Guideline on management of suspected adverse reactions to ingested histamine: Guideline of the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI), the Society for Pediatric Allergology and Environmental Medicine (GPA), the Medical Association of German Allergologists (AeDA) as well as the Swiss Society for Allergology and Immunology (SGAI) and the Austrian Society for Allergology and Immunology (ÖGAI).

Adverse reactions to food or food ingredients are more often perceived than objectively verifiable. However, reliable laboratory tests are often lacking. As a result, people with perceived adverse reactions to food often follow extensive elimination diets for years and unnecessarily restrict their diet, as in the case of the frequently suspected histamine intolerance. In this condition, laboratory parameters such as the determination of diamine oxidase in serum have been shown to be inconclusive. The lack of symptom reproducibility calls into question the clinical picture of adverse reactions to ingested histamine. In order to approach persons with perceived histamine intolerance and to support them in moving from blanket restrictions, which are often unnecessarily strict, to effective personalized therapeutic strategies, the present guideline of the Working Group on Food Allergy of the German Society of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI) in cooperation with the Medical Association of German Allergists (AeDA), the Pediatric Allergology and Environmental Medicine (GPA) as well as the Swiss Society of Allergology and Immunology (SGAI) and the Austrian Society of Allergology and Immunology (ÖGAI) recommends a practicable diagnostic and therapeutic approach.

Update of the S2k guideline on the management of IgE-mediated food allergies.

Not available.

Non-celiac gluten/wheat sensitivity (NCGS)-a currently undefined disorder without validated diagnostic criteria and of unknown prevalence: Position statement of the task force on food allergy of the German Society of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI).

Within the last decade, non-celiac gluten/wheat sensitivity (NCGS) has been increasingly discussed not only in the media but also among medical specialties. The existence and the possible triggers of NCGS are controversial. Three international expert meetings which proposed recommendations for NCGS were not independently organized and only partially transparent regarding potential conflicts of interest of the participants. The present position statement reflects the following aspects about NCGS from an allergist's and nutritionist's point of view: (A) Validated diagnostic criteria and/or reliable biomarkers are still required. Currently, this condition is frequently self-diagnosed, of unknown prevalence and non-validated etiology. (B) Gluten has not been reliably identified as an elicitor of NCGS because of high nocebo and placebo effects. Double-blind, placebo-controlled provocation tests are of limited value for the diagnosis of NCGS and should be performed in a modified manner (changed relation of placebo and active substance). (C) Several confounders hamper the assessment of subjective symptoms during gluten-reduced or gluten-free diets. Depending on the selection of food items, e.g., an increased vegetable intake with soluble fibers, diets may induce physiological digestive effects and can modify gastrointestinal transit times independent from the avoidance of gluten. (D) A gluten-free diet is mandatory in celiac disease based on scientific evidence. However, a medically unjustified avoidance of gluten may bear potential disadvantages and risks. (E) Due to a lack of diagnostic criteria, a thorough differential diagnostic work-up is recommended when NCGS is suspected. This includes a careful patient history together with a food-intake and symptom diary, if necessary an allergy diagnostic workup and a reliable exclusion of celiac disease. We recommend such a structured procedure since a medically proven diagnosis is required before considering the avoidance of gluten.

German guideline for the management of adverse reactions to ingested histamine: Guideline of the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI), the German Society for Pediatric Allergology and Environmental Medicine (GPA), the German Association of Allergologists (AeDA), and the Swiss Society for Allergology and Immunology (SGAI).

Adverse food reactions are far more often perceived than objectively verified. In our scientific knowledge on non-allergic adverse reactions including the so called histamine intolerance, there are large deficits. Due to the fact that this disorder is increasingly discussed in the media and the internet, more and more people suspect it to be the trigger of their symptoms. The scientific evidence to support the postulated link between ingestion of histamine and adverse reactions is limited, and a reliable laboratory test for objective diagnosis is lacking. This position paper by the "Food Allergy" Working Group of the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI) in collaboration with the German Association of Allergologists (AeDA), the Society for Pediatric Allergology and Environmental Medicine (GPA), and the Swiss Society for Allergology and Immunology (SGAI) reviews the data on the clinical picture of adverse reactions to ingested histamine, summarizes important aspects and their consequences, and proposes a practical diagnostic and therapeutic approach.

