Dupilumab reduces inflammatory biomarkers in pediatric patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) often have elevated type 2 inflammatory serum biomarkers. OBJECTIVE: To report changes in thymus- and activation-regulated chemokine (TARC)/CC chemokine ligand 17 (CCL17), total immunoglobulin E (IgE), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and eosinophils in pediatric patients treated with dupilumab or placebo. METHODS: Biomarker data were analyzed from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 studies of patients with moderate-to-severe AD. Patients aged 6 months-5 years were randomized to weight-dependent dupilumab 200/300mg every 4 weeks (q4w) or placebo; aged 6-11 years to dupilumab 100/200mg every 2 weeks (q2w), dupilumab 300mg q4w, or placebo; aged 12-17 years to dupilumab 200/300mg q2w, dupilumab 300mg q4w, or placebo. The youngest two groups also applied topical corticosteroids. Median percent changes from baseline to week 16 reported using last observation carried forward method, censoring after rescue treatment. RESULTS: Pediatric patients who received dupilumab vs placebo achieved significantly greater median percent reductions at week 16 in: TARC/CCL17 (-83.3% to -72.4% vs -14.9% to -1.8%), total IgE (-71.2% to -58.4% vs -21.0% to +28.1%), and LDH (-26.2% to -9.8% vs -1.5% to +1.5%). All comparisons were significantly different (P < .0001) between each dupilumab dosing group and respective placebo groups. In contrast, absolute changes in eosinophils were small in all groups. CONCLUSIONS: Dupilumab treatment for pediatric patients with moderate-to-severe AD significantly reduced levels of TARC/CCL17, total IgE, and LDH to levels comparable to those of healthy controls, reflecting a reduction in systemic type 2 and general inflammation.

Preparing Patients for Oral Immunotherapy (PPOINT): International Delphi consensus for procedural preparation and consent.

BACKGROUND: Despite the promise of oral immunotherapy (OIT) to treat food allergies, this procedure is associated with potential risk. There is no current agreement about what elements should be included in the preparatory or consent process. OBJECTIVE: We developed consensus recommendations about the OIT process considerations and patient-specific factors that should be addressed before initiating OIT and developed a consensus OIT consent process and information form. METHODS: We convened a 36-member Preparing Patients for Oral Immunotherapy (PPOINT) panel of allergy experts to develop a consensus OIT patient preparation, informed consent process, and framework form. Consensus for themes and statements was reached using Delphi methodology, and the consent information form was developed. RESULTS: The expert panel reached consensus for 4 themes and 103 statements specific to OIT preparatory procedures, of which 76 statements reached consensus for inclusion specific to the following themes: general considerations for counseling patients about OIT; patient- and family-specific factors that should be addressed before initiating OIT and during OIT; indications for initiating OIT; and potential contraindications and precautions for OIT. The panel reached consensus on 9 OIT consent form themes: benefits, risks, outcomes, alternatives, risk mitigation, difficulties/challenges, discontinuation, office policies, and long-term management. From these themes, 219 statements were proposed, of which 189 reached consensus, and 71 were included on the consent information form. CONCLUSION: We developed consensus recommendations to prepare and counsel patients for safe and effective OIT in clinical practice with evidence-based risk mitigation. Adoption of these recommendations may help standardize clinical care and improve patient outcomes and quality of life.

Management of Refractory Anaphylaxis: An Overview of Current Guidelines.

In this review, we compare different refractory anaphylaxis (RA) management guidelines focusing on cardiovascular involvement and best practice recommendations, discuss postulated pathogenic mechanisms underlining RA and highlight knowledge gaps and research priorities. There is a paucity of data supporting existing management guidelines. Therapeutic recommendations include the need for the timely administration of appropriate doses of aggressive fluid resuscitation and intravenous (IV) adrenaline in RA. The preferred second-line vasopressor (noradrenaline, vasopressin, metaraminol and dopamine) is unknown. Most guidelines recommend IV glucagon for patients on beta-blockers, despite a lack of evidence. The use of methylene blue or extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is also suggested as rescue therapy. Despite recent advances in understanding the pathogenesis of anaphylaxis, the factors that lead to a lack of response to the initial adrenaline and thus RA are unclear. Genetic factors, such as deficiency in platelet activating factor-acetyl hydrolase or hereditary alpha-tryptasaemia, mastocytosis may modulate reaction severity or response to treatment. Further research into the underlying pathophysiology of RA may help define potential new therapeutic approaches and reduce the morbidity and mortality of anaphylaxis.

