Background: Bronchial hyperresponsiveness testing is useful for diagnosing and predicting the risk of bronchial asthma attacks. The Astograph is a tidal breathing method often used in as bronchial provocation testing in Japan. The minimum methachorine dose (Dmin) indicates bronchial sensitivity and is used mainly as an index of bronchial hyperresponsiveness. However, Dmin does not measured hyperresponsiveness, it cannot be compared directly with PC₂₀ in standard methods using FEV₁.

Methods: We investigated the relationship among sensitivity, reactivity, and hyperresponsiveness with the Astograph. We recruited 142 patients with confirmed or suspected bronchial asthma from outpatient clinic at St. Marianna University School of Medicine, Yokohama City Seibu Hospital. We calculated Dmin, SGrs/Grscont, PD_35Grs, and PD_15Grs compared them as bronchial hyperresponsiveness indices.

Results: Subjects had suspected asthma (n=103), or required assessment of asthma remission (n=39). There were significant relationships between logDmin and logPD_35Grs (r=0.838, p<0.001), and between parameters and SGrs/Grscont (log PD_35Grs r=-0.504, p<0.001, strong, logDmin: r=-0.191, p=0.023, weaker). Among subjects positive for hypersensitivity, (Dmin<10), 38 (36.5%) showed negative hyperresponsiveness (PD_35Grs>25). PD_15Grs was a strongly and significantly correlated with Dmin and PD_35Grs. The ROC curve to detect PD_35Grs<25, showed that the cutoff of PD_15Grs was 10.7 (AUC 0.983, sensitivity 0.984, specificity 0.905).

Conclusion: In Astograph, evaluation of bronchial hyperresponsiveness, we focused on relationship differences between sensitivity and reactivity, and hyperresponsiveness. We revealed the usefulness of the PD_15Grs evaluation method.

Background, Objectives: The factors associated with parents' decisions to vaccinate their children with SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and the impact of the coexistence of allergic diseases in their children are unclear.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among parents of patients aged 15 years or younger who visited our pediatric allergy outpatient clinic and three partner pediatric clinics between April and May 2021. Survey items included presence or absence of other allergic diseases, and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination preferences and reasons.

Results: 646 responses were received, with 568 valid responses (88%). Thirty-eight respondents (6.7%) did not want their children to receive SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Factors that led parents to reject the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine for their children were the coexistence of food allergies and a low evaluation of the expectations of the safety and preventive effect of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. The top reasons for not wanting to vaccinate were related to concerns about side effects to the vaccine.

Conclusion: In order for parents to make correct decisions regarding SARS-CoV-2 vaccination of their children, it is necessary to create an environment in which up-to-date and correct information is available to avoid excessive anxiety. More care is needed, especially if the child has food allergies.

Background: Little is known whether sublingual immunotherapy using Japanese cedar pollen extract (cedar SLIT) is effective for not only Japanese cedar pollinosis but also Japanese cypress pollinosis. We investigated the prevalence rate of Japanese cypress pollinosis, efficacy of cedar SLIT on cypress pollinosis and patients' wish to receive cypress SLIT.

Methods: We investigated a multi-center (31 institutions), cross-sectional survey using a self-administrated questionnaire with four questions for patients received cedar SLIT aged from 5 to 69 years old.

Results: 2523 subjects were enrolled for analysis. 83.4% of them had pollinosis symptoms during cypress season before cedar SLIT. In such patients, 37.4% experienced lessened efficacy of cedar SLIT during cypress season. Both the prevalence of cypress pollinosis and the lessened efficacy of cedar SLIT on cypress pollinosis were significantly seen in western Japan as compared to eastern Japan. 76.1% of the subject having cypress pollinosis before SLIT wished to receive cypress SLIT if it is available.

Conclusion: A lessened efficacy of cedar SLIT during cypress season was broadly seen in Japan, and further showed a regional difference. Together with the finding of high wish by patients, these results suggest a development of cypress SLIT is desirable.

Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is frequently misdiagnosed as drug allergy. It is essential to differentiate HAE from allergy. Diagnosing HAE-normal-C1INH (conventional HAE type III), presenting normal C1-INH, is even more difficult. Here, we report a case of a 17-year-old female diagnosed with HAE and having labeled wheat and multiple drug allergies. She had been suffering from skin edema and abdominal symptoms since childhood. After taking wheat at 13 years old, she had multiple episodes of the same symptoms. Wheat allergy was suspected, and she started eliminating wheat. Multiple attacks were observed after several drug use, and drug allergy was labeled. However, her attacks did not improve after eliminating wheat and the suspected drugs. Her C4 and C1-INH activity was normal, but we diagnosed her with HAE-normal-C1INH based on her family history, multiple attacks after dental procedures, ineffective antihistamines, and significant efficacy of C1-INH infusion. A double-blind, placebo-controlled wheat challenge test at our hospital was negative, and wheat removal was lifted. Drugs could be de-labeled by allergic tests and history. Repeated attacks of unexplained edema and abdominal pain should be differentiated from HAE and lead to an appropriate diagnosis.

Reactivity to an anisakis allergen component was examined in three patients with a history of an anisakiasis anaphylaxis. Case 1, a 38-year-old man, allergic symptoms appeared 0.5 hours after ingestion, and the component Ani s 1 and 3 were positive. Case 2, a 44-year-old woman, allergic symptoms appeared 4 hours after ingestion, and components Ani s 3 and 12 were positive. Case 3, a 36-year-old woman, developed allergic symptoms 7 hours after ingestion of fish and shellfish, and tested positive for Ani s 1, 4, and 12. Case 3 reacted strongly to both heated and unheated Anisakis extract, while cases 1 and 2 reacted weakly to heated Anisakis extract. The most common allergen was Ani s 12, followed by Ani s 1, when analyzed in conjunction with existing reports on 10 cases. Anisakis IgE was class 3 or higher in all cases. Analysis of 13 cases showed 2 cases sensitized to Ani s 4 and moderate or higher anaphylaxis, while Ani s 4-sensitized patients were reported to be more likely to develop severe disease. It is possible that the patients sensitized to Ani s 4 need to be careful about the severity of their allergic symptoms.

Long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) are preferred add-on treatment for adult asthmatic patients whose symptoms cannot be controlled with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) alone. However, over the last decade, long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) have gained approval for use in treating asthma, and their efficacy is anticipated. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to investigate whether the addition of LABA or LAMA is more beneficial for the long-term management of adult asthmatic patients poorly controlled on ICS monotherapy. We extracted eight relevant randomized controlled trials (represented in 18 articles) conducted by June 2022 form the corresponding Cochrane review and additional searches through medical databases (CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and ICHUSHI (https://www.jamas.or.jp/)). While the LAMA add-on group showed a significantly better improvement in some respiratory function tests, the difference between groups did not exceed the minimum clinically important difference (MCID). On the other hand, the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire, a quality of life metric, was significantly higher in the LABA add-on group, but the difference also did not surpass the MCID. Because no outcomes exceeded the MCID, we could not determine whether adding LABA or LAMA on ICS is more beneficial in the long-term management of adult asthmatic patients. Given that no significant differences were found in the incidence of adverse events (including serious ones), when specific adverse events associated with one treatment occur, switching to the other treatment (from LABA to LAMA, or vice versa) can be considered as an option.