Combined LTP Sublingual and Oral Immunotherapy in LTP Syndrome: Efficacy and Safety.

INTRODUCTION: SLIT for the treatment of plant food allergies has been demonstrated to be safe but less effective than OIT, but the latter is associated with more adverse reactions. The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a new protocol starting with SLIT-peach followed by OIT with commercial peach juice in patients with LTP syndrome. METHODS: This was a prospective, noncontrolled, open study on patients with LTP syndrome who are not sensitized to storage proteins. SLIT peach ALK was followed by OIT with Granini® peach juice after 40 days of the SLIT maintenance phase. At home, the Granini® juice dose was progressively increased during the 42 days until reaching 200 ml. After achieving the maximum dose, an open oral food challenge was carried out with the food that had caused the most severe reaction. If negative, the patient was instructed to progressively introduce the foods that were avoided before starting immunotherapy at home. Patients were reviewed 1 month later. The quality-of-life questionnaire FAQLQ-AF was completed at the beginning of the study and one month after the final challenge. RESULTS: Forty-five patients were included, most of them with LTP anaphylaxis. Peach SLIT was well tolerated in 80.5%, and OIT with Granini® was well tolerated in 85%, with no severe adverse reactions. The final provocation was successful in 39/45 (86.6%). One month after the final provocation, 42/45 (93.3%) patients had no dietary restrictions. FAQLA-AF was significantly reduced. CONCLUSIONS: This combination of peach SLIT and OIT with commercial peach juice provides a new, fast, effective, and safe immunotherapy option for selected patients with LTP syndrome who are not allergic to storage proteins, improving their quality of life. This study suggests that cross-desensitization relative to the nsLTPs of several plant foods can be achieved by using Prup3.

[Reproducibilidad clínica de reacciones de hipersensibilidad a fármacos en pruebas de exposición controlada].

Objective: To assess the reproducibility of symptoms in drug challenge tests. Methods: The study included patients with positive cutaneous or challenge test throughout 2019. For each patient, clinical suspicion according to Karch-Lasagna algorithm was registered. Primary outcome was the reproducibility of symptoms in the provocation tests using a paired analysis of data with McNemar test. Results: Eighty-nine patients were included, 16 of them presented more than one positive test. Thirty were skin tests positive and 75 reacted to provocation tests. Eighty nine percent of patients who reacted in challenge test were probably or possibly reactors according to Karch-Lasagna scale. Symptoms of initial reaction did not differ from those triggered in challenge tests. Conclusions: Karch-Lasagna scale is useful in predicting the response to drug provocation tests. In most of the positive studies, results were suggested by clinical history and no differences were found between symptoms triggered in challenge test and that referred to in the previous reaction.

Objetivo: Evaluar la reproducibilidad de los síntomas en pruebas de exposición con fármacos. Métodos: Estudio retrospectivo, efectuado en pacientes con prueba cutánea o exposición positiva, atendidos en 2019. De cada paciente se registró la sospecha clínica según el algoritmo de Karch-Lasagna. El resultado principal fue la reproducibilidad de síntomas en las pruebas de exposición, mediante el análisis de datos emparejado con prueba de McNemar. Resultados: Se incluyeron 89 pacientes, y de estos 16 reportaron varias pruebas positivas. Se obtuvieron 30 pruebas cutáneas y 75 de exposición positivas. En el 89% de las pruebas de exposición positivas, las reacciones iniciales se clasificaron en probables o posibles, según la escala de Karch-Lasagna. Los síntomas reportados en la reacción inicial no difirieron de los de las pruebas de exposición. Conclusiones: La escala de Karch-Lasagna es un método útil para predecir la respuesta en las pruebas de exposición con fármacos. En la mayor parte de las pruebas positivas, los resultados fueron sugeridos por la historia clínica, sin diferencias entre la manifestación de síntomas en la prueba de exposición versus los referidos en la reacción inicial.

[Anaphylaxis sugammadex-induced in a pediatric patient]. / Anafilaxia por sugammadex en paciente pediátrico.

INTRODUCTION: Sugammadex is a cyclodextrin that reverses neuromuscular blockade, especially of rocuronium. The occurrence of anaphylaxis produced by its use is of 1:1000 and 1:20000; it is observed mainly in subjects of Asian origin. CASE REPORT: A 9-year-old boy of Asian origin who, after the administration of sugammadex, immediately manifested an episode of anaphylaxis, which was reverted by using adrenaline and antihistamines. The serum tryptase at two hours was 27.7 µg/L; at 6 weeks, it was 3 µ/L. The sugammadex 100 mg/mL skin test was positive. The basophil activation test was positive with sugammadex 20 mg/mL. CONCLUSION: The temporal relationship between the administration of the drug, the clinical manifestations, the elevation of tryptase, and the diagnostic tests performed, disclosed the episode of anaphylaxis associated with hypersensitivity to sugammadex.

Introducción: Sugammadex es una ciclodextrina que revierte el bloqueo neuromuscular, especialmente de rocuronio. La incidencia de anafilaxia producida por su uso es de 1:1.000 y 1:20.000, se observa principalmente en sujetos de origen asiático. Reporte de caso: Niño de 9 años, de raza asiática que tras la administración de sugammadex, inmediatamente manifestó un episodio de anafilaxia, la cual revirtió con el uso de adrenalina y antihistamínicos. La triptasa sérica a las 2 h fue de 27.7 µg/L; a las 6 semanas fue 3 µg/L. La prueba cutánea a sugammadex 100 mg/mL fue positiva. La prueba de activación de basófilos fue positiva con 20 mg/mL sugammadex. Conclusión: La relación temporal de la administración del medicamento, las manifestaciones clínicas, la elevación de la triptasa y las pruebas diagnósticas realizadas, identificaron el episodio de anafilaxia asociado con hipersensibilidad por sugammadex.