Nitration of the Egg-Allergen Ovalbumin Enhances Protein Allergenicity but Reduces the Risk for Oral Sensitization in a Murine Model of Food Allergy

Nitration of proteins on tyrosine residues, which can occur due to polluted air under "summer smog" conditions, has been shown to increase the allergic potential of allergens. Since nitration of tyrosine residues is also observed during inflammatory responses, this modification could directly influence protein immunogenicity and might therefore contribute to food allergy induction. In the current study we have analyzed the impact of protein nitration on sensitization via the oral route.BALB/c mice were immunized intragastrically by feeding untreated ovalbumin (OVA), sham-nitrated ovalbumin (snOVA) or nitrated ovalbumin (nOVA) with or without concomitant acid-suppression. To analyze the impact of the sensitization route, the allergens were also injected intraperitoneally. Animals being fed OVA or snOVA under acid-suppressive medication developed significantly elevated levels of IgE, and increased titers of specific IgG1 and IgG2a antibodies. Interestingly, oral immunizations of nOVA under anti-acid treatment did not result in IgG and IgE formation. In contrast, intraperitoneal immunization induced high levels of OVA specific IgE, which were significantly increased in the group that received nOVA by injection. Furthermore, nOVA triggered significantly enhanced mediator release from RBL cells passively sensitized with sera from allergic mice. Gastric digestion experiments demonstrated protein nitration to interfere with protein stability as nOVA was easily degraded, whereas OVA and snOVA remained stable up to 120 min. Additionally, HPLC-chip-MS/MS analysis showed that one tyrosine residue (Y(107)) being very efficiently nitrated is part of an ovalbumin epitope recognized exclusively after oral sensitization.These data indicated that despite the enhanced triggering capacity in existing allergy, nitration of OVA may be associated with a reduced de novo sensitizing capability via the oral route due to enhanced protein digestibility and/or changes in antibody epitopes

Enhancing monitoring and transboundary collaboration for conserving migratory species under global change: The priority case of the red kite

Calls for urgent action to conserve biodiversity under global change are increasing, and conservation of migratory species in this context poses special challenges. In the last two decades the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) has provided a framework for several subsidiary instruments including action plans for migratory bird species, but the effectiveness and transferability of these plans remain unclear. Such laws and policies have been credited with positive outcomes for the conservation of migratory species, but the lack of international coordination and on-ground implementation pose major challenges. While research on migratory populations has received growing attention, considerably less emphasis has been given to integrating ecological information throughout the annual cycle for examining strategies to conserve migratory species at multiple scales in the face of global change. We fill this gap through a case study examining the ecological status and conservation of a migratory raptor and facultative scavenger, the red kite (Milvus milvus), whose current breeding range is limited to Europe and is associated with agricultural landscapes and restricted to the temperate zone. Based on our review, conservation actions have been successful at recovering red kite populations within certain regions. Populations however remain depleted along the southern-most edge of the geographic range where many migratory red kites from northern strongholds overwinter. This led us to a forward-looking and integrated strategy that emphasizes international coordination involving researchers and conservation practitioners to enhance the science-policy-action interface. We identify and explore key issues for conserving the red kite under global change, including enhancing conservation actions within and outside protected areas, recovering depleted populations, accounting for climate change, and transboundary coordination in adaptive conservation and management actions. The integrated conservation strategy is sufficiently general such that it can be adapted to inform conservation of other highly mobile species subject to global change.Financial and logistic support were provided by GREFA, IREC, UCLM (Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha), CSIC and MITECO.Peer reviewe

D1.2 New framework for monitoring systemic impacts of freshwater and wetland restoration actions

Robust demonstration case-studies are needed to evaluate whether improvements in ecosystem condition are translated into improvements in ecosystem services. This research is essential for effectively scaling-up nature-based solutions across Europe and providing the evidence to support transformation agendas in society and industries, and ultimately supporting the ambitions of the European Green Deal. Clear guidance and standardised indicators help monitor the impact of freshwater and wetland restoration measures on European Green Deal goals. These monitoring indicators should include environmental indicators (e.g. for biodiversity, greenhouse gas emissions and water storage capacity) as well as socio-economic indicators such as stakeholder representation, private finance mobilisation and job creation. A combined Before-After-Control-Intervention (BACI) monitoring design is recommended to provide robust evidence and attribute change to the restoration measures. Benchmark (cost or effort) and local/regional context data (e.g. land use, governance) are also needed alongside monitoring of impacts to not just measure what has happened at a site but to understand why it has happened

