Basophil allergen threshold sensitivity, CD-sens, IgE-sensitization and DBPCFC in peanut-sensitized children

Basophil allergen threshold sensitivity to casein (casein-specific CD-sens) predicts allergic reactions at a milk challenge in most but not all patients

BACKGROUND

The basophil activation test is an emerging clinical tool in the diagnosis of cow's milk allergy (CMA). The aim was to assess the association between the basophil allergen threshold sensitivity to the major milk protein casein (casein-specific CD-sens), the levels of milk- and casein-specific Immunoglobulin E antibodies (IgE-ab), and the severity of allergic reactions at milk challenges.

METHODS

We enrolled 34 patients aged 5-15 (median 9) years who underwent a double-blind placebo-controlled milk-challenge (DBPCMC) as screening before inclusion in an oral immunotherapy study for CMA. The severity of the allergic reaction at the DBPCMC was graded using Sampson's severity score. Venous blood was drawn before the DBPCMC. Milk- and casein-specific IgE-ab were analyzed. Following in vitro stimulation of basophils with casein, casein-specific CD-sens, was determined.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients completed the DBPCMC. There were strong correlations between casein-specific CD-sens and IgE-ab to milk (rs = 0.682, p < .001), and between casein-specific CD-sens and IgE-ab to casein (rs = 0.823, p < .001). There was a correlation between the severity of the allergic reaction and casein-specific CD-sens level (rs = 0.395, p = .041) and an inverse correlation between casein-specific CD-sens level and the cumulative dose of milk protein to which the patient reacted at the DBPCMC (rs = -0.418, p = .027). Among the 30 patients with an allergic reaction at the DBPCMC, 67% had positive casein-specific CD-sens, 23% had negative casein-specific CD-sens, and 10% were declared non-responders.

CONCLUSION

Two thirds of those reacting at the DBPMC had positive casein-specific CD-sens, but reactions also occurred despite negative casein-specific CD-sens. The association between casein-specific CD-sens and the severity of the allergic reaction and cumulative dose of milk protein, respectively, was moderate.

Basophil activation test in the food allergy clinic: its current use and future applications

INTRODUCTION

The basophil activation test (BAT) has shown evidence of high sensitivity and high specificity to support the diagnosis of IgE-mediated allergy. It is a functional test that uses live cells analyzed by flow cytometry and thus needs to be performed within 24h of blood collection. BAT has shown to be reproducible and reliable when tested in a clinical diagnostic laboratory with standardized protocols and flow cytometry settings.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we summarize the evidence to support clinical use of BAT and the next steps required for clinical implementation for an improve clinical care for patients with suspected IgE-mediated food allergy.

EXPERT OPINION

BAT has recently been included in Clinical Guidelines of Food Allergy Diagnosis and its implementation in clinical practice depends largely on availability. Proposed clinical applications of the BAT include: distinction between food allergy and asymptomatic IgE sensitization; determination of food allergic status to peanut, tree nuts and seeds in polysensitized children; evaluation of tolerance to baked egg and baked milk in egg and milk allergic children; identification of patients at high-risk of severe allergic reactions; monitoring for spontaneous resolution of food allergy; confirmation of eligibility for specific treatments of food allergy; prediction and monitoring of response to immunomodulatory treatments.

Systematic review and meta-analyses on the accuracy of diagnostic tests for IgE-mediated food allergy

The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is updating the Guidelines on Food Allergy Diagnosis. We aimed to undertake a systematic review of the literature with meta-analyses to assess the accuracy of diagnostic tests for IgE-mediated food allergy. We searched three databases (Cochrane CENTRAL (Trials), MEDLINE (OVID) and Embase (OVID)) for diagnostic test accuracy studies published between 1 October 2012 and 30 June 2021 according to a previously published protocol (CRD42021259186). We independently screened abstracts, extracted data from full texts and assessed risk of bias with QUADRAS 2 tool in duplicate. Meta-analyses were undertaken for food-test combinations for which three or more studies were available. A total of 149 studies comprising 24,489 patients met the inclusion criteria and they were generally heterogeneous. 60.4% of studies were in children ≤12 years of age, 54.3% were undertaken in Europe, ≥95% were conducted in a specialized paediatric or allergy clinical setting and all included oral food challenge in at least a percentage of enrolled patients, in 21.5% double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges. Skin prick test (SPT) with fresh cow's milk and raw egg had high sensitivity (90% and 94%) for milk and cooked egg allergies. Specific IgE (sIgE) to individual components had high specificity: Ara h 2-sIgE had 92%, Cor a 14-sIgE 95%, Ana o 3-sIgE 94%, casein-sIgE 93%, ovomucoid-sIgE 92/91% for the diagnosis of peanut, hazelnut, cashew, cow's milk and raw/cooked egg allergies, respectively. The basophil activation test (BAT) was highly specific for the diagnosis of peanut (90%) and sesame (93%) allergies. In conclusion, SPT and specific IgE to extracts had high sensitivity whereas specific IgE to components and BAT had high specificity to support the diagnosis of individual food allergies.

The combination of Ara h 2-sIgE and basophil activation test could be an alternative to oral food challenge in cases of suspected peanut allergy

BACKGROUND

Most children with peanut sensitisation do not have a clinical peanut allergy (PA). Oral food challenge (OFC) is then necessary to diagnose PA and assess the reactive dose of the allergen. However, OFC is laborious to perform, expensive and stressful. We evaluated whether in vitro tests, such as basophil activation test (BAT), allergen-specific IgE (sIgE) and their combination, could be used to replace OFC for the diagnosis of PA in children.

METHODS

Ninety-one patients aged 6 months to 18 years with suspected PA were prospectively recruited. These patients then underwent an OFC to assess PA. Whole peanut-sIgE, Ara h 2-sIgE, Ara h 8-sIgE and %CD63+ basophils (CCR3+ /SCClow ) to peanut measured by BAT were investigated for PA diagnosis.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients had a positive peanut OFC, and the remaining 50 were only sensitised. All patients with Ara h 2-sIgE >7 kUA /L were allergic to peanut. A threshold of 6% for activated basophils yielded a sensitivity of 95% and a specificity of 54%. All patients with Ara h 2-sIgE ≤7 kUA /L and BAT ≤6% (n = 22) had a negative OFC except for one who presented an oral syndrome due to PR-10 sensitisation.

CONCLUSIONS

We have shown that Ara h 2-sIgE >7 kUA/L is a discriminating threshold for the diagnosis of PA. Furthermore, when Ara h 2-sIgE ≤7 kUA/L and BAT ≤6%, patients do not need to adjust their diet and, thus, do not need an OFC.

EAACI Molecular Allergology User's Guide 2.0

Since the discovery of immunoglobulin E (IgE) as a mediator of allergic diseases in 1967, our knowledge about the immunological mechanisms of IgE-mediated allergies has remarkably increased. In addition to understanding the immune response and clinical symptoms, allergy diagnosis and management depend strongly on the precise identification of the elicitors of the IgE-mediated allergic reaction. In the past four decades, innovations in bioscience and technology have facilitated the identification and production of well-defined, highly pure molecules for component-resolved diagnosis (CRD), allowing a personalized diagnosis and management of the allergic disease for individual patients. The first edition of the "EAACI Molecular Allergology User's Guide" (MAUG) in 2016 rapidly became a key reference for clinicians, scientists, and interested readers with a background in allergology, immunology, biology, and medicine. Nevertheless, the field of molecular allergology is moving fast, and after 6 years, a new EAACI Taskforce was established to provide an updated document. The Molecular Allergology User's Guide 2.0 summarizes state-of-the-art information on allergen molecules, their clinical relevance, and their application in diagnostic algorithms for clinical practice. It is designed for both, clinicians and scientists, guiding health care professionals through the overwhelming list of different allergen molecules available for testing. Further, it provides diagnostic algorithms on the clinical relevance of allergenic molecules and gives an overview of their biology, the basic mechanisms of test formats, and the application of tests to measure allergen exposure.

