This is default featured slide 1 title

Go to Blogger edit html and find these sentences.Now replace these sentences with your own descriptions.This theme is Bloggerized by Lasantha Bandara - Premiumbloggertemplates.com.

This is default featured slide 2 title

Go to Blogger edit html and find these sentences.Now replace these sentences with your own descriptions.This theme is Bloggerized by Lasantha Bandara - Premiumbloggertemplates.com.

This is default featured slide 3 title

Go to Blogger edit html and find these sentences.Now replace these sentences with your own descriptions.This theme is Bloggerized by Lasantha Bandara - Premiumbloggertemplates.com.

This is default featured slide 4 title

Go to Blogger edit html and find these sentences.Now replace these sentences with your own descriptions.This theme is Bloggerized by Lasantha Bandara - Premiumbloggertemplates.com.

This is default featured slide 5 title

Go to Blogger edit html and find these sentences.Now replace these sentences with your own descriptions.This theme is Bloggerized by Lasantha Bandara - Premiumbloggertemplates.com.

Saturday, May 9, 2015

Effector cells of anaphylaxis: mast cells and basophils

Effector cells of anaphylaxis: mast cells and basophils

Abstract. Systemic anaphylaxis arises when mast cells, possibly along with other cell types, are provoked to secrete mediators that evoke a systemic response. Mast cells in perivascular, respiratory, gastrointestinal and cutaneous tissues are likely involved, regardless of whether IgE or non-IgE-dependent pathways are invoked. affib tryptases are selectively and abundantly produced by mast cells. Tryptase levels in the circulation provide a precise indicator of mast cell involvement. Mature b tryptase is stored in secretory granules and is released when the cells are activated to degranulate, as occurs in anaphylaxis. affib proffipro’ tryptases are spontaneously secreted by mast cells. Consequently, mature tryptase levels in serum (normally 1 ngffiml) are elevated in systemic anaphylaxis. Total tryptase levels (mature plus precursor forms), normally 1^ 15 ngffiml in baseline serum samples, are elevated in patients with systemic mastocytosis (420 ngffiml), a disease that also predisposes one to anaphylactic reactions. The assessment of basophils in systemic anaphylactic reactions has been problematic, because an assay for a speci¢c releasable marker from this cell type has not been developed. Nevertheless, in cases of anaphylaxis in which elevations of histamine, but not tryptase, have been detected, it is enticing to speculate that basophil-dependent anaphylaxis may have occurred.

2004 Anaphylaxis. Wiley, Chichester (Novartis Foundation Symposium 257) p 65^79

Definition

Systemic anaphylaxis arises when mast cells are provoked to secrete mediators that evoke a systemic response. Although mast cells in any organ system may be involved, depending on the distribution of the instigating stimulus, the principal targets include the cardiovascular, cutaneous, respiratory and gastrointestinal systems, sites where mast cells are most abundant. The terms anaphylactic and anaphylactoid, respectively, attempt to distinguish between mast cell activation initiated by allergen and IgE through FceRI, classical immediate hypersensitivity, versus those that initiate mast cell activation by alternative pathways. Although the mediators elicited from mast cells will overlap extensively in anaphylaxis and anaphylactoid reactions, and thereby invoke similar acute therapies, understanding di¡erences in causation will likely impact on therapeutic interventions aimed at preventing future attacks. Cells other than mast cells also undoubtedly participate in systemic anaphylaxis, particularly those armed with antigen-speci¢c IgE. Basophils, like mast cells, constitutively express substantial amounts of the tetrameric (abg2), high a⁄nity receptor for IgE, FceRI, and when activated through this pathway, also release mediators within minutes. Eosinophils, monocytes, antigen-presenting cells and epithelial cells may be induced to express this receptor, primarily in its trimeric (ag2) form and thereby a¡ect the intensity, duration or character of anaphylactic reactions. Whether some cases of systemic anaphylaxis occur through one or more of these cell types without involving mast cells is theoretically possible, but remains controversial.

Precipitating factors

Most IgE-dependent mast cell activation events occur at local sites, and result in local disease. For example, allergic conjunctivitis, allergic rhinitis or allergic asthma typically occurs when allergen lands on the corresponding mucosal surface of a sensitive individual. Systemic anaphylaxis presumably requires the allergen (or non-allergen agonist) to distribute systemically before mast cells at remote sites will be activated. This is most likely to occur with parenteral administration, less likely with administration by the oral route, by inhalation or by direct cutaneous or ocular contact. Activation of mast cells in perivascular locations should have the greatest e¡ect on systemic vascular responses, even though large amounts of mediators released locally in theory could spill into the circulation and a¡ect remote sites. However, the precise distributions of mast cells that are activated during anaphylactic reactions are undetermined. Also, the numbers of mast cells available to respond, or factors a¡ecting mast cell releasability may have an impact on the severity of the response of a sensitive subject to an allergen challenge, and need to be better understood.

Allergens

The most common allergens causing systemic anaphylactic reactions include drugs, e.g. penicillin, insect venoms, foods, radiocontrast media, allergen immunotherapy injections, latex and autoantigens. Proteins or glycoproteins typically serve as complete antigens. In contrast, most drugs act as haptens after coupling to self proteins. Allergen multivalency is important, because cross- linking of IgE on the surface of cells brings together at least two FceRI molecules that then transmit an activating signal into the cell. A monovalent antigen would block cross-linking and thereby should block activation.

An allergen exposure must lead to sensitization before an immediate hypersensitivity reaction can occur, a process involving antigen processing, presentation to Th2 cells and class-switching of allergen-speci¢c B cells to IgE, a process that takes between one to two weeks. Consequently, anaphylaxis does not occur upon ¢rst exposure to an allergen, but may occur after subsequent exposures.

Non-IgE-dependent agonists

Most non-IgE-dependent foreign agents do not require antigen processing, and can elicit a mast cell-activation response upon ¢rst exposure. These would include radiocontrast dyes, narcotics such as codeine and morphine, and vancomycin. Endogenous mast cell activators include neuropeptides such as substance P, neurokinin A and calcitonin gene-related peptide, and the complement anaphylatoxin C5a. Whether a magnitude of mast cell activation su⁄cient to cause systemic anaphylaxis can result from endogenous secretion or generation of these peptides by themselves is unproven.

Aspirin hypersensitivity can manifest either at mucosal or cardiovascular sites.

Most cases of aspirin hypersensitivity appear to be pharmacologically (not IgE) mediated, and in sensitive subjects can occur to any of the cyclooxygenase (COX)-1 inhibitors. A mechanism to explain mast cell activation has not yet emerged. COX-2-selective inhibitors are relatively safe in aspirin-sensitive asthmatics, but have not been adequately tested in aspirin-sensitive anaphylaxis subjects. The recent identi¢cation of COX-3 and COX-related enzymes (Chandrasekharan et al 2002) that may have distinct pharmacological pro¢les adds to the complexity of aspirin-mediated hypersensitivity reactions.

Autoimmunity

Some patients present with spontaneous episodes of anaphylaxis. In certain cases this may be an extension of a physical urticaria. Because chronic urticaria may be associated with IgG and IgM antibodies against FceRI or IgE, an analogous autoimmune process might cause anaphylaxis.

Epidemiology

Assessing the annual incidence of systemic anaphylaxis and the prevalence of those at risk for systemic anaphylaxis are compromised by imprecise diagnostic measures. Approximately 1500 to 2000 deaths occur per year from systemic anaphylaxis in the USA (Neugut et al 2001). Non-fatal cases are much more common, estimated to occur in about 0.2% of the population per year. Further analyses suggest that between 3 and 43 million (1^15% of the population) may be at risk for such reactions. Drug reactions account for the majority of cases. Food, insect sting and latex reactions account for many of the other cases.

Pathophysiology

Mast cells participate in both acquired and innate forms of immunity (Wedemeyer et al 2000). They develop in peripheral tissues from bone marrow progenitors primarily under the in£uence of stem cell factor, the ligand for the tyrosine kinase receptor called Kit. Armed with allergen-speci¢c IgE, they are activated by multivalent allergens that cross-link IgE and associated FceRI molecules on the mast cell surface. This may be important in the defence against certain parasites that elicit a strong IgE response. Experiments performed in rodents suggest that mast cells also can be directly activated by certain bacterial products, leading to the secretion of mediators that recruit neutrophils, and thereby restrain bacterial dissemination until a more potent acquired immune response develops. Activation of mast cells by endogenous peptides such as substance P or calcitonin gene-related peptide may in£uence basic biological processes such a wound healing and angiogenesis. Whether mast cells have a critical, non-redundant role in these biologic and immunological processes remains controversial. However, their central role in immediate hypersensitivity is clear.

Mediators released by mast cells include preformed mediators stored in secretory granules, newly generated products of arachidonic acid, and an array of cytokines and chemokines (Schwartz 2002). Histamine, formed from histidine by histidine decarboxylase, is the sole biogenic amine stored in all granules of human mast cells and human basophils. Histamine released by mast cells or basophils di¡uses freely, and interacts with H1, H2 and H3 receptors. Histamine-mediated bronchial and gastrointestinal smooth muscle contraction, vascular smooth muscle relaxation and increased permeability of postcapillary venules account for many of the signs and symptoms of systemic anaphylaxis, primarily but not exclusively through H1 receptors. Excessive levels of histamine in the CNS may account for the sense of doom commonly experienced at the onset of anaphylaxis. Once secreted, histamine is rapidly metabolized to methyl histamine and indole acetic acid. Consequently, the plasma histamine level is not a practical test for anaphylaxis. Urinary histamine levels re£ect the small portions of histamine not metabolized in the circulation before renal clearance, and are a¡ected by ingested histamine-containing foods and histamine-producing mucosal bacteria, compromising the utility of this test.

Prostaglandin D2 (PGD2) is the principal COX-catalysed product of arachidonic acid secreted by activated mast cells, but is not made by basophils. It binds to the G protein-coupled receptors CRTH2 and DP (Hirai et al 2001). Both COX-1 and COX-2 are involved in PGD2 production by mast cells. Consequently, a COX inhibitor that is bipotent might be better than one which is selective at

blocking PGD2-mediated responses during anaphylaxis, which may include hypotension, bronchospasm and inhibition of platelet aggregation.

Leukotriene C4 (LTC4), is released by both mast cells and basophils after its formation from arachidonic acid and glutathione is sequentially catalysed ¢rst by 5-lipoxygenase and 5-lipoxygenase activating protein and then by LTC synthase. Conversion to LTD4 and LTE4, which also are bioactive, occurs in the extracellular space. These sul¢dopeptide leukotrienes bind to CysLT1 (smooth muscle, epithelial and endothelial cells, lung macrophages, eosinophils) (Evans 2002) and CysLT2 (endothelial and epithelial cells), both G protein-coupled receptors. Sul¢dopeptide leukotrienes cause bronchoconstriction, mucus secretion, eosinophil recruitment, increased vasopermeability, diminished cardiac contractility, vasoconstriction of coronary and peripheral arteries and vasodilation of venules.

