Search

Objective To review the literature related to mountain cedar in terms of allergic disease and societal impact. Data Sources English-language articles obtained through PubMed searches with relevance to mountain cedar allergies. Study Selections Articles with the following search terms were included: mountain cedar, Juniperus ashei, juniper, allergy, pollen, cedar fever, Jun a 1, and San Antonio. Results A total of 61 relevant articles were selected regarding mountain cedar and its distribution, phylogenetics, allergens, potency, cross-reactivity, pollen counting and monitoring, symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, and future research. Conclusion Mountain cedar remains a major cause of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis in the south central United States during the winter months. Key treatment strategies involve a combination of allergen avoidance, pharmacologic therapy, and subcutaneous immunotherapy. Allergists can help affected patients in their management of “cedar fever.”

The 2020 National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee Expert Panel Working Group (NAEPP [2020 Focused Asthma Update]) guidelines and the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2021 strategy report are compared in this Rostrum article. The methodologies of each publication are described. Subsequently, 4 different selected pharmacological recommendations are compared in the 2 documents: step 1 for children 0 to 4 years of age with viral-induced wheezing, step 2 in ages 12 years and older with the intermittent use of inhaled corticosteroid, steps 3 and 4 with single-inhaler maintenance and reliever therapy with inhaled corticosteroids-formoterol (SMART), and steps 3, 4, and 5 with add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonist therapy. Nonpharmacological recommendations are also considered and contrasted, including for exhaled nitric oxide, environmental control, immunotherapy, and bronchial thermoplasty. Similarities and differences in these 2 documents are highlighted, and recommendations are made about harmonizing the approaches where possible.

Background: Allergic disease, allergic rhinoconjunctivitis/bronchial asthma, are very prevalent worldwide, and the poten-tially modifying therapy is immunotherapy with aeroallergens. In December 2019 a new coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) was iden-tified in China, causing a pandemic with devastating effects. For this reason, the State of Emergency (SE) was declared in Portugal for the first time in this pandemic, between 18 March and 2 May 2020, and all non-urgent activity was suspended in our hospital, including the administration of subcutaneous immunotherapy with aeroallergens (SCITA). Objective: Cha-racterize the dose adjustments according to the delay in SCITA administration, verify the safety of the dose administered when resuming SCITA and evaluate the worsening of symptoms of the allergic disease, in patients under SCITA program that inter-rupted it during the SE. Material and methods: An analysis of the SCITA clinical records of the 195 patients who interrupt-ed the maintenance dose during EE was performed. According to the symptoms and the delay interval, the dose was reduced or a new initiation protocol was performed, according to our Allergen Immunotherapy Functional Unit protocol, adapted from international guidelines for this specific time. Results: 7.7% of patients had worsening of allergic symptoms during the interruption period and 6.2% resorted to rescue therapy. 96.4% decreased the dose in SCITA resumption, with a decrease that was mostly greater than predicted, according to our protocol. Immediate local reactions were recorded in 9.2%, with no ana-phylactic reactions. After recovery, 9.7% worsened symptoms and 5.1% resorted to rescue therapy. Conclusions: The pandemic made it very difficult to monitor patients’ chronic pathologies, including allergic diseases. The majority of patients did not report worsening of symptoms and few had adverse reactions in the resumption of SCITA, demonstrating the safety of the dose adjustment protocol. © 2021 Sociedade Portuguesa de Alergologia e Imunologia Clinica. Published by Publicacoes Ciencia & Vida.

BackgroundAllergen extracts used in subcutaneous immunotherapy can be standardized or non-standardized. Standardized extracts are available in specific biological potencies, presumably making their biological activity more consistent. The majority of allergen extracts are non-standardized and may have less consistent potencies. Non-standardized extracts are labeled as weight per volume or protein nitrogen units (PNUs). Neither method provides direct information regarding the extract’s biologic potency. The purpose of this study was to compare weight per volume versus PNU concentrations for 4 non-standardized allergen extracts prepared by two allergen manufacturers. The potencies were compared to current North American practice recommendations.MethodsThe weight per volume and PNU values were provided for 4 non-standardized extracts—birch, short ragweed, dog hair and Alternaria—from HollisterStier and Stallergenes Greer. Weight per volume and PNU concentrations were compared for each of these extracts from both manufacturers. From the raw data, we calculated the corresponding PNU values for a weight per volume of 1:100 and 1:200 for each extract. Similarly, we calculated the corresponding weight per volume including a range of PNU values, for 1000, 2000, 3000, 4000 and 5000 PNU/ml.ResultsBirch extract has low PNU concentration, below 5000, for a weight per volume of 1:200 for both HollisterStier and Stallergenes Greer. In contrast, for both HollisterStier and Stallergenes Greer ragweed extract, a weight per volume of 1:200 corresponds to a PNU concentration greater than 5000. Dog extract for a weight per volume of 1:200, and even for 1:100, corresponds to very low PNUs for both companies. For Alternaria, corresponding PNU concentrations for HollisterStier is low at only 500 while over 5000 for Stallergenes Greer.ConclusionsOur results show variability when comparing weight per volume and PNU concentrations for both Hollister-Stier and Stallergenes Greer products. We suggest selecting a PNU dose that corresponds to a weight per volume of 1:200 as this may improve patient safety. Our recommendations for starting PNU dose for the four non-standardized extracts are 1500 for birch, 5000 for ragweed, 25 for dog, and 500 for Alternaria when using HollisterStier products; 2300 for birch, 5000 for ragweed, 1200 for dog, and 5000 for Alternaria when using Stallergenes Greer products. If the starting PNU concentration is considerably below 5000 for a weight per volume of 1:200 slow up-titration is advised. Conversely, for PNU concentrations above 5000 for weight per volume of 1:200 we suggest a maintenance dose of 5000 PNU.

