Introduction: Weed pollen allergy is an important and in prevalence increasing cause of pollinosis in Europe and across the world. In this study we focus on the value of common diagnostic tools for detection of a sensitization to mugwort and English plantain, especially with regard to the clinical relevance of the sensitization. Methods: Eighty weed pollen sensitized patients (41 to mugwort and 39 to English plantain) were assessed retrospectively regarding their clinical anamnesis, in-vivo tests (skin prick test [SPT] and allergen specific provocation) and in-vitro tests (immunoglobulin E [IgE] reactivity to purified natural allergen extract and specific allergen components in serum). Results: 85% of mugwort and 83% of English plantain sensitizations could be diagnosed by SPT alone. Distinction between allergic and non-allergic patients could be made with clinical challenges solely. IgE serology revealed IgE antibodies against the native pollen extracts for mugwort in 98% and for English plantain in 90% of patients. Detection of major allergens nArt v 1, nArt v 3 and Pla l 1 did not add accuracy to the diagnosis. A vast majority of the weed pollen allergic patients was sensitized to >1 allergen. Minor allergens were found to be of less importance. Conclusion: The exact diagnosis of weed pollen allergy can be challenging due to confounding components in anamnesis and diagnostic tests. IgE-serology does not delineate allergic from sensitized patients. Component resolved diagnostics (CRD) can confirm, but not replace, extract based diagnostic methods, such as SPT, provocation tests or serology to native extracts. Hence, these are the gold standard diagnostic tools in weed pollen allergy up to now.

Keywords:
Mugwort, English plantain, Recombinant allergens, Component resolved diagnostics
1.
Himly M, Jahn-Schmid B, Dedic A, Kelemen P, Wopfner N, Altmann F, et al. Art v 1, the major allergen of mugwort pollen, is a modular glycoprotein with a defensin-like and a hydroxyproline-rich domain.
FASEB J
. 2003;17(1):106–8.
2.
Stemeseder T, Hemmer W, Hawranek T, Gadermaier G. Marker allergens of weed pollen: basic considerations and diagnostic benefits in the clinical routine: part 16 of the series molecular allergology.
Allergo J Int
. 2014;23(8):274–80.
3.
Gadermaier G, Hauser M, Ferreira F. Allergens of weed pollen: an overview on recombinant and natural molecules.
Methods
. 2014;66(1):55–66.
4.
Burbach GJ, Heinzerling LM, Edenharter G, Bachert C, Bindslev-Jensen C, Bonini S, et al. GA(2)LEN skin test study II: clinical relevance of inhalant allergen sensitizations in Europe.
Allergy
. 2009;64(10):1507–15.
5.
Forkel S, Beutner C, Heetfeld A, Fuchs T, Schön MP, Geier J, et al. Allergic rhinitis to weed pollen in Germany: dominance by plantain, rising prevalence, and polysensitization rates over 20 years.
Int Arch Allergy Immunol
. 2020;181(2):128–35.
6.
Haftenberger M, Laußmann D, Ellert U, Kalcklösch M, Langen U, Schlaud M, et al. [Prevalence of sensitisation to aeraoallergens and food allergens: results of the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Adults (DEGS1)].
Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz
. 2013;56(5–6):687–97.
7.
Wopfner N, Gadermaier G, Egger M, Asero R, Ebner C, Jahn-Schmid B, et al. The spectrum of allergens in ragweed and mugwort pollen.
Int Arch Allergy Immunol
. 2005;138(4):337–46.
8.
Lombardero M, García-Sellés FJ, Polo F, Jimeno L, Chamorro MJ, García-Casado G, et al. Prevalence of sensitization to Artemisia allergens Art v 1, Art v 3 and Art v 60 kDa. Cross-reactivity among Art v 3 and other relevant lipid-transfer protein allergens.
Clin Exp Allergy
. 2004;34(9):1415–21.
9.
Oberhuber C, Ma Y, Wopfner N, Gadermaier G, Dedic A, Niggemann B, et al. Prevalence of IgE-binding to Art v 1, Art v 4 and Amb a 1 in mugwort-allergic patients.
Int Arch Allergy Immunol
. 2008;145(2):94–101.
10.
Wopfner N, Willeroidee M, Hebenstreit D, van Ree R, Aalbers M, Briza P, et al. Molecular and immunological characterization of profilin from mugwort pollen.
Biol Chem
. 2002;383(11):1779–89.
11.
Yagami T. Allergies to cross-reactive plant proteins. Latex-fruit syndrome is comparable with pollen-food allergy syndrome.
Int Arch Allergy Immunol
. 2002;128(4):271–9.
12.
Egger M, Mutschlechner S, Wopfner N, Gadermaier G, Briza P, Ferreira F. Pollen-food syndromes associated with weed pollinosis: an update from the molecular point of view.
