Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Practical relevance:

Human allergy to cats affects a substantial and growing proportion of the global population, and cat allergy is regarded as the third most common cause of human respiratory allergies, and the second most common indoor cause. Veterinarians will frequently encounter owners who are cat-allergic, and having an understanding of this disease and the methods available to help control the allergy will assist them in giving appropriate advice, alongside human healthcare professionals.

Aim:

The aim of this review is to summarise currently available data on the prevalence, causes, symptoms and control of human allergy to cats. In terms of managing cat allergy, the emphasis is on reviewing current and emerging modalities to reduce environmental exposure to cat allergens rather than on pharmacotherapy or immunotherapy, as it is in these areas in particular that the veterinarian may be able to offer help and advice to complement that of human healthcare professionals.

Evidence base:

The information in this review is drawn from the current and historical literature on human allergy to cats, and approaches to reduce exposure to cat allergens and manage symptoms of cat allergy.

Keywords

Allergy human management diet

Prevalence of human allergy to cats

Inhaled aeroallergens are typically divided into outdoor (such as pollens and moulds) and indoor (such as house dust mite, cat, dog and certain insect allergens).¹ Climate and environmental conditions cause substantial geographical variations in the relative importance of different aeroallergens but globally domestic cats (Felis catus) are considered the second most common cause of indoor respiratory allergies and the third most common overall (after pollens and house dust mites).^2-8

Respiratory and other allergies have become more common over recent decades for reasons that are complex and not fully understood, but are likely to include increased rates of allergen sensitisation along with genetics and environmental factors such as pollutants, irritants and infectious diseases.^1,5,7,9-11

Sensitisation (production of allergen-specific IgE9) is necessary for signs of respiratory allergy to develop, but not all sensitised individuals develop allergy symptoms since this depends on many factors, including the level of sensitisation (amount of allergen-specific IgE produced), the ‘allergenicity’ and amount of exposure to the antigen, and other environmental factors.^{1,7,9,12–14} Cat allergy is reported to be approximately twice as common as dog allergy,¹⁰ and many studies have reported a higher prevalence of sensitisation and/or allergy to cats.^4,15–21 Even in studies showing similar rates of sensitisation to dogs and cats,^7,11 cats may still be a more important cause of allergic symptoms due to quantitative and qualitative differences in the level of sensitisation, the allergenicity of cat antigens, and in exposure to allergens (which may be influenced by pet populations and differences in the physicochemical properties of the allergens).^{9,10,14,15,17,19,20,22–25}

The prevalence of sensitisation to cats in different studies has typically been reported to be around 5–20%,^{6–8
,10,21,26} and in patients with respiratory allergies may be as high as 20–30% or more,^7,8,10,21,26 with pet allergies affecting an estimated 10–20% of the population worldwide.11 Cat allergy is therefore a major global problem.

Causes of cat allergy

Eight cat allergens are currently recognised by the World Health Organization/International Union of Immunological Societies (Table 1, allergen.org).²’⁶’⁷’⁹’^11,27 However, Fel d 1 is the only major antigen, and is by far the most important and potent allergen. Fel d 1 shares no significant cross-reactivity with other mammalian proteins’¹¹ although it is also produced by other members of the Felidae family.²⁸ Around 90-96% of cat-allergic individuals are sensitised to Fel d 1’ and it is responsible for 60-90% of the total allergic reactivity seen in affected individuals.²’⁶’^9,11’^19,29-31 The prevalence of reactivity to the other seven antigens in cat-allergic individuals is variable and typically 10-40%’^6,11’^14,29 often with lower levels of IgE.⁶ Sequence homology between lipocalins of different species means that cross-reactivity is seen, for example between Fel d 4 and Can f 6, and Fel d 7 and Can f 1,^11,32,33 which can result in cross-sensitivity in allergic individuals. Similarly, Fel d 2 is a minor cat allergen, but cross-reactivity with pork albumin (‘pork-cat syndrome’) means occasional individuals sensitised to Fel d 2 react to eating pork meat.¹¹

Table 1.

Recognised cat allergens and their properties^{2,6,7,9,11,27}

Allergen	Protein family	Major source	Molecular mass
Fel d 1	Secretoglobin	Dander, saliva	38 kDa
Fel d 2	Serum albumin	Dander, serum, urine	69 kDa
Fel d 3	Cystatin A	Dander	11 kDa
Fel d 4	Lipocalin	Saliva	22 kDa
Fel d 5	IgA	Saliva, serum	400 kDa
Fel d 6	IgM	Saliva, serum	800-1000 kDa
Fel d 7	Lipocalin	Saliva	17.5 kDa
Fel d 8	Latherin-like	Saliva	24 kDa

Fel d 1 is a secretoglobin and is a 38 kDa tetramer glycoprotein formed from two linked heterodimers.^2,6,11 The major sources of Fel d 1 are the saliva and sebaceous glands (Figure 1),^34-41 and some is also present in lacrimal and anal gland secretions and in urine.^37,41,42 Skin production of Fel d 1 varies according to anatomical site, with the facial region reported to produce higher amounts than the chest.⁴³ Salivary Fel d 1 is distributed during grooming,⁶ with papillae on the cat’s tongue efficiently wicking and depositingsaliva and Fel d 1 through the haircoat.⁴⁴ Grooming presumably also assists in distribution of Fel d 1 from sebaceous glands.

Figure 1

Major sources of Fel d 1 present on the haircoat and shed into the environment are the saliva and sebaceous glands

Entire male cats (at least partially under the influence of testosterone) produce greater amounts of Fel d 1 than neutered males or females (irrespective of neuter status).^45-49 Production is not affected by coat colour or hair length.^40,49-51 Production of Fel d 1 varies considerably between cats and also within individual cats over time, but some cats tend to remain higher (or lower) producers compared with others.^49,52-54 Production may decline in older cats.⁴⁹

The structure of Fel d 1 indicates a potential carrier function.^2,6,55,56 While its biological function remains to be determined, a role in the transport of steroids, hormones or perhaps pheromones seems likely.^2,57,58

Fel d 1 in the haircoat and on the skin is the main reservoir for environmental Fel d 1, being shed in substantial amounts on dander (dried saliva, cutaneous flakes and debris).^9,30,59 Custovic et al²⁴ found that 49% of cat danderparticles were >9 µm and 23% <4.5 µm in size. The small particle size means that, as well as being present in settled dust, Fel d 1 can remain airborne for prolonged periods (several days) with minimal air disturbance. Particles readily reach smaller airways, explaining the rapid onset of clinical symptoms seen in some cat-allergic individuals following exposure.^2,60-62 Moreover, the sticky nature of dander and Fel d 1 means that spread to environments outside of the home readily occurs on clothes or even human hair;⁶³ thus Fel d 1 isa ubiquitous allergen.^{2,30,50,59-62,64}

Beyond houses with cats, immunologically significant levels of Fel d 1 are frequently detected in homes without cats, schools and day care centres, cars, hospitals, churches, cinemas, hotels and other public buildings, and on public transport including trains, buses and aeroplanes.^{2,30,50,59-62,64-80} In regions where pet cat ownership is common, detection rates in homes, schools and other public buildings are often in the order of75-100%.^{66,68,69,71,74-80} Generally, environmental concentrations of Fel d 1 are much higher in houses where cats are kept as pets, and in other places the amount is influenced primarily by the number of cat-owning people who use the space.^{9,30,50,60,61,64,71,73,81} Fel d 1presence is also affected by the physical environment, as concentrations are higher in dust from soft furnishings such as upholsteredchairs, carpets and mattresses.^{2,24,30,60,65,68,69,78,80,82}The very widespread distribution of Fel d 1 beyond cat-owning homes is regarded as an important source of allergen for bothsensitisation and allergic symptoms.^{30,59,60,64,66,68,75,76,78,81,83}