Mast cells also are the principal source of heparin proteoglycan and the proteases a tryptase, b tryptase, chymase and mast cell carboxypeptidase. Like neutrophils and monocytes, they also contain cathepsin G. Basophils are relatively de¢cient in these enzymes. Mature tryptase is stored in the secretory granules of all mast cells, while the other proteases appear together in a subset of mast cells. Those with tryptase alone are called MCT cells, and are the predominant type of mast cell in the lung and small intestinal mucosa, while those with all proteases are called MCTC cells, and account for most of the mast cells in skin, intestinal submucosa, conjunctiva and blood vessel walls. The role(s) of these molecules in the pathophysiology of anaphylaxis are unde¢ned.

Tryptase (EC3.4.21.59) is the most abundant protein product produced by human mast cells, accounting for about 20% of the cell protein, and is derived principally from two genes on chromosome 16, a tryptase and b tryptase. The product of the b tryptase gene(s) is autoprocessed from b protryptase to b pro’tryptase at acidic pH, optimally in the presence of heparin proteoglycan, and then to b tryptase by a dipeptidase, thought to be dipeptidyl peptidase I in humans (Sakai et al 1996). Tryptase in murine mast cells utilizes a di¡erent dipeptidase (Wolters et al 2001). Mature b tryptase is stored in secretory granules as an enzymatically active tetramer in a complex with heparin proteoglycan until the cells are activated to degranulate and release the protease^proteoglycan complex. In contrast, a protryptase may not undergo autoprocessing from a protryptase to a pro’tryptase, because a tryptase-resistant Q-3 rather than a tryptase-sensitive R-3 is present in the -3 position of the propeptide (Sakai et al 1996). Indeed, when mature a tryptase is produced in vitro, though it forms a tetramer, the protein appears to be enzymatically inactive (Huang et al 1999, Marquardt et al 2002, Selwood et al 2002).

The major form of tryptase found in normal blood fails to bind to the G5 mAb, which recognizes mature forms of rha and rhb tryptases, but not the corresponding pro or pro’ forms of tryptase (Sakai et al 1996, Schwartz et al 1995, 2003). Thus, an immunoassay using this mAb measures mature tryptase. Although mature tryptase levels are undetectable in normal serum (51 ngffiml), they are elevated in the blood of most cases of systemic anaphylaxis with haemodynamic compromise, particularly when the precipitating agent is administered parenterally. In such cases, the magnitude of mast cell degranulation appears to be the primary determinant of clinical severity (Schwartz et al 1987, 1989, van der Linden et al 1992). In contrast, based on mAbs that recognize all forms of a and b tryptases, a total tryptase immunoassay was developed that detected levels of tryptase in baseline serum from essentially all individuals (mean ± SD, 4.9 ± 2.3 ngffiml) (Schwartz et al 1994). So-called total tryptase levels are elevated in subjects with systemic mastocytosis, and re£ect the total body burden of mast cells (Schwartz et al 1995). These observations can largely be explained by the in vitro observations that precursor forms of a and b tryptases are spontaneously secreted by unstimulated mast cells, while mature tryptase is preferentially stored in secretory granules and released by activated mast cells.

Approximately 25% of individuals lack a gene for a tryptase (Guida et al 2000, Soto et al 2002). Whether such a genetic di¡erence a¡ects the level of tryptase in the blood has been investigated. Preliminary data in healthy subjects indicates that a de¢ciency in the gene for a-tryptase does not in£uence the circulating levels of tryptase precursors in healthy subjects (Schwartz et al 2003). Finally, the hypothesis that mature forms of tryptase are preferentially stored in secretory granules, while immature forms of tryptase are preferentially selected for spontaneous secretion has not been directly examined.

Cytokines (TNFa, interleukins 4, 5, 6, 13 and 16, GM-CSF) and chemokines (interleukin 8,  monocyte chemotactic protein 1, monocyte in£ammatory protein 1a) represent another dimension of the mediators released by mast cells and basophils. Though not selectively produced by these cell types, the vasoactive and in£ammatory potential of such mediators could impact the severity and duration of anaphylaxis. Although cytokine secretion typically occurs in association with granulation, experiments in vitro indicate that cytokine secretion also can be induced in the absence of degranulation. As selective antagonists of the relevant cytokines and chemokines become available and are tested for therapeutic bene¢ts, their roles in the pathogenesis of anaphylaxis will be better understood.

Diagnosis and di¡erential diagnosis

Systemic anaphylaxis, with various combinations of hypotension, tachycardia, urticaria, bronchoconstriction, laryngeal oedema, colics and diarrhoea, often associated with a sense of doom, beginning within minutes of the provoking stimulus, can be precisely con¢rmed by demonstrating antigen-speci¢c IgE (sensitization) and an elevated b tryptase level in serum (mast cell activation). Skin testing or in vitro measurements of antigen-speci¢c IgE should be delayed for at least two weeks after the precipitating event to prevent false negative results. An increased level of mature tryptase in serum obtained within several hours following a hypotensive event, normal levels being undetectable, strongly suggests that mast cell activation occurred. During a study of experimental insect sting-induced anaphylaxis, the increased level of mature tryptase correlated closely with the drop in mean arterial pressure, indicating that the magnitude of mast cell activation is a primary determinant of clinical severity (van der Linden et al 1992). Objective criteria, such as an elevated level of mature tryptase, provide greater precision for the diagnosis of anaphylaxis than clinical signs and symptoms alone, and may be useful to distinguish anaphylaxis from other conditions. However, some cases of apparent IgE-mediated anaphylaxis, particularly some cases of food-induced anaphylaxis, are not associated with an elevated level of mature tryptase. This raises the question of whether there are anaphylactic pathways not involving mast cell activation, but instead perhaps basophil activation.

Anaphylaxis should be distinguished from a variety of disorders with overlapping presentations. Vasovagal syncope presents with diaphoresis, nausea, hypotension and bradycardia, but without urticaria. Flushing disorders may be benign and unrelated to anaphylaxis, or could be a manifestation of pathologic conditions such as the carcinoid syndrome, in which urticaria and profound hypotension are not typically associated, and phaeochromocytoma, which causes episodic hypertension. Precise detection of these latter conditions involves determining serum serotonin and urinary 5-hydroxyindole acetic acid, catecholamines and vanillylmandelic acid levels. Panic attacks and vocal cord dysfunction can be a challenge to distinguish from anaphylaxis, especially by history alone, but nevertheless must be considered. Acute attacks of hereditary and acquired angioedema due to C1 esterase inhibitor de¢ciency are not associated with pruritic urticaria, and persist longer than attacks of anaphylaxis. Shock due to complement activation by contaminated haemodialysis tubing, without involving mast cell activation, also has been reported. Scombroidosis occurs 5^90 min after ingestion of histamine in poorly-stored ¢sh, and presents with £ushing, palpitations, headache and gastrointestinal symptoms. The condition lasts several hours, both duration and severity depending on the amount of histamine ingested, and usually responds to H1 receptor and H2 receptor antihistamines, but occasionally requires epinephrine and intravenous £uids. Acute serum sickness, genetic cell activation syndromes, endotoxin- mediated septic shock and superantigen-mediated toxic shock syndromes present with fever, which is not characteristic of anaphylaxis by itself. Also, hypoglycaemia, seizure and primary pulmonary or cardiac events should be considered.

In some cases, systemic anaphylaxis may occur together with another disorder. For example, a 65 year-old male after being stung by a wasp complained of dizziness and shortness of breath, was hypotensive with urticaria, responded to treatment with subcutaneous epinephrine, then complained of chest pressure, and had an EKG indicating an inferior wall infarction. Both b tryptase level and cardiac enzymes were elevated, indicating both anaphylaxis and myocardial infarction had occurred.

Systemic mastocytosis is an important condition to consider in the di¡erential diagnosis of anaphylaxis (Schwartz 2001). In adults, somatic activating mutations in the gene for Kit in mast cell progenitors result in an excessive body burden of mast cells. In children with this disorder the disease may regress spontaneously, possibly due to the lack of this activating mutation. Patients with too many mast cells are at increased risk for anaphylaxis, and anaphylaxis may be a presenting manifestation of systemic mastocytosis. For example, anaphylaxis to an insect sting, particularly in the absence of venom-speci¢c IgE, should suggest the possibility of systemic mastocytosis. Diagnostic tests for systemic mastocytosis might include a biopsy of a skin lesion suspected to be urticaria pigmentosa, a bone marrow biopsy stained for mast cells (anti-tryptase immunohistochemistry being most sensitive), detection of bone marrow mast cells expressing surface CD2 and CD25, and an elevated serum level of total tryptase (mature plus immature forms of a and b tryptases) during a non-acute interval (Valent et al 2001).

Prevention and therapy

Acutely, treatment of systemic anaphylaxis ¢rst requires that airway patency, blood pressure and cardiac status be addressed. Epinephrine administration is critical, the earlier during the course of an anaphylactic event the better. Glucagon may be used in patients taking a b blocker. Parenteral administration of H1 and H2 receptor antihistamines may prevent progression of some of the signs and symptoms. Glucocorticosteroids may reduce the risk of protracted or recurrent anaphylaxis, but are unlikely to be of bene¢t acutely.

Patients who have experienced an anaphylactic reaction are at greatest risk of su¡ering another episode. Elevated baseline levels of total tryptase may be another indicator of anaphylactic risk (Fricker et al 1997, Ludolph-Hauser et al 2001, Schwartz et al 1994). Individuals at risk should wear a Medic-Alert bracelet, carry epinephrine, and avoid b blockers and ACE inhibitors as well as agents to which they are sensitive. In subjects with recurrent anaphylaxis, prophylactic use of H1 and H2 receptor antihistamines is bene¢cial. A leukotriene antagonist and cyclooxygenase inhibitor theoretically would provide additional bene¢t, but have not been systematically studied. Immunotherapy for venom-sensitive subjects, desensitization for certain cases of drug allergy, anti-IgE therapy for subjects at risk of food-induced anaphylaxis and cyclosporin A for recurrent anaphylaxis are considerations. Glucocorticosteroids, which do not inhibit experimental mast cell activation, are unlikely to provide a major bene¢t in most patients with recurrent anaphylaxis. More e¡ective and long-lasting therapies for IgE- and non-IgE-mediated anaphylaxis are still needed.

