Conflict of interest disclosureThe authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Background: Some patients with a wheat allergy have been reported to show clinical cross-reactivity to barley. However, it is not clear whether the development of barley allergy in patients with a wheat allergy is due to cross-antigenicity between wheat and barley. In our study, we aimed to determine the clinical cross-reactivity and immunological cross-antigenicity of wheat and barley. Methods: We compared the results of barley oral food challenges (OFCs) before oral immunotherapy (OIT) for wheat with those after OIT in nine patients with a wheat allergy to estimate the clinical cross-reactivity of wheat and barley. Moreover, we performed enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) inhibition and immunoblotting inhibition using serum from seven patients allergic to wheat and barley. Results: Nine patients who had positive barley-OFC results performed before OIT for wheat were all negative on barley-OFC performed after OIT. In ELISA inhibition, preincubation of serum from patients allergic to wheat and barley with a high barley extract concentration inhibited binding of IgE to wheat extract by less than 10%. On the other hand, wheat and barley extracts equally inhibited binding to barley sIgE at high concentrations. In the immunoblotting inhibition test, the spots of wheat were inhibited but weakly by barley extracts, and most of the spots of barley were inhibited even by low concentrations of the wheat and barley extract. Conclusion: We showed that barley allergy associated with wheat allergy is caused by cross-reactivity from wheat. The OIT for wheat was one of the promising options for barley allergy.

Background: We have previously reported that more than half of the patients who achieved desensitization after wheat rush oral immunotherapy (OIT) developed exercise-induced allergic reaction on desensitization (EIARD). However, data on EIARDs after slow OIT are lacking. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the results of exercise provocation tests (EPTs) in patients after slow OIT for cow’s milk and wheat allergies. Methods: This was a retrospective chart review of 87 EPTs in 74 patients. The EPTs were performed in patients who were desensitized to at least 6,600 mg cow’s milk protein or 5,200 mg wheat protein with slow OIT and were identified to be at a high risk of EIARDs. EPTs were performed after ingestion of the maximum desensitization dose. The patients’ clinical characteristics and symptoms were analyzed. Results: The EPT results were positive for cow’s milk in 49% (21/43) of the patients and for wheat in 48% (15/31) of the patients. There was no significant difference in the clinical characteristics between the EIARD-positive and EIARD-negative groups. The specific IgE (sIgE) levels before OIT and the reduction rates of sIgE before and after OIT did not correlate with the outcomes of the EPTs. Among the EIARD-positive patients, 13 patients (cow’s milk, n=7; wheat, n=6) underwent a second EPT, and the EIARD disappeared in 8 patients (cow’s milk, n=4; wheat, n=4). Conclusion: EIARDs were observed after slow OIT for cow’s milk and wheat. Further research into the predictive factors of EIARDs in these patients is needed to understand its clinical manifestations.

Background: We previously reported that the specific IgE levels to αs1-casein (CN) and β-CN in patients with cow’s milk allergy decreased with similar dynamics during oral immunotherapy. Therefore, we hypothesized that αs1- and β-CN have strong cross-reactivity among CN components, despite the low similarity in the full-length amino acid sequences. Methods: The αs1-, β-, and κ-CN were purified from commercial cow’s milk. We recruited 39 patients with cow’s milk allergy and the serum IgE levels for each CN component were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Cross-reactivity between CN components was investigated by competitive ELISA against αs1-CN. Sequence homology between CN components at the peptide level was calculated using in silico analysis and quantified by the Property Distance (PD) value. Results: The αs1-CN-specific IgE levels exhibited a strong positive correlation with the β-CN-specific IgE (r = 0.945, P < 0.001). Complete competition was observed by β-CN against αs1-CN, suggesting the presence of common epitopes between them. In silico analysis detected 24 peptide sets with PD values lower than 10 between αs1- and β-CN, and 14 sets between αs1- and κ-CN. The amino acid sequences of αs1- (E61-E70) and β-CN (I12-E21) that showed the lowest PD value (5.30) were present in the characteristic sequence known as casein phosphopeptide (CPP). Conclusion: We detected strong cross-reactivity between CN components. Furthermore, we found highly homologous sequences in the CPP region, which contains a core sequence of “SSSEE” with phosphorylated serine residues.