Faculty Bibliography

The appropriate at-home management of anaphylaxis begins with patient education on recognition and treatment, especially when and how to use epinephrine. Delayed administration of epinephrine as well as having severe symptoms and needing multiple doses of epinephrine to treat symptoms are risk factors for biphasic anaphylaxis. The successful implementation of at-home management of anaphylaxis requires appropriate patient selection and an algorithmic approach that recommends activation of emergency medical services (EMS) when the patient does not adequately respond to at-home administration of epinephrine or there are extenuating patient-related circumstances. Fortunately, approximately 98% of anaphylactic episodes respond to 2 or fewer doses of epinephrine, the standard prescription used for epinephrine autoinjectors; fatal anaphylaxis is very rare, as low as 0.002 deaths/million person-years; and biphasic reactions are uncommon (∼5%), and only extremely rarely lethal. Thus, most common concerns leading to recommended EMS activation and emergency department visits after epinephrine administration are generally unsubstantiated. Furthermore, emergency department visits do not always lead to better treatment and drive health care costs higher. Open communications with patients and families regarding risks and benefits of at-home management and observation versus EMS activation and emergency department evaluation after epinephrine administration for anaphylaxis are essential. However, we believe the data indicate that it is time to reconsider the often used and taught approach that recommends EMS activation whenever epinephrine is used.

Background/UNASSIGNED:The immunopathogenesis of cow's milk protein allergy (CMPA) is based on different mechanisms related to immune recognition of protein epitopes, which are affected by industrial processing. Purpose/UNASSIGNED:The purpose of this WAO DRACMA paper is to: (i) give a comprehensive overview of milk protein allergens, (ii) to review their immunogenicity and allergenicity in the context of industrial processing, and (iii) to review the milk-related immune mechanisms triggering IgE-mediated immediate type hypersensitivity reactions, mixed reactions and non-IgE mediated hypersensitivities. Results/UNASSIGNED:The main cow's milk allergens - α-lactalbumin, β-lactoglobulin, serum albumin, caseins, bovine serum albumins, and others - may determine allergic reactions through a range of mechanisms. All marketed milk and milk products have undergone industrial processing that involves heating, filtration, and defatting. Milk processing results in structural changes of immunomodulatory proteins, leads to a loss of lipophilic compounds in the matrix, and hence to a higher allergenicity of industrially processed milk products. Thereby, the tolerogenic capacity of raw farm milk, associated with the whey proteins α-lactalbumin and β-lactoglobulin and their lipophilic ligands, is lost. Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:The spectrum of immunopathogenic mechanisms underlying cow's milk allergy (CMA) is wide. Unprocessed, fresh cow's milk, like human breast milk, contains various tolerogenic factors that are impaired by industrial processing. Further studies focusing on the immunological consequences of milk processing are warranted to understand on a molecular basis to what extent processing procedures make single milk compounds into allergens.

OBJECTIVE:This research sought to explore health care providers' (HCPs) experiences of delivering the first US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Commission (EC) approved peanut oral immunotherapy (peanut OIT; Palforzia). Semi-structured qualitative interviews with HCPs who had initiated treatment with ≥ 3 patients in the first nine months following FDA approval sought to identify challenges faced and successful implementation strategies. RESULTS:Eight allergists and three nurse practitioners from eight sites based in the United States participated. The HCPs included in this research were motivated to implement this novel treatment, however, entered the process with some reservations. HCPs described how successful implementation of peanut OIT requires them to be thoughtful about their clinic's abilities to integrate complex, time-consuming treatments into their daily practice. Prior experience of OIT was deemed beneficial, but not essential for implementation and learning from others' experience was suggested as a way of helping new prescribers overcome perceived and actual implementation challenges. Delivering licensed peanut OIT during the COVID-19 pandemic posed both challenges and unexpected opportunities for implementation. The experiences described have the potential to benefit the wider allergy community by providing practical solutions, successful implementation strategies and opportunities to enhance training and resources.

Wheat is a dietary staple in many cultures as well as a common food allergen. Although not as extensively studied as other forms of oral immunotherapy, the current literature suggests that wheat oral immunotherapy (WOIT) can result in successful desensitization. There has only been one multicenter, double-blind, randomized controlled trial of WOIT, along with several open-label nonrandomized trials. The trials were limited by several factors, including small sample sizes; demographic skew; and heterogeneity in dosing, duration, and outcomes. The majority of WOIT regimens results in desensitization, with literature that indicates that a longer duration and higher dosing may lead to more clinical success. WOIT has been associated with adverse events, including allergic reactions, but these events seem to decrease over time. Study on WOIT is underway, but evidence from trials suggests it can be successful and safe. Further studies will need to optimize dosing protocols to improve efficacy and safety.

The increasing prevalence of food allergies is a growing public health problem. For children considered high risk of developing food allergy (particularly due to the presence of other food allergies or severe eczema), the evidence for the early introduction of allergenic foods, and in particular peanut and egg, is robust. In such cases, the consensus is clear that not only should such foods not be delayed, but that they should be introduced at approximately 4 to 6 months of age in order to minimize the risk of food allergy development. The early introduction of allergenic foods appears to be an effective strategy for minimizing the public health burden of food allergy, though further studies on the generalizability of this approach in low-risk populations is needed.