Clinical symptoms and diagnosis of cat allergy

Briefly, the major clinical symptoms of cat allergy are perennial rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma through type I hypersensitivity and chronic inflammation, with combinations of different symptoms (conjunctivitis, rhinitis and asthma) being seen.^{1,6,10,17,18,84} The severity of clinical symptoms varies considerably between individuals, but up to 20-30% of asthma sufferers may develop severe symptoms on contact with cats,¹⁰ and cat allergy has a significant negative impact on these patients’ quality of life.⁷ In addition to respiratory signs, cat allergy may also influence the severity of atopic dermatitis in affected individuals,⁸⁵ and signs of irritable bowel syndrome in atopy sufferers.⁸⁶

A diagnosis of cat allergy is generally made on the basis of history, clinical symptoms, knowledge of exposure, and reactivity to catallergens demonstrated by detection of serum-specific IgE and/or a positive skin prick test.^7,84,87,88 Because Fel d 1 is the dominant cat allergen and because the vast majority of cat-allergic individuals react to this protein, recombinant Fel d 1 is often used in IgE assays or skin prick tests rather than a mixed antigen extract, and has usually proved reliable and reproducible diagnostically.^2,6,7,17 Nevertheless, the use of a mixed antigen skin prick test and/or other recombinant feline allergens may allow the detection of allergen-specific IgE in the small proportion of patients with less typical sensitisation profiles (without Fel d 1 sensitisation).⁸⁹ Quantitative assessment of serum Fel d 1-specific IgE helps in the diagnosis and assessing the prognosis in cat allergy.^2,6,90,91 Provocative testing can also be undertaken, although this is rarely necessary or advised.^7,12,88

The rise in popularity of cats as pets and the fact that many people now spend well over 90% of their time in enclosed environments,⁹² has likely contributed to the increase in exposure to cat allergens and the development of cat allergies in atopy-predisposed individuals.^1,7,10,93 The relationship between genetics, environment, allergen exposure and the development of sensitisation is complex, but there is some evidence that early life (in the first year) exposure to cats may help reduce the risk of subsequent sensitisa-tion.^1,7,9,60,94 However, the risk reduction of early-life exposure is not considered sufficient to recommend getting a cat to avoid IgE sensitisation.^4,95

Methods for managing cat allergy

Members of the veterinary healthcare team may frequently get involved in discussions with cat owners about management of cat allergies, especially if the owner or someone in their household is allergic to cats, and working alongside human healthcare professionals may provide valuable insights on potential management strategies.

Most (but not all) individuals who develop a cat allergy will also suffer with otherallergies,^{1,7,8,19,26,61,62,64,76,90,96} but the focus hereis purely on the management of cat allergy. As with other allergies, the classic triad of management options is firstly avoidance (reducing exposure to cat allergens), secondly pharmacotherapy (to modify the immune response and relieve symptoms) and thirdly immunotherapy.²⁵ Avoiding or reducing exposure to the allergen(s) is a critical foundational management strategy,²⁵ but does not necessarily imply complete avoidance of all allergen exposure. The concept of a critical threshold with allergy suggests that if the degree ofinflammation (caused by exposure to allergens, irritants, etc) is kept below this threshold, the patient may remain free of symptoms,²⁵ and achieving this may be possible by reducing exposure to allergen(s) rather than complete avoidance, often in combination with other management strategies (Figure 2).

Figure 2

Overview of potential control measures currently available for managing allergy to cats, and the level at which the intervention works

Reducing cat allergen exposure

Allergen avoidance or exposure reduction, where possible, is regarded as fundamental to managing allergies,^{7,23,88,95,97-99} as avoiding the inciting allergen is the most effective means of preventing reactions in sensitised individuals. Interestingly, while many control measures have been proven to reduce the burden of Fel d 1 in the environment, high quality evidence of clinical benefits from field trials isoften lacking.^{7,60,87,88,100-102} This may, at least inpart, reflect the challenges inherent in trials with a heterogeneous population of cat-allergic individuals (who may frequently have other allergies) and heterogeneous living environments, making dose-response relationships with allergens complex.^23,98 Furthermore, it is widely accepted that combining several environmental control measures is likely to give superior results and thus greater clinical efficacy.^{7,97,98,100,101}

Removing the cat from the home

Management guidelines for cat-allergic individuals frequently place emphasis on removal of the cat from the home, wherever possible, as this reliably reduces direct (cat) and indirect (environmental) Fel d 1 expo-sure.^{7,25,60,95,102} However, it is recognised that the strength of the human-cat bond makes this difficult for many owners and this strategy may damage the patient-physician relationship.^7,25 Homes with pet cats have the highest burden of environmental Fel d 1 (typically 80-300 times higher than homeswithout cats^{13,24,50,74,79,83}) and, while eliminating cats from the house may dramatically reduce Fel d 1 concentrations,⁹⁹ it may take 4-6 months or more to achieve levels seen in homes without cats, although aggressive cleaning measures including washing or removal of carpets may speed this up.^82,103-105

The strength of the human-cat bond means that few owners are willing to part with their cat (4-35% in different studies), even when recommended to do so,^104,106-108 and in one publication 70% of owners replaced the pet once it had died, despite the presence of a diagnosed allergy.¹⁰⁷ In an online survey of over 2000 cat owners in the USA, 84% reported they would ignore advice to give up their cat even if told to do so to help manage aller-gies.¹⁰⁹ This emphasises the importance of alternative measures to help control environmental Fel d 1 and, as noted, a combination of different approaches is recommended foroptimal results.^{7,25,87,95,97,101,102,110}

Restricting access of the cat within the home environment

Limiting access so the cat is not allowed in bedrooms, only has access to certain rooms, and/or is restricted to uncarpeted rooms, has been advocated.^{7,25,95,97,101} The physical characteristics of dander mean these measures alone are unlikely to be sufficient to control signs of allergy.⁹⁷ In some situations environmental restriction might have important welfare implications for cats, potentially resulting in chronic frustration and behavioural issues that are risk factors for relinquishment.^111,112 Limiting physical contact with the cat may also negatively impact the human-cat bond,^113,114 and thus it would seem prudent to involve a veterinarian when such measures are being contemplated (with additional advice from a veterinary behaviourist if needed).

Onmental modification and cleaning

Many environmental modifications and/or cleaning regimens have been advocated to control Fel d 1 in the air and in dust. These measures and their rationale are summarised in Table 2. There is evidence that using multiple such measures is effective and may help to improve clinical disease, but continuous implementation is required.^{110,115,118,119}

Table 2

Environmental controls commonly utilised in catallergen management programmes

Recommendation	Rationale
Remove carpeting from bedrooms ± other rooms and replace with hard flooring5⁹,60,⁹7102,110,115	Carpets are known to harbour large quantities of Fel d 1-containing dust
Remove upholstered furniture from bedrooms ± other rooms^59,102,115	Soft furnishings are known to harbour large quantities of Fel d 1-containing dust
Use mattress and pillow covers with a mean pore size ≤4-6 µm^{7,59,95,110,115}	Mattresses are known to harbour large quantities of Fel d 1-containing dust
Vacuum floors, carpets and furniture at least weekly with a cleaner that incorporates a high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter^{7,60,95,102,110}	High-efficiency vacuum cleaners will not leak and disperse allergens
Wash bedding and curtains regularly^{59,60,101,115}	Washing will help to remove Fel d 1
Wipe down walls and wash hard floors regularly^95,115	Wiping/washing physically removes dust particles that may harbour Fel d 1 antigen
Increase natural ventilation (eg, by keeping windows open)^60,95,115	Increasing ventilation will help to reduce airborne Fel d 1 concentrations
Use HEPA filters in the home^{7,25,95,101,102,110,116,117}	HEPA filters are capable of reducing airborne Fel d 1 concentrations and may be helpful when used with other measures
Use night-time laminar airflow system over beds^7,110	Filtered laminar airflow may displace aeroallergens from the owner’s breathing area