Approach to suspected food allergy in atopic dermatitis. Guideline of the Task Force on Food Allergy of the German Society of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI) and the Medical Association of German Allergologists (ADA) and the German Society of Pediatric Allergology (GPA).

The following guideline of the "Arbeitsgruppe Nahrungsmittelallergie der DGAKI" (Task Force on Food Allergy of the German Society of Allergology and Clinical Immunology) and the ADA ("Arzteverband Deutscher Allergologen", Medical Association of German Allergologists) and the GPA (German Society of Pediatric Allergology) summarizes the approach to be taken when food allergy is suspected in patients with atopic dermatitis (neurodermatitis, atopic eczema). The problem is clinically relevant because many patients assume that allergic reactions against foods are responsible for triggering or worsening their eczema. It is important to identify those patients who will benefit from an elimination diet but also to avoid unnecessary diets. Elimination diets (especially in early childhood) are associated with the risk of malnutrition and additional emotional stress for the patients. The gold standard for the diagnosis of food-dependent reactions is to perform placebo-controlled, double-blind oral food challenges because specific IgE, prick tests and history often do not correlate with clinical reactivity. This is particularly true in the case of delayed eczematous skin reactions. Diagnostic elimination diets should be used before an oral provocation test. If multiple sensitizations against foods are discovered in a patient, an oligoallergenic diet and a subsequent stepwise supplementation of the nutrition should be performed. If a specific food is suspected of triggering food allergy, oral provocation should be performed after a diagnostic elimination diet. As eczema-tous skin reactions may develop slowly (i. e. within one or two day), the skin be inspected the day after the provocation test and that a repetitive test be performed if the patient has not reacted to a given food on the first day of oral provocation. The guideline discusses various clinical situations for patients with atopic dermatitis to facilitate differentiated diagnostic procedures.

Diagnostic approach for suspected pseudoallergic reaction to food ingredients.

Chronic urticaria, recurrent angioedema and non-allergic asthma have all been associated with pseudoallergic reactions to food ingredients. For atopic dermatitis and diseases of the gastrointestinal tract, this association is controversial. Pseudoallergic reactions can be elicited by additives as well as by natural food ingredients. An altered histamine metabolism may be associated with pseudoallergy. Acute urticaria or a short episode of angioedema is not an indication for exhaustive evaluation. If basic diagnostic screening is negative in chronic urticaria, a low-pseudoallergen diet can be considered. Skin and serological tests are not objective diagnostic parameters for pseudoallergic reactions. The severity of symptoms should be documented while the patient is on a low-pseudoaller-gen diet. Oral provocation with additives leads to reproducible symptoms only in a few cases. Therefore, if a low-pseudoallergen diet brings improvement, the patient is then exposed to a pseudoallergen-rich "super meal". After a positive reaction to the "super meal" the challenge with additives takes place in the form of collective group exposition. When the patient has asthma or a history of anaphylac-toid reactions, testing with individual substances in carefully increasing dosages is required. The suspicion of adverse reactions against histamine can be confirmed by a challenge with histamine dihydrochloride. In the case of respiratory symptoms, provocation by inhalation should be considered. Objectifying symptoms especially in gastrointestinal diseases is mandatory and should include double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge, if possible.

Skin testing with food allergens. Guideline of the German Society of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI), the Physicians' Association of German Allergologists (ADA) and the Society of Pediatric Allergology (GPA) together with the Swiss Society of Allergology.

Skin testing has a central role in the diagnosis of food allergy. Prick testing is well- established as a routine diagnostic tool. Nonetheless, unstable allergens and the lack of standardized extracts create difficulties in the identification of sensitization to foods in patients with suspected food allergy. Therefore prick-to-prick tests with native (raw, fresh) foods are still recommended. The indications and contraindications are the same as those of routine skin testing in clinical allergology. We recommend a careful and restricted application of skin tests in patients with a history of severe anaphylaxis to foods.

Anaphylactic reaction to lupine flour.