Immunology of COVID-19: mechanisms, clinical outcome, diagnostics and perspectives – a report of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI)

With the worldwide spread of the novel Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) resulting in declaration of a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) on March 11, 2020, the SARS‐CoV‐2‐induced Coronavirus disease‐19 (COVID‐19) has become one of the main challenges of our times. The high infection rate and the severe disease course led to major safety and social restriction measures worldwide. There is an urgent need of unbiased expert knowledge guiding the development of efficient treatment and prevention strategies. This report summarizes current immunological data on mechanisms associated with the SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and COVID‐19 development and progression to the most severe forms. We characterize the differences between adequate innate and adaptive immune response in mild disease and the deep immune dysfunction in the severe multi‐organ disease. The similarities of the human immune response to SARS‐CoV‐2 and the SARS‐CoV and MERS‐CoV are underlined. We also summarize known and potential SARS‐CoV‐2 receptors on epithelial barriers, immune cells, endothelium and clinically involved organs such as lung, gut, kidney, cardiovascular and neuronal system. Finally, we discuss the known and potential mechanisms underlying the involvement of comorbidities, gender and age in development of COVID‐19. Consequently, we highlight the knowledge gaps and urgent research requirements to provide a quick roadmap for ongoing and needed COVID‐19 studies.The authors would like to thank the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) for the financial support to the sections, interest groups and working groups enabling the development of this paper. The research of SM is supported by a SNSF grant 310039_189334; JSR is funded by Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (IJCI-2016-27619); KKI is supported by the FWO Post doc mandate 12W2219N; BW and PF were supported by funding from the Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, Fondazione Telethon (project GGP19103), and Ricerca Finalizzata Giovani Ricercatori 2016 - Ministero Salute Italia (project GR-2016-02362413); GCC is supported by a postdoctoral contract cofounded by the competitive Program “Attracting Talent,” Community of Madrid, Spain; the research of SWCB was funded by DFG (398577603), “ADAPT” EIT Health is a body of the EU receiving support from H2020 and BMBF “ESCAPE” 01KI20169A; the research of UE is supported by the H2020 grant 768641 and by the BMF grant 19056.Peer reviewe

Use of biologicals in allergic and type-2 inflammatory diseases during the current COVID-19 pandemic: Position paper of Ärzteverband Deutscher Allergologen (AeDA)A, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Allergologie und Klinische Immunologie (DGAKI)B, Gesellschaft für Pädiatrische Allergologie und Umweltmedizin (GPA)C, Österreichische Gesellschaft für Allergologie und Immunologie (ÖGAI)D, Luxemburgische Gesellschaft für Allergologie und Immunologie (LGAI)E, Österreichische Gesellschaft für Pneumologie (ÖGP)F in co-operation with the German, Austrian, and Swiss ARIA groupsG, and the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI)H

