Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 111
Filtrar
1.
Allergy ; 79(4): 793-822, 2024 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38263695

RESUMO

Food allergy is a global public health problem that until recent years lacked any aetiological treatment supported by academy, industry and regulators. Food immunotherapy (AIT) is an evolving treatment option, supported by clinical practice and industry trial data. Recent AIT meta-analyses have highlighted the difficulty in pooling safety and efficacy data from AIT trials, due to secondary heterogeneity in the study. An EAACI task force (CO-FAITH) initiated by the Paediatric Section was created to focus on AIT efficacy outcomