No abstract

Background: Shrimp sensitization is common in the general population, but the presence of symptoms is only moderately related to sensitization. A point still at issue is which in vivo and/or in vitro tests (food challenge, component-resolved diagnosis, house dust mite [HDM] sensitization) can help in distinguishing shrimp-allergic subjects from subjects that are sensitized but tolerant. Methods: The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of IgE to the different shrimp and mite allergens in distinguishing shrimp challenge-positive from challenge-negative patients. Subjects with suspected hypersensitivity reactions to shrimp, positive skin prick tests (SPTs), and/or anti-shrimp IgE were submitted to open and double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFC). Specific IgE to shrimp, mites, and the recombinants rPen a 1, rDer p 1, 2, and 10 were tested using ImmunoCAP-FEIA. IgE immunoblotting was performed to identify the patients' allergenic profiles. Results: In total, 13 out of 51 (25.5%) patients with reported reactions to shrimp were truly shrimpallergic (7 DBPCFC positive and 6 with documented severe reactions). These patients had significantly higher skin test wheal diametersthan nonallergic patients,as well as higher levels of IgE to rPen a 1 and rDer p 10. HDM-induced asthma and thesimultaneous presence of anti-nDer p 1, 2, and 10 IgE levels increased the risk of true shrimp allergy. Conclusion: Food challenge tests are mandatory for the diagnosis of shrimp allergy. Tropomyosin is associated with clinical reactivity. HDM-induced asthma and anti-mite IgE are risk factors for shrimp allergy.

BackgroundHypersensitivity reactions to anaesthetic agents are rare but often severe, with a mortality ranging from 4 to 9% in IgE-mediated events. Identification of the risk factors may contribute to limit the incidence of these reactions. The aim of our study was to search for possible risk factors of severe perioperative hypersensitivity reactions in our study population.MethodsFor this study we retrospectively reviewed data from 193 patients who experienced drug hypersensitivity reactions during general anaesthesia. The diagnostic protocol consisted of 1) history of the reaction, 2) measurement of serum baseline tryptase and specific IgE-assays for latex, beta-lactams and succinylcholine, 3) skin tests for the agents listed in the anaesthesia chart and for others likely to be safe for future use, latex, and others medications administered during the perioperative period (i.e. antibiotics), 4) subdivision of our patients on the basis of two criteria: a) grade of severity of clinical reactions according to the Ring and Messmer classification; b) results of skin tests and/or serum specific IgE-assays.ResultsOne hundred of 193 patients had reactions of grade I, 32/193 patients had reactions of grade II, 55/193 patients had reactions of grade III and 6/193 patients had reactions of grade IV. A diagnosis of IgE-mediated reaction was established in 55 cases (28.50%); the most common causes were neuromuscular blocking agents, followed by latex and beta-lactams. Severe reactions were associated with older age (p = 0.025), asthma (p = 0.042), history of hypertension (p = 0.001), intake of serum angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor medication (p = 0.012) or serum angiotensin II antagonist (p = 0.033), higher levels of basal tryptase (p = 0.0211). Cardiovascular symptoms (p = 0.006) and history of hypersensitivity to antibiotics (p = 0.029) were more frequently reported in IgE-mediated reactions.ConclusionsWe confirmed the relevance of several clinical features as risk factors for anaphylactic reactions induced by anaesthetic agents: older age, asthma, hypertension and antihypertensive drugs. We observed increased levels of serum basal tryptase in severe reactions: this finding may signify that this biomarker is useful for the identification of patients at risk.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12948-015-0017-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Injective immunotherapy is safe and clinically effective in European patients sensitized to Ambrosia.

Fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray (FPANS) is a topically active glucocorticoid which has been successfully used for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). Topical levocabastine is a highly selective H1 antagonist which has been proposed as an alternative treatment of SAR. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy of two topical nasal treatments, FPANS and levocabastine, in the treatment of SAR. Additionally, the effect of treatments on nasal inflammation was examined during natural pollen exposure. A group of 288 adolescent and adult patients with at least a 2-year history of SAR to seasonal pollens participated in a multicenter, doubleblind, double-dummy, and placebo-controlled study. Patients were treated with either FPANS 200 microg, once daily (n = 97), or topical levocabastine, 200 microg, given twice daily (n = 96), or matched placebo (n = 95) for a period of 6 weeks, starting from the expected beginning of the pollen season. Clinically relevant pollens included Parietaria, olive, and grass. Assessment of efficacy was based on scores of daily nasal symptoms and on nasal cytology of nasal lavage. Nasal lavage was performed immediately before, during, and at the end of treatment in 39 patients. FPANS significantly increased the percentage of symptom-free days for nasal obstruction on waking and during the day, rhinorrhea, sneezing, and itching. FPANS provided a better control for night and day nasal obstruction (P<0.02 and P<0.01) and rhinorrhea (P<0.01) than levocabas tine. In addition, fewer patients treated with FPANS used rescue medication (P<0.025). The percentage of eosinophils in nasal lavage was reduced only during treatment with FPANS. The results of this study indicate that FPANS 200 microg, once daily, provides a better clinical effect than levocabastine 200 microg, twice daily, in patients with SAR. Unlike levocabastine, FPANS significantly attenuates nasal eosinophilia during pollen exposure, a feature which may explain its therapeutic efficacy.

