Der p 1 IgE measurement for distinguishing between sensitization and allergy

[Pitfalls in the diagnosis of house dust mite allergy]

House dust mite (HDM) is the most significant indoor allergen, responsible for not only many cases of rhinoconjunctivitis but also for many cases of bronchial asthma, rendering it of considerable socioeconomic relevance. Besides symptomatic treatment and avoidance measures, allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is crucial, as the only causal, disease-modifying therapeutic approach. However, high diagnostic certainty is essential for initiating AIT. The challenge in making a correct diagnosis lies in interpreting the demonstrated HDM sensitization regarding its clinical relevance (clinically silent sensitization vs. allergy). While the risk of allergy increases with the level of IgE titers against HDM extract, Der p 1, or Der p 2, as well as with the breadth of the molecular sensitization profile against HDM components (Der p 1, Der p 2, Der p 23), no threshold can be defined for the presence of allergy, nor can sensitization to a specific component be confidently considered allergy inducing. It should be noted that at least in Southern Bavaria, the prevalence of Der p 23 sensitization is too low to be considered a major allergen, and Der p 23 is not able to molecularly differentiate all HDM sensitizations when added to the two major allergens Der p 1 and Der p 2. Evidently, HDM possesses a diverse profile of allergens, with some relevant ones possibly yet to be described. Unfortunately, patient history does not provide a sufficient assessment of the clinical relevance of a demonstrated HDM sensitization, necessitating allergen provocation testing before initiating AIT with HDM, despite the relatively large effort involved.

How reliable is anamnestic data in predicting the clinical relevance of house dust mite sensitization?

PURPOSE

For perennial inhalant allergens such as house dust mite (HDM), the German guideline on allergen-specific immunotherapy explicitly recommends provocation testing. This procedure is time-consuming, expensive, and potentially dangerous for the patient. Recently it has been discussed whether provocation tests are really necessary for diagnosing allergy to Dermatophagoides species. Thus, our study aimed to analyze the concordance between nasal provocation tests with Dermatophagoides species and anamnestic data.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the concordance between patients' histories including self-reported symptom scores and the results of provocation testing in 471 individuals with proven sensitization to Dermatophagoides species.

RESULTS

248 patients had a positive nasal provocation test (NPT) result to Dermatophagoides species and 223 individuals a negative NPT result. Patients allergic to HSM suffered significantly more often from atopic dermatitis (14% vs. 7%, p = 0.046) and more from asthma (20% vs. 19%, p = 0.851). Moreover, individuals with clinically silent sensitization complained less about nasal secretion (37% vs. 45%, p = 0.244) but significantly more about nasal dryness (46% vs. 34%, p = 0.046) whereas rates of nasal airway obstruction, ocular complaints and sleep quality were comparable in both groups. Allergic patients reported more often perennial (34% vs. 30%, p = 0.374) and location-dependent (39% vs. 31%, p = 0.090) symptoms. However, the discrepant prevalence of atopic dermatitis was the only statistically significant difference between both groups.

CONCLUSION

Despite slight differences between both patient groups, clinical data are not sufficient to distinguish between silent sensitization and clinically relevant allergic rhinitis to HDM. Therefore, nasal provocation testing remains the gold standard for assessing clinical relevance in patients sensitized to Dermatophagoides species.

The Role of Der p 23 Sensitization: An Analysis of 474 Patients Sensitized to Mite

INTRODUCTION

House dust mite contains several allergen components and causes perennial allergy. Lately, a new major allergen, Der p 23, was described with relatively high sensitization rates in different European Countries. In addition, Der p 23 is supposed to cause asthmatic disease.

OBJECTIVE

We would like to question the prevalence and clinical impact of specific immunoglobulin E to Der p 23 in a large patient sample in southern Bavaria, Germany.

METHODS

474 patients from southern Bavaria, who visited the allergy department within the Department of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology of a university hospital, with sensitization to Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus were retrospectively compared regarding their sensitization profile to Der p 1, Der p 2, and Der p 23 and their clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

Among D. pteronyssinus-sensitized patients, the overall sensitization rate to Der p 23 was 42% in southern Bavaria. Most likely, patients were simultaneously sensitized to Der p 1, Der p 2, and Der p 23. Der p 23-sensitized patients reported more frequently asthma and showed higher prevalence of poly-sensitization towards 3 additional allergen groups and higher prevalence of double-sensitization to Der p 1 and Der p 2 compared to patients with missing sensitization to Der p 23. Considering the results of allergen provocation tests, neither IgE sensitization against Der p 23 nor levels of specific immunoglobulin E to Der p 23 allow a clear prediction of the clinical relevance of the sensitization.

CONCLUSION

With a sensitization rate of 42%, Der p 23 closely misses the criterion of a major allergen in our southern Bavarian patient collective. A higher prevalence of polysensitization and self-reported asthma was the only clinical feature found in Der p 23-sensitized patients.

