World Allergy Organization (WAO) Diagnosis and Rationale for Action against Cow's Milk Allergy (DRACMA) guideline update - XI - Milk supplement/replacement formulas for infants and toddlers with CMA - Systematic review.

Background: Cow's milk allergy (CMA) is the most complex and common food allergy in infants. Elimination of cow's milk from the diet and replacement with a specialized formula for infants with cow's milk allergy who cannot be breastfed is an established approach to minimize the risk of severe allergic reactions while avoiding nutritional deficiencies. Given the availability of multiple options, such as extensively hydrolyzed cow's milk-based formula (eHF-CM), aminoacid formula (AAF), hydrolyzed rice formula (HRF), and soy formula (SF), there is some uncertainty regarding which formula might represent the most suitable choice with respect to health outcomes. The addition of probiotics to a specialized formula has also been proposed as a potential approach to possibly increase the benefit. We systematically reviewed specialized formulas for infants with CMA to inform the updated World Allergy Organization (WAO) DRACMA guidelines. Objective: To systematically review and synthesize the available evidence about the use of specialized formulas for the management of individuals with CMA. Methods: We searched from inception PubMed, Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the websites of selected allergy organizations, for randomized and non-randomized trials of any language investigating specialized formulas with or without probiotics. We included all studies irrespective of the language of the original publication. The last search was conducted in January 2024. We synthesized the identified evidence quantitatively or narratively as appropriate and summarized it in the evidence profiles. We conducted this review following the PRISMA, Cochrane methods, and the GRADE approach. Results: We identified 3558 records including 14 randomized trials and 7 observational studies. Very low certainty evidence suggested that in infants with IgE-mediated CMA, eHF-CM, compared with AAF, might have higher probability of outgrowing CMA (risk ratio (RR) 2.32; risk difference (RD) 25 more per 100), while showing potentially lower probability of severe vomiting (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.88; RD 23 fewer per 100, 95% CI 3 to 26) and developing food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES) (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.82; RD 34 fewer per 100, 95% CI 7 to 39). We also found, however, that eHF-CM might be inferior to AAF in supporting a physiological growth, with respect to both weight (-5.5% from baseline, 95%CI -9.5% to -1.5%) and length (-0.7 z-score change, 95%CI -1.15 to -0.25) (very low certainty). We found similar effects for eHF-CM, compared with AAF, also in non-IgE CMA. When compared with SF, eHF-CM might favor weight gain for IgE CMA infants (0.23 z-score change, 95%CI 0.01 to 0.45), and tolerance acquisition (RR 1.86, 95%CI 1.03 to 3.37; RD 27%, 95%CI 1%-74%) for non-IgE CMA (both at very low certainty of the evidence (CoE)). The comparison of eHF-CM vs. HRF, and HRF vs. SF, showed no difference in effect (very low certainty). For IgE CMA patients, low certainty evidence suggested that adding probiotics (L. rhamnosus GG, L. casei CRL431 and B. lactis Bb-12) might increase the probability of developing CMA tolerance (RR 2.47, 95%CI 1.03 to 5.93; RD 27%, 95%CI 1%-91%), and reduce the risk of severe wheezing (RR 0.12, 95%CI 0.02 to 0.95; RD -23%, 95%CI -8% to -0.4%). However, in non-IgE CMA infants, the addition of probiotics (L. rhamnosus GG) showed no significant effect, as supported by low to very low CoE. Conclusions: Currently available studies comparing eHF-CM, AAF, HRF, and SF provide very low certainty evidence about their effects in infants with IgE-mediated and non-IgE-mediated CMA. Our review revealed several limitations in the current body of evidence, primarily arising from concerns related to the quality of studies, the limited size of the participant populations and most importantly the lack of diversity and standardization in the compared interventions. It is therefore imperative for future studies to be methodologically rigorous and investigate a broader spectrum of available interventions. We encourage clinicians and researchers to review current World Allergy Organization (WAO) Diagnosis and Rationale for Action against Cow's Milk Allergy (DRACMA) Guidelines for suggestions on how to use milk replacement formulas in clinical practice and what additional research would be the most beneficial.

