Epidemiology, management and survival outcomes of primary cutaneous melanoma: a ten-year overview.

BACKGROUND: Malignant melanoma (MM) is the most aggressive type of skin cancer, accounting for 90% of all the skin cancer mortality. The objective of this study was providing an overview of current patient- and tumour characteristics, treatment strategies, complications and survival in patients with MM over the past ten years. Hereby, an up-to-date view of every day clinical practice is obtained. METHODS: Files of patients treated for primary cutaneous melanoma (n = 686) in the VieCuri Medical Centre in the Netherlands between January 2002 and December 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. Relevant patient features, tumour characteristics, and (surgical) outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: The majority of all the patients presented thin tumours (59.1% stage 1A/in situ melanoma). Men showed more ulceration (17.7% vs. 8.4%, p < .01) and a significantly higher Breslow thickness than women (1.2 mm vs. 0.9 mm, p < .01). 14.6% (40/273) underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB); 10/40 (25%) showed nodal metastasis, 50 patients (7.3%) developed distant metastases (M: 10.6%, F: 5%, p < .01). One-, 5- and 10- year disease specific survival rates were 96%, 86% and 84%, respectively. Median survival for stage 4 MM was 3 months. Extensive surgery was uncommon (n = 3). CONCLUSIONS: Patients generally presented with thin melanomas. Lymph node disease and distant metastases remained infrequently observed during following years, and general 1- and 5-year overall disease-specific survival rates exceeded 85%. Small numbers of rescue surgery and palliative medical treatment warrant further centralisation and investigation.

Characterization of recombinant Mal d 4 and its application for component-resolved diagnosis of apple allergy.

BACKGROUND: Profilins are ubiquitous panallergens that have been extensively characterized; yet, their clinical relevance is still unclear. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to produce recombinant apple profilin (rMal d 4) and to evaluate its allergenic activity and its potency for component-resolved allergy diagnosis. METHODS: Complementary DNA-derived Mal d 4 was cloned, expressed in Escherichia coli and subsequently purified via poly (l-proline) sepharose. A total of 28 sera from apple-allergic patients were used for IgE-ELISA, immunoblot, RAST and basophil histamine release (BHR) test. In addition, skin prick tests (SPTs) were performed in five patients. RESULTS: Four different complementary DNA coding for apple profilin, Mal d 4, each with an open reading frame of 393 nucleotides, were identified. One isoform Mal d 4.0101 was expressed in Escherichia coli and subsequently purified. Mass spectroscopy revealed the expected mass of 13.826 for rMal d 4.0101, and circular dichroism analysis data were typical for a folded protein and small-angle X-ray scattering measurement identified the protein as a monomer. All the serum samples displayed IgE binding to rMal d 4.0101 in IgE ELISA, immunoblot and RAST. In immunoblotting, IgE binding to natural Mal d 4 was partially/completely inhibited by preincubation with rMal d 4.0101, and RAST values to apple extract were significantly reduced upon serum pretreatment with rMal d 4.0101. SPTs and BHR assays using purified rMal d 4.0101 were positive. Purified rMal d 4.0101 was destroyed within seconds when subjected to pepsin digestion. CONCLUSIONS: Apple profilin complementary DNAs were identified. The physicochemical and allergenic properties of purified recombinant Mal d 4.0101 were evaluated showing that the recombinant protein was equal to the natural protein as shown by inhibition assays. Thus, Mal d 4 represents another example suitable for component-resolved diagnosis of food allergy.

A mutant of the major apple allergen, Mal d 1, demonstrating hypo-allergenicity in the target organ by double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge.