Allergy
. 2006;61(4):461–76.
13.
Popescu FD. Cross-reactivity between aeroallergens and food allergens.
World J Methodol
. 2015;5(2):31–50.
14.
Mohapatra SS, Lockey RF, Polo F. Weed pollen allergens.
Clin Allergy Immunol
. 2008;21:127–39.
15.
Sousa R, Osório H, Duque L, Ribeiro H, Cruz A, Abreu I. Identification of Plantago lanceolata pollen allergens using an immunoproteomic approach.
J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol
. 2014;24(3):177–83.
16.
Gadermaier G, Dedic A, Obermeyer G, Frank S, Himly M, Ferreira F. Biology of weed pollen allergens.
Curr Allergy Asthma Rep
. 2004;4(5):391–400.
17.
Couto M, Miranda M. Proposed GA2LEN standardized allergen battery: what about regional sensitization differences?
J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol
. 2011;21(6):491–2.
18.
Calabozo B, Barber D, Polo F. Purification and characterization of the main allergen of Plantago lanceolata pollen, Pla l 1.
Clin Exp Allergy
. 2001;31(2):322–30.
19.
Asero R, Mistrello G, Roncarolo D, Casarini M. Detection of allergens in plantain (Plantago lanceolata) pollen.
Allergy
. 2000;55(11):1059–62.
20.
Moya R, Rubio V, Beitia JM, Carnés J, López-Matas MA. Purification and immunochemical characterization of Pla l 2, the profilin from Plantago lanceolata.
Mol Immunol
. 2017;83:100–6.
21.
Heinzerling L, Frew AJ, Bindslev-Jensen C, Bonini S, Bousquet J, Bresciani M, et al. Standard skin prick testing and sensitization to inhalant allergens across Europe: a survey from the GALEN network.
Allergy
. 2005;60(10):1287–300.
22.
Riechelmann H, Bachert C, Goldschmidt O, Hauswald B, Klimek L, Schlenter WW, et al. [Application of the nasal provocation test on diseases of the upper airways. Position paper of the German society for allergology and clinical immunology (ENT section) in cooperation with the Working Team for Clinical Immunology].
Laryngorhinootologie
. 2003;82(3):183–8.
23.
Bernstein IL, Storms WW. Practice parameters for allergy diagnostic testing. Joint task force on practice parameters for the diagnosis and treatment of asthma. The American academy of allergy, asthma and immunology and the American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology.
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol
. 1995;75(6 Pt 2):543–625.
24.
Frati F, Incorvaia C, Cavaliere C, Di Cara G, Marcucci F, Esposito S, et al. The skin prick test.
J Biol Regul Homeost Agents
. 2018;32(1 Suppl. 1):19–24.
25.
Krouse JH, Mabry RL. Skin testing for inhalant allergy 2003: current strategies.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg
. 2003;129(4 Suppl):S33–49.
26.
Brunetto B, Tinghino R, Braschi MC, Antonicelli L, Pini C, Iacovacci P. Characterization and comparison of commercially available mite extracts for in vivo diagnosis.
Allergy
. 2010;65(2):184–90.
27.
Sastre J, Landivar ME, Ruiz-García M, Andregnette-Rosigno MV, Mahillo I. How molecular diagnosis can change allergen-specific immunotherapy prescription in a complex pollen area.
Allergy
. 2012;67(5):709–11.
28.
Panzner P, Vachová M, Vítovcová P, Brodská P, Vlas T. A comprehensive analysis of middle-European molecular sensitization profiles to pollen allergens.
Int Arch Allergy Immunol
. 2014;164(1):74–82.
29.
Hamilton RG, Kleine-Tebbe J. Molecular allergy diagnostics: analytical features that support clinical decisions.
Curr Allergy Asthma Rep
. 2015;15(9):57.
30.
Ferreira F, Wolf M, Wallner M. Molecular approach to allergy diagnosis and therapy.
Yonsei Med J
. 2014;55(4):839–52.
31.
Moverare R, Larsson H, Carlsson R, Holmquist I. Mugwort-sensitized individuals from North Europe, South Europe and North America show different IgE reactivity patterns.
Int Arch Allergy Immunol
. 2011;154(2):164–72.
32.
Barber D, de la Torre F, Lombardero M, Antépara I, Colas C, Dávila I, et al. Component-resolved diagnosis of pollen allergy based on skin testing with profilin, polcalcin and lipid transfer protein pan-allergens.
Clin Exp Allergy
. 2009;39(11):1764–73.
33.
Hauser M, Roulias A, Ferreira F, Egger M. Panallergens and their impact on the allergic patient.
Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol
. 2010;6(1):1.
© 2021 S. Karger AG, Basel
2021
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.