In addition to the measures shown in Table 2, some authors have also recommended:

Selecting female or neutered male cats, as they generally produce less Fel d 1 (see earlier);^59,101

Washing hands after touching a cat;^25,101 andChanging and washing clothesregularly.^{7,60,95,101,102}

Evidence from a study in Sweden showed that when children changed into school clothes (that were kept at school) on arrival, the reduction in airborne Fel d 1 concentrations in the classrooms was four- to six-fold, which was equivalent to banning pet ownership for all children.¹²⁰

Bathing the cat

Bathing cats, usually at weekly or twice-weekly intervals, to reduce Fel d 1 shedding is a common management recommenda-tion.⁷’^59,60’⁹⁵’⁹⁷’^100,115 Studies of the efficacy of cat bathing have yielded inconsistent results. One study demonstrated a mean reduction of 79% in airborne Fel d 1 levels 3 h after immersing a cat in plain water, compared with 44% for a 60 s shampoo,⁵³ suggesting the former technique may be superior. Although consistent reductions in airborne Fel d 1 were seen 3 h after bathing, concentrations had returned to pre-bathing levels when measured a week later, even with weekly bathing.⁵³ Two other studies have shown a reduction in airborne Fel d 1 after bathing cats in water;^54,121 although one showed a progressive decline with weekly bathing of a single cat,¹²¹ the other showed a four- to five-fold reduction 3 h after bathing 12 cats, but that levels returned to baseline within 24 h.⁵⁴ One study failed to show any benefits from weekly bathing,¹²² and one other showed that concentrations of Fel d 1 on shaved skin returned to baseline levels 2 days after a water wash.⁴³

Collectively, although the methodology of these studies varied, the results suggest bathing cats may reduce environmental shedding of Fel d 1, but that any reduction is short-lived. While this could form part of a combined strategy to manage environmental Fel d 1, it would seem bathing two or three times weekly would be required, and any benefits would need to be carefully assessed against the potential stress this would cause for the cat and damage to the human-cat bond.

Hypoallergenic cats

There are many anecdotal reports about certain breeds of cats being less allergenic, but no scientific data to substantiate any claims.^123,124 Fel d 1 production varies between and within individual cats, and is partially influenced by testosterone levels.^45-49
,52-54 Although some cats appear to produce more Fel d 1 and may thus provoke stronger reactions in allergic individuals,⁵² all cats studied thus far produce Fel d 1.⁹⁵ A study of Siberian and domestic cats revealed numerous sequence variations in Fel d 1 genes, but whether these translate to differences in Fel d 1 production or Fel d 1 allergenicity is unknown.¹²⁵ In the future, gene editing and deletion of the Fel d 1 gene using ‘CRISPR’ (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats) technology might become available,¹²⁶ but the biological implications of this have yet to be explored.

Inducing autoimmunity to Fel d 1 in cats

Two studies have reported preliminary results of attempted immunisation of cats to induce anti-Fel d 1 autoantibodies.^127,128 The vaccine, which includes recombinant Fel d 1 and cucumber mosaic virus-like particles, induced a strong serum IgG response after a course of three injections, and resulted in reduced tear secretion of Fel d 1.¹²⁷ In an open label, uncontrolled field trial, 10 cat-allergic humans were enrolled with their 13 cats which received the vaccine.¹²⁸ Seven of nine peoplethat completed the study reported improvement in their symptom score with provocation (petting the cat), and 8/9 reported longer duration of cat interaction before symptom development at 24 weeks post-vaccination. Although initial results suggest vaccination of cats could help in reducing Fel d 1 secretion, at the time of writing this review the vaccine is not commercially available and, although no serious adverse events were reported, the long-term safety of vaccine-induced autoimmunity in cats would need to be assured.

Using a feline diet supplemented with anti-Fel d 1 IgY immunoglobulins

A novel approach to reducing Fel d 1 environmental contamination has focused on neutralising Fel d 1 after it has been produced (rendering it non-immunogenic) by using polyclonal chicken egg anti-Fel d 1 antibodies (IgY antibodies).^129-133 This approach blocks the human IgE-binding epitopes on Fel d 1,¹³⁰ but does not alter total Fel d 1 production by the cat, and thus may not interfere with any natural biological role for Fel d 1.

Chickens produce IgY antibodies against environmental antigens, which are transferred into eggs to provide passive immunity for the developing and newly hatched chicks.^134-136 Large quantities of ethically produced IgY can be purified from chicken eggs and used for passive immunoprophylaxis and, unlike mammalian immunoglobulins, IgY does not stimulate mammalian complement proteins, react with rheumatoid factors, or bind to mammalian Fc receptors.^136-140 Orally administered IgY antibodies have been safely used for decades in the prevention or treatment of a wide variety of conditions in both animals and humans, including bacterial or viral diar-rhoea,^140-144 bacterial-induced dental caries and periodontal disease,^140,144 gastrointestinal parasitic disease^140,145 and bacterial or viral respiratory diseases.¹⁴⁶

Initial in vitro and ex vivo research confirmed that specific anti-Fel d 1 polyclonal IgY antibodies successfully blocked the binding of Fel d 1-specific IgE from cat-allergic individuals, and reduced the release of inflammatory mediators.^130,133 Subsequently, studies were conducted in cats using a control diet or a test diet (same kibble but coated with anti-Fel d 1 IgY). In a pilot study, the test diet was able to neutralise an average of almost 30% of active (allergenic) Fel d 1 in cat saliva, with reductions seen as early as 2 weeks after starting the diet. In a subsequent controlled trial with 20 adult cats, the test diet produced a significant (24%) decrease in mean salivary active Fel d 1, with >80% of the cats showing ≥ 20% reduction (Figure 3).¹²⁹

Figure 3

Mean change from baseline in salivary active Fel d 1 (aFel d 1; ug/mr) in control cats (blue circles) and those fed the specific polyclonal immunoglobulin (sIgY)-supplemented diet (green diamonds). Asterisks indicate measurements significantly different from baseline (P <0.05). Adapted from Satyaraj et al (2019)¹²⁹

These studies demonstrated that the IgY-supplemented diet was able to neutralise Fel d 1 present in saliva, but whether additional neutralisation of cutaneous-origin Fel d 1 occurs as a result of saliva distribution of the IgY during grooming and licking remains to be determined. However, in a 12-week study of multiple hair samples collected from 105 cats that consumed the control diet for 2 weeks and then the test diet for 10 weeks, significant reductions in active Fel d 1 on hair samples were seen by week 3 of consuming the test diet, and by week 10 there was a mean 47% reduction in active Fel d 1 present (Figure 4).^131,133 Individual reductions ranged from33% to 71%,^131,133 with 86% of cats showing atleast a 30% reduction and half of the cats showing a reduction of at least 50%.¹³¹

Figure 4

Mean active Fel d 1 concentration from hair samples of 105 cats consuming an anti-Fel d 1 IgY-supplemented diet for 10 weeks. Concentrations in weeks 3-10 are all significantly (P <0.05) lower than baseline. Adapted from Satyaraj et al (2019)¹³¹

