Background: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is an effective treatment for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (AR) with or without asthma. It is important to note that due to the complex interaction between patient, allergy triggers, symptomatology and vaccines used for AIT, some patients do not respond optimally to the treatment. Furthermore, there are no validated or generally accepted candidate biomarkers that are predictive of the clinical response to AIT. Clinical management of patients receiving AIT and efficacy in randomised controlled trials for drug development could be enhanced by predictive biomarkers. Method: The EAACI taskforce reviewed all candidate biomarkers used in clinical trials of AR patients with/without asthma in a literature review. Biomarkers were grouped into seven domains: (i) IgE (total IgE, specific IgE and sIgE/Total IgE ratio), (ii) IgG-subclasses (sIgG1, sIgG4 including SIgE/IgG4 ratio), (iii) Serum inhibitory activity for IgE (IgE-FAB and IgE-BF), (iv) Basophil activation, (v) Cytokines and Chemokines, (vi) Cellular markers (T regulatory cells, B regulatory cells and dendritic cells) and (vii) In vivo biomarkers (including provocation tests?). Results: All biomarkers were reviewed in the light of their potential advantages as well as their respective drawbacks. Unmet needs and specific recommendations on all seven domains were addressed.

Nasal allergen challenge (NAC) is an important tool to diagnose allergic rhinitis. In daily clinical routine, experimentally, or when measuring therapeutic success clinically, nasal allergen challenge is fundamental. It is further one of the key diagnostic tools when initiating specific allergen immunotherapy. So far, national recommendations offered guidance on its execution; however, international divergence left many questions unanswered. These differences in the literature caused EAACI to initiate a task force to answer unmet needs and find a consensus in executing nasal allergen challenge. On the basis of a systematic review containing nasal allergen challenges of the past years, task force members reviewed evidence, discussed open issues, and studied variations of several subjective and objective assessment parameters to propose a standardized way of a nasal allergen challenge procedure in clinical practice. Besides an update on indications, contraindications, and preparations for the test procedure, main recommendations are a bilaterally challenge with standardized allergens, with a spray device offering 0.1 mL per nostril. A systematic catalogue for positivity criteria is given for the variety of established subjective and objective assessment methods as well as a schedule for the challenge procedure. The task force recommends a unified protocol for NAC for daily clinical practice, aiming at eliminating the previous difficulty of comparing NAC results due to unmet needs.

The outbreak of the SARS‐CoV‐2‐induced coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic re‐shaped doctor‐patient interaction and challenged capacities of healthcare systems. It created many issues around the optimal and safest way to treat complex patients with severe allergic disease. A significant number of the patients are on treatment with biologicals, and clinicians face the challenge to provide optimal care during the pandemic. Uncertainty of the potential risks for these patients is related to the fact that the exact sequence of immunological events during SARS‐CoV‐2 is not known. Severe COVID‐19 patients may experience a “cytokine storm” and associated organ damage characterized by an exaggerated release of pro‐inflammatory type 1 and type 3 cytokines. These inflammatory responses are potentially counteracted by anti‐inflammatory cytokines and type 2 responses. This expert‐based EAACI statement aims to provide guidance on the application of biologicals targeting type 2 inflammation in patients with allergic disease. Currently, there is very little evidence for an enhanced risk of patients with allergic diseases to develop severe COVID‐19. Studies focusing on severe allergic phenotypes are lacking. At present, noninfected patients on biologicals for the treatment of asthma, atopic dermatitis, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, or chronic spontaneous urticaria should continue their biologicals targeting type 2 inflammation via self‐application. In case of an active SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, biological treatment needs to be stopped until clinical recovery and SARS‐CoV‐2 negativity is established and treatment with biologicals should be re‐initiated. Maintenance of add‐on therapy and a constant assessment of disease control, apart from acute management, are demanded.