The impact of probiotics on core autism symptoms - A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Studies have shown evidence of gut dysbiosis in individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Various microbiome-modifying treatments, including probiotics, have been proposed. This review systematically assessed the evidence on the effects of probiotics on core autism symptoms in children with ASD. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature search in Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, PsycInfo, and clinical trial registries, up to March 2023, and updated on January 10, 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of parallel-group and cross-over designs were eligible. The population included individuals below 20 years of age diagnosed with ASD. Trials evaluating the effects of probiotics (any strain or dose) compared to placebo, no treatment, or another intervention were included. The outcomes of interest included the core autism symptoms: deficits in social skills, communication skills, and restricted, repetitive behaviors. No language restrictions were applied. Studies were excluded if an additional active compound was administered. The risk of bias was assessed using the Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (RoB 2). This review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023393000). RESULTS: In total, 12 RCTs assessing 630 participants were included. A borderline significant beneficial effect of probiotics on core ASD symptoms was found (8 RCTs, mean difference -0.21; 95% CI -0.39 to -0.03). Subgroup analysis according to study type showed a significant positive effect in parallel group trials (6 RCTs, mean difference -0.26; 95% CI -0.48 to -0.05). The pooled effect estimates for the other outcomes didn't reveal significant differences between the groups. Importantly, the risk of bias was high in nine studies. CONCLUSIONS: Available data do not provide high-quality evidence supporting the use of probiotics for ASD symptoms in children.

Is There Evidence to Support Probiotic Use for Healthy People?

Probiotics are typically marketed as foods and dietary supplements, categories for products intended to maintain health in generally healthy populations and which, unlike drugs, cannot claim to treat or cure disease. This review addresses the existing evidence that probiotics are beneficial to healthy people. Our approach was to perform a descriptive review of efficacy evidence that probiotics can prevent urinary, vaginal, gastrointestinal, and respiratory infections, and improve risk factors associated with cardiovascular health or reduce antibiotic use. Other endpoints such as mental, dental, or immune health were not specifically addressed. We concluded that there is sufficient evidence of efficacy and safety for clinicians and consumers to consider using specific probiotics for some indications - such as the use of probiotics to support gut function during antibiotic use or to reduce the risk of respiratory tract infections - for certain people. However, we did not find a sufficiently high level of evidence to support unconditional, population-wide recommendations for other preventive endpoints we reviewed for healthy people. Although evidence for some indications is suggestive of the preventive benefits of probiotics, additional research is needed.

Current Regulatory Issues for the Use of Probiotics.

The chapter provides an overview of the current regulatory challenges surrounding the use of probiotics. It explores the global regulatory landscape, noting the need for uniform regulations across various regions. It emphasizes that these inconsistencies pose challenges for consumers, healthcare professionals, and industry stakeholders. Furthermore, the chapter highlights the ongoing efforts at the Codex Alimentarius to establish harmonized probiotic guidelines. The chapter also discusses labeling regulations, stressing the need for more accurate and comprehensive information on probiotic products to aid in evidence-based decision-making. Finally, it addresses safety concerns, particularly for vulnerable populations like children, and calls for a multi-layered approach to safety assessments. The chapter concludes by advocating harmonizing regulations and guidelines to facilitate probiotics' safer and more effective use.