Towards an FDA-cleared basophil activation test

Food allergy is a global health problem affecting up to 10% of the world population. Accurate diagnosis of food allergies, however, is still a major challenge in medical offices and for patients seeking alternative avenues of diagnosis. A flawless test to confirm or rule out a food allergy does not exist. The lack of optimum testing methods to establish precise clinical correlations remains a major obstacle to effective treatment. Certain IgE measurement methods, including component testing, have received FDA clearance, but they have been used primarily as an analytical tool and not to establish clinical correlations. Most allergy tests are still carried out within the laboratory, and skin tests outside a laboratory setting that are used for food allergy diagnosis rely on non-standardized allergens, according to the FDA definition. Epitope mapping and basophil activation test (BAT) have recently been proposed as a means of establishing better clinical correlations. Yet neither have received FDA clearance for widespread distribution. Of the two methods, the BAT has the advantage of being a functional assay. Over the past few years, several large private practice groups in the United States, have developed BAT as a clinical assay and have started using it in patient care. Given this clinical experience, the vast number of papers published on BAT (more than 1,400 as of 2022) and the trend toward increasing FDA regulation, it is essential to understand the roadmap for regulatory clearance of this assay.

Basophil activation test has high reproducibility and is feasible in the clinical setting

BACKGROUND

The basophil activation test (BAT) has high accuracy to diagnose peanut allergy and can reduce the need for oral food challenges (OFC); however, so far it has not been incorporated in clinical practice.

METHODS

We assessed the reproducibility of BAT within the same laboratory and between two different laboratories and the feasibility of using BAT in the clinical setting.

RESULTS

One hundred and two children being assessed for peanut allergy were tested on BAT (72 allergic, 30 sensitized tolerant). There was little internal variation (coefficient of variation <15%) in the BAT and a very strong correlation (R_s  > .95) between BAT performed across laboratories. The 2 BAT methods were strongly correlated but not interchangeable. In the cases of discrepancy, our in house BAT method was 100% accurate. BAT was feasible and well-accepted by clinicians: no patient with positive BAT was referred for OFC, leading to reduction in the number of OFC required. Twenty one percent of patients who underwent OFC reacted to peanut. A negative BAT also encouraged the performance of OFC in sensitized children who would otherwise be considered allergic, 50% of whom did not react and incorporated peanut in the diet.

CONCLUSIONS

The BAT is a robust test that can reliably be transferred between laboratories; however, different BAT methods are not interchangeable. BAT was well integrated in the clinical decision-making process in a specialized center.

Biomarkers in oral immunotherapy

Food allergy (FA) is a global health problem that affects a large population, and thus effective treatment is highly desirable. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has been showing reasonable efficacy and favorable safety in most FA subjects. Dependable biomarkers are needed for treatment assessment and outcome prediction during OIT. Several immunological indicators have been used as biomarkers in OIT, such as skin prick tests, basophil and mast cell reactivity, T cell and B cell responses, allergen-specific antibody levels, and cytokines. Other novel indicators also could be potential biomarkers. In this review, we discuss and assess the application of various immunological indicators as biomarkers for OIT.

IgG Autoantibodies Against IgE from Atopic Dermatitis Can Induce the Release of Cytokines and Proinflammatory Mediators from Basophils and Mast Cells

IgE-mediated release of proinflammatory mediators and cytokines from basophils and mast cells is a central event in allergic disorders. Several groups of investigators have demonstrated the presence of autoantibodies against IgE and/or FcεRI in patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria. By contrast, the prevalence and functional activity of anti-IgE autoantibodies in atopic dermatitis (AD) are largely unknown. We evaluated the ability of IgG anti-IgE from patients with AD to induce the in vitro IgE-dependent activation of human basophils and skin and lung mast cells. Different preparations of IgG anti-IgE purified from patients with AD and rabbit IgG anti-IgE were compared for their triggering effects on the in vitro release of histamine and type 2 cytokines (IL-4, IL-13) from basophils and of histamine and lipid mediators (prostaglandin D₂ and cysteinyl leukotriene C₄) from human skin and lung mast cells. One preparation of human IgG anti-IgE out of six patients with AD induced histamine release from basophils, skin and lung mast cells. This preparation of human IgG anti-IgE induced the secretion of cytokines and eicosanoids from basophils and mast cells, respectively. Human monoclonal IgE was a competitive antagonist of both human and rabbit IgG anti-IgE. Human anti-IgE was more potent than rabbit anti-IgE for IL-4 and IL-13 production by basophils and histamine, prostaglandin D₂ and leukotriene C₄ release from mast cells. Functional anti-IgE autoantibodies rarely occur in patients with AD. When present, they induce the release of proinflammatory mediators and cytokines from basophils and mast cells, thereby possibly contributing to sustained IgE-dependent inflammation in at least a subset of patients with this disorder.

High-dimensional immune profiles correlate with phenotypes of peanut allergy during food-allergic reactions

BACKGROUND

Food challenges carry a burden of safety, effort and resources. Clinical reactivity and presentation, such as thresholds and symptoms, are considered challenging to predict ex vivo.

AIMS

To identify changes of peripheral immune signatures during oral food challenges (OFC) that correlate with the clinical outcome in patients with peanut allergy (PA).

METHODS

Children with a positive (OFC⁺ , n = 16) or a negative (OFC^- , n = 10) OFC-outcome were included (controls, n = 7). Single-cell mass cytometry/unsupervised analysis allowed unbiased immunophenotyping during OFC.

RESULTS

Peripheral immune profiles correlated with OFC outcome. OFC⁺ -profiles revealed mainly decreased Th2 cells, memory Treg and activated NK cells, which had an increased homing marker expression signifying immune cell migration into effector tissues along with symptom onset. OFC^- -profiles had also signs of ongoing inflammation, but with a signature of a controlled response, lacking homing marker expression and featuring a concomitant increase of Th2-shifted CD4⁺ T cells and Treg cells. Low versus high threshold reactivity-groups had differential frequencies of intermediate monocytes and myeloid dendritic cells at baseline. Low threshold was associated with increased CD8⁺ T cells and reduced memory cells (central memory [CM] CD4⁺ [Th2] T cells, CM CD8⁺ T cells, Treg). Immune signatures also discriminated patients with preferential skin versus gastrointestinal symptoms, whereby skin signs correlated with increased expression of CCR4, a molecule enabling skin trafficking, on various immune cell types.

CONCLUSION

We showed that peripheral immune signatures reflected dynamics of clinical outcome during OFC with peanut. Those immune alterations hold promise as a basis for predictive OFC biomarker discovery to monitor disease outcome and therapy of PA.

The Indirect Basophil Activation Test Is a Safe, Reliable, and Accessible Tool to Diagnose a Peanut Allergy in Children

BACKGROUND

The gold standard for the diagnosis of a peanut allergy is an oral food challenge (OFC), but it is a time-consuming, patient-unfriendly, and expensive test. The in vitro direct basophil activation test (BAT) for peanuts was shown to be a promising diagnostic tool for replacing the OFC.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of the indirect (passive) BAT. Compared with the direct BAT, the timing of the indirect BAT is more flexible, and the problem of nonresponding basophils (unresponsive to IgE receptor-mediated signaling) is circumvented.

METHODS

In 74 children, suspected of peanut allergy and eligible for an OFC, indirect BAT results for peanut extract, Ara h2, and Ara h6 were compared with the results of a double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge. The reactivity and sensitivity of the basophils in the BAT were correlated to both the allergy status and the threshold dose in the OFC.

RESULTS

The combined basophil reactivity for Ara h2 and Ara h6 showed the highest accuracy (94%) for the diagnosis of a peanut allergy, with positive and negative predictive values of 96% and 89%, respectively. The sensitivity of the basophils for Ara h2 significantly discriminates between patients who tolerated up to 0.4 g of peanut protein in the OFC and those who did not.