In a further study, eight cats were fed either the control or IgY-supplemented diet for 8 weeks and, during the last 4 weeks of feeding, blankets used by the cats as bedding were collected. Subsequently, 11 cat-allergic people(asthma sufferers excluded) were exposed to the blankets in a controlled chamber, serving as a provocation test, in a crossover design. Total nasal symptom scores were significantly lower with exposure to blankets from cats fed the IgY-supplemented diet, with significantly reduced nasal congestion, and some aspects of ocular scores were also lower, suggesting significant clinical improvements in cat-allergic individuals as a result of lower active Fel d 1 exposure.^130,133

Although further studies are needed to fully understand the potential impact of an anti-Fel d 1 IgY-supplemented diet, published data are very encouraging and the long-term safety of the diet has been established.¹⁴⁷ This new diet, which is a complete and balanced dry food coated with anti-Fel d 1 IgY, is now available commercially (Pro Plan LiveClear; Purina) and has been given the ‘Allergy Friendly Product Award’ by Allergy UK (allergyuk.org) in recognition that it may be of value in helping to manage cat allergies. The availability of this diet gives an opportunity for the veterinary healthcare team to be better involved in discussions with both owners and human healthcare professionals about combinations of measures that can be taken to help reduce the environmental burden of Fel d 1 while addressing important issues around cat welfare and the human-cat bond.

Other dietary strategies

Pezzali and others have speculated on specific dietary manipulations that might reduce sebum (and hence Fel d 1) production.¹⁴⁸ Theysuggested that polyphenols, phytoestrogenisoflavones and certain carotenoids could potentially influence testosterone concentrations or testosterone metabolism in entire male cats, thus influencing sebum and Fel d 1 production. Based on studies in other species, they also suggested that a diet with enhanced omega-3 fatty acids and a low glycaemic index might have the potential to reduce sebum concentrations. They noted that none of these dietary manipulations had been investigated in cats for the purpose of altering sebum (and Fel d 1) production.

At present, the role of manipulating the nutritional profile of the diet remains speculative, although one abstract published in 2005¹⁴⁹ suggested that cats fed one of two different diets might have experienced differences in long-term Fel d 1 production, although details of the cats, diets and study design were lacking. Based on these data it is at least possible that manipulation of certain nutrients might have a role to play in helping to reduce Fel d 1 production, and further studies are warranted.

Medications to manage cat allergy

Although largely beyond the scope of this review, Table 3 outlines the major pharmaco-therapeutic agents used for symptomatic control of cat and other respiratory allergies. Medication is adjusted in a stepwise approach according to the severity of symptoms and the response to therapy.

Table 3

Commonly recommended therapeutic optionsfor human allergic rhinitis and asthma

	Allergic rhinitis ^{87,88,100,101,150}	Asthma ^97,151-154
✜ First-line/major treatment options	✜ Intranasal corticosteroids (eg, fluticasone, beclomethasone, mometasone, budesonide) ✜ Intranasal antihistamines (eg, azelastine, olopatadine) ✜ Oral second-generation antihistamines (eg, cetirizine, loratidine, desloratadine, bilastine, fexofenadine, levocetrizine)	✜ Inhaled corticosteroids (eg, fluticasone, budesonide, mometasone) ✜ Inhaled long-acting β-2 agonists (eg, salmeterol, formoterol) ✜ Inhaled short-acting β-2 agonists (eg, salbutamol, terbutaline)
✜ Second-line or adjuvant options	✜ Intranasal cromolyn ✜ Intranasal anticholinergics (eg, ipratropium) ✜ Leukotriene receptor antagonists	✜ Long-acting inhaled anticholinergics (eg, tiotropium) ✜ Antihistamines prior to exposure ✜ Leukotriene receptor antagonists ✜ Theophylline ✜ Anti-IgE antibodies ✜ Anti-IL-5 antibodies ✜ Anti-IL-5 receptor antibodies ✜ Anti-IL-4 antibodies

Immunotherapy for cat allergy

Allergen immunotherapy, while not always successful, is recommended for people suffering moderate to severe allergic rhinitis or asthma that is inadequately controlled with pharmacotherapy.^150,155 Both subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) have been recommended for the management of cat allergies,^{7,87,88,100,101,155,156} but there are relatively few good trials of allergen immunotherapy in cats and results have been mixed.^7,156-158 It has been suggested that some cat-allergic patients are likely to benefit from allergen immunotherapy, but that larger studies are required for developing definitive advice.^7,157

Although the mechanism(s) by which allergen-specific immunotherapy benefit the patient are still poorly understood, the induction of allergen-specific IgG molecules (especially IgG4) that compete with IgE for epitope-binding is one possibility.¹⁵⁹ Studies of recombinant-blocking monoclonal IgG4 against Fel d 1 have demonstrated that administration in cat-allergic humans may block IgE binding to Fel d 1, reduce clinical symptoms and act much more rapidly than allergen-specific immunotherapy,¹⁶⁰ and thus may have a role in clinical management.

Key points

✜ A combination of different control measures is likely to be most successful in reducing Fel d 1 concentrations in the home (and elsewhere), but not all recommendations are necessarily easy to follow and some may damage the human-cat bond.

✜ There is an important role for the veterinary healthcare team in contributing to discussions on how Fel d 1 exposure can be reduced, in ways that maintain cat welfare.

✜ The recent introduction of a cat diet that is capable of reducing active Fel d 1 in saliva, hair and bedding has the potential to contribute appreciably to JM environmental control.

Conclusions

Human sensitisation to cat allergens is a common problem and, although cat-allergic owners may spend less time in close contact with their cat in an attempt to avoid provoking symptoms,¹⁶¹ it is clear that contamination of the environment with Fel d 1 is a major source of exposure and risk. Recommendations to remove the cat from the home are rarely followed, and thus efforts to reduce the environmental allergen load, combined with pharmacotherapy and allergen immunotherapy where necessary, are important.

Footnotes

Conflict of interest

The author provides consultancy services to the Purina Institute () but neither the Purina Institute nor Nestlé Purina exerted any editorial control over the content of this review.

Funding

The author received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Ethical approval

This work did not involve the use of animals and therefore ethical approval was not specifically required for publication in JFMS.

Informed consent

This work did not involve the use of animals (including cadavers) and therefore informed consent was not required. No animals or people are identifiable within this publication, and therefore additional informed consent for publication was not required.

References

Baldacci

Maio

Cerrai

, et al. Allergy and asthma: effects of the exposureto particulate matter and biological allergens. Respir Med 2015; 109:1089–1104.

Bonnet

Messaoudi

Jacomet

, et al. An update on molecular cat allergens:Fel d 1 and what else? Chapter 1: Fel d 1, the major cat allergen.Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol 2018; 14. DOI: 10.1186/s13223-018-0239-8.

Custovic

Simpson

Woodcock

Importance of indoor allergensin the induction of allergy and elicitation of allergic disease. Allergy 1998;53: 115–120.

Galant

Berger

Gillman

, et al. Prevalence of sensitization to aero -allergens in California patients with respiratory allergy. Allergy Skin TestProject Team. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 1998; 81: 203–210.

Sly

RM.

Changing prevalence of allergic rhinitis and asthma. Ann AllergyAsthma Immunol 1999; 82: 233–248; quiz 248–252.

Grönlund

Saarne

Gafvelin

, et al. The major cat allergen, Fel d 1,in diagnosis and therapy. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2010; 151: 265–274.

Dávila

Domínguez-Ortega

Navarro-Pulido

, et al. Consensus documenton dog and cat allergy. Allergy 2018; 73: 1206–1222.

