Faculty Bibliography

Food Protein-Induced Enterocolitis (FPIES) is a non-IgE mediated GI food allergy characterized by delayed, protracted vomiting, accompanied by lethargy and pallor, usually 1-4 hours following ingestion of the food allergen. The pathophysiology of FPIES remains unknown and currently there are no diagnostic biomarkers available to assess disease activity or its resolution. Over the last two decades, FPIES has become increasingly recognized in both pediatric and adult patients. Forty years later after the initial FPIES description, the first international classification of diseases (ICD-10) code for FPIES was established and the first international consensus guidelines for diagnosis and management of FPIES was published. On June 22, 2022, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) held its first virtual multidisciplinary workshop on FPIES. Various clinical and translational aspects of FPIES, as well as the important areas of unmet needs were discussed as priorities for future research during this 2-day virtual workshop. The following report provides a summary of content of the workshop, including updated literature on the topic areas, as well as providing a critical commentary on the state of FPIES.

Immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated food allergies are the most common type of food allergy, often causing rapid symptoms after exposure to allergens posing a serious health risk and a high impact on patient's and caregiver's quality of life. Omalizumab, a humanized anti-IgE monoclonal antibody, reduces allergic reactions by binding to circulating IgE. Omalizumab has been successfully used in allergic asthma, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, and chronic urticaria, and was recently approved for treating IgE-mediated food allergies by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This GA²LEN ANACARE Consensus Statement presents our position on the use of omalizumab for treating IgE-mediated food allergies, based on a systematic review and meta-analysis, experience with use for other conditions, and expert consensus achieved via an eDelphi process. Following publication of the recent OUtMATCH study (stage 1) results and subsequent FDA approval, we propose that there is now sufficient evidence to recommend omalizumab as the only drug currently available that can mechanistically reduce IgE-mediated food allergic reactions. We acknowledge that the evidence does not reach the highest level of evidence which would be needed for a guideline recommendation.

Immunoglobuin E (IgE)-mediated food allergies greatly impact patients and their families, causing financial and emotional stress, and placing them at risk for lifethreatening reactions. Until recently, food allergies have been treated with allergen avoidance and emergency treatment of allergic reactions. Omalizumab was recently approved in adults and children greater than one year who are allergic to one or more foods for the prevention of serious allergic reactions in the setting of accidental exposure. Omalizumab also shows promise when combined with oral immunotherapy for possible allergen ingestion. Other classes of biologics and small molecule inhibitors have also demonstrated potential for use in preventing and treating food allergy.

This common statement of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (AAAAI) and The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) provides an update of the 2012 published guidelines on food challenges. The guidelines equally address food challenges in the research and the clinical settings. They first address the diagnostic tests which can guide the decision to conduct a challenge. Safety of food challenges is prime, and the various procedures and safety issues as well as medications potentially involved in challenges are extensively discussed. Challenges are suggested to be conducted with semi-logarithmic incremental doses based on the protein content, typically for IgE-mediated food allergy with intervals of 20-30 min between doses. Specific protocols for other types of reactions such atopic dermatitis or gastrointestinal food allergy are detailed separately. Proper stopping criteria are essential in order to reduce the risk of false-positive diagnoses, but also severe reactions. The guidelines recommend criteria based on "go on," "stop," or "observation." These revised guidelines will clearly provide much needed guidance for food challenges in the research and clinical settings. They will continue to evolve with new diagnostic tests or new needs in the field of food allergy.

This article explores food allergy and the nascent field of nutritional psychiatry. Individuals with food allergy experience lower levels of "food freedom" than their non-allergic counterparts, which can create cognitive, emotional, social, nutritional, and financial burdens. Patterns of food avoidance may influence neuroinflammatory states as well as the gut microbiome; these changes may be associated with neuropsychiatric symptoms. Food restriction may promote disruption of the microbiome neuroimmune axis, which has been linked to various allergic diseases. Targeted psychological counseling strategies can provide benefit. Food allergy and restricted diets may impact dietary health benefits.

Patient registries are a mechanism for collecting data on allergic and immunologic diseases that provide important information on epidemiology and outcomes that can ultimately improve patient care. Key criteria for establishing effective registries include the use of a clearly defined purpose, identifying the target population and ensuring consistent data collection. Registries in allergic diseases include those for diseases such as inborn errors of immunity (IEI), food allergy, asthma and anaphylaxis, pharmacological interventions in vulnerable populations, and adverse effects of pharmacologic interventions including hypersensitivity reactions to drugs and vaccines. Important insights gained from patient registries in our field include contributions in phenotype and outcomes in IEI, the risk for adverse reactions in food-allergic patients in multiple settings, the benefits and risk of biologic medications for asthma during pregnancy, vaccine safety, and the categorization and genetic determination of risk for severe cutaneous adverse reactions to medications. Impediments to the development of clinically meaningful patient registries include the lack of funding resources for registry establishment and the quality, quantity, and consistency of available data. Despite these drawbacks, high-quality and successful registries are invaluable in informing clinical practice and improving outcomes in patients with allergic and immunological diseases.