CONCLUSIONS

Because the indirect BAT showed a high diagnostic accuracy for peanut allergy, it is a promising alternative to the classical direct BAT and could lead to a reduction in OFC use.

Basophil Activation Test Utility as a Diagnostic Tool in LTP Allergy

Plant-food allergy is an increasing problem, with nonspecific lipid transfer proteins (nsLTPs) triggering mild/severe reactions. Pru p 3 is the major sensitizer in LTP food allergy (FA). However, in vivo and in vitro diagnosis is hampered by the need for differentiating between asymptomatic sensitization and allergy with clinical relevance. The basophil activation test (BAT) is an ex vivo method able to identify specific IgE related to the allergic response. Thus, we aimed to establish the value of BAT in a precise diagnosis of LTP-allergic patients. Ninety-two individuals with peach allergy sensitized to LTP, Pru p 3, were finally included, and 40.2% of them had symptoms to peanut (n = 37). In addition, 16 healthy subjects were recruited. BAT was performed with Pru p 3 and Ara h 9 (peanut LTP) at seven ten-fold concentrations, and was evaluated by flow cytometry, measuring the percentage of CD63 (%CD63+) and CD203c (%CD203chigh) cells, basophil allergen threshold sensitivity (CD-Sens), and area under the dose−response curve (AUC). Significant changes in BAT parameters (%CD63+ and %CD203chigh) were found between the controls and patients. However, comparisons for %CD63+, %CD203chigh, AUC, and CD-Sens showed similar levels among patients with different symptoms. An optimal cut-off was established from ROC curves, showing a significant positive percentage of BAT in patients compared to controls and great values of sensitivity (>87.5%) and specificity (>85%). In addition, BAT showed differences in LTP-allergic patients tolerant to peanut using its corresponding LTP, Ara h 9. BAT can be used as a potential diagnostic tool for identifying LTP allergy and for differentiating peanut tolerance, although neither reactivity nor sensitivity can distinguish the severity of the clinical symptoms.

Exploring the role of basophil activation test in diagnosis of Dermatophagoides farinae sensitization and evaluation of therapeutic efficacy of subcutaneous immunotherapy in children

OBJECTIVE

It aims to detect basophil activation ratio (%CD63⁺ ) in peripheral blood of children with allergic asthma and rhinitis by using Flow cytometry (FCM) , so as to analyze the application values and clinical relevance of the Basophil Activation Test (BAT) in diagnosis of Dermatophagoides farinae (Derf) sensitization and monitoring therapeutic efficacy of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT).

METHODS

It was a prospective study. From the newly diagnosed children with asthma and rhinitis in our pediatric clinic, 39 patients diagnosed Derf sensitization and 15 patients not allergic to Derf were enrolled; another 4 healthy children were taken as control group. Using Derf extracts in concentration of 1 μg/ml, 10 μg/ml and 100 μg/ml as the stimulus, BAT results were expressed as %CD63⁺ in diagnosis of Derf sensitization and its correlation with skin prick tests (SPT), serum total IgE (tIgE), specific IgE (sIgE), sIgE/tIgE, specific IgG4 (sIgG4), FEV1%pred in pulmonary ventilation function, exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), children asthma control test (C-ACT) and visual analogue scale (VAS) were observed. In sensitization group, %CD63⁺ , sIgG4 and clinical indicators were detected again from patients who had received SCIT to analyze their internal connections.

RESULTS

The average levels of %CD63⁺ in three concentrations showed an increasing concentration-dependent trend overall. %CD63⁺ in sensitization group was significantly higher than that in the other two groups. The analysis of ROC for Derf sensitization showed the area under the curve (AUC) for BAT in three concentrations were higher than that for sIgE whose AUC is 0.893. %CD63⁺ was positively correlated with SPT grade, sIgE, sIgE/tIgE and VAS, and negatively correlated with C-ACT. In patients receiving SCIT, %CD63⁺ became lower and sIgG4 level became higher than pretreatment. There was no obvious change in sIgG4 in those who hadn't received SCIT.

CONCLUSIONS

BAT is a reliable and non-invasive tool for diagnosis of Derf sensitization in children with asthma and rhinitis. CD63-based BAT has clinical value to monitor outcome of SCIT, and the change of basophil activation is inherently related to induction of sIgG4.

Basophil activation test in food allergy: is it ready for real-time?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Utilization of basophil activation in the diagnosis and monitoring of food allergy has gained increasing recognition. An ex-vivo functional assay, basophil activation reflects clinical reactivity, thereby providing clinically relevant insights. Moreover, as a biomarker of reactivity and tolerance, basophil activation testing (BAT) may provide a useful tool for management of food allergies. Despite its utility, significant limitations of BAT have prevented widespread use. Addressing these limitations will increase the future application and adoption of BAT in food allergy.

RECENT FINDINGS

A number of clinical trials in the past few years have demonstrated the use of BAT in the diagnosis and treatment of food allergy. Specifically, BAT has been found to be a biomarker of tolerance.

SUMMARY

Basophil activation testing is an effective biomarker for diagnosis and monitoring of food allergy.

From Allergen Molecules to Molecular Immunotherapy of Nut Allergy: A Hard Nut to Crack

Peanuts and tree nuts are two of the most common elicitors of immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated food allergy. Nut allergy is frequently associated with systemic reactions and can lead to potentially life-threatening respiratory and circulatory symptoms. Furthermore, nut allergy usually persists throughout life. Whether sensitized patients exhibit severe and life-threatening reactions (e.g., anaphylaxis), mild and/or local reactions (e.g., pollen-food allergy syndrome) or no relevant symptoms depends much on IgE recognition of digestion-resistant class I food allergens, IgE cross-reactivity of class II food allergens with respiratory allergens and clinically not relevant plant-derived carbohydrate epitopes, respectively. Accordingly, molecular allergy diagnosis based on the measurement of allergen-specific IgE levels to allergen molecules provides important information in addition to provocation testing in the diagnosis of food allergy. Molecular allergy diagnosis helps identifying the genuinely sensitizing nuts, it determines IgE sensitization to class I and II food allergen molecules and hence provides a basis for personalized forms of treatment such as precise prescription of diet and allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT). Currently available forms of nut-specific AIT are based only on allergen extracts, have been mainly developed for peanut but not for other nuts and, unlike AIT for respiratory allergies which utilize often subcutaneous administration, are given preferentially by the oral route. Here we review prevalence of allergy to peanut and tree nuts in different populations of the world, summarize knowledge regarding the involved nut allergen molecules and current AIT approaches for nut allergy. We argue that nut-specific AIT may benefit from molecular subcutaneous AIT (SCIT) approaches but identify also possible hurdles for such an approach and explain why molecular SCIT may be a hard nut to crack.

Peanut components measured by ISAC: comparison with ImmunoCap and clinical relevance in peanut allergic children

Background

Specific IgE (sIgE) against the peanut component Arachis hypogaea (Ara h) 2 has been shown to be the most important allergen to discriminate between peanut allergy and peanut tolerance. Several studies determined sIgE cut off values for Ara h 2, determined by singleplex measurements. However, cut off values for Ara h 2 from multiplex arrays are less well defined. The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between Ara h 2 sIgE determined by singleplex versus multiplex measurements and to assess the diagnostic value of the different peanut components included in Immuno Solid-phase Allergen Chip (ISAC) multiplex analysis in children with a suspected peanut allergy.

Methods

In this retrospective study we analyzed Ara h 2 sIgE values with singleplex Fluorescence Enzyme Immunoassay (FEIA, ImmunoCap) and multiplex microarray (ISAC) measurements in 117 children with a suspected peanut allergy. Also, other peanut components measured by ISAC were analyzed. Double blinded placebo controlled oral food challenges were used as golden standard.