It is currently unclear if SARS-CoV-2 infection or mRNA vaccination can also induce IgG and IgA against common human coronaviruses (HCoVs) in lactating parents. Here we prospectively analyzed human milk (HM) and blood samples from lactating parents to measure the temporal patterns of anti-SARS-CoV-2 specific and anti-HCoV cross-reactive IgA and IgG responses. Two cohorts were analyzed: a vaccination cohort (n = 30) who received mRNA-based vaccines for COVID-19 (mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2), and an infection cohort (n = 45) with COVID-19 disease. Longitudinal HM and fingerstick blood samples were collected pre- and post-vaccination or, for infected subjects, at 5 time-points 14-28 days after confirmed diagnosis. The anti-spike(S) and anti-nucleocapsid(N) IgA and IgG antibody levels against SARS-CoV-2 and HCoVs were measured by multiplex immunoassay (mPlex-CoV). We found that vaccination significantly increased the anti-S IgA and IgG levels in HM. In contrast, while IgG levels increased after a second vaccine dose, blood and HM IgA started to decrease. Moreover, HM and blood anti-S IgG levels were significantly correlated, but anti-S IgA levels were not. SARS2 acute infection elicited anti-S IgG and IgA that showed much higher correlations between HM and blood compared to vaccination. Vaccination and infection were able to significantly increase the broadly cross-reactive IgG recognizing HCoVs in HM and blood than the IgA antibodies in HM and blood. In addition, the broader cross-reactivity of IgG in HM versus blood indicates that COVID-19 vaccination and infection might provide passive immunity through HM for the breastfed infants not only against SARS-CoV-2 but also against common cold coronaviruses.

BACKGROUND:There is substantial interest in immunotherapy and biologicals in IgE-mediated food allergy. METHODS:We searched six databases for randomized controlled trials about immunotherapy alone or with biologicals (to April 2021) or biological monotherapy (to September 2021) in food allergy confirmed by oral food challenge. We pooled the data using random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS:We included 36 trials about immunotherapy with 2126 mainly child participants. Oral immunotherapy increased tolerance whilst on therapy for peanut (RR 9.9, 95% CI 4.5.-21.4, high certainty); cow's milk (RR 5.7, 1.9-16.7, moderate certainty) and hen's egg allergy (RR 8.9, 4.4-18, moderate certainty). The number needed to treat to increase tolerance to a single dose of 300 mg or 1000 mg peanut protein was 2. Oral immunotherapy did not increase adverse reactions (RR 1.1, 1.0-1.2, low certainty) or severe reactions in peanut allergy (RR 1,6, 0.7-3.5, low certainty), but may increase (mild) adverse reactions in cow's milk (RR 3.9, 2.1-7.5, low certainty) and hen's egg allergy (RR 7.0, 2.4-19.8, moderate certainty). Epicutaneous immunotherapy increased tolerance whilst on therapy for peanut (RR 2.6, 1.8-3.8, moderate certainty). Results were unclear for other allergies and administration routes. There were too few trials of biologicals alone (3) or with immunotherapy (1) to draw conclusions. CONCLUSIONS:Oral immunotherapy improves tolerance whilst on therapy and is probably safe in peanut, cow's milk and hen's egg allergy. More research is needed about quality of life, cost and biologicals.

Importance/UNASSIGNED:Long-term effect of parental COVID-19 infection vs vaccination on human milk antibody composition and functional activity remains unclear. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To compare temporal IgA and IgG response in human milk and microneutralization activity against SARS-CoV-2 between lactating parents with infection and vaccinated lactating parents out to 90 days after infection or vaccination. Design, Setting, and Participants/UNASSIGNED:Convenience sampling observational cohort (recruited July to December 2020) of lactating parents with infection with human milk samples collected at days 0 (within 14 days of diagnosis), 3, 7, 10, 28, and 90. The observational cohort included vaccinated lactating parents with human milk collected prevaccination, 18 days after the first dose, and 18 and 90 days after the second dose. Exposures/UNASSIGNED:COVID-19 infection diagnosed by polymerase chain reaction within 14 days of consent or receipt of messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccine (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273). Main Outcomes and Measures/UNASSIGNED:Human milk anti-SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain IgA and IgG and microneutralization activity against live SARS-CoV-2 virus. Results/UNASSIGNED:Of 77 individuals, 47 (61.0%) were in the infection group (mean [SD] age, 29.9 [4.4] years), and 30 (39.0%) were in the vaccinated group (mean [SD] age, 33.0 [3.4] years; P = .002). The mean (SD) age of infants in the infection and vaccinated group were 3.1 (2.2) months and 7.5 (5.2) months, respectively (P < .001). Infection was associated with a variable human milk IgA and IgG receptor-binding domain-specific antibody response over time that was classified into different temporal patterns: upward trend and level trend (33 of 45 participants [73%]) and low/no response (12 of 45 participants [27%]). Infection was associated with a robust and quick IgA response in human milk that was stable out to 90 days after diagnosis. Vaccination was associated with a more uniform IgG-dominant response with concentrations increasing after each vaccine dose and beginning to decline by 90 days after the second dose. Vaccination was associated with increased human milk IgA after the first dose only (mean [SD] increase, 31.5 [32.6] antibody units). Human milk collected after infection and vaccination exhibited microneutralization activity. Microneutralization activity increased throughout time in the vaccine group only (median [IQR], 2.2 [0] before vaccine vs 10 [4.0] after the first dose; P = .003) but was higher in the infection group (median [IQR], 20 [67] at day 28) vs the vaccination group after the first-dose human milk samples (P = .002). Both IgA and non-IgA (IgG-containing) fractions of human milk from both participants with infection and those who were vaccinated exhibited microneutralization activity against SARS-CoV-2. Conclusions and Relevance/UNASSIGNED:In this cohort study of a convenience sample of lactating parents, the pattern of IgA and IgG antibodies in human milk differed between COVID-19 infection vs mRNA vaccination out to 90 days. While infection was associated with a highly variable IgA-dominant response and vaccination was associated with an IgG-dominant response, both were associated with having human milk that exhibited neutralization activity against live SARS-CoV-2 virus.