Does clinical outcome of birch pollen immunotherapy relate to induction of blocking antibodies preventing IgE from allergen binding? A pilot study monitoring responses during first year of AIT

Table 1 Patients’ table

Serum donor	Age (years)	Sex	Birch pollen					ImmunoCAP			Other sensitizations
			Allergy symptoms	Skin prick test	Rhino-conjunctivitis total symptom scores			Bet v 1-specific IgE (kU/l)			Skin prick test
			Allergy symptoms	Skin prick test	T0	T1	T2	T0	T1	T2	Skin prick test
P1	41	m	RC	+++	6	2	1	40.2	42.7	19.8	Mites, hazel pollen
P2	50	m	RC	+++	8	1	1	4.4	5.8	4.8	Grass, hazel pollen
P3	54	m	RC	+	3	0	2	26.3	53.3	38.0	Mites, hazel pollen
P4	45	m	RC	++	3	2	0	51.1	159.0	81.3	Mold, hazel pollen
P5	63	f	RC	+	4	3	1	10.3	17.5	10.0	Mugwort, ragweed, hazel pollen
NA	47	f	None	Neg				< 0.01			None
NBA	26	f	None	Neg				< 0.01			Mites

P1–5, AIT patients; NA, non-allergic serum donor; NBA, non-birch allergic serum donor; RC, rhino-conjunctivitis; +, mild reaction; ++, moderate reaction; +++, strong reaction; Neg, negative; T0, before AIT; T1, 2 weeks after reaching the maintenance dose; T2, 1 year after starting AIT

ISSN: 2045-7022