Diagnosis and management of food allergy-induced constipation in young children-An EAACI position paper.

The recognition of constipation as a possible non-Immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated allergic condition is challenging because functional constipation (unrelated to food allergies) is a common health problem with a reported worldwide prevalence rate of up to 32.2% in children. However, many studies in children report challenge proven cow's milk allergy and constipation as a primary symptom and have found that between 28% and 78% of children improve on a cow's milk elimination diet. Due to the paucity of data and a focus on IgE-mediated allergy, not all food allergy guidelines list constipation as a symptom of food allergy. Yet, it is included in all cow's milk allergy guidelines available in English language. The Exploring Non-IgE-Mediated Allergy (ENIGMA) Task Force (TF) of the European Academy for Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) considers in this paper constipation in the context of failure of standard treatment and discuss the role of food allergens as culprit in constipation in children. This position paper used the Delphi approach in reaching consensus on both diagnosis and management, as currently published data are insufficient to support a systematic review.

Development of neffy, an Epinephrine Nasal Spray, for Severe Allergic Reactions.

Epinephrine autoinjectors (EAIs) are used for the treatment of severe allergic reactions in a community setting; however, their utility is limited by low prescription fulfillment rates, failure to carry, and failure to use due to fear of needles. Given that delayed administration of epinephrine is associated with increased morbidity/mortality, there has been a growing interest in developing needle-free, easy-to-use delivery devices. neffy (epinephrine nasal spray) consists of three Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved components: epinephrine, Intravail A3 (absorption enhancer), and a Unit Dose Spray (UDS). neffy's development pathway was established in conjunction with the FDA and the European Medicines Agency and included multiple clinical trials to evaluate pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic responses under a variety of conditions, such as self-administration and allergic and infectious rhinitis, as well as an animal anaphylaxis model of severe hypotension, where neffy demonstrated a pharmacokinetic profile that is within the range of approved injection products and a pharmacodynamic response that is as good or better than injections. The increased pulse rate (PR) and blood pressure (BP) observed even one minute following the administration of neffy confirm the activation of α and ß adrenergic receptors, which are the key components of epinephrine's mechanism of action. The results suggest that neffy will provide a safe and effective needle-free option for the treatment of severe allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis.

Health Promotion of Early and Sustained Allergenic Food Introduction for the Prevention of Food Allergy.

Observational studies and landmark randomized control trials support early and sustained allergenic food introduction in infancy as an effective preventive strategy against food allergy development. Despite a consensus regarding the intended goals of early and sustained allergenic food introduction, there have been myriad policy recommendations among health authorities in how to achieve both individual and population-level health outcomes for food allergy prevention. This clinical management review provides an overview on the data that informs early and sustained allergenic food introduction strategies, suggestions on how to advise allergenic food introduction, principles of prevention programs as they relate to food allergy prevention, and health promotion and systems-level challenges that impede achievement of food allergy prevention goals.

The future of cow's milk allergy - milk ladders in IgE-mediated food allergy.

Cow's milk allergy (CMA) is one of the most common and complex presentations of allergy in early childhood. CMA can present as IgE and non-IgE mediated forms of food allergy. Non-IgE mediated CMA includes food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES), eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGIDs), and food protein-induced proctocolitis (FPIAP). There are recent guidelines addressing CMA diagnosis, management, and treatment. Each of these guidelines have their own strengths and limitations. To best manage CMA, individualized avoidance advice should be given. Cow's milk (CM) can be replaced in the diet by using hypoallergenic formulas or plant-based milk, depending on factors such as the child's age and their current food intake. Oral and epicutaneous immunotherapy is used to increase tolerance in children with CMA but is not without risk, and the long-term outcome of sustained unresponsiveness is still unclear. The allergenicity of CM proteins are affected differently by different forms of heating, leading to the use of baked milk or milk ladders in the management of CMA, most likely the most promising option for future management and treatment of CMA. Future management of children with CMA will also include discussion around the immunomodulatory potential of the child's dietary intake.