Jonathan Corren,1 Sarbjit S Saini,2 Remi Gagnon,3 Mark H Moss,4 Gordon Sussman,5 Joshua Jacobs,6 Elizabeth Laws,7 Elinore S Chung,8 Tatiana Constant,8 Yiping Sun,8 Jennifer Maloney,8 Jennifer D Hamilton,8 Marcella Ruddy,8 Claire Q Wang,8 Meagan P O’Brien8 1Departments of Medicine and Pediatrics, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA; 2Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Johns Hopkins Asthma and Allergy Center, Baltimore, MD, USA; 3Clinique Spécialisée en Allergie de la Capitale, Québec, QC, Canada; 4Departments of Medicine and Pediatrics, Division of Allergy, Pulmonary and Critical Care, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA; 5Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; 6Allergy and Asthma Clinical Research, Inc, Walnut Creek, CA, USA; 7Sanofi, Bridgewater, NJ, USA; 8Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Tarrytown, NY, USACorrespondence: Meagan P O’BrienRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, 777 Old Saw Mill River Road, Tarrytown, NY, 10591, USATel +1 914 826-5271Email meagan.obrien@regeneron.comJonathan CorrenDepartments of Medicine and Pediatrics, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, 10833 Le Conte Ave, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USATel +1 310 312-5050, ext 250Email jcorren@ucla.eduBackground: Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) has been proven as an effective therapy against some allergens for seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) patients unresponsive to intranasal corticosteroids and/or antihistamines but carries risk of systemic allergic reactions. Dupilumab blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin-4 and interleukin-13, key and central drivers of type 2 inflammation in multiple diseases.Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of SCIT+dupilumab vs SCIT alone.Methods: This phase 2a, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel-group study conducted in 103 adults with grass pollen-induced SAR (NCT03558997) randomized patients 1:1:1:1 to SCIT, dupilumab (300 mg every 2 weeks), SCIT+dupilumab, or placebo. SCIT was administered using an 8-week cluster protocol followed by 8 weeks of maintenance injections. Primary endpoint was change from pre-treatment baseline in area under the curve (AUC) in total nasal symptom score (TNSS) 0– 1 h following nasal allergen challenge (NAC) with timothy grass extract at Week 17.Results: Although 16 weeks of treatment with SCIT+dupilumab did not significantly improve TNSS AUC (0– 1 h) following NAC at Week 17 vs SCIT (least squares mean − 56.76% vs − 52.03%), a higher proportion of SCIT+dupilumab-treated patients (61.5%) achieved SCIT maintenance dose vs SCIT (46.2%). A lower proportion of SCIT+dupilumab-treated patients (7.7%) required epinephrine rescue treatment vs SCIT (19.2%). There were significantly fewer withdrawals in the SCIT+dupilumab group than in the SCIT group (n = 2 [7.7%] vs n = 8 [30.8%]; P = 0.0216); the majority of SCIT group withdrawals were due to SCIT-related intolerability, compared with no discontinuations from the SCIT+dupilumab group.Conclusion: In SAR patients, 16 weeks of SCIT+dupilumab may improve SCIT tolerability but did not incrementally reduce post-allergen challenge nasal symptoms compared with SCIT alone.Clinical Study Number: NCT03558997.Keywords: dupilumab, seasonal allergic rhinitis, subcutaneous immunotherapy, nasal allergen responses

Purpose: To elucidate the usefulness of Japanese cedar pollen (JCP)-specific antigen-specific immunoglobulin (IgG) 4 as a biomarker for predicting the efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy for cedar pollen-induced allergic rhinitis. Methods: We divided a total of 105 cases with Japanese cedar pollinosis into three groups: “SLIT Successful,” SLIT Unsatisfactory,” and “SCIT” groups. The SLIT group patients were treated with JCP Droplet (Torii Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) for one year from 2015 and were divided into two groups, the SLIT Successful group or the SLIT Unsatisfactory group. The SLIT Successful group (n = 16) were subjects treated by SLIT only, who were able to experience control of their naso-ocular symptoms without the need for antiallergic rescue agents during the peak season of atmospheric pollen. The SLIT Unsatisfactory group (n = 76) comprised subjects treated with SLIT only, who did not respond successfully, and were administered with rescue agents to control their naso-ocular symptoms. The SCIT group had been treated with standardized JCP extract (Torii Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) for three years from 2012, and were also able to experience control of their symptoms during the peak pollen season without the need for antiallergic rescue agents. We determined the serum level of JCP-specific immunoglobulin E (IgE), IgG, and IgG4 used in the 3gAllergy-specific IgE assay (3gAllergy). The serum levels of periostin and SCCA2 were measured using established ELISA procedures (clones SS18A and SS17B, Shino-Test, Japan) following the manufacturer’s instructions. We then made ROC curves for each group and assessed which index was best able to predict the efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy. Results: Serum JCP-specific IgE was significantly lower in the SCIT group than in the SLIT Successful group and the SLIT Unsatisfactory group (p &lt, 0.05). Serum JCP-specific IgG was significantly higher in the SCIT group and the SLIT Successful group than in the SLIT Unsatisfactory group (p &lt, 0.05). Serum JCP-specific IgG4 was also significantly higher in the SCIT group and the SLIT Successful group than in the SLIT Unsatisfactory group (p &lt, 0.05). There was no significant difference among serum levels of periostin in the SCIT group, the SLIT Successful group, or the SLIT Unsatisfactory group. There was also no significant difference in SCCA2 among the three groups. In terms of ROC curves, a serum JCP-specific IgG4 value greater than 989.5 UA/mL showed the best sensitivity (93.3%) and specificity (94.7%) (p &lt, 0.05) among other parameters. Conclusions: The serum JCP-specific IgG4 level is significantly correlated with the clinical efficacy of SLIT. Serum JCP-specific IgG4 cutoff levels greater than 989.5 UA/mL were correlated with an effective clinical response to SLIT, with a sensitivity of 93.3% and a specificity of 94.7%.

Aim: Compare a pre-co-seasonal with a perennial schedule using an undiluted mixture of a depigmented-polymerized grass/Olea europaea immunotherapy (2,000 DPP/mL) in pediatric patients with rhinitis/rhinoconjunctivitis with or without controlled asthma.Material and Methods: Primary objective was to determine the non-superiority of a perennial compared to a pre-co-seasonal schedule by means of Paediatric/Adolescent Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (PRQLQ/AdolRQLQ). Secondary objectives were Paediatric Asthma/Caregiver´s Quality of Life Questionnaire (PAQLQ/PACQLQ) Asthma Control Test (ACT), Visual Analogue Scale global assessment of allergic disease (VAS), use of resources and immunological response. All variables were compared during the pollen season (April-June) without (2015) and with (2016) immunotherapy.Results: Forty patients were included in the study of which 29 patients were assigned to the perennial and 11 to the pre-co-seasonal schedule. During 2016 pollen season a significant improvement in the PRQLQ/AdolRQLQ, PAQLQ/AdolAQLQ, ACT and VAS score were observed both in perennial and pre-co-seasonal schedule group. No significant differences were seen between treatment schedules for PRQLQ/AdolRQLQ, PAQLQ/AdolAQLQ and ACT scores comparing both pollen seasons. A significant increase in sIgG4 and reduction in the number of rescue medications used and number of patients who needed visit to any specialist was observed in both treatment schedules during 2016 pollen season. No relevant differences were found in the safety profile of any treatment schedule.Discussion: Treatment with undiluted mixture of a depigmented-polymerized Grass/Olea europaea allergen immunotherapy has proven to be effective both using a perennial and a pre-co-seasonal schedule and therefore suitable for polyallergic patients.

