Oral exposure to Mal d 1 affects the immune response in patients with birch pollen allergy

Identification of allergenomic signatures in allergic and well-tolerated apple genotypes using LC-MS/MS

The apple fruit (Malus domestica L. Borkh) is one of the most popular fruits worldwide. Beyond their beneficial properties, apples contain proteins that trigger allergic reactions in susceptible consumers. Mal d1 to d4 are allergens present in a variety of different isoforms in apples. In this study, we used proteomics to quantify all four Mal d proteins in 52 apple genotypes with varying allergenic potentials. A total of 195, 17, 14, and 18 peptides were found to be related to Mal d1, d2, d3, and d4 proteins, respectively of which 25 different Mal d proteins could be unambiguously identified. The allergenic potential of the Mal d isoforms was characterized by comparing the isoform abundance with the allergenic score of genotypes from oral challenge tests. The detected Mal d peptides presumably have different IgE binding properties and could be used as potential molecular markers to discriminate between hypoallergenic and hyperallergenic cultivars.

Isotype-specific binding patterns of serum antibodies to multiple conformational epitopes of Bet v 1

BACKGROUND

Birch pollen is an important elicitor of respiratory allergy. The major allergen, Bet v 1, binds IgE exclusively via conformational epitopes.

OBJECTIVE

To identify Bet v 1-specific epitope repertoires of IgE and IgG from birch pollen-allergic and non-allergic subjects.

METHODS

Chimeric proteins were created by grafting individual epitope-sized, contiguous surface patches of Bet v 1 onto a non-allergenic structural homologue and expressed in Escherichia coli. Binding of IgE, IgG1 and IgG4 from sera of 30 birch pollen-allergic and 11 non-allergic subjects to Bet v 1, 13 chimeric proteins and four bacterial Bet v 1 homologues were measured by ELISA. The proportion of epitope-specific in total Bet v 1-specific IgE and the cross-reactivity of Bet v 1-specific IgE with bacterial homologues were determined by competitive ELISA.

RESULTS

Thirteen soluble, correctly folded chimeric proteins were produced. IgE from 27/30 birch pollen-allergic patients bound to 1-12 chimeric proteins (median 4.0) with patient-specific patterns. Three chimeras binding IgE from the majority of sera were identified, whose pgrafted patches overlapped with previously published epitopes. Patterns of IgG1 and IgG4 binding to the chimeric proteins did not correspond to the binding patterns of IgE. Sera of 19/30 birch pollen-allergic patients contained low amounts of IgE to bacterial homologues. Bacterial proteins were able to partially inhibit IgE binding to Bet v 1.

CONCLUSION

Epitopes recognized by Bet v 1-specific antibodies from birch pollen-allergic patients are specific to each patient and differ between IgE, IgG1 and IgG4.

When the Frequencies of Sensitization and Elicitation of Allergic Reaction Do Not Correlate-The Case of Apple Gibberellin-Regulated Protein Tested in an Italian Population

Background: The literature reports describing allergic symptoms against apples in the patients sensitized to the gibberellin-regulated proteins (GRPs) suggested the presence of an allergenic GRP in this fruit. Objective: This study aimed to assess the presence of a GRP protein in apples and investigate its allergenicity. Methods: The protein was isolated and identified by the classical biochemical methods. The bioinformatics tools were used for similar searches and molecular modeling. The immunological features were investigated using the multiplex FABER test. Clinical data were collected by the allergy specialists. Results: A GRP was detected in the apple peel and pulp and it was named applemaclein. This protein displays 94% of sequence identity with peamaclein, Pru p 7, representing the prototype of this allergen family. The applemaclein molecular model shows a very irregular surface with grooves/clefts that may potentially accommodate small molecular ligands. In a population of 4,721 patients in Italy, 187 (4.0%) were sensitized to any allergenic GPR. Of those, 115 (61.5%), 61 (32.6%), 30 (16.0%), and 99 (52.9%) had immunoglobulin E (IgE) to apple, peach, pomegranate, and cypress GRP, respectively. However, in a cohort of the patients in Italy, most individuals IgE positive to the apple GRP did not report allergic reactions against this fruit. Conclusion: Compared with the peach Pru p 7, applemaclein shows some different structural features and higher sensitization frequency, which is often not associated with allergic reactions against apple. Further studies are needed to understand a possible correlation between the applemaclein structural properties, the interaction with still unknown molecules, and immunological behavior.

