Allergo Journal International

Molecular technologies have paved the way to improved understanding of allergic diseases in many ways, ranging from molecular allergens to tailor-made tools for analytical, diagnostic, and therapeutic purposes. Engineering of such molecules has become a mainstay in most biotechnical and biomedical areas. A not so new kid on the block is the nanobody, a single-domain antibody obtained from primarily camelid species. Despite their large promise and potential, it took nanobodies a long time to also enter the stage in allergology. This review summarizes the state of the art and the feasibility of engineering nanobody-based tools for applications in allergology. In recent years, nanobodies with specificity for allergens have been increasingly generated. In parallel, their molecular engineering has enabled the development of derivatives that offer many advantages compared to standard antibody approaches. Hence, different application forms of nanobody-based molecules have been developed and reported in proof-of-concept studies. Recent studies give a first glimpse of the future possibilities of nanobody technologies in a complex system such as allergic diseases. It has become clear that the simplicity of the approaches as compared to regular antibody technologies will both broaden and deepen the scope of applications in allergology.

As a widespread disease, contact dermatitis affects all age groups with a high prevalence and incidence. In addition to a reduction in the quality of life, it causes considerable health and socioeconomic costs. Essentially, five subtypes can be distinguished, namely irritant contact dermatitis, phototoxic contact dermatitis, allergic contact dermatitis with its two special forms of hematogenous and aerogenous contact dermatitis, photoallergic contact dermatitis, and protein contact dermatitis. The diagnosis is based on a detailed history and clinical skin findings as well as the exposure-related performance of allergological in vivo and in vitro tests. Once the contact substance—irritant or allergen—has been identified, the key to therapeutic success lies in its strict avoidance. Symptomatic therapy of contact dermatitis should always be individualized and based on the stage of eczema. Topical glucocorticoids are considered first-line therapy for both irritant and allergic contact dermatitis. The always accompanying basic therapy with skin care products plays a central role for sustainable therapeutic success. Systemic therapy is considered when topical therapy is ineffective or not feasible. In this context, the short-term use of systemic glucocorticoids should be limited to extensive or clinically severe acute contact dermatitis and exacerbations of chronic contact dermatitis. The efficacy of the use of newer biologics and Janus kinase inhibitors in contact dermatitis is currently being evaluated in several clinical trials.

Correction to: Allergo J Int 2018 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40629-018-0078-7 An error was identified in the review on “Air pollutants and primary allergy prevention”. The given PM2.5 increment of 2 µg/m3 was wrong and should be replaced with an increment of 5 µg/m3. This was the case on:

Allergic diseases account for the largest proportion of chronic diseases in childhood and adolescence and place a significant burden on everyday family, social, and in particular school life. Without appropriate education, affected individuals often have little of the knowledge required to understand and deal safely with their allergic disease, and their social environment (school) generally offers insufficient information. An interdisciplinary project involving the Bielefeld Community Foundation (“Bielefelder Bürgerstiftung”), the Children’s Center Bethel, and the local school authority investigated the current knowledge, possibilities for increasing that knowledge, as well as pupils’ and teachers’ perception of the problems experienced by fellow pupils, while at the same time collecting current prevalence figures on allergic diseases among primary school children. All Bielefeld primary schools were invited to participate in the 3 years between 2008 and 2010. A teaching session on allergic diseases held by specialists from the pediatric hospital formed the core of the project. A standardized survey of children – which also addressed non-affected children for the first time in Germany – on the effects of, their knowledge of, and their attitudes toward allergic diseases, as well as an assessment of their quality of life (cross-sectional study), was conducted prior to and following each session. Parents were also surveyed. In all, 24 schools per year, each with around 60 classes and 1,250 pupils aged 9 years, took part between 2008 and 2010. Approximately 30 % reported suffering from an allergic disease themselves, of which – with regard to single entries – 16 % were “allergies,” 4 % “asthma,” and 5 % atopic dermatitis. Figures collected from parents were only slightly lower than those from their children. Clear deficits that existed in terms of factual knowledge and/or correct conduct in allergic disease – among affected children as well as in their social environment – prior to the education program were noticeably improved by the teaching session. The prevalence data gathered here confirm the high numbers recently found in the KiGGS study. Thus, allergic diseases represent a considerable disease risk and potential burden in school children. Providing affected children and their social environment (teachers, fellow pupils) with specialist education can bring about considerable improvements in everyday school life.

Anaphylaxis in connection with the administration of vaccines occurs only very rarely. Triggers of immunoglobulin IgE-mediated and non-IgE-mediated anaphylaxis—in addition to the active ingredient itself—may be excipients contained in the vaccine due to their special properties. Some of the excipients in medicinal products are the same compounds used as additives in food. Furthermore, residues from the manufacturing process (e.g., chicken egg white, casein, antibiotics, formaldehyde) or contaminants (e.g., from the primary packaging material) may be potential triggers of anaphylaxis in vaccines. This review article provides an overview of ingredients in vaccines that pose an allergenic risk potential. The components of COVID-19 vaccines approved and marketed in Germany are discussed with regard to their potential for triggering anaphylaxis and possible pathophysiological mechanisms involved.

Vitamins A and D are able to modulate innate and adaptive immune responses and may therefore influence the development and the course of allergic diseases. This article reviews the current evidence for the experimental effects of vitamins A and D in vivo in animal models and on immune cells in vitro, and discusses their translational implication. A systematic literature search over the last 10 years was performed using MEDLINE and PubMed databases. Deficiencies of vitamin A or vitamin D in mouse models of allergic asthma seem to exacerbate allergic symptoms along with enhanced lung inflammation and Th2 cytokine production. In contrast, supplementation regimes especially with vitamin D were able to attenuate symptoms in therapeutic mouse models. The active metabolites retinoic acid (RA) and 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 (VD3) induced tolerogenic dendritic cells (DCs) and up-regulated T‑regulatory cells in the allergic sensitization phase, which likely contributes to tolerance induction. Additionally, RA and VD3 maintained the stability of eosinophils and mast cells in the effector phase, thereby reducing allergic mediator release. Thus, both active vitamin metabolites RA and VD3 are able to influence allergic immune responses at several immunological sites. Animal studies predict that vitamin A and D may also be attractive players in the control of allergy in humans. Whether these experimental observations can be translated to the human situation remains open, as results from clinical trials are controversial.

Heparins are unproblematic drugs from an allergist’s perspective, since despite frequent application heparin hypersensitivity is quite rarely in clinical routine. This article provides an overview of selected scientific articles and is based on a literature search in PubMed and specialist databases. Most commonly, heparin allergic patients develop lymphocyte-mediated, eczematous local reactions directly at the injection sites (usually on the lower abdomen) hours to days after initiating regular subcutaneous heparin injections. The high sensitivity of skin-prick and intradermal testing procedures means that subcutaneous provocation tests are seldom necessary for diagnosis. The “compartment allergy” phenomenon is a particular feature of heparin-induced local allergic reactions. Here, the route of application determines whether an allergic inflammatory reaction develops. In case of heparin-allergic individuals, injections into the subcutaneous tissue cause eczematous plaques, whereas intravenous injections or infusions are well tolerated. Since the introduction of low molecular weight heparin preparations, the incidence of potentially life-threatening heparin-induced thrombocytopenia caused by activating IgG (Ig: immunoglobulin) antibodies against heparin-platelet factor 4 (PF4) complexes on platelet membranes has declined. IgE-mediated heparin allergy with immediate-type anaphylactic reactions seems to be extremely rare.