Background Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is an effective treatment for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. However, adverse events, including life-threatening systemic reactions, may occur. The purpose of this project is to identify risk factors for systemic reactions to SCIT and to provide practice-based solutions using a quality improvement (QI) framework. Methods A QI initiative was performed in a hospital-based, Canadian Allergy clinic administering SCIT in a 12-month period. Results A total of 4242 injections of SCIT were performed over a period of 12 months. Of these, 10 injections resulted in a systemic reaction requiring epinephrine administration (i.e., an incidence of 1 in 424 injections, or 0.24%). Eight patients had at least one documented risk factor for a systemic reaction, and six had multiple risk factors. Major risk factors included seasonal exacerbation of allergic rhinitis, uncontrolled asthma, and an error in route of administration. All reactions occurred with the highest allergen extract concentration. Conclusion This QI initiative highlights the need for improved patient and health care practitioner education and pre-administration screening. We suggest several considerations for SCIT administration: provide patients with written information on safety; screen patients before injections, including a review of treatment plan adherence and asthma control; adjust dosing to slow down buildup of the most concentrated immunotherapy extract, particularly in high risk patients; and apply additional safety measures in patients with multiple risk factors.

Aim:Specific allergen immunotherapy (SIT) is the only disease-modifying therapy for allergic diseases. We aimed to examine the effect of subcutaneous specific allergen immunotherapy (SCIT) applications on the prognosis of asthma and allergic rhinitis in pediatric cases in real-life settings.Methods:The study was designed as a retrospective cohort study. Patients with asthma and/or allergic rhinitis aged between 5 and 18 years old were enrolled between 2010 and 2015. The groups who received SCIT and who did not receive were compared in terms of disease severity parameters in follow-up recorded in their files.Results:A total of 298 cases, among which 140 received subcutaneous specific allergen immunotherapy. The frequency of asthma, allergic rhinitis, and co-morbidity was similar between the two groups. In the first year of the follow-up, asthma symptoms severity was not significant between the two groups; however, both asthma and allergic rhinitis symptoms were significantly lower in the SCIT patients at the end of the third year of follow-up. While the follow-up rate for three years or more was 62% in the group that received subcutaneous specific allergen immunotherapy, it was 38% in the group that did not receive.Conclusion:These results showed that SIT is an effective treatment modality in real-life settings with low side effects in pediatric patients with uncontrolled asthma and allergic rhinitis despite medical treatment.

Background Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only causal therapy for IgE-mediated allergy. There is less evidence about the safety and efficacy of AIT especially subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) in children under 5 years old. We aimed to investigate the side effects and associated risk factors of house dust mite (HDM) SCIT in preschool children with respiratory allergic diseases. Methods The preschool children who had HDM-related allergic rhinitis with/without asthma were enrolled and undergone standardized HDM SCIT in our department from June 2013 to December 2019. Local reactions (LRs) and systemic reactions (SRs) were recorded and categorized according to World Allergy Organization recommendations. Demographic data and other therapeutic-related parameters were also recorded to investigate potential risk factors for these side effects. Results A total of 91 children (60 boys, 65.93%; 31 girls, 34.07%; mean age 4.13 years old) were included in the study. Among the 91 patients, 3109 SCIT injections were recorded, 62/91 (68.13%) experienced 186 immediate LRs, 4 /91(4.40%) experienced 6 delayed LRs, 11/91 (12.09%) children experienced 44 immediate SRs, 21/44 (47.73%) were grade 1 SRs, 21/44 (47.73%) were grade 2, 2/44 (4.55%) were grade 3, no grade 4 or 5 SRs occurred. Furthermore, 1/91 (1.10%) experienced 1 delayed SRs, manifested by urticaria 2 days later after allergen injection. 9/91 (9.89%) experienced 2 or more times SRs. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed BMI (OR 1.506; 95%CI 1.091 to 2.079; p p p > 0.05). Conclusions HDM subcutaneous immunotherapy is considered to be safe in preschool children with respiratory allergic diseases. Higher BMI and HDM sIgE level in children are risk factors for developing LRs. The incidence of SRs and the rate of severe SRs are low in preschool children.

Introduction Humulus pollen is an important cause of allergic asthma in East Asia. There have been some murine models for Humulus pollen allergy established by intraperitoneal (IP) sensitization and nasal drip stimulation, but they were not comprehensive enough. Here, we used atomized inhalation for challenge and compared the subcutaneous (SC) and IP sensitization routes to determine the optimal method to establish a model of asthma induced by Humulus pollen. Subsequently, we tried to develop a rapid subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) model for Humulus allergy. Methods BALB/c Mice were sensitized through the SC or IP route, with respective reference to previously established sensitization methods and allergen dosing, and challenged with nebulized Humulus pollen extract to induce asthma. To compare the two sensitization methods, airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR), inflammatory cell infiltration, allergen‐specific serum immunoglobulin (Ig)E (sIgE) levels, cytokine levels, and lung histopathology were assessed. The effects of SCIT (once every other day for 16 days) on airway inflammation, AHR, sIgE, and allergen‐specific serum IgG2a (sIgG2a) levels were evaluated by using the model established in this study. Results Although mice sensitized by the SC or IP routes both showed AHR and airway inflammation, the SC route elicited significantly higher levels of sIgE, eosinophil inflammation, and T helper type 2 cytokines, compared with the IP route. SCIT in the treatment group significantly reduced the titers of sIgE, enhanced the titers of sIgG2a, and effectively alleviated pulmonary inflammation and AHR, compared with the vehicle group. Conclusions The SC route can be used to establish a murine model of Humulus pollen allergy that recapitulates the characteristics of clinical allergic asthma. Short‐term SCIT can significantly improve symptoms and pathophysiology in asthmatic mice., The SC route can be used to establish a murine model of Humulus pollen allergy that recapitulates the characteristics of clinical allergic asthma. Short‐term subcutaneous immunotherapy can significantly improve symptoms and pathophysiology in asthmatic mice.