Bousquet

P-J

Chinn

Janson

, et al. Geographical variation in the prevalenceof positive skin tests to environmental aeroallergens in theEuropean Community Respiratory Health Survey I. Allergy 2007; 62:301–309.

Konradsen

Fujisawa

van Hage

, et al. Allergy to furry animals:new insights, diagnostic approaches, and challenges. J Allergy ClinImmunol 2015; 135: 616–625.

10.

Kim

Jahan

Kabir

A review on human health perspective ofair pollution with respect to allergies and asthma. Environ Int 2013; 59:41–52.

11.

Chan

Leung

DYM

. Dog and cat allergies: current state of diagnosticapproaches and challenges. Allergy Asthma Immunol Res 2018; 10:97–105.

12.

Al-Ahmad

Jusufovic

Arifhodzic

, et al. Sensitization to cat: when isnasal challenge needed? Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2019; 179: 108–113.

13.

Zahradnik

Raulf

Animal allergens and their presence in theenvironment. Front Immunol 2014; 5: 76. DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2014.00076.

14.

Eder

Becker

San Nicoló

, et al. Usefulness of component resolvedanalysis of cat allergy in routine clinical practice. Allergy Asthma ClinImmunol 2016; 12: 58. DOI: 10.1186/s13223-016-0163-8.

15.

Murray

Ferguson

Morrison

. The frequency and severity ofcat allergy vs. Dog allergy in atopic children. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1983;72: 145–149.

16.

Al-Mousawi

Lovel

Behbehani

, et al. Asthma andsensitization in a community with low indoor allergen levelsand low pet-keeping frequency. J Allergy Clin Immunol2004; 114: 1389–1394.

17.

Asarnoj

Hamsten

Wadén

, et al. Sensitization tocat and dog allergen molecules in childhood and predictionof symptoms of cat and dog allergy in adolescence:a BAMSE/MeDALL study. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2016; 137:813–821.e7.

18.

Nwaru

Suzuki

Ekerljung

, et al. Furry animal allergencomponent sensitization and clinical outcomes in adultasthma and rhinitis. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2019; 7:1230–1238.e4.

19.

Vachová

Panzner

Vlas

, et al. Analysis of sensitizationprofiles in Central European allergy patients focused on animalallergen molecules. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2020; 181: 278–284.

20.

Park

Lim

Park

, et al. Changes in allergen sensitizationover the last 30 years in Korea respiratory allergicpatients: a single-center. Allergy Asthma Immunol Res 2014; 6:434–443.

21.

Suzuki

Nwaru

Ekerljung

, et al. Characterization ofsensitization to furry animal allergen components in anadult population. Clin Exp Allergy 2019; 49: 495–505.

22.

Custovic

Green

Fletcher

, et al. Aerodynamic propertiesof the major dog allergen Can f 1: distribution in homes,concentration, and particle size of allergen in the air. Am JRespir Crit Care Med 1997; 155: 94–98.

23.

Custovic

Chapman

. Indoor allergens as a riskfactor for asthma. In: Barnes

Grunstein

Leff

, et al (eds). Asthma. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1997,pp 83–103.

24.

Custovic

Simpson

Pahdi

, et al. Distribution, aero -dynamic characteristics, and removal of the major cat allergenFel d 1 in British homes. Thorax 1998; 53: 33–38.

25.

Reisacher

WR.

Allergy treatment: environmental controlstrategies. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2011; 44: 711–725.

26.

Bousquet

, et al; Aria Workshop Group; World HealthOrganization. Allergic rhinitis and its effect on asthma.J Allergy Clin Immunol 2001; 108: S147–S334.

27.

Smith

O’Neil

Hales

, et al. Two newly identified catallergens: the von Ebner gland protein Fel d 7 and thelatherin-like protein Fel d 8. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2011;156: 159–170.

28.

de Groot

van Swieten

Aalberse

. Evidence for aFel d I-like molecule in the “big cats” (Felidae species).J Allergy Clin Immunol 1990; 86: 107–116.

29.

Dolgova

Sudina

Cherkashina

, et al. Componentresolvedmicroarray analysis of IgE sensitization profiles toFelis catus major allergen molecules in Russian cat-allergicpatients. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 2018; 78: 81–86.

30.

Zahradnik

Raulf

Respiratory allergens from furredmammals: environmental and occupational exposure. VetSci 2017; 4: 38. DOI: 10.3390/vetsci4030038.

31.

Ukleja-Sokołowska

Gawrońska-Ukleja

Żbikowska-Gotz

, et al. Analysis of feline and canine allergen componentsin patients sensitized to pets. Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol2016; 12: 61. DOI: 10.1186/s13223-016-0167-4.

32.

Yamamoto

Ishibashi

Sugiura

, et al. Crystal structureof the dog allergen Can f 6 and structure-based implicationsof its cross-reactivity with the cat allergen Fel d 4. Sci Rep2019; 9: 1503. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-38134-w.

33.

Apostolovic

Sánchez-Vidaurre

Waden

, et al. The catlipocalin Fel d 7 and its cross-reactivity with the doglipocalin Can f 1. Allergy 2016; 71: 1490–1495.

34.

Charpin

Mata

Charpin

, et al. Fel d I allergen distributionin cat fur and skin. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1991; 88: 77–82.

35.

Dabrowski

Van der Brempt

Soler

, et al. Cat skin asan important source of Fel d I allergen. J Allergy Clin Immunol1990; 86: 462–465.

36.

Anderson

Baer

Ohman

JL.

A comparative studyof the allergens of cat urine, serum, saliva, and pelt. J AllergyClin Immunol 1985; 76: 563–569.

37.

Brown

Leitermann

Ohman

Jr . Distribution ofcat allergen 1 in cat tissues and fluids. Int Arch Allergy ApplImmunol 1984; 74: 67–70.

38.

Mata

Charpin

, et al. Fel d I allergen: skin andor saliva? Ann Allergy 1992; 69: 321–322.

39.

Bartholome

Kissler

Baer

, et al. Where does cat allergen1 come from? J Allergy Clin Immunol 1985; 76: 503 –506.

40.

Kelly

Karsh

Marcelo

, et al. Fel d 1 and Fel d 4 levelsin cat fur, saliva, and urine [Letter]. J Allergy Clin Immunol2018; 142: 1990–1992.e3.

41.

van Milligen

Vroom

Aalberse

RC.

Presence of Felis domesticus allergen I in the cat’s salivary and lacrimalglands. Int Arch Allergy Appl Immunol 1990; 92: 375–378.

42.

De Andrade

Birnbaum

Magalon

, et al. Fel d I levelsin cat anal glands. Clin Exp Allergy 1996; 26: 178–180.

43.

Carayol

Birnbaum

Magnan

, et al. Fel d 1 productionin the cat skin varies according to anatomical sites. Allergy2000; 55: 570–573.

44.

Noel

DL.

Cats use hollow papillae to wick salivainto fur. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2018; 115: 12377–12382.

45.

Bienboire-Frosini

Cozzi

Lafont-Lecuelle

, et al.Immunological differences in the global release of themajor cat allergen Fel d 1 are influenced by sex andbehaviour. Vet J 2012; 193: 162–167.

46.

Jalil-Colome

de Andrade

Birnbaum

, et al. Sex differencein Fel d 1 allergen production. J Allergy Clin Immunol1996; 98: 165–168.

47.

Ramadour

Birnbaum

Magalon

, et al. Cat sex differencesin major allergen production (Fel d 1). J Allergy ClinImmunol 1998; 101: 282–284.

48.

