Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disorder characterized by relapsing eczematous injuries and severe pruritus. In the last few years, the AD prevalence has been increasing, reaching 20% in children and 10% in adults in high-income countries. Recently, the potential role of probiotics in AD prevention has generated considerable interest. As many clinical studies show, the gut microbiota is able to modulate systemic inflammatory and immune responses influencing the development of sensitization and allergy. Probiotics are used increasingly against AD. However, the molecular mechanisms underlying the probiotics mediated anti-allergic effect remain unclear and there is controversy about their efficacy. In this narrative review, we examine the actual evidence on the effect of probiotic supplementation for AD prevention in the pediatric population, discussing also the potential biological mechanisms of action in this regard.

Cow’s milk allergy (CMA) is a common condition in the pediatric population. CMA can induce a diverse range of symptoms of variable intensity. It occurs mainly in the first year of life, and if the child is not breastfed, hypoallergenic formula is the dietary treatment. Extensively hydrolyzed cow’s milk formulas (eHF) with documented hypo-allergenicity can be recommended as the first choice, while amino acid-based formulas (AAF) are recommended for patients with more severe symptoms. Hydrolyzed rice-based formulas (HRFs) are a suitable alternative for infants with CMA that cannot tolerate or do not like eHF and in infants with severe forms of CMA. In the present paper, we reviewed the nutritional composition of HRFs as well as studies regarding their efficacy and tolerance in children, and we provided an updated overview of the recent evidence on the use of HRFs in CMA. The available studies provide evidence that HRFs exhibit excellent efficacy and tolerance and seem to be adequate in providing normal growth in healthy children as well as in children with CMA.

Background: We followed the effects of a new SCIT with a chemically polymerized allergen Alt a1, evaluating the trend of clinical and functional parameters in an observational-prospective study. Methods: 42 children with AR and intermittent asthma sensitized to A.A.: 17 patients started SCIT (Modigoid^®), and 25 continued symptomatic therapy. At the initial visit (T0), all patients performed total IgE (tIgE) and specific IgE (sIgE) for Alt a1, nasal nitric oxide (nFeNo), nasal cytology, anterior active rhinomanometry (AAR) and spirometry. After 24 months (T1), they repeated the same procedures as in T0. Results: Patients treated with Modigoid presented a statistically significant (p < 0.001) reduction of nFeNO (T0:1651.06 ± 149.18; T1: 1394.12 ± 108.98), tIgE (T0: 311.48 ± 144.18; T1: 164.73 ± 50.69), sIgE for Alt a1 (T0: 28.59 ± 12.69; T1: 19.54 ± 7.37), an improvement of nasal airflow (T0: 71.62 ± 8.66; T1: 95.12 ± 5.91), nasal eosinophils (T0: 20.59 ± 2.35; T1: 14.88 ± 1.65) and FEV1 (T0: 95.58 ± 7.91; T1: 116.64 ± 5.94). Conclusions: The new SCIT for Alt a1 significantly improves AR symptoms from a subjective, objective point of view and laboratory and functional parameters.

Background: Between June and July 2020, we evaluated children and adolescents concerning post-infection surveillance after a COVID-19 positivity during the lockdown. We aimed to assess whether the anamnestic presence of allergies could correlate with the presence of SARS-CoV-2 symptoms, and in particular with anosmia. Material and methods: For each patient, we collected anamnestic data, the presence of allergies documented by performing skin prick tests, and COVID-19 symptoms. Then, if over six years of age, each patient underwent an active anterior rhinomanometry. Results: A total of 296 patients were enrolled, of whom 105 (35.4%) reported allergies. Considering COVID-19 symptoms, 74 subjects (25%) presented an asymptomatic form, 222 (75%) reported symptoms, and anosmia recurred in 60 subjects (27.03%). A statistically significant relationship was found between allergies and symptomatic COVID-19 (p = 0.042), allergies, and anosmia (p = 0.05), and allergies and anosmia in males (p = 0.007). Moreover, anosmic patients presented a higher body mass index, older age, and a longer COVID-19 duration with statistical significance (p = 0.001, 0.001, 0.006, respectively). Conclusions: Allergic subjects seem to develop symptomatic COVID-19 more frequently and allergies appear to be a protective factor from anosmia’s onset in males.