Results

Among all studied peanut components FEIA Ara h 2 sIgE showed the highest area under the curve (AUC, 0.922), followed by ISAC Ara h 6 and Ara h 2 sIgE with AUCs of respectively 0.906 and 0.902. Best cut off values to diagnose peanut allergy were 4.40 kU/l for FEIA Ara h 2 sIgE and, 7.43 ISU and 8.13 ISU for respectively Ara h 2 and Ara h 6 sIgE in ISAC microarray. Ara h 2 sIgE determined in FEIA and ISAC showed a good correlation (r = 0.88; p < 0.01).

Conclusion

Ara h 6 and Ara h 2 sIgE in multiplex ISAC are both good predictors of clinical peanut allergy in Dutch children, and their performance is comparable to the use of Ara h 2 in singleplex FEIA. The simultaneous measurement of different peanut components using ISAC is an advantage and clinically useful to detect peanut allergic children that are Ara h 2 negative but sensitized to other peanut proteins such as Ara h 6.

Basophil activation test: Mechanisms and considerations for use in clinical trials and clinical practice

The basophil activation test (BAT) is a functional assay that measures the degree of degranulation following stimulation with allergen or controls by flow cytometry. It correlates directly with histamine release. From the dose-response curve resulting from BAT in allergic patients, basophil reactivity (%CD63⁺ basophils) and basophil sensitivity (EC₅₀ or similar) are the main outcomes of the test. BAT takes into account all characteristics of IgE and allergen and thus can be more specific than sensitization tests in the diagnosis of allergic disease. BAT reduces the need for in vivo procedures, such as intradermal tests and allergen challenges, which can cause allergic reactions of unpredictable severity. As it closely reflects the patients' phenotype in most cases, it may be used to support the diagnosis of food, venom and drug allergies and chronic urticaria, to monitor the natural resolution of food allergies and to predict and monitor clinical the response to immunomodulatory treatments, such as allergen-specific immunotherapy and biologicals. Clinical application of BAT requires analytical validation, clinical validation, standardization of procedures and quality assurance to ensure reproducibility and reliability of results. Currently, efforts are ongoing to establish a platform that could be used by laboratories in Europe and in the USA for quality assurance and certification.

Basophil activation test shows high accuracy in the diagnosis of peanut and tree nut allergy: The Markers of Nut Allergy Study

BACKGROUND

Peanut and tree nut allergies are the most important causes of anaphylaxis. Co-reactivity to more than one nut is frequent, and co-sensitization in the absence of clinical data is often obtained. Confirmatory oral food challenges (OFCs) are inconsistently performed.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the utility of the basophil activation test (BAT) in diagnosing peanut and tree nut allergies.

METHODS

The Markers Of Nut Allergy Study (MONAS) prospectively enrolled patients aged 0.5-17 years with confirmed peanut and/or tree nut (almond, cashew, hazelnut, pistachio, walnut) allergy or sensitization from Canadian (n = 150) and Austrian (n = 50) tertiary pediatric centers. BAT using %CD63⁺ basophils (SSClow/CCR3pos) as outcome was performed with whole blood samples stimulated with allergen extracts of each nut (0.001-1000 ng/mL protein). BAT results were assessed against confirmed allergic status in a blinded fashion to develop a generalizable statistical model for comparison to extract and marker allergen-specific IgE.

RESULTS

A mixed effect model integrating BAT results for 10 and 100 ng/mL of peanut and individual tree nut extracts was optimal. The area under the ROC curve (AUROC) was 0.98 for peanut, 0.97 for cashew, 0.92 for hazelnut, 0.95 for pistachio, and 0.97 for walnut. The BAT outperformed sIgE testing for peanut or hazelnut and was comparable for walnut (AUROC 0.95, 0.94, 0.92) in a sub-analysis in sensitized patients undergoing OFC.

CONCLUSIONS

Basophil activation test can predict allergic clinical status to peanut and tree nuts in multi-nut-sensitized children and may reduce the need for high-risk OFCs in patients.

The Role of Lipid Transfer Proteins as Food and Pollen Allergens Outside the Mediterranean Area

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an overview of the prevalence and clinical manifestation of non-specific lipid transfer proteins (LTP)-mediated allergies outside the Mediterranean area and to address potential reasons for the different geographical significance of LTP-driven allergies.

RECENT FINDINGS

LTPs are major allergens in the Mediterranean area, which frequently can elicit severe reactions. Pru p 3 the LTP from peach is reported as genuine allergen and is considered a prototypic marker for LTP-mediated allergies. However, both food and pollen LTP allergies exist outside the Mediterranean area, but with lower clinical significance, different immunogenicity, and less clarified role. Evidence has been reported that in areas with high exposure to pollen, in particular to mugwort, pollen-derived LTPs can act as a primary sensitizer to trigger secondary food allergies. Co-sensitization to unrelated allergens might be causative for less severe reactions in response to LTPs. However, the reason for the geographical different sensitization patterns to LTPs remains unclear.

Recent advances in the management of nut allergy

Peanut/tree nut allergy is common and has been associated with particularly severe reactions. Epidemiological data have shown that the prevalence ranges between 0.05% and 4.9% for tree nut and between 0.5% and 3% for peanut. These large variations can be explained by differences in the age of included patients and the geographical region. In addition, the food consumption modality (ie, raw versus roasted) plays a major role, as heat treatment has the capacity to modify the allergenicity of nuts and legumes. Nut allergies tend to persist into adulthood and consequently have a high impact on quality of life.

Recently, it has been demonstrated that a significant proportion of nut allergic patients are able to tolerate other nuts. As opposed to the avoidance of all nuts, this approach is currently proposed in several tertiary allergy centers. However, diagnosis of nut allergy is particularly difficult due to co-sensitization leading to high rate of false positive skin prick tests and/or specific IgE to whole allergen extracts. The use of component resolved diagnosis leads to major improvement of diagnosis, particularly to distinguish between primary and secondary nut allergies. The basophil activation test has been suggested to be useful but is still used mainly as a research tool. Thus, diagnosis remains mainly based on the oral food challenge, which is considered as the gold standard.

Regarding treatment, avoidance remains the cornerstone of management of nut allergy. Oral immunotherapy is increasingly proposed as an alternative management strategy.

Peanut allergy diagnosis: A 2020 practice parameter update, systematic review, and GRADE analysis

Given the burden of disease and the consequences of a diagnosis of peanut allergy, it is important that peanut allergy be accurately diagnosed so that an appropriate treatment plan can be developed. However, a test that indicates there is peanut sensitization present (eg, a "positive" test) is not always associated with clinical reactivity. This practice parameter addresses the diagnosis of IgE-mediated peanut allergy, both in children and adults, as pertaining to 3 fundamental questions, and based on the systematic reviews and meta-analyses, makes recommendations for the clinician who is evaluating a patient for peanut allergy. These questions relate to when diagnostic tests should be completed, which diagnostic tests to utilize, and the utility (or lack thereof) of diagnostic testing to predict the severity of a future allergic reaction to peanut.

Effects of omalizumab on basophils: Potential biomarkers in asthma and chronic spontaneous urticaria

Omalizumab is an anti-IgE humanized monoclonal antibody approved for the treatment of severe asthma and chronic spontaneous urticaria. Omalizumab binds free serum IgE and antagonizes its interaction with FcεRI, which is considered the main pharmacodynamic mechanism responsible for the clinical response to the treatment. The reduction of IgE serum concentration down-regulates the cellular expression of FcεRI on basophils. However, the biological events occurring on basophils during the therapy with omalizumab are multiple and complex. Here we review the current evidence regarding the specific biological effects of omalizumab on basophils in patients with asthma and chronic spontaneous urticaria. In addition to the modulation of IgE receptors, omalizumab may affect basophils homeostasis, intra-cellular signaling, cellular responsiveness/activation and cytokine release. These effects may be partially responsible for the clinical success of omalizumab and potentially provide useful biological markers for future assessment of the clinical response to the treatment. However, further investigation is required to better elucidate the role of basophils during the treatment with omalizumab.

