Current practice of allergy diagnosis and the potential impact of regulation in Europe

Outdoor airborne allergens: Characterization, behavior and monitoring in Europe

Aeroallergens or inhalant allergens, are proteins dispersed through the air and have the potential to induce allergic conditions such as rhinitis, conjunctivitis, and asthma. Outdoor aeroallergens are found predominantly in pollen grains and fungal spores, which are allergen carriers. Aeroallergens from pollen and fungi have seasonal emission patterns that correlate with plant pollination and fungal sporulation and are strongly associated with atmospheric weather conditions. They are released when allergen carriers come in contact with the respiratory system, e.g. the nasal mucosa. In addition, due to the rupture of allergen carriers, airborne allergen molecules may be released directly into the air in the form of micronic and submicronic particles (cytoplasmic debris, cell wall fragments, droplets etc.) or adhered onto other airborne particulate matter. Therefore, aeroallergen detection strategies must consider, in addition to the allergen carriers, the allergen molecules themselves. This review article aims to present the current knowledge on inhalant allergens in the outdoor environment, their structure, localization, and factors affecting their production, transformation, release or degradation. In addition, methods for collecting and quantifying aeroallergens are listed and thoroughly discussed. Finally, the knowledge gaps, challenges and implications associated with aeroallergen analysis are described.

Inconsistent Skin Prick Tests for Allergy to Birch Homologous Trees May Result from Cross-Reacting Allergens or Technical Errors

INTRODUCTION

Skin prick tests (SPTs) are the gold standard for diagnosis of allergic rhinitis (AR). A decrease in the number of allergens included in standard SPT panels has recently been debated - particularly regarding the cross-reacting homologous pollen from birch, alder, and hazel trees - but has not yet been implemented in clinical guidelines.

METHODS

A subgroup of patients with AR (n = 69) who showed inconsistent SPT results among birch, alder, and hazel was investigated in detail. Beyond SPT, patient workup included assessment of clinical relevance and various serological parameters (total IgE, and specific IgE to birch, alder, and hazel and to Bet v 1, Bet v 2, and Bet v 4).

RESULTS

More than half the study group had negative SPT results for birch but positive results for alder and/or hazel, and 87% of the study group was polysensitized, showing at least one more positive SPT result for other plants. Whereas 30.4% of patients showed serological sensitization to birch pollen extract, only 18.8% displayed positive specific IgE to Bet v 1. Clinical assessment revealed that most patients with AR were polysensitized and had perennial symptoms or symptoms also occurring during times other than tree flowering times. If the SPT panel is limited to testing birch only, 52.2% of patients in this subgroup would have been overlooked.

CONCLUSION

Inconsistent SPT results in the birch homologous group may result from cross-reacting allergens or technical errors. If patients report convincing clinical symptoms despite negative results from a reduced SPT panel or inconsistent results for homologous allergens, SPT should be repeated, and molecular markers should be added to achieve a correct diagnosis.

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.

Allergy screening with extract-based skin prick tests demonstrates higher sensitivity over in vitro molecular allergy testing

BACKGROUND

As extract-based skin testing as well as in vitro tests for major allergens have their own advantages, both procedures are usually performed in routine settings. In times of shortages in medical staff and supplies, we asked ourselves, how many patients would be underdiagnosed, if only one test could be used.

METHODS

In a retrospective analysis, we investigated a cohort of 2646 patients seen by a single physician in a large Austrian outpatient allergy clinic in 2018. Only patients with an allergen source-specific history and pairs of extract-based skin prick (SPT) and in vitro molecular allergy tests to major allergens were included.

RESULTS

For all tested allergen sources, sensitivity was higher for SPT than for sIgE-based molecular allergy testing. Concerning 1006 birch pollen-allergic patients, 791 (78.6%) had positive results with both tests, while 153 (15.2%) only with the SPT and 62 (6.2%) only with the sIgE to Bet v1. The other allergen sources showed similar results: For house dust mite 816/1120 (72.9%), grass pollen 1077/1416 (76.1%) and cat 433/622 (69.6%) remained test-positive with both procedures, whereas in 276 (24.6%), 224 (15.8%) and 173 (27.8%) times only the SPT and 28 (2.5%), 115 (8.1%) and 16 (2.6%) times only the sIgE to Der p1/2/23, Phl p1/5 and Fel d1 showed a positive result. Each comparison was statistically significant (each p < 0.0001, Chi-squared test).

CONCLUSIONS

Screening for allergy with major molecular allergens has lower sensitivity when compared with extract-based skin tests. A combination of both is required for an optimal sensitivity.

