Nasal and ocular challenges

Methodological Principles of Nasal Food Challenge

Thanks to their valuable assessment possibilities (subjective complaints and changes in nasal patency during the examination), nasal provocation tests may serve as an alternative tool for oral food challenges in the future. However, this test requires successive attempts to regulate its methodology in order to develop a standardized lyophilisate form and determine the threshold dose for a positive result. The study objective was to present the methodological foundation for nasal food allergen provocation tests induced by freeze-dried powdered chicken egg whites. A control group of 25 individuals with no history of allergy to chicken eggs or any other allergy was included in the study. Optical rhinometry and visual analog scales were used to assess the response of nasal mucosa to local allergen challenges. Minor variations in nasal flows, as measured by optical rhinometry, were observed in the provocation tests. The mean optical density measurements (as measured regardless of the allergen dose used) varied from positive to negative values and vice versa, e.g., amounting to 0.018 OD (standard deviation 0.095) at 15 min and -0.011 OD (standard deviation 0.090) at 30 min. No significant differences were observed concerning the perceived nasal discomfort using the visual analog scale. Due to the absence of nasal mucosal reactivity, nasal challenge is an excellent methodological tool for implementing food allergen tests.

EAACI position paper on the clinical use of the bronchial allergen challenge: Unmet needs and research priorities

Allergic asthma (AA) is a common asthma phenotype, and its diagnosis requires both the demonstration of IgE-sensitization to aeroallergens and the causative role of this sensitization as a major driver of asthma symptoms. Therefore, a bronchial allergen challenge (BAC) would be occasionally required to identify AA patients among atopic asthmatics. Nevertheless, BAC is usually considered a research tool only, with existing protocols being tailored to mild asthmatics and research needs (eg long washout period for inhaled corticosteroids). Consequently, existing BAC protocols are not designed to be performed in moderate-to-severe asthmatics or in clinical practice. The correct diagnosis of AA might help select patients for immunomodulatory therapies. Allergen sublingual immunotherapy is now registered and recommended for controlled or partially controlled patients with house dust mite-driven AA and with FEV1 ≥ 70%. Allergen avoidance is costly and difficult to implement for the management of AA, so the proper selection of patients is also beneficial. In this position paper, the EAACI Task Force proposes a methodology for clinical BAC that would need to be validated in future studies. The clinical implementation of BAC could ultimately translate into a better phenotyping of asthmatics in real life, and into a more accurate selection of patients for long-term and costly management pathways.

The use of nasal allergen vs allergen exposure chambers to evaluate allergen immunotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease-modifying treatment option for allergic rhinitis (AR) patients with persistent moderate-severe AR for whom traditional pharmacotherapies are ineffective. The nasal allergen challenge (NAC) and allergen exposure chamber (AEC) are two translational models of AR that can be used to investigate the properties, safety, and efficacy of AIT.

AREAS COVERED

Peer-reviewed, human-centered articles utilizing AEC or NAC models to investigate AIT between 2010 and 2020 were curated from PubMed, EMBASE, and OVID Medline databases. AECs have been used to evaluate traditional subcutaneous and sublingual administrations of AIT, including cross-protective effects and different dosing regimens. More recently, the effectiveness of novel AIT formulations has been evaluated. NACs are another model used to study AIT, including using novel intralymphatic routes of administration. It is an especially powerful and versatile tool to determine if basic science and animal model findings are clinically translatable.

EXPERT OPINION

The AEC and NAC models both produce clinically relevant and reproducible results. AECs are more effective for studying many participants but are limited because they require a specialized facility. As more AIT therapies and new formulations are developed over time, the versatility of the NAC will be especially useful.

Current Knowledge in Allergic Conjunctivitis

Allergic conjunctivitis is a disease of increasing prevalence that affects both children and adults and causes significant deterioration of their quality of life and sometimes irreversible visual damage. There are various forms of the disease, some are allergen-induced such as seasonal and perennial allergic conjunctivitis, giant papillary conjunctivitis, and contact allergic blepharoconjunctivitis, whereas others are not always explained by allergen exposure, such as vernal keratoconjunctivitis and atopic keratoconjunctivitis. We review their clinical course, characteristics, and differential diagnosis, and highlight recent advances in their pathophysiology and treatment.

Objectification of the nasal patency assessment techniques used in nasal allergen provocation testing

Topical allergen application in nasal provocation testing (NPT) is associated with remarkably rapid changes in nasal patency. Thus, selecting the techniques of assessing the extent of nasal obstruction (as one of the responses to topical allergen application) is an important component of NPT. The study attempted to systematize and evaluate the techniques selected for assessing nasal patency during NPT based on a review of relevant literature. We reviewed the literature on the attempts to standardize the objective techniques for assessing nasal patency and their use in NPT. The best known, well-established technique for assessing nasal patency as part of NPT was rhinomanometry, followed by peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) testing and acoustic rhinometry.