Basophil Activation as Marker of Clinically Relevant Allergy and Therapy Outcome

For some years now the basophil activation test (BAT) using flow cytometry has emerged as a powerful tool and sensitive marker that can be used to detect clinically relevant allergies, provide information on the severity of an allergic reaction, and monitor therapies. Compared to other in vitro diagnostic tests, BAT seems to have a better informative value in terms of clinical relevance. In general, the BAT can be used for the diagnosis of the most common forms of IgE-mediated allergy such as hymenoptera venom allergy, inhalant allergy, food allergy, and drug allergy. Various basophil markers and parameters have been established which, depending on the trigger of the respective allergy, can provide information on the clinical relevance of sensitization, on the development of natural tolerance, on trigger thresholds, and on the severity of the allergic reaction. The BAT also serves as a suitable follow-up instrument for various therapeutic approaches such as specific immunotherapy, desensitization protocols, or use of anti-IgE-antibodies for the various diseases. Quality controls for routine use, standardization, and automatization are expected to expand the range of applications for the above-mentioned indications.

Sensitization to storage proteins in peanut and hazelnut is associated with higher levels of inflammatory markers in asthma

Background

Sensitization to peanuts and hazelnuts is common among young asthmatics and can be primary or a result of cross-reactivity. Sensitization as a result of cross-reactivity to birch pollen is typically associated to tolerance or mild and local symptoms upon intake of peanut or hazelnut.

Aim

The aim of this study was to investigate relationships between IgE antibody responses against peanut and hazelnut components, airway and systemic inflammation markers, lung function parameters and reported food hypersensitivity in a cohort of asthmatic children and young adults.

Methods

A population of 408 asthmatic individuals aged 10-35 years were investigated. Information on hypersensitivity symptoms upon intake of peanut or hazelnut were recorded in a standardized questionnaire. Fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), blood eosinophil count (B-Eos), spirometry, methacholine challenge outcome and IgE antibodies to peanut and hazelnut allergens were measured by standard clinical and laboratory methods.

Results

Subjects sensitized to any of the peanut (Ara h 1, 2 or 3) or hazelnut (Cor a 9 or 14) storage proteins were significantly younger (17.6 vs 21.2 years), had higher levels of FeNO (23.2 vs 16.7 ppb) and B-Eos (340 vs 170 cells/mcl) than those displaying only pollen-related cross-reactive sensitization. Levels of FeNO correlated with levels of IgE to storage proteins in children, but not in adults. Levels of B-Eos correlated with levels of IgE to all allergen components investigated in children, but only to levels of IgE to storage proteins in adults. Anaphylaxis and skin reactions upon intake of peanuts or hazelnuts were more often reported among subjects sensitized to the respective storage proteins than among those with only pollen-related cross-reactive sensitization. As compared to peanut, hazelnut was more often reported to cause gastrointestinal symptoms and less often oral cavity symptoms.

Conclusions

Sensitization to peanut and hazelnut storage proteins was associated with higher levels of inflammation markers and food hypersensitivity symptoms in this population of subjects with asthma.

Accuracy of component-resolved diagnostics in peanut allergy: Systematic literature review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Peanut allergy diagnosis relies on clinical reactivity to peanut supported by detection of specific IgE (sIgE) antibodies. Extract-based sIgE tests have low specificity, so component-resolved diagnostics may complement whole-extract testing.

METHODS

We systematically collected peanut allergen component data in seven databases and studied the diagnostic accuracy of peanut storage proteins (Arah1, 2, 3) and cross-reactive peanut proteins (Arah8 PR-10 and Arah9 lipid transfer protein) through meta-analyses. The systematic literature review included studies employing peanut components and oral food challenge (OFC) as reference standard in patients suspected of peanut allergy. Data for component sIgE at pre-defined detection thresholds were extracted and combined in random-effects bivariate meta-analyses. Risk of bias was assessed as recommended by Cochrane, with two additional quality items of importance for this review.

RESULTS

Nineteen eligible studies presented data suitable for meta-analysis. In cross-sectional pediatric studies, the pooled sensitivity of Arah2-sIgE at 0.35 kU_A /L cutoff was 83.3% [95% CI 75.6, 88.9] and specificity in diagnosing objective peanut allergy was 83.6% [95% CI 77.4, 88.4]. Compared with 0.1 and 1.0 kU_A /L, this threshold provided the best diagnostic accuracy. At 0.35 kU_A /L, Arah1 and Arah3 had comparable specificity (86.0% and 88.0%, respectively) but significantly lower sensitivity compared with Arah2 (37.0% and 39.1%, respectively; P < .05).

CONCLUSION

sIgE to Arah2 can enhance the certainty of diagnosis and reduce the number of OFC necessary to rule out clinical peanut allergy in unclear cases.

Immunoglobulin E (IgE)-Mediated Food Allergy in Children: Epidemiology, Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, Prevention, and Management

A food allergy is an immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated hypersensitive reaction to food, which consists in the appearance of allergic symptoms; it can vary from common urticaria to even fatal anaphylaxis. The prevalence of food allergies has been increasing in the past twenty years and it represents a major public health problem in industrialized countries. The mechanism that leads to food allergies is the lack of immunologic and clinical tolerance to food allergens. The diagnosis of IgE-mediated food allergies is based on the combined use of a detailed medical history, in-vivo, and in-vitro research of specific IgE, the elimination diet, and the double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge. The only currently available treatment for allergies is the strict elimination diet. This type of attitude, which we could define as “passive”, does not overcome the risk of accidental reactions due to involuntary intake of the culprit food. For food allergy management, an “active” approach is urgently needed, such as specific allergen immunotherapy, which is currently under development and only used for research purposes. This article aims to give an updated review of IgE-mediated food allergies in pediatric populations in terms of epidemiology, pathogenesis, prevention, diagnosis, and management.

IgE allergy diagnostics and other relevant tests in allergy, a World Allergy Organization position paper

Currently, testing for immunoglobulin E (IgE) sensitization is the cornerstone of diagnostic evaluation in suspected allergic conditions. This review provides a thorough and updated critical appraisal of the most frequently used diagnostic tests, both in vivo and in vitro. It discusses skin tests, challenges, and serological and cellular in vitro tests, and provides an overview of indications, advantages and disadvantages of each in conditions such as respiratory, food, venom, drug, and occupational allergy. Skin prick testing remains the first line approach in most instances; the added value of serum specific IgE to whole allergen extracts or components, as well as the role of basophil activation tests, is evaluated. Unproven, non-validated, diagnostic tests are also discussed. Throughout the review, the reader must bear in mind the relevance of differentiating between sensitization and allergy; the latter entails not only allergic sensitization, but also clinically relevant symptoms triggered by the culprit allergen.

Current Controversies and Future Prospects for Peanut Allergy Prevention, Diagnosis and Therapies

Peanut allergy has increased substantially in the past few decades, both in developed and developing countries. Peanut allergy has become a major public health concern, affecting up to 1 in 50 children, with repercussions for school and airline policies. Recent research findings have shown that, contrary to the long-standing teaching of "delayed" introduction of allergens, early introduction of peanut protein is of benefit as an allergy prevention strategy, especially in high-risk cases. Ideal dose, frequency and duration of "proactive" peanut therapy for maximum protection remain to be determined in order for it to become acceptable and practical on a large scale. Logistics around widespread screening of high-risk patients remain complex. The correct diagnosis of peanut allergy is crucial and diagnostic tests have been fine-tuned in the past 2 decades in order to help differentiate true allergy from false-positive sensitization through cross-reactivity. Component-resolved diagnostics have become routinely available, and the use of basophil activation tests has increased, although standardization and availability remain issues. Future tests, including epitope testing and histamine-release assays, promise to be even more specific in ruling out false positives and reducing the need for incremental food challenges. Stringent peanut avoidance and prompt treatment of reactions remain the cornerstone of treatment. The concept of exposing the allergic body to small amounts of peanut protein in a cautious, orderly, escalating fashion in the form of desensitization has been widely applied in the past 10-15 years, mainly in the research domain, but of late spilling over into every-day practice. However, desensitization does not equate to a cure, and has significant safety concerns and practical ramifications; probably requiring lifelong-controlled peanut ingestion for ongoing protection. Further strategies to enhance the safety and efficacy of immunotherapy are under exploration, many with a non-specific immune-modifying effect. Despite recent advances in peanut allergy, we still need to go back to basics with accurate diagnosis, nutritional counselling, well-organized allergy action plans and accessible emergency kits.