References

Chandrasekharan NV, Dai H, Roos KL et al 2002 COX-3, a cyclooxygenase-1 variant inhibited by acetaminophen and other analgesicffiantipyretic drugs: cloning, structure, and expression. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:13926^13931

Evans JF 2002 Cysteinyl leukotriene receptors. Prostaglandins Other Lipid Mediat 68^69:587^  Fricker M, Helbling A, Schwartz L, Muller U 1997 Hymenoptera sting anaphylaxis and urticaria pigmentosa: clinical ¢ndings and results of venom immunotherapy in ten patients. J Allergy Clin Immunol 100:11^15

Guida M, Riedy M, Lee D, Hall J 2000 Characterization of two highly polymorphic human tryptase loci and comparison with a newly discovered monkey tryptase ortholog.

Pharmacogenetics 10:389^396

Hirai H, Tanaka K, Yoshie O et al 2001 Prostaglandin D2 selectively induces chemotaxis in T helper type 2 cells, eosinophils, and basophils via seven-transmembrane receptor CRTH2. J Exp Med 193:255^261

Huang C, Li L, Krilis SA et al 1999 Human tryptases alpha and betaffiII are functionally distinct due, in part, to a single amino acid di¡erence in one of the surface loops that forms the substrate-binding cleft. J Biol Chem 274:19670^19676

Ludolph-Hauser D, Rue¡ F, Fries C, Schopf P, Przybilla B 2001 Constitutively raised serum concentrations of mast-cell tryptase and severe anaphylactic reactions to Hymenoptera stings. Lancet 357:361^362

Marquardt U, Zettl F, Huber R, Bode W, Sommerho¡ C 2002 The crystal structure of human alpha1-tryptase reveals a blocked substrate-binding region. J Mol Biol 321:491^502

Neugut AI, Ghatak AT, Miller RL 2001 Anaphylaxis in the United States: an investigation into its epidemiology. Arch Intern Med 161:15^21

Sakai K, Ren S, Schwartz LB 1996 A novel heparin-dependent processing pathway for human tryptase. Autocatalysis followed by activation with dipeptidyl peptidase I. J Clin Invest 97:988^995

Schwartz LB 2001 Clinical utility of tryptase levels in systemic mastocytosis and associated hematologic disorders. Leuk Res 25:553^562

Schwartz LB 2002 Mast cells and basophils. Clin Allergy Immunol 16:3^42

Schwartz LB, Metcalfe DD, Miller JS, Earl H, Sullivan T 1987 Tryptase levels as an indicator of mast-cell activation in systemic anaphylaxis and mastocytosis. N Engl J Med 316:1622^1626 Schwartz LB, Yunginger JW, Miller JS, Bokhari R, Dull D 1989 The time course of appearance and disappearance of human mast cell tryptase in the circulation after anaphylaxis. J Clin Invest 83:1551^1555

Schwartz LB, Bradford TR, Rouse C et al 1994 Development of a new, more sensitive immunoassay for human tryptase: use in systemic anaphylaxis. J Clin Immunol 14:190^204

Schwartz LB, Sakai K, Bradford TR et al 1995 The a form of human tryptase is the predominant type present in blood at baseline in normal subjects and is elevated in those with systemic mastocytosis. J Clin Invest 96:2702^2710

Schwartz LB, Min H, Ren S et al 2003 Tryptase precursors are preferentially and spontaneously released, while mature tryptase is retained by HMC-1 cells, monomac-6 cells and human skin-

derived mast cells. J Immunol 170:5667^5673

Selwood T, Wang ZM, McCaslin DR, Schechter NM 2002 Diverse stability and catalytic properties of human tryptase alpha and beta isoforms are mediated by residue di¡erences at the S1 pocket. Biochemistry 41:3329^3340

Soto D, Malmsten C, Blount JL, Muilenburg DJ, Caughey GH 2002 Genetic de¢ciency of human mast cell a-tryptase. Clin Exp Allergy 32:1000^1006

Valent P, Horny H-P, Escribano L et al 2001 Diagnostic criteria and classi¢cation of mastocytosis: a consensus proposal. Leuk Res 25:603^625

van der Linden P-WG, Hack CE, Poortman J, Vivie¤ -Kipp YC, Struyvenberg A, van der Zwan JK 1992 Insect-sting challenge in 138 patients: relation between clinical severity of anaphylaxis and mast cell activation. J Allergy Clin Immunol 90:110^118

Wedemeyer J, Tsai M, Galli SJ 2000 Roles of mast cells and basophils in innate and acquired immunity. Curr Opin Immunol 12:624^631

Wolters PJ, Pham CTN, Muilenburg DJ, Ley TJ, Caughey GH 2001 Dipeptidyl peptidase I is essential for activation of mast cell chymases, but not tryptases, in mice. J Biol Chem 276:18551^18556

DISCUSSION

Galli: How many instances have you observed in which good specimens of blood had been obtained and yet there was evidence for histamine release without elevated tryptase? You showed details about one case.

Schwartz: We haven’t done a systematic study of this. You never know when you are going to get that. In some of the fatal or near-fatal food anaphylactic patients that Hugh Sampson has reported, assays were performed in which there was no elevation of total or mature tryptase. There are a number of potential explanations. Some of these patients had prolonged hypotension. It is not clear to me whether the same pathogenesis that is involved in the initial event is involved in the persistence of that event. Another possibility is that different groups of mast cells may get activated through di¡erent routes of allergen administration. Intestinal mast cells may not have the same quantity of tryptase per cell as the mast cells that are in the skin and around the vasculature. They conceivably could be more distant from blood vessels. Although I still favour the possibility that mast cells may not be involved in some of those reactions, perhaps other cell types have to be considered.

Vercelli: What do you mean when you say that a signi¢cant proportion of a¡ected individuals don’t have the a tryptase gene?

Schwartz: There is a tryptase locus. Each haploid chromosome 16 has two affib tryptase genes (one or two b tryptase genes and one or zero a tryptase genes). About 25% of individuals have all b tryptase genes and no a tryptase gene.

Vercelli: So it is not as if they have a truncated gene that may give rise to some functional dominant negative, or anything like that. Do we know that the gene is not there at all?

Schwartz: There is allelic variation. One can have one of the b tryptase subtypes or of the a tryptase subtypes at one site, and at the other site just the b tryptases. There are also polymorphisms among both a and b tryptases that have been documented.

Austen: Larry Schwartz, could you say more about the number of tryptase genes? How many do you think there are, and what are the alleles? What about the relevance of the g and d tryptase?

Schwartz: If we look at a peptide phylogram showing the relationships between tryptases, there are two principal a tryptase forms that vary by one or two amino acids, and three principal forms of b tryptase which vary by one to three amino acids. a and b tryptases are more closely related to one another than they are to any of the rodent or other animal tryptases. George Caughey has performed the best work on this. About 25% of people have no a tryptase gene in either of their chromosome 16s. There is also a tryptase d, a tryptase g and a tryptase e. We didn’t originally describe the d, but we published a paper saying that this was probably a pseudogene (Min et al 2001). It is truncated 40 amino acids earlier than are affib tryptases. We detected little to no mRNA for it in mast cells. Subsequent to this there has been a very nice paper from an Australian group which does detect the mRNA in mast cells and possibly other cell types and shows that the protein is also expressed in these cells (Wang et al 2002). Because of a stop codon it would be about 5^10 000 Da less than tryptase. In Western blots with our anti-tryptase mAbs, we don’t see a product of that size in mast cells. Either our antibodies aren’t detecting it, or the amount present compared to affib tryptases is very low. Tryptase g has been described by both Rick Stevens and George Caughey. It has a transmembrane portion to it. It is biochemically and immunologically quite distinct from affib tryptases. From what I recall, tryptase e also was a little bit less similar to the affib tryptases.

Austen: There are papers claiming that in systemic mastocytosis there are some patients who do not have elevated tryptase. George Caughey and colleagues have provided substantial evidence for a null humans (Soto et al 2002). Does this account for tryptase-negative mastocytosis patients?

Schwartz: At the recent International Mastocytosis meeting, this issue wasn’t raised. When I spoke to Peter Valent and Luis Escribano at the meeting in Vienna, they told me that they didn’t have anyone with systemic mastocytosis without an elevated tryptase level. At that meeting, a total tryptase level greater than 20 ngffiml was adopted as one of the diagnostic criteria. I think those patients without an elevated tryptase that are said to have systemic mastocytosis need to be looked at carefully and reported. One possibility would be that they are a tryptase de¢cient and for some reason don’t secrete enough tryptase. However, our results with healthy subjects, show that total tryptase levels are una¡ected by the presence or absence of the a tryptase gene. Whether there is an e¡ect in mastocytosis is being examined. Another possibility is that early in the course of systemic mastocytosis, when the mast cell burden is still low, the total tryptase level would be normal. The more distantly related tryptic-like enzymes that have been named tryptase, e.g. NK cell tryptase and clara cell tryptase are unrelated to the affib tryptases of mast cells.

Simons: With regard to the normal values for total tryptase of 1^15 ngffiml, were young children included in the population from which these norms were derived?

Schwartz: Young children haven’t been looked at systematically. With adults we’ve examined 100 to 200 subjects on at least two occasions. The mean and two standard deviations gives a range of about 2^12 ngffiml. I have taken three standard deviations to go from 1 to 15 ngffiml, because we have seen some individuals who appear healthy in that upper range, so I arbitrarily decided to extend it to three standard deviations.

Simons: My point is that for so many normal values there are age-related di¡erences between infants and prepubertal children versus teens and adults. This might be an interesting line of investigation to pursue.

Schwartz: I agree.

Finkelman: We have some mouse data which are possibly relevant to the mast cell versus basophil issue in anaphylaxis. We have looked at two phenomena: the development of anaphylaxis as assessed by changes in behaviour and hypothermia, versus increase in in vivo production of Th2 cytokines, following anti-IgE treatment of either wild-type or c-Kit de¢cient mice. There is a pretty strong dichotomy between the two phenomena. When c-Kit de¢cient mice are treated with anti-IgE they shown no change in behaviour and don’t develop hypothermia. Nor do they show an increase in MMCP1 or histamine levels. Yet they show as great an increase in IL4 production as do wild-type mice. In the mouse there is a relatively simple situation: the only two cell types that are thought to have FceRI are mast cells and basophils. So these responses are coming from one of these two cell types. If one were to ¢nd that mast cells require c-Kit for development and the basophils don’t, then one could say that the anaphylaxis is not coming from basophils. Again, I don’t know whether the mouse situation will be pertinent to the human, but it creates a bias in my mind.

Schwartz: Certainly within those experimental circumstances, I think your interpretation is reasonable. Mice normally seem to have very few basophils. If you did something to induce higher levels of basophils in your c-Kit-defective animals - such as using certain immunization techniques - and see what happens then, this may be revealing.

Finkelman: These experiments were done in mice that had been immunized in a way that causes a Th2 response. This results in the production of a large number of cells that are variously described as basophils or immature basophils.