International audienceBackground: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the treatment of patients with allergic and atopy-associated diseases has faced major challenges. Recommendations for "social distancing" and the fear of patients becoming infected during a visit to a medical facility have led to a drastic decrease in personal doctor-patient contacts. This affects both acute care and treatment of the chronically ill. The immune response after SARS-CoV-2 infection is so far only insufficiently understood and could be altered in a favorable or unfavorable way by therapy with monoclonal antibodies. There is currently no evidence for an increased risk of a severe COVID-19 course in allergic patients. Many patients are under ongoing therapy with biologicals that inhibit type 2 immune responses via various mechanisms. There is uncertainty about possible immunological interactions and potential risks of these biologicals in the case of an infection with SARS-CoV-2.Materials and methods: A selective literature search was carried out in PubMed, Livivo, and the internet to cover the past 10 years (May 2010 - April 2020). Additionally, the current German-language publications were analyzed. Based on these data, the present position paper provides recommendations for the biological treatment of patients with allergic and atopy-associated diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic.Results: In order to maintain in-office consultation services, a safe treatment environment must be created that is adapted to the pandemic situation. To date, there is a lack of reliable study data on the care for patients with complex respiratory, atopic, and allergic diseases in times of an imminent infection risk from SARS-CoV-2. Type-2-dominant immune reactions, as they are frequently seen in allergic patients, could influence various phases of COVID-19, e.g., by slowing down the immune reactions. Theoretically, this could have an unfavorable effect in the early phase of a SARS-Cov-2 infection, but also a positive effect during a cytokine storm in the later phase of severe courses. However, since there is currently no evidence for this, all data from patients treated with a biological directed against type 2 immune reactions who develop COVID-19 should be collected in registries, and their disease courses documented in order to be able to provide experience-based instructions in the future.Conclusion: The use of biologicals for the treatment of bronchial asthma, atopic dermatitis, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, and spontaneous urticaria should be continued as usual in patients without suspected infection or proven SARS-CoV-2 infection. If available, it is recommended to prefer a formulation for self-application and to offer telemedical monitoring. Treatment should aim at the best possible control of difficult-to-control allergic and atopic diseases using adequate rescue and add-on therapy and should avoid the need for systemic glucocorticosteroids. If SARS-CoV-2 infection is proven or reasonably suspected, the therapy should be determined by weighing the benefits and risks individually for the patient in question, and the patient should be involved in the decision-making. It should be kept in mind that the potential effects of biologicals on the immune response in COVID-19 are currently not known. Telemedical offers are particularly desirable for the acute consultation needs of suitable patients

Clinical Effect of Early vs Late Amyloid Positron Emission Tomography in Memory Clinic Patients

International audienceImportance Amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) allows the direct assessment of amyloid deposition, one of the main hallmarks of Alzheimer disease. However, this technique is currently not widely reimbursed because of the lack of appropriately designed studies demonstrating its clinical effect. Objective To assess the clinical effect of amyloid PET in memory clinic patients. Design, Setting, and Participants The AMYPAD-DPMS is a prospective randomized clinical trial in 8 European memory clinics. Participants were allocated (using a minimization method) to 3 study groups based on the performance of amyloid PET: arm 1, early in the diagnostic workup (within 1 month); arm 2, late in the diagnostic workup (after a mean [SD] 8 [2] months); or arm 3, if and when the managing physician chose. Participants were patients with subjective cognitive decline plus (SCD+; SCD plus clinical features increasing the likelihood of preclinical Alzheimer disease), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), or dementia; they were assessed at baseline and after 3 months. Recruitment took place between April 16, 2018, and October 30, 2020. Data analysis was performed from July 2022 to January 2023. Intervention Amyloid PET. Main Outcome and Measure The main outcome was the difference between arm 1 and arm 2 in the proportion of participants receiving an etiological diagnosis with a very high confidence (ie, ≥90% on a 50%-100% visual numeric scale) after 3 months. Results A total of 844 participants were screened, and 840 were enrolled (291 in arm 1, 271 in arm 2, 278 in arm 3). Baseline and 3-month visit data were available for 272 participants in arm 1 and 260 in arm 2 (median [IQR] age: 71 [65-77] and 71 [65-77] years; 150/272 male [55%] and 135/260 male [52%]; 122/272 female [45%] and 125/260 female [48%]; median [IQR] education: 12 [10-15] and 13 [10-16] years, respectively). After 3 months, 109 of 272 participants (40%) in arm 1 had a diagnosis with very high confidence vs 30 of 260 (11%) in arm 2 ( P < .001). This was consistent across cognitive stages (SCD+: 25/84 [30%] vs 5/78 [6%]; P < .001; MCI: 45/108 [42%] vs 9/102 [9%]; P < .001; dementia: 39/80 [49%] vs 16/80 [20%]; P < .001). Conclusion and Relevance In this study, early amyloid PET allowed memory clinic patients to receive an etiological diagnosis with very high confidence after only 3 months compared with patients who had not undergone amyloid PET. These findings support the implementation of amyloid PET early in the diagnostic workup of memory clinic patients. Trial Registration EudraCT Number: 2017-002527-2