Probiotics and Antibiotic-Induced Microbial Aberrations in Children: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Probiotics are often considered in children to prevent antibiotic-associated diarrhea. However, the underlying mechanistic effects and impact of probiotics on antibiotic-induced microbiota changes are not well understood. Objective: To investigate the effects of a multispecies probiotic on the gut microbiota composition in children receiving antibiotics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a secondary analysis of a randomized, quadruple-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial from February 1, 2018, to May 31, 2021, including 350 children receiving broad-spectrum antibiotics in the inpatient and outpatient settings. Patients were followed up until 1 month after the intervention period. Fecal samples and data were analyzed between September 1, 2022, and February 28, 2023. Eligibility criteria included 3 months to 18 years of age and recruitment within 24 hours following initiation of broad-spectrum systemic antibiotics. In total, 646 eligible patients were approached and 350 participated in the trial. Intervention: Participants were randomly assigned to receive daily placebo or a multispecies probiotic formulation consisting of 8 strains from 5 different genera during antibiotic treatment and for 7 days afterward. Main Outcomes and Measures: Fecal stool samples were collected at 4 predefined times: (1) inclusion, (2) last day of antibiotic use, (3) last day of the study intervention, and (4) 1 month after intervention. Microbiota analysis was performed by 16S ribosomal RNA gene sequencing. Results: A total of 350 children were randomized and collected stool samples from 88 were eligible for the microbiota analysis (54 boys and 34 girls; mean [SD] age, 47.09 [55.64] months). Alpha diversity did not significantly differ between groups at the first 3 times. Shannon diversity (mean [SD], 3.56 [0.75] vs 3.09 [1.00]; P = .02) and inverse Simpson diversity (mean [SD], 3.75 [95% CI, 1.66-5.82] vs -1.31 [95% CI, -3.17 to 0.53]; P = 1 × 10-4) indices were higher in the placebo group compared with the probiotic group 1 month after intervention. Beta diversity was not significantly different at any of the times. Three of 5 supplemented genera had higher relative abundance during probiotic supplementation, but this difference had disappeared after 1 month. Conclusions and Relevance: The studied probiotic mixture had minor and transient effects on the microbiota composition during and after antibiotic treatment. Further research is needed to understand their working mechanisms in manipulating the microbiome and preventing antibiotic-associated dysbiosis and adverse effects such as antibiotic-associated diarrhea. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03334604.

Early diet and the risk of coeliac disease. An update 2024 position paper by the ESPGHAN special interest group on coeliac disease.

This position paper by the European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) Special Interest Group on Coeliac Disease (SIG-CD) presents an update to the 2016 recommendations concerning early diet and the risk of coeliac disease (CD). This update adheres to the policy that mandates reviewing guidelines every 5 years, particularly when new data emerge. The 2024 statements and recommendations are essentially similar to the 2016 recommendations. Breastfeeding, whether any amount, exclusive, or of any duration, does not reduce the risk of developing CD. Introducing gluten into an infant's diet at any time between completed 4 months (≥17 weeks) and 12 months of age does not affect the cumulative incidence of CD, although earlier introduction may lead to earlier seroconversion and CD. In observational studies involving cohorts with a known risk for CD, consuming a high amount of gluten compared to a low amount during weaning and in the subsequent childhood years-specifically the first 2-3 years, and even up to 5 years in some studies-was associated with an increased risk for CD. However, the specific optimal amounts of gluten consumption remain undetermined due to insufficient evidence on safe thresholds, and the impact of restricting gluten in the diet of healthy children of unknown risk for CD is unknown. Thus, any recommendation on the gluten amount is currently unjustifiable for the general population and infants with known HLA risk types. There is no specific guidance on the type of gluten-containing foods to be introduced at weaning.

What should I eat today? Evidence, guidelines, dietary patterns and consumer's behavior.

Over the past century, dietary recommendations emphasizing food patterns as means to deliver essential nutrients have garnered widespread acceptance. The necessity for foods supplying vital nutrients and energy throughout various life stages requires the involvement of local resources and cultural practices to prevent nutrient deficiency diseases. Since the 1980s, dietary guidelines aimed at adverting chronic diseases have relied on epidemiological research to predict which dietary patterns correlate with reduced risk of chronic disease or links to health outcomes. Dietary guidelines have been broad, typically recommending avoiding excess or deficiency of single nutrients. Efforts to fine-tune these recommendations face challenges due to a scarcity of robust scientific data supporting more specific guidance across the life cycle. Consumers have become skeptical of dietary guidelines, because media coverage of new studies is often in conflict with accepted nutrition dogma. Indications to align individual and planet's health have been issued supporting the concept of sustainable dietary patterns. Whether we really have a science-based databank to support dietary guidelines is still a matter of ongoing debate, as presented in this paper.

