Suchergebnisse

The topic of standardization in relation to allergen products has been discussed by allergists, regulators, and manufacturers for a long time. In contrast to synthetic medicinal products, the natural origin of allergen products makes the necessary comparability difficult to achieve. This holds true for both aspects of standardization: Batch-to-batch consistency (or product-specific standardization) and comparability among products from different manufacturers (or cross-product comparability). In this review, we focus on how the United States and the European Union have tackled the topic of allergen product standardization in the past, covering the early joint standardization efforts in the 1970s and 1980s as well as the different paths taken by the two players thereafter until today. So far, these two paths have been based on rather classical immunological methods, including the corresponding benefits like simple feasability. New technologies such as mass spectrometry present an opportunity to redefine the field of allergen standardization in the future.

The topic of standardization in relation to allergen products has been discussed by allergists, regulators, and manufacturers for a long time. In contrast to synthetic medicinal products, the natural origin of allergen products makes the necessary comparability difficult to achieve. This holds true for both aspects of standardization: Batch-to-batch consistency (or product-specific standardization) and comparability among products from different manufacturers (or cross-product comparability). In this review, we focus on how the United States and the European Union have tackled the topic of allergen product standardization in the past, covering the early joint standardization efforts in the 1970s and 1980s as well as the different paths taken by the two players thereafter until today. So far, these two paths have been based on rather classical immunological methods, including the corresponding benefits like simple feasability. New technologies such as mass spectrometry present an opportunity to redefine the field of allergen standardization in the future.

Background: Foods not commonly consumed in the European Union (EU) must be proven save before brought to market, including an assessment of allergenicity. We present a three-stepwise strategy for allergenicity assessment of natural novel foods using three novel vegetables as example (water spinach, hyacinth bean, Ethiopian eggplant). Methods: First, vegetable extracts were analysed for the presence of pan-allergens [Bet v 1 homologous proteins, profilins, non specific lipid transfer proteins (LTP)] by immunoblot analysis with specific animal antibodies. Second, the IgE-binding of the food extracts was investigated by EAST (Enzyme-allergosorbent test) and immunoblot analysis using sera with IgE-reactivity to known pan-allergens or to phylogenetically related foods from subjects 1) allergic to birch, grass and mugwort pollen, 2) with food allergy to soy, peanut, tomato, multiple pollen-related foods and 3) sensitised to LTP. Third, the clinical relevance of IgE-binding was assessed in vivo by skin prick testing (SPT) and open oral food challenges (OFC). Results: Profilin and LTP were detected by animal antibodies in all vegetables, a Bet v 1 homologue selectively in hyacinth bean. IgE-binding to LTP, profilin and a Bet v 1 homologue was proven by immunoblot analysis and EAST. Positive SPT and OFC results were observed for all vegetables in pollen-allergic patients. Conclusion: Our stepwise procedure confirmed the presence and IgE-binding capacity of novel vegetable proteins homologous to known allergens in endemic vegetable foods. In vivo testing proved the potential of the novel vegetables to elicit clinical allergy. Hence, our described algorithm seems to be applicable for allergenicity testing of natural novel foods.

International audience ; Concerning development of medicinal products, children belong to a so-called "special population" for which additional legislation applies: Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 on medicinal products for paediatric use sets up a system of requirements, rewards and incentives to ensure that medicinal products are researched, developed and authorized to meet the therapeutic needs of children. Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) is believed to contain a strong potential for immunomodulatory effects inducing sustained clinical efficacy after cessation of treatment (disease modifying effect) and thereby may prevent the progression of the atopic march towards asthma manifestation. However, to this day only few data on long-term effects in general exist and even fewer in children. These are predominantly data from open studies, which are strongly influenced in their validity by the known placebo effect of AIT. Furthermore, there are no studies allowing for the conclusion that efficacy in adults are mirrored by a similar efficacy in children and thus, up to now, it is not possible to extrapolate data from adults to children. The Paediatric Committee (PDCO)-European Medicines Agency's (EMA) scientific committee responsible for activities on medicines for children-initiated a Multi-Stakeholder Meeting on AIT for Children held at the Paul-Ehrlich-Institut in Langen, Germany, to provide a platform for discussion and exchange of thoughts to this topic between allergy experts from academia, regulators and AIT-manufacturers. The consented meeting minutes, conclusions and participants are presented.

International audience ; Concerning development of medicinal products, children belong to a so-called "special population" for which additional legislation applies: Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 on medicinal products for paediatric use sets up a system of requirements, rewards and incentives to ensure that medicinal products are researched, developed and authorized to meet the therapeutic needs of children. Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) is believed to contain a strong potential for immunomodulatory effects inducing sustained clinical efficacy after cessation of treatment (disease modifying effect) and thereby may prevent the progression of the atopic march towards asthma manifestation. However, to this day only few data on long-term effects in general exist and even fewer in children. These are predominantly data from open studies, which are strongly influenced in their validity by the known placebo effect of AIT. Furthermore, there are no studies allowing for the conclusion that efficacy in adults are mirrored by a similar efficacy in children and thus, up to now, it is not possible to extrapolate data from adults to children. The Paediatric Committee (PDCO)-European Medicines Agency's (EMA) scientific committee responsible for activities on medicines for children-initiated a Multi-Stakeholder Meeting on AIT for Children held at the Paul-Ehrlich-Institut in Langen, Germany, to provide a platform for discussion and exchange of thoughts to this topic between allergy experts from academia, regulators and AIT-manufacturers. The consented meeting minutes, conclusions and participants are presented.