BACKGROUND: Allergen-specific immunotherapy for food allergy has been hindered by severe side-effects in the past. Well-characterized hypo-allergenic recombinant food allergens potentially offer a safe solution. OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate hypo-allergenicity of a mutated major food allergen from apple, Mal d 1, in vitro and in vivo. METHODS: A mutant of the major apple allergen, Mal d 1, was obtained by site-directed mutagenesis exchanging five amino acid residues. Fourteen patients with combined birch pollen-related apple allergy were included in the study. Hypo-allergenicity of the mutant rMal d 1 (rMal d 1mut) compared with rMal d 1 was assessed by in vitro methods, i.e. RAST (inhibition), immunoblotting and basophil histamine release (BHR) and in vivo by skin prick test and double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC). RESULTS: RAST analysis (n = 14) revealed that IgE reactivity to rMal d 1mut was twofold lower than that of the wild-type molecule (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.7-2.4). RAST inhibition (n = 6) showed a 7.8-fold decrease in IgE-binding potency (95% CI: 3.0-12.6). In contrast to this moderate decrease in IgE-binding potency, the biological activity of rMal d 1mut assessed by SPT and BHR decreased 10-200-fold. Hypo-allergenicity was confirmed by DBPCFC (n = 2) with both recombinant molecules. CONCLUSION: A moderate decrease in IgE-binding potency translates into a potent inhibition of biological activity. This is the first study that confirms by DBPCFC that a mutated recombinant major food allergen is clinically hypo-allergenic. This paves the way towards safer immunotherapy for the treatment of food-allergic patients.

Severe allergy to sharon fruit caused by birch pollen.

BACKGROUND: Allergy to sharon fruit (persimmon) has been only rarely reported. Cross-reactivity with pollen (profilin and Bet v 6) appeared to be involved, but Bet v 1 has not been implicated previously. OBJECTIVE: It is our aim to identify whether Bet v 1 sensitization is linked to sharon fruit allergy. METHODS: Two patients with a reaction upon first exposure to sharon fruit were included in the study, as well as 7 patients with birch-pollen-related apple allergy. Sensitivity was assessed by skin prick testing (SPT), a radio-allergosorbent test (RAST) and immunoblotting. RAST analysis was performed for Bet v 1, Bet v 2 and Bet v 6. Cross-reactivity was evaluated by RAST and immunoblot inhibitions. Biological activity of IgE was measured by basophil histamine release. Sharon fruit allergy was evaluated by double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) or open challenge (OC). RESULTS: Both sharon-fruit-allergic patients demonstrated positive reactions in the RAST (8.6 and 6.2 IU/ml, respectively) and SPT (wheal area 37 and 36 mm2). Sharon fruit allergy was confirmed by DBPCFC in 1 patient. The second patient refused a challenge because of the severe initial reaction. Sera from both patients were reactive to Bet v 1 and Bet v 6, which was cross-reactive with sharon fruit by inhibition assays. The patient with the severest reactions was reactive to profilin on immunoblotting. However, profilin did not induce significant histamine release, nor did Bet v 6. Bet v 1 induce approximately 60% histamine release. An OC with sharon fruit in 7 patients allergic to birch pollen and apple, who had not eaten sharon fruit previously, was positive in 6/7 cases. CONCLUSIONS: Birch-pollen-related allergy to sharon fruit is mediated by the known cross-reactive pollen allergens including Bet v 1 and may become more of a problem should sharon fruit consumption increase.

The prevalence of positive reactions in the atopy patch test with aeroallergens and food allergens in subjects with atopic eczema: a European multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: The atopy patch test (APT) was proposed to evaluate IgE-mediated sensitizations in patients with atopic eczema (AE). OBJECTIVE: The prevalence and agreement with clinical history and specific IgE (sIgE) of positive APT reactions was investigated in six European countries using a standardized method. METHODS: A total of 314 patients with AE in remission were tested in 12 study centers on clinically uninvolved, non-abraded back skin with 200 index of reactivity (IR)/g of house dust mite Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, cat dander, grass, and birch pollen allergen extracts with defined major allergen contents in petrolatum. Extracts of egg white, celery and wheat flour with defined protein content were also patch tested. APT values were evaluated at 24, 48, and 72 h according to the European Task Force on Atopic Dermatitis (ETFAD) guidelines. In addition, skin-prick test (SPT) and sIgE and a detailed history on allergen-induced eczema flares were obtained. RESULTS: Previous eczema flares, after contact with specific allergens, were reported in 1% (celery) to 34% (D. pteronyssinus) of patients. The frequency of clear-cut positive APT reactions ranged from 39% with D. pteronyssinus to 9% with celery. All ETFAD intensities occured after 48 and 72 h. Positive SPT (16-57%) and elevated sIgE (19-59%) results were more frequent. Clear-cut positive APT with all SPT and sIgE testing negative was seen in 7% of the patients, whereas a positive APT without SPT or sIgE for the respective allergen was seen in 17% of the patients. APT, SPT and sIgE results showed significant agreement with history for grass pollen and egg white (two-sided Pr > /Z/ < or = 0.01). In addition, SPT and sIgE showed significant agreement with history for the other aeroallergens. With regard to clinical history, the APT had a higher specificity (64-91% depending on the allergen) than SPT (50-85%) or sIgE (52-85%). Positive APT were associated with longer duration of eczema flares and showed regional differences. In 10 non-atopic controls, no positive APT reaction was seen. CONCLUSION: Aeroallergens and food allergens are able to elicit eczematous skin reactions after epicutaneous application. As no gold standard for aeroallergen provocation in AE exists, the relevance of aeroallergens for AE flares may be evaluated by APT in addition to SPT and sIgE. The data may contribute to the international standardization of the APT.

