In this first exploratory clinical trial, SLIT for peach allergy seems to be a promising therapeutic option that could modify the clinical reactivity of the patients to peach intake and the underlying immunological response with a good tolerance.

No abstract

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (ASIT) with fungal extracts has been beset by safety and efficacy problems, which result mainly from qualitative and quantitative variations. Little has been published on the safety and efficacy of these extracts. The objective was to analyze the safety and efficacy of ASIT with an Alternaria alternata extract. A total of 28 patients were selected with rhinitis and/or bronchial asthma because of Alternaria allergy and monosensitization to molds. The patients were randomized to an active ASIT or placebo group, both groups on a conventional immunotherapy schedule (increasing weekly doses until maintenance dose and then monthly doses). Adverse reactions were classified with the European Academy of Allergology and Clinical Immunology system. Clinical efficacy was analyzed for a year with symptom/medication diary cards, peak expiratory flow (PEF) measures, clinical severity score, severity of symptoms (visual analog scale), subjective evaluation of treatment by the patient and the physician, and a quality of life questionnaire. Twenty-three patients completed the study; all reached the established maintenance dose with only two mild adverse reactions in the whole sample. Significant improvements were found after 6 months in respiratory symptoms in the active treatment group, and in all symptoms in both groups. PEF increased significantly in the active treatment group but not in the placebo group. The severity of asthma decreased in the active treatment group, and the severity of rhinitis decreased in both groups. Visual analog scale scores for severity of symptoms improved in all phases in the active treatment group, but only after 12 months in the placebo group. Physicians judged the disease course as significantly better in the active treatment group. ASIT with the A. alternata extract was safe, with clinical improvements after one year of treatment.

Background: A considerable number of pollen-allergic patients develops allergy to plant foods, which has been attributed to cross-reactivity between food and pollen allergens. The aim of this study was to analyze the differences among pollen-allergic patients with and without plant food allergy. Methods: Eight hundred and six patients were recruited from 8 different hospitals. Each clinical research group included 100 patients (50 plant food-allergic patients and 50 pollen-allergic patients). Diagnosis of pollen allergy was based on typical case history of pollen allergy and positive skin prick tests. Diagnosis of plant-food allergy was based on clear history of plant-food allergy, skin prick tests and/or plant-food challenge tests. A panel of 28 purified allergens from pollens and/or plant foods was used to quantify specific IgE (ADVIA-Centaur® platform). Results: Six hundred and sixty eight patients (83%) of the 806 evaluated had pollen allergy: 396 patients with pollen allergy alone and 272 patients with associated food and pollen allergies. A comparison of both groups showed a statistically significant increase in the food and pollen allergy subgroup in frequency of: (1) asthma (47 vs. 59%; p < 0.001); (2) positive skin test results to several pollens: Plantago,Platanus,Artemisia,Betula,Parietaria and Salsola (p < 0.001); (3) sensitization to purified allergens: Pru p 3, profilin, Pla a 1 – Pla a 2, Sal k 1, PR-10 proteins and Len c 1. Conclusion: Results showed relevant and significant differences between both groups of pollen-allergic patients depending on whether or not they suffered from plant-derived food allergy.

No abstract