Managing Food Allergy When the Patient Is Not Highly Allergic
Few patients with food allergy are "highly allergic," meaning they always have severe reactions and always react to very small amounts of allergen. Standard medical approaches for allergy management have focused on the safety and lifestyle modifications this group truly needs, but consequently families with food allergy are typically advised to strictly avoid any exposure to their implicated allergens. Most food-allergic subjects are actually not reactive to very low doses, and many never experience severe reactions. There are also notable conditions where a different care plan is already commonly offered: patients with pollen-related food allergy syndrome, with food-associated exercise-induced anaphylaxis, and with resolving or mild milk or egg allergy might be advised to ingest the allergens in specific circumstances with detailed instructions. Because oral immunotherapy and allergy prevention by early exposure have emphasized alternatives to strict avoidance, there is increasing interest in prospects to forego strict avoidance in those with food allergy. For patients with a high threshold of reactivity (low-dose tolerant, high-dose mildly reactive), there may be options such as allowing the ingestion of products with precautionary allergen labels, allowing dietary indiscretions with small amounts of the allergen, or even encouraging ingestion of subthreshold amounts with therapeutic intent. These practices have not been extensively studied and could be considered controversial. If these approaches are considered, shared decision making is needed in discussing them with patients and families. This review considers the potential approaches to those who are "not highly allergic": the risks, benefits, shared decision making, and research needs.
Wheat oral immunotherapy
PURPOSE OF REVIEW/OBJECTIVE:The prevalence of food allergy is increasing on a global scale, and therefore increased attention is being paid to specific food allergy epidemiology and management. There has been a large amount of progress made in the last decade on human trials of wheat oral immunotherapy (WOIT). RECENT FINDINGS/RESULTS:To date, there has been one multicenter, double-blind, randomized controlled trial of WOIT, one randomized, noncontrolled trial of WOIT, and several smaller, nonrandomized clinical trials of WOIT. WOIT trials are generally limited by smaller sample sizes, affecting the demographic skew of evaluated patients. In addition, there is minimal standardization of efficacy and safety outcomes between trial protocols, making head-to-head comparison challenging. However, some common themes emerge. The majority of WOIT regimens result in successful desensitization, and success is more likely with higher maintenance dosing for longer periods of time. Limited studies have looked at sustained unresponsiveness in WOIT. WOIT can induce allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis, but more severe reactions often have an associated augmenting factor, such as exercise. Lower maintenance doses likely are associated with less severe reactions, and food modification and/or adjunct therapeutics may also decrease the risk of reactions. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS:WOIT trials are ongoing and will optimize updosing protocols and maintenance doses to improve efficacy and safety.
Characterizing Biphasic Food-Related Allergic Reactions through a US Food Allergy Patient Registry
BACKGROUND:Understanding about patient-reported biphasic food-related allergic reactions currently remains sparse. OBJECTIVE:To characterize patient-reported biphasic food-related allergic reactions among a national food allergy registry. METHODS:We utilized two Patient Registry surveys established by Food Allergy Research & Education (FARE). Variables were described with proportions and 95% confidence intervals; unadjusted results were stratified by respondent type. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated the adjusted odds of reporting a biphasic reaction. RESULTS:The incidence of reported biphasic reactions was 16.4% (CI: 15.3-17.7). 12.8% (CI: 12.5-14.3) of parent/guardian respondents and 21.8% (CI: 19.7-23.8) of self-respondents indicated a biphasic reaction during their most recent food-allergic reaction. Among respondents with a mild initial reaction, 7.4% reported a biphasic reaction compared with 30% with a very severe initial reaction. When the initial reaction was mild, 69.6% of parent/guardian respondents (CI: 47.2 - 85.4) and 52.0% of self-respondents (CI: 38.0 - 35.7) with a biphasic reaction reported a mild secondary reaction. When the initial reaction was very severe, 36.3% of parent/guardian respondents (CI: 26.4 - 47.5) and 42.9% of self-respondents (CI: 31.1 - 55.5) with a biphasic reaction reported a very severe secondary reaction. Female gender, Black/African-American race, reaction age 5-12 and 26-66 years, initial moderate, severe, or very severe reaction, and one or more annual reactions were associated with increased odds of a biphasic reaction. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This study characterizes the incidence of patient-reported biphasic reactions and provides valuable information on probable severity of a biphasic food-related allergic reaction. Further research is necessary to understand the epidemiology of food-related biphasic reactions.
