Allergens in veterinary medicine

Abstract

Allergic diseases in animals are increasingly gaining importance in veterinary practice and as research models. For intradermal testing and allergen immunotherapy, a good knowledge of relevant allergens for the individual species is of great importance. Currently, the knowledge about relevant veterinary allergens is based on sensitization rates identified by intradermal testing or serum testing for allergen‐specific IgE; crude extracts are the basis for most evaluations. Only a few studies provide evidence about the molecular structure of (particularly) dust mite, insect and mould allergens in dogs and horses, respectively. In those species, some major allergens differ from those in humans. This position paper summarizes the current knowledge about relevant allergens in dogs, cats and horses.

Allergic diseases are frequently observed in veterinary practice. With increasing standards in veterinary care, intradermal testing and allergen immunotherapy were introduced to small animal practice in the mid‐nineteen hundreds; later, serum testing for allergen‐specific IgE was developed for dogs, cats and horses. Although atopic asthma is rare in the dog and not much is known with regard to allergic rhinitis, atopic dermatitis is a frequently encountered disease in small animal practice and a focus of research in veterinary dermatology. It resembles human atopic dermatitis and has been proposed as a canine model for its human counterpart 1. Due to distinct breed predispositions 2, a genetic base in the dog was assumed for years and more recently has been confirmed with gene microarray studies 3. Atopic dermatitis is regularly observed in cats, but the clinical signs of atopic dermatitis are very different from the disease observed in humans 4. In contrast to dogs, feline asthma is not uncommon. Although intradermal testing, serum testing for allergen‐specific IgE and allergen immunotherapy are used regularly in feline patients, studies elucidating the exact pathogenesis in this species are scarce. Horses develop skin and respiratory disorders that have been attributed to allergy. While recurrent airway obstruction, previously called ‘heaves’, has many similarities to human asthma, the best understood allergic disease in horses is insect‐bite hypersensitivity 5. An effective treatment for this disease still remains elusive. In contrast to human medicine, where allergen immunotherapy is predominantly used for atopic rhinitis and asthma, allergen immunotherapy is an accepted and frequently conducted treatment for atopic dermatitis in the dog, cat and horse 6, although data on the major allergens relevant for dogs, cats and horses are limited (Table 1). In contrast to environmental allergens, studies evaluating food allergens in veterinary medicine are rare. Food rechallenges after elimination diets are notoriously difficult and not performed in a double‐blinded fashion. Skin and serum testing for food allergens has been shown in many studies to be unreliable 7, 8. For this reason, this position paper focusses on information currently published regarding environmental allergens in canine, feline and equine medicine.

Table 1.

Allergens of documented importance in domestic animals that have been characterized at the molecular level

Allergen source	Allergen name	Identity/homology	MW(kDa)	Relevant in species	References
Dermatophygoides farinae	Der f 15	Chitinase	98/109	Dog	18
	Der f 18	Chitinase	60	Dog	19
Cryptomeria japonica	Cry j 1	Pectate lyase	41	Human Dog	32
Cryptomeria japonica	Cry j 2	Polygalacturonase	56	Human Dog	78
Cryptomeria japonica	Cry j 3	Thaumatin‐like protein	24	Human Dog	32
Ctenocephalides felis	Cte f 1	None	18	Dog	36
Culicoides nubeculosus	Cul n 1	Antigen‐5 like	25	Horse	70
	Cul n 2	Hyaluronidase	46.7	Horse	68
	Cul n 3	Cysteine endopeptidase	44.6	Horse	68
	Cul n 4	None	17.5	Horse	68
	Cul n 5	None	45.7	Horse	68
	Cul n 6	None	16.9	Horse	68
	Cul n 7	None	20.9	Horse	68
	Cul n 8	Maltase	68.7	Horse	68
	Cul n 9	D7‐related	15.5	Horse	68
	Cul n 10	None	47.8	Horse	68
	Cul n 11	Trypsin	30.1	Horse	68
Culicoides obsoletus	Cul o 1a	Maltase	66.8	Horse	79
	Cul o 2a	Hyaluronidase	42.3	Horse	79
	Cul o 3	Antigen‐5 like	27.9	Horse	79
	Cul o 4	Trypsin	27.1	Horse	79
	Cul o 5	None	17.9	Horse	79
	Cul o 6	D7‐related	15.2	Horse	79
	Cul o 7	None	15	Horse	79
	Cul o1a	Kunitz protease inhibitor	23.3	Horse	67
	Cul o 2a	D7‐related	17.5	Horse	67
Culicoides sonorensis	Cul s 1	Maltase	66	Horse	66
Simulium vittatum	Sim v 1	Antigen 5 like	29.8	Horse	69
	Sim v 2	Kunitz protease Inhibitor	9.6	Horse	69
	Sim v 3	A‐amylase	28	Horse	69
	Sim v 4	a‐amylase	26	Horse	69
Aspergillus fumigatus	Asp f 7	None	27.4	Human, horse	59, 75
	Asp f 8	Acidic P 2 ribosomal proteins	11	Human, horse	59, 60, 75