Update on pollen-food allergy syndrome

INTRODUCTION

Allergies affect 20-30% of the population and respiratory allergies are mostly due to pollen grains from anemophilous plants. One to 5% of people suffer from food allergies and clinicians report increasing numbers of pollen-food allergy syndrome (PFAS), such that the symptoms have broadened from respiratory to gastrointestinal, and even to anaphylactic shock in the presence of cofactors. Thirty to 60% of food allergies are associated with pollen allergy while the percentage of pollen allergies associated to food allergy varies according to local environment and dietary habits.

AREAS COVERED

Articles published in peer-reviewed journals, covered by PubMed databank, clinical data are discussed including symptoms, diagnosis, and management. A chapter emphasizes the role of six well-known allergen families involved in PFAS: PR10 proteins, profilins, lipid transfer proteins, thaumatin-like proteins, isoflavone reductases, and β-1,3 glucanases. The relevance in PFAS of three supplementary allergen families is presented: oleosins, polygalacturonases, and gibberellin-regulated proteins. To support the discussion a few original relevant results were added.

EXPERT OPINION

Both allergenic sources, pollen and food, are submitted to the same stressful environmental changes resulting in an increase of pathogenesis-related proteins in which numerous allergens are found. This might be responsible for the potential increase of PFAS.

[What is the role of allergen immunotherapy in IgE-mediated food allergy?]

In food allergy, allergen avoidance and emergency treatment are still therapeutic hallmarks but, recently, allergen immunotherapy (AIT), with different application routes, has gained more attention. In primary food allergy, oral immunotherapy has been frequently used in clinical trials. This year, an oral immunotherapy preparation for treatment of peanut allergy was licensed in Europe. In secondary food allergy, sublingual and subcutaneous extracts have been used in clinical trials, mostly with cross-reactive pollen allergens. As there is no AIT preparation licensed for this indication, therapy should only be started when there also is a need for treating associated respiratory symptoms.

Development of a sensitive and stable chemiluminescent immunoassay for detection of birch pollen allergic specific IgE based on recombinant Bet v1 protein

Background Quantitative detection of allergens is of great significance for clarifying the cause, treatment, and prevention of allergy disease. Birch pollen is one of the most common inhalational allergens and Bet v1 is the major component allergen of birch allergen. This study aims to develop a stable and sensitive chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) for the detection of birch pollen allergic specific IgE (sIgE) based on recombinant Bet v1 (rBet v1) protein. Methods rBet v1 protein was expressed in Escherichia coli and purified. Then rBet v1 was applied to detect sIgE in human serum. The performance of the established CLIA was evaluated and compared with Phadia rBet v1 fluorescence enzyme immunoassay (FEIA) system. Results The developed CLIA for sIgE to rBet v1 detection shows excellent performance. The assay showed a linear range from 0.1 to 100 IU/mL, with a low detection limit of 0.06 IU/mL. A total of 164 samples were evaluated by CLIA and compared with the results of FEIA. The positive, negative, and total coincidence rate was 90.6% (87/96), 91.2% (62/68), and 90.9% (149/164), respectively. The r-value of Spearman's rank correlation analysis was 0.935 (P < 0.001). The use of high levels of bilirubin (50 mg/dL), hemoglobin (400 mg/dL) and lipid (2000 mg/dL) didn't interfere with the results. Conclusions The proposed CLIA exhibits excellent performance for the detection of rBet v1 specific IgE. It can be a reliable tool for the early diagnosis of hypersensitivity.

Oral birch pollen immunotherapy with apples: Results of a phase II clinical pilot study

BACKGROUND

Seventy percent of patients suffering from birch pollen allergy (BPA) develop a pollen-related food allergy (prFA), especially to apples, due to a clinically relevant cross-reactivity between the major allergen in birch Bet v 1 and Mal d 1 in apples. Therefore allergen-specific immunotherapy with fresh apples (AITA) could be a promising natural treatment of both BPA and prFA.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical efficacy of immunotherapy by daily apple consumption for patients with BPA and prFA.