Zielonka

Charpin

Berbis

, et al. Effects of castrationand testosterone on Fel dI production by sebaceous glandsof male cats: I – immunological assessment. Clin Exp Allergy1994; 24: 1169–1173.

49.

Bastien

Gardner

Satyaraj

Influence of time andphenotype on salivary Fel d1 in domestic shorthair cats.J Feline Med Surg 2019; 21: 867–874.

50.

Nicholas

Wegienka

Havstad

, et al. Influence of catcharacteristics on Fel d 1 levels in the home. Ann AllergyAsthma Immunol 2008; 101: 47–50.

51.

Siebers

Healy

Holt

, et al. Fel d 1 levels in domestic livingrooms are not related to cat color or hair length [Letter].J Allergy Clin Immunol 2001; 108: 652–653.

52.

Wentz

Swanson

Reed

CE.

Variability of catallergenshedding. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1990; 85: 94–98.

53.

Avner

Perzanowski

Platts-Millsi

TAE

, et al.Evaluation of different techniques for washing cats:quantitation of allergen removed from the cat and the effecton airborne Fel d 1. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1997; 100: 307–312.

54.

Nageotte

Park

Havstad

, et al. Duration of airborneFel d 1 reduction after cat washing. J Allergy Clin Immunol2006; 118: 521 –;522.

55.

Kaiser

Velickovic

Badia-Martinez

, et al. Structuralcharacterization of the tetrameric form of the major cat allergenFel d 1. J Mol Biol 2007; 370: 714–727.

56.

Ligabue-Braun

Sachett

Pol-Fachin

, et al. The calciumgoes meow: effects of ions and glycosylation on Fel d 1,the major cat allergen. PLoS One 2015; 10: e0132311.DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0132311.

57.

Bienboire-Frosini

Durairaj

Pelosi

, et al. The major catallergen Fel d 1 binds steroid and fatty acid semiochemicals:a combined in silico and in vitro study. Int J Mol Sci 2020; 21:1365. DOI: 10.3390/ijms21041365.

58.

Durairaj

Pageat

Bienboire-Frosini

Another cat andmouse game: deciphering the evolution of the SCGB super-familyand exploring the molecular similarity of major catallergen Fel d 1 and mouse ABP using computationalapproaches. PLoS One 2018; 13: e0197618. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0197618.

59.

Erwin

Woodfolk

Custis

, et al. Animal danders.Immunol Allergy Clin North Am 2003; 23: 469–481.

60.

Liccardi

D’Amato

Russo

, et al. Focus on cat allergen(Fel d 1): immunological and aerodynamic characteristics,modality of airway sensitization and avoidance strategies.Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2003; 132: 1–12.

61.

Pomés

Chapman

Wünschmann

Indoor allergensand allergic respiratory disease. Curr Allergy AsthmaRep 2016; 16: 43. DOI: 10.1007/s11882-016-0622-9.

62.

Platts-Mills

Ward

Sporik

, et al. Epidemiology ofthe relationship between exposure to indoor allergens andasthma. Int Arch Allergy Appl Immunol 1991; 94: 339–345.

63.

Liccardi

Barber

Russo

, et al. Human hair: anunexpected source of cat allergen exposure. Int Arch AllergyImmunol 2005; 137: 141–144.

64.

Esty

Permaul

DeLoreto

, et al. Asthma and allergies inthe school environment. Clin Rev Allergy Immunol 2019; 57:415–426.

65.

Custovic

Taggart

Woodcock

House dust miteand cat allergen in different indoor environments. Clin ExpAllergy 1994; 24: 1164–1168.

66.

Siebers

Jones

Bailey

, et al. Indoor allergen exposure inprimary school classrooms in New Zealand. N Z Med J 2019;132: 42 –47.

67.

Möhrenschlager

Ring

Lauener

Possible in-cabinexposure to cat allergen: a 2010 airline survey on live animaltransport and a review of literature. Allergy 2010; 86:1496–1498.

68.

Martin

Wickens

Patchett

, et al. Cat allergen levels inpublic places in New Zealand. N Z Med J 1998; 111: 356–358.

69.

Custovic

Fletcher

Pickering

, et al. Domesticallergens in public places III: house dust mite, cat, dog andcockroach allergens in British hospitals. Clin Exp Allergy1998; 28: 53–59.

70.

Gulbahar

Sin

Mete

, et al. Sensitization to cat allergensin non-cat owner patients with respiratory allergy.Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2003; 90: 635–639.

71.

Heinrich

Bedada

Zock

, et al. Cat allergen level:its determinants and relationship to specific IgE to catacross European centers. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2006; 118:674–681.

72.

Ichikawa

Iwasaki

Baba

, et al. High prevalence ofsensitization to cat allergen among Japanese childrenwith asthma, living without cats. Clin Exp Allergy 1999; 29:754–761.

73.

Ingram

Sporik

Rose

, et al. Quantitative assessmentof exposure to dog (Can f 1) and cat (Fel d 1) allergens:relation to sensitization and asthma among children livingin Los Alamos, New Mexico. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1995; 96:449–456.

74.

Niesler

Ścigała

Łudzeń-Izbińska

Cat (Fel d 1) anddog (Can f 1) allergen levels in cars, dwellings and schools.Aerobiologia (Bologna) 2016; 32: 571–580.

75.

Norbäck

Gui-Hong

Kreft

, et al. Cat, dog and horseallergens in Swedish day care centres – associations withfractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) among day carecentre staff. Glob J Health Sci 2016; 8: 24–35.

76.

Salo

Arbes

Crockett

, et al. Exposure to multipleindoor allergens in US homes and its relationship toasthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2008; 121: 678 –684.e2.

77.

Salo

Wilkerson

Rose

, et al. Bedroom allergen exposuresin US households. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2018; 141:1870–1879.e14.

78.

Sander

Neumann

Lotz

, et al. Allergen quantificationin surface dust samples from German day care centers.J Toxicol Environ Health A 2016; 79: 1094–1105.

79.

Woodcock

Addo-Yobo

Taggart

, et al. Pet allergenlevels in homes in Ghana and the United Kingdom. J AllergyClin Immunol 2001; 108: 463–465.

80.

Zhang

Chew

Soh

, et al. Prevalence and distributionof indoor allergens in Singapore. Clin Exp Allergy 1997; 27:876–885.

81.

Almqvist

Larsson

Egmar

A-C

, et al. School as a riskenvironment for children allergic to cats and a site for transferof cat allergen to homes. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1999; 103:1012–1017.

82.

van der Brempt

Charpin

Haddi

, et al. Cat removal andFel d I levels in mattresses. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1991; 87:595 –596.

83.

Arbes

Cohn

Yin

, et al. Dog allergen (Can f 1) andcat allergen (Fel d 1) in US homes: results from the NationalSurvey of Lead and Allergens in Housing. J Allergy ClinImmunol 2004; 114: 111–117.

84.

Singh

Hays

. Indoor and outdoor allergies. Prim Care 2016; 43: 451–463.

85.

Cid

Perez-Mateluna

Iturriaga

, et al. Is there an associationbetween indoor allergens and the severity of atopicdermatitis? Int J Dermatol 2019; 58: 433–439.

86.

Siah

KTH

Santosa

Cheung

CKY

, et al. Atopic patientswho fulfilled Rome III criteria for irritable bowel syndromehad higher animal danders sensitization. J NeurogastroenterolMotil 2020; 26: 267–273.

87.

Wise

Lin

Toskala

, et al. International consensusstatement on allergy and rhinology: allergic rhinitis. IntForum Allergy Rhinol 2018; 8: 108–352.

88.