Peanut-induced food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES) in infants with early peanut introduction
The evolution of food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome: From a diagnosis that did not exist to a condition in need of answers
OBJECTIVE:Although food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES) was first described approximately 50 years ago and research is increasing, there are still considerable unmet needs in FPIES. This article catalogs the areas of progress and areas for further research. DATA SOURCES/METHODS:Through our personal experiences in caring for patients with FPIES, our personal research, and a review of the existing FPIES literature as indexed in PubMed, we explored what is known and what is needed in FPIES. STUDY SELECTIONS/METHODS:The studies that have improved the knowledge of FPIES, defined phenotypes, allowed for better-informed management of FPIES, and laid the groundwork for further research. RESULTS:Further research is needed in the areas of prevalence, natural history, trigger foods, threshold doses, how and when to perform oral food challenges, and immunopathogenesis of this disorder. Development of a biomarker and determination of the best method to treat reactions is also needed. Furthermore, FPIES has a substantial psychosocial and economic impact on families, and more research is needed in developing and implementing ameliorating strategies. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:By partnering together, health care providers, advocacy organizations, and families can continue to advance our understanding and improve the care of patients and families living with FPIES.
Evaluation of the introduction of allergen-containing foods: Feeding Infants and Toddlers Study 2016
BACKGROUND:Guidelines on the early introduction of allergen-containing foods are evolving; however, little national data exist defining current allergen-feeding practices. OBJECTIVE:To investigate the consumption rates of foods containing egg and peanut among infants and toddlers before the guideline changes inÂ 2017. METHODS:The Feeding Infants and Toddlers Study 2016 was conducted nationally among 3235 caregivers with a child under 4 years of age. The 24-hour dietary recalls were reviewed for peanut or egg ingredients. Participants were categorized as "consuming peanut or egg-containing foods" or "not consuming peanut or egg-containing foods." Data on physician-diagnosed food allergies and avoidance were collected. RESULTS:The consumption rates of peanut- and egg-containing foods were low. For the age group of 4 to 5.9 months, 0.3% reported peanut consumption and 2.4% reported egg consumption. For the age group of 6 to 8.9 months, 0.9% reported eating peanut-containing foods and 13.0% egg, and for the age group of 9 to 11.9 months, 5.5% were consuming peanut-containing foods and 33.2% egg-containing foods. Peanut or egg ingredients were identified in the diet of children whose caregivers reported avoidance. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Before the publication of the 2017 Addendum Guidelines for the Prevention of Peanut Allergy, there were low rates of reported peanut consumption across the study population with less than 1% of any age group before 9 months of age and less than 6% in any age group before 12 months of age consuming peanut on the 24-hour recall day. In addition, reported egg consumption was low and increased with age. These results serve as an important baseline comparison for future studies evaluating the implementation and impact of early peanut and egg introduction.
Food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome oral food challenge: Time for a change?
OBJECTIVE:Food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES) is typically diagnosed based on a characteristic clinical history; however, an oral food challenge (OFC) may be necessary to confirm the diagnosis or evaluate for the development of tolerance. FPIES OFC methods vary globally, and there is no universally agreed upon protocol. The objective of this review is to summarize reported FPIES OFC approaches and consider unmet needs in diagnosing and managing FPIES. DATA SOURCES:PubMed database was searched using the keywords food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome, oral food challenge, cow milk allergy, food allergy, non-immunoglobulin E-mediated food allergy and FPIES. STUDY SELECTIONS:Primary and review articles were selected based on relevance to the diagnosis of FPIES and the FPIES OFC. RESULTS:We reviewed the history of FPIES and the evolution and variations in the FPIES OFC. A summary of current literature suggests that most patients with FPIES will react with 25% to 33% of a standard serving ofÂ the challenged food, there is little benefit to offering a divided dose challenge unless there is suspicion of specific immunoglobulin E to the food being challenged, reactions typically appear within 1 to 4 hours ofÂ ingestion, and reactions during OFC rarely result in emergency department or intensive care unit admission. CONCLUSION:International standardization in the FPIES OFC approach is necessary with particular attention to specific dose administration across challenged foods, timing between the patient's reaction and offered OFC to verify tolerance, patient safety considerations before the OFC, and identification of characteristics that would indicate home reintroduction is appropriate.
Food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome: Up close and personal [Editorial]
Acute FPIES reactions are associated with an IL-17 inflammatory signature
BACKGROUND:Food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES) is a non-IgE-mediated food allergy characterized by profuse vomiting within hours of ingestion of the causative food. We have previously reported that FPIES is associated with systemic innate immune activation in the absence of a detectable antigen-specific antibody or T-cell response. The mechanism of specific food recognition by the immune system remains unclear. OBJECTIVE:Our aim was to identify immune mechanisms underlying FPIES reactions by proteomic and flow cytometric analysis of peripheral blood. METHODS:Children with a history of FPIES underwent supervised oral food challenge. Blood samples were taken at baseline, at symptom onset, and 4 hours after symptom onset. We analyzed samples from 23 children (11 reactors and 12 outgrown). AÂ total of 184 protein markers were analyzed by proximity ligation assay and verified by multiplex immunoassay. Analysis of cell subset activation was performed by mass cytometry and spectral cytometry. RESULTS:17 cells. CONCLUSIONS:These results demonstrate a unique IL-17 signature and activation of innate lymphocytes in FPIES.
Peanut Oral Food Challenges and Subsequent Feeding of Peanuts in Infants