Prevalence of tree nut allergy in Europe: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

In 2014, the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) published the first systematic review that summarized the prevalence of food allergy (FA) and food sensitization in Europe for studies published 2000-2012. However, only summary estimates for tree nut allergy (TNA) were feasible in that work. In the current update of that systematic review, we summarized the prevalence of tree nut allergy/sensitization to individual tree nuts. Six databases were searched for relevant papers published 2012-2021 and 17 eligible studies were added to the 15 studies already identified between 2000 and 2012, giving a total of 32 studies. Of the investigated tree nuts, meta-analysis was possible for hazelnut, walnut, almond, and in few cases, for cashew, and Brazil nut. The lifetime self-reported prevalence was 0.8% (95% CI 0.5-1.1) for hazelnut and 0.4% (0.2-0.9) for walnut. The point self-reported prevalence was 4.0% (2.9-5.2) for hazelnut, 3.4% (2.0-4.9) for Brazil nut, 2.0% (1.1-2.9) for almond, and 1.8% (1.1-2.5) for walnut. Point prevalence of food challenge-confirmed TNA was 0.04% (0.0-0.1) for hazelnut and 0.02% (0.01-0.1) for walnut. Due to paucity of data, we could not identify any meaningful and consistent differences across age groups and European regions.

Tolerance development in cow's milk-allergic children receiving amino acid-based formula with synbiotics: 36-Months follow-up of a randomized controlled trial (PRESTO Study).

The objective of the present study is to assess the rates of acquired tolerance to cow's milk (CM) after 36 months in subjects who consumed amino acid-based formula with synbiotics (AAF-S) or amino acid-based formula without synbiotics (AAF) during a 1-year intervention period in early life as part of the PRESTO study (Netherlands Trial Register number NTR3725). Differences in CM tolerance development between groups were analysed using a logistic regression model. Results show that the proportion of subjects (mean [±SD] age, 3.8 ± 0.27 years) who developed CM tolerance after 36 months was similar in the group receiving AAF-S (47/60 [78%]) and in the group receiving AAF (49/66 [74%]) (p = 0.253), that is, figures comparable to natural outgrowth of CM allergy. Our data suggest that the consumption of AAF and absence of exposure to CM peptides do not slow down CM tolerance acquisition.

How to diagnose IgE-mediated food allergy.

Immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated food allergy is an immune response, typically to a food protein. Accurate diagnosis reduces unnecessary dietary restrictions and economic and psychological burden on patients and caregivers but relies on a rigorous clinical history, specific IgE diagnostic tests and, where needed, oral food challenge. Increased awareness is needed around which patients to test for IgE-mediated food allergy, as well as terms commonly associated with IgE-mediated food allergy testing, in order to optimise patient diagnosis and management. Herein, we describe approaches to diagnosis of IgE-mediated food allergy, appropriate interpretation of results and risks of overtesting.

Frequency of food allergy in Europe: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

Food allergy (FA) is increasingly reported in Europe, however, the latest prevalence estimates were based on studies published a decade ago. The present work provides the most updated estimates of the prevalence and trends of FA in Europe. Databases were searched for studies published between 2012 and 2021, added to studies published up to 2012. In total, 110 studies were included in this update. Most studies were graded as moderate risk of bias. Pooled lifetime and point prevalence of self-reported FA were 19.9% (95% CI 16.6-23.3) and 13.1% (95% CI 11.3-14.8), respectively. The point prevalence of sensitization based on specific IgE (slgE) was 16.6% (95% CI 12.3-20.8), skin prick test (SPT) 5.7% (95% CI 3.9-7.4), and positive food challenge 0.8% (95% CI 0.5-0.9). While lifetime prevalence of self-reported FA and food challenge positivity only slightly changed, the point prevalence of self-reported FA, sIgE and SPT positivity increased from previous estimates. This may reflect a real increase, increased awareness, increased number of foods assessed, or increased number of studies from countries with less data in the first review. Future studies require rigorous designs and implementation of standardized methodology in diagnosing FA, including use of double-blinded placebo-controlled food challenge to minimize potential biases.