Precision Medicine in House Dust Mite-Driven Allergic Asthma

House dust mites (HDMs) are the allergenic sources most frequently involved in airway allergy. Nevertheless, not every sensitized patient develops respiratory symptoms upon exposure to HDM, and there is a clinical need to differentiate allergic asthmatics (AAs) from atopic non-allergic asthmatics with HDM sensitization. This differentiation sometimes requires in vivo provocations like the bronchial allergen challenge (BAC). Interestingly, recent data demonstrate that non-atopic patients with asthma can also develop positive BAC results. This novel phenotype has been termed local allergic asthma (LAA). The interest in identifying the allergic triggers of asthma resides in the possibility of administering allergen immunotherapy (AIT). AIT is a disease-modifying intervention, the clinical benefit of which persists after therapy discontinuation. Recently, new modalities of sublingual tablets of HDM immunotherapy registered as pharmaceutical products (HDM-SLIT tablets) have become commercially available. HDM-SLIT tablets have demonstrated a robust effect over critical asthma parameters (dose of inhaled corticosteroids, exacerbations, and safety), thus being recommended by international guidelines for patients with HDM-driven AA. In this review, we will summarize the current knowledge on the phenotype and endotype of HDM-driven AA, and LAA, address the difficulties for BAC implementation in the clinic, and discuss the effects of AIT in AA and LAA.

Rhinitis 2020: A practice parameter update

This comprehensive practice parameter for allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) provides updated guidance on diagnosis, assessment, selection of monotherapy and combination pharmacologic options, and allergen immunotherapy for AR. Newer information about local AR is reviewed. Cough is emphasized as a common symptom in both AR and NAR. Food allergy testing is not recommended in the routine evaluation of rhinitis. Intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) remain the preferred monotherapy for persistent AR, but additional studies support the additive benefit of combination treatment with INCS and intranasal antihistamines in both AR and NAR. Either intranasal antihistamines or INCS may be offered as first-line monotherapy for NAR. Montelukast should only be used for AR if there has been an inadequate response or intolerance to alternative therapies. Depot parenteral corticosteroids are not recommended for treatment of AR due to potential risks. While intranasal decongestants generally should be limited to short-term use to prevent rebound congestion, in limited circumstances, patients receiving regimens that include an INCS may be offered, in addition, an intranasal decongestant for up to 4 weeks. Neither acupuncture nor herbal products have adequate studies to support their use for AR. Oral decongestants should be avoided during the first trimester of pregnancy. Recommendations for use of subcutaneous and sublingual tablet allergen immunotherapy in AR are provided. Algorithms based on a combination of evidence and expert opinion are provided to guide in the selection of pharmacologic options for intermittent and persistent AR and NAR.

Coexistence of nasal reactivity to allergens with and without IgE sensitization in patients with allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis (AR) and local allergic rhinitis (LAR) are defined by nasal reactivity to aeroallergens with and without positive skin prick test (SPT), respectively. In this study, we aimed to investigate whether both types of allergen-specific reactivity can coexist in the same individual.

METHODS

Forty-eight patients with perennial rhinitis symptoms and positive SPT with seasonal allergens only (discrepant group) were subjected to consecutive nasal allergen challenges (NAC) with seasonal (NAC-S) and perennial allergens (NAC-P). A nasal lavage was collected before and after the NACs to measure eosinophil cationic protein (ECP). A basophil activation test (BAT) with seasonal and/or perennial allergens was performed in ten patients from the discrepant group and in six seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR), eight perennial local allergic rhinitis (LAR), six nonallergic rhinitis (NAR), and six healthy control (HC) individuals.

RESULTS

All patients in the discrepant group tested positive in the NAC-S, and 41 of them (85.4%), also in the NAC-P (group A). Conversely, seven patients tested negative in the NAC-P (group B). ECP in the nasal lavage increased after the NAC-P in the group A (P = .004), but not in the group B. The BAT with seasonal allergens was positive in 100% of SAR and group A cases, whereas the BAT with perennial allergens was positive in 37.5% and 60% of LAR and group A cases, respectively. All NAR and HC subjects tested negative for the BAT.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that nasal reactivity to aeroallergens with and without positive SPT can coexist in the same patient. We propose the term dual allergic rhinitis for this rhinitis phenotype.

Allergen Immunotherapy for Local Respiratory Allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIESW

Local respiratory allergy (LRA) is an eosinophilic phenotype of chronic airway disease. Three entities have been described within the LRA spectrum: local allergic rhinitis (LAR) and local allergic asthma (LAA) in non-atopic patients, and dual allergic rhinitis (DAR) in atopic patients (coexistence of LAR and allergic rhinitis). In this article, we aim to review the current evidence on the therapeutic options for LRA.

RECENT FINDINGS

No controlled study has assessed the effect of standard therapy (oral antihistamines, intranasal or inhaled corticosteroids, bronchodilators) in LRA subjects. Three randomized clinical trials and one observational study demonstrated that allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is able to control nasal and ocular symptoms, decrease the need for rescue medication, and improve quality of life in LAR individuals. Nasal or inhaled steroids can be expected to improve eosinophilic inflammation in LRA patients but cannot change the natural course of the disease. Moreover, the long-term and disease-modifying effects of AIT in LRA subjects need to be investigated.