Safety and efficacy of epicutaneous immunotherapy with DBV712 (peanut patch) in peanut allergy.

INTRODUCTION: DBV712 250 µg (also referred to as Viaskin Peanut or peanut patch; Viaskin is a trademark of DBV Technologies) is an innovative approach to epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT). The patch-based technology system facilitates peanut protein (allergen) absorption into the intact non-vascularized epidermis to promote desensitization to peanut while limiting systemic allergen exposure. AREAS COVERED: Efficacy and safety in children have been evaluated in four completed phase 3 studies. Overall, the results from these studies have demonstrated the peanut patch to be superior in desensitization compared with placebo and safe for daily use over multiple years. EXPERT OPINION: These findings, as well as supportive evidence from phase 2 studies, confirm the potential for an effective treatment of peanut allergy in children. The purpose of this review is to summarize the safety and efficacy of the peanut patch in the treatment of peanut allergy.

Varying Doses of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy With Viaskin Milk vs Placebo in Children With Cow's Milk Allergy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: No approved treatment exists for allergen-specific immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated cow's milk allergy (CMA), a common childhood food allergy. Objective: To assess dose, efficacy, and safety of epicutaneous immunotherapy with Viaskin milk in children with IgE-mediated CMA. Design, Setting, and Participants: A phase 1/2, 2-part, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled dose-ranging clinical trial in children aged 2 to 17 years with IgE-mediated CMA was conducted between November 2014 through December 2017. It took place at 17 trial sites in the US and Canada. Current CMA was confirmed by double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge at study entry. Part A assessed the short-term safety of 150 µg, 300 µg, or 500 µg of Viaskin milk; part B evaluated the efficacy and safety of the 3 doses vs placebo over 12 months of treatment. Of the 308 screened participants with physician-diagnosed CMA, 198 met eligibility criteria (including an eliciting dose 300 mg or less) and were randomized. Intervention: Safety of Viaskin milk (150-µg, 300-µg, or 500-µg doses) was evaluated over a 3-week period (part A). In part B, 180 additional participants were randomized to receive Viaskin milk at doses of 150 µg, 300 µg, or 500 µg or placebo (1:1:1:1) for 12 months. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of treatment responders, defined as a 10-fold or more increase in the cumulative reactive dose of cow's milk protein (reaching at least 144 mg) or a cumulative reactive dose of cow's milk protein at 1444 mg or more at the month 12 double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge. Results: A total of 95.5% of the randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 8 [4.17] years; 124 of 198 were male [62.6%]) completed treatment. The highest response rate was observed in participants who received Viaskin milk at the 300-µg dose with 24 of 49 responders (49.0%) overall vs 16 of 53 responders (30.2%) in the placebo group (odds ratio, 2.19; 95% CI, 0.91-5.41; P = .09), highest in the 2 to 11 years age group (22 of 38 [57.9%] vs 13 of 40 [32.5%]; P = .04). Most treatment-emergent adverse events were mild or moderate application-site reactions. One participant in the 500-µg Viaskin milk dose group experienced treatment-related anaphylaxis. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, 12 months of daily epicutaneous immunotherapy with a dose of Viaskin milk at 300 µg was associated with a statistically significant treatment response in 2- to 11-year-old children with IgE-mediated CMA. Treatment-related anaphylaxis and treatment-related discontinuation rates were low. Further research is needed to explore Viaskin milk as a viable treatment option for children with IgE-mediated CMA. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02223182.

Identifying Children at Risk of Growth and Nutrient Deficiencies in the Food Allergy Clinic.