Basophil degranulation in response to IgE ligation is controlled by a distinctive circadian clock in asthma

BACKGROUND

Several factors may contribute to the circadian variability of clinical manifestations in asthma and allergy. Basophils play a pivotal role in allergic inflammation. However, evidence for a functional clock governing the effector function of these cells is sparse and contradictory. We have systematically sampled the 24-hour response of basophils to IgE- and non-IgE-dependent ligands in asthma to understand their possible contribution to the diurnal variations of allergic symptoms.

METHODS

Leukocytes were collected every 4 hours for 24 hours from 10 patients with moderate, persistent asthma and 10 matched, nonallergic controls, and then incubated with concentrations of anti-IgE, formyl-methionyl-leucylphenylalanine (fMLP), or the Ca²⁺ ionophore, A23187. Histamine release (HR) was tested for time-of-day- or disease-related variability by conventional statistics and for 24-hour rhythmicity by the cosinor method.

RESULTS

HR induced by anti-IgE was significantly increased at 08:00 vs. 20:00 in basophils from asthmatics but not controls. No significant differences were seen at any time in the response to A23187, while the response to fMLP was significantly higher at 08:00 vs. 20:00 in controls but not asthmatics. The basophil response to anti-IgE, but not fMLP or A23187, varied significantly across the 24 hours in asthma, and its amplitude, percent rhythm, and acrophase were comparable to those of peak expiratory flow or serum cortisol.

CONCLUSION

Using an integrated statistical approach, we show that basophil responsiveness undergoes significant circadian variability and that distinct patterns of rhythmicity can be recognized depending on the signal delivered, the activation parameters assessed, and the disease status.

Early decrease in basophil sensitivity to Ara h 2 precedes sustained unresponsiveness after peanut oral immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Only some patients with peanut allergy undergoing oral immunotherapy (OIT) achieve sustained clinical response. Basophil activation could provide a functional surrogate of efficacy.

OBJECTIVE

We hypothesized that changes in basophil sensitivity and area under the curve (AUC) to the immunodominant allergen Ara h 2 correlate with clinical responses to OIT.

METHODS

Children with peanut allergy aged 7 to 13 years were enrolled in a single-center, open-label peanut OIT trial. Levels of specific immunoglobulins were measured throughout OIT. Peripheral blood from multiple time points was stimulated in vitro with peanut allergens for flow cytometric assessment of the percentage of CD63^hi activated basophils.

RESULTS

Twenty-two of 30 subjects were successfully treated with OIT; after avoidance, 9 achieved sustained unresponsiveness (SU), and 13 had transient desensitization (TD). Basophil sensitivity, measured by using the dose that induces 50% of the maximal basophil response, to Ara h 2 stimulation decreased from baseline in subjects with SU (after OIT, P = .0041; after avoidance, P = .0011). At 3 months of OIT, basophil sensitivity in subjects with SU decreased from baseline compared with that in subjects with TD (median, 18-fold vs 3-fold; P = .01), with a receiver operating characteristic of 0.84 and optimal fold change of 4.9. Basophil AUC to Ara h 2 was suppressed after OIT equally in subjects with SU and those with TD (P = .4). After avoidance, basophil AUC rebounded in subjects with TD but not those with SU (P < .001). Passively sensitized basophils suppressed with postavoidance SU plasma had a lower AUC than TD plasma (6.4% vs 38.9%, P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

Early decreases in basophil sensitivity to Ara h 2 correlate with SU. Basophil AUC rebounds after avoidance in subjects with TD. Therefore, different aspects of basophil activation might be useful for monitoring of OIT efficacy.

How to diagnose food allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To assess the recent studies that focus on specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) testing and basophil activation test (BAT) for diagnosing IgE-mediated food allergies.

RECENT FINDINGS

The sIgE to allergen extract or component can predict reactivity to food. The cutoff value based on the positive predictive value (PPV) of sIgE can be considered whenever deciding whether oral food challenge (OFC) is required to diagnose hen's egg, cow's milk, wheat, peanut, and cashew nut allergy. However, PPV varies depending on the patients' background, OFC methodology, challenge foods, and assay methodology. Component-resolved diagnostics (CRD) has been used for food allergy diagnosis. Ovomucoid and omega-5 gliadin are good diagnostic markers for heated egg and wheat allergy. More recently, CRD of peanut, tree nuts, and seed have been investigated. Ara h 2 showed the best diagnostic accuracy for peanut allergy; other storage proteins, such as Jug r 1 for walnut, Ana o 3 for cashew nut, Ses i 1 for sesame, and Fag e 3 for buckwheat, are also better markers than allergen extracts. Some studies suggested that BAT has superior specificity than skin prick test and sIgE testing.

SUMMARY

The sIgE testing and BAT can improve diagnostic accuracy. CRD provides additional information that can help determine whether OFCs should be performed to diagnose food allergy.

Clinical and immunological differences between asymptomatic HDM-sensitized and HDM-allergic rhinitis patients

BACKGROUND

Confirmation of the clinical relevance of sensitisation is important for the diagnosis of allergic rhinitis.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the usefulness of an in vitro basophil activation test and component-resolved diagnosis in distinguishing between symptomatic allergic rhinitis patients and asymptomatic sensitization to house dust mites (HDMs).

METHODS

Thirty-six subjects with a positive skin prick test (SPT) for HDM were divided into a symptomatic (n = 17) and an asymptomatic (n = 19) group on the basis of their clinical history and a nasal provocation test. A basophil CD63 response to in vitro stimulation with Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus whole allergen extract and the IgE reactivity profiles for Der p 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 14, 15, 18, 21, 23 were evaluated. Serum IgE and IgG specific to D pteronyssinus whole allergen extract and total IgE were measured.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in the levels of IgE (IgE levels were higher in symptomatic patients with P = 0.055) and IgG specific to D pteronyssinus and total IgE. Symptomatic patients showed a lower threshold for in vitro basophil activation (3.33 ng/mL vs 33.3 ng/mL), a higher area under the curve (AUC) of basophil activation (171 vs 127) (P = 0.017), a higher response to positive control with anti-FcεRI stimulation (97% vs 79%) (P < 0.001), a recognition of more HDM allergens (4 vs 2) and more frequent sensitization to rDer p 7 (P = 0.016) and rDer p 23 compared to asymptomatic subjects (P = 0.018). There was a positive correlation (r = 0.63; P < 0.001) between the number of recognized allergens and the AUC of basophil activation.

CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

In the subjects studied, the differences in the basophil response to D pteronyssinus allergen extract, number of recognized HDM allergens and reactivity to rDer p 7 and rDer p 23 distinguish symptomatic from asymptomatic HDM sensitisation better than SPT or allergen extract-specific IgE. Information regarding the clinical relevance of sensitization is important for the prescription of allergen-specific immunotherapy.

Human mast cells and basophils-How are they similar how are they different?

Mast cells and basophils are key contributors to allergies and other inflammatory diseases since they are the most prominent source of histamine as well as numerous additional inflammatory mediators which drive inflammatory responses. However, a closer understanding of their precise roles in allergies and other pathological conditions has been marred by the considerable heterogeneity that these cells display, not only between mast cells and basophils themselves but also across different tissue locations and species. While both cell types share the ability to rapidly degranulate and release histamine following high-affinity IgE receptor cross-linking, they differ markedly in their ability to either react to other stimuli, generate inflammatory eicosanoids or release immunomodulating cytokines and chemokines. Furthermore, these cells display considerable pharmacological heterogeneity which has stifled attempts to develop more effective anti-allergic therapies. Mast cell- and basophil-specific transcriptional profiling, at rest and after activation by innate and adaptive stimuli, may help to unravel the degree to which these cells differ and facilitate a clearer understanding of their biological functions and how these could be targeted by new therapies.