^aNomenclature needs modification. These allergen sequences were submitted to GenBank at the same time by different groups.

Allergens in canine medicine

In canine allergology, dust mites are considered relevant and important allergens. This was initially based on the high number of positive reactions with intradermal testing against Dermatophagoides (D.) farinae and D. pteronissynus. The clinical relevance is further documented by a number of studies documenting the presence of mites and mite antigens in the dogs’ environment as well as on the dogs’ skin and coat 9, and clinical signs and T‐cell responses after exposure to dust mite antigens in dogs sensitized to house dust mites 10. However, skin reactivity as well as dust mite‐specific serum IgE has also been shown to be present in a high number of normal dogs 11, indicating that sensitization is not always associated with clinical signs. Sensitization without clinical disease is also reported in humans and varies between 13 and 36%, but in contrast to dogs, the rate of sensitization is generally lower than in atopic patients 12, 13. In some areas such as the UK, D. pteronyssinus is the predominant mite in the environment, and in other areas, D. farinae is more commonly found. Despite these differences in geographic prevalence, positive reactions to D. farinae are uniformly most frequently observed in intradermal tests 14, 15. Commercially available veterinary mite allergen preparations used in practice are extracts of D. farinae and D. pteronyssinus and are produced by a number of companies 15. Currently, to the authors’ knowledge, recombinant mite allergens are not available for dogs and cats. The available human recombinant or purified mite antigens developed for humans are not considered suitable for dogs, as the currently identified major allergens in dogs differ from those in humans. On Western blot, binding of IgG4 to purified group 1 and 2 allergens was not observed in atopic dogs reacting to intradermal crude dust mite extract 16. The majority of atopic dogs in this study showed reactions to allergens of higher molecular weights (68 and 90 kDa, respectively). Similarly, only a minority of dust mite‐allergic dogs with IgE antibodies against D. farinae and D. pteronyssinus had specific IgE against group 1 and group 2 allergens 17 or specifically against Der f 1, Der f 2, Der p 1 and Der p 2 14. Homology of a protein with 98 kDa and 555 amino acids suggested a chitinase, which was cloned, expressed and named Der f 15 18. This molecule elicited positive reactions on intradermal testing in almost all atopic dogs reacting to a crude extract of D. farinae; similarly, all sera from dogs with antibodies against D. farinae extracts also had antibodies against Der f 15. A 60 kDa protein, Der f 18, was purified and showed sequence homology with other chitinases. Approximately 80% of atopic dogs with D. farinae‐specific IgE antibodies also had antibodies against Der f 18 19. Both Der f 15 and Der f 18 are localized to the digestive system of the mites. Der f 15 and Der f 18 can be considered major dust mite allergens in the dog. A range of minor allergens from 15‐150 kDa were identified in dogs, but not characterized in more detail 17.

