Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE OF REVIEW/OBJECTIVE:This review incorporates findings from studies of oral food challenges (OFC) over the last decade and highlights the latest innovations and understanding of the procedure. RECENT FINDINGS/RESULTS:PRACTALL guidelines are widely used in OFC research, but there is still no international consensus on the OFC protocol in clinical practice. Guidelines for performing OFC in clinical practice have been updated to include oral food challenges for infants. There have been advances in predictive models for outcomes and severity of reaction during OFC that take into account multiple clinical data as well as newer laboratory modalities. Low-dose OFC and eliciting threshold dose determination are being examined for additional diagnostic and therapeutic use in the management of food allergy. Quality-of-life considerations have also been reviewed, as well as post-OFC assessment and care. The OFC remains an important diagnostic tool in the management of food allergy and in clinical research. Advances in the field should improve safety and broaden the clinical applications of this essential procedure.

Food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES) is a non IgE-mediated gastrointestinal food allergy that presents with delayed vomiting after ingestion primarily in infants. While the pathophysiology of FPIES is poorly understood, the clinical presentation of acute FPEIS reactions has been well characterized. The first International Consensus Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Food Protein-induced Enterocolitis Syndrome were published in 2017 and reviewed epidemiology, clinical presentation, and prognosis of acute and chronic FPIES. The workgroup outlined clinical phenotypes, proposed diagnostic criteria, and made recommendations on management. This article summarizes the guidelines and adds recent updates. FPIES is gaining recognition, however there continues to be delays in diagnosis and misdiagnosis due to overlap of symptoms with over conditions, lack of a diagnostic test, and because some of the common trigger foods are not thought of as allergenic. More research into disease mechanisms and factors influencing differences between populations is needed.

Baked milk (BM) and baked egg (BE) diets are increasingly used in the management of milk and egg allergy, rather than avoidance. Children with tolerance versus reactivity to BM and BE may have smaller skin prick test and lower specific IgE, and BM-tolerant children have less basophil reactivity and more peripheral T regulatory cells. However, most milk- and egg-allergic children tolerate BM and BE and an individual's reactivity is unpredictable. Non-reactivity is due to conformational changes in the allergens. Significant differences in the published advice about methods of introduction exist from graded introduction at home to a medically supervised full dose. These approaches carry different risks and may have different immunological effects. Reactivity to BM is a predictor of a severe milk allergy. Therefore, medical supervision for BM and BE introduction is prudent. The baked diet allows dietary liberation. Most, but not all, BM- and BE-tolerant children continue eating the baked foods. The prognosis of children who can eat BM and BE is favorable with likely resolution of their allergy over the next few years. Murine models of BE diets demonstrate that heated egg can impart clinical protection against anaphylaxis and cause immune changes. Most observational human studies of BM and BE diets demonstrate clinical resolution of allergy and favorable immune changes versus regular care controls. However, the one randomized controlled trial for the BE diet in BE-tolerant children did not support an immune-modifying effect of the BE diet. Another study of BE immunotherapy is expected to be completed in 2018. There is currently no evidence for prevention of allergy with the baked diets. There may be a future role for BM and BE in liberating the diets of individuals with non-IgE-mediated allergy given recent studies that a subset of these patients can consume BM without a clinical reaction.

With rising prevalence of food allergy (FA), allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) for FA has become an active area of research in recent years. In AIT, incrementally increasing doses of inciting allergen are given with the goal to increase tolerance, initially through desensitization, which relies on regular exposure to allergen. With prolonged therapy in some subjects, AIT may induce sustained unresponsiveness, in which tolerance is retained after a period of allergen avoidance. Methods of AIT currently under study in humans include oral, sublingual, epicutaneous, and subcutaneous delivery of modified allergenic protein, as well as via DNA-based vaccines encoding allergen with lysosomal-associated membrane protein I. The balance of safety and efficacy varies by type of AIT, as well as by targeted allergen. Age, degree of sensitization, and other comorbidities may affect this balance within an individual patient. More recently, AIT with modified proteins or combined with immunomodulatory therapies has shown promise in making AIT safer and/or more effective. Though methods of AIT are neither currently advised by experts (oral immunotherapy [OIT]) nor widely available, AIT is likely to become a part of recommended management of FA in the coming years. Here, we review and compare methods of AIT currently under study in humans to prepare the practitioner for an exciting new phase in the care of food allergic patients in which improved tolerance to inciting foods will be a real possibility.

Results from the Learning Early About Peanut trial and its follow-up study suggest that early peanut introduction in the diets of high-risk infants may prevent the development of peanut allergy. Allergy organizations around the world released a unified statement, the Consensus Communication on Early Peanut Introduction and the Prevention of Peanut Allergy in High Risk Infants, in response to results from the Learning Early About Peanut trial, which recommends early introduction of peanut into the diet of those children at greatest risk of development of peanut allergy. As a result, it is expected that practicing allergists will experience an increased demand to perform an oral food challenge (OFC) in infants. Allergists often perform OFCs; however, conducting an OFC in an infant creates unique circumstances that have not been considered in previously published OFC guideline documents. The purpose of this workgroup report is to provide guidance to practitioners regarding the proper approach for conducting a peanut challenge in an infant.