Retrospective definition of reaction risk in Italian children with peanut, hazelnut and walnut allergy through component-resolved diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Serum IgE evaluation of peanut, hazelnut and walnut allergens through the use of component-resolved diagnosis (CRD) can be more accurate than IgE against whole food to associate with severe or mild reactions.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to retrospectively define the level of reaction risk in children with peanut, hazelnut and walnut sensitization through the use of CRD.

METHODS

34 patients [n=22 males, 65%; median age eight years, interquartile range (IQR) 5.0-11.0 years] with a reported history of reactions to peanut and/or hazelnut and/or walnut had their serum analyzed for specific IgE (s-IgE) by ImmunoCAP^® and ISAC^® microarray technique.

RESULTS

In children with previous reactions to peanut, the positivity of Arah1 and Arah2 s-IgE was associated with a history of anaphylaxis to such food, while the positivity of Arah8 s-IgE were associated with mild reactions. Regarding hazelnut, the presence of positive Cora9 and, particularly, Cora14 s-IgE was associated with a history of anaphylaxis, while positive Cora1.0401 s-IgE were associated with mild reactions. Concerning walnut, the presence of positive Jug r 1, Jug r 2, Jug r 3 s-IgE was associated with a history of anaphylaxis to such food. ImmmunoCAP^® proved to be more useful in retrospectively defining the risk of hazelnut anaphylaxis, because of the possibility of measuring Cor a14 s-IgE.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data show that the use of CRD in patients with allergy to peanut, hazelnut and walnut could allow for greater accuracy in retrospectively defining the risk of anaphylactic reaction to such foods.

Basophil Activation Test: Old and New Applications in Allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The basophil activation test (BAT) using flow cytometry has supplanted traditional methods of measuring basophil degranulation using histamine and other mediator release, and can be used for clinical applications as well as to explore the immune mechanisms of effector cell response to allergen. This review discusses the advancements made in clinical, diagnostic and laboratory research of allergy utilizing an ever-evolving BAT.

RECENT FINDINGS

Being an in vitro surrogate of the allergic reaction that happens in vivo in the sick patient, the BAT can be used to support the diagnosis of various allergic conditions, such as food, drug, respiratory and insect venom allergies, and the assessment of clinical response to allergen-specific immunotherapy and other immunomodulatory treatments. The BAT can also be used for research purposes to explore the mechanisms of allergy and tolerance at the level of the basophil, for instance by manipulating IgE and IgG and their receptors and by studying intracellular signalling cascade in response to allergen. This review covers the applications of the BAT to the clinical management of allergic patients and the increased understanding of the mechanisms of immune response to allergens as well as technological advancements made in recent years.

Biomarkers in Food Allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To familiarize the reader with the concept of precision medicine in food allergy by dealing with the current biomarkers for the diagnosis, prognosis, and management of the disease.

RECENT FINDINGS

Many efforts have been devoted in order to characterize reliable biomarkers able to identify specific phenotypes and endotypes in food allergy. Specific IgE (sIgE), sIgE/total IgE ratios, and T cell assays are just a few candidates that have been investigated over time. With the advent of omics sciences, a new era is commencing. A better understanding of pathogenesis of food allergy and mechanisms of action of the different therapeutic options will allow the accurate selection of the appropriate patient. In the near future, advances in technologies and data interpretation will allow a better understanding of the pathogenesis of food allergy and the identification of proper biomarkers for a personalized treatment tailored on the specific patient's profile.

The basophil activation test differentiates between patients with alpha-gal syndrome and asymptomatic alpha-gal sensitization

BACKGROUND

Galactose-alpha-1,3-galactose (alpha-gal) syndrome is characterized by the presence of serum specific IgE antibodies to alpha-gal and delayed type I allergic reactions to the carbohydrate alpha-gal after consumption of mammalian (red) meat products and drugs of mammalian origin. Diagnostics currently rely on patient history, skin tests, determination of serum specific IgE antibodies, and oral food or drug challenges.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess the utility of different basophil parameters (basophil reactivity and sensitivity, the ratio of the percentage of CD63⁺ basophils induced by the alpha-gal-containing allergen to the percentage of CD63⁺ basophils after stimulation with anti-FcεRI antibody [%CD63⁺/anti-FcεRI], and area under the dose-response curve [AUC]) as biomarkers for the clinical outcome of patients with alpha-gal syndrome compared with subjects with asymptomatic alpha-gal sensitization.

METHODS

In addition to routine diagnostics, a basophil activation test (Flow CAST) with different concentrations of alpha-gal-containing allergens (eg, commercially available alpha-gal-carrying proteins and pork kidney extracts) was performed in 21 patients with alpha-gal syndrome, 12 alpha-gal-sensitized subjects, and 18 control subjects.

RESULTS

Alpha-gal-containing allergens induced strong basophil activation in a dose-dependent manner in patients. Basophil reactivity at distinct allergen concentrations, the %CD63⁺/anti-FcεRI ratio across most allergen concentrations, the AUC of dose-response curves, and basophil allergen threshold sensitivity (CD-sens) with pork kidney extract were significantly higher in patients with alpha-gal syndrome compared with those in sensitized subjects. All parameters were negative in control subjects.

CONCLUSION

The basophil activation test should be considered as an additional diagnostic test before performing time-consuming and potentially risky oral provocation tests. The %CD63⁺/anti-FcεRI ratio for all allergens and AUCs for pork kidney were the best parameters for distinguishing patients with alpha-gal syndrome from subjects with asymptomatic alpha-gal sensitization.

A clinical follow-up of omalizumab in routine treatment of allergic asthma monitored by CD-sens

Introduction

Omalizumab has been available for treatment of allergic asthma for more than a decade and thus, its efficacy in routine treatment was of interest to evaluate. Basophil allergen threshold sensitivity (CD‐sens) has been shown to correlate with the bronchial allergen threshold sensitivity and can be used to objectively measure omalizumab treatment efficacy. We aimed to evaluate the effect of omalizumab treatment of allergic asthma by CD‐sens, as an objective marker of the IgE‐mediated inflammation, and related to SPT, spirometry, FeNO, Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ), and Global Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness (GETE).

Methods

Thirty‐two patients were treated with omalizumab for 16 weeks. CD‐sens was used to define the response and related to clinical parameters. If CD‐sens was negative (<0.1) (CD‐sens low Group) the patient continued with the standard dose. If CD‐sens was ≥0.1 (CD‐sens high Group) a second 16 weeks period with 25–50% dosage increase was started and evaluated after a total of 32 weeks.

Results

Nine of 32 patients became CD‐sens negative after treatment (CD‐sens start: 8.0; 16 weeks: <0.01) and regarded as successful. 15/23 were unsuccessful (CD‐sens start: 13; 16 weeks: 1.65) and the omalizumab dose was increased. CD‐sens decreased significantly (p < 0.05) and further 3/15 patients became CD‐sens negative (CD‐sens at 32 weeks: 0.5). There was a significantly smaller IgE‐ab fraction (IgE‐ab/IgE) in the CD‐sens low versus the CD‐sens high Group (p < 0.0001). A significant decrease in ACQ was seen in both groups after 16 weeks treatment (p = 0.05 and 0.01, respectively). No significant changes could be detected for the other clinical parameters.

Conclusion

By the use of the objective laboratory method CD‐sens, which effectively measure the direct effect of omalizumab, that is, the IgE‐mediated part of the allergic asthma, in combination with clinical parameters it might be possible to more effectively monitor and treat IgE‐mediated allergic asthma.