Galli: About ¢ve years ago, Choi et al (1998) reported that active fatal anaphylaxis could be elicited to penicillin V in mast cell-de¢cient WffiWv mice and that this response was IgE-dependent. Based on a pharmacological approach, the authors attributed the reaction to PAF production, presumably by basophils. Although there was no formal proof that basophils were the origin of the PAF, the authors provided evidence that this form of active anaphylaxis is an IgE- dependent response (Choi et al 1998, Park et al 1997). So there has been at least that one reported example of an IgE-dependent anaphylactic reaction in the mast cell-de¢cient mouse.

Finkelman: I would argue with you about that paper. I don’t think there was good evidence that it was IgE mediated.

Galli: If it was not IgE-mediated, then that may be why the reaction could be elicited in WffiWv mice.

Fisher: In one of the studies of the mast cell tryptase postmortem, there were three patients, I think, where the diagnosis was myocardial infarction. Have you any explanation for that?

Schwartz: That’s a good point. There have been a couple of interesting studies where elevated b tryptase levels are found without any evidence for IgE-mediated anaphylaxis. Some of these are in postmortem samples in adults, associated with trauma. About 1 in 20^25 knife murders or shootings end up having markedly elevated tryptase. There have also been some hospital postmortem cases where elevated levels were thought by the medical examiner not to be associated with an IgE-mediated reaction. But many of these patients received a variety of drugs close to the terminal event, so it is hard to sort this out. Then there is a series of sudden infant death syndrome patients, where about 40% of these infants had postmortem tryptase levels that were elevated compared with explained death controls (Platt et al 1994). This has been more or less reproduced in two out of three subsequent studies. All groups agree that there is no antigen-speci¢c IgE detectable in blood. There may be some non-IgE-dependent ways of activating mast cells, and these need to be better understood.

Fisher: One of the things that interested us about the cardiac cases is that in the last eight cases of anaphylaxis we have seen have had elevated troponins when they were measured in four. This is supposed to be very speci¢c for myocardial ischaemia, yet there has been no evidence of myocardial ischaemia in these patients.

Schwartz: This sounds fascinating.

Sampson: Could you comment on the paper by Lin et al (2000) in which they looked at 92 patients coming into the emergency room with anaphylaxis? Only 21% had elevated tryptase.

Schwartz: Those elevations were all near the limit of detection. Almost none of those patients were hypotensive. Clinically these were not severe episodes. I am not sure that those results were clinically signi¢cant.

Golden: With respect to insect sting anaphylaxis and mastocytosis, you commented on the absence of IgE. That raises an interesting question. Is it anaphylaxis or mastocytosis? Can they coexist if there is no IgE? If I remember Ulrich Mˇller’s reports correctly, in virtually all cases of insect sting anaphylaxis with mastocytosis there is detectable IgE. My question on the case that you mentioned, is what laboratory did the assays? Could there have been a very low level of IgE that might have been detected in a sensitive assay?

Mˇller: In the paper you are mentioning (Fricker et al 1997) we describe 10 cases with urticaria pigmentosa and anaphylaxis to Hymenoptera stings. Eight had elevated basal serum tryptase levels. In two of the patients we had both negative i.c. skin tests at 1 gffiml and in ¢ve no venom speci¢c IgE was detectable by Phadezym RAST. Failure to detect speci¢c IgE in mastocytosis patients in spite of positive skin tests could be explained by absorption of most of the speci¢c IgE to the abundant mast cells.

Schwartz: With a higher sink for IgE, it is conceivable you could have mast cells that have become sensitized. In such a scenario, you could have a positive skin test and a negative assay in the serum.

Golden: Since the redescription in the past two years of sting anaphylaxis with negative skin tests the situation has gotten better. In 90^95% of those cases with negative skin tests we were able to detect at least a trace of venom-speci¢c IgE. It is really hard to ¢nd someone with insect allergy but without venom-speci¢c IgE.

Galli: Ulrich Mˇller, did you interpret your cases as probably being independent of IgE?

Mˇller: We thought of direct mediator release by venom components such as melittin, MCD-peptide or mastoparan.

Schwartz: This is a distinct possibility.

Ring: Perhaps 5^10% of our patients have negative skin tests. In these cases we then look at histamine or release from basophils. When we get a positive result we know they are sensitized, even though we have not detected venom-speci¢c IgE. It may be the basophil that is responsible. You showed us a lot about mast cells. Do we have a marker or basophil product similar to tryptase?

Schwartz: No. There have been two basophil-speci¢c antibodies. Both recognize a granule component, but in neither case has the antigen been identi¢ed.

Galli: So your point, Johannes Ring, is that in the skin test and radioallergosorbent test (RAST)-negative patients with anaphylaxis, a large proportion give you in vitro basophil histamine release in response to allergen.

Ring: Yes. We do this routinely. If they are negative in skin test and RAST, then we look at histamine release. Very few of them are still negative, yet they have a very severe reaction.

Schwartz: I take it that normal basophils won’t respond to venom.

Ring: That is correct, in the respective doses.

Ohtsu: You showed that tryptase levels are very high in systemic mastocytosis. Theoretically, if there is a lot of tryptase in the blood, tryptase receptors should be down-regulated. Are there any tryptase receptors?

Schwartz: It is not clear that there are. Because tryptase is a protease, it would have substrates that could be on a cell’s surface. What these biological substrates might be is not clearly resolved.

Ohtsu: Even so, I would expect that there would be some sort of diminished response with time to these elevated tryptase levels. Is there any evidence in these mastocytosis patients that the occurrence of systemic anaphylaxis reaction is di⁄cult.

Schwartz: What likely is being detected in the mastocytosis serum is the pro- and

pro’- forms of tryptase, which are enzymatically inactive. Those forms of tryptase would not be able to carry out the enzymatic function(s) of the mature enzyme.

References

Choi IH, Shin YM, Park JS et al 1998 Immunoglobulin E-dependent active fatal anaphylaxis in mast cell-de¢cient mice. J Exp Med 188:1587^1592

Fricker M, Helbling A, Schwartz L, Mˇller U 1997 Hymenoptera sting anaphylaxis and urticaria pigmentosa: clinical ¢ndings and results of venom immunotherapy in 10 patients. J Allergy Clin Immunol 100:11^15

Lin RY, Schwartz LB, Curry A et al 2000 Histamine and tryptase levels in patients with acute allergic reactions: an emergency department-based study. J Allergy Clin Immun 106:65^71

Min HK, Kambe N, Schwartz LB 2001 Human mouse mast cell protease 7-like tryptase genes are pseudogenes. J Allergy Clin Immunol 107:315^321

Park JS, Choi IH, Lee DG et al 1997 Anti-IL-4 monoclonal antibody prevents antibiotics-

induced active fatal anaphylaxis. J Immunol 158:5002^5006

Platt MS, Yunginger JW, Sekula-Perlman A et al 1994 Involvement of mast cells in sudden infant death syndrome. J Allergy Clin Immunol 94:250^256

Soto D, Malmsten C, Blount JL, Muilenburg DJ, Caughey GH 2002 Genetic de¢ciency of human mast cell alpha-tryptase. Clin Exp Allergy 32:1000^1006

Wang HW, McNeil HP, Husain A et al 2002 Delta tryptase is expressed in multiple human tissues, and a recombinant form has proteolytic activity. J Immunol 169:5145^5152

The high affinity receptor for IgE, FceRI.

The high affinity receptor for IgE, FceRI

Abstract. Progress in our understanding of the structure and function of the receptor with high a⁄nity for IgE (FceRI) is already being applied in attempts to mitigate allergic reactions, speci¢cally by using speci¢c anti-IgEs to prevent sensitization. Investigations of the complex network of intracellular signals generated by FceRI and related receptors are proceeding. Although achieving a ‘complete’ description of the events will be a daunting task, the e¡ort is likely to identify additional targets for therapeutic intervention along the way.

As we learn more about the variety of surface proteins through which cells sense and respond to their environment it becomes increasingly apparent that the simplistic, linear conceptualizations we adopted during our initial experimental probes in which we focused on the cellular consequences of a single type of ligand^receptor interaction, are no longer adequate. We must now confront entire systems of molecules whose interactions with each other vary with time and with changes in the external milieu. In this discussion, I will use the receptor with high affinity for IgE as an example of such a conceptualization, emphasizing not so much the results that have been obtained so far, as the approaches that will be necessary to pursue a more holistic approach to the receptor’s function.

This audience is undoubtedly familiar with many of the basic facts about the receptor (FceRI) and up-to-date reviews have appeared regularly (Kinet 1999, Kawakami & Galli 2002, Metzger et al 1989), so I will sharply limit my discussion of these matters.

Status of structural analyses

X-ray di¡raction structures of IgE, of the IgE-binding ectodomains of the receptor’s a chain, and of the 1:1 complex of these structures have been determined (Wurzburg & Jardetzky 2002). The sites of interaction are sufficiently well de¢ned to assist in the rational development of small molecules that could act as inhibitors of the binding (Pietersz et al 2002). As noted below, the increasing evidence that anti-IgE antibodies that inhibit the interaction are clinically useful (Chang 2000, Metzger 2003), shows that in principle, this approach is worth pursuing.

Regrettably, there has been little progress in structurally de¢ning the cytoplasmic domains of the b and g subunits of the receptor, although there continues to be progress in clarifying the interactions of these domains with other cellular proteins before and after their phosphorylation. Interfering with such interactions is another potential target for low molecular compounds and it would be helpful if structural data comparable to that for the interaction between IgE and the receptor might be available.

Initial events

Aggregation as the initiating event

Considerable experimental data support a model in which it is the aggregation of the receptor induced by the interaction of a multivalent antigen with the receptor- bound IgE that initiates a variety of biochemical cascades (Metzger 1992). The ability of apparently monomeric IgE to likewise trigger similar events is likely a laboratory artefact due to the tendency of certain monoclonal IgE antibodies to aggregate (Asai et al 2001, Kawakami & Galli 2002) either spontaneously or possibly due to some cross reaction with an antigen in the medium or on the cell surface (see also below). Whether the ‘anti-apoptotic’ e¡ect of the binding of IgE to FceRI is similarly based on aggregation remains unclear (Asai et al 2001, Kawakami & Galli 2002).

Molecular consequences of aggregation

A variety of experiments have supported a mechanistic model in which a kinase (Lyn) constitutively associated with the C-terminal cytoplasmic extension of the unphosphorylated b chain transphosphorylates one or more g chains on an alternate receptor that has become approximated by the binding of antigen (Pribluda et al 1994). Experimental data suggest that normally this initial event occurs in specialized lipid ‘micro domains’, but that that is an incidental occurrence rather than an absolute requirement. A somewhat di¡erent model proposes that the aggregation-induced movement of receptors into the micro domains is critical for the phosphorylation of b and g because the micro domains are enriched in the kinase (translocation model) (Baird et al 1999).