Sensitivity to storage mites such as Tyrophagus putrescentiae, Lepidoglyphus destructor and Acarus siro in dogs was based on skin test reactivity against mite extracts and storage mite‐specific IgE 20, 21. Storage mites have been identified in the dogs’ environment 22 as well as in dog food 23. However, the amount of contamination in the dog food seems to be dependent on optimal environmental conditions including warm temperature and high humidity 23 and is also influenced by the packaging material, and the duration the package has been open. In most studies evaluating storage mite sensitization, reactions against crude extracts were measured. In one study, the major allergens confirmed were >80 kD 20, but data on more specific identification are not available. Whether the high rate of sensitization is clinically relevant is not clear. There was no difference in the number of positive intradermal reactions to Tyrophagus putrescentiae 21 and Lepidoglyphus destructor 24 between normal dogs and dogs with atopic dermatitis, which is similar to what is observed in dogs sensitized to house dust mites 11. Prominent cross‐reactivity has been reported between house dust and storage mite antigens in the dog 15, and exposure to storage mites leads to clinical signs in Beagles sensitized to house dust mites 25. This further complicates the interpretation of the clinical relevance of storage mite sensitivity.

Sensitization of dogs with atopic dermatitis against various plant‐derived allergens such as from tree, grass and weed pollens was reported in several studies. In the largest study, the incidence of positive reactions to individual grass, tree and weed pollen extracts was between 10 and 25% 26. Those studies evaluating possible cross‐reactivities between related and nonrelated allergen sources 27, 28, 29 came to the conclusion that concurrent positive reactions among botanically closely related plant allergens were significantly more common than those among nonrelated allergens. However, as more than 30% of the dogs did not show positive concurrent reactions to closely related allergens, cross‐reactivity was not pronounced enough to warrant testing and desensitization with allergen extracts containing pollens from several different grasses, trees or weeds. No seasonal, sex‐ or age‐dependent risk factors were observed in a recent comprehensive study of canine grass pollen sensitization in Western France 30. Importantly, as in humans, a significant increase in the number of dogs sensitized to grass pollen has been observed increasing from 14.4% (1999 and 2002) to 27.7% (2007 and 2010). More than 80% of the 262 tests were positive for at least one allergen, and 21% to at least one pollen allergen. Masuda et al. tested 42 Japanese atopic dogs by IDT and IgE test using 26 allergen extracts from 8 allergen sources 31. Japanese cedar (Cryptomeria japonica) pollen extract was the second most important allergen extract after house dust mite extract. Sensitization was observed in 24% of the atopic dogs. Concentrations of IgE against Japanese cedar pollen were above 200 U/ml in 5 of the 10 positive dogs, whereas the other 5 remained under 60 U/ml. In a recent approach, the sensitization to single allergen molecules from Japanese cedar pollen was evaluated more precisely in 15 dogs. Besides IgE to Cry j 1, 76% showed IgE against Cry j 3, a major allergen in dogs 32.

Flea allergy is one of the most common allergies in the dog. On intradermal testing, positive reactions to fleas are more common than to any other insect 33. Serum antibodies against flea antigens were isolated in dogs many years ago. Up to half of the dogs in flea‐infested environments develop IgE antibodies against flea antigens 34. Two proteins with a molecular weight of 8–12 and 40 kD were identified as relevant in dogs 35. A further protein of 18 kD was isolated from the saliva of the cat flea, Ctenocephalides felis, and elicited reactions in 100% of dogs sensitized to fleas and in 80% of clinically flea‐allergic dogs. This antigen was considered a major allergen in dogs, cloned and named Cte f 1 36.

Insect allergies other than flea allergies are relatively rare in dogs. Local and sometimes systemic anaphylactoid and anaphylactic reactions following hymenoptera stings have been described 37, 38. However, the incidence of anaphylactic reactions to bee or vespid stings is unknown in companion animals 39 and it is not always known whether the reactions are immune‐mediated or due to massive envenomation. To our knowledge, it is also not known whether dogs are sensitized to the same venom allergens as human patients. There is only sparse published information available on hypersensitivity reactions to biting insects such as tabanids, black fly, mosquito, deer fly, horse fly, red ant and black ant, but clinical cases have been reported. Pruritic skin lesions are usually located on the thinly haired areas of the body, although there are definite regional areas of predisposition, such as the ear tips with some biting flies. Intradermal tests indicate sensitizations to horse flies, Culicoides spp. (midges), Simuliidiae (black flies) but also to other insects such as housefly, ant, deerfly and mosquito. However, intradermal test results with insect extracts have to be interpreted carefully, because positive reactions to intradermal tests with arthropods are often found in healthy control dogs at similar frequencies as in dogs with allergic skin disease 33. In one study, the only significant difference between control dogs and skin‐allergic dogs was found with flea extract 33.