Roasted lupine seeds have been used as snack food in Mediterranean countries for years. Since the 1990s, lupine flour has been used as a substitute for or additive to other flours in countries of the European Union; usually the amount is so low that no declaration is required. Since 1994, a number of cases of immediate-type allergy to lupine flour-containing products have been published. A 52-year-old woman developed facial and mucosal edema, followed by dizziness and shortness of breath a few minutes after ingestion of a nut croissant containing lupine flour; she required emergency care. Allergy diagnostic tests revealed a total IgE of 116 kU/l, a highly elevated concentration of IgE specific for lupine seed (42.9 kU/l) and birch pollen IgE of 2.57 kU/l. Skin prick test with native lupine flour was strongly positive. Allergy against lupine seeds may develop de novo or via cross-reactivity to legumes, particularly peanuts, the latter being detectable in up to 88% of cases, founded on a strong sequence similarity between lupine and peanut allergens. In our patient, no cross-reactivity could be detected via immunoblotting, indicating a rare monovalent sensitization to lupine flour. Treatment consists of avoidance of lupine flour-containing products. Patients with proven peanut allergy should also avoid lupine flour because of the major risk of cross-reaction.

Analysis of the composition of an immunoglobulin E reactive high molecular weight protein complex of peanut extract containing Ara h 1 and Ara h 3/4.

Peanuts (Arachis hypogaea) contain some of the most potent food allergens. In recent years an increasing prevalence of peanut allergies both in children and adults has been observed in the USA and in Europe. In vitro identification and characterization of allergens including those from peanut have been frequently performed by Western blotting. However this method may alter the immunoglobulin E (IgE) antibody reactivity since the proteins are denatured by detergent treatment and/or reduction of disulfide bonds by reducing reagents and does not answer the question how peanut allergens interact with the human digestive apparatus and immune system. Size exclusion chromatography of peanut extract shows that approximately 90% of the total protein content is eluted as one peak in the exclusion volume with a molecular mass of over 200 kDa. The proteins of this fraction were analyzed by blue-native polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE), immunoblotting, two-dimensional PAGE and Western blotting. A complex of Ara h 1 (Acc. no. P43237), Ara h 3/4 (AAM46958), Ara h 3 (AAC63045), Ara h 4 (AF086821), Gly 1 (AAG01363) and iso-Ara h 3 (AAT39430) was identified using patients' IgE and allergen-specific monoclonal antibodies; N-terminal sequencing and matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionisation-time of flight analysis verified these findings. A comparison of the peanut allergen sequences of Ara h 3/4, Ara h 3, Ara h 4 and peanut trypsin inhibitor (AF487543) and the proteins Gly 1 and iso-Ara h 3, not yet described as allergens, leads to the conclusion that these proteins are isoallergens of each other. It was shown that these isoallergens are post-translationally cleaved and held together by disulfide bonds in accordance to the 11S plant seed storage proteins signature.

Isolation and characterization of natural Ara h 6: evidence for a further peanut allergen with putative clinical relevance based on resistance to pepsin digestion and heat.

Peanut allergy is a significant health problem because of its prevalence and the potential severity of the allergic reaction. The characterization of peanut allergens is crucial to the understanding of the mechanism of peanut allergy. Recently, we described cloning of the peanut allergen Ara h 6. The aim of this study was isolation and further characterization of nAra h 6. We purified nAra h 6 from crude peanut extract using gel filtration and anion exchange chromatography. The preparation was further characterized by two-dimensional polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (2-D PAGE) with subsequent immunoblotting. Stability of nAra h 6 was studied by an in vitro digestibility assay as well as by resistance against thermal processing. Sequencing of nAra h 6 identified the N-terminal amino acid sequence as MRRERGRQGDSSS. Further results clearly demonstrated stability of nAra h 6 against pepsin digestion and heating. Immunoglobulin G (IgE) binding analysis and its biological activity shown by RBL 25/30-test of natural Ara h 6 supported the importance of this peanut allergen. Investigation of nAra h 6 revealed evidence for a further peanut allergen with putative clinical relevance based on resistance to pepsin digestion and heat.