METHODS

A daily defined increasing amount of selected cultivars (Red Moon®, Pink Lady®, Topaz, Golden Delicious) was continuously consumed by 16 patients (12 female; median age; 50; range, 23-68 years), leading to increased intake of allergen over a period of at least 8 months. Specific IgE and IgG₄ to Bet v 1 and Mal d 1, conjunctival and oral provocation tests, skin reactivity, and the average daily rhinoconjunctivitis combined symptom and medication score (CSMS) were measured during the peak birch pollen season.

RESULTS

After 8 months of therapy, patients showed increased tolerance to apples (p < .001) and a decreased skin reactivity to apples. Oral allergy syndrome to other birch prFA than apple also decreased (p < .05). Moreover, daily rhinoconjunctivitis CSMS declined by 34% (p < .001), as did conjunctival reactivity to birch pollen extract by 27% (p < .01), while specific IgG₄ to Mal d 1 and Bet v 1 increased (p < .01).

Inverse relation between structural flexibility and IgE reactivity of Cor a 1 hazelnut allergens

A major proportion of allergic reactions to hazelnuts (Corylus avellana) are caused by immunologic cross-reactivity of IgE antibodies to pathogenesis-related class 10 (PR-10) proteins. Intriguingly, the four known isoforms of the hazelnut PR-10 allergen Cor a 1, denoted as Cor a 1.0401-Cor a 1.0404, share sequence identities exceeding 97% but possess different immunologic properties. In this work we describe the NMR solution structures of these proteins and provide an in-depth study of their biophysical properties. Despite sharing highly similar three-dimensional structures, the four isoforms exhibit remarkable differences regarding structural flexibility, hydrogen bonding and thermal stability. Our experimental data reveal an inverse relation between structural flexibility and IgE-binding in ELISA experiments, with the most flexible isoform having the lowest IgE-binding potential, while the isoform with the most rigid backbone scaffold displays the highest immunologic reactivity. These results point towards a significant entropic contribution to the process of antibody binding.

The Role of the Environment in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, immune-mediated inflammatory disease with incompletely understood pathogenesis. Though disease manifestations were initially ascribed to a delayed reaction to food allergens, emerging evidence suggests that modifiable host factors and environmental allergen exposure may also play critical roles in the pathogenesis and ongoing manifestations of EoE. As with other atopic diseases, lack of early-life exposure to microbial pathogens leads to an immune tolerance defect and reprograms the commensal gut microflora toward a type 2 T helper (Th2) phenotype; the esophageal microbiota, a rich environment consisting of diverse bacterial species, is greatly altered by inflammation. Although multiple early life microbiome-altering factors are associated with EoE development, no causative, direct relationships have been identified. Interestingly, large, cross-sectional analyses of several populations identify an inverse relationship between Helicobacter pylori presence and EoE, likely via virulence factors that downregulate Th2 inflammation, though causality has not been proven. In regard to environmental allergens, some studies support seasonal variation in EoE diagnosis and flares, and EoE can be generated after a large, identifiable aeroallergen exposure. Examples include mouse models of intranasal Aspergillus dosing and following initiation of oral immunotherapy to foods or environmental allergens. Conversely, treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis may improve EoE symptoms, though data is limited to case reports and small series. Unfortunately, biologic therapies for atopic conditions have failed to improve EoE symptoms despite improvement in esophageal eosinophil count, though dupilumab shows promise in ongoing studies. Overall, this chapter shows that EoE pathogenesis is likely multifactorial, and the environment is a key component in our understanding of EoE.