Background: Allergen-specific immunotherapy is a potentially disease-modifying therapy that is effective for the treatment of patients with allergic diseases. Although the pain caused by the administration of subcutaneous immunotherapy with allergens (SCITA) is considered to be minimal, no studies assessing that pain for the treatment of only pediatric patients have been reported. Objectives: This research aimed to evaluate the pain associated with SCITA for pediatric patients followed at our Immunoallergology Department. Methods: During four consecutive weeks, the nurse who administered the injection completed a questionnaire recording the child’s assessment of the pain associated with SCITA; these questionnaires were randomized before any analyses were done. Two different pain evaluation scales were used, with the choice of scale being determined based on the child’s age: the self-reporting faces scale (score: 0–10; 5 to 8 years old) and the numeric scale (score: 0–10; >8 years old). Demographic and clinical data, as well as any adverse reactions, were documented. Results: We included 46 pediatric patients (mean age: 12.3 ± 2.6 years; 69.5% male), most of whom were suffering from rhinitis/rhinoconjunctivitis and undergoing subcutaneous immunotherapy with mites. Seven local adverse reactions were recorded, and all were mild. Ten patients did not mention any pain associated with SCITA. Of the 36 patients who mentioned some pain, 33 mentioned mild pain (scores between 1 and 3); only three mentioned moderate pain (scores between 4 and 6). For both scales, the median score obtained was 1. The maximum pain reported had a score of 6. No significant differences were observed between different groups of patients. Conclusions: In this study, SCITA was shown to be a mildly painful procedure that is associated with only a few local reactions. Therefore, SCITA should be considered as a safe option for the treatment of most pediatric patients suffering from allergies.

Background: The role of salivary-specific IgG4 and IgA in subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is not well defined. We aimed to investigate the change of IgG4 and IgA in both serum and saliva and their correlations with IgE-blocking-factor (IgE-BF) during SCIT. Method: 307 Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (DP) allergic rhinitis and/or asthma patients were recruited for this study. 286 patients received DP-SCIT for 1 year. Twenty-one patients received only symptomatic treatment. DP-, Der p 1-, and Der p 2-specific IgE in serum, specific-IgG4 and Der p 2-specific IgA1 and IgA2 in both serum and saliva were measured at timepoints 0, 4, and 12 months during DP-SCIT. Correlation between salivary and serological IgG4, IgA, and their correlation with DP-specific IgE-BF measured in serum was evaluated. Results: During DP-SCIT, the allergen-specific IgG4 in both saliva and serum increased and correlated significantly, the correlation becomes stronger over the treatment time. DP-specific IgE-BF significantly correlated with DP-specific IgG4 in serum (p < 0.0001) at different timepoints and in saliva at 12 months of SCIT (p < 0.01). No change in Der p 2-specific IgA during DP-SCIT was observed, and the IgA in serum did not correlate with IgA in saliva. There was no correlation between DP IgE-BF and Der p 2-specific IgA in serum or saliva. The control group did not exhibit significant changes in any antibody level measured. Conclusion: The IgE blocking activity induced by DP-SCIT treatment correlated with specific IgG4 and not IgA. The IgG4 in saliva correlates with serum IgG4 and can be an alternative immunological marker beyond 1 year of SCIT treatment.

Background: As the number of allergic sensitizations increases the severity of allergic respiratory diseases worsens. Multiple monoallergen immunotherapy can be accompanied by poor treatment adherence and high costs, single multiallergen immunotherapy needs to prove efficacy whilst maintaining a good safety profile. Methods: Observational, retrospective, multicenter study using a 2-pollen single undiluted multiallergen subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) in routine clinical practice in Spain. Patients with rhinoconjunctivitis, with/without controlled asthma, sensitized to grass, olive, Parietaria, Cupressus, plane tree and/or Salsola pollen were included. Primary and secondary clinical efficacy endpoints were quality of life (mini Rhinitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (miniRQLQ)) and visual analogue scale (VAS) respectively. All adverse events were documented. Results: Ten centers included 97 patients, median age 32 years. SCIT treatment included combinations of grass mix with olive, Parietaria, Cupressus, plane tree or Salsola or olive with Parietaria, Cupressus or Salsola. The mean duration of SCIT was 1.8 years with a high treatment adherence (73%). Significant improvement in quality of life, nasal and ocular symptoms, activity limitations and practical problems (p< 0.0001) and other symptoms (p= 0.024) was observed. Most patients did not develop asthma-like symptoms and a significant improvement of all allergic symptom severity was perceived. VAS showed a significant improvement in rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma by patients and physicians. Twenty-nine patients experienced adverse reactions, 25 had local and 6 had systemic reactions. Conclusions: Single undiluted multiallergen SCIT treatment of two different pollens is efficacious and safe in both children and adults, showing that it is a suitable option for the treatment of polyallergic patients.

Purpose: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) while usually safe, is not without risk. Both sublingual (SLIT) and subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) have the potential for systemic reactions including anaphylaxis. Materials and Methods: A short survey was distributed to fellows of the American Academy of Otolaryngic Allergy (AAOA) (n = 553) in July of 2019 to determine current prescribing practices. Results: A total of 103/553 surveys were completed, giving a response rate of 18.6%. Prescribing patterns for SCIT showed 79.6% prescribed auto-injectable epinephrine (AIE) to all patients, 11.7% prescribed only to high risk patients, while 1.9% did not prescribe AIE at all. SLIT showed similar patterns with 71.8% prescribing AIE to all, 11.7% to high risk or letting patient choose, and 6.8% did not prescribe to anyone. Just under half of the physicians responded affirmatively to giving a written anaphylaxis plan to patients on immunotherapy. 48.5% physicians reported treating in-office anaphylaxis due to SCIT or skin testing in the past year, while 6% reported anaphylaxis due to SLIT. Conclusions: A majority of otolaryngic allergists are still prescribing AIE for both SCIT and SLIT. With the recent higher costs attributed to AIE as well as drug shortages, some physicians are risk-stratifying patients. While SCIT has a higher risk for treatment related systemic reactions, anaphylaxis does occur with SLIT, thus making it imperative to counsel patients on a clear anaphylaxis protocol in all forms of AIT.

Objective: We aimed to evaluate our patient’s treatment responses to three-month immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis with or without asthma, and to investigate the factors affecting treatment Material and Methods: A total of 53 patients receiving subcutaneous immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis with or without asthma were included in the study. All patients were positive for mite skin prick test. Asthma was present as a concomitant disease in 28(52.8%) patients. Patients with and without asthma were classified in two groups as “Allergic rhinitis + Asthma+” and “Allergic rhinitis+ Asthma-“. The values of pulmonary function tests of all patients, and in rhinitis with asthma patients, the Asthma Control Test scores before and after three months of treatment were recorded. Results: In “Allergic rhinitis + Asthma+” and “Allergic rhinitis + Asthma-“groups, male/female ratio was 7/21 and 10/15, mean age was 33±9 and 32±9 years. No statistically significant differences were present between the pre-treatment and 3-month-treatment values of pulmonary function test. The difference between the pre-treatment and 3-month treatment asthma control test scores was strongly significant. Conclusion: In allergic rhinitis, which is quite commonly associated with asthma, the control of asthma is also provided with the treatment of allergic rhinitis. By using pulmonary function test in allergic rhinitis and asthma control test in asthma, we showed that the effectiveness of allergen specific immunotherapy started in 3 months which was earlier from current literature.

