Influence of profilin on sensitisation profiles determined by cutaneous tests and IgE to major allergens in polysensitised patients

Background: Profilin sensitisation is considered a diagnostic confounding factor in areas where patients are exposed to multiple pollens. The aim of this study is to assess pollen sensitisation profiles in adults and children and to evaluate, by means of component-resolved diagnosis (CRD) and skin prick testing (SPT), which pollens may be considered as risk factors of profilin sensitisation in order to establish the best diagnostic approach in polysensitised patients. Methods: A total of 231 pollen-allergic patients (adults and children) were included, out of the pollen season, from an area with similar levels of pollen exposure. Allergological diagnosis was performed by SPT and determination of specific IgE (sIgE) to major allergen components (ADVIA-Centaur™). Patients had not received immunotherapy in the last 5 years and had to reside in the area for 5 consecutive years before entering the study. Results: The relation between sensitisation measured by SPT and by sIgE was studied using a model of cases (patients with +sIgE to a specific allergen) and controls (patients with -sIgE to the same allergen). The outcome, in terms of odds-ratios (OR), was statistically significant for Olea (Ole e 1) (p = 0.0005), Salsola (Sal k 1) (p = 0.0118) and Platanus (Pla a 1+ 2) (p = 0.0372). While positivity of SPT to most pollens was statistically associated with a risk of profilin sensitisation, by CRD the association was statistically significant only for Ole e 1 (OR 3.5, CI 95 %, 1.6-7.6, p = 0.0014), and Phl p 5 (OR 11.9, CI 95 %, 4.1-35.2, p < 0.001). When analysing this association using a logistic regression model, Phl p 5 was the only allergen associated with the risk of being sensitised to profilin (p = 0.0023). Conclusions: In patients sensitised to profilin, the concordance between SPT and CRD is much lower than in those not sensitised to profilin. CRD is able to provide refined information about which pollens increase the risk of sensitisation to profilin

Anidulafungin: a novel echinocandin for candida infections.

A third echinocandin, anidulafungin, has recently been approved for Candida infections in the non-neutropenic patient. In the EU it is indicated for invasive candidiasis; in 2006 it was approved in the USA for candida esophagitis, candidemia, and two types of invasive infections, peritonitis and intra-abdominal abscesses. It is fungicidal against Candida species and fungistatic against Aspergillus species. In addition to its favorable tolerability in studies to date, it does not need adjustment for renal or hepatic insufficiency and has no known drug interactions. A steady state concentration can be achieved on day 2 following a loading dose of twice the maintenance concentration on day 1, and the drug is administered intravenously once daily. Cross resistance with other classes of antifungals is not a concern as it possesses a unique mechanism of action