Effect of Low-Dose Iron Supplementation on Early Development in Breastfed Infants: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Breastfed infants are at risk of iron deficiency, which is associated with suboptimal development. There is a paucity of evidence on the effects of iron supplementation on child development, and current guidelines are divergent. Objective: To assess whether daily iron supplementation, 1 mg/kg, between 4 and 9 months in exclusively or predominantly breastfed infants improves psychomotor development at 12 months. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted between December 2015 and May 2020 with follow-up through May 2023 in an outpatient setting in Poland and Sweden. Participants were healthy singleton infants born at term with birth weight greater than 2500 g who were exclusively or predominantly breastfed (>50%) and did not have anemia (hemoglobin >10.5 g/dL) at age 4 months. Exclusion criteria included major illness, congenital anomaly, food allergy, and difficulty communicating with caregivers. Interventions: Iron (micronized microencapsulated ferric pyrophosphate), 1 mg/kg, or placebo (maltodextrin) once daily from age 4 to 9 months. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was psychomotor development assessed by motor score of Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development III at 12 months, adjusted for gestational age, sex, and maternal education. Secondary outcomes included cognitive and language scores at 12 months; motor, cognitive, and language scores at 24 and 36 months; iron deficiency (serum ferritin <12 ng/mL), and iron deficiency anemia (iron deficiency and hemoglobin <10.5 g/dL) at 12 months. Results: Of 221 randomized infants (111 female), 200 (90%) were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (mean [SD] age, 12.4 [0.8] months). Iron supplementation (n = 104) compared to placebo (n = 96) had no effect on psychomotor development (mean difference [MD] for motor score, -1.07 points; 95% CI, -4.69 to 2.55), cognitive score (MD, -1.14; 95% CI, -4.26 to 1.99), or language score (MD, 0.75; 95% CI, -2.31 to 3.82) at 12 months. There were no significant differences at 24 and 36 months. The intervention did not reduce the risk for iron deficiency (relative risk [RR], 0.46; 95% CI, 0.16 to 1.30) or iron deficiency anemia (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.05 to 12.46) at 12 months. Conclusion and Relevance: No benefit was found with daily low-dose iron supplementation between 4 and 9 months with respect to psychomotor development, risk of iron deficiency, or iron deficiency anemia among breastfed infants in a setting of low risk of anemia. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02242188.

World Allergy Organization (WAO) Diagnosis and Rationale for Action against Cow's Milk Allergy (DRACMA) guideline update - XII - Recommendations on milk formula supplements with and without probiotics for infants and toddlers with CMA.

Background: Cow's milk allergy (CMA) is the most common food allergy in infants. The replacement with specialized formulas is an established clinical approach to ensure adequate growth and minimize the risk of severe allergic reactions when breastfeeding is not possible. Still, given the availability of multiple options, such as extensively hydrolyzed cow's milk protein formula (eHF-CM), amino acid formula (AAF), hydrolyzed rice formula (HRF) and soy formulas (SF), there is some uncertainty as to the most suitable choice with respect to health outcomes. Furthermore, the addition of probiotics to a formula has been proposed as a potential approach to maximize benefit. Objective: These evidence-based guidelines from the World Allergy Organization (WAO) intend to support patients, clinicians, and others in decisions about the use of milk specialized formulas, with and without probiotics, for individuals with CMA. Methods: WAO formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to include the views of all stakeholders and to minimize potential biases from competing interests. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline-development process, including updating or performing systematic evidence reviews. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used, including GRADE Evidence-to-Decision frameworks, which were subject to review by stakeholders. Results: After reviewing the summarized evidence and thoroughly discussing the different management options, the WAO guideline panel suggests: a) using an extensively hydrolyzed (cow's milk) formula or a hydrolyzed rice formula as the first option for managing infants with immunoglobulin E (IgE) and non-IgE-mediated CMA who are not being breastfed. An amino-acid formula or a soy formula could be regarded as second and third options respectively; b) using either a formula without a probiotic or a casein-based extensively hydrolyzed formula containing Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG) for infants with either IgE or non-IgE-mediated CMA.The issued recommendations are labeled as "conditional" following the GRADE approach due to the very low certainty about the health effects based on the available evidence. Conclusions: If breastfeeding is not available, clinicians, patients, and their family members might want to discuss all the potential desirable and undesirable consequences of each formula in infants with CMA, integrating them with the patients' and caregivers' values and preferences, local availability, and cost, before deciding on a treatment option. We also suggest what research is needed to determine with greater certainty which formulas are likely to be the most beneficial, cost-effective, and equitable.

Reevaluating the FDA's warning against the use of probiotics in preterm neonates: A societal statement by ESPGHAN and EFCNI.