Non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) is a heterogeneous nasal disease with high global prevalence. NAR can be subclassified as nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome (NARES), vasomotor rhinitis (VMR), and local allergic rhinitis (LAR). Although the precise factors involved in the etiology of NAR are not clear, there is evidence that immunological factors play an important role in the pathogenesis of NAR. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the immunological and neurogenic mechanisms involved in the diagnosis and treatment of NAR.This review provides a comprehensive overview of the immunological basis of diagnostic and treatment strategies for NARES, VMR, and LAR. In particular, recently documented molecular and immunological mechanisms of NAR are discussed, which may help to better understand the mechanisms underlying the pathologies of the different endotypes of NAR.An increasing number of studies investigating the pathogenesis of NAR suggest that the immunological mechanisms underlying the different subtypes of NAR vary greatly, and are still not fully understood to accurately diagnose these subtypes. Thus, further studies should focus on making diagnosis and treatment of NAR more precise, safe, and effective. A better understanding of the immunological mechanisms involved in NAR should help in the discovery of new diagnostic and treatment strategies.

Allergen immunotherapy may modify the natural course of allergic diseases and induce remission. It includes subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). For asthma, allergen immunotherapy using house dust mite (HDM) improves clinical symptoms and airway hyperresponsiveness and decreases drug requirements. Furthermore, it has been suggested that allergen immunotherapy also has the following effects: (1) the effect can be maintained for more than a year even if the treatment is terminated, (2) the remission rate of childhood asthma can be increased, (3) new allergen sensitization can be suppressed, and (4) asthma development can be prevented if allergen immunotherapy was performed in the case of pollinosis. Allergen immunotherapy differs from conventional drug therapy, in particular the effect of modifying the natural course of allergic diseases and the effect of controlling complicated allergic diseases such as rhinoconjunctivitis. The general indication for HDM-SCIT in asthma is HDM-sensitized atopic asthma with mild-to-moderate disease and normal respiratory function. HDM allergens should be involved in the pathogenesis of asthma, and a duration of illness of less than 10 years is desirable. HDM-SLIT is available for allergic rhinitis but not for asthma in Japan. However, as the efficacy of SLIT for asthma has been fully proven internationally, SLIT is also applied in asthmatics with complicated allergic rhinitis in Japan.

Background House dust mites (HDMs) are among the most important allergen sources containing many different allergenic molecules. Analysis of patients from a double-blind, placebo-controlled allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) study indicated that patients may benefit from AIT to different extents depending on their molecular sensitization profiles. Objective Our aim was to investigate in a real-life setting whether stratification of patients with HDM allergy according to molecular analysis may enhance AIT success. Methods Serum and nasal secretion samples from patients with HDM allergy (n = 24) (at baseline, 7, 15, 33, and 52 weeks) who had received 1 year of treatment with a well-defined subcutaneous AIT form (Alutard SQ 510) were tested for IgE and IgG reactivity to 15 microarrayed HDM allergen molecules with ImmunoCAP Immuno-solid-phase Allergen Chip technology. IgG subclass levels to allergens and peptides were determined by ELISA, and IgG blocking was assessed by basophil activation. In vitro parameters were related to reduction of symptoms determined by combined symptom medication score and visual analog scale score. Results Alutard SQ 510 induced protective IgG mainly against Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (Der p) 1 and Der p 2 and to a lesser extent to Der p 23, but not to the other important allergens such as Der p 5, Der p 7, and Der p 21, showing better clinical efficacy in patients sensitized only to Der p 1 and/or Der p 2 as compared with patients having additional IgE specificities. Conclusion Stratification of patients with HDM allergy according to molecular sensitization profiles and molecular monitoring of AIT-induced IgG responses may enhance the success of AIT.

Background Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is the standard approach for treating patients with sensitizations to aeroallergens. However, immunotherapy can trigger severe systemic reactions if delivered inappropriately or to high risk patients. We sought to characterize and quantify SCIT systemic reactions requiring epinephrine administration during a 6-year period in a Canadian setting following the recommendations for components and dosages published in the 2010 Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (CSACI) Immunotherapy Manual. Methods A single centre retrospective chart review was performed for all patients with systemic reactions to subcutaneous immunotherapy requiring intramuscular epinephrine injection between January 2011 and October 2017. Each systemic reaction requiring epinephrine was reviewed for baseline patient characteristics, details of the reaction, and reaction severity. Research ethics approval was obtained through McMaster University. Results 28 of 380 patients experienced a systemic reaction requiring epinephrine administration, with an incidence rate of 1 per 1,047 injection visits (0.095%). 26 of the 28 reactions occurred within the mandatory 30-minute observation period post allergen immunotherapy. Of the 28 patients that experienced a systemic reaction to SCIT, 11 patients had asthma and 5 patients had a history of possible food allergy. All of the systemic reactions occurred during injections from vial number 4, and five patients reacted to their first shot of a re-ordered extract. 10 of the 28 patients required more than one intramuscular injection of epinephrine, and 20 of 28 patients were transferred to the hospital by ambulance. Conclusions This is the first Canadian study to review patients with systemic reactions to subcutaneous immunotherapy. Several best practice methods were employed throughout the study to optimize subcutaneous delivery of immunotherapy extract, and our recorded per injection incidence rate for systemic reactions was comparable or below the rate published in similar studies. The recommendations in the CSACI Immunotherapy Manual provide an approach to standardizing prescriptions for SCIT to maximize immunotherapy efficacy and reduce the risk of systemic reactions, though similar studies in larger multicenter settings are needed to confirm these observations. These observations provide important objective information to clinicians about the potential risks for systemic reactions in patients considering SCIT.

Allergen-specific immunotherapy is currently the only treatment with the potential to modify and prevent progression of allergic asthma in children. In clinical practice, it is available in two forms: subcutaneous immunotherapy and sublingual immunotherapy. Trials and meta-analyses showed both the safety and the short- and long-term benefits of allergen-specific immunotherapy in asthmatic children. However, its use and role in asthma remains controversial, since studies are largely heterogeneous. This is mainly due to the lack of consensus on the optimal primary outcome to be considered for clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of allergen-specific immunotherapy in asthma. Therefore, well-conducted researchis needed using standardized and validated tools to evaluate key outcomes in asthmatic children.