Nasal challenges in allergen immunotherapy trials

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The nasal allergen challenge (NAC) model can be a valuable diagnostic tool for allergic rhinitis. Alongside its clinical use, NACs can be used as primary and secondary endpoints in studies evaluating allergen immunotherapy (AIT) products for allergic rhinitis treatment. This review will discuss the technical aspects of the NAC model and provide a summary of recent studies using NACs to assess existing and new AIT treatments.

RECENT FINDINGS

Over the last 2 years, both titrated and single-dose nasal challenge protocols have been used to evaluate immunotherapies targeting grass, birch, house dust mite, and cat allergens. Early efficacy and dose-finding trials showed improvements in allergic symptoms and nasal tolerance to allergens after AIT treatment with standardized extracts or modified forms of whole allergen. NACs were also used in two proof-of-concept studies to illustrate the efficacy of intralymphatic immunotherapy with two concomitant allergens and subcutaneous immunotherapy with Fel d 1-specific IgG-blocking antibodies.

SUMMARY

Along with existing therapies, nasal challenges are useful in evaluating AIT treatments in the very early stages of clinical development. However, because of the variety in challenge techniques and symptom assessments available, special attention must be placed in the protocol design in order to compare the study results with existing NAC publications.

Precision medicine allergy immunoassay methods for assessing immunoglobulin E sensitization to aeroallergen molecules

Molecular-based allergy diagnosis for the in vitro assessment of a patient immunoglobulin E (IgE) sensitization profile at the molecular level uses allergen molecules (also referred to as allergen components), which may be well-defined, highly purified, natural allergen components or recombinant allergens. Modern immunoassay methods used for the detection of specific IgE against aeroallergen components are either singleplex (such as the fluorescence enzyme immunoassay with capsulated cellulose polymer solid-phase coupled allergens, the enzyme-enhanced chemiluminescence immunoassay and the reversed enzyme allergosorbent test, with liquid-phase allergens), multiparameter (such as the line blot immunoassay for defined partial allergen diagnostics with allergen components coating membrane strips) or multiplex (such as the microarray-based immunoassay on immuno solid-phase allergen chip, and the two new multiplex nanotechnology-based immunoassays: the patient-friendly allergen nano-bead array, and the macroarray nanotechnology-based immunoassay used as a molecular allergy explorer). The precision medicine diagnostic work-up may be organized as an integrated “U-shape” approach, with a “top-down” approach (from symptoms to molecules) and a “bottom-up” approach (from molecules to clinical implications), as needed in selected patients. The comprehensive and accurate IgE sensitization molecular profiling, with identification of the relevant allergens, is indicated within the framework of a detailed patient’s clinical history to distinguish genuine IgE sensitization from sensitization due to cross-reactivity (especially in polysensitized patients), to assess unclear symptoms and unsatisfactory response to treatment, to reveal unexpected sensitizations, and to improve assessment of severity and risk aspects in some patients. Practical approaches, such as anamnesis molecular thinking, laboratory molecular thinking and postmolecular anamnesis, are sometimes applied. The component-resolved diagnosis of the specific IgE repertoire has a key impact on optimal decisions making for prophylactic and specific immunotherapeutic strategies tailored for the individual patient.

Molecular allergy diagnostics refine characterization of children sensitized to dog dander

BACKGROUND

Sensitization to dog dander is an important risk factor for rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma but is not sufficient for diagnosing dog allergy. Molecular allergy diagnostics offer new opportunities for refined characterization.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to study the association between sensitization to all presently known dog allergen components and clinical symptoms of dog allergy in children evaluated by using nasal provocation tests (NPTs).

METHODS

Sixty children (age, 10-18 years) sensitized to dog dander extract underwent NPTs with dog dander extract. Measurement of IgE levels to dog dander and to Can f 1, Can f 2, Can f 3, and Can f 5 was performed with ImmunoCAP, and measurement of IgE levels to Can f 4 and Can f 6 was performed with streptavidin ImmunoCAP. An IgE level of 0.1 kU_A/L or greater was considered positive.

RESULTS

There was an association between sensitization to an increasing number of dog allergen components and a positive nasal challenge result (P = .01). Sensitization to lipocalins (odds ratio [OR], 6.0; 95% CI, 1.04-34.5), in particular Can f 4 (OR, 6.80; 95% CI 1.84-25.2) and Can f 6 (OR, 5.69; 95% CI, 1.59-20.8), was associated with a positive NPT result. Monosensitization to Can f 5 was related to a negative NPT result (OR, 5.78; 95% CI, 1.01-33.0).

CONCLUSION

Sensitization to an increasing number of dog allergen components and to lipocalins is associated with dog allergy. Monosensitization to Can f 5 should not be regarded primarily as a marker for dog allergy.