The recent advisory issued by the United States Food and Drug Administration, cautioning against the routine administration of probiotics in preterm neonates, has sparked a lively debate within the scientific community. This commentary presents a perspective from members of the Special Interest Group on Gut Microbiota and Modifications within the European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) and other authors who contributed to the ESPGHAN position paper on probiotics for preterm infants, as well as representatives from the European Foundation for the Care of Newborn Infants. We advocate for a more nuanced and supportive approach to the use of certain probiotics in this vulnerable population, balancing the demonstrated benefits and risks.

Evaluating the impact of lactase supplementation on infant colic: Study protocol for a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Infant colic is a common functional gastrointestinal disorder that affects infants during their first months of life. The etiology of this condition remains unclear. However, some studies suggest lactase deficiency may be a contributing factor. Currently, the evidence on dietary treatment and lactase supplementation for management of infant colic is limited. We aim to systematically review evidence on the efficacy and safety of using a lactase supplementation for managing infant colic. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, and EMBASE will be searched to identify randomized controlled trials comparing oral lactase supplementation with placebo or no intervention in infants aged less than 6-month-old with infant colic using any recognized definition. The risk of bias will be assessed using the second version of the Cochrane Collaboration's risk-of-bias tool. The main outcome will be the number of responders in each group after treatment, defined as infants who experienced a decrease in daily crying as reported by the study authors. Additional outcomes will include the duration and frequency of crying episodes, infant sleep duration, parental satisfaction, discomfort of infants, number of hospital admissions, family quality of life, and adverse events during the intervention. The study findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and will be submitted to relevant conferences.

Effect of lactase supplementation on infant colic: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

To systematically review evidence on the efficacy and safety of using a lactase supplementation for managing infant colic. The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched (up to September 2023) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing oral lactase supplementation with placebo or no intervention in infants younger than 6 months old with infant colic. The risk of bias was assessed using the revised version of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Outcomes measured were selected according to a standardized core outcome set. Five RCTs involving a total of 391 infants were identified. Three RCTs reported reduced crying duration, but one showed effect only in a compliant group (40.4%, p = 0.0052). A meta-analysis of two RCTs found no difference in crying duration and fussing time during 1 week of lactase treatment compared with placebo (mean difference [MD] -17.66 min/day, 95% confidence interval [CI], -60.8 to 25.5; I2 = 68% and MD 2.75, 95% CI, -58.2 to 57.2; I2 = 80%, respectively). Other outcomes were assessed only in individual studies or not reported. The risk of bias was low in only one RCT, high in three, and raised some concerns in one. While individual trials have shown some promise, the overall evidence for the efficacy of lactase supplementation in treating infant colic remain inconclusive. Further well-designed RCTs are necessary to determine the effects of lactase on managing infant colic.

An ESPGHAN Position Paper on the Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention of Cow's Milk Allergy.

A previous guideline on cow's milk allergy (CMA) developed by the European Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) was published in 2012. This position paper provides an update on the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of CMA with focus on gastrointestinal manifestations. All systematic reviews and meta-analyses regarding prevalence, pathophysiology, symptoms, and diagnosis of CMA published after the previous ESPGHAN document were considered. Medline was searched from inception until May 2022 for topics that were not covered in the previous document. After reaching consensus on the manuscript, statements were formulated and voted on each of them with a score between 0 and 9. A score of ≥6 was arbitrarily considered as agreement. Available evidence on the role of dietary practice in the prevention, diagnosis, and management of CMA was updated and recommendations formulated. CMA in exclusively breastfed infants exists, but is uncommon and suffers from over-diagnosis. CMA is also over-diagnosed in formula and mixed fed infants. Changes in stool characteristics, feeding aversion, or occasional spots of blood in stool are common and in general should not be considered as diagnostic of CMA, irrespective of preceding consumption of cow's milk. Over-diagnosis of CMA occurs much more frequently than under-diagnosis; both have potentially harmful consequences. Therefore, the necessity of a challenge test after a short diagnostic elimination diet of 2-4 weeks is recommended as the cornerstone of the diagnosis. This position paper contains sections on nutrition, growth, cost, and quality of life.

Cow's Milk-related Symptom Score (CoMiSS) values in presumed healthy European infants aged 6-12 months: a cross-sectional study.