Scadding

Kariyawasam

Scadding

, et al. BSACIguideline for the diagnosis and management of allergic andnon-allergic rhinitis (revised edition 2017; first edition2007). Clin Exp Allergy 2017; 47: 856–889.

89.

Ukleja-Sokołowska

Gawrońska-Ukleja

Żbikowska-Gotz

, et al. Analysis of feline and canine allergen componentsin patients sensitized to pets. Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol2016; 12: 61. DOI: 10.1186/s13223-016-0167-4.

90.

Ahlstedt

Murray

CS.

In vitro diagnosis of allergy:how to interpret IgE antibody results in clinical practice.Prim Care Respir J 2006; 15: 228–236.

91.

Smoldovskaya

Feyzkhanova

Arefieva

, et al. Allergenextracts and recombinant proteins: comparison of efficiencyof in vitro allergy diagnostics using multiplex assay on abiological microchip. Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol 2016; 12: 9.DOI: 10.1186/s13223-016-0117-1.

92.

Klepeis

Nelson

Ott

, et al. The National HumanActivity Pattern Survey (NHAPS): a resource for assessingexposure to environmental pollutants. J Expo Anal EnvironEpidemiol 2001; 11: 231–252.

93.

Galvão

CES

Graudenz

Kalil

, et al. Sensitization to catallergen and its association with respiratory allergies: crosssectionalstudy. Sao Paulo Med J 2017; 135: 488–490.

94.

Dharmage

Lodge

Matheson

, et al. Exposure tocats: update on risks for sensitization and allergic diseases.Curr Allergy Asthma Rep 2012; 12: 413–423.

95.

Portnoy

Kennedy

Sublett

, et al. Environmentalassessment and exposure control: a practice parameter –furry animals. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2012; 108:223.E1–223.E15. DOI: 10.1016/j.anai.2012.02.015.

96.

Salo

Arbes

Jaramillo

, et al. Prevalence of allergicsensitization in the United States: results from the NationalHealth and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES)2005–2006. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2014; 134: 350–359.

97.

Ling

Long

AA.

Pet dander and difficult-to-controlasthma: therapeutic options. Allergy Asthma Proc 2010; 31:385–391.

98.

Bateman

Hurd

Barnes

, et al. Global strategy forasthma management and prevention: GINA executivesummary. Eur Respir J 2008; 31: 143–178.

99.

Shirai

Matsui

Suzuki

, et al. Effect of pet removal onpet allergic asthma. Chest 2005; 127: 1565–1571.

100.

Seidman

Gurgel

Lin

, et al. Clinical practiceguideline: allergic rhinitis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2015;152: S1–43.

101.

Wallace

DV.

Pet dander and perennial allergic rhinitis:therapeutic options. Allergy Asthma Proc 2009; 30: 573–583.

102.

Cosme-Blanco

Arce-Ayala

Malinow

, et al. Primary andsecondary environmental control measures for allergicdiseases. In: Mahmoudi

Craig

Ledford

(eds). Allergyand asthma. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2018, pp 1–36.

103.

Wood

Chapman

Adkinson

, et al. The effect ofcat removal on allergen content in household-dust samples.J Allergy Clin Immunol 1989; 83: 730–734.

104.

Chan-Yeung

Ferguson

Dimich-Ward

, et al.Effectiveness of and compliance to intervention measuresin reducing house dust and cat allergen levels. Ann AllergyAsthma Immunol 2002; 88: 52–58.

105.

Poole

King

Suphioglu

Effectiveness of vacuumingand carpet washing in the removal of the major catallergen, Fel d 1 [Letter]. Allergy 2020; 75: 2694–2695.

106.

Busse

Wang

Halm

. Allergen sensitization evaluationand allergen avoidance education in an inner-cityadult cohort with persistent asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol2005; 116: 146–152.

107.

Coren

Allergic patients do not comply with doctors’advice to stop owning pets [Letter]. BMJ 1997; 314: 517.

108.

Sánchez

Díez

Cardona

Pet avoidance in allergycases: is it possible to implement it?

Biomedica 2015; 35:357–362.

109.

Human Animal Bond Research Institute. New survey showscat owners with cat allergen sensitivities go to extraordinarylengths to manage cat allergens. https://habri.org/pressroom/20200514 (2020, accessed 17 September 2021).

110.

Custovic

Simpson

The role of inhalant allergens inallergic airways disease. J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol 2012;22: 393–401.

111.

Mills

Karagiannis

Zulch

Stress – its effects onhealth and behavior: a guide for practitioners. Vet Clin NorthAm Small Anim Pract 2014; 44: 525–541.

112.

Rioja-Lang

Bacon

Connor

, et al. Determining prioritywelfare issues for cats in the United Kingdom using expertconsensus. Vet Rec Open 2019; 6: e000365. DOI: 10.1136/vetreco-2019-000365.

113.

Adamelli

Marinelli

Normando

, et al. Owner and catfeatures influence the quality of life of the cat. Appl AnimBehav Sci 2005; 94: 89–98.

114.

Vitale Shreve

Mehrkam

Udell

MAR.

Social interaction,food, scent or toys? A formal assessment of domesticpet and shelter cat (Felis silvestris catus) preferences.Behav Processes 2017; 141: 322–328.

115.

Björnsdottir

Jakobinudottir

Runarsdottir

, et al. Theeffect of reducing levels of cat allergen (Fel d 1) on clinicalsymptoms in patients with cat allergy. Ann Allergy AsthmaImmunol 2003; 91: 189–194.

116.

Gherasim

de Blay

Does air filtration work for catallergen exposure?

Curr Allergy Asthma Rep 2020; 20: 18.DOI: 10.1007/s11882-020-00912-w.

117.

Gherasim

Jacob

Schoettel

, et al. Efficacy of air cleanersin asthmatics allergic to cat in ALYATEC® environmentalexposure chamber. Clin Exp Allergy 2020; 50: 160–169.

118.

Morgan

Crain

Gruchalla

, et al. Results of a homebasedenvironmental intervention among urban childrenwith asthma. N Engl J Med 2004; 351: 1068 –1080.

119.

Stillerman

Nachtsheim

, et al. Efficacy of a novel airfiltration pillow for avoidance of perennial allergens insymptomatic adults. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2010; 104:440–449.

120.

Karlsson

Andersson

Renström

, et al. Airborne catallergen reduction in classrooms that use special schoolclothing or ban pet ownership. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2004;113: 1172–1177.

121.

de Blay

Chapman

Platts-Mills

. Airborne catallergen (Fel d I). Environmental control with the cat in situ.Am Rev Respir Dis 1991; 143: 1334–1339.

122.

Klucka

Ownby

Green

, et al. Cat shedding of Fel d I is not reduced by washings, Allerpet-C spray, or acepromazine. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1995; 95: 1164–1171.

123.

Butt

Rashid

Lockey

RF.

Do hypoallergenic catsand dogs exist?

Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2012; 108:74–76.

124.

Lockey

RF.

The myth of hypoallergenic dogs (and cats)[Editorial]. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2012; 130: 910–911.

125.

Sartore

Landoni

Maione

, et al. Polymorphism analysisof Ch1 and Ch2 genes in the Siberian cat. Vet Sci 2017; 4: 63.DOI: 10.3390/vetsci4040063.

126.

Brackett

Riedy

Adli

, et al. Gene editing the major catallergen, Fel d 1, using CRISPR-Cas9 [Abstract]. J AllergyClin Immunol 2020; 145: AB156.

127.

Thoms

Jennings

Maudrich

, et al. Immunization ofcats to induce neutralizing antibodies against Fel d 1, themajor feline allergen in human subjects. J Allergy ClinImmunol 2019; 144: 193–203.

