Safety, clinical, and immunologic efficacy of a Chinese herbal medicine (Food Allergy Herbal Formula-2) for food allergy.

BACKGROUND: Food Allergy Herbal Formula-2 (FAHF-2) is a 9-herb formula based on traditional Chinese medicine that blocks peanut-induced anaphylaxis in a murine model. In phase I studies FAHF-2 was found to be safe and well tolerated. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of FAHF-2 as a treatment for food allergy. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study 68 subjects aged 12 to 45 years with allergies to peanut, tree nut, sesame, fish, and/or shellfish, which were confirmed by baseline double-blind, placebo-controlled oral food challenges (DBPCFCs), received FAHF-2 (n = 46) or placebo (n = 22). After 6 months of therapy, subjects underwent DBPCFCs. For those who demonstrated increases in the eliciting dose, a repeat DBPCFC was performed 3 months after stopping therapy. RESULTS: Treatment was well tolerated, with no serious adverse events. By using intent-to-treat analysis, the placebo group had a higher eliciting dose and cumulative dose (P = .05) at the end-of-treatment DBPCFC. There was no difference in the requirement for epinephrine to treat reactions (P = .55). There were no significant differences in allergen-specific IgE and IgG4 levels, cytokine production by PBMCs, or basophil activation between the active and placebo groups. In vitro immunologic studies performed on subjects' baseline PBMCs incubated with FAHF-2 and food allergen produced significantly less IL-5, greater IL-10 levels, and increased numbers of regulatory T cells than untreated cells. Notably, 44% of subjects had poor drug adherence for at least one third of the study period. CONCLUSION: FAHF-2 is a safe herbal medication for subjects with food allergy and shows favorable in vitro immunomodulatory effects; however, efficacy for improving tolerance to food allergens is not demonstrated at the dose and duration used.

Anaphylaxis to pine nut: cross-reactivity to Artemisia vulgaris?

The use of pine nuts, the seeds of Pinus pinea, is on the increasing in the modern Mediterranean diet. Little more than 20 cases of allergy to this tree nut have been published, and cross-reactivity with pine pollen, peanut and almond has already been reported. We describe the case of a young boy with several episodes of anaphylaxis after pine nut ingestion. Specific IgE to pine nut and Artemisia vulgaris was demonstrated by skin prick tests and in vitro determination of specific IgE, although no IgE to pine pollen or other nuts was detected. Immunoblotting of Artemisia vulgaris and pine nut revealed two matching diffuse bands, just below 14 kDa and 30 kDa. The ImmunoCAP inhibition assays showed complete inhibition of pine nut specific IgE after serum incubation with Artemisia vulgaris extract. As far as we know, this is the first reported case of documented cross-reactivity between pine nut and Artemisia vulgaris.

Anaphylaxis to foods.

Three crucial areas of the management of anaphylaxis due to food allergy are discussed: making a diagnosis, deciding who needs a self-injectable adrenaline device and spotting the novel allergen. Managing children and teenagers with anaphylaxis is challenging due to the lack of available evidence that specific addresses these issue. The available evidence is presented and discussed.

Mustard allergy confirmed by double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges: clinical features and cross-reactivity with mugwort pollen and plant-derived foods.

BACKGROUND: Mustard IgE-mediated allergy is supposed to be a rare cause of food allergy, and its clinical features and cross-reactivities have not been fully elucidated. METHODS: A prospective study was carried out, recruiting mustard allergic patients, and paired control subjects. A clinical questionnaire was administered, and skin-prick tests (SPT) with panels of aeroallergens and foods, serum extraction for in vitro tests and double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFC) were performed. RESULTS: Thirty-eight mainly adult patients, with 10.5% reporting systemic anaphylaxis, were included in the study [age (mean +/- SD): 21.9 +/- 8.6 years]. DBPCFC were performed in 24 patients, being positive in 14 cases (58.3%). Patients with positive outcome showed significantly greater mustard SPT than those with negative outcome (8.2 +/- 3.7 vs 5.3 +/- 2.4 mm, P <0.05), and the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis yielded a cut-off value for mustard commercial SPT of 8 mm, with a specificity of 90% (95% CI, 55.5-98.3), and a sensitivity of 50% (95% CI, 23.1-76.9). A significant association between mustard hypersensitivity and mugwort pollen sensitization was found (97.4% of patients), with partial cross-reactivity demonstrated by UniCAP System inhibition assays. All patients showed sensitization to other members of Brassicaceae family, and cross-reactivity among them was also confirmed. Moreover, significant associations with nut (97.4%), leguminous (94.7%), corn (78.9%), and Rosaceae fruit (89.5%) sensitizations were also shown. Around 40% of these food sensitizations were symptomatic, including food-dependent exercise-induced anaphylaxis in six patients. CONCLUSIONS: Mustard allergy is a not-uncommon disorder that can induce severe reactions. Significant associations with mugwort pollinosis and several plant-derived food allergies are demonstrated, suggesting a new mustard-mugwort allergy syndrome. A relationship between this syndrome and food-dependent exercise-induced anaphylaxis is also reported.