Recent new ¢ndings have so-far not resolved the issue. On the one hand, studies using rigid bivalent ligands whose epitopes are thought (but not proven) to be sufficiently distant from each other to make the transphosphorylation sterically impossible, found them capable of stimulating phosphorylation of the receptors, suggesting to the authors that the translocation model is correct (Paar et al 2002). On the other hand, experiments in which normal phosphorylation of the receptors was observed even though Lyn or constructs of Lyn that were incapable of entering the domains (Kovarova et al 2001, Vonakis et al 2001) were used, or the domains were disrupted (Yamashita et al 2000), seriously challenge the proposal that translocation is required for the initiating event. The subtle di¡erence in these proposals is not irrelevant if one were to try to disrupt receptor-initiated responses by interfering with the proximal event following aggregation. On the basis of the transphosphorylation model, one would focus on inhibiting a speci¢c protein^ protein interaction; alternatively one would have to interfere with more non- speci¢c protein^lipid domain interactions. Further exploration of these alternative models is warranted. The recent observation that a related kinase, Fyn, is also required during the initiating events has added a further level of complexity (Parravicini et al 2002).

Later events

Phosphorylation of FceRI attracts a variety of additional proteins to the receptor aggregates. The composition of these signalling complexes, their lifetimes, and their topological movements are being actively pursued (Rivera 2002). That the propagation of signals requires the assembly of a multicomponent macromolecular ‘machine’ explains why at least some of the cellular responses re£ect the lifetime of the receptor aggregates. This leads to a phenomenon called ‘kinetic proofreading’ (Hop¢eld 1974, McKeithan 1995), a mechanistic regime under which the length of the signalling pathway stimulated by di¡erent ligands will be inversely related to their rate of dissociation from their binding component. In the case of FceRI, it is the rate of dissociation of the allergen from the receptor- bound IgE that determines the lifetime of the receptor in the aggregate, and therefore the length of time the aggregate can propagate the sequential downstream events.

We have explored the importance of kinetic proofreading in the IgE^FceRI system and have uncovered two interesting aspects. The ¢rst was the phenomenon of non-competitive ligand inhibition. In this situation one ligand can inhibit the cellular stimulation by another ligand in the absence of direct competition for the ligand-binding sites (Sette et al 1994). The mechanism we uncovered was based upon the inhibitory ligand’s ability to sequester the limited supply of a critical enzyme (Torigoe et al 1998). A second phenomenon, the details of which have just been published (Eglite et al 2003), relates to the ability of a weakly binding (rapidly dissociating) ligand that stimulates a relatively distal response such as degranulation, poorly or not at all, to nevertheless e¡ectively stimulate cellular responses that are even more delayed, e.g. transcription of the gene for the chemoattractant MCP-1. In this instance it appears that relative to its own lifetime, a critical messenger for stimulating the transcription, Ca2+, is generated early enough in the cascade initiated by the receptor aggregates, that adequate concentrations of the ion can be stimulated even by the short-lived aggregates.

Future analyses

Ultimate goals

The goal(s) for those engaged in unravelling the ways particular cells respond to a variety of external signals is to ‘. . . understand as completely as possible the relationships between sets of inputs and outputs that vary both temporally and spatially. How does a cell respond appropriately to one voice when it must listen simultaneously to many, and how does it alter this response in the context of other concurrent or recent signalling events?’(Gilman et al 2002). Ultimately, of course, one wishes to use this information therapeutically, either to correct genetic defects or pathological responses. The more we know about the signalling pathways the better we will be able to pinpoint the appropriate targets for manipulation, but our understanding need not be exhaustive before such interventions can be attempted. A good example, already referred to above, is the use of anti-IgE to prevent sensitization. This approach was initiated even before many of the details about how IgE interacts with FceRI were uncovered. Even now, the impact on the therapeutic e¡ectiveness of the anti-IgE interacting with membrane IgE on B cells (but not with IgE bound to FceRII on lymphocytes, monocytes and platelets) and the presence of IgE:anti-IgE complexes in the serum remain to be determined (Chang 2000).

What will be required and how will we get there?

To achieve the more complete understanding we seek, we must ¢rst identify all the critical molecules engaged in relevant signalling pathways, and characterize the temporal changes in their concentrations, locations, interactions, and modi¢cations normally, and in pathological conditions. Second, these data must be incorporated into mechanistic and quantitative models that can be used to test whether the critical events are understood, and to predict the consequences of interventions.

Those who are following the progress in this area of cell biology are becoming increasingly impressed by the extraordinary complexity of these systems. Although there has been nothing uncovered so far that would justify a nihilistic assessment of the likelihood for achieving any level of understanding we desire, the enormity of the task ahead cannot be minimized. It makes the unravelling of the human genome look relatively simple by comparison. This realization is prompting some novel proposals on the organization of research in this area. Perhaps the most ambitious proposal is the recently organized ‘Alliance for Cellular Signaling’ (AfCS) (Gilman et al 2002).

This consortium currently involves some 50 ‘participating investigators’ from around 20 institutions who will organize their group and individual activities according to an initial organizational network (see Fig. 1 in Gilman et al 2002) that stipulates the interactions for decision-making with respect to research directions, development of new technologies, distribution of experimental ¢ndings and publication of signi¢cant new information.

The AfCS’s initial experimental strategy is presented in Table 1. As can be seen there is nothing particularly novel in the individual components; all of the same elements have been used by individual investigators interested in particular cellular events. The unique feature will be the coordination and comprehensiveness of the e¡orts.

In their inaugural ‘Overview’ the group underscores two aspects of this endeavour. First, that this endeavour is itself an experiment in collaborative science that although not unprecedented in biology (e.g. the human genome project) is unusual in the basic research arena. There are implications to such e¡orts that go well beyond the experiments conceived, planned, executed, interpreted and published by committees. For example, the current reward systems in academic careers in the biological sciences put a premium on individual creativeness, a characteristic that will be di⁄cult to tease out for any particular participant in such group e¡orts.

Second, only a modest contribution can be expected from even the substantial coterie of investigators assembled so far along with its $10 000 000 initial annual budget relative to the size of the problem. The present e¡ort will be directed towards only two cells, mouse B lymphocytes and cardiac myocytes. The

image

consortium of course hopes that their experiment in ‘socialistic science’ will be sufficiently productive to attract the (¢nancial) interest of pharmaceutical firms, and to encourage additional investigators to use the AfCS approach as a research paradigm.

Quantitative modelling

I shall close this discussion with a brief consideration of the last element of this list on which my own group has focused in a long-term collaboration with a group in the Theoretical Biology and Biophysics Group of the Theoretical Division at Los Alamos. Although using the same overall strategy planned by the AfCS, our e¡ort has of course been much more limited. We have varied only a single type of input (aggregation of FceRI) and quantitatively examined the ‘£ow of information’ through only a selected set of molecules that are engaged very early in the response. A presentation of the detailed mathematical model and its properties has just appeared (Faeder et al 2003).

Many of the molecular mechanisms that are modelled are based on experimental results from ourselves as well as several other groups, but also include a number of assumed aspects. The hope is that such modelling will allow one to test the validity of certain assumptions.

The current version models the phosphorylation of FceRI and Syk following aggregation of FceRI by addition of chemically cross-linked dimers of IgE - a surrogate input for aggregation of receptor-bound IgE by antigen. The model is a network which contains 354 discrete chemical species and the chemical reactions that connect them. Concentrations of the principal components (FceRI, Lyn and Syk) are based on measurements using quantitative Western blotting. Twenty-one rate constants based on direct measurements or other observations are used: four constants relate to binding of the dimers to the receptors, four each to the association of Lyn and Syk kinase, eight to the phosphorylation of tyrosines in the various molecular aggregates and one for the rate of dephosphorylation. Among the simplifying assumptions is that multiple tyrosine residues on the subunits of the receptor and on Syk are treated as single units of phosphorylation. The network is then converted to a predictive model using a set of coupled di¡erential equations. Quantitative outcomes were based on a computer program that generates the states and reaction network from the components and reaction rules. A second program uses the generated network, rate parameters and initial concentrations to generate and solve the set of 354 di¡erential equations as a function of time.

I will not focus on the results of this modelling except to note a few ¢ndings. First, simulations of experiments where RBL cells were exposed to covalently cross-linked dimers of IgE reproduced the observed kinetics of phosphorylation of the receptors’ subunits over a period of an hour, and the predicted dose response curves followed closely those observed experimentally. The model also is consistent with the evidence for a kinetic proofreading constraint with respect to the phosphorylation of Syk kinase as observed experimentally. The model also makes a variety of other mechanistic predictions that can be experimentally tested in future experiments.

There is no reason to think that this approach would not be equally applicable to examine related systems such as those stimulated by other multi-subunit immune response receptors that initiate cellular responses using related molecular mechanisms. But, what is the likelihood that such an approach can be extended to more complete networks involving many more inputs simultaneously triggering multiple receptors thereby activating networks containing possibly hundreds of nodes?

The principal authors of this model at Los Alamos conclude on a pragmatic note: ‘Ultimately we want su⁄cient knowledge for quantitative prediction of larger segments of signalling pathways. To have con¢dence in such predictions, our approach is to proceed step-wise, testing each extension of the model against many di¡erent forms of experimental data’ (Faeder et al 2003).

The leaders of the AfCS believe that this incremental approach will be inadequate to deal with the complexity of cellular networks. ‘For this goal [to model such networks] it will almost certainly be inappropriate to adopt the traditional reductionist approach of simply measuring in vitro all the Kd, Km, and Vmax values, cooperativity constants, rate constants and molar concentrations for all molecules involved’ (Gilman et al 2002). They surmise that it will not be practical to mimic the milieu in which these reactions occur nor the multiple interactions of single molecules and that therefore it will not be possible to estimate accurately many of the avidity and rate constants. Finally, they consider the manipulation of the mass of data and the equations that relate them, ‘daunting’. Certainly no one could argue with the latter assessment.

The alternative approach they propose is ¢rst to express the observed functional interactions in relative terms. For example, fractional activation of a particular molecule would be related to a fractional e¡ect on a downstream molecule in order to arrive at a series of ‘linkage functions’. This approach, albeit still demanding, is much less so than the explicit approach currently used by the Los Alamos team and others. But the strategy proposed by the AfCS also has a potential problem. That is, whereas such linkage functions can be manipulated to give reasonable quantitative predictive values over a given set of inputs, they may not be able to distinguish between substantially di¡erent mechanistic models. The Ptolemaic epicycles and a variety of other mathematical constructs were quite e¡ective in rationalizing the wandering motions of the planets but of course bore no relationship to the reality of our solar system.

Closing comments

The investigation of cellular responses is proceeding from the state where the focus was on identifying individual molecules a¡ected by individual receptors and the linear pathways that connected them, to a more physiologically relevant approach. This will try to describe the multitude of molecular responses that follow variations in the stimuli to the multitude of receptors that cells use to monitor their environment. We already know enough to be able to develop a realistic assessment of the enormity of the task, but despite this enormity there is nothing, so far, that suggests that the task is in principle undoable.

