Allergologie select最新文献

Furry pets are beloved companion animals; horse riding is a popular leisure activity. So-called hypoallergenic animals have gained high interest as sensitization to animal dander and allergy to furry animals are widespread. Allergen immunotherapy to furry animals is still limited, and allergen avoidance in addition to symptomatic pharmaceutical treatment is often the only available option. Patients with an existing allergy to furry animals or with an atopic background are seeking for a hypoallergenic alternative. This review summarizes current knowledge and discusses future strategies.

Background: Asthma is characterized by variable airflow limitation. FEF_25-75 has been proposed as a reliable marker for bronchial obstruction, especially when FEV₁ and FEV₁/FVC are normal.

Objectives: To investigate the role of FEF_25-75 in patients with asthma seen in clinical settings.

Materials and methods: The cross-sectional study included 439 (181 females and 255 males; mean age 39 years) outpatients with asthma who consecutively visited an allergy clinic for a routine assessment. History, physical examination, asthma control, and spirometry were evaluated.

Results: FEF_25-75 was impaired (< 65% of predicted) in 136 (31%) outpatients. Considering only subjects with normal FEV₁ and FEV₁/FVC, FEF_25-75 was impaired in 71 (19.6%) subjects. In this subset, impaired FEF_25-75 was associated with low FEV₁ and FEV₁/FVC values (OR 0.91 and 0.85, respectively), and presence of asthma symptoms (OR 2.19).

Conclusion: FEF_25-75 deserves adequate and careful consideration in patients with asthma and normal FEV₁ and FEV₁/FVC, as the presence of impaired FEF_25-75 in this subset suggests a more specific approach.

Remission is the goal of modern asthma treatment. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is an essential component in the armamentarium of personalized asthma therapy. Subcutaneous AIT (SCIT) or sublingual AIT (SLIT) offer the possibility to prevent asthma in patients with allergic rhinitis (reduction of the risk of developing asthma) and the possibility to achieve remission in patients with allergic asthma. Accordingly, AIT should always be considered in patients with asthma and a documented, clinically relevant allergy. However, precise phenotyping of the patient is an essential prerequisite for a success of AIT in asthma.

The development and approval of DMAADs ("disease-modifying anti-asthmatic drugs"), in particular inhaled steroids (alone or in combination with long-acting bronchodilators), biologics and modern allergen immunotherapies, has fundamentally changed the asthma therapy concept from symptom control to symptom prevention. This concept is linked to the new asthma treatment goal of asthma remission: long-term absence of symptoms (good asthma control), absence of exacerbations, and stable lung function, without the use of systemic steroids for asthma therapy. Three types of asthma remission are distinguished: spontaneous remission (e.g., childhood asthma), remission "off treatment" (e.g., after successful allergen immunotherapy), and remission "on treatment" (e.g., during inhaled therapy or biologic therapy). A treat-to-target approach is used, as in rheumatoid arthritis or chronic inflammatory bowel disease: The goal is to achieve asthma remission, through individually tailored treatment with highly effective drugs with minimal side effects. However, this requires precise phenotyping of the patient, including detailed history taking, pulmonary function diagnostics, allergological diagnostics, and measurement of type 2 biomarkers.

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only causal therapy for allergic diseases and therefore particularly important. Allergen preparations have been classified as medicinal products since 1989 (Directive 89/342/EEC) and were taken over into Directive 2001/83/EC in 2001. In addition, in 2008 the Therapy Allergen Ordinance (TAO) came into force to stricter regulate the exception for named patient products (NPP) by exclusion of common therapy allergens from the exception to be marketed as NPP. The TAO regulates the requirements for testing safety and efficacy for these common therapy allergens. Due to the long transitional provisions, the last deadlines for solving clinical shortcomings will end in 2026. The advantage of this regulation is that the market for common allergens has been cleared of products without proof of efficacy, and new preparations with an optimal dose range are developed through dose-finding studies. The demand for long-term pediatric studies has been outlined by the standard Pediatric Investigation Plan (PIP) on allergen products from the Pediatric Committee of the EMA (PDCO). This is particularly problematic, as it is foreseeable that recruitment of patients will be limited and ethical problems arise from the prolonged use of placebo. Furthermore, many newly approved preparations will not be used in pediatrics for the foreseeable future, as no marketing authorization has yet been granted for this age group. This will result in a serious supply gap for children.

