Objective eliciting doses of peanut-allergic adults and children can be combined for risk assessment purposes.

BACKGROUND: To improve food labelling strategies, information regarding eliciting doses (EDs) and the effect of patient characteristics on these EDs is necessary. OBJECTIVE: To establish EDs for objective and subjective symptoms and analyse the effect of sensitization levels and other patient characteristics on threshold distribution curves (TDCs). METHODS: Threshold data from 100 adults and 262 children with a positive food challenge were analysed with interval-censoring survival analysis (ICSA) and fitted to a TDC from which EDs could be extracted. Possible influencing factors were analysed as covariates by ICSA. A hazard ratio (HR) was calculated in case of a significant effect. RESULTS: TDCs for both objective and subjective symptoms were significantly different between adults and children (P < 0.001). Objective ED05 values, however, were comparable (2.86 mg peanut protein in adults and 6.38 mg in children). Higher levels of sIgE to Ara h 2 and peanut extract were associated with a larger proportion of patient groups reacting to a dose increase with objective symptoms (adults and children) or subjective symptoms (adults, in children a trend). Age had a similar effect in children (HR 1.05 for objective symptoms and 1.09 for subjective symptoms). Gender had no effect on TDCs. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Subjective and objective TDCs were different between adults and children, but objective ED05 values were comparable, meaning that threshold data from children and adults can be combined for elaboration of reference doses for risk assessment. Higher sIgE levels to Ara h 2 and peanut extract were associated with a larger proportion of both patient groups to react to a certain dose increase.

Peanut allergy is common among hazelnut-sensitized subjects but is not primarily the result of IgE cross-reactivity.

BACKGROUND: Hazelnut and peanut are botanically unrelated foods, but patients are often sensitized and allergic to both, for reasons that are not well understood. METHODS: To investigate molecular cosensitization and cross-reactivity to peanut in hazelnut-sensitized individuals, children (n = 81) and adults (n = 80) were retrospectively selected based on sensitization to hazelnut. IgE to hazelnut extract, Cor a 1, 8, 9 and 14, to peanut extract, Ara h 1, 2, 3, 8 and 9, and to Bet v 1 was determined by ImmunoCAP. Allergy to hazelnut and peanut was established by DBPCFC and/or detailed clinical history. Patients were either tolerant or displayed subjective or objective symptoms to either food. IgE cross-reactivity between hazelnut and peanut storage proteins was assessed by reciprocal ImmunoCAP inhibition experiments. RESULTS: Of the 161 hazelnut-sensitized subjects, 109 (68%) were also sensitized to peanut, and 73 (45%) had clinical expression of allergy to peanut that was not associated with the presence or severity of hazelnut allergy. Instead, it was associated with IgE reactivity to peanut storage proteins, in particular Ara h 2. No cross-reactivity could be detected between Ara h 2 and Cor a 14, and 2 of 13 subjects displayed extensive cross-reactivity between 11S globulins; in plasma of both individuals, Ara h 3 almost completely inhibited IgE binding to Cor a 9. CONCLUSIONS: Peanut allergy is not primarily the result of IgE cross-reactivity to hazelnut storage proteins. IgE to Cor a 14 and Ara h 2 may serve as useful markers of primary sensitization to hazelnut and peanut, respectively.

Hazelnut allergy differs between children and adults in frequency of severity, aetiology and relevance of diagnostic parameters.

BACKGROUND: Hazelnut allergy in adults is often birch pollen related, whereas in children, non-pollen-related hazelnut allergy is more frequent. OBJECTIVE: To compare the differences in hazelnut allergy between children and adults with regard to severity, aetiology and diagnostic value of routinely available data. METHODS: Adults (n = 120) who underwent a double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) for hazelnut were selected and compared to 151 hazelnut-challenged children from a previous study. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to build a prediction model. The area under the curve (AUC) of the ROC curve was determined for level of hazelnut-specific IgE, skin prick test (SPT) and the prediction model. RESULTS: Hazelnut allergy was confirmed by DBPCFC in 95/120 (79%) adults, 77% had only subjective and 23% objective symptoms, whereas in children, 63% had objective symptoms to hazelnut. Within the group of children, the frequency of severe hazelnut allergy was higher in younger than in older children. A concomitant birch pollen allergy was more common in adults (82%) than in children (39%) with a hazelnut allergy. A detailed history with allergic symptoms to previous ingestion of hazelnut had the highest diagnostic value in adults, while in children, SPT to hazelnut extract showed the highest level of discrimination between clinical reactivity and tolerance to hazelnut. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Hazelnut allergy differs between children and adults with respect to frequency of severity, aetiology and relevance of diagnostic parameters. Therefore, age has to be taken into account in the diagnostic work-up of a hazelnut allergy.

A systematic review of the effect of thermal processing on the allergenicity of tree nuts.

BACKGROUND: Allergenicity of foods can be influenced by processing. Tree nuts are an important source of nutrition and increasingly consumed; however, processing methods are quite variable and data are currently lacking on the effects of processing on allergenicity. OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic literature review on the effects of food processing on the allergenicity of tree nuts. METHODS: A systematic literature search of PubMed and Embase databases was performed, with screening of references, related articles and citations. Studies were included if they assessed the allergenicity or immunogenicity of processed nuts. RESULTS: The search resulted in 32 articles suitable for analysis. Clinical studies indicate that roasting reduces the allergenicity of hazelnut in individuals with a birch pollen allergy and reactivity to raw hazelnut. Thermal processing may reduce the allergenicity of the PR-10 protein in hazelnut and almond in vitro. The majority of the in vitro studies investigating the allergenicity of nonspecific lipid transfer proteins (nsLTPs) and seed storage proteins in hazelnut, almond, cashew nut, Brazil nut, walnut, pecan nut and pistachio nut show heat stability towards different thermal processing methods. CONCLUSION: Thermal processing may reduce allergenicity of PR-10 proteins in hazelnut and almond, in contrast to nsLTPs and seed storage proteins. This has important implications for source materials used for IgE testing and food challenges and diet advice.

Diagnostic value of hazelnut allergy tests including rCor a 1 spiking in double-blind challenged children.

BACKGROUND: The diagnostic value of hazelnut allergy tests in double-blind challenged children is largely unknown. The aim of this study was to analyze the performance of current diagnostic tests for hazelnut allergy in children and the effect of spiking. METHODS: Data of 151 children who underwent a double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge for hazelnut were analyzed. The positive predictive value and negative predictive value (PPV/NPV) of level of specific IgE (sIgE) for hazelnut, the influence of rCor a 1 spiking of the ImmunoCAP, and size of the skin prick test (SPT) for hazelnut were determined, also in relation to the severity of the hazelnut allergy. Reported accidental ingestion leading to an allergic reaction to hazelnut was also analyzed in relation to hazelnut allergy. RESULTS: Specific IgE ≥0.35 kU(A) /l for hazelnut was a moderate predictor for hazelnut allergy. The spiking decreased the PPV from 41% to 38% and increased the NPV from 91% to 100% for sIgE ≥0.35 kU(A) /l. The maximum reached PPV was 73% for sIgE cutoff of 26 kU(A) /l. Level of sIgE before spiking was significantly different between different grades of severity and was lost after spiking. Skin prick test was a better predictor for hazelnut allergy and severity than the level of sIgE. A history of accidental ingestion leading to an allergic reaction to hazelnut had a predictive value of 59% for hazelnut allergy. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed a good NPV of diagnostic tests for hazelnut allergy in children which further improved by rCor a 1 spiking. However, the PPVs are moderate and decreased by spiking.