International audience ; Concerning development of medicinal products, children belong to a so-called "special population" for which additional legislation applies: Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 on medicinal products for paediatric use sets up a system of requirements, rewards and incentives to ensure that medicinal products are researched, developed and authorized to meet the therapeutic needs of children. Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) is believed to contain a strong potential for immunomodulatory effects inducing sustained clinical efficacy after cessation of treatment (disease modifying effect) and thereby may prevent the progression of the atopic march towards asthma manifestation. However, to this day only few data on long-term effects in general exist and even fewer in children. These are predominantly data from open studies, which are strongly influenced in their validity by the known placebo effect of AIT. Furthermore, there are no studies allowing for the conclusion that efficacy in adults are mirrored by a similar efficacy in children and thus, up to now, it is not possible to extrapolate data from adults to children. The Paediatric Committee (PDCO)-European Medicines Agency's (EMA) scientific committee responsible for activities on medicines for children-initiated a Multi-Stakeholder Meeting on AIT for Children held at the Paul-Ehrlich-Institut in Langen, Germany, to provide a platform for discussion and exchange of thoughts to this topic between allergy experts from academia, regulators and AIT-manufacturers. The consented meeting minutes, conclusions and participants are presented.

Concerning development of medicinal products, children belong to a so-called "special population" for which additional legislation applies: Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 on medicinal products for paediatric use sets up a system of requirements, rewards and incentives to ensure that medicinal products are researched, developed and authorized to meet the therapeutic needs of children. Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) is believed to contain a strong potential for immunomodulatory effects inducing sustained clinical efficacy after cessation of treatment (disease modifying effect) and thereby may prevent the progression of the atopic march towards asthma manifestation. However, to this day only few data on long-term effects in general exist and even fewer in children. These are predominantly data from open studies, which are strongly influenced in their validity by the known placebo effect of AIT. Furthermore, there are no studies allowing for the conclusion that efficacy in adults are mirrored by a similar efficacy in children and thus, up to now, it is not possible to extrapolate data from adults to children. The Paediatric Committee (PDCO)—European Medicines Agency's (EMA) scientific committee responsible for activities on medicines for children—initiated a Multi-Stakeholder Meeting on AIT for Children held at the Paul-Ehrlich-Institut in Langen, Germany, to provide a platform for discussion and exchange of thoughts to this topic between allergy experts from academia, regulators and AIT-manufacturers. The consented meeting minutes, conclusions and participants are presented.

The first approved COVID-19 vaccines include Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162B2, Moderna mRNA-1273 and AstraZeneca recombinant adenoviral ChAdOx1-S. Soon after approval, severe allergic reactions to the mRNA-based vaccines that resolved after treatment were reported. Regulatory agencies from the European Union, Unites States and the United Kingdom agree that vaccinations are contraindicated only when there is an allergy to one of the vaccine components or if there was a severe allergic reaction to the first dose. This position paper of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) agrees with these recommendations and clarifies that there is no contraindication to administer these vaccines to allergic patients who do not have a history of an allergic reaction to any of the vaccine components. Importantly, as is the case for any medication, anaphylaxis may occur after vaccination in the absence of a history of allergic disease. Therefore, we provide a simplified algorithm of prevention, diagnosis and treatment of severe allergic reactions and a list of recommended medications and equipment for vaccine centres. We also describe potentially allergenic/immunogenic components of the approved vaccines and propose a workup to identify the responsible allergen. Close collaboration between academia, regulatory agencies and vaccine producers will facilitate approaches for patients at risks, such as incremental dosing of the second injection or desensitization. Finally, we identify unmet research needs and propose a concerted international roadmap towards precision diagnosis and management to minimize the risk of allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines and to facilitate their broader and safer use.

AbstractOpinion on acetaldehyde as a flavouring substance: considerations for risk assessmentAcetaldehyde occurs naturally in many foods and is also used as a flavouring due to its fruity aroma. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified acetaldehyde as possibly carcinogenic to humans and, in combination with oral intake via alcoholic beverages, as carcinogenic to humans. Therefore, the question arises whether the use of acetaldehyde as a flavouring agent is still justifiable. The Senate Commission on Food Safety (SKLM) of the German Research Foundation (DFG) reviewed the scientific basis for health risk assessment of the use of acetaldehyde as a flavouring substance and adopted an opinion. Based on the available data, it is at present not possible to conclude if acetaldehyde is genotoxic and mutagenic in vivo after oral exposure. There is also uncertainty regarding the contribution of acetaldehyde as a flavouring substance to the overall exposure to acetaldehyde. Therefore, a science-based assessment on health risk related to the use of acetaldehyde as a flavouring is not possible at present. Considering the genotoxic potential as well as numerous data gaps that need to be closed for a full risk assessment, the SKLM is concerned about the safety of acetaldehyde as a flavouring substance. For reasons of precautionary consumer protection, the SKLM considers that the use of acetaldehyde as a food additive should be re-evaluated.