Cargando…

Lack of neo-sensitization to Pen a 1 in patients treated with mite sublingual immunotherapy

BACKGROUND: Some studies reported the possible induction of food allergy, caused by neo-sensitization to cross-reacting allergens, during immunotherapy with aeroallergens, while other studies ruled out such possibility. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the development of neo-sensiti...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rossi, Renato E, Monasterolo, Giorgio, Incorvaia, Cristoforo, Moingeon, Philippe, Frati, Franco, Passalacqua, Giovanni, Rossi, Lucilla, Canonica, Giorgio W
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2859740/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20230633
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-7961-8-4
_version_ 1782180529958813696
author Rossi, Renato E
Monasterolo, Giorgio
Incorvaia, Cristoforo
Moingeon, Philippe
Frati, Franco
Passalacqua, Giovanni
Rossi, Lucilla
Canonica, Giorgio W
author_facet Rossi, Renato E
Monasterolo, Giorgio
Incorvaia, Cristoforo
Moingeon, Philippe
Frati, Franco
Passalacqua, Giovanni
Rossi, Lucilla
Canonica, Giorgio W
author_sort Rossi, Renato E
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Some studies reported the possible induction of food allergy, caused by neo-sensitization to cross-reacting allergens, during immunotherapy with aeroallergens, while other studies ruled out such possibility. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the development of neo-sensitization to Pen a 1 (tropomyosin) as well as the appearance of reactions after ingestion of foods containing tropomyosin as a consequence of sublingual mite immunization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Specific IgE to Tropomyosin (rPen a 1) before and after mite sublingual immunotherapy in 134 subjects were measured. IgE-specific antibodies for mite extract and recombinant allergen Pen a 1 were evaluated using the immunoenzymatic CAP system (Phadia Diagnostics, Milan, Italy). RESULTS: All patients had rPen a 1 IgE negative results before and after mite SLIT and did not show positive shrimp extract skin reactivity and serological rPen a 1 IgE conversion after treatment. More important, no patient showed systemic reactions to crustacean ingestion. CONCLUSIONS: Patients did not show neo-sensitization to tropomyosin, a component of the extract (namely mite group 10) administered. An assessment of a patient's possible pre-existing sensitisation to tropomyosin by skin test and/or specific IgE prior to start mite extract immunotherapy is recommended. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered in EudraCT, with the ID number of 2010-02035531.
format Text
id pubmed-2859740
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28597402010-04-27 Lack of neo-sensitization to Pen a 1 in patients treated with mite sublingual immunotherapy Rossi, Renato E Monasterolo, Giorgio Incorvaia, Cristoforo Moingeon, Philippe Frati, Franco Passalacqua, Giovanni Rossi, Lucilla Canonica, Giorgio W Clin Mol Allergy Research BACKGROUND: Some studies reported the possible induction of food allergy, caused by neo-sensitization to cross-reacting allergens, during immunotherapy with aeroallergens, while other studies ruled out such possibility. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the development of neo-sensitization to Pen a 1 (tropomyosin) as well as the appearance of reactions after ingestion of foods containing tropomyosin as a consequence of sublingual mite immunization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Specific IgE to Tropomyosin (rPen a 1) before and after mite sublingual immunotherapy in 134 subjects were measured. IgE-specific antibodies for mite extract and recombinant allergen Pen a 1 were evaluated using the immunoenzymatic CAP system (Phadia Diagnostics, Milan, Italy). RESULTS: All patients had rPen a 1 IgE negative results before and after mite SLIT and did not show positive shrimp extract skin reactivity and serological rPen a 1 IgE conversion after treatment. More important, no patient showed systemic reactions to crustacean ingestion. CONCLUSIONS: Patients did not show neo-sensitization to tropomyosin, a component of the extract (namely mite group 10) administered. An assessment of a patient's possible pre-existing sensitisation to tropomyosin by skin test and/or specific IgE prior to start mite extract immunotherapy is recommended. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered in EudraCT, with the ID number of 2010-02035531. BioMed Central 2010-03-15 /pmc/articles/PMC2859740/ /pubmed/20230633 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-7961-8-4 Text en Copyright ©2010 Rossi et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Rossi, Renato E
Monasterolo, Giorgio
Incorvaia, Cristoforo
Moingeon, Philippe
Frati, Franco
Passalacqua, Giovanni
Rossi, Lucilla
Canonica, Giorgio W
Lack of neo-sensitization to Pen a 1 in patients treated with mite sublingual immunotherapy
title Lack of neo-sensitization to Pen a 1 in patients treated with mite sublingual immunotherapy
title_full Lack of neo-sensitization to Pen a 1 in patients treated with mite sublingual immunotherapy
title_fullStr Lack of neo-sensitization to Pen a 1 in patients treated with mite sublingual immunotherapy
title_full_unstemmed Lack of neo-sensitization to Pen a 1 in patients treated with mite sublingual immunotherapy
title_short Lack of neo-sensitization to Pen a 1 in patients treated with mite sublingual immunotherapy
title_sort lack of neo-sensitization to pen a 1 in patients treated with mite sublingual immunotherapy
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2859740/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20230633
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-7961-8-4
work_keys_str_mv AT rossirenatoe lackofneosensitizationtopena1inpatientstreatedwithmitesublingualimmunotherapy
AT monasterologiorgio lackofneosensitizationtopena1inpatientstreatedwithmitesublingualimmunotherapy
AT incorvaiacristoforo lackofneosensitizationtopena1inpatientstreatedwithmitesublingualimmunotherapy
AT moingeonphilippe lackofneosensitizationtopena1inpatientstreatedwithmitesublingualimmunotherapy
AT fratifranco lackofneosensitizationtopena1inpatientstreatedwithmitesublingualimmunotherapy
AT passalacquagiovanni lackofneosensitizationtopena1inpatientstreatedwithmitesublingualimmunotherapy
AT rossilucilla lackofneosensitizationtopena1inpatientstreatedwithmitesublingualimmunotherapy
AT canonicagiorgiow lackofneosensitizationtopena1inpatientstreatedwithmitesublingualimmunotherapy