The Role of the Environment in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, immune-mediated inflammatory disease with incompletely understood pathogenesis. Though disease manifestations were initially ascribed to a delayed reaction to food allergens, emerging evidence suggests that modifiable host factors and environmental allergen exposure may also play critical roles in the pathogenesis and ongoing manifestations of EoE. As with other atopic diseases, lack of early-life exposure to microbial pathogens leads to an immune tolerance defect and reprograms the commensal gut microflora toward a type 2 T helper (Th2) phenotype; the esophageal microbiota, a rich environment consisting of diverse bacterial species, is greatly altered by inflammation. Although multiple early life microbiome-altering factors are associated with EoE development, no causative, direct relationships have been identified. Interestingly, large, cross-sectional analyses of several populations identify an inverse relationship between Helicobacter pylori presence and EoE, likely via virulence factors that downregulate Th2 inflammation, though causality has not been proven. In regard to environmental allergens, some studies support seasonal variation in EoE diagnosis and flares, and EoE can be generated after a large, identifiable aeroallergen exposure. Examples include mouse models of intranasal Aspergillus dosing and following initiation of oral immunotherapy to foods or environmental allergens. Conversely, treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis may improve EoE symptoms, though data is limited to case reports and small series. Unfortunately, biologic therapies for atopic conditions have failed to improve EoE symptoms despite improvement in esophageal eosinophil count, though dupilumab shows promise in ongoing studies. Overall, this chapter shows that EoE pathogenesis is likely multifactorial, and the environment is a key component in our understanding of EoE.

The Effect of Birch Pollen Immunotherapy on Apple and rMal d 1 Challenges in Adults with Apple Allergy

Background: A proportion of patients allergic to birch pollen are also allergic to pit fruit. The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of immunotherapy with birch pollen on birch-pollen-related apple allergy. Method: Patients with birch pollen immunotherapy underwent a skin-prick test with birch pollen, apple and rMal d 1, global assessments and nasal challenges with birch pollen, open food challenge with apple and a double-blind, placebo-controlled test with rMal d 1 at the start of and during the immunotherapy. Measurements of specific IgE in response to Bet v 1 and rMal d 1 and IgG4 in response to Bet v 1 and rMal d 1 took place. Results: Six of eight patients demonstrated an improvement of nasal challenge test results and all patients improved on global assessment during the immunotherapy. The median oral dose of apple required to elicit a reaction increased but was not statistically significant. The patients showed a decrease in skin-prick test values in response to birch pollen (1.05 to 0.36), apple (0.78 to 0.25) and rMal d 1 (0.51 to 0.10) with p-values of 0.04, 0.03 and 0.06, respectively and a decrease of specific IgE in response to Bet v 1 (10.66 kU/L to 5.19 kU/L) and rMal d 1 (0.99 to 0.61 kU/L) with p-values of 0.01 and 0.05, respectively. Only the median specific IgG4 value to Bet v 1 increased from 0.05 to 1.85 mg/L (p-value of 0.02) and not to IgG4 rMal d 1 (0.07 to 0.08 kU/L). Conclusion: The beneficial effects of immunotherapy for birch pollen were accompanied by a limited effect on apple allergy.

Allergen-specific immunotherapy with apples: selected cultivars could be a promising tool for birch pollen allergy

Background

Most birch pollen‐allergic patients develop allergic cross‐reactions to the major allergen found in apples Mal d1, known as pollen‐related food allergy (prFA). This is due to a strong clinically relevant homology between the major allergen in birch Bet v 1 and Mal d 1. Daily apple consumption induces oral tolerance in prFA, but its effect on the inhalational allergy has not been investigated.

Objectives

As continuous apple consumption might also mitigate the inhalational allergy, this study aimed to uncover apple cultivars suitable for treatment of birch pollen rhinoconjunctivitis and apple allergy in a controlled and established dosage.

Methods

Patients (n = 52) with birch pollen allergy and prFA to apples were subjected to a prick‐to‐prick test (SPT) with 23 cultivars (red‐fleshed, old traditional and new commercial). By SPT, the apple parts flesh, peel equatorial and peel apical near the stalk were compared for their reactivity. One apple cultivar of each allergenicity class (low, middle and high) was subsequently tested in an oral provocation test (OPT).

Results

According to the SPTs, we provide a ranking of all 23 cultivars. Red‐fleshed apples displayed the lowest reactivity, followed by old and new cultivars. Four cultivars showed disagreement from their allergenicity class: Santana and Pink Lady®, new cultivars that provoked only low to moderate. In contrast, White Rosemary and Goldparmäne, two old cultivars, induced strong reactions. Skin reactivity increased from flesh to peel to stalk, and SPT results could predict the severity of prFA of each allergenicity class.