The seventh “Future of the Allergists and Specific Immunotherapy (FASIT)” workshop held in 2019 provided a platform for global experts from academia, allergy clinics, regulatory authorities and industry to review current developments in the field of allergen immunotherapy (AIT). Key domains of the meeting included the following: (a) Biomarkers for AIT and allergic asthma; (b) visions for the future of AIT; (c) progress and data for AIT in asthma and the updates of GINA and EAACI Asthma Guidelines (separated for house dust mite SCIT, SLIT tablets and SLIT drops; patient populations) including a review of clinically relevant endpoints in AIT studies in asthma; (d) regulatory prerequisites such as the “Therapy Allergen Ordinance” in Germany; (e) optimization of trial design in AIT clinical research; (f) challenges planning and conducting phase III (field) studies and the future role of Allergen Exposure Chambers (AEC) in AIT product development from the regulatory point of view. We report a summary of panel discussions of all six domains and highlight unmet needs and possible solutions for the future.

Diagnosis early in life, sensitization, asthma endotypes, monitoring of disease and treatment progression are key motivations for the exploration of biomarkers for allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma. The number of genes related to allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma increases steadily; however, prognostic genes have not yet entered clinical application. We hypothesize that the combination of multiple genes may generate biomarkers with prognostic potential. The current review attempts to group more than 161 different potential biomarkers involved in respiratory inflammation to pave the way for future classifiers. The potential biomarkers are categorized into either epithelial or infiltrate-derived or mixed origin, epithelial biomarkers. Furthermore, surface markers were grouped into cell-typespecific categories. The current literature provides multiple biomarkers for potential asthma endotypes that are related to T-cell phenotypes such as Th1, Th2, Th9, Th17, Th22 and Tregs and their lead cytokines. Eosinophilic and neutrophilic asthma endotypes are also classified by epithelium-derived CCL-26 and osteopontin, respectively. There are currently about 20 epithelium-derived biomarkers exclusively derived from epithelium, which are likely to innovate biomarker panels as they are easy to sample. This article systematically reviews and categorizes genes and collects current evidence that may promote these biomarkers to become part of allergic rhinitis or allergic asthma classifiers with high prognostic value.

Interferon-γ (IFN-γ) and interleukin-4 (IL-4) are key effector cytokines for the differentiation of T helper type 1 and 2 (Th1 and Th2) cells. Both cytokines induce fate-decisive transcription factors such as GATA3 and TBX21 that antagonize the polarized development of opposite phenotypes by direct regulation of each other's expression along with many other target genes. Although it is well established that mesenchymal cells directly respond to Th1 and Th2 cytokines, the nature of antagonistic differentiation programs in airway epithelial cells is only partially understood. In this study, primary normal human bronchial epithelial cells (NHBEs) were exposed to IL-4, IFN-γ, or both and genome-wide transcriptome analysis was performed. The study uncovers an antagonistic regulation pattern of IL-4 and IFN-γ in NHBEs, translating the Th1/Th2 antagonism directly in epithelial gene regulation. IL-4- and IFN-γ-induced transcription factor hubs form clusters, present in antagonistically and polarized gene regulation networks. Furthermore, the IL-4-dependent induction of IL-24 observed in rhinitis patients was downregulated by IFN-γ, and therefore IL-24 represents a potential biomarker of allergic inflammation and a Th2 polarized condition of the epithelium.

Background Hundreds of plant species release their pollen into the air every year during early spring. During that period, pollen allergic as well as non‐allergic patients frequently present to doctors with severe respiratory tract infections. Our objective was therefore to assess whether pollen may interfere with antiviral immunity. Methods We combined data from real‐life human exposure cohorts, a mouse model and human cell culture to test our hypothesis. Results Pollen significantly diminished interferon‐λ and pro‐inflammatory chemokine responses of airway epithelia to rhinovirus and viral mimics and decreased nuclear translocation of interferon regulatory factors. In mice infected with respiratory syncytial virus, co‐exposure to pollen caused attenuated antiviral gene expression and increased pulmonary viral titers. In non‐allergic human volunteers, nasal symptoms were positively correlated with airborne birch pollen abundance, and nasal birch pollen challenge led to downregulation of type I and ‐III interferons in nasal mucosa. In a large patient cohort, numbers of rhinoviruspositive cases were correlated with airborne birch pollen concentrations. Conclusion The ability of pollen to suppress innate antiviral immunity, independent of allergy, suggests that high‐risk population groups should avoid extensive outdoor activities when pollen and respiratory virus seasons coincide.

No abstract