Background: The aim of this study is to investigate the impact of COVID-19 related treatment delay on subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) efficacy in patients with allergic rhinitis (AR). Methods: The study was performed in 643 patients with SCIT appointments between February 1 and May 31, 2020. The clinical assessment, performed at baseline (V0) and one year later (V1), included visual analogue scale (VAS); daily symptom score (dSS); daily medication score (dMS); combined symptom and medication scores (CSMS); quality of life (QoL); self-rating anxiety scale (SAS); and self-rating depression scale (SDS) for each patient. Results: At V0, 249 patients were treated on schedule, and 394 were delayed (7 ± 4.68 weeks). Among them, 319 patients (105 on schedule, and 214 delayed) also completed the assessments at V1, with the absence of 25.39% patients due to completion of SCIT, and 25.35% patients were withdrawal. The results of all assessments were within the normal range for all patients at V0 and V1, with the exception of a slightly higher SDS score (56.13) at V0. In the SCIT delayed group. there was a significant positive correlation between the length (weeks) of the delay and SDS score, and this was significantly higher in patients with poor control of nasal symptoms. Conclusions: This study showed the long-term efficacy of SCIT for AR patients, including those who have had to delay normal therapy due to the COVID-19 outbreak. The psychological status of SCIT patients in response to lockdown of hospital services during this critical period should be considered.

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) has gained a permanent place in the therapeutic arsenal for the patient with allergy. Particularly, substantial evidence has been established for the efficacy of AIT in allergic rhinitis. A hallmark of AIT is it disease modifying effect resulting in persistent benefit after the treatment has been terminated. Both the subcutaneous and sublingual mode of administration appear to be safe. It is, however, a matter of debate whether AIT can be implemented for patients with asthma. EAACI and GINA guidelines recommend sublingual AIT in house dust mite driven asthma. The question however remains whether the different available forms of AIT should be used for allergic asthma in general.

Asthma is one of the most common childhood chronic diseases worldwide. Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is commonly used in the treatment of house dust mite (HDM)‑related asthma in children. However, the therapeutic mechanism of SCIT in asthma remains unclear. The present study aimed to investigate the molecular biomarkers associated with HDM‑related asthma in asthmatic children prior and subsequent to SCIT treatment compared with those in healthy children via proteomic analysis. The study included a control group (30 healthy children), ‑Treatment group (30 children with HDM‑related allergic asthma) and +Treatment group (30 children with HDM‑related allergic asthma treated with SCIT). An isobaric labeling with relative and absolute quantification‑based method was used to analyze serum proteome changes to detect differentially expressed proteins, while functional enrichment and protein‑protein interaction network analysis were used to select candidate biomarkers. A total of 72 differentially expressed proteins were detected in the ‑Treatment, +Treatment and control groups. A total of 33 and 57 differentially expressed proteins were observed in the ‑Treatment vs. control and +Treatment vs. control groups, respectively. Through bioinformatics analysis, 5 candidate proteins [keratin 1 (KRT1), apolipoprotein B (APOB), fibronectin 1, antithrombin III (SERPINC1) and α‑1‑antitrypsin (SERPINA1)] were selected for validation by western blotting; among them, 4 proteins (KRT1, APOB, SERPINC1 and SERPINA1) showed robust reproducibility in asthma and control samples. This study illustrated the changes in proteome regulation following SCIT treatment for asthma. The 4 identified proteins may serve as potential biomarkers prior and subsequent to SCIT treatment, and help elucidate the molecular regulation mechanisms of SCIT to treat HDM‑related asthma.

Background and objective Nasal symptoms of allergic rhinitis can be reduced with allergen‐specific subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT). However, the mechanisms underlying the effectiveness of SCIT for Japanese cedar pollinosis are not well understood. We studied changes in the numbers of metachromatic cells, eosinophils and neutrophils in nasal swabs following SCIT for Japanese cedar pollinosis. Methods Subjects were either untreated or given SCIT for 0.5 to 13 years duration. For the 2019 seasons, nasal swabs were taken in the pollinosis preseason (immunotherapy n = 36; untreated control, n = 62) and in the pollinosis season (immunotherapy n = 45; untreated control n = 46) and the numbers of mast cells, eosinophils and neutrophils assessed by microscopy. Results There were significant improvements in symptom severities following SCIT in comparison to untreated subjects (P, The number of metachromatic cells in nasal swabs in untreated subjects (B) and SCIT (C) for Japanese cedar pollinosis in pre‐season and in season.

Allergy immunotherapy (AIT), whether administered as subcutaneous immunotherapy or as sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), is an effective treatment for sensitization to inhalant allergens. There remain, however, some important unresolved issues, such as the need for compelling evidence for or against the efficacy of treatment with multiple unrelated allergen extracts and optimal dosing with SLIT-liquid preparations. Both methods of AIT involve prolonged periods of treatment to achieve persisting benefit. This can be inconvenient and expensive, and failure to complete the period of prescribed treatment is common with both methods. New approaches are being developed and studied to make AIT more effective, safer, or more convenient. Among these approaches are using alternative routes of administration; using adjuvants, including vitamin D, Toll-like receptor ligand agonists, biologics, or probiotics; introducing additional SLIT tablets; defining the patterns of major and minor allergen sensitivity of patients and the content of allergen extracts to better match sensitization with treatment; and treating cats to reduce their allergen release. The allergen molecules themselves are being altered to make them less reactive with specific immunoglobulin E, both by creating allergoids and by using recombinant technology to produce modified allergen molecules. Which, if any, of these new approaches will become part of AIT practice in the next decade depends in part on their efficacy and in part on the availability of the resources to adequately study them.

Background Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is administered via tablets (SLIT-T) or liquid drops (SLIT-D). In North America, currently 4 SLIT-T formulations are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for allergy immunotherapy, and SLIT-D is an off-label use of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) extracts. Objective To compare and contrast aspects of SLIT-T and SLIT-D, including physical characteristics, mechanism of action, dosing, efficacy, safety, adherence, and cost. Data Sources PubMed literature review (no limits), product prescribing information, and manufacturer websites. Study Selections Publications related to physical characteristics, mechanism of action, dosing, efficacy, safety, and adherence. Results Published evidence indicates that tablet and drop formulations differ in regard to physical characteristics, dosing, and strength of evidence for efficacy. Whether there are any differences in absorption and mechanism of action between the 2 formulations is currently unknown. Optimal dosing, efficacy, and safety have been established for SLIT-T. In contrast, in North America there is little support for efficacy of SLIT-D from randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, and dose ranges have not been appropriately evaluated. SLIT-T treats a single allergen, whereas in the United States SLIT-D often contains multiple allergens to treat polysensitization. The safety profiles of SLIT-T and SLIT-D appear similar, and both formulations are considered safer than SCIT. Conclusion Professional guidelines should make a clear distinction between SLIT-T and SLIT-D in their recommendations to minimize confusion with the umbrella term SLIT.