The hope is that such investigations will not only be enlightening but also useful. Speci¢cally, in the networks that are currently known one can distinguish two types of molecular interaction. The members of one class involve ‘nodes’ in which a molecule engages in only a small number of interactions; alternatively other interactions occur in ‘hubs’ and involve a multitude of interactions. Pathological aberrations in nodes may be relatively easy to correct by manipulations that will create detours around them; defects in hubs may be much more challenging to overcome but on the other hand can serve as e¡ective targets for disabling a whole set of responses.

References

Asai K, Kitaura J, Kawakami Y et al 2001 Regulation of mast cell survival by IgE. Immunity 14:791^800

Baird B, Sheets ED, Holowka D 1999 How does the plasma membrane participate in cellular signaling by receptors for immunoglobulin E? Biophys Chem 82:109^119

Chang TW 2000 The pharmacological basis of anti-IgE therapy. Nat Biotechnol 18:157^162 Eglite S, Morin J, Metzger H 2003 Synthesis and secretion of monocyte chemotactic protein-1

stimulated by the high a⁄nity receptor for IgE. J Immunol 170:2680^2687

Faeder JR, Hlavacek WS, Reischl I et al 2003 Investigation of early events in Fc(epsilon)RI- mediated signaling using a detailed mathematical model. J Immunol 170:3769^3781

Gilman AG, Simon MI, Bourne HR, et al 2002 Overview of the Alliance for Cellular Signaling.

Nature 420:703^706

Hop¢eld JJ 1974 Kinetic proofreading: a new mechanism for reducing errors in biosynthetic processes requiring high speci¢city. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 71:4135^4139

Kawakami T, Galli SJ 2002 Regulation of mast-cell and basophil function and survival by IgE. Nat Rev Immunol 2:773^786

Kinet J-P 1999 The high a⁄nity IgE receptor (FceRI): from physiology to pathology. Annu Rev Immunol 17:931^972

Kovarova M, Tolar P, Arudchandran R, Draberova L, Rivera J, Draber P 2001 Structure^ function analysis of Lyn kinase association with lipid rafts and initiation of early signaling events after Fc epsilon receptor I aggregation. Mol Cell Biol 21:8318^8328

McKeithan TW 1995 Kinetic proofreading in T-cell receptor signal transduction. Proc Natl

Acad Sci USA 92:5042^5046

Metzger H 1992 The receptor with high a⁄nity for IgE. Immunol Rev 125:37^48 Metzger H 2003 Two approaches to peanut allergy. N Engl J Med 348:1046^1048

Metzger H, Blank U, Kinet J-P et al 1989 Emerging picture of the receptor with high a⁄nity for IgE. Intl Arch Allergy Appl Immunol 88:14^17

Paar JM, Harris NT, Holowka D, Baird B 2002 Bivalent ligands with rigid double-stranded DNA spacers reveal structural constraints on signaling by Fc epsilon RI. J Immunol 169:856^864

Parravicini V, Gadina M, Kovarova M et al 2002 Fyn kinase initiates complementary signalsr equired for IgE-dependent mast cell degranulation. Nat Immunol 3:741^748

Pietersz GA, Powell MS, Ramsland PA, Hogarth PM 2002 Fc receptor structure and the design of anti-in£ammatories: new therapeutics for autoimmune disease. Annu Rep Med Chem 37:217^224

Pribluda V, Pribluda C, Metzger H 1994 Transphosphorylation as the mechanism by which the high-a⁄nity receptor for IgE is phosphorylated upon aggregation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91:11246^11250

Rivera J 2002 Molecular adapters in Fc(epsilon)RI signaling and the allergic response. Curr Opin Immunol 14:688^693

Sette A, Alexander J, Ruppert J et al 1994 Antigen analogs/MHC complexes as speci¢c T cell receptor antagonists. Annu Rev Immunol 12:413^431

Torigoe C, Inman JK, Metzger H 1998 An unusual mechanism for ligand antagonism. Science28 1:568^572

Vonakis BM, Haleem-Smith H, Benjamin P, Metzger H 2001 Interaction between the unphosphorylated receptor with high a⁄nity for IgE and Lyn kinase. J Biol Chem 276:1041^1050

Wurzburg BA, Jardetzky TS 2002 Structural insights into the interactions between human IgE and its high a⁄nity receptor Fc epsilon RI. Mol Immunol 38:1063^1072

Yamashita T, Yamaguchi T, Murakami K, Nagasawa S 2000 Detergent-resistant membrane domains are required for mast cell activation but not for tyrosine phosphorylation upon aggregation of the high a⁄nity receptor for IgE. J Biochem (Tokyo) 129:861^868

DISCUSSION

Lasser: I have a rather simplistic question. In what way does the anti-IgE molecule inhibit the binding of IgE? What is the mechanism?

Metzger: The simple answer is that it sterically inhibits: it binds to an area on the molecule that is necessary for it to interact with the receptor. It is a little bit like the princess and the pea: it doesn’t necessarily have to interact directly with those atoms that are involved with the interaction; as long as it prevents the IgE and receptor from forming the van der Waal’s contact, that is enough to prevent the binding.

Lasser: Why does it do that?

Metzger: Because this particular antibody is directed towards a region of the IgE, the binding to which interferes with the interaction between the IgE and the receptor. The critical thing is that those molecules that bind to the IgE and inhibit the binding don’t at the same time bind to molecules of IgE that are already bound. That’s a perfect way of triggering the cell: to use an anti-IgE that aggregates the IgE.

MacGlashan: In the modelling that you and Bryon and his team have done, have you identi¢ed a hub in that signalling network?

Metzger: To some extent Syk would be a hub, as would Lyn. The Lyn phosphorylates Syk which then phosphorylates other molecules.

MacGlashan: I know they have this interesting path analysis where they work out which species are actually dominant in the network.

Metzger: The current concept is that there is some sort of an initial signalling

complex, and that is what that diagram showed. Almost any molecule in that initial complex might be an e¡ective target. We know that in the case of the inhibitor of the intrinsic kinase of the EGF receptor, this is an approach that has some therapeutic possibilities. Whether that would be better than preventing the initial sensitization of the cells, which a small molecule equivalent of anti-IgE could do, I don’t know. I suppose one could say that if we had a way of preventing the interaction with an intracellular hub, we could reverse an allergic reaction, which the anti-IgE can’t do. But this is a much more complex approach.

Galli: There are some recent observations that IgE, prepared in a way to ensure as much as can be done experimentally that one is dealing with monomers, might have e¡ects on mast cells survival and function that are independent of any agent added speci¢cally to induce FceRI aggregation. The two reports (Asai et al 2001, Kalesniko¡ et al 2001) agreed on several points, one of which is that these IgEs would inhibit the development of apoptosis in mouse mast cells from which growth factors have been withdrawn. I will mention two reservations about these two studies. First, they were done entirely using mouse cells, and second, the work was done entirely in vitro. Moreover, there were other observations in the two papers that di¡ered. In the study by Kalesniko¡ et al (2001), the IgE antibody preparations induced the cells to release cytokines, interestingly without evidence that they were releasing histamine. In contrast, in the study by Asai et al (2001), the antibodies did not induce the release of cytokines.

Both groups of course were curious about why they had obtained apparently contradictory results. They discovered that, for the most part, they had been dealing with di¡erent panels of monoclonal IgE antibodies. Most of the IgE antibodies have now been tested in both labs. The simplest way to summarize our results is that when we tested the antibodies used by Kalesniko¡ et al, we got results similar to those that they had reported. In other words, there are some antibodies that can induce an enhanced resistance to apoptosis without inducing detectable cytokine secretion, and there are some that both enhance the resistance to apoptosis and also induce cytokine secretion (Kitaura et al 2003). In our hands, the latter antibodies can also induce histamine release. We performed indirect tests on whether the antibodies can induce FceRI aggregation, such as examining Syk dependence using Syk knockout mast cells, or using monovalent hapten to inhibit the reaction. These experiments showed that the IgE antibodies can induce responses that are like those induced by aggregation of FceRI, in that they are completely Syk dependent and they can be inhibited by monovalent haptens (Kitaura et al 2003). But there is, as yet, no formal proof that FceRI aggregation actually occurs in this setting. If it does, we don’t know how it happens, although it could be related to the speci¢c structural properties of the individual IgE molecules. Moreover, some of the observations have been replicated using serum-free medium (Kalsniko¡ et al 2001, Kitaura et al 2003). So it is unlikely that the phenomenon simply re£ects a reaction of the IgE with an unknown factor present in serum. However, so far, these observations lack a mechanistic explanation. Note: since the conference was held, it has been reported that one of the IgE antibodies that can induce the strongest enhancement of mast cell survival and mediator secretion has an antigen binding site that exists in two di¡erent conformations, one of which binds DNP and the other of which binds an unrelated antigen (James et al 2003). The potential ‘multispeci¢city’ of IgE antibodies, based on the conformational diversity of the antigen binding site, represents an intriguing clue to the mechanism by which certain IgE antibodies might induce FceRI aggregation in the absence of ‘speci¢c’ antigen (James et al 2003, Foote 2003).

Metzger: In some unpublished work (C. Torigoe), the two di¡erent kinds of IgEs behave di¡erently on acrylamide gels as if the stimulatory IgE might be an aggregate.

Galli: Even the antibodies that don’t induce detectable cytokine or histamine release can enhance resistance to apoptosis. This e¡ect can also be blocked by monovalent hapten. One might argue that enhanced resistance to apoptosis on the withdrawal of growth factors is one of the most sensitive ways the cell can indicate that something is happening with the receptor that is very much like aggregation, if not aggregation itself. If that is true, then mostly everything can be explained.

Lasser: Is it not the case that this IgE molecule might elicit anti anti-IgE molecules?

Sampson: As far as I know, no one has reported any antibodies to the antibody when it is given i.v. or subcutaneously.

MacGlashan: There was a report where it was inhaled. It wasn’t really in patients receiving the drug.

Sampson: In the one case I know of it was inhaled, but it hasn’t been seen in subcutaneous or i.v. administered antibody.

