases, which constitute a global health problem in terms of physical, psychological economic and social impact. During the last 40 years, PROs have gained large consideration and use in the scientific community, to gain a better understanding of patients' subjective assessment with respect to elements concerning their health condition. They include all health-related reports coming from the patient, without involvement or interpretation by physician or others. PROs assessment should be performed by validated tools (disease-specific tools when available or generic ones) selected taking into account the aim of the study, the expected intervention effects and the determinant and confounding factors or patient-related factors which could influence PROs. Moreover, each tool should be used exclusively in the patient population following the authors' indications without modification and performing a cross-cultural validation if the tool must be used in a language that differs from the original. The result analysis also suggests that the relevance of PROs results in any interventional study should include a pre-post assessment providing information concerning statistical differences within or among groups, rates of response for the PROs and a minimal important difference for the population. The report underlines the importance of further investigation on some topics, such as the quality assessment of existing PROs tools, the definition of inclusion and exclusion criteria and a more extensive evaluation of the correlation between PROs, besides health-related quality of life, and clinical data.

Pharmacovigilance of drug allergy and hypersensitivity using the ENDA-DAHD database and the GALEN platform. The Galenda project.

Nonallergic hypersensitivity and allergic reactions are part of the many different types of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Databases exist for the collection of ADRs. Spontaneous reporting makes up the core data-generating system of pharmacovigilance, but there is a large under-estimation of allergy/hypersensitivity drug reactions. A specific database is therefore required for drug allergy and hypersensitivity using standard operating procedures (SOPs), as the diagnosis of drug allergy/hypersensitivity is difficult and current pharmacovigilance algorithms are insufficient. Although difficult, the diagnosis of drug allergy/hypersensitivity has been standardized by the European Network for Drug Allergy (ENDA) under the aegis of the European Academy of Allergology and Clinical Immunology and SOPs have been published. Based on ENDA and Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA(2)LEN, EU Framework Programme 6) SOPs, a Drug Allergy and Hypersensitivity Database (DAHD((R))) has been established under FileMaker((R)) Pro 9. It is already available online in many different languages and can be accessed using a personal login. GA(2)LEN is a European network of 27 partners (16 countries) and 59 collaborating centres (26 countries), which can coordinate and implement the DAHD across Europe. The GA(2)LEN-ENDA-DAHD platform interacting with a pharmacovigilance network appears to be of great interest for the reporting of allergy/hypersensitivity ADRs in conjunction with other pharmacovigilance instruments.