Search

Cannabis is the most widely used recreational drug in the world. Cannabis sativa and Cannabis indica have been selectively bred to develop their psychoactive properties. The increasing use in many countries has been accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Cannabis can provoke both type 1 and type 4 allergic reactions. Officially recognized allergens include a pathogenesis-related class 10 allergen, profilin, and a nonspecific lipid transfer protein. Other allergens may also be relevant, and recognition of allergens may vary between countries and continents. Cannabis also has the potential to provoke allergic cross-reactions to plant foods. Since cannabis is an illegal substance in many countries, research has been hampered, leading to challenges in diagnosis since no commercial extracts are available for testing. Even in countries such as Canada, where cannabis is legalized, diagnosis may rely solely on the purchase of cannabis for prick-to-prick skin tests. Management consists of avoidance, with legal issues hindering the development of other treatments such as immunotherapy. Education of healthcare professionals is similarly lacking. This review aimed to summarize the current status of cannabis allergy and proposes recommendations for the future management of this global issue., (© 2022 European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has evolved into a pandemic infectious disease transmitted by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Allergists and other healthcare providers (HCPs) in the field of allergies and associated airway diseases are on the front line, taking care of patients potentially infected with SARS-CoV-2. Hence, strategies and practices to minimize risks of infection for both HCPs and treated patients have to be developed and followed by allergy clinics., Method: The scientific information on COVID-19 was analysed by a literature search in MEDLINE, PubMed, the National and International Guidelines from the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the Cochrane Library, and the internet., Results: Based on the diagnostic and treatment standards developed by EAACI, on international information regarding COVID-19, on guidelines of the World Health Organization (WHO) and other international organizations, and on previous experience, a panel of experts including clinicians, psychologists, IT experts, and basic scientists along with EAACI and the "Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA)" initiative have developed recommendations for the optimal management of allergy clinics during the current COVID-19 pandemic. These recommendations are grouped into nine sections on different relevant aspects for the care of patients with allergies., Conclusions: This international Position Paper provides recommendations on operational plans and procedures to maintain high standards in the daily clinical care of allergic patients while ensuring the necessary safety measures in the current COVID-19 pandemic., (© 2020 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Women's work has traditionally been considered less hazardous to health in comparison with men's work. The increased women's participation in the workforce has led to an increased attention to women's working conditions. Women and men are unequally represented in individual professions or sectors (horizontal segregation), with women also under-represented in leadership positions (vertical segregation). The selection of specific occupations can result in differences between types and levels of occupational exposures among women and men and can affect prevalence of occupational allergy. Gender distribution of work-related asthma appears to vary across countries without clear global difference. Occupational rhinitis tends to be higher in women, although is not clear if this is related to a sex/gender effect or to differences in work exposure. Women are more likely to have occupational contact dermatitis, mainly due to wet work. No clear effects of gender on rates of hypersensitivity pneumonitis have been shown. Besides variation in exposures, physical and physiological characteristics, different behaviours and health consciousness have an impact on the occupational health hazards of women and men. Occupational allergy health promotion strategies need to consider approaches for women and men adjusted by gender, and legislative actions similarly could be implemented in a more gender-sensitive way., (© 2020 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Background: Apprentices are usually exposed to the same workplace agents as qualified professionals. There is therefore a risk of the development of occupational allergy in apprentices exposed to high (HMW-A) and low molecular inhalant allergens (LMW-A)., Aims: To evaluate and compare the occurrence of work-related allergy-like symptoms in apprentices exposed to HMW-A and LMW-A in a culinary and hairdressing school during the first and second year of vocational training., Methods: We asked culinary and hairdressing apprentices in their first and second year of vocational training to complete a questionnaire about work-related allergy-like symptoms. In first-year apprentices, we undertook spirometry, skin prick tests for occupational allergens and blood tests for allergen-specific Immunoglobulin E (IgE) antibodies., Results: Hypersensitivity to occupational allergens was more frequent in first-year apprentices exposed to HMW-A compared to LMW-A (P < 0.05). Apprentices exposed to LMW-A reported increasing occurrence of skin disorders and upper respiratory tract symptoms between the first and second years of training. First-year apprentices exposed to HMW-A more frequently reported rhino-conjunctivitis and dyspnoea (approximately P < 0.001 and P < 0.05) and those exposed to LMW-A more often reported skin symptoms (P < 0.05)., Conclusions: Periodic skin and respiratory health surveillance for apprentices exposed to LMW-A or HMW-A might help with early identification and management of occupational allergy., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Occupational Medicine. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Diagnosis of mould allergy is complicated due to the heterogeneity of the test material and the decrease in the number of commercial mould skin test solutions that are currently available., Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare skin prick tests (SPT) from different manufacturers to one another and concurrently with sIgE tests for Aspergillus fumigatus (Asp f), Cladosporium herbarum (Cla h), Penicillium chrysogenum (Pen ch), Alternaria alternata (Alt a) and Aspergillus versicolor (Asp v) to ascertain a feasible diagnostic procedure for mould sensitization., Methods: In this multi-centre study, 168 patients with mould exposure and/or mould-induced respiratory symptoms were included. Mould SPT solutions were analysed biochemically and tested in duplicate on patients' arms. Specific IgE (sIgE) concentrations to corresponding mould species and mould mix (mx1) were measured by ImmunoCAP. SPTs in accordance with one another and with sIgE were further considered. The test efficiency was calculated using receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis., Results: Mould sensitization was more frequently detected by the SPT (90 of 168) than by the sIgE tests (56 of 168). Concordances of double SPT positives were only sufficient (≥ 80%) for environmental allergens, two Asp f and three Alt a SPT solutions, whereas all other mould solutions revealed concordances < 80%. The antigen content of SPT solutions was positively associated with concordant SPT double values as well as with sIgE. Taking sIgE as the 'positive standard', all mould SPT solutions revealed test efficiencies > 80%, but varied up to 20% in sensitivity and positive predictive value with the exception of Alt a., Conclusions: SPT solutions are sensitive and essential diagnostic tools for the detection of mould sensitization. Our recommendation for diagnosis would be to test at least Alt a, Asp f and Pen ch using SPT and additional sIgE test to mx1., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objectives: To evaluate the risk factors for the development of occupational allergy to birds among Polish zoo garden keepers., Methods: A total of 200 bird zookeepers employed in the Polish zoo gardens in KLódź, Warsaw, Gdańsk, Chorzów and Płock and exposed occupationally to bird allergens were examined using a questionnaire, skin prick tests (SPTs) to common allergens and bird allergens, spirometry and cytograms of nasal swab. The level of total IgE in serum and serum-specific IgE to parrot, canary, pigeon feathers and serum were also evaluated., Results: Eight percent of bird zookeepers were sensitized to at least one of the bird allergens. The most frequent allergens yielding positive SPT results were D. farinae - 32 cases (16%), D. pteronyssinus - 30 cases (15%) and grass pollens (16.5%). In the studied group, allergen-specific IgE against bird allergens occurred with the following frequency: 87 (43.5%) against canary feathers and/or serum, 80 (40%) against parrot feathers and/or serum and 82 (41%) against pigeon feathers and/or serum. Occupational allergy was diagnosed in 39 (26.5%) cases, occupational rhinitis was present in 22 (15%) cases, occupational asthma in 20 (13.6%) subjects, occupational conjunctivitis in 18 (12.2%) cases, whereas occupational skin diseases in 11 (7.5%) cases. More eosinophils were found in nose swab cytograms among bird zookeepers with occupational airway allergy., Conclusions: The findings indicate that occupational allergy to birds is an important health problem among zoo bird keepers in Poland.