Conclusions

Herein, we propose a treatment protocol for allergen immunotherapy to birch pollen and prFA with daily apple consumption. Red‐fleshed, old and the new cultivars Santana and Pink Lady® provoke less allergic reactions and are suitable for initial induction. After a controlled and well‐tolerated increase of intake, also moderate and finally high allergenic apple cultivars should be integrated into treatment of birch pollen allergenic patients.

Linked Commentary: K.‐C. Bergmann. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2020; 34: 1130–1130. https://doi.org/10.1111/jdv.16556.

Sublingual Immunotherapy for Other Indications: Venom Large Local, Latex, Atopic Dermatitis, and Food

There is some evidence to support the use of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in food allergy, although its role is unclear. One randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial supports the safe and efficacious use of dust mite SLIT in children with mild to moderate atopic dermatitis, but these data have not been confirmed. Although there are several randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials to support the use of SLIT-LATEX, this product is not available in the United States and extrapolation of these effects to latex extracts is unsubstantiated. There is also insufficient evidence to support the use of SLIT for venom hypersensitivity at this time.

Pollen-Food Allergy Syndrome: A not so Rare Disease in Childhood

Seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (SAR) affects millions of people worldwide, particularly in childhood and adolescence. Pollen food allergy syndrome (PFAS) is a common adverse reaction occurring few minutes after the consumption of vegetable foods in patients with pollen-induced SAR. PFAS has rarely been investigated in the pediatric population, as it has been mainly examined as an adult disease. Recent studies suggested that PFAS might be more frequent in childhood than previously recognized. The present review aims to give an overview of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, management and prognosis of PFAS in children with SAR-induced by pollens.

Immunoglobulin E-Mediated Autoimmunity

The study of autoimmunity mediated by immunoglobulin E (IgE) autoantibodies, which may be termed autoallergy, is in its infancy. It is now recognized that systemic lupus erythematosus, bullous pemphigoid (BP), and chronic urticaria, both spontaneous and inducible, are most likely to be mediated, at least in part, by IgE autoantibodies. The situation in other conditions, such as autoimmune uveitis, rheumatoid arthritis, hyperthyroid Graves’ disease, autoimmune pancreatitis, and even asthma, is far less clear but evidence for autoallergy is accumulating. To be certain of an autoallergic mechanism, it is necessary to identify both IgE autoantibodies and their targets as has been done with the transmembrane protein BP180 and the intracellular protein BP230 in BP and IL-24 in chronic spontaneous urticaria. Also, IgE-targeted therapies, such as anti-IgE, must have been shown to be of benefit to patients as has been done with both of these conditions. This comprehensive review of the literature on IgE-mediated autoallergy focuses on three related questions. What do we know about the prevalence of IgE autoantibodies and their targets in different diseases? What do we know about the relevance of IgE autoantibodies in different diseases? What do we know about the cellular and molecular effects of IgE autoantibodies? In addition to providing answers to these questions, based on a broad review of the literature, we outline the current gaps of knowledge in our understanding of IgE autoantibodies and describe approaches to address them.

Allergen immunotherapy for birch-apple syndrome: what do we know?

Apple allergy is common in patients allergic to birch pollen, and this is defined as ‘birch-apple syndrome’. Allergens responsible for cross-reactivity belong to the pathogenesis-related-10 family, and high homology in the amino acid sequences of the major allergens Bet v 1 from birch and Mal d 1 from apple has been demonstrated. Here we review the literature on the treatment of birch-apple syndrome by allergen immunotherapy. The only allergen immunotherapy method available thus far is based on the administration of birch-pollen extracts, through the subcutaneous or sublingual route, to induce tolerance to Bet v1 and to the homologous allergen Mal d 1. However, the studies performed thus far show modest efficacy, and thus other methods of immunotherapy should be investigated.

Efficacy and safety of 4 months of sublingual immunotherapy with recombinant Mal d 1 and Bet v 1 in patients with birch pollen-related apple allergy

BACKGROUND

Birch pollen-related apple allergy is among the most prevalent food allergies in adolescent/adult subjects and mainly results from sensitization to the major birch pollen allergen Bet v 1 and subsequent cross-reaction with the apple protein Mal d 1. However, specific immunotherapy with birch pollen has inconsistent effects on apple allergy.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to compare the safety and efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) with 2 formulations containing either rMal d 1 or rBet v 1 on birch pollen-related apple allergy.

