RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: IgE-mediated food allergy (FA) is a global health concern with substantial individual and societal implications. While diverse intervention strategies have been researched, inconsistencies in reported outcomes limit evaluations of FA treatments. To streamline evaluations and promote consistent reporting, the Core Outcome Measures for Food Allergy (COMFA) initiative aimed to establish a Core Outcome Set (COS) for FA clinical trials and observational studies of interventions. METHODS: The project involved a review of published clinical trials, trial protocols and qualitative literature. Outcomes found as a result of review were categorized and classified, informing a two-round online-modified Delphi process followed by hybrid consensus meeting to finalize the COS. RESULTS: The literature review, taxonomy mapping and iterative discussions with diverse COMFA group yielded an initial list of 39 outcomes. The iterative online and in-person meetings reduced the list to 13 outcomes for voting in the formal Delphi process. One more outcome was added based on participant suggestions after the first Delphi round. A total of 778 participants from 52 countries participated, with 442 participating in both Delphi rounds. No outcome met a priori criteria for inclusion, and one was excluded as a result of the Delphi. Thirteen outcomes were brought to the hybrid consensus meeting as a result of Delphi and two outcomes, 'allergic symptoms' and 'quality of life' achieved consensus for inclusion as 'core' outcomes. CONCLUSION: In addition to the mandatory reporting of adverse events for FA clinical trials or observational studies of interventions, allergic symptoms and quality of life should be measured as core outcomes. Future work by COMFA will define how best to measure these core outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos , Calidad de Vida , Humanos , Técnica Delphi , Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos/terapia , Inmunoglobulina E , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud , Proyectos de Investigación , Resultado del Tratamiento , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Estudios Observacionales como AsuntoRESUMEN
Most children with milk and egg allergy are nonreactive to modified forms of milk and egg in bakery products such as muffins because of 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 and then advise dietary introduction of baked products for children who have tolerance. 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 have allergy to BM or BE, the ladder is essentially oral immunotherapy, although not always labeled or recognized as such. Risk assessment and education of patients suitable for home introduction are 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. Moreover, 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.
Asunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad al Huevo , Hipersensibilidad a la Leche , Niño , Humanos , Animales , Dieta/métodos , Leche , Culinaria/métodos , Inmunoglobulina E , Alérgenos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Egg is the third most common food allergy in children; however, data on pediatric egg-induced anaphylaxis are sparse. OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of pediatric egg-induced anaphylaxis. METHODS: Children presenting with anaphylaxis were recruited from 13 emergency departments as part of the Cross-Canada Anaphylaxis Registry, from which data on anaphylaxis triggered by egg were extracted. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with prehospital epinephrine autoinjector (EAI) use and to compare anaphylaxis triggered by egg with other triggers of food-induced anaphylaxis (FIA). RESULTS: We recruited 302 children with egg-induced anaphylaxis. The mean age was 2.6 years (SD = 3.6), and 55.3% were male. Only 39.4% had previously been diagnosed with an egg allergy. Prehospital EAI use was 32.1%, but this was not significantly lower than in other triggers of FIA (P = .26). Only 1.4% of patients required hospital admission. Relative to other triggers of FIA, patients with egg-induced anaphylaxis were significantly younger (P < .001) and exhibited more vomiting (P = .0053) and less throat tightness (P = .0015) and angioedema (P < .001). CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest published cohort of pediatric egg-induced anaphylaxis. In this cohort, prehospital EAI use was very low. In addition, we identified certain symptoms that distinguish egg-induced from other triggers of FIA. Taken together, high suspicion is crucial in identifying egg-induced anaphylaxis, given the younger patient demographic and frequent lack of FIA history.