Background: Cow's milk allergy (CMA) is the most complex and common food allergy in infants. Elimination of cow's milk from the diet and replacement with a specialized formula for infants with cow's milk allergy who cannot be breastfed is an established approach to minimize the risk of severe allergic reactions while avoiding nutritional deficiencies. Given the availability of multiple options, such as extensively hydrolyzed cow's milk-based formula (eHF-CM), aminoacid formula (AAF), hydrolyzed rice formula (HRF), and soy formula (SF), there is some uncertainty regarding which formula might represent the most suitable choice with respect to health outcomes. The addition of probiotics to a specialized formula has also been proposed as a potential approach to possibly increase the benefit. We systematically reviewed specialized formulas for infants with CMA to inform the updated World Allergy Organization (WAO) DRACMA guidelines. Objective: To systematically review and synthesize the available evidence about the use of specialized formulas for the management of individuals with CMA. Methods: We searched from inception PubMed, Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the websites of selected allergy organizations, for randomized and non-randomized trials of any language investigating specialized formulas with or without probiotics. We included all studies irrespective of the language of the original publication. The last search was conducted in January 2024. We synthesized the identified evidence quantitatively or narratively as appropriate and summarized it in the evidence profiles. We conducted this review following the PRISMA, Cochrane methods, and the GRADE approach. Results: We identified 3558 records including 14 randomized trials and 7 observational studies. Very low certainty evidence suggested that in infants with IgE-mediated CMA, eHF-CM, compared with AAF, might have higher probability of outgrowing CMA (risk ratio (RR) 2.32; risk difference (RD) 25 more per 100), while showing potentially lower probability of severe vomiting (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.88; RD 23 fewer per 100, 95% CI 3 to 26) and developing food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES) (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.82; RD 34 fewer per 100, 95% CI 7 to 39). We also found, however, that eHF-CM might be inferior to AAF in supporting a physiological growth, with respect to both weight (−5.5% from baseline, 95%CI -9.5% to −1.5%) and length (−0.7 z-score change, 95%CI -1.15 to −0.25) (very low certainty). We found similar effects for eHF-CM, compared with AAF, also in non-IgE CMA. When compared with SF, eHF-CM might favor weight gain for IgE CMA infants (0.23 z-score change, 95%CI 0.01 to 0.45), and tolerance acquisition (RR 1.86, 95%CI 1.03 to 3.37; RD 27%, 95%CI 1%"“74%) for non-IgE CMA (both at very low certainty of the evidence (CoE)). The comparison of eHF-CM vs. HRF, and HRF vs. SF, showed no difference in effect (very low certainty). For IgE CMA patients, low certainty evidence suggested that adding probiotics (L. rhamnosus GG, L. casei CRL431 and B. lactis Bb-12) might increase the probability of developing CMA tolerance (RR 2.47, 95%CI 1.03 to 5.93; RD 27%, 95%CI 1%"“91%), and reduce the risk of severe wheezing (RR 0.12, 95%CI 0.02 to 0.95; RD -23%, 95%CI -8% to −0.4%). However, in non-IgE CMA infants, the addition of probiotics (L. rhamnosus GG) showed no significant effect, as supported by low to very low CoE. Conclusions: Currently available studies comparing eHF-CM, AAF, HRF, and SF provide very low certainty evidence about their effects in infants with IgE-mediated and non-IgE-mediated CMA. Our review revealed several limitations in the current body of evidence, primarily arising from concerns related to the quality of studies, the limited size of the participant populations and most importantly the lack of diversity and standardization in the compared interventions. It is therefore imperative for future studies to be methodologically rigorous and investigate a broader spectrum of available interventions. We encourage clinicians and researchers to review current World Allergy Organization (WAO) Diagnosis and Rationale for Action against Cow's Milk Allergy (DRACMA) Guidelines for suggestions on how to use milk replacement formulas in clinical practice and what additional research would be the most beneficial.

BACKGROUND:Consumption of ultra-processed foods [UPFs] may be associated with negative health outcomes. Limited data exist regarding the potential role of UPFs in the occurrence of allergic diseases. The underlying mechanisms underpinning any such associations are also poorly elucidated. METHODS:We performed a systematic review and narrative evidence synthesis of the available literature to assess associations between UPF consumption and pediatric allergy outcomes (n = 26 papers), including data on the association seen with the gut microbiome (n = 16 papers) or immune system (n = 3 papers) structure and function following PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS:Dietary exposure to fructose, carbonated soft drinks, and sugar intake was associated with an increased risk of asthma, allergic rhinitis, and food allergies in children. Commercial baby food intake was associated with childhood food allergy. Childhood intake of fructose, fruit juices, sugar-sweetened beverages, high carbohydrate UPFs, monosodium glutamate, UPFs, and advanced glycated end-products (AGEs) was associated with the occurrence of allergic diseases. Exposure to UPFs and common ingredients in UPFs seem to be associated with increased occurrence of allergic diseases such as asthma, wheezing, food allergies, atopic dermatitis, and allergic rhinitis, in many, but not all studies. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:More preclinical and clinical studies are required to better define the link between UPF consumption and the risk of allergies and asthma. These observational studies ideally require supporting data with clearly defined UPF consumption, validated dietary measures, and mechanistic assessments to definitively link UPFs with the risk of allergies and asthma.