Allergy to jackfruit: a novel example of Bet v 1-related food allergy.

BACKGROUND: Jackfruit allergy has been reported just once. It is unknown whether this food allergy is caused by direct sensitization or cross-sensitization to pollen allergens. OBJECTIVE: Establish whether jackfruit allergy is linked to birchpollen allergy. METHODS: Two jackfruit allergic patients and five patients with birchpollen-related apple allergy were recruited. Sensitization to pollen and plant foods was assessed by skin prick test (SPT), radio-allergosorbent test (RAST) and immunoblot. RAST analysis was performed for Bet v 1 and Mal d 1. Cross-reactivity was evaluated by RAST and immunoblot-inhibition. Biological activity of immunoglobulin E (IgE) was measured by basophil histamine release. Allergy to jackfruit was evaluated by double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) or open challenge (OC). RESULTS: In both patients DBPCFC confirmed the reported jackfruit allergy. SPT was 41 and 27 mm2 and specific IgE to jackfruit was 5.9 and 0.8 IU/ml, respectively. Immunoblot analysis revealed IgE reactivity at Mr of approximately 17 kDa. The Bet v 1-related nature of this allergen in jackfruit was demonstrated by RAST and immunoblot inhibition. To assess whether jackfruit allergy might be common in patients with combined birchpollen-fruit allergy, five such patients underwent an OC with jackfruit. All five had OA-like symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Jackfruit allergy can be added to the list of birchpollen-related food allergies. Increased consumption of this fruit will result in a rise in allergic reactions.

Efficacy of birch-pollen immunotherapy on cross-reactive food allergy confirmed by skin tests and double-blind food challenges.

BACKGROUND: The effect of birch-pollen immunotherapy (IT) on cross-reactive food allergies is controversial. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of birch-pollen IT on apple allergy and to evaluate recombinant allergens and double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFCs) as monitoring tools. METHODS: Twenty-five adult birch-pollen- and apple-allergic patients were randomly divided into two groups, either receiving birch-pollen IT or symptomatic drugs only. IgE and IgG4 antibodies against birch pollen, apple, natural Bet v 1 and Mal d 1 were measured. In addition, skin prick tests (SPT) were performed using recombinant Bet v 1 (rBet v 1) and Mal d 1 (rMal d 1). Clinical outcome was evaluated by DBPCFC. CD4(+)CD25(+) regulatory T cells (Tregs) were isolated from peripheral blood and tested in functional assays. RESULTS: Birch-pollen IT resulted in a significant decrease of SPT reactivity for rBet v 1 (30-fold) and rMal d 1 (10-fold) already after 3 months. IgG4 antibodies were potently induced against Bet v 1, displaying cross-reactivity to Mal d 1. Visual analogue scale scores decreased >10-fold in 9/13 patients of the IT group, with three patients converting to negative. In the control group, no decrease was observed. Birch-pollen IT did not lead to detectable changes in the number or function of the CD4(+)CD25(+) Tregs. CONCLUSIONS: This trial supports the claims that birch-pollen IT also decreases allergy to foods containing Bet v 1-homologous allergens. Recombinant allergens and DBPCFCs have proven to be useful tools for monitoring the effect of birch-pollen IT on linked food allergies.