BACKGROUND: Food allergies affect growth in children by decreasing the availability of nutrients through decreased dietary intake, increased dietary needs, food-medication interactions, and psychosocial burden. Guidelines on food allergy management frequently recommend nutrition counseling and growth monitoring of children with food allergies. OBJECTIVE: To provide clear guidance for clinicians to identify children with food allergies who are at nutritional risk and ensure prompt intervention. METHODS: We provide a narrative review summarizing information from national and international guidelines, retrospective studies, population studies, review articles, case reports, and case series to identify those with food allergy at greatest nutritional risk, determine the impact of nutritional interventions on growth, and develop guidance for risk reduction in children with food allergies. RESULTS: Children with food allergies are at increased risk of nutritional deficiencies and poor growth. Nutritional assessment and intervention can improve outcomes. Identifying poor growth is an important step in the nutrition assessment. Therefore, growth should be assessed at each allergy evaluation. Interventions to ensure adequate dietary intake for growth include appropriately prescribed elimination diets, breast-feeding support and assessment, supplemental formula, vitamin and/or mineral supplementation, appropriate milk substitutes, and timely introduction of nutrient-dense complementary foods. Access to foods of appropriate nutritional value is an ongoing concern. CONCLUSION: Nutrition intervention or referral to registered dietitian nutritionists with additional training and/or experience in food allergy may result in improved growth and nutrition outcomes.

Early Introduction of Novel and Less-Studied Food Allergens in the Plant-Based Era: Considerations for US and EU Infant Formula Regulations.

Early life feeding practices may affect the long-term health of individuals, particularly in terms of the development of non-communicable diseases, such as metabolic and allergic diseases. Accumulating evidence suggests that the interplay of breastfeeding and/or formula feeding followed by the introduction of solids plays a role in the occurrence of non-communicable diseases both in the short and long term. International food allergy guidelines recommend that breastfeeding women do not need to avoid food allergens and do not recommend any infant formula for allergy prevention. Guidelines regarding solid food introduction for food allergy prevention recommend the introduction of well-cooked eggs and peanuts around 4-6 months of age, and not to delay the introduction of other food allergens. There is also an increasing trend to feed infants a plant-based or plant-forward diet and have access to infant formulas based on plant-based ingredients. The use of novel plant-based infant formulas raises a few questions reviewed in this paper: (1) Do fortified, plant-based infant formulas, compliant with US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations and European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (European) guidelines, support adequate infant growth? (2) Are plant-based infant formulas suitable for the management of cow's milk allergy? (3) Does feeding with novel, plant-based infant formulas increase the risk of food allergies to the food allergens they contain? (4) Does feeding infants plant-based food allergens in early life increase the risk of allergic and severe allergic reactions? The review of the literature indicated that (1) plant-based formulas supplemented with amino acids and micronutrients to comply with FDA regulations and EFSA guidelines, evaluated in sufficiently powered growth studies, can support adequate growth in infants; (2) currently available plant-based infant formulas are suitable for the management of CMA; (3) an early introduction and continuous intake of food allergens are more likely to prevent food allergies than to increase their risk; and (4) an early introduction of food allergens in young infants is safe.

Efficacy and safety of peanut epicutaneous immunotherapy in patients with atopic comorbidities.

Background: Co-occurring atopic conditions are common in children with peanut allergy. As such, it is important to examine the safety and efficacy of epicutaneous immunotherapy with Viaskin Peanut 250 µg patch (VP250) in peanut-allergic children with these conditions. Objective: We sought to compare efficacy and safety of VP250 versus placebo in peanut-allergic children with/without ongoing atopic conditions at baseline, including asthma, atopic dermatitis/eczema, or concomitant food allergy. Methods: A subgroup analysis of peanut-allergic children aged 4 to 11 years enrolled in PEPITES (12 months) and REALISE (6 months) randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials was conducted. The efficacy outcome measure was the difference in prespecified responder rate between placebo and VP250 groups at month 12 based on eliciting dose of peanut protein using double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge in PEPITES. Safety profiles were evaluated by baseline concomitant disease subgroup in all randomized subjects who received 1 or more dose of the study drug in PEPITES and REALISE pooled data. Results: Responder rates were significantly (P < .05, all comparisons) greater with VP250 compared with placebo treatment regardless of whether subjects had other atopic conditions. Safety and tolerability profiles were generally similar across subgroups, with no new safety concerns detected. A trend for both higher responder rates and rates of local reactions was observed in subjects with baseline atopic dermatitis versus those without. In subjects with concomitant food allergy at baseline, higher rates of treatment-emergent adverse events, but not study discontinuations or overall rates of anaphylaxis, were observed. Conclusions: The results support the safety and efficacy of VP250 for treating peanut-allergic children with or without concomitant atopic conditions.