Asunto(s)
Anafilaxia , Hipersensibilidad al Huevo , Epinefrina , Humanos , Anafilaxia/tratamiento farmacológico , Anafilaxia/etiología , Anafilaxia/diagnóstico , Anafilaxia/terapia , Masculino , Femenino , Estudios Transversales , Hipersensibilidad al Huevo/terapia , Hipersensibilidad al Huevo/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidad al Huevo/inmunología , Hipersensibilidad al Huevo/complicaciones , Preescolar , Niño , Epinefrina/uso terapéutico , Epinefrina/administración & dosificación , Lactante , Canadá/epidemiología , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Sistema de RegistrosAsunto(s)
Alérgenos , Arachis , Desensibilización Inmunológica , Hipersensibilidad al Cacahuete , Humanos , Hipersensibilidad al Cacahuete/terapia , Hipersensibilidad al Cacahuete/inmunología , Desensibilización Inmunológica/métodos , Administración Oral , Arachis/inmunología , Alérgenos/inmunología , Alérgenos/administración & dosificaciónRESUMEN
There is an increasing trend in the management of food allergy toward active treatment using allergen immunotherapy (AIT). Although AIT is efficacious, treatment-related adverse events are common, particularly with oral immunotherapy in those with high levels of allergen-specific IgE sensitization. In clinical practice, these adverse events inevitably create challenges: clinicians and patients routinely face decisions whether to alter the dose itself, the frequency of dosing, and the pace of escalation, or indeed discontinue AIT altogether. Flexibility is therefore needed to adapt treatment, particularly in clinical practice, so that participants are "treated-to-target." For example, this may entail a significant change in the dosing protocol or even switching from one route of administration to another in response to frequent adverse events. We refer to this approach as flexible immunotherapy. However, there is little evidence to inform clinicians as to what changes to treatment are most likely to result in treatment success. Classical clinical trials rely, by necessity, on relatively rigid updosing protocols. To provide an evidence base to optimize AIT, the food allergy community should adopt adaptive platform trials, where a "master protocol" facilitates more efficient evaluation, including longer-term outcomes of multiple interventions. Within a single clinical trial, participants are able to switch between different treatment arms; interventions can be added or dropped without compromising the integrity of the trial. Developing platform trials for food AIT may initially be costly, but they represent a significant opportunity to grow the evidence base (with respect to both treatment outcomes and biomarker discovery) at scale. In addition, they could help understand longitudinal disease trajectories that are difficult to study in clinical trials for food allergy due to the time needed to demonstrate changes in efficacy. Finally, their adoption would achieve greater collaboration and consistency in approaches to proactive management of food allergy in routine clinical practice. As a community, we need to actively pursue this with funders and established research collaborations to deliver the very best outcomes for our patients and their families.
Asunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos , Humanos , Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos/terapia , Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos/etiología , Desensibilización Inmunológica/métodos , Alimentos , Alérgenos/uso terapéutico , Administración OralRESUMEN
The use of infant formulas (IFs) based on hydrolyzed cow's milk proteins to prevent cow's milk allergy (CMA) is highly debated. The risk of sensitization to milk proteins induced by IFs may be affected by the degree of hydrolysis (DH) as well as other physicochemical properties of the cow's milk-based protein hydrolysates within the IFs. The immunogenicity (specific IgG1 induction) and sensitizing capacity (specific IgE induction) of 30 whey- or casein-based hydrolysates with different physicochemical characteristics were compared using an intraperitoneal model of CMA in Brown Norway rats. In general, the whey-based hydrolysates demonstrated higher immunogenicity than casein-based hydrolysates, inducing higher levels of hydrolysate-specific and intact-specific IgG1. The immunogenicity of the hydrolysates was influenced by DH, peptide size distribution profile, peptide aggregation, nano-sized particle formation, and surface hydrophobicity. Yet, only the surface hydrophobicity was found to affect the sensitizing capacity of hydrolysates, as high hydrophobicity was associated with higher levels of specific IgE. The whey- and casein-based hydrolysates exhibited distinct immunological properties with highly diverse molecular composition and physicochemical properties which are not accounted for by measuring DH, which was a poor predictor of sensitizing capacity. Thus, future studies should consider and account for physicochemical characteristics when assessing the sensitizing capacity of cow's milk-based protein hydrolysates.
Asunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad a la Leche , Suero Lácteo , Humanos , Animales , Bovinos , Femenino , Lactante , Ratas , Caseínas , Hipersensibilidad a la Leche/prevención & control , Hidrólisis , Hidrolisados de Proteína , Proteína de Suero de Leche , Proteínas de la Leche , Inmunoglobulina G , Péptidos , Inmunoglobulina ERESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has emerged as the most popular therapy for food allergy. However, data on the long-term adherence and efficacy of this approach are sparse. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the long-term adherence rates to OIT protocol and the associated risk of allergic reactions. METHODS: Patients who completed milk OIT and reached a maintenance dose of 200 mL of milk were surveyed biannually on their dairy consumption and occurrence of allergic reactions. A survival analysis was performed to evaluate the association between the risk of reaction and the adherence to OIT maintenance protocol. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 50 patients. Only 56% of the cohort adhered to the protocol, which consisted of ingesting a minimum of 200 mL of milk at least 3 times per week. Adherent patients had a significantly reduced risk of allergic reactions as well as a reduced incidence of anaphylaxis, health care/emergency room visits, and epinephrine/antihistamine administration. CONCLUSIONS: The findings demonstrate the importance of consistent maintenance dose consumption in the management of food allergies, with regular milk consumption contributing to the maintenance of unresponsiveness and decreased risk of allergic symptoms.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Racialized communities, including Black Canadians, have disproportionately higher COVID-19 cases. We examined the extent to which SARS-CoV-2 infection has affected the Black Canadian community and the factors associated with the infection. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey in an area of Ontario (northwest Toronto/Peel Region) with a high proportion of Black residents along with 2 areas that have lower proportions of Black residents (Oakville and London, Ontario). SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies were determined using the EUROIMMUN assay. The study was conducted between August 15, 2020, and December 15, 2020. RESULTS: Among 387 evaluable subjects, the majority, 273 (70.5%), were enrolled from northwest Toronto and adjoining suburban areas of Peel, Ontario. The seropositivity values for Oakville and London were comparable (3.3% (2/60; 95% CI 0.4-11.5) and 3.9% (2/51; 95% CI 0.5-13.5), respectively). Relative to these areas, the seropositivity was higher for the northwest Toronto/Peel area at 12.1% (33/273), relative risk (RR) 3.35 (1.22-9.25). Persons 19 years of age or less had the highest seropositivity (10/50; 20.0%, 95% CI 10.3-33.7%), RR 2.27 (1.23-3.59). There was a trend for an interaction effect between race and location of residence as this relates to the relative risk of seropositivity. INTERPRETATION: During the early phases of the pandemic, the seropositivity within a COVID-19 high-prevalence zone was threefold greater than lower prevalence areas of Ontario. Black individuals were among those with the highest seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccination has been associated with anaphylaxis and hypersensitivity reactions. Infectious disease physicians and allergists in the Canadian Special Immunization Clinic (SIC) Network developed guidance for evaluating patients with adverse events following immunization (AEFI) including suspected hypersensitivity. This study evaluated management and adverse event recurrence following subsequent COVID-19 vaccinations. METHODS: Individuals aged 12 years and older enrolled at participating SICs before February 28, 2023 who were referred for suspected or diagnosed hypersensitivity reaction following COVID-19 vaccination, or for prevaccination assessment of suspected allergy to a COVID-19 vaccine component were included. De-identified clinical assessments and revaccination data, captured in a centralized database, were analyzed. The Brighton Collaboration case definition (BCCD) for anaphylaxis (2023 version) was applied. RESULTS: The analysis included 206 participants from 13 sites: 26 participants referred for pre-vaccination assessment and 180 participants referred for adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination (15/180 [8.3%] with BCCD confirmed anaphylaxis, 84 [46.7%] with immediate hypersensitivity symptoms not meeting BCCD, 33 [18.3%] with other diagnosed hypersensitivity reactions, and 48 [26.7%] participants with a final diagnosis of non-hypersensitivity AEFI). Among participants referred for AEFIs following COVID-19 vaccination, 166/180 (92.2%) were recommended for COVID-19 revaccination after risk assessment, of whom 158/166 (95.2%) were revaccinated (all with a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine). After revaccination, 1/15 (6.7%) participants with prior anaphylaxis, 1/77 (1.3%) with immediate hypersensitivity not meeting criteria for anaphylaxis and 1/24 (4.2%) with other physician diagnosed hypersensitivity developed recurrent AEFI symptoms that met the BCCD for anaphylaxis. All 26 participants referred pre-vaccination, including 9 (34.6%) with history of polyethylene glycol-asparaginase reactions, were vaccinated without occurrence of immediate hypersensitivity symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Most individuals in this national cohort who experienced a hypersensitivity event following COVID-19 vaccination and were referred for specialist review were revaccinated without AEFI recurrence, suggesting that specialist evaluation can facilitate safe revaccination.
RESUMEN
Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is the medically supervised ingestion of a food allergen. Understanding of the expected outcomes of OIT allow for risk-benefit assessments for patient-centered decisions. The efficacy of OIT to achieve desensitization in children has been confirmed in multiple meta-analyses, even with vastly disparate study populations and methodologies. Most children initiated on OIT will achieve the ability to eat more allergen before experiencing an allergic reaction than if they continue to avoid their allergen. This effect is diminished without regular ingestion. Previous meta-analyses showed increased allergic reactions on OIT versus avoidance or placebo due to the dosing itself; however, a recent meta-analysis showed that peanut OIT in children did not lead to an increase in allergic reactions. Analysis of emerging data suggests that OIT may reduce reactions to accidental exposures over time. Important patient-centered outcomes, including reaction avoidance or amelioration, and psychosocial impacts and/or quality of life, and studies of more demographically representative populations are also necessary.