METHODS

Sixty participants with birch pollen-related apple allergy were randomized to daily sublingual application of placebo (n = 20) or 25 μg of rMal d 1 (n = 20) or rBet v 1 (n = 20) for 16 weeks. Adverse events were regularly recorded. Sublingual challenges with standardized doses of rMal d 1, skin prick tests with recombinant allergens, and measurements of allergen-specific IgE and IgG₄ antibodies were performed before and after treatment.

RESULTS

Both formulations caused comparable, mainly local adverse events. No systemic reactions occurred. Compared with the placebo and rBet v 1-treated groups, SLIT with rMal d 1 reduced rMal d 1-induced oral symptoms (P = .001 and P = .038) accompanied by longitudinally reduced rMal d 1-specific cutaneous reactions (P = .022) and enhanced IgG₄/IgE ratios (P = .012). SLIT with rBet v 1 neither improved the clinical reactivity to rMal d 1 nor enhanced rMal d 1-specific IgG₄/IgE ratios. Participants receiving placebo showed no allergen-specific changes.

CONCLUSION

Sublingual treatment with a recombinant food allergen was safe and clinically effective, as determined by using standardized challenges. We present a promising approach for the effective treatment of birch pollen-related apple allergy.

The quantity and quality of α-gal-specific antibodies differ in individuals with and without delayed red meat allergy

Background

IgG to galactose‐α‐1,3‐galactose (α‐gal) are highly abundant natural antibodies (Ab) in humans. α‐Gal‐specific IgE Ab cause a special form of meat allergy characterized by severe systemic reactions 3–7 h after consumption of red meat. We investigated 20 patients who experienced such reactions and characterized their α‐gal‐specific IgE and IgG responses in more detail.

Methods

α‐Gal‐specific IgE was determined by ImmunoCAP. IgE reactivity to meat extract and bovine gamma globulin (BGG) was assessed by immunoblotting and ELISA, respectively. In some experiments, sera were pre‐incubated with α‐gal or protein G to deplete IgG Ab. α‐Gal‐specific IgG_1–4 Ab in individuals with and without meat allergy were assessed by ELISA.

Results

In immunoblots, BGG was the most frequently recognized meat protein. Binding of IgE and IgG to BGG was confirmed by ELISA and completely abolished after pre‐incubation with α‐gal. Neither the depletion of autologous α‐gal‐specific IgG Ab nor the addition of α‐gal‐specific IgG Ab from nonallergic individuals changed the IgE recognition of BGG of meat‐allergic patients. Meat‐allergic patients showed significantly higher α‐gal‐specific IgG1 and IgG3 Ab than nonallergic individuals, whereas the latter showed significantly higher levels of α‐gal‐specific IgG4 Ab.

Conclusion

Patients with delayed meat allergy display IgE and IgG Ab that selectively recognize the α‐gal epitope on BGG. Their enhanced α‐gal‐specific IgE levels are accompanied by high levels of α‐gal‐specific IgG1 devoid of IgE‐blocking activity. This subclass distribution is atypical for food allergies and distinct from natural α‐gal IgG responses in nonallergic individuals.

Recombinant Mal d 1 facilitates sublingual challenge tests of birch pollen-allergic patients with apple allergy

It is still unclear whether allergen‐specific immunotherapy (AIT) with birch pollen improves birch pollen‐related food allergy. One reason for this may be the lack of standardized tests to assess clinical reactions to birch pollen‐related foods, for example apple. We tested the applicability of recombinant (r) Mal d 1, the Bet v 1‐homolog in apple, for oral challenge tests. Increasing concentrations of rMal d 1 in 0.9% NaCl were sublingually administered to 72 birch pollen‐allergic patients with apple allergy. The dose of 1.6 μg induced oral allergy syndromes in 26.4%, 3.2 μg in 15.3%, 6.3 μg in 27.8%, 12.5 μg in 8.3%, 25 μg in 11.1%, and 50 μg in 4.2% of the patients. No severe reactions occurred. None of the patients reacted to 0.9% NaCl alone. Sublingual administration of 50 μg of rMal d 1 induced no reactions in three nonallergic individuals. Our approach allows straight forward, dose‐defined sublingual challenge tests in a high number of birch pollen‐allergic patients that inter alia can be applied to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of birch pollen AIT on birch pollen‐related food allergy.