The Cow's Milk-related Symptom Score (CoMiSS) is an awareness tool for evaluating cow's milk-related symptoms. Previous studies have focused on providing CoMiSS values for healthy and symptomatic infants aged 0-6 months. However, there is a notable gap in the literature concerning CoMiSS values for infants older than 6 months. This cross-sectional study aimed to determine CoMiSS values in presumed healthy infants who have completed 6 months and are up to 12 months old, hereafter referred to as 6 to 12 months old. Physicians from six European countries prospectively determined CoMiSS values in infants attending well-child clinics. Exclusion criteria included preterm delivery, acute or chronic disease, and the consumption of a therapeutic formula, dietary supplements (except vitamins), or medication. The following information was collected: gestational age, gender, age, type of feed (breast milk or infant formula), and complementary feeding. Descriptive statistics were summarized with mean and standard deviation for normally distributed continuous variables, median and IQR for non-normally distributed variables, and differences in CoMiSS values were analyzed with appropriate tests. Data from 609 infants were obtained. The overall median (Q1-Q3) CoMiSS values were 3 (1-5). Significant differences were found across age groups (p < 0.001), but not across groups based on gender (p = 0.551) or feeding type (p = 0.880).   Conclusions: This study provided CoMiSS values in presumed healthy infants aged 6-12 months. Additional studies should be conducted to establish the use of CoMiSS to assess cow's milk-related symptoms in infants 6 months and older. What is Known: • The Cow's Milk-related Symptom Score (CoMiSS) is an awareness tool for evaluating symptoms related to cow's milk. • CoMiSS values for presumed healthy infants aged 0-6 months infants are already available. What is New: • CoMiSS values in European infants aged 6-12 months are provided. • These CoMiSS values differed across various age groups but not across groups based on gender or feeding type.

Recommendations to Improve Quality of Probiotic Systematic Reviews With Meta-Analyses.

Importance: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses often report conflicting results when assessing evidence for probiotic efficacy, partially because of the lack of understanding of the unique features of probiotic trials. As a consequence, clinical decisions on the use of probiotics have been confusing. Objective: To provide recommendations to improve the quality and consistency of systematic reviews with meta-analyses on probiotics, so evidence-based clinical decisions can be made with more clarity. Evidence Review: For this consensus statement, an updated literature review was conducted (January 1, 2020, to June 30, 2022) to supplement a previously published 2018 literature search to identify areas where probiotic systematic reviews with meta-analyses might be improved. An expert panel of 21 scientists and physicians with experience on writing and reviewing probiotic reviews and meta-analyses was convened and used a modified Delphi method to develop recommendations for future probiotic reviews. Findings: A total of 206 systematic reviews with meta-analysis components on probiotics were screened and representative examples discussed to determine areas for improvement. The expert panel initially identified 36 items that were inconsistently reported or were considered important to consider in probiotic meta-analyses. Of these, a consensus was reached for 9 recommendations to improve the quality of future probiotic meta-analyses. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the expert panel reached a consensus on 9 recommendations that should promote improved reporting of probiotic systematic reviews with meta-analyses and, thereby, assist in clinical decisions regarding the use of probiotics.

Development of peanut, sesame and tree nut allergy in Polish children at high risk of food allergy: a protocol for a cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: Peanut allergies cause serious health problems worldwide. A strong finding has shown that the early introduction of peanuts into the diet of infants at high risk of food allergy reduces the prevalence of peanut allergy. Allergies to peanuts, sesame and tree nuts have been shown to coexist in 60% of cases and vary according to geographical location and dietary habits. Insights into the prevalence of nut and seed allergies in societies with varying consumption levels are essential for developing population-specific weaning guidelines. Understanding the age at which peanut allergy develops is paramount for successful early introduction strategies. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will perform a cross-sectional study at two tertiary allergy centres in Warsaw and Bydgoszcz. Two hundred forty children aged 4-36 months with eczema or egg allergy will undergo an extensive assessment of their peanut, sesame and tree nut allergy status through skin testing, specific IgE measurements and oral food challenges. The primary outcome is the prevalence of peanut, sesame and tree nut allergies in Polish children at high risk of food allergy. Additionally, the timing of the development of peanut, sesame and tree nut allergies in the first 3 years of life in a high-risk population will be assessed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Ethics Committee of the Medical University of Warsaw, Poland approved this protocol (KB/86/2021). The results of this study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal no later than 1 year after data collection. The abstract will be presented at relevant national and international conferences.Although the authors may be able to commit to journal submission no later than 1 year after data collection, publication dates remain beyond their control. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05662800.