Sensitization to mould allergens occurs in dogs with atopic dermatitis 40. However, percentages of dogs with IgE against fungal allergens vary considerably among studies. These discrepancies may reflect lack of standardization in allergen extracts used in these studies or low specificity of available assays. Higher sensitization in North American studies 2 than in Europe 41, Australia 26 or Asia 42 suggested geographical influences. Mould proteases can degrade pollen allergens when stored in the same vial 43. There is evidence for clinical relevance in canine immunotherapy, as dogs with moulds in their SIT extract had a much lower success rate than dogs in the same environment for which the same mould extracts were stored in different vials 44. To the authors’ knowledge, exact allergens relevant for canine allergology have not been identified and recombinant mould allergens have not been used in allergy testing in dogs.

Allergens in feline medicine

House dust mite antigens (Der p 1, Der f 1 and group 2 allergens) were detected in households housing cats, at a concentration of > 2 mcg/g dust 45. This concentration is regarded as a risk factor for the development of sensitization in susceptible humans. Sensitization to house dust mites was documented by intradermal testing with extracts from D. farinae and D. pteronyssinus 46 and serum testing for dust mite‐specific IgE 47. Both clinically allergic cats and cats with no clinical evidence of atopic disease showed the same concentrations of D.f.‐specific IgE, in contrast to specific pathogen‐free cats 48. When evaluating intradermal testing and testing for allergen‐specific IgE using the Fc epsilon RI alpha to capture IgE in an asthmatic cat model, no cat showed positive results in either test prior to sensitization with house dust mite antigens, while the majority of cats developed positive skin test reactions after 28 days and dust mite‐specific serum IgE after 50 days 49. However, although intradermal testing was positive more often in cats with allergic dermatitis than in nonallergic cats 46, serum concentrations of dust mite‐specific IgE in normal cats were not different from cats with allergic skin disease 47. There is no information available about major and minor dust mite allergens in feline allergic skin disease, nor is there any conclusive evidence for or against the involvement of storage mites in feline allergic diseases.

Sensitization of cats against pollen antigens has been reported in a number of studies evaluating cats with skin disease, seasonal rhinitis and asthma. Sensitization was reported in 8.3% of asthmatic cats against orchard grass pollen, only in 4% against birch pollen, and ragweed or mugwort pollen sensitization was not reported 50. However, the proportion of cats showing symptoms of allergy with positive reactions on serum testing for allergen‐specific IgE was not different to that of healthy cats in one study 51. Similarly, comparing the number of allergens with increased allergen‐specific serum IgE in atopic cats with flea‐allergic cats, cats with adverse food reactions or those with nonallergic pruritic skin disease, no significant differences were found between groups 52. IgE to environmental allergens including pollen could be even found in cats housed in a pathogen‐free environment 53. Cats may also present with rhinitis, sporadically permitting the identification of causative pollen allergens 54.

Flea allergy is the most common allergy in the cat. In one study, the majority of cats reacting to a live flea challenge also showed an immediate hypersensitivity on intradermal testing with flea extracts from three manufacturers 55, although only a few reacted to the extracts of all manufacturers. Delayed‐type reactions after 24 and 48 h were observed in fewer cats, again not often uniformly reacting to the extracts of all manufacturers 55.

Hymenoptera sting allergies seem to occur in cats 39, but the prevalence is probably low as the authors found no published reports on bee or vespid sting hypersensitivities in cats. Feline mosquito bite hypersensitivity is a predominantly facial‐allergic skin disease characterized by papules, crusted papules and punctate ulcers. Lesions may also occur on the pawpads and pinnae. Histopathologically, severe eosinophilic inflammation in the dermis with lymphocytes, macrophage, neutrophil and/or mast cell infiltration and an associated eosinophilic folliculitis and furunculosis has been reported 56. Lesions have been shown to occur at the exact site of previous mosquito bites. An elegant study showed that following controlled Aedes albopictus bite exposure, hypersensitive cats developed wheals within 20 min of exposure, followed by papules or small crusts after 12–48 h in some of the cats. Healthy control cats only showed slight and transient erythema after exposure. Similar results were obtained in intradermal tests. Furthermore, a Prausnitz–Küstner tests clearly confirmed the involvement of type I hypersensitivity reactions 56 in these mosquito bite‐allergic cats. However, detailed information on the involved allergens is lacking.