EAACI guidelines on the diagnosis of IgE-mediated food allergy.

This European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology guideline provides recommendations for diagnosing IgE-mediated food allergy and was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. Food allergy diagnosis starts with an allergy-focused clinical history followed by tests to determine IgE sensitization, such as serum allergen-specific IgE (sIgE) and skin prick test (SPT), and the basophil activation test (BAT), if available. Evidence for IgE sensitization should be sought for any suspected foods. The diagnosis of allergy to some foods, such as peanut and cashew nut, is well supported by SPT and serum sIgE, whereas there are less data and the performance of these tests is poorer for other foods, such as wheat and soya. The measurement of sIgE to allergen components such as Ara h 2 from peanut, Cor a 14 from hazelnut and Ana o 3 from cashew can be useful to further support the diagnosis, especially in pollen-sensitized individuals. BAT to peanut and sesame can be used additionally. The reference standard for food allergy diagnosis is the oral food challenge (OFC). OFC should be performed in equivocal cases. For practical reasons, open challenges are suitable in most cases. Reassessment of food allergic children with allergy tests and/or OFCs periodically over time will enable reintroduction of food into the diet in the case of spontaneous acquisition of oral tolerance.

Food allergy prevention: Where are we in 2023?

Food allergy prevention involves recommendations to the maternal diet during pregnancy and breast feeding, early life feeding and introduction of solid foods. Pregnant and breastfeeding women are not recommended to exclude any food allergens from their diet, but data are lacking to support active consumption of food allergens for prevention of food allergy. Breastfeeding is recommended for the many health benefits to the mother and child but has not shown any association with reduction in childhood food allergies. There is currently no recommendation regarding the use of any infant formula for allergy prevention, including the use of partially or extensively hydrolyzed formulas. Once the introduction of solid food commences, based on randomized controlled trials, it is advised to actively introduce peanuts and egg early into the infant diet and continue with consumption of these. Although there are limited data with respect to other major food allergens and whether early introduction may prevent allergy development, there is no need to delay the introduction of these allergens into the infant diet. Interpreting food allergen consumption in the context of cultural food practices has not been studied, but it makes sense to introduce the infant to family foods by 1 year of age. Consumption of foods typical of the Western diet and foods high in advanced glycation end products may be associated with an increase in food allergies. Similarly, intake of micronutrients, such as vitamin D and omega-3 fatty acids in both the maternal and infant diet, needs further clarification in the context of food allergy prevention.

Updated guidance regarding the risk of allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines and recommended evaluation and management: A GRADE assessment and international consensus approach.

This guidance updates 2021 GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) recommendations regarding immediate allergic reactions following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and addresses revaccinating individuals with first-dose allergic reactions and allergy testing to determine revaccination outcomes. Recent meta-analyses assessed the incidence of severe allergic reactions to initial COVID-19 vaccination, risk of mRNA-COVID-19 revaccination after an initial reaction, and diagnostic accuracy of COVID-19 vaccine and vaccine excipient testing in predicting reactions. GRADE methods informed rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations. A modified Delphi panel consisting of experts in allergy, anaphylaxis, vaccinology, infectious diseases, emergency medicine, and primary care from Australia, Canada, Europe, Japan, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States formed the recommendations. We recommend vaccination for persons without COVID-19 vaccine excipient allergy and revaccination after a prior immediate allergic reaction. We suggest against >15-minute postvaccination observation. We recommend against mRNA vaccine or excipient skin testing to predict outcomes. We suggest revaccination of persons with an immediate allergic reaction to the mRNA vaccine or excipients be performed by a person with vaccine allergy expertise in a properly equipped setting. We suggest against premedication, split-dosing, or special precautions because of a comorbid allergic history.