Kricek: I wanted to extend this one step further. There exist anti-IgE autobodies, which occur naturally in the serum and which are non-analaphylactogenic. There are not only those which see the receptor binding sites of IgE. The same holds true for anti-a chain antibodies. There are some which are anaphylactogenic, some which are not, and some which become anaphylactogenic if you remove IgE from the receptor. The idea was always that a therapeutic anti-IgE would have to compete with a high a⁄nity interaction. One knows that just a couple of receptors which are still able to be triggered by IgE are su⁄cient to induce anaphylactic reactions. People always said that such a therapeutic approach wouldn’t really work, even using a high-a⁄nity anti-IgE antibody. The antibody that has been developed by Novartis is only moderate. Nevertheless, clinical data show that it works. One of the explanations was the down-regulatory e¡ect on the receptor of removing IgE from the circulation. Another aspect has not yet been discussed: what if you generate anti-idiotypic antibodies? These would then mimic the part of IgE that interacts with the receptor. They might bind to the receptor and potentiate the e¡ect of the passive anti-IgE immunotherapy. I don’t know whether anyone who has developed therapeutic anti-IgE antibodies has already looked into this. The consequence would be that we shouldn’t stu¡ half a gram of this anti-IgE into the patient, but instead we might formulate it as a vaccine and get the same protective e¡ect with much less material.

Gould: I wanted to clarify the statement concerning the comparison of the two IgEs on gel electrophoresis. Did you mean when you said that it acted as an aggregate that it had oligomers? Or could the fact that one is slower be due to di¡erential glycosylation?

Metzger: That still needs to be looked into. It would have to be a very substantial di¡erence in glycosylation.

Marone: We have approached the question of the binding of monomeric IgE from a di¡erent angle. In collaboration with Lars Bj˛rck of the University of Lund. They puri¢ed a protein (protein L) from a bacterium (Peptostreptococcus magnus) which has four binding domains (B1^B4) for k light chains. Each binding domain, B1^B4, was originally described to have a single binding domain for the k light chains. We found that protein L and B1^B4 were potent stimuli for the release of preformed and de novo synthesized mediators from human basophils and mast cells (Genovese et al 2003). Bj˛rck and collaborators recently produced the recombinant B1 that apparently had a single binding domain for k light chains. We found that B1 is also a very important stimulus for the release of mediators from basophils and mast cells. However, Bj˛rck and collaborators went back and did more careful NMR studies. These revealed that there are two binding sites for k light chains on each domain of B1^B4, which turned out to be the explanation for our results.

MacGlashan: The ‘dog in the manger’ idea is applicable in your experiments to two di¡erent antigen speci¢cities, where one draws the Lyn kinase from the other’s reaction, e¡ectively. The lower-a⁄nity one is using up the available Lyn kinase, so that the higher a⁄nity interaction doesn’t seem to take place. Hugh Sampson and I had a conversation earlier about whether or not that would apply when you £ood the cell with a low a⁄nity IgE to the same antigen to which there might be some high a⁄nity interaction. In e¡ect, the same antigen is binding to a low a⁄nity IgE and a high a⁄nity IgE on the cell. If there was enough low a⁄nity IgE it would act in the same way. The lower a⁄nity interaction might not be able to trigger, but it would give you that ‘dog in a manger’ e¡ect, so that it gives you a disproportionately poor response in the cell. Have you ever done an experiment like this, where you had IgEs of di¡ering a⁄nities to the same antigen?

Metzger: No, we have used cross-reacting antigens with di¡erent a⁄nities. The ‘dog in a manger’ e¡ect is done with two antigens, both of which react with the same IgE, but which have very di¡erent a⁄nities.

MacGlashan: So that would be the application of this idea. Part of the anaphylactic story is whether or not, at any given moment, your a⁄nity for the antigen has shifted to one that is dominantly low or dominantly high.

Metzger: As you know, this is an area that those interested in modifying the action of T cells are exploring. By using so-called ‘ligand antagonists’ they hope to prevent T cell stimulation.

Finkelman: There is a very similar phenomenon in the B cell world. This is that if B cells don’t express IgM or some other surface immunoglobulin, they die. This is despite there not being any established ligand for the IgM or IgD on these B cells. The idea is that there is some weak a⁄nity interaction that causes a tiny amount of cross-linking, but it is not really established that cross-linking is critical.

Galli: Trying to prove the presence or absence of a tiny amount of cross-linking is rather di⁄cult.

Finkelman: You mentioned that you were using a univalent ligand as an inhibitor. Which one do you use for FceRI?

Galli: Depending on the speci¢city of the IgE antibody being tested, we used DNP-lysine, or TNP-glutamate (Kitaura et al 2003).

Finkelman: You are inhibiting the aggregation then.

Galli: Presumably. This speaks to Henry’s point about whether some low level of aggregation will also have an anti-apoptotic e¡ect. If the important event in this phenomenon is a low level of FceRI aggregation, then, yes, this can have an anti- apoptotic e¡ect and it is inhibited by the monovalent hapten.

Metzger: The critical point, which is confusing, is that it suggests that spontaneous aggregation is occurring via the antibody combining sites. It is strange. They used a hapten that was speci¢c for the speci¢city of that IgE.

Finkelman: Do you get binding of the IgE to plastic when you do the in vitro culture? One of the ways of promoting T cell signalling is to coat plastic in anti- CD3 antibody. Do you see the same thing with the IgE antibody?

Galli: I don’t think that any of the experiments have involved an attempt to bind the IgE to plastic.

Finkelman: As an accident? Is there anything to prevent it from occurring?

Galli: I can’t answer that. One would have to investigate this possibility directly.

References

Asai K, Kitaura J, Kawakami Y et al 2001 Regulation of mast cell survival by IgE. Immunity 14:791^800

Foote J 2003 Immunology. Isomeric antibodies. Science 299:1327^1328

Genovese A, Borgia G, Bjorck L et al 2003 Immunoglobulin superantigen protein L induces IL- 4 and IL-13 secretion from human Fc epsilon RI+ cells through interaction with the kappa

light chains of IgE. J Immunol 170:1854^1861

James LC, Roversi P, Taw¢k DS 2003 Antibody multispeci¢city mediated by conformational diversity. Science 299:1362^1367

Kalesniko¡ J, Huber M, Lam V et al 2001 Monomeric IgE stimulates signaling pathways in mast cells that lead to cytokine production and cell survival. Immunity 14:801^811

Kitaura J, Song J, Tsai M et al 2003 Evidence that IgE molecules mediate a spectrum of e¡ects on mast cell survival and activation via aggregation of the Fc epsilonRI. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:12911^12916

General discussion I

General discussion I

Galli: There are two topics that I would like us to address in this general discussion. One is the clinical di¡erences in anaphylaxis between patients who develop anaphylaxis in the context of severe atopy, as opposed to those who have no evidence of atopy. The other topic is the controversy regarding the potential reclassi¢cation of anaphylaxis and the utility of the concept that everything that clinically looks like anaphylaxis shall be called anaphylaxis, as opposed to attempting to ferret out the different mechanistic causes of this phenomenon. Perhaps ¢rst we could consider anaphylaxis in atopic and non-atopic individuals.

Golden: I’ll start by commenting on some ¢ndings we made some years ago in our epidemiological survey of insect sting anaphylaxis. We found a dissociation between symptoms and atopy (Golden et al 1989). The presence of IgE to inhalant allergens correlated clearly with the presence of IgE to venom allergens. But atopic history of rhinitis or asthma had no correlation to anaphylaxis to insect stings. It complicates the discussion about ‘what is atopy?’ and ‘how do IgE level and atopy relate to the expression clinically of anaphylaxis?’.

Galli: I’d like to be more speci¢c about my question. There seems to be no doubt that patients who do not ¢t the classical de¢nition of atopy can develop anaphylaxis to, for example, venom and peanuts. The question is, however, when atopic individuals develop an anaphylactic reaction, is it in any way more severe or di¡erent than the anaphylaxis that develops in patients without atopy?

Ring: We did a study involving large numbers of patients which showed that insect venom anaphylaxis is not more frequent in atopics than in non-atopics. I think everyone agrees with this. But the concentration of IgE antibodies against bee venom was higher in atopics, independent of the severity. For practical purposes, in the atopic patients high IgE means less for their clinical symptomatology compared to non-atopic patients. An atopic patient may have class 5 or 6 without very severe symptoms, whereas if a non-atopic class 5 is probably more signi¢cant.

Golden: Is it clinically important? Do the non-atopics have more severe reactions with high IgE?

Ring: This is what we guess, but there is no good study.

Mˇller: There has been an interesting ¢nding in beekeepers who are allergic to bee venom. In this group atopy is signi¢cantly more frequent than in non- beekeeper patients who are allergic to bee venom. There was a suggestion that this is caused by the fact that atopic beekeepers inhale tiny amounts of the venom during their work in the beehive and thus get sensitized through the mucosal route (Miyachi et al 1979). If you look at symptoms, atopic patients with bee venom allergy more commonly have respiratory symptoms than non-atopics.

Vercelli: I have a general question. We have here a remarkable group of people who know everything about mast cells and basophils. From my point of view, if we think about potential genetic mechanisms, the question is, are there individuals with a genetically determined deregulation in their pathways that leads to degranulation and mediator release because of a lower threshold? In such individuals, stimuli that would normally be harmless may become pathogenic.

Galli: This is an interesting topic. Individual variation in the responsiveness of basophils and mast cells derived from di¡erent patients has been studied by a number of investigators, including Don MacGlashan and Gianni Marone. Perhaps we could discuss this after Larry Schwartz’ presentation on the e¡ector cells. However, getting back to one of the general discussion topics, I am still not certain as to whether we have a consensus on the issue of anaphylaxis being more or less severe in patients with atopy. Or does it depend on the circumstances?

Sampson: At least when we look at patients with food allergy, the patients who die virtually all have asthma and are atopic. Among the food allergic group atopy seems to be extremely harmful.

Galli: I would like to attempt to link this observation to one of the points that I made in my introduction. Mast cells and basophils in mice or humans with high levels of IgE have high levels of surface expression of the FceRI, and these cells thereby have heightened ability to release mediators when activated by IgE- dependent mechanisms (Hsu & MacGlashan 1996, Yamaguchi et al 1997, 1999, Lantz et al 1997, Williams & Galli 2000, MacGlashan et al 1997). Speci¢cally, in vitro studies indicate that cells with high levels of surface expression of FceRI both undergo activation at lower concentrations of antigen and also, upon activation, can release larger amounts of pre-formed and lipid mediators, and cytokines (Yamaguchi et al 1997, 1999, Williams & Galli 2000, MacGlashan et al 1997). This could be one explanation for why people with very high levels of IgE may experience more severe anaphylaxis reactions to the same antigen than those with low levels of IgE.

Sampson: The one other observation that we have made is that we don’t see a good correlation between the level of speci¢c antibody and the severity of the allergic response. We see people with very low levels of food-speci¢c IgE who die, and people with extremely high levels that get just some eczematous symptoms. We haven’t seen a good correlation there, but there does seem to be this thing with asthma.

Pumphrey: Looking at the fatal cases and the cases we see in clinic, the severity of the responses does not seem to depend on the severity of allergy, but on concomitant pathology. We recently had a striking illustration of this. A child at the age of six weeks was given cow’s milk for the ¢rst time. He had a generalized allergic reaction with urticaria, local symptoms in the mouth and so on. That child then had bronchiolitis, went on to have viral-associated wheeze, and at the age of 5.5 months was given a similar dose of cow’s milk, resulting in a fatal asthmatic anaphylactic reaction. I suggest the severity of the allergy hadn’t changed; there was simply concomitant pathology that made the reaction more dangerous.