Reply to Mazela et al. Comment on "Jankiewicz et al. The Effect of Goat-Milk-Based Infant Formulas on Growth and Safety Parameters: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Nutrients 2023, 15, 2110".

Thank you for carefully reading and commenting [...].

Cow's Milk-Related Symptom Score (CoMiSS): From Bristol to Brussels Stool Scale.

OBJECTIVES: The Cow's Milk-related Symptom Score (CoMISS) is an awareness tool for evaluating cow's milk-related symptoms in otherwise healthy infants <1 year of age. This study assessed whether replacing the Bristol Stool Form Scale (BSFS) with the Brussels Infants and Toddlers Stool Scale (BITSS) in non-toilet-trained infants would modify the overall CoMiSS and change the clinical approach regarding potential cow's milk allergy. METHODS: Non-toilet-trained infants aged <13 months were assessed by CoMiSS using the 7 images from the BSFS (CoMiSS-BSFS) compared to the 4 images of stools from BITSS (CoMiSS-BITSS). The Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Pearson correlation coefficient were calculated. A post hoc analysis using identical tests was performed in subsets of CoMiSS-BSFS scores ≥10, ≥12, ≤5, and ≥6. RESULTS: Eight hundred forty-four pairwise scores were collected. Applying the Wilcoxon test over the complete dataset, the difference between CoMiSS-BSFS and CoMiSS-BITSS was statistically significant ( P < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference in the subsets with CoMiSS-BSFS ≥10, ≥12, and ≥6 ( P = 0.84, P = 0.48, and P = 0.81, respectively). The significant difference remained restricted to the group with CoMiSS-BSFS ≤5, considered at low risk for CM-related symptoms ( P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Replacing BSFS with BITSS does not change the cutoff for awareness of possible CM-related symptoms and will not impact the use of CoMiSS in clinical practice. Changes in CoMiSS remained limited to the subgroup with a low risk for CM-related symptoms.

World Allergy Organization (WAO) Diagnosis and Rationale for Action against Cow's Milk Allergy (DRACMA) Guideline update - VII - Milk elimination and reintroduction in the diagnostic process of cow's milk allergy.

The diagnosis of cow's milk allergy (CMA) in infants and young children remains a challenge because many of the presenting symptoms are similar to those experienced in other diagnoses. Both over- and under-diagnosis occur frequently. Misdiagnosis carries allergic and nutritional risks, including acute reactions, growth faltering, micronutrient deficiencies and a diminished quality of life for infants and caregivers. An inappropriate diagnosis may also add a financial burden on families and on the healthcare system. Elimination and reintroduction of cow's milk (CM) and its derivatives is essential for diagnosing CMA as well as inducing tolerance to CM. In non-IgE mediated CMA, the diagnostic elimination diet typically requires 2-4 weeks before reintroduction, while for IgE mediated allergy the time window may be shorter (1-2 weeks). An oral food challenge (OFC) under medical supervision remains the most reliable diagnostic method for IgE mediated and more severe types of non-IgE mediated CMA such as food protein induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES). Conversely, for other forms of non-IgE mediated CMA, reintroduction can be performed at home. The OFC cannot be replaced by the milk ladder after a diagnostic elimination diet. The duration of the therapeutic elimination diet, once a diagnosis was confirmed, can only be established through testing changes in sensitization status, OFCs or home reintroduction, which are directed by local protocols and services' availability. Prior non-evidence-based recommendations suggest that the first therapeutic elimination diet should last for at least 6 months or up to the age of 9-12 months, whichever is reached first. After a therapeutic elimination diet, a milk-ladder approach can be used for non-IgE mediated allergies to determine tolerance. Whilst some centers use the milk ladder also for IgE mediated allergies, there are concerns about the risk of having immediate-type reactions at home. Milk ladders have been adapted to local dietary habits, and typically start with small amounts of baked milk which then step up in the ladder to less heated and fermented foods, increasing the allergenicity. This publication aims to narratively review the risks associated with under- and over-diagnosis of CMA, therefore stressing the necessity of an appropriate diagnosis and management.