Transport workers, subjected to variable direct exposure to allergens in the workplace, are an occupational group at risk of developing occupational allergic diseases of the respiratory system as well as the skin. Their work environment is characterized by considerable diversity of both chemical and biological sensitizers. Sensitization occurs due to occupational exposure to allergens mainly by inhalation or direct skin contact. Therefore, it is necessary to be aware of the presence of strong allergens in the work environment to introduce appropriate preventive measures and to reduce the adverse health effects resulting from the exposure. This publication presents the most important allergens described as causal factors of occupational allergy among transport workers and the basic principles of diagnostics and medical certification of these diseases.

In most cases diagnosis of immediate-type occupational allergy is very complex. Mainly it is caused by diversity of occupational allergens and lack of standardized diagnostic methods. The content of allergic proteins in commercially available skin prick test reagents differs between companies and in some the most important allergens are not named. Also the evaluation of serum specific IgE (asIgE) is characterized by different diagnostic accuracy. In some cases, false-positive results of asIgE detection are the consequence of cross-reaction to common environmental allergens. In those cases it is helpful to determine asIgE for cross-reacting carbohydrate determinants (CCDs) to exclude cross-hypersensitivity. The presented paper reviews the structure of carbohydrate determinants, their prevalence and possible impact on laboratory in vitro tests used in allergy diagnostics, as well as the methods of their identification. Possible applications of CCDs in occupational allergy diagnostics are also discussed.

Objectives: Moulds are frequently found in the indoor environment of residential houses. An association between domestic mould contamination and respiratory symptoms has been reported, but mould exposure as a risk factor for allergy to moulds is not well documented. The aim of the study was to evaluate the prevalence and associated factors of allergic hypersensitivity to moulds., Materials and Methods: A group of 243 participants was examined. Of these 118 lived in dwellings with evident signs of fungal contamination (study group) and 125 in non-contaminated sites (controls). An interview, skin prick tests to common and fungal allergens, evaluation of total serum IgE and specific IgE to moulds, resting spirometry as well as mycological analysis in building were performed for each participant., Results: 19.8% subjects were sensitized to at least one mould allergen. Logistic regression analysis revealed that the history of respiratory and skin symptoms, smoking cigarettes in the past and positive skin prick tests (SPT) to common allergens (dust mite and grass pollens) or the presence of a cat as a pet animal were the significant associated factors of hypersensitivity to moulds., Conclusions: The association between indoor fungal exposure and the development of fungal allergy was not confirmed in our study.