The in vitro potency of German cockroach extracts for IgE reactivity depends on allergen content and allergen-specific IgE titers of patients with cockroach allergy. These factors are relevant for selection of potent extracts to be used for immunotherapy and for the design and interpretation of data from immunotherapy trials.

Mouse allergy has become increasingly common, mainly affecting laboratory workers and inner-city households. To date, only one major allergen, namely Mus m 1, has been described. We sought to identify T cell targets in mouse allergic patients. PBMC from allergic donors were expanded with either murine urine or epithelial extract and subsequently screened for cytokine production (IL-5 and IFNγ) in response to overlapping peptides spanning the entire Mus m 1 sequence, peptides from various Mus m 1 isoforms [major urinary proteins (MUPs)], peptides from mouse orthologs of known allergens from other mammalian species and peptides from proteins identified by immunoproteomic analysis of IgE/IgG immunoblots of mouse urine and epithelial extracts. This approach let to the identification of 106 non-redundant T cell epitopes derived from 35 antigens. Three major T cell-activating regions were defined in Mus m 1 alone. Moreover, our data show that immunodominant epitopes were largely shared between Mus m 1 and other MUPs even from different species, suggesting that sequence conservation in different allergens is a determinant for immunodominance. We further identified several novel mouse T cell antigens based on their homology to known mammalian allergens. Analysis of cohort-specific T cell responses revealed that rhinitis and asthmatic patients recognized different epitope repertoires. Epitopes defined herein can be formulated into an epitope “megapool” used to diagnose mouse allergy and study mouse-specific T cell responses directly ex vivo. This analysis of T cell epitopes provides a good basis for future studies to increase our understanding of the immunopathology associated with MO-allergy and asthma.

German cockroach extract is used clinically to evaluate allergen-specific sensitization and for subcutaneous allergen-specific immunotherapy, though there are no guidelines for standardization in its manufacture. We performed an immunological evaluation of 12 different cockroach extracts prepared from different sources and their potency to induce allergen-specific T cell reactivity. PBMC from 13 cockroach allergic donors were expanded in vitro with 12 different German cockroach extracts. After culture expansion, cells were re-stimulated with the different extracts and T cell responses were assessed by FluoroSpot (IL-5, IFNγ and IL-10 production). In parallel to the extracts, single allergen peptide pools for allergens from groups 1, 2, 4, 5, and 11 were tested to determine allergen immunodominance. Furthermore, to assess allergy specificity, PBMC from 13 non-allergic donors were also tested with the most potent extract and T cell responses were compared to the allergic cohort. Dramatic variations in T cell reactivity were observed to the different cockroach extract batches. Response magnitudes varied over 3 logs within a single donor. IL-5 production in the allergic cohort was significantly higher compared to the non-allergic cohort (p=0.004). Allergen content determination by ELISA detected much lower concentrations of Bla g 5 compared to Bla g 1 and 2. Mass spectrometric analysis revealed that Bla g 5 was present in similar amounts to Bla g 1 and 2 in extracts made from whole body, whereas it was not detected in extracts made from fecal matter, suggesting that Bla g 5 is not excreted into feces. Different donors exhibit different response patterns to different extracts, potentially dependent on the donor-specific T cell allergen immunodominance pattern and the allergen content of the extract tested. These findings have dramatic implications for the selection of potent extracts used for diagnostic purposes or allergen-specific immunotherapy.

Background Exposure to airborne allergens is a frequent trigger of respiratory allergy and asthma in atopic individuals. While allergic patients suffer hypersensitivity reactions to these allergens, non-allergic individuals do not exhibit clinical symptoms despite environmental exposure to these ubiquitous allergen sources. The aim of this study was to characterize T cell responses in non-allergic laboratory workers, who are heavily exposed to mice allergens (Exposed Non-Allergics, ENA) and compare this data to previously published T cell responses measured in mouse (MO)-allergic patients. METHODS: Peripheral mononuclear cells (PBMC) from ENA subjects were expanded for 2 weeks in vitro with mouse urine extract and screened for IFNγ and IL-5 cytokine production in response to mouse antigen-derived peptides by ELISPOT. Ex vivo T cell reactivity in the ENA cohort was performed after 6hr stimulation with peptide pools by intracellular staining of CD154. Results Vigorous responses were detected, associated with 147 epitopes derived from 16 mouse antigens. As expected, responses in ENA subjects were somewhat lower than those observed in MO-allergics for both responder frequency and overall response magnitude. While responses in allergics were polarized towards IL-5 production and associated with low IFNγ production, ENA responses were not polarized. The composition of targeted antigens and epitopes was overall similar between the two cohorts, with the majority of T cell reactivity directed against Mus m 1 and other major urinary proteins. However, kappa-casein precursor and odorant binding protein Ib were more abundantly recognized in MO-allergics compared to ENA subjects. Additionally, T cell responses against oligopeptides derived from the low molecular weight fraction of mouse urine were also assessed. Interestingly, no difference in the response frequency, magnitude or polarization between MO-allergic and ENA individuals was observed. Finally, assessment of ex vivo T cell activation also revealed T cell reactivity in the ENA cohort, with a non-significant trend for lower responses compared to MO-allergics. Conclusion Exposure to mouse induces potent T cell responses in non-allergic individuals, targeting similar epitopes as seen in allergic patients.

Whole extract or allergen-specific IgE testing has become increasingly popular in the diagnosis of peanut allergy. However, much less is known about T cell responses in peanut allergy and how it relates to different clinical phenotypes. CD4+ T cells play a major role in the pathophysiology of peanut allergy as well as tolerance induction during oral desensitization regimens. We set out to characterize and phenotype the T cell responses and their targets in peanut sensitized patients. Using PBMC from peanut-allergic and non-allergic patients, we mapped T cell epitopes for three major peanut allergens, Ara h 1, 2 and 3 (27 from Ara h 1, 4 from Ara h 2 and 43 from Ara h 3) associated with release of IFNγ (representative Th1 cytokine) and IL5 (representative Th2 cytokine). A pool containing 19 immunodominant peptides, selected to account for 60% of the total Ara h 1-3-specific T cell response in allergics, but only 20% in non-allergics, was shown to discriminate T cell responses in peanut-sensitized, symptomatic vs non-symptomatic individuals more effectively than peanut extract. This pool elicited positive T cell responses above a defined threshold in 12/15 sensitized, symptomatic patients, whereas in the sensitized but non-symptomatic cohort only, 4/14 reacted. The reactivity against this peptide pool in symptomatic patients was dominated by IL-10, IL-17 and to a lesser extend IL-5. For four distinct epitopes, HLA class II restrictions were determined, enabling production of tetrameric reagents. Tetramer staining in four donors (2 symptomatic, 2 non-symptomatic) revealed a trend for increased numbers of peanut epitope-specific T cells in symptomatic patients compared to non-symptomatic patients, which was associated with elevated CRTh2 expression whereas cells from non-symptomatic patients exhibited higher levels of Integrin β7 expression. Our results demonstrate differences in T cell response magnitude, epitope specificity and phenotype between symptomatic and non-symptomatic peanut-sensitized patients. In addition to IgE reactivity, analysis of peanut-specific T cells may be useful to improve our understanding of different clinical manifestations in peanut allergy.