Establishing the diagnosis of peanut allergy in children never exposed to peanut or with an uncertain history: a cross-Canada study.

The diagnosis of peanut allergy (PA) can be complex especially in children never exposed to peanut or with an uncertain history. The aim of the study is to determine which diagnostic algorithms are used by Canadian allergists in such children. Children 1-17 yrs old never exposed to peanut or with an uncertain history having an allergist-confirmed diagnosis of PA were recruited from the Montreal Children's Hospital (MCH) and allergy advocacy organizations. Data on their clinical history and confirmatory testing were compared to six diagnostic algorithms: I. Skin prick test (SPT) >or=8 mm or specific IgE >or=5 kU/l or positive food challenge (+FC); II. SPT >or=8 or IgE >or=15 or +FC; III. SPT >or=13 or IgE >or=5 or +FC; IV. SPT >or=13 or IgE >or=15 or +FC; V. SPT >or=3 and IgE >or=5 or IgE >or=5 or +FC; VI. SPT >or=3 and IgE >or=15 or IgE >or=15 or +FC. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with the use of each algorithm. Of 497 children recruited, 70% provided full data. The least stringent algorithm, algorithm I, was applied in 81.6% (95% CI, 77-85.6%) of children and the most stringent, algorithm VI, in 42.6% (95% CI, 37.2-48.1%).The factor most associated with the use of all algorithms was diagnosis made at the MCH in those never exposed to peanut. Other factors associated with the use of specific diagnostic algorithms were higher paternal education, longer disease duration, and the presence of hives, asthma, eczema, or other food allergies. Over 18% (95% CI, 14.4-23.0%) of children were diagnosed with PA without fulfilling even the least stringent diagnostic criteria.

Role of food labels in accidental exposures in food-allergic individuals in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the impact of food labeling on the allergic consumer. OBJECTIVE: To determine the proportion of food-allergic individuals attributing an accidental exposure to inappropriate labeling, failure to read a food label, or ignoring a precautionary statement and to identify factors associated with accidental exposures. METHODS: Food-allergic individuals or their caregivers were recruited from a Canadian registry of individuals with a physician-confirmed diagnosis of peanut allergy and from allergy awareness organizations. Participants completed questionnaires regarding accidental exposures due to specific food labeling issues. The association between accidental exposures and characteristics of food-allergic individuals or their caregivers was estimated using multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: Of 1,862 potential participants, 1,454 (78.1%) responded. Of the 47.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 45.1%-50.5%) of respondents who experienced an accidental exposure, 47.0% (95% CI, 43.1%-50.9%) attributed the event to inappropriate labeling, 28.6% (95% CI, 25.1%-32.2%) to failure to read a food label, and 8.3% (95% CI, 6.3%-10.7%) to ignoring a precautionary statement. Food-allergic individuals who were allergic to peanut, tree nut, fish, or shellfish were less likely to experience an accidental exposure due to the allergen not being identified in plain language. CONCLUSIONS: A considerable proportion of accidental exposures are attributed to inappropriate labeling, failure to read labels, and ignoring precautionary statements. Clear and consistent labeling of food allergens combined with increased consumer education is necessary to improve consumer confidence and compliance and to reduce accidental exposures.

Availability of the epinephrine autoinjector at school in children with peanut allergy.

BACKGROUND: Peanut allergy accounts for most severe food-related allergic reactions, and accidental exposures are frequent. Delayed administration of epinephrine and the allergic individual's failure to personally carry epinephrine contribute to fatal outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To describe epinephrine autoinjector availability at school and to determine factors that might affect autoinjector availability in children allergic to peanut. METHODS: Two hundred seventy-one children with peanut allergy living in Quebec were queried about their autoinjector. Logistic regression models were used to select factors associated with device availability. RESULTS: Four of 271 children diagnosed as having peanut allergy were not prescribed autoinjectors. Forty-eight percent of the children did not carry the autoinjector with them at school. In 78.0% of those, the autoinjector was located in the nurse's or another school office, which was staffed by a full-time nurse only in 18.5%. Of all the respondents, those administered epinephrine for a previous reaction (odds ratio [OR], 2.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-5.7), older children (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 1.0-1.2), and those living only with their mother (OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.0-11.0) were more likely to carry the autoinjector with them at school. Of children 7 years or older, those who experienced a severe reaction were more likely to carry their autoinjector (OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.4-8.1). CONCLUSIONS: Almost 50% of children allergic to peanut might experience a delay in anaphylaxis treatment due to limited access to their device. More education is required regarding the importance of a readily available autoinjector.

Peanut-free guidelines reduce school lunch peanut contents.

BACKGROUND: Some schools implement peanut-free guidelines (PFG) requesting omission of peanut from lunches. Our study assessed parental awareness of, and adherence to, PFG by comparing the percentage of lunches containing peanut between primary school classes with and without PFG in Montreal, Québec. METHODS: Parents, school principals and teachers were queried concerning the school's PFG and children's lunches were inspected by a dietician for peanut-containing foods. RESULTS: When lunch peanut contents were compared in randomly selected classrooms, peanut was found in 5/861 lunches in classes with PFG (0.6%, 95% CI 0.2% to 1.4%) and in 84/845 lunches in classes without PFG (9.9%, 95% CI 8.0% to 12.2%), a 9.4% (95% CI 7.3% to 11.4%) difference. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that PFG are effective in reducing peanut in classrooms providing a basis for future research that should address whether or not the reduction in peanut achieved by restrictive lunch policies decreases the morbidity associated with peanut allergy in the school setting.

Prevalence of peanut allergy in primary-school children in Montreal, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Peanut allergy is receiving increasing attention. Only one study has estimated the prevalence in North America, but it did not corroborate history with diagnostic testing. OBJECTIVE: We estimated the prevalence of peanut allergy in Montreal by administering questionnaires regarding peanut ingestion to children in kindergarten through grade 3 in randomly selected schools. METHODS: Respondents were stratified as follows: (1). peanut tolerant, (2). never-rarely ingest peanut, (3). convincing history of peanut allergy, and (4). uncertain history of peanut allergy. Groups 2, 3, and 4 underwent peanut skin prick tests (SPTs), and if the responses were positive in groups 2 or 4, measurement of peanut-specific IgE were undertaken. Children in group 3 with a positive SPT response were considered allergic to peanut without further testing. Children in groups 2 and 4 with peanut-specific IgE levels of less than 15 kU/L underwent oral peanut challenges. RESULTS: Of the 7768 children surveyed, 4339 responded, 94.6% in group 1. The prevalence of peanut allergy was 1.50% (95% CI, 1.16%-1.92%). When multiple imputation was used to incorporate data on those responding to the questionnaire but withdrawing before testing, the estimated prevalence increased to 1.76% (95% CI, 1.38%-2.21%). When data regarding the peanut allergy status of nonresponders (as declared to the school before the study) were also incorporated, the estimated prevalence was 1.34% (95% CI, 1.08%-1.64%). CONCLUSION: Our prevalence study is the first in North America to corroborate history with confirmatory testing and the largest worldwide to incorporate these techniques. We have shown that, even with conservative assumptions, prevalence exceeds 1.0%.