Phase 3 Trial of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy in Toddlers with Peanut Allergy.

BACKGROUND: No approved treatment for peanut allergy exists for children younger than 4 years of age, and the efficacy and safety of epicutaneous immunotherapy with a peanut patch in toddlers with peanut allergy are unknown. METHODS: We conducted this phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial involving children 1 to 3 years of age with peanut allergy confirmed by a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge. Patients who had an eliciting dose (the dose necessary to elicit an allergic reaction) of 300 mg or less of peanut protein were assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive epicutaneous immunotherapy delivered by means of a peanut patch (intervention group) or to receive placebo administered daily for 12 months. The primary end point was a treatment response as measured by the eliciting dose of peanut protein at 12 months. Safety was assessed according to the occurrence of adverse events during the use of the peanut patch or placebo. RESULTS: Of the 362 patients who underwent randomization, 84.8% completed the trial. The primary efficacy end point result was observed in 67.0% of children in the intervention group as compared with 33.5% of those in the placebo group (risk difference, 33.4 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 22.4 to 44.5; P<0.001). Adverse events that occurred during the use of the intervention or placebo, irrespective of relatedness, were observed in 100% of the patients in the intervention group and 99.2% in the placebo group. Serious adverse events occurred in 8.6% of the patients in the intervention group and 2.5% of those in the placebo group; anaphylaxis occurred in 7.8% and 3.4%, respectively. Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 0.4% of patients in the intervention group and none in the placebo group. Treatment-related anaphylaxis occurred in 1.6% in the intervention group and none in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving children 1 to 3 years of age with peanut allergy, epicutaneous immunotherapy for 12 months was superior to placebo in desensitizing children to peanuts and increasing the peanut dose that triggered allergic symptoms. (Funded by DBV Technologies; EPITOPE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03211247.).

WAO consensus on DEfinition of Food Allergy SEverity (DEFASE).

Background: While several scoring systems for the severity of anaphylactic reactions have been developed, there is a lack of consensus on definition and categorisation of severity of food allergy disease as a whole. Aim: To develop an international consensus on the severity of food allergy (DEfinition of Food Allergy Severity, DEFASE) scoring system, to be used globally. Methods Phase 1: We conducted a mixed-method systematic review (SR) of 11 databases for published and unpublished literature on severity of food allergy management and set up a panel of international experts. Phase 2: Based on our findings in Phase 1, we drafted statements for a two-round modified electronic Delphi (e-Delphi) survey. A purposefully selected multidisciplinary international expert panel on food allergy (n = 60) was identified and sent a structured questionnaire, including a set of statements on different domains of food allergy severity related to symptoms, health-related quality of life, and economic impact. Participants were asked to score their agreement on each statement on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree". Median scores and percentage agreements were calculated. Consensus was defined a priori as being achieved if 70% or more of panel members rated a statement as "strongly agree" to "agree" after the second round. Based on feedback, 2 additional online voting rounds were conducted. Results: We received responses from 92% of Delphi panel members in round 1 and 85% in round 2. Consensus was achieved on the overall score and in all of the 5 specific key domains as essential components of the DEFASE score. Conclusions: The DEFASE score is the first comprehensive grading of food allergy severity that considers not only the severity of a single reaction, but the whole disease spectrum. An international consensus has been achieved regarding a scoring system for food allergy disease. It offers an evaluation grid, which may help to rate the severity of food allergy. Phase 3 will involve validating the scoring system in research settings, and implementing it in clinical practice.