The authors could not identify any reports regarding mould allergens in feline allergic skin disease.

Allergens in equine medicine

House dust mites were reported to be present in horse rugs in one study 57 and in another study a variety of storage mite species were found in stables, but Dermatophagoides species could not be identified 58. Intradermal testing and serum testing for dust mite‐specific IgE was reported in a number of studies with variable results. In most of those studies, crude extracts of a variety of storage mites and house dust mites were used. In a few studies, no difference could be observed in the sensitization to storage mite extracts between normal horses and horses suffering from chronic bronchitis 59, now called recurrent airway obstruction (RAO) or heaves, an asthma‐like condition of horses, caused by hypersensitivity reactions to hay dust, or chronic urticaria based on intradermal testing 60 as well as serum testing 59, 60. Based on those studies, positive reactions to crude extracts are not useful in the diagnosis of allergic skin or respiratory disease. However, the concentrations of the crude extracts used varied and threshold concentrations for intradermal testing of horses with mite extracts have only recently been established 58. In a retrospective study at the University of California‐Davis, successful immunotherapy, in which crude extracts have been used for both intradermal testing and desensitization of horses suffering from atopic dermatitis or urticaria, has been reported 61.

The authors are not aware of any reported allergic reactions following hymenoptera stings in horses. However, hypersensitivity reactions to insect bites occur relatively frequently in this species. The best characterized allergic reaction to insect bites in horses is an IgE‐mediated dermatitis caused by bites of insects of the genus Culicoides, named insect bite hypersensitivity (IBH) or sometimes also Culicoides hypersensitivity, summer eczema or Queensland itch. The genus Culicoides consists of over 500 different biting Culicoides species. Culicoides spp. can be found worldwide, except in Iceland. The prevalence of IBH varies between 3 and 60% depending on the environment and genetic background of the horse 62. A number of studies have shown that IBH‐affected horses more frequently have positive IDT results with Culicoides extract and sometimes also with other insect extracts than healthy control horses 62. The involvement of Culicoides allergens in IBH has also been demonstrated in functional in vitro tests such as sulfidoleukotriene release (CAST, Bühlmann laboratories AG) 63 or histamine release tests using C. nubeculosus, C. sonorensis or C. obsoletus extracts 64, 65. Furthermore, sulfidoleukotrienes and histamine are released significantly more frequently from IBH‐affected horses than from healthy controls following the stimulation of peripheral blood leucocytes with Simulium vittatum extract 63.

Since 2009, allergens from different Culicoides species (C. sonorensis [Cul s], C. nubeculosus [Cul n], C. obsoletus [Cul o]) have been characterized at the molecular level and expressed as recombinant protein (Table 1) 65, 66, 67, 68. Some of these Culicoides allergens are homologous to known allergens in the human field, such as amylase/maltase (Cul s1, Cul n8, Cul o1), hyaluronidase (Cul n2, Cul o2) antigen‐5 (Cul n 1, Cul o 3), D‐7‐related proteins (Cul n 9, Cul o 6, Cul o 2b), cysteine protease (Cul n 3) and serine protease inhibitor (Cul o 1b). Nevertheless, identities at the amino acid level between these Culicoides allergens and the homologous allergens relevant in human allergy are not very high with, for example, 44% for hyaluronidase (Api m2, a major allergen of bee venom) and cross‐reactivity is probably rather unlikely to occur. In a pilot study, it was observed that sera from horses with high IgE levels to recombinant C. nubeculosus hyaluronidase did not bind to the corresponding allergen from bees (E. Marti, unpublished data). Additionally, Culicoides salivary gland proteins with yet unknown function have been identified as allergens relevant for IBH (Cul n 4‐ 7, Cul n 10, Cul o 5 and Cul o 7). All these recombinant allergens elicit immediate‐type reactions in IBH‐affected horses in intradermal tests indicating sensitization.