Correlation of sensitizing capacity and T-cell recognition within the Bet v 1 family

Background

Bet v 1 is the main sensitizing allergen in birch pollen. Like many other major allergens, it contains an immunodominant T cell–activating region (Bet v 1_142-156). Api g 1, the Bet v 1 homolog in celery, lacks the ability to sensitize and is devoid of major T-cell epitopes.

Objective

We analyzed the T-cell epitopes of Mal d 1, the nonsensitizing Bet v 1 homolog in apple, and assessed possible differences in uptake and antigen processing of Bet v 1, Api g 1, and Mal d 1.

Methods

For epitope mapping, Mal d 1–specific T-cell lines were stimulated with overlapping synthetic 12-mer peptides. The surface binding, internalization, and intracellular degradation of Bet v 1, Api g 1, and Mal d 1 by antigen-presenting cells were compared by using flow cytometry. All proteins were digested with endolysosomal extracts, and the resulting peptides were identified by means of mass spectrometry. The binding of Bet v 1_142-156 and the homologous region in Mal d 1 by HLA class II molecules was analyzed in silico.

Results

Like Api g 1, Mal d 1 lacked dominant T-cell epitopes. The degree of surface binding and the kinetics of uptake and endolysosomal degradation of Bet v 1, Api g 1, and Mal d 1 were comparable. Endolysosomal degradation of Bet v 1 and Mal d 1 resulted in very similar fragments. The Bet v 1_142-156 and Mal d 1_141-155 regions showed no striking difference in their binding affinities to the most frequent HLA-DR alleles.

Conclusion

The sensitizing activity of different Bet v 1 homologs correlates with the presence of immunodominant T-cell epitopes. However, the presence of Bet v 1_142-156 is not conferred by differential antigen processing.

Advances in allergic skin disease, anaphylaxis, and hypersensitivity reactions to foods, drugs, and insects in 2013

This review highlights some of the research advances in anaphylaxis; hypersensitivity reactions to foods, drugs, and insects; and allergic skin diseases that were reported in the Journal in 2013. Studies on food allergy suggest that (1) 7.6% of the US population is affected, (2) a "healthy" early diet might prevent food allergy, (3) the skin might be an important route of sensitization, (4) allergen component testing might aid diagnosis, (5) the prognosis of milk allergy might be predictable through early testing, (6) oral or sublingual immunotherapy show promise but also have caveats, and (7) preclinical studies show promising alternative modes of immunotherapy and desensitization. Studies on eosinophilic esophagitis show a relationship to connective tissue disorders and that dietary management is an effective treatment for adults. Markers of anaphylaxis severity have been determined and might inform potential diagnostics and therapeutic targets. Insights on serum tests for drug and insect sting allergy might result in improved diagnostics. Genetic and immune-mediated defects in skin epithelial differentiation contribute to the severity of atopic dermatitis. Novel management approaches to treatment of chronic urticaria, including use of omalizumab, are being identified.

Induction of eosinophilic esophagitis by sublingual pollen immunotherapy

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is increasingly investigated and utilized for the treatment of food and pollen allergies. Previous case reports suggested that eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) might develop as a long-term complication in children after completion of oral immunotherapy. Here, we describe a 44-year-old female with a medical history of pollinosis who for the first time in her life developed complete manifestation of EoE (peak eosinophils 164/high power field) 4 weeks after initiation of SLIT using specific soluble allergens (hazelnut, birch, alder) according to previous specific serum IgE testing. After discontinuation of SLIT, EoE resolved completely within 4 weeks without any other medical intervention. During a follow-up of 12 months the patient remained free of any esophageal symptoms. This is the first case report demonstrating a close and therefore likely causative association between pollen SLIT and EoE in an adult patient.