Biomarkers for diagnosis and prediction of therapy responses in allergic diseases and asthma

Modern health care requires a proactive and individualized response to diseases, combining precision diagnosis and personalized treatment. Accordingly, the approach to patients with allergic diseases encompasses novel developments in the area of personalized medicine, disease phenotyping and endotyping, and the development and application of reliable biomarkers. A detailed clinical history and physical examination followed by the detection of IgE immunoreactivity against specific allergens still represents the state of the art. However, nowadays, further emphasis focuses on the optimization of diagnostic and therapeutic standards and a large number of studies have been investigating the biomarkers of allergic diseases, including asthma, atopic dermatitis, allergic rhinitis, food allergy, urticaria and anaphylaxis. Various biomarkers have been developed by omics technologies, some of which lead to a better classification of distinct phenotypes or endotypes. The introduction of biologicals to clinical practice increases the need for biomarkers for patient selection, prediction of outcomes and monitoring, to allow for an adequate choice of the duration of these costly and long‐lasting therapies. Escalating healthcare costs together with questions about the efficacy of the current management of allergic diseases require further development of a biomarker‐driven approach. Here, we review biomarkers in diagnosis and treatment of asthma, atopic dermatitis, allergic rhinitis, viral infections, chronic rhinosinusitis, food allergy, drug hypersensitivity and allergen immunotherapy with a special emphasis on specific IgE, the microbiome and the epithelial barrier. In addition, EAACI guidelines on biologicals are discussed within the perspective of biomarkers.

In-vivo diagnostic test allergens in Europe: A call to action and proposal for recovery plan-An EAACI position paper

Diagnostic allergens are defined as medicinal products in the EU. Marketing authorization by national authorities is necessary; however, diagnostic allergens are not homogeneously regulated in different EU member states. Allergen manufacturers argue with increasing costs forcing them to continuously reduce the diagnostic allergen portfolios offered to allergists. In contrast, EAACI and national European Allergy Societies see the need for the availability of a wide range of high-quality diagnostic allergens for in vivo diagnosis of IgE-mediated allergies not only covering predominant but also less frequent allergen sources. In a recent EAACI task force survey, the current practice of allergy diagnosis was shown to rely on skin tests as first option in almost 2/3 of all types of allergic diseases and in 90% regarding respiratory allergies. With the need to ensure the availability of high-quality diagnostic allergens in the EU, an action plan has been set up by EAACI to analyse the current regulatory demands in EU member states and to define possible solutions stated in this document: (a) simplification of authorization for diagnostic allergens; (b) specific regulation of special types of diagnostic allergens; (c) new models beyond the current model of homologous groups; (d) simplification of pharmacovigilance reporting; (e) reduction of regulation fees for diagnostic allergens; (f) reimbursement for diagnostic allergens. Joining forces of allergists, manufacturers and authorities are of high importance to ensure remaining relevant allergens in the EU markets to facilitate a sustainable and comprehensive service for the diagnosis and treatment of allergic diseases.

Does the principle of homologous groups allow a reduction of allergens in the skin prick test panel?

PURPOSE

Regulatory and economic conditions drive the application of the concept of homologous groups on therapeutic and diagnostic formulations. In this context, a possible reduction of allergens in the skin prick test panel in the clinical routine should be investigated for the grass, birch and Dermatophagoides homologous group.

METHODS

Grass and cultivated rye skin prick test results of 1101 patients, birch/hazel/alder skin prick test results of 1131 patients and 1068 Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus and farinae skin prick tests were retrospectively evaluated with regard to sensitivity and false-negative rate detecting sensitization against cultivated rye with grass skin prick test, sensitization against hazel and/or alder with birch skin prick test and sensitization towards Dermatophagoides farinae with Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus skin prick test.

RESULTS

Skin prick test results in all groups highly correlated in Spearman Rank Order correlation. Sensitivity of grass skin prick test detecting sensitization against cultivated rye was highest with 98.9%, sensitivity of birch skin prick test detecting sensitization toward hazel and alder was 95.6 and 90.0%, respectively. Sensitivity of skin prick test with Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus detecting sensitization towards Dermatophagoides farinae was 93.6%. Only 26 patients with positive rye, hazel, alder or Dermatophagoides farinae skin prick test that were overlooked by grass, birch or Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus skin prick test reported allergic symptoms.

CONCLUSION

In routine clinical practice, sensitization against cultivated rye can safely be detected by skin prick test with grass allergen. In addition, the sensitivity of birch skin prick test is high in terms of sensitization towards hazel, but lower for alder. Sensitivity of Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus skin prick test also is high to detect sensitization towards Dermatophagoides farinae. Further research will indicate if several skin prick test allergens will disappear and be completely replaced by a single skin prick test based on the principle of homologous groups.

Introducing a Stabilizer Formulation for Allergenic Mold Extracts

Background

Sensitization to common mold allergens is one of the major causes of allergic rhinitis and asthma. Therefore, there is a critical need for standard sensitivity tests including skin prick tests to improve the stability of fungi extracts in traditional allergenic formulations. To address this concern, the present study aimed to develop a formulation to preserve allergenic activity of mold extracts.

Methods

48 stabilizer formulations were designed and monitored for allergenic activity during a 40-days incubation period at 37 °C using an ELISA. Specifically, the IgE reactivity of allergenic A. alternata extracts were examined. After establishing the most effective stabilizer formulation, we evaluated whether it could protect the allergenic activity of Alt a1, A. fumigatus, and C. herbarum using an IgE inhibition ELISA after 40 days at 37 °C.