Prevalence estimates of eight big food allergies in Europe: Updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

In 2014, the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology published prevalence estimates for food allergy (FA) and food sensitization (FS) to the so-called eight big food allergens (i.e. cow's milk, egg, wheat, soy, peanut, tree nuts, fish and shellfish) in Europe for studies published between 2000 and 2012. The current work provides 10-year updated prevalence estimates for these food allergens. A protocol was registered on PROSPERO before starting the research (reference number CRD42021266657). Six databases were searched for studies published 2012-2021, added to studies published up to 2012, resulting in a total of 93 studies. Most studies were graded as at moderate risk of bias. The overall pooled estimates for all age groups of self-reported lifetime prevalence were as follows: cow's milk (5.7%, 95% confidence interval 4.4-6.9), egg (2.4%, 1.8-3.0), wheat (1.6%, 0.9-2.3), soy (0.5%, 0.3-0.7), peanut (1.5%, 1.0-2.1), tree nuts (0.9%, 0.6-1.2), fish (1.4%, 0.8-2.0) and shellfish (0.4%, 0.3-0.6). The point prevalence of food challenge-verified allergy were as follows: cow's milk (0.3%, 0.1-0.5), egg (0.8%, 0.5-1.2), wheat (0.1%, 0.01-0.2), soy (0.3%, 0.1-0.4), peanut (0.1%, 0.0-0.2), tree nuts (0.04%, 0.02-0.1), fish (0.02%, 0.0-0.1) and shellfish (0.1%, 0.0-0.2). With some exceptions, the prevalence of allergy to common foods did not substantially change during the last decade; variations by European regions were observed.

EAACI guidelines on the diagnosis of IgE-mediated food allergy.

This European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology guideline provides recommendations for diagnosing IgE-mediated food allergy and was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. Food allergy diagnosis starts with an allergy-focused clinical history followed by tests to determine IgE sensitization, such as serum allergen-specific IgE (sIgE) and skin prick test (SPT), and the basophil activation test (BAT), if available. Evidence for IgE sensitization should be sought for any suspected foods. The diagnosis of allergy to some foods, such as peanut and cashew nut, is well supported by SPT and serum sIgE, whereas there are less data and the performance of these tests is poorer for other foods, such as wheat and soya. The measurement of sIgE to allergen components such as Ara h 2 from peanut, Cor a 14 from hazelnut and Ana o 3 from cashew can be useful to further support the diagnosis, especially in pollen-sensitized individuals. BAT to peanut and sesame can be used additionally. The reference standard for food allergy diagnosis is the oral food challenge (OFC). OFC should be performed in equivocal cases. For practical reasons, open challenges are suitable in most cases. Reassessment of food allergic children with allergy tests and/or OFCs periodically over time will enable reintroduction of food into the diet in the case of spontaneous acquisition of oral tolerance.

Tolerance development in cow's milk-allergic infants receiving amino acid-based formula: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Tolerance development is an important clinical outcome for infants with cow's milk allergy. OBJECTIVE: This multicenter, prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical study (NTR3725) evaluated tolerance development to cow's milk (CM) and safety of an amino acid-based formula (AAF) including synbiotics (AAF-S) comprising prebiotic oligosaccharides (oligofructose, inulin) and probiotic Bifidobacterium breve M-16V in infants with confirmed IgE-mediated CM allergy. METHODS: Subjects aged ≤13 months with IgE-mediated CM allergy were randomized to receive AAF-S (n = 80) or AAF (n = 89) for 12 months. Stratification was based on CM skin prick test wheal size and study site. After 12 and 24 months, CM tolerance was evaluated by double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge. A logistic regression model used the all-subjects randomized data set. RESULTS: At baseline, mean ± SD age was 9.36 ± 2.53 months. At 12 and 24 months, respectively, 49% and 62% of subjects were CM tolerant (AAF-S 45% and 64%; AAF 52% and 59%), and not differ significantly between groups. During the 12-month intervention, the number of subjects reporting at least 1 adverse event did not significantly differ between groups; however, fewer subjects required hospitalization due to serious adverse events categorized as infections in the AAF-S versus AAF group (9% vs 20%; P = .036). CONCLUSIONS: After 12 and 24 months, CM tolerance was not different between groups and was in line with natural outgrowth. Results suggest that during the intervention, fewer subjects receiving AAF-S required hospitalization due to infections.