Faculty Bibliography

Oral allergy syndrome or pollen food allergy syndrome (PFAS) represents a common clinical conundrum when the reported trigger food is a tree nut (usually almond or hazelnut) or peanut. The PFAS may give rise to uncertainty about the potential severity of the future reactions, indications for prescribing epinephrine, and the extent of the necessary dietary avoidance. As a food allergy, secondary to cross-reactivity with airborne pollen, PFAS usually manifests toward the end of the first decade of life as contact urticaria of the oropharyngeal mucous membranes. Molecular allergology facilitates diagnosis and risk stratification by establishing the profile of sensitization. Exclusive sensitization to pathogenesis-related proteins family 10 (PR10) and profilins indicates that signs and symptoms are due to PFAS, whereas sensitization to seed storage proteins with or without sensitization to PR10 and profilins may indicate a more severe primary nut allergy phenotype. Management relies on avoidance of the specific nut trigger, advice on the likelihood of more severe local or systemic symptoms, and treatment of reactions according to the severity. Future studies are needed to better delineate the risk of systemic reactions in individuals with nut PFAS and to establish the role of food or pollen allergen immunotherapy for the prevention or moderation of this condition.

Most milk and egg allergic children are non-reactive to modified forms of milk and egg in bakery products such as muffins due to conformational changes in proteins. These baked milk (BM) and baked egg (BE) diets have become commonplace in the management of milk and egg allergy, respectively. Current laboratory and skin test based diagnostic approaches remain limited in their ability to predict BM/BE tolerance, resulting in various approaches to introduce these foods. One approach to introduce BM/BE is to offer a medically supervised oral food challenge (OFC) and then advise dietary introduction of baked products for children who are tolerant. Another approach is adapted from a home-based protocol of graded ingestion of BM or BE originally intended for non-IgE mediated allergy, often referred to as a "ladder." The ladder advises home-ingestion of increasing amounts of BM or BE. For children who are allergic to BM or BE, the ladder is essentially oral immunotherapy (OIT), although not always labeled or recognized as such. Risk assessment and education of patients suitable for home-introduction is essential. A home approach that may be called a ladder can also be used to escalate diets after demonstrated tolerance of baked forms by introducing lesser cooked forms of milk or egg after tolerating BM or BE. A randomized controlled trial provided clear evidence that baked diets can hasten the resolution of IgE-mediated milk allergy. BM/BE foods have an emerging role in the treatment of non-IgE mediated allergy. There is tangential evidence for BM and BE diets in the prevention of IgE-mediated allergy.

BACKGROUND:Food allergies affect growth in children by decreasing the availability of nutrients through decreased dietary intake, increased dietary needs, food-medication interactions, and psychosocial burden. Guidelines on food allergy management frequently recommend nutrition counseling and growth monitoring of children with food allergies. OBJECTIVE:To provide clear guidance for clinicians to identify children with food allergies who are at nutritional risk and ensure prompt intervention. METHODS:We provide a narrative review summarizing information from national and international guidelines, retrospective studies, population studies, review articles, case reports, and case series to identify those with food allergy at greatest nutritional risk, determine the impact of nutritional interventions on growth, and develop guidance for risk reduction in children with food allergies. RESULTS:Children with food allergies are at increased risk of nutritional deficiencies and poor growth. Nutritional assessment and intervention can improve outcomes. Identifying poor growth is an important step in the nutrition assessment. Therefore, growth should be assessed at each allergy evaluation. Interventions to ensure adequate dietary intake for growth include appropriately prescribed elimination diets, breast-feeding support and assessment, supplemental formula, vitamin and/or mineral supplementation, appropriate milk substitutes, and timely introduction of nutrient-dense complementary foods. Access to foods of appropriate nutritional value is an ongoing concern. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Nutrition intervention or referral to registered dietitian nutritionists with additional training and/or experience in food allergy may result in improved growth and nutrition outcomes.

INTRODUCTION/UNASSIGNED:models. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:B cells were analyzed by flow cytometry. Acute and sub-chronic toxicity were evaluated. IL-4 promoter DNA methylation, RNA-Seq, and qPCR analysis were performed to determine the regulatory mechanisms of XPP. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:B cells compared to the untreated group. XPP increased IL-4 promoter methylation. RNA-Seq and RT-PCR experiments revealed that XPP regulated the gene expression of CCND1, DUSP4, SDC1, ETS1, PTPRC, and IL6R, which are related to plasma cell IgE production. All safety testing results were in the normal range. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:XPP successfully protected peanut-allergic mice against peanut anaphylaxis by suppressing IgE production. XPP suppresses murine IgE-producing B cell numbers and inhibits IgE production and associated genes in human plasma cells. XPP may be a potential therapy for IgE-mediated food allergy.

BACKGROUND:Patients exquisitely sensitive to cashew/pistachio are at risk for allergic reactions to citrus seeds and pectin. OBJECTIVE:In this study, we sought to evaluate whether pectin is contaminated with citrus seeds, to identify a culprit antigen in citrus seeds, and to assess for cross-reactivity among allergens in citrus seeds, citrus pectin, and cashew or pistachio. METHODS:Proteins from orange seed coats, orange seed endosperms, lemon seeds, grapefruit seeds, citrus pectin, apple pectin, and grapefruit pectin were extracted. Protein concentrations in all extracts were determined and visualized using sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis technique. Immunoglobulin E-binding capacity was determined with Western blot analyses and tandem mass spectrometry for the identification of the culprit allergen in citrus seeds and pectin. RESULTS:In subjects with citrus seed, pectin, and cashew allergies, there was strong immunoglobulin E-reactivity to bands between 17 to 28 kDa and 28 to 38 kDa. The tandem mass spectrometry analysis of these bands indicated the presence of citrin as the culprit allergen. Citrin and Ana o 2 are both 11S globulins belonging to the cupin superfamily, and significant homology was found between these proteins. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Citrus pectin may be contaminated with citrus seeds. Citrin, a newly identified allergen in citrus seeds, seems to be the culprit antigen in citrus seeds and contaminated citrus pectin. Citrin is highly homologous with Ana o 2 in cashew and Pis v 2 in pistachio, suggesting potential for cross-reactivity and providing an explanation for co-allergenicity of cashew or pistachio, citrus seeds, and citrus pectin.

BACKGROUND:Epinephrine is the first-line treatment for severe allergic reactions, and rapid treatment is associated with lower rates of hospitalization and death. Current treatment options (epinephrine auto-injectors and manual intramuscular injection) are considered cumbersome, and most patients/caregivers fail to use them, even during severe reactions. An intranasal epinephrine delivery device, neffy, has been designed to provide an additional option for patients/caregivers. OBJECTIVE:We sought to assess the comparative pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of neffy 2.0 mg, EpiPen 0.3 mg, and manual intramuscular injection 0.3 mg. METHODS:This was a phase 1, randomized, 6-treatment, 6-period, 2-part crossover study in 59 healthy subjects. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters following single and repeat doses of epinephrine were assessed before dosing and at various postdose intervals. RESULTS:The pharmacokinetic profile of neffy was bracketed by approved injection products, with a mean peak plasma level of 481 pg/mL, which fell between EpiPen (753 pg/mL) and epinephrine manual intramuscular injection (339 pg/mL). When dosed both once and twice, neffy resulted in more pronounced increases in pharmacodynamic parameters relative to EpiPen or manual injection. CONCLUSIONS:neffy's pharmacokinetic profile was bracketed by approved injection products, with pharmacodynamic responses that were comparable to or better than approved injection products. neffy is expected to be a safe and effective option, particularly for patients/caregivers who are reluctant to carry and use injection devices.