Galli: This certainly seems to be a well documented clinical observation. I am having a little trouble with the conclusion that perhaps the allergy hadn’t changed in the interval, though. Isn’t that an assumption? The child was allergic in the ¢rst instance and the second, but couldn’t there have been some signi¢cant change in an aspect of the allergy during the intervening time?

Pumphrey: There are several possibilities. The level of IgE at the time of death was not outstandingly high (milk-speci¢c 6 kUA/L, total 22 kIU/L). Looking at that, there was no reason to assume that the child had extreme anaphylactic sensitivity, but it is possible that he died from an asthmatic reaction because of concomitant pathology in the lungs.

Golden: We have reported a number of times that there is not a consistent correlation between the level of venom-speci¢c IgE and the outcome (Golden et al 2001). There is a paradox, if you will. However, there is a statistical correlation but it is the outliers that are the puzzle. It is the patient with barely detectable IgE who dies from sting anaphylaxis, or the patients who have late phase large local reaction to insect stings but rarely get systemic reactions despite markedly elevated venom IgE. I’d also like to put a slightly di¡erent spin on something that Hugh Sampson said. I’ll suggest that there are at least two di¡erent phenotypes in anaphylaxis: the respiratory pattern and the vascular pattern. They can coexist, but perhaps what is occurring in the paediatric population is that they rarely get vascular symptoms - they are predominantly respiratory or cutaneous - and this may correlate more with atopy. The atopic children may have more of that respiratory pattern and fatal asthmatic deaths, whereas the vascular pattern which is more common in adults may not behave with that atopic or respiratory correlation.

Schwartz: In any de¢nition one comes up with for anaphylaxis, it is just as important to consider the cells involved as it is to distinguish between whether it is IgE or non-IgE. It is important to decide whether anaphylaxis is mast cell- dependent or whether it depends upon other cell types. We participated in a study with John Yunginger looking at fatal anaphylaxis (Yunginger et al 1991). We divided the groups into those that had been exposed to the precipitating factor parenterally versus orally. The parenterally exposed subjects had low levels of antigen-speci¢c IgE in their postmortem serum, but very high levels of mature tryptase. In those that succumbed to an oral challenge, they had high levels of antigen-speci¢c IgE, but low levels of mature tryptase. This suggests that there is a di¡erent magnitude of mast cell responsiveness depending on the route of administration. In a study that Peter van der Linden (van der Linden et al 1992), sensitive individuals were systemically challenged with insect stings; anaphylaxis occurred in a number of them. If you look at the baseline levels of total tryptase in their blood prior to anaphylaxis, there were higher baseline total tryptase levels in those who were destined to have a more severe anaphylactic reaction, perhaps re£ecting higher mast cell numbers. There have been some reports in the literature suggesting that having a high baseline level of tryptase may be a risk factor for anaphylaxis. Although this remains to be con¢rmed, if true, does it re£ect simply an increase in mast cell number, or instead some kind of priming or hyper-releasability of the mast cells?

MacGlashan: We have discussed several times the correlation (or lack of) for an antigen-speci¢c IgE response and anaphylaxis. The other part of this is the ratio of the antigen-speci¢c IgE to the total IgE. It is generally not the case that you can cross-calibrate between antigen-speci¢c IgE, measured by radioallergosorbent test (RAST), and total IgE, measured by radioimmunosorbent test (RIST). In fact, the absolute ratio is never known (unless a laboratory explicitly cross-calibrates the two assays). In terms of the studies mentioned, we discuss this relationship between speci¢c IgE and the anaphylactic response, but I take it it is not actually known what the speci¢c to total IgE ratios are.

Golden: In the insect sting cases we have not systematically looked at the ratio of speci¢c versus total serum IgE. We are in the process of doing that in our latest series of sting challenges, but I have no data yet.

Ring: Coming back to the relationship between atopy and anaphylaxis, I think the route of contact is crucial. Atopy is a hypersensitivity of the surface: the mucous membranes and the skin. Therefore, when the antigen comes via the surface, there is a connection. When the antigen comes parenterally, like a drug, there is no relation.

Lasser: It may be a mistake to look at death as an endpoint for the kinds of things that we are discussing. In contrast material reactions, for example, it is known that the incidence of total reactions is highest from the ages of 10^45. The incidence of total IgE is likewise highest in these ages, but death rates peak about age 70 (Lasser et al 1997). In other words, I think there are concomitant circumstances that go into the production of death at that time, versus earlier times. The patients are more fragile.

Galli: Most people would probably agree that if a patient who undergoes anaphylaxis also has signi¢cant pre-existing cardio-pulmonary problems, then it will be more likely that the anaphylactic reaction will be fatal. However, severe anaphylactic reactions resulting in death also occur in the younger age group. That outcome can occur both in the atopic and non-atopic populations. It is probably fair to say that the most compelling data indicating that an atopic history is a predictor of a severe outcome are those from the food allergic patients. So, let’s go back to the publication entitled ‘A revised nomenclature for allergy’ (Johansson et al 2001). I think this is the report that Johannes Ring was referring to in his paper when he mentioned the proposal that ‘anaphylaxis’ be used as a general clinical term. A number of you have commented that it is critical to understand the actual mechanisms that are responsible for producing this clinical picture in a number of di¡erent settings, but that these mechanisms may not always be known at the time when it may be necessary to explain the cause of death. Therefore, as I understand the recent proposal, it is to use the term anaphylaxis for all of these cases and then leave to the basic and clinical investigators the problem of ferreting out the mechanism(s) responsible. Would anyone like to comment on this proposal?

Metzger: As a non-clinician, I would opt for Frank Austen’s position. It seems to me that at the autopsy or death report one shouldn’t go beyond one’s knowledge. If the patient died of respiratory death or shock, this should be put down. As soon as you use a term such as anaphylaxis you are implying something for which you may lack ¢rm evidence. At one stage sarcoidosis was not distinguished from tuberculosis: you could make the same argument there. To the extent that we know at least one cause of a particular syndrome, it is useful to have a speci¢c term for that syndrome caused by that pathology. That similar symptoms may occur due to other forms of pathology shouldn’t justify the use of the same term.

Pumphrey: My understanding is that this new de¢nition does allow for that. Anaphylaxis is divided into allergic and non-allergic, and the allergic is divided into IgE-mediated and non-IgE mediated. What you are talking about is IgE- mediated anaphylaxis, so you could possibly defend the European Academy of Allergology and Clinical Immunology de¢nition.

Schwartz: How would you then classify the hypotensive shock that occurs from complement activation, due to dialysis membranes, for example? This doesn’t involve mast cells or IgE. Would you call that anaphylaxis?

Pumphrey: That’s a non-IgE-mediated anaphylaxis.

Marone: Frankly, I am a little confused by that position paper on the classi¢cation of allergic diseases. As previously mentioned by Frank Austen I fully understand the meaning of IgE-mediated anaphylaxis. It is more di⁄cult for me to understand non-IgE-mediated anaphylaxis. Also in that paper it has been suggested to eliminate the use of the term ‘anaphylactoid’ reactions. We have to discuss this.

Galli: I have always liked that term, because it covers a whole variety of situations where we lack the information to say that something is anaphylaxis.

Mosbech: From a clinical point of view we have to keep things simple. We have

heard that a lot of these patients are not treated as rapidly as they should be. If the physicians have to think about whether this is one or the other, this might hinder prompt treatment. So it might be a good idea to call all these responses anaphylaxis.

Sampson: I can think of a scenario where that would be harmful to the patient. We have seen a syndrome in young children called milk-induced enterocolitis. These children present with severe repetitive vomiting, marked hypotension and look extremely sick. If you then diagnose that as anaphylaxis and give epinephrine, this will do nothing for them. What they need is large volume expansion. This is part of the therapy, but the ¢rst response would be to give them epinephrine, and this is not what these children need.

References

Golden DBK, Marsh DG, Kagey-Sobotka A et al 1989 Epidemiology of insect venom sensitivity. J Am Med Assoc 262:240^244 Golden DBK, Kagey-Sobotka A, Norman PS, Hamilton RG, Lichtenstein LM 2001 Insect

sting allergy with negative venom skin test responses. J Allergy Clin Immunol 107:897^901 Hsu C, MacGlashan D Jr 1996 IgE antibody up-regulates high a⁄nity IgE binding on murine bone marrow-derived mast cells. Immunol Lett 52:129^134

Johansson SG, Hourihane JO, Bousquet J et al 2001 A revised nomenclature for allergy. An EAACI position statement from the EAACI nomenclature task force. Allergy 56:813^824 [Erratum in Allergy 56:1229]

Lantz CS, Yamaguchi M, Oettgen HC et al 1997 IgE regulates mouse basophil Fc epsilon RI expression in vivo. J Immunol 158:2517^2521

Lasser EC, Lyon SG, Berry CC 1997 Reports on contrast media reactions: analysis of data from reports to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Radiology 203:605^610 [Erratum in Radiology 204:876]

MacGlashan DW Jr, Bochner BS, Adelman DC et al 1997 Down-regulation of Fc(epsilon)RI expression on human basophils during in vivo treatment of atopic patients with anti-IgE antibody. J Immunol 158:1438^1445

Miyachi S, Lessof MH, Kemeny DM, Green LA 1979 Comparison of the atopic background between allergic and non-allergic beekeepers. Int Arch Allergy Appl Immunol 58:160^166 van der Linden P-WG, Hack CE, Poortman J, Vivie¤ -Kipp YC, Struyvenberg A, van der Zwan JK 1992 Insect-sting challenge in 138 patients: relation between clinical severity of anaphylaxis and mast cell activation. J Allergy Clin Immunol 90:110^118

Williams CM, Galli SJ 2000 The diverse potential e¡ector and immunoregulatory roles of mast cells in allergic disease. J Allergy Clin Immunol 105:847^859

Yamaguchi M, Lantz CS, Oettgen HC et al 1997 IgE enhances mouse mast cell Fc(epsilon)RI expression in vitro and in vivo: evidence for a novel ampli¢cation mechanism in IgE-dependent reactions. J Exp Med 185:663^672

Yamaguchi M, Sayama K, Yano K et al 1999 IgE enhances Fc epsilon receptor I expression and IgE-dependent release of histamine and lipid mediators from human umbilical cord blood derived mast cells: synergistic e¡ect of IL-4 and IgE on human mast cell Fc epsilon receptor I expression and mediator release. J Immunol 162:5455^5465

Yunginger JW, Nelson DR, Squillace DL et al 1991 Laboratory investigation of deaths due to anaphylaxis. J Forensic Sci 36:857^865