IDT, CAST and immunoblots have revealed that a proportion of the IBH‐affected horses concurrently react with Simulium extracts. IgE‐binding salivary gland proteins from S. vittatum were identified using phage surface display technology and expressed as recombinant proteins 69. These proteins showed sequence similarities to antigen 5‐like protein (Sim v 1), to a serine protease inhibitor (Sim v 2) and to alpha‐amylase (Sim v 3 and Sim v 4) (Table 1). Furthermore, three S. vittatum erythema proteins (SVEPs) were identified. IBH‐affected horses had significantly higher IgE levels than controls against r‐Sim v 1, 2, 3, 4, whereas the r‐SVEP showed only marginal IgE binding. First studies using immunoblots suggested that the antigen 5‐like proteins from C. nubeculosus (Cul n 1) and S. vittatum (Sim v 1) are cross‐reactive, although they only display 49% identity at the amino acid level 69. Cross‐reactivity was confirmed by extended inhibition ELISA experiments clearly showing that Sim v 1 in fluid phase is able to strongly inhibit binding of serum IgE to solid‐phase‐coated Cul n 1 in a concentration‐dependent manner and vice versa 70. This study indicates that the reactivity to black flies observed in some of the IBH‐affected horses is probably due to cross‐reactivity and is secondary to Culicoides sensitization. Hypersensitivity reactions to other insects are much less well studied in horses, but they seem to play a role in equine recurrent urticaria and atopic dermatitis. Horses affected with these conditions show positive IDT reactions to insect extracts more frequently than control horses, although positive IDT reactions are also common in those controls 71. Depending on the study, positive reactions to Aedes, black ant, horse fly, black fly, deer fly or mosquito were found more frequently in patients than in healthy controls. To our knowledge, sera from these horses have never been tested for IgE binding to recombinant insect allergens.

Horses develop respiratory and skin diseases due to pollen allergens and show positive intradermal test results against tree, grass and weed pollens 61 as well as pollen‐specific serum IgE 5, 72. Most reactions on intradermal testing with grass pollen extracts were observed against Bermuda grass, with weed extracts against sage mix (both in approximately half the horses) and with tree pollen extracts against olive, cedar, orange and alder trees 61. Positive correlations between symptom severity and exogenous factors such as climatic conditions, rainfall or seasonal pollen counts were observed 73.

Exposure to mouldy hay plays a central role in equine recurrent airway obstruction (RAO). Challenge with mouldy hay or mould extracts leads to exacerbation of clinical symptoms. Although non‐IgE‐mediated mechanisms have been implicated in the pathogenesis of RAO, there is also evidence of sensitization to fungal allergens. Basophil histamine release in response to stimulation with fungal allergens or hay extract is higher in RAO‐affected horses than in healthy controls 74. Histamine release from pulmonary mast cells after in vitro stimulation with fungal extracts was also significantly higher in RAO‐affected horses than healthy controls. Schmallenbach et al. (1998) found increased Aspergillus fumigatus extract‐specific IgE and IgG responses in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid of RAO‐affected horses 75. Other studies detected IgE antibodies specific for crude extracts of Aspergillus fumigatus, Alternaria alternata and Penicillium notatum, and the recombinant allergens Asp f 7,8, 9 and Alt a 1 in BAL or serum 59, 76. IgE specific for crude mould extracts was not different between healthy and affected horses. In contrast, IgE against recombinant allergens was detectable only in some horses – more frequently in RAO‐affected horses than in healthy controls. IgG antibodies specific for the A. fumigatus extract were also detected in both healthy and RAO horses with no significant differences between the two groups, while RAO horses had significantly higher IgG responses against Asp f 8 than healthy horses 59, 76. It is possible that IgE plays a role only in a subset of RAO patients with genetic predisposition. Scharrenberg et al. (2010) detected Asp f 7‐specific IgE, IgGa, IgGb and IgG(T) in two families from RAO‐affected sires. No differences in total IgE, but significant differences in Asp f 7‐specific IgE levels were found between RAO‐affected animals and controls, but also between the offspring of one stallion vs the other 77. Genetic analysis identified several quantitative trait loci associated with this phenotype. Although fungal extracts as well as recombinant allergens have been used to detect IgE responses against moulds in horses, it is not known which proteins are major allergens in horses. The authors could also not find reports of immunotherapy using fungal allergens in horses.