128.

Thoms

Haas

Erhart

, et al. Immunization of catsagainst Fel d 1 results in reduced allergic symptoms ofowners. Viruses 2020; 12. 288. DOI: 10.3390/v12030288.

129.

Satyaraj

Sun

, et al. Anti-Fel d1 immunoglobulin Yantibody-containing egg ingredient lowers allergen levelsin cat saliva. J Feline Med Surg 2019; 21: 875–881.

130.

Satyaraj

Sun

Fel d1 blocking antibodies against themajor cat allergen Fel d1 [Abstract]. Allergy 2019; 74: 324.

131.

Satyaraj

Gardner

Filipi

, et al. Reduction of active Feld1 from cats using an antiFel d1 egg IgY antibody. ImmunInflamm Dis 2019; 7: 68–73.

132.

Wedner

Mantia

Satyaraj

, et al. Feeding cats eggproduct with polyclonal-anti-Fel d1 antibodies decreasesenvironmental Fel d1 and allergic response: a proof ofconcept study. J Allergy Infect Dis 2021; 2: 1–8.

133.

Satyaraj

Wedner

Bousquet

Keep the cat, changethe care pathway: a transformational approach to managingFel d 1, the major cat allergen. Allergy 2019; 74 Suppl 107: 5–17.

134.

Bedrani

Helloin

Guyot

, et al. Passive maternalexposure to environmental microbes selectively modulatesthe innate defences of chicken egg white by increasingsome of its antibacterial activities. BMC Microbiol 2013; 13:128. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2180-13-128.

135.

Hamal

Burgess

Pevzner

, et al. Maternal antibodytransfer from dams to their egg yolks, egg whites, andchicks in meat lines of chickens. Poult Sci 2006; 85:1364–1372.

136.

Pereira

EPV

van Tilburg

Florean

EOPT

, et al. Egg yolkantibodies (IgY) and their applications in human andveterinary health: a review. Int Immunopharmacol 2019; 73:293–303.

137.

Larsson

Sjöquist

Chicken IgY: utilizing the evolutionarydifference. Comp Immunol Microbiol Infect Dis 1990; 13:199–201.

138.

Vega

Bok

Vlasova

, et al. IgY antibodies protectagainst human rotavirus induced diarrhea in the neonatalgnotobiotic piglet disease model. PLoS One 2012; 7: e42788.DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0042788.

139.

Zhang

Calvert

Sutton

, et al. IgY: a key isotype inantibody evolution. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 2017; 92:2144–2156.

140.

Schade

Calzado

Sarmiento

, et al. Chicken egg yolkantibodies (IgY-technology): a review of progress in productionand use in research and human and veterinarymedicine. Altern Lab Anim 2005; 33: 129–154.

141.

Diraviyam

Zhao

Wang

, et al. Effect of chicken eggyolk antibodies (IgY) against diarrhea in domesticatedanimals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2014; 9: e97716. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0097716.

142.

Wang

Zhen

, et al. Chicken egg yolk antibodies(IgY) as non-antibiotic production enhancers for use inswine production: a review. J Anim Sci Biotechnol 2015; 6: 40.DOI: 10.1186/s40104-015-0038-8.

143.

Spillner

Braren

Greunke

, et al. Avian IgY antibodiesand their recombinant equivalents in research, diagnosticsand therapy. Biologicals 2012; 40: 313–322.

144.

Leiva

Gallardo

Casanova

, et al. IgY-technology(egg yolk antibodies) in human medicine: a review ofpatents and clinical trials. Int Immunopharmacol 2020; 81:106269. DOI: 10.1016/j.intimp.2020.106269.

145.

Thirumalai

Visaga Ambi

Vieira-Pires

, et al. Chickenegg yolk antibody (IgY) as diagnostics and therapeutics inparasitic infections – a review. Int J Biol Macromol 2019; 136:755–763.

146.

Abbas

El-Kafrawy

Sohrab

, et al. IgY antibodies forthe immunoprophylaxis and therapy of respiratory infections.Hum Vaccin Immunother 2019; 15: 264–275.

147.

Matulka

Thompson

Corley

. Multi-level safetystudies of anti Fel d 1 IgY ingredient in cat food. Front Vet Sci2019; 6: 477. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2019.00477.

148.

Pezzali

Smith

Aldrich

CG.

An overview of the effectof diet on the allergenicity of cats to susceptible humans.SOJ Vet Sci 2018; 4: 1–9. DOI: 10.15226/2381-2907/4/2/00151.

149.

Arlian

Morgan

Neal

, et al. Influence of diet on Feld 1 production by cats [Abstract]. J Allergy Clinical Immunol 2005; 115: S236.

150.

Bousquet

Pfaar

Togias

, et al. 2019 ARIA Care pathwaysfor allergen immunotherapy. Allergy 2019; 74:2087–2102.

151.

Chung

Paton

JY.

Two sides of the same coin? –Treatment of chronic asthma in children and adults. FrontPediatr 2019; 7: 62. DOI: 10.3389/fped.2019.00062.

152.

Côté

Godbout

Boulet

L-P.

The management ofsevere asthma in 2020. Biochem Pharmacol 2020; 179: 114112.DOI: 10.1016/j.bcp.2020.114112.

153.

Asthma

GIF

. Pocket guide for asthma management and prevention.Global Initiative for Asthma. https://ginasthma.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Main-pocket-guide_2020_04_03-final-wms.pdf (2020 accessed 17 September 2021).

154.

Nakamura

Tamaoki

Nagase

, et al. Japanese guidelinesfor adult asthma 2020. Allergol Int 2020; 69: 519–548.

155.

Jutel

Agache

Bonini

, et al. International consensus onallergy immunotherapy. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2015; 136:556–568.

156.

Alvaro-Lozano

Akdis

, et al. EAACI allergenimmunotherapy user’s guide. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 2020;31 Suppl 25: 1–101.

157.

Dhami

Agarwal

. Does evidence support the use ofcat allergen immunotherapy? Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol2018; 18: 350–355.

158.

Dhami

Kakourou

Asamoah

, et al. Allergenimmunotherapy for allergic asthma: a systematic reviewand meta-analysis. Allergy 2017; 72: 1825–1848.

159.

Wachholz

Durham

SR.

Mechanisms of immunotherapy:IgG revisited. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2004; 4: 313–318.

160.

Orengo

Radin

Kamat

, et al. Treating cat allergywith monoclonal IgG antibodies that bind allergen andprevent IgE engagement. Nat Commun 2018; 9: 1421. DOI:10.1038/s41467-018-03636-8.

161.

Yang

Lee

Kwon

, et al. Dog and cat allergies andallergen avoidance measures in Korean adult pet ownerswho participated in a pet exhibition. Allergy Asthma ImmunolRes 2018; 10: 155–164.

Human allergy to cats: A review for veterinarians on prevalence,causes,symptoms and control

Abstract

Practical relevance:

Aim:

Evidence base:

Keywords

Prevalence of human allergy to cats

Causes of cat allergy

Clinical symptoms and diagnosis of cat allergy

Methods for managing cat allergy

Reducing cat allergen exposure

Removing the cat from the home

Restricting access of the cat within the home environment

Onmental modification and cleaning

Bathing the cat

Hypoallergenic cats

Inducing autoimmunity to Fel d 1 in cats

Using a feline diet supplemented with anti-Fel d 1 IgY immunoglobulins

Other dietary strategies

Medications to manage cat allergy

Immunotherapy for cat allergy

Key points

Conclusions

Footnotes

Conflict of interest

Funding

Ethical approval

Informed consent

References