Systemic allergic reactions induced by labile plant-food allergens: Seeking potential cofactors. A multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Heat-and-pepsin-sensitive plant food allergens (PR-10 and profilin) sometimes cause systemic reaction. OBJECTIVE: To detect the risk factors for systemic reactions induced by labile food allergens. METHODS: A retrospective multicenter study was performed on patients with a documented history of systemic allergic reaction to labile plant food allergens and on age-matched controls with a history of oral allergy syndrome (OAS) induced by the same foods. Offending foods, their amount, and state (solid or liquid), and potential cofactors (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, protonic pump inhibitors, exercise, alcohol, and fasting) were considered. RESULTS: We studied 89 patients and 81 controls. Sensitization to PR-10 or profilin, IgE to Bet v 1 and/or Bet v 2, and foods causing OAS were similar in the two groups. Twenty patients experienced >1 systemic allergic reaction. Tree nuts, Rosaceae, Apiaceae, and soymilk were the main offending foods. Seventeen (19%) patients were taking a PPI when the systemic reaction occurred (vs 5% in controls; P < .025). The ingestion of the offending food in liquid form (soymilk) was frequent among patients (15%) but unusual among controls (2%; P < .025). Soy milk-induced systemic reactions were independent of PPI treatment. Fasting and excess of allergen, but not NSAID and exercise, were other relevant cofactors for systemic reactions. Systemic reactions occurred without any identifiable cofactor in 39 (44%) cases. CONCLUSION: PR-10- and profilin-induced systemic reactions are facilitated by PPI, ingestion of large amounts of unprocessed foods, and fasting. Soybean beverages represent a risk for PR-10 hypersensitive patients and should be avoided.

Mollusk allergy in shrimp-allergic patients: Still a complex diagnosis. An Italian real-life cross-sectional multicenter study.

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.

Peanut allergy in Italy: A unique Italian perspective.

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.

Safety of uSCIT-MPL-4: prevalence and risk factors of systemic reactions in real life.

Aim: We assessed the safety of allergoid adjuvanted by monophosphoryl lipid A (uSCIT-MPL-4) in a real-life setting. Materials & methods: Patients treated with uSCIT-MPL-4 were followed-up for 1 year. Systemic reactions (SRs) were registered and the association with potential risk factors was evaluated. Results: 2929 patients were included. Grade 0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 SR reactions were observed respectively in 3.3, 1.5, 0.31, 0.07 and 0.07% of patients. A significant association was detected between Grade ≥1 SRs and: female gender, number of administrations, previous local reactions. Conclusion: uSCIT-MPL-4 is safe. Local reactions should be accurately assessed as they may represent a risk factor for Grade ≥1 SRs, together with gender and number of doses/year.

How far from correct is the use of adrenaline auto-injectors? A survey in Italian patients.

Self-administered adrenaline through an auto-injector is the main out-of-hospital treatment for anaphylaxis, and patients should be trained to promptly and correctly use the device. The aim of the study was to verify the proper use of the device and the correct drug administration, and to identify possible misuse by patients. In seven Italian Allergy clinics, patients who were previously provided with self-injectable adrenaline were recruited at the follow-up visit required for the renewal of their prescription. All patients completed a questionnaire covering details of their allergic reactions, and knowledge of the device. The correct use was verified by the physician using a trainer with a four-step examination. 242 patients were included; 46 patients (18 %) did not always carry the auto-injector, and 35 patients (14 %) reported situations in which they were doubtful about whether to use adrenaline. Only 39 % of patients properly managed the device, while some patients (6 %) failed in all four steps. The majority of patients considered it appropriate to use adrenaline at the onset of respiratory symptoms (56 %). The factor most closely related to proper use of the device was the education of the patient (p = 0.03), while age and the time from first prescription did not affect the ability to properly use the auto-injector. Even though accurate training is conducted, many patients are still unable to properly use the adrenaline auto-injector in case of anaphylaxis. Allergists should review the instructions provided to the patients every time a renewal of the auto-injector is prescribed.

5-grass pollen tablets achieve disease control in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis unresponsive to drugs: a real-life study.

BACKGROUND: An important subpopulation in allergic rhinitis is represented by patients with severe form of disease that is not responsive to drug treatment. It has been reported that grass pollen subcutaneous immunotherapy is effective in drug-resistant patients. In a real-life study, we evaluated the efficacy of 5-grass pollen tablets in patients with grass pollen-induced allergic rhinitis not responsive to drug therapy. METHODS: We carried out this multicenter observational study in adults and adolescents with grass-induced allergic rhinitis not responsive to drug therapy who were treated for a year with 5-grass pollen tablets. Clinical data collected before and after sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) included Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) classification of allergic rhinitis, response to therapy, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients entered the study. By ARIA classification, three patients had moderate to severe intermittent allergic rhinitis, ten had mild persistent allergic rhinitis, and 34 had moderate to severe persistent allergic rhinitis. There were no cases of mild intermittent allergic rhinitis before SLIT. After SLIT, 33 patients had mild intermittent allergic rhinitis, none had moderate to severe intermittent allergic rhinitis, seven had mild persistent allergic rhinitis, and seven had moderate to severe persistent allergic rhinitis. The mean medication score decreased from 4.2±1.3 before to 2.4±2.0 after SLIT (P<0.01), representing a reduction of 42%. The response to treatment before SLIT was judged as poor by 70% of patients and very poor by 30%. Patient satisfaction was significantly increased after SLIT (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: In real life, most patients with grass pollen-induced allergic rhinitis not responsive to drug treatment can achieve control of the condition with one season of treatment using 5-grass pollen tablets.