BackgroundAnticonvulsant hypersensitivity syndrome represents a rare but potentially fatal kind of adverse drug reaction. This clinical picture often hampers the flexibility with which alternative anticonvulsants or even other classes of drugs are prescribed in these patients, negatively affecting the efficacy of treatment and the course of the disease. The aim of this study was to analyse a group of six patients with severe cutaneous drug reactions induced by anticonvulsants and to report which alternative antiepileptic drugs and which drugs of other classes were tolerated.Case presentationA total of six patients (2 males and 4 females, age 11–73 years) are described in this study. In all the patients the onset of the severe cutaneous drug reactions was 2–4 weeks after initiating the anticonvulsant therapy: 2 out of 6 patients presented with a drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms under therapy with phenytoin; 2 out of 6 presented with Stevens–Johnson syndrome under therapy with lamotrigine; and 2 out of 6 presented with a toxic epidermal necrolysis, one of them under therapy with valproic acid, and the other one under therapy with lamotrigine. Alternative anticonvulsants tolerated after the reaction were: clonazepam, levetiracetam, diazepam, delorazepam and lormetazepam.ConclusionsIn our cases we observed that non aromatic anticonvulsants and benzodiazepines were well tolerated as alternative treatments in six patients with reactions to aromatic anticonvulsivants and that the risk of hypersensitivity reactions to other drug classes was not increased as compared to general population.

Background: Wheat ingestion can lead to disorders such as IgE-mediated food allergy and wheat-dependent exercise-induced anaphylaxis (WDEIA), both of which are associated with impaired quality of life and significant morbidity. Allergy to wheat is relatively benign in children, although its natural history in adults is still unknown. Objective: We used placebo-controlled challenge to evaluate the natural history of wheat hypersensitivity in atopic patients with adultonset wheat allergy. Methods: We enrolled 13 patients from an initial cohort of adult patients with IgE-mediated wheat allergy (mean age, 40 years). After diagnosis, the patients observed a wheat-free diet and were followed as outpatients for 5 years to evaluate wheat exposure. Wheat-IgE titers were determined at the end of follow-up, and a second wheat-challenge was performed. Results: Ten out of 13 patients took part in the study. The mean period of wheat avoidance was 4.2 years. Three patients had spontaneously reintroduced wheat before the second evaluation, after a mean (IQR) of 28 (18-36) months, with only mild gastrointestinal discomfort at reintroduction. At the end of follow-up, 9 of the 10 patients were wheat-tolerant. Two patients had a history of WDEIA. We observed a reduction in IgE levels, with median (IQR) IgE falling from 2.77 (0.35-100) kU/L at diagnosis to 0.88 (0.1-20.8) kU/L. The association between IgE and a negative challenge result was not statistically significant. Conclusion: IgE-mediated wheat allergy in adults is benign and represents a temporary break in gastrointestinal tolerance. Future studies may improve our knowledge of wheat allergens, routes of and factors leading to sensitization, and prognostic biomarkers.

Background: β-Lactam antibiotics (mainly amoxicillin, AX) are the drugs that most frequently induce systemic drug allergy reactions. Objective: We attempted to identify the risk factors associated with systemic reactions to AX. Methods: All patients who were referred to our department for suspected hypersensitivity reactions to AX over a 6-month period were evaluated for anti-AX immunoglobulin E (IgE) levels and skin-test positivity for β-lactams. Age, sex, concomitant diseases, therapies, total IgE, serum tryptase levels and signs and symptoms suggesting mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS) were analyzed in relation to the severity of the reaction in accordance with the Mueller classification. Results: Sixty-seven patients were selected: 39 with mild reactions such as cutaneous or gastrointestinal symptoms (grades I and II) and 28 with severe systemic reactions (grades III and IV). Anti-AX IgE levels and total IgE were significantly higher in severe reactions than in mild ones (p < 0.00005, p = 0.0037). Treatment with histamine-2 receptor antagonists (anti-H2) was significantly related to severe reactions (p = 0.007). No significant correlations were found between the severity of the reactions and dyslipidemia or levels of angiotensin-converting enzyme and tryptase. Conclusion: Anti-AX IgE levels were the most significant immunological parameter distinguishing patients who presented with severe reactions to AX and those with mild reactions. Higher values of total IgE, the use of gastroprotective drugs and signs and symptoms suggesting an MCAS significantly increased the odds ratio of having a severe reaction. The risk of serious adverse reactions to AX increased in older patients and in males, but this trend was not significant.