Outlook and future trends

The number of pets in total and thus also the number of animals with diagnosed allergies are continuously increasing and so are the awareness of and the interest in veterinary allergology. It can be assumed, that increased awareness of the differences will enhance the transfer of recent trends in human allergology to veterinary medicine. This will be facilitated by the increased economic impact of veterinary medicine for pets as well as for farm animals. This fact can be exemplified by the discovery of novel allergens playing a key role in Culicoides‐mediated allergic skin disease of horses. The identification of these allergens was pursued over a 20‐year period and enabled the discovery of new allergens in human medicine. The direct consequence of this availability is the development of component‐specific diagnostics tools to identify insect‐bite hypersensitivity in the horse and to perform research towards specific immunotherapies with recombinant insect allergens to desensitize horses suffering from this disease. More recent approaches, in silico based or derived from the wet laboratory, such as integrated approaches using genomic, transcriptomic, proteomic and metabolomic data, will be more and more frequently used, as the overall price erosion of these high‐throughput technologies will make them increasingly available for use in veterinary medicine. Identification of and testing for major allergens in each species may allow one to differentiate clinically nonrelevant extract‐specific IgE from relevant IgE directed against the true allergens and thus improve the diagnostic accuracy of allergy testing and probably also the success of allergen‐specific immunotherapy. The usage of recent technologies in veterinary medicine will thus provide novel insights into the basic immunological mechanisms of pet mammals, leading to the discovery of novel biomarkers, identification of new allergens, and thus to novel diagnostic tools and therapeutic concepts. The formation of a veterinary allergology special interest group within the EAACI is giving new impetus to the field of veterinary allergy, while human allergy may also benefit from the veterinary field as allergic diseases in domestic species can represent natural models of allergy. Unlike mouse models, dogs and cats kept as pets are generally exposed to the same environmental influences as humans and thus are much better mirrors of the human disease counterpart. New diagnostic and therapeutic tools successful in veterinary practice may be more applicable to the human field than those developed in the laboratory. Thus, there is great potential in the collaboration of human and veterinary allergology. An increased and facilitated interaction of specialists in both fields, one of the aims of the EAACI Interest Group ‘Comparative and Veterinary Allergology’, may benefit all and help in advancing allergology worldwide.

Conclusion

Despite the increasing awareness of the importance of allergic diseases in animals, the discipline of veterinary allergology limps behind its human counterpart. There are several reasons for this. The full methodology available in human allergology often cannot be transferred to other species without adjustments. For example, simple development of an ELISA to detect allergen‐specific IgE often suffered from the limited availability of well‐characterized detection molecules such as monoclonal antibodies specific for the species of interest. However, for dogs and horses, some of those reagents are now available. For some animals, the exact interaction of defined immunoglobulin isotypes with their high‐ and low‐affinity receptors on cells of the immune system is not elucidated to the same degree as in humans. Nevertheless, during the recent years, increasing effort led to novel reagents and technologies and stimulated research in the field of veterinary allergology, resulting in the identification of novel relevant allergens and deeper understanding of animal‐specific pathogenesis of allergic diseases. This availability of methodologies for diagnosis and therapy, together with an increasing awareness for allergic diseases in veterinary practice as well as in the general population of companion animal owners, facilitated this development. Between one in two (UK and France) and one in three households (Germany) have pets (http://www.ifaheurope.org/companion-animals/about-pets.html: accessed 7.7.14), and the potential economical impact can easily be deduced from the large numbers of pets living in European households (260 Mio, without fish and reptiles). Veterinary allergology has become an important, dedicated veterinary discipline, and allergic disorders of man's best friend slowly gain the awareness they deserve beyond being mere models for human allergies.

Funding

EAACI.

Conflicts of interest

EJJ was supported by the Austrian Science Fund FWF, grant SFB F4606‐B19. EM was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation grant no. 310030‐160196/1.

Author contributions

All authors conceived the position paper, RM wrote the introduction and the sections on mite and flea allergens, EM those on insect allergens other than flea, EJJ those on pollen allergens, JJ those on mould allergens and CR the outlook and future trends. RM collated the parts and edited the manuscript, and all authors critically commented on drafts of the manuscript.

Mueller RS, Janda J, Jensen‐Jarolim E, Rhyner C, Marti E. Allergens in veterinary medicine. Allergy 2016; 71: 27–35.