BSACI guideline for the diagnosis and management of peanut and tree nut allergy

Peanut nut and tree nut allergy are characterised by IgE mediated reactions to nut proteins. Nut allergy is a global disease. Limited epidemiological data suggest varying prevalence in different geographical areas. Primary nut allergy affects over 2% of children and 0.5% of adults in the UK. Infants with severe eczema and/or egg allergy have a higher risk of peanut allergy. Primary nut allergy presents most commonly in the first five years of life, often after the first known ingestion with typical rapid onset IgE-mediated symptoms. The clinical diagnosis of primary nut allergy can be made by the combination of a typical clinical presentation and evidence of nut specifc IgE shown by a positive skin prick test (SPT) or specific IgE (sIgE) test. Pollen food syndrome is a distinct disorder, usually mild, with oral/pharyngeal symptoms, in the context of hay fever or pollen sensitisation, which can be triggered by nuts. It can usually be distinguish clinically from primary nut allergy. The magnitude of a SPT or sIgE relates to the probability of clinical allergy, but does not relate to clinical severity. SPT of ≥ 8 mm or sIgE ≥ 15 KU/L to peanut is highly predictive of clinical allergy. Cut off values are not available for tree nuts. Test results must be interpreted in the context of the clinical history. Diagnostic food challenges are usually not necessary but may be used to confirm or refute a conflicting history and test result. As nut allergy is likely to be a long-lived disease, nut avoidance advice is the cornerstone of management. Patients should be provided with a comprehensive management plan including avoidance advice, patient specific emergency medication and an emergency treatment plan and training in administration of emergency medication. Regular re-training is required.

The usefulness of the basophil activation test in monitoring specific immunotherapy with house dust mite allergens

Introduction

In clinical practice, reliable tools for monitoring specific immunotherapy (SIT) are of utmost importance.

Aim

To assess the usefulness of the basophil activation test (BAT) in monitoring SIT in paediatric patients with allergy to house dust mites (HDM).

Material and methods

Thirty-one children qualified for SIT with HDM, of whom 21 completed the SIT during the observation period. The BAT was carried out prior to commencing the SIT (time point BAT1) and upon finishing the initial pack of allergy vaccine (cumulative dose of allergen 12487.5 PNU; BAT2), as well as after the second vaccine pack (cumulative dose of allergen 23750.0 PNU; BAT3). Peripheral blood of the patients was stimulated with allergen solutions in five concentrations from 0.00225 ng/ml to 22.5 ng/ml. Basophil activation was measured by CD63 expression in flow cytometry.

Results

For the allergen concentration of 0.225 ng/ml, a statistically significant decrease in median basophil activation was observed, from 51.29% at BAT1 to 8.48% at BAT2 (p = 0.004) and 4.21% at BAT3 (p < 0.001). For the allergen concentration of 0.0225 ng/ml, a statistically significant decrease was seen between BAT1 (1.72%) and BAT3 (0.21%, p = 0.01). Median CD-sens index decreased significantly from 1099.02 at BAT1 to 179.31 at BAT2 (p < 0.002) and 168.04 at BAT3 (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

There is a significant decrease in BAT results in the course of specific immunotherapy with HDM allergens in children, with the optimum allergen concentration for monitoring basophil response at 0.225 ng/ml. The CD-sens index seems to be a better monitoring parameter than the plain percentage of CD63-expressing basophils.

A comparative study on basophil activation test, histamine release assay, and passive sensitization histamine release assay in the diagnosis of peanut allergy

BACKGROUND

Allergy can be diagnosed using basophil tests. Several methods measuring basophil activation are available. This study aimed at comparing basophil activation test (BAT), histamine release assay (HR), and passive sensitization histamine release assay (passive HR) in the diagnosis of peanut allergy.

METHODS

BAT, HR, and passive HR were performed on 11 peanut-allergic and 14 nonallergic subjects. Blood was incubated with peanut extract or anti-IgE and tests were performed as follows: BAT-CD63 upregulation was assessed by flow cytometry; HR-released histamine was quantified by a glass fiber-based fluorometric method; passive HR-IgE-stripped donor basophils were incubated with participants' serum and histamine release was quantified as HR.

RESULTS

CDsens, a measure of basophil allergen sensitivity, was significantly higher for BAT (80.1±17.4) compared to HR (23.4±10.31) and passive HR (11.1±2.0). BAT, HR, and passive HR had a clinical sensitivity of 100%, 100%, and 82% and specificity of 100%, 100%, and 100%, respectively, when excluding inconclusive results. BAT identified 11 of 11 allergic patients, HR 10, and passive HR 9. Likewise, BAT recognized 12 of 14 nonallergic subjects, HR 10, and passive HR 13. However, the tests' diagnostic performances were not statistically different. Interestingly, nonreleasers in HR but not in BAT had lower basophil count compared to releasers (249 vs 630 counts/min).

CONCLUSION

BAT displayed a significantly higher CDsens compared to HR and passive HR. The basophil tests' diagnostic performances were not significantly different. Still, BAT could diagnose subjects with low basophil number in contrast to HR.

Making the Most of In Vitro Tests to Diagnose Food Allergy

Various in vitro tests assess different aspects of the underlying immune mechanism of IgE-mediated food allergy. Some can be used for diagnostic purposes; specific IgE to allergen extracts is widely available; specific IgE to allergen components is used in most specialist centers, and the basophil activation test is becoming increasingly used clinically. IgE to allergen peptides, T-cell assays, allergen-specific/total IgE ratios, and allergen-specific IgG4/IgE ratios are currently reserved for research. Different factors can modulate the likelihood of IgE-mediated food allergy of a given allergy test result, namely, the patients' age, ethnicity, previous allergic reaction to the identified food, concomitant atopic conditions, and geographical location, and need to be taken into account when interpreting the allergy test results in the clinic. The importance of the specific food, the clinical resources available, and patient preferences are additional aspects that need to be considered when deciding whether an oral food challenge is required to reach an accurate diagnosis of IgE-mediated food allergy.

Windows of opportunity for tolerance induction for allergy by studying the evolution of allergic sensitization in birth cohorts

Allergic sensitization is a risk factor for developing IgE-mediated allergic diseases, which are a major cause of chronic illness world-wide. The introduction of allergen molecules to the field of allergy diagnostics has allowed dissecting the IgE response on a molecular level to pinpoint the specific disease-causing allergens. Studying birth cohorts is an essential tool for understanding the development and life course of allergy, enabling the possibility to design preventive strategies. Here we review the evolution of sensitization using data from some of the large European birth cohort studies. Differences and similarities between sensitization to food and various sources of inhalant allergens are discussed and allergen molecules of importance in early childhood predicting disease in adolescence are highlighted. Finally, we discuss windows of opportunity where intervention could be considered and address possible preventive strategies.

Road map for the clinical application of the basophil activation test in food allergy

The diagnosis of IgE‐mediated food allergy based solely on the clinical history and the documentation of specific IgE to whole allergen extract or single allergens is often ambiguous, requiring oral food challenges (OFCs), with the attendant risk and inconvenience to the patient, to confirm the diagnosis of food allergy. This is a considerable proportion of patients assessed in allergy clinics. The basophil activation test (BAT) has emerged as having superior specificity and comparable sensitivity to diagnose food allergy, when compared with skin prick test and specific IgE. BAT, therefore, may reduce the number of OFC required for accurate diagnosis, particularly positive OFC. BAT can also be used to monitor resolution of food allergy and the clinical response to immunomodulatory treatments. Given the practicalities involved in the performance of BAT, we propose that it can be applied for selected cases where the history, skin prick test and/or specific IgE are not definitive for the diagnosis of food allergy. In the cases that the BAT is positive, food allergy is sufficiently confirmed without OFC; in the cases that BAT is negative or the patient has non‐responder basophils, OFC may still be indicated. However, broad clinical application of BAT demands further standardization of the laboratory procedure and of the flow cytometry data analyses, as well as clinical validation of BAT as a diagnostic test for multiple target allergens and confirmation of its feasibility and cost‐effectiveness in multiple settings.