Background and Objective Nasal symptoms were reduced following allergen‐specific sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for allergic rhinitis. The mechanisms underlying the effectiveness of SLIT for Japanese cedar pollinosis are poorly understood. We studied changes in the numbers of metachromatic cells, eosinophils, and neutrophils following SLIT for Japanese cedar pollinosis. Methods Nasal swabs were taken in the preseason (n = 32) and in pollinosis season (n = 49) from subjects given sublingual drop immunotherapy for an average duration of 1.5 years. The numbers of metachromatic cells (mast cells and basophils), eosinophils and neutrophils were determined and compared with those from untreated subjects in preseason (n = 65) and in season (n = 54). Results SLIT subjects had a significantly reduced frequency of moderate to most severe symptoms in comparison to untreated subjects in preseason (P, The mechanisms underlying the effectiveness of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for Japanese cedar pollinosis are poorly understood. One of mechanisms is a reduction of the number of metachromatic cells and eosinophils.

BACKGROUND Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is the allergen-specific curative treatment of allergic rhinitis. Adverse effects, most of which are local, can be observed during the immunotherapy. These adverse effects have been reported more frequently during the pollen season. The purpose of this study was to estimate the rate of local, large local, and systemic reactions during the treatment, to determine the relationship between adverse reactions and the season in which these reactions occur, as well as the risk factors for adverse reactions during the grass pollen-specific SCIT treatment in children. METHODS We retrospectively collected and analyzed the data of 261 children who administered grass pollen SCIT between 2008 and 2018. RESULTS A total of 261 children (177, 67.8% male), who received grass pollen SCIT, with a mean (±SD) age of 12.0 ± 3.0 years at the initiation of SCIT were enrolled to the study. The number of the patients who experienced local and large local reactions was 109 and 30, respectively. In addition, the number of the patients with systemic reactions was 35. After the 12 284 injections, local reactions occurred in 357 (2.9%), and this was followed by systemic reaction as 55 (0.4%) and large local reactions as 40 (0.3%). Frequency of local (P

Antecedentes: Existen lineamientos para el diagnóstico de las enfermedades alérgicas y la aplicación de inmunoterapia con alérgenos (ITA).Objetivo: Describir cómo los alergólogos mexicanos diagnostican y tratan con ITA las alergias alimentaria y respiratoria.Métodos: Se encuestó a 227 alergólogos que acudieron a un simposio de inmunoterapia; se indagaron prácticas cotidianas en el diagnóstico de las alergias respiratoria y alimentaria, así como en la forma de aplicar la ITA.Resultados: Los alergólogos utilizan las pruebas cutáneas por punción para el diagnóstico de las alergias respiratorias y alimentarias en 100 y 87.7 % de los casos de una y otra; diagnóstico in vitro mediante determinación de IgE alérgeno-específica en 55.5 y 63 %; y diagnóstico molecular por componentes en 14.1 y 13.2 %. Para los aeroalérgenos, 81 % emplea ITA subcutánea; 77.9 %, ITA sublingual líquida; 1.8 %, ITSL en tabletas; 45 % indicó que estaba dispuesto a emplear tabletas en el futuro. Para los alérgenos de alimentos, la mayoría no utilizaba ITA, aunque 55 % se interesa en la ITA oral y 59 %, en la ITA sublingual.Conclusiones: En términos generales, el diagnóstico y tratamiento de las enfermedades alérgicas se realizan conforme los lineamientos internacionales, además, los alergólogos encuestados mostraron flexibilidad para adoptar nuevos esquemas.

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis is a public health problem. Allergen Immunotherapy is an effective and safe treatment, that modifies the natural course of allergic disease and induces long-term tolerance.OBJECTIVE: To correlate basophil and antibody biomarkers of subcutaneous immunotherapy to clinical outcomes and cellular changes in target tissue.METHODS: Adults suffering from allergic rhinoconjunctivitis due to grass pollen allergy were randomized to receive subcutaneous immunotherapy (n=18) or to an open control group (n=6). Patients reported daily symptom and medication scores and weekly rhinitis related quality of life scores during four pollen seasons. Biomarkers were measured every 3 months for three years treatment and every 6 months in the follow-up year. Nasal and cutaneous allergen challenge tests were performed annually. Leucocyte subsets were assessed in nasal mucosa biopsies at baseline and after treatment.RESULTS: Subcutaneous immunotherapy led to a 447-fold decrease in basophil sensitivity during the first treatment year. This remained hundredfold lower than baseline during the 3 year-treatment period and tenfold lower during the follow-up year (n=18, p=0.03). Decrease in basophil sensitivity after three weeks of treatment predicted long-term improvement in seasonal combined symptom and medication scores (ῥ=-0.69, p=0.0027) during three years of treatment. AUC of IgE blocking factor correlated to nasal allergen challenge (ῥ =0.63, p=0.0012) and SPT (ῥ =0.45, p=0.03). Plasma cell numbers in the nasal mucosa increased during treatment (p=0.02).CONCLUSION: Decrease in basophil sensitivity after three weeks of subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy predicted the clinical outcome of this treatment.

Background Biomarkers of clinical efficacy for subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) on allergic rhinitis (AR) have not been identified yet. This study aims to assess the clinical relevance of serum inhibitory activity for IgE by the method of enzyme-linked immunosorbent facilitated antigen binding (ELIFAB) during SCIT for Artemisia-sensitized AR patients. Methods 19 AR patients were studied who had undergone Artemisia-specific SCIT for more than 8 months (19.68 months on average, ranging from 9 to 33 months). Peripheral bloods were collected before and after treatment. The serum inhibitory activity for IgE was tested by ELIFAB and the level of Artemisia-specific IgG4 (Artemisia-sIgG4) was determined by ELISA. Clinical improvement was evaluated based on the symptom scores and rescue medication use (SMS). The 2-tailed Wilcoxon signed-rank test and the Spearman rank test (two-tailed) were used to analyze data by using SPSS 20.0, with P values of less than 0.05 considered as significant. Results The SMS decreased significantly after SCIT (before: 12.79 ± 4.250, after: 6.11 ± 3.828, P = 0.000 Conclusions The serum inhibitory activity for IgE increased significantly after SCIT, however, there was no correlation between it and clinical improvements by statistics analysis. So whether the serum inhibitory activity for IgE can act as biomarker of efficacy for SCIT or not needs to be studied further.

Background The Allergy Patient Identification for Immunotherapy (AsPIRe) program was a parallel physician and patient survey. The objectives were to examine physician and patient perceptions of seasonal allergy symptoms and their impact on patients, and to examine patient and physician attitudes to allergen immunotherapy (AIT) for seasonal allergies. AsPIRe was led by a steering committee and received research ethics board clearance from Queen’s University. Methods Allergists (17) from across Canada enrolled in the AsPIRe program and completed an on-line survey to collect demographic information and baseline perceptions. Allergists then recruited patients and completed paper-based parallel physician and patient questionnaires. Patients received an AIT informational booklet with their questionnaire. Patients who were AIT-naïve with no contraindication to AIT and 12 years of age and older met the inclusion criteria. Results The survey was in field from February 2018 to June 2018. A total of 141 allergist surveys and 136 patient surveys were completed. Mean age of patients was 30 years old (range 12–70). Fifty-seven percent of patients reported prior knowledge of AIT. Seventy-two percent of patients reported seasonal allergies of longer than 5 years duration and in this subset of patients, 46% were at their first allergist visit. Seventy-three percent of all patients indicated they would be likely or very likely to try sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), if recommended by their allergist compared to 36% for subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT). Conversely, 10% of patients reported they would be unlikely or very unlikely to try SLIT compared to 46% of patients who would be unlikely or very unlikely to try SCIT if recommended by their allergist. Conclusions In this particular study cohort, there was a gap in perception between allergists and their patients as to the impact of allergy symptoms on daily life. Patients reported being more frequently impacted vs. their physician’s assessment. When asked about preference for AIT options, Canadian patients reported they were more likely to follow their allergists’ recommendation for initiation of SLIT compared to SCIT.

Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is effective for allergic rhinitis and conjunctivitis, asthma, and insect venom hypersensitivity. The risk of severe allergic reactions induced by SCIT remains low, and mild systemic reactions have recently shown a tendency to decline. However, near-fatal and fatal anaphylactic reactions may occur. Clinicians administering allergen-specific immunotherapy should receive specialized training and be aware of risk factors and preventive measures to avoid severe allergic reactions induced by SCIT.

BACKGROUND: Bronchial asthma (BA) is characterized by chronic airway inflammation. Many studies have shown a significant overlap between BA and allergic rhinitis (AR). Specific allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is effective for the treatment of BA and AR. Only limited studies have evaluated the role of immunological parameters to assess the response in patients on AIT. Hence, this study was done to assess the role of interleukin-4 (IL-4), IL-5, and IL-6 in the follow-up of patients of BA and AR on AIT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was conducted on diagnosed cases of BA, AR, and BA with AR attending the outpatient department who were started on subcutaneous immunotherapy as per the standard Indian guidelines. Blood samples were collected at the beginning of the treatment and every 3 months thereafter for a period of 51 months, and serum IL-4, IL-5, and IL-6 levels were measured. RESULTS: In this study, 170 patients were enrolled over a period of 51 months. Out of 170, 80 (47.1%) patients had completed 1 year of treatment with AIT at the end of 51 months of follow-up. Significant reduction was observed in IL-4, IL-5, and IL-6 levels during the treatment with AIT over a period of 12 months. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests a possible role of IL-4, IL-5, and IL-6 in the follow-up of BA and AR patients; however, further studies are needed in this area.

Objective: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) employs incremental amounts of an antigen to selected patients to promote clinical tolerance towards the offending allergen. The adverse reactions to AIT include local side effects such as induration in the field of application, itching and hyperemia, or systemic side effects such as shortness of breath, urticaria, hypotension, abdominal pain, vomiting and anaphylaxis. It is important that patients receiving AIT and their parents know about possible adverse reactions and can intervene when necessary. We aimed to assess the knowledge and attitudes towards anaphylaxis of the caregivers/parents of allergic children who receive subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT). Materials and Methods: We gathered information using a structured questionnaire on the subject demographics and clinical information as regards the type of allergies and symptoms; and employed specific questions to capture information on the knowledge and attitudes of the patients’ parents about the symptoms and management strategies of anaphylaxis and the use of an epinephrine autoinjector. All pediatric allergy patients’ parents who were received SCIT between 2016 and 2019 at the Yeditepe University Hospital’s pediatric allergy clinic were included in the study. Results: We studied 101 participants who completed the questionnaire. The median age of the patients receiving SCIT was 12.0 (minmax, 5.0-17.0) years, and 52.5% of the study group were boys. Only less than half of the subjects had some idea about anaphylaxis. Seventy-eight percent had no idea that food might lead to anaphylaxis. Seventy percent of the participants did not expect SCIT to cause anaphylaxis; 6% had no idea about this anaphylaxis at all. Most of the parents did not know how to react to anaphylaxis and the majority had no clue about the epinephrine autoinjector. Conclusion: We identified important knowledge gaps among the parents of children receiving SCIT about anaphylaxis or its management. We emphasize the necessity of educating the parents of children receiving SCIT on anaphylaxis as well as the application of epinephrine autoinjectors when indicated.

Background: the heterogeneity and lack of validation of existing severity scores for food allergic reactions limit standardization of case management and research advances. We aimed to develop and validate a severity score for food allergic reactions. Methods: following a multidisciplinary experts consensus, it was decided to develop a food allergy severity score (FASS) with ordinal (oFASS) and numerical (nFASS) formats. oFASS with 3 and 5 grades were generated through expert consensus, and nFASS by mathematical modeling. Evaluation was performed in the EuroPrevall outpatient clinic cohort (8232 food reactions) by logistic regression with request of emergency care and medications used as outcomes. Discrimination, classification, and calibration were calculated. Bootstrapping internal validation was followed by external validation (logistic regression) in 5 cohorts (3622 food reactions). Correlation of nFASS with the severity classification done by expert allergy clinicians by Best-Worst Scaling of 32 food reactions was calculated. Results: oFASS and nFASS map consistently, with nFASS having greater granularity. With the outcomes emergency care, adrenaline and critical medical treatment, oFASS and nFASS had a good discrimination (receiver operating characteristic area under the curve [ROC-AUC]>0.80), classification (sensitivity 0.87–0.92, specificity 0.73–0.78), and calibration. Bootstrapping over ROC-AUC showed negligible biases (1.0 × 10 −6–1.23 × 10 −3). In external validation, nFASS performed best with higher ROC-AUC. nFASS was strongly correlated (R 0.89) to best-worst scoring of 334 expert clinicians. Conclusion: FASS is a validated and reliable method to measure severity of food allergic reactions. The ordinal and numerical versions that map onto each other are suitable for use by different stakeholders in different settings.