Component resolved analysis of ash pollen allergy in Bavaria

Background

Sensitization to ash pollen is underestimated in various regions. The prevalence in Germany is about 10%. However, allergy to ash pollen is widely overlooked by allergists, since the pollination period of ash and birch in central Europe closely overlap and rhinoconjunctival symptoms during April/May are often assigned to birch pollen. Component resolved analysis of the different ash allergens is not routinely available. Therefore, we would like to question the usefulness of component resolved diagnostic via olive components, as ash and olive are both part of the Oleaceae family.

Methods

113 patients with nasal provocation and skin prick test to ash were retrospectively compared regarding their specific immunoglobulin E antibody profiles with response to native ash extract, rOle e 1, nOle e 7 and rOle e 9.

Results

In nasal provocation testing 58% of 113 patients sensitized to ash were allergic, 42% were only sensitized without showing symptoms. Skin prick testing and serology against native ash extract detected most patients sensitized to ash pollen, whereas rOle e 1 was less sensitive. However, the value of measurements of skin prick test, serology to native ash extract and rOle e 1 did not allow a differentiation between an allergy and clinically silent sensitization. Specific antibodies to nOle e 7 and rOle e 9 were only seen in individual patients and were all positive for native ash extract and rOle e 1.

Conclusion

Skin prick testing and serology to native extract of ash pollen are the most reliable tools to diagnose a sensitization to ash pollen for patients living in Germany. Component resolved diagnostic to the major allergen rOle e 1 as representative of the Oleaceae family is possible but was less sensitive. Diagnostic of nOle e 7 and rOle e 9 did not show any additional benefit. Regarding differentiation between allergy and clinically silent sensitization to ash pollen, provocation is the leading diagnostic tool. Concluding, in routine clinical practice the standard methods-skin prick test, serology to native ash extract and provocation testing-remain crucial in the diagnosis and differentiation of ash sensitization and allergy.

Sensitization to dust mite defines different phenotypes of asthma: A multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Indoor allergens are risk factors for asthma: Thus, the characterization of indoor air quality is important for studying environment-health relationships in children. In particular, Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus is the dominant allergen for asthma. We cross-sectionally investigated the relationships among respiratory symptoms and function, airway inflammation, allergen sensitization, and indoor allergen concentration.

METHODS

One hundred and thirty-two children aging 10-14 years and living in a Southern Mediterranean area were evaluated by parental questionnaires. Spirometry, exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), skin prick tests, total, and specific serum IgE analyses were performed along with the evaluation of home dust samples for the content in Der p 1 allergen. Three clusters were created on the basis of the presence/absence of wheeze in the last 12 months (Wh12m) and Der p 1-specific IgE level.

RESULTS

Cluster 1 (Wh12m+/high Der p 1 IgE) presented higher FeNO and poorer pulmonary function (lower FEV₁ and FEF_25%-75% ), while its symptom score was not different from Cluster 2 (Wh12m+/low Der p 1 IgE). Cluster 3 (Wh12m-/low IgE) showed the lowest FeNO values and pulmonary function similar to Cluster 2. Within Cluster 1, both Der p 1-specific IgE and FeNO were positively correlated with dust Der p 1.

CONCLUSIONS

Similar asthma phenotypes may occur in children despite differences in their atopic state. In atopic children, sensitizing allergens in the indoor environment may increase airway inflammation worsening pulmonary function. Moreover, environmental exposures may contribute to the development of asthma-like symptoms also in the absence of atopic sensitization, thus contributing to asthma overdiagnosis.

Management of the polyallergic patient with allergy immunotherapy: a practice-based approach

Background

The great majority (60–80 %) of patients consulting specialist physicians for allergic respiratory disease are polysensitized and thus may be potentially clinically polyallergic. However, management approaches to allergen immunotherapy (AIT) in polysensitized and polyallergic patients are not standardized.

Methods

An international group of clinicians with in-depth expertise in AIT product development, clinical trials and clinical practice met to generate up-to-date, unambiguous, pragmatic guidance on AIT in polysensitized and polyallergic patients. The guidance was developed after reviewing (1) the current stance of regulatory bodies and learned societies, (2) the literature data on single- and multi-AIT and (3) the members’ confirmed clinical experience with polysensitized patients.

Results

AIT is safe and effective in polysensitized and polyallergic patients, and should always be based on the identification of one or more clinically relevant allergens (based on the type and severity of symptoms, the duration of induced symptoms, the impact on quality of life and how difficult an allergen is to avoid). Single-AIT is recommended in polyallergic patients in whom one of the relevant allergens is nevertheless clearly responsible for the most intense and/or bothersome symptoms. Parallel 2-allergen immunotherapy or mixed 2-allergen immunotherapy is indicated in polyallergic patients in whom two causal relevant allergens have a marked clinical and QoL impact. In parallel 2-allergen immunotherapy (whether subcutaneous or sublingual), high-quality, standardized, single-allergen formulations must be administered with an interval of 30 min. Mixing of allergen extracts may be considered, as long as (1) the mixture is technically feasible, (2) the mixture is allowed from a regulatory standpoint, (3) the allergen doses are reduced in proportion to the number of components but are still at concentrations with demonstrated efficacy.

Conclusions

Physicians can prescribe AIT (preferably with high-quality, standardized, single-allergen formulations) with confidence in polysensitized and polyallergic patients by focusing on clinical/QoL relevance and safety.