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) has been performed for 112 years. In this article we summarize regulatory standards and challenges based on scientific evidence on AIT. Most crucial and timely aspects concerning AIT are addressed from the regulatory perspective of the authors as employees of a national competent authority in Europe: (1) product specificity; (2) clinical efficacy; (3) treatment for adults and children (needs for extrapolation); (4) allergen exposure chambers; (5) biomarkers; (6) standardization; (7) real-world evidence; (8) independent official batch release (benefit and challenges); (9) harmonization on the EU level. The Paul-Ehrlich-Institut (PEI), the Federal Institute for Vaccines and Biomedicines, in Langen near Frankfurt/Main in Germany, examines and evaluates the benefits and risks of AIT products within the course of clinical development, marketing authorization, and subsequently throughout their entire life cycle to ensure high-quality, safe, and effective AIT products.

Although used for over 100 years, allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is still an indispensable tool in modern allergy managemen20t due to its potential to cure allergic diseases. Its current rapid development through the application of personalized and precision medicine approaches is strongly supported by advances in mHealth, component-resolved diagnosis (CRD)-based diagnostics, validation of novel biomarkers, advanced data management, and development of novel preparations. This review summarizes the key advances in the field and shows the perspectives for further development of next-generation AIT treatments.

llergen immunotherapy (AIT) with Hymenoptera venom (HV) shows high efficiency treating insect venom allergy, covering an almost 100-year-long history. Untreated patients with HV allergy can develop serious, potentially lethal sting reactions. Before starting AIT with HV, indication and contraindications, the presence of comorbidities and the intake of concomitant medications as well as individual risk factors have to be carefully evaluated. Application of HV-AIT entails an individually adapted procedure in case of undesired adverse events or initial failure to induce tolerance, as the final goal has to be the development of immunologic protection against anaphylactic sting reactions.

A roundtable discussion on February 10, 2023 between the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI) and the Paul-Ehrlich-Institut (PEI) aimed to discuss in detail current aspects of allergen immunotherapy (AIT), its regulatory framework under the transitional provision of the Therapy Allergen Ordinance (TAO), and the consequences for the planned guideline work of the DGAKI, regulatory challenges in the approval of AIT products for children and adolescents as well as allergy diagnostics. The content and discussion points of this dialogue are summarized and are set in context with the current literature.

Aims: This case series aimed to evaluate the effects of treatment for allergic rhinitis (AR) in AR-diagnosed children with previous diagnosis of tic disorders/attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorders (TD/ADHD) but unresponsive to behavioral or medical treatment.

Materials and methods: Between July 2016 and June 2021, children diagnosed with AR in our hospital were enrolled. All were diagnosed with TD/ADHD refractory to behavioral or medical treatment. The demography and clinical information were collected from medical records. The outcomes were visual analogue scale (VAS) for AR severity, Yale Comprehensive Tic Severity Scale (YGTSS) for TD symptoms, and Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Screening Scale (SNAP-IV) for ADHD symptoms.

Results: A total of 27 children (18 boys, 9 girls) were included, with a mean age 7.4 ± 2.9 years (3 - 17 years). They had undergone behavioral or medical treatment of TD/ADHD for 3.6 ± 1.9 years but without significant improvement in TD/ADHD symptoms. After 2-6 months of systematic treatment for AR, VAS was decreased to 0.4 ± 0.1 from 0.8 ± 0.2, YGTSS to 3.5 ± 0.7 from 6.8 ± 1.4, and SNAP-IV to 0.4 ± 0.1 from 0.6 ± 0.2 (all p < 0.001). No recurrence of TD/ADHD symptoms was reported during a mean follow-up of 2.4 ± 1.1 years (0.5 - 5 years).

Conclusion: AR treatment improves TD/ADHD outcomes in children with difficult-to-treat TD/ADHD. In TD/ADHD children who are unresponsive to behavioral or drug treatment and have AR-related symptoms, AR examination and treatment are recommended for better prognosis.