Results

We demonstrated that the most effective stabilizer formulation was a glycerol-based extract containing Arg and Glu. This formulation had an equal ratio of sucrose, sorbitol and protein and was able to preserve more than 95% of allergenic A. alternata extract activity during a 40-days incubation period at 37 °C.

Conclusion

The present study reveals a novel formulation that is an efficient stabilizer of allergenic mold extract activity and has practical applications in mold skin prick tests, ELISAs, immunotherapies, and RAST.

Highlights and recent developments in airway diseases in EAACI journals (2018)

The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) supports three journals: Allergy, Pediatric Allergy and Immunology, and Clinical and Translational Allergy. EAACI's major goals include supporting the promotion of health, in which the prevention of allergy and asthma plays a critical role, and disseminating the knowledge of allergic disease to all stakeholders. In 2018, the remarkable progress in the identification of basic mechanisms of allergic and respiratory diseases as well as the translation of these findings into clinical practice were observed. Last year's highlights include publication of EAACI guidelines for allergen immunotherapy, many EAACI Position Papers covering important aspects for the specialty, better understanding of molecular and cellular mechanisms, identification of biomarkers for disease prediction and progress monitoring, novel prevention and intervention studies, elucidation of mechanisms of multimorbidities, introduction of new drugs to the clinics, recently completed phase three clinical studies, and publication of a large number of allergen immunotherapy studies and meta-analyses.

Component-resolved diagnostics in the clinical and laboratory investigation of allergy

The diagnosis and management of allergy is complex; the clinical symptoms associated with allergic reactions span a broad spectrum of severity, from mild hay fever-type symptoms through to life-threatening anaphylaxis. Obtaining an allergy-focused clinical history is therefore vital for identifying possible allergic triggers and directing testing. However, this focus could be changing as scientific and technological advances have paved the way for developments within in vitro testing for allergy. With knowledge of allergens at the molecular level expanding, there are now the facilities to characterize the sensitization profiles of allergy sufferers and determine the specific molecules (or components) against which the allergen-inducing immunoglobulin type E proteins have been produced. This technology is termed component-resolved diagnostics. We know that accurate identification of immunoglobulin type E specificity, the source of the causative allergen, and knowledge of potential allergic cross-reactivities are required for optimal clinical management of allergy patients. These factors can make allergy a diagnostic challenge outside of a specialist centre, and contribute to the difficulties associated with requesting and interpreting allergy tests. The incorporation of component-resolved diagnostics into current practice has provided a platform for patient-tailored risk stratification and improved the application of allergen-specific immunotherapy, revolutionizing specialist management of these patients. This review discusses the roles of each type of testing in allergy management and predictions for future pathways.

Local allergic rhinitis: Implications for management

A significant proportion of rhinitis patients without systemic IgE-sensitisation tested by skin prick test and serum allergen-specific IgE (sIgE) display nasal reactivity upon nasal allergen provocation test (NAPT). This disease phenotype has been termed local allergic rhinitis (LAR). LAR is an underdiagnosed entity affecting children and adults from different parts of the world, with moderate-to-severe symptoms, impairment of quality of life and rapid progression to symptom worsening. LAR is a stable phenotype and not merely an initial state of AR. Allergic rhinitis and LAR share many clinical features including a positive NAPT response, markers of type 2 nasal inflammation including sIgE in nasal secretions and a significant rate of asthma development. LAR should be considered as a differential diagnosis in those subjects of any age with symptoms suggestive of AR but no evidence of systemic atopy. Although LAR pathophysiology is partially unknown, in some patients sIgE can be demonstrated directly in the nasal secretions and/or indirectly via positive responses in basophil activation test (BAT). LAR can coexist with other rhinitis phenotypes, especially AR. The diagnosis currently relies on the positivity of NAPT to a single or multiple allergens. NAPT has high sensitivity, specificity and reproducibility, and it is considered the gold standard. BAT and the measurement of nasal sIgE can also contribute to LAR diagnosis. LAR patients benefit from the same therapeutic strategies than AR individuals, including the avoidance of allergen exposure and the pharmacotherapy. Moreover, several recent studies support the effectiveness and safety of allergen immunotherapy for LAR, which opens a window of treatment opportunity in these patients.

Perspectives in allergen immunotherapy: 2017 and beyond

The Future of the Allergists and Specific Immunotherapy (FASIT) workshop provides a regular platform for global experts from academia, allergy clinics, regulatory authorities and industry to review developments in the field of allergen immunotherapy (AIT). The most recent meeting, held in February 2017, had two main themes: advances in AIT and hot topics in AIT from the regulatory point of view. The first theme covered opportunities for personalized AIT, advances in adjuvants and delivery systems, and the development of new molecules and future vaccines for AIT. Key topics in the second part of the meeting were the effects of the enactment of European Directive 2001/83 on the availability of allergens for therapy and diagnosis across the EU, the challenges of conducting Phase 3 studies in the field, the future role of allergen exposure chambers in AIT studies and specific considerations in performing AIT studies in the paediatric population. Finally, the group highlighted the forthcoming EAACI guidelines and their particular importance for the standardization of practice in the treatment of allergies. This review presents a comprehensive insight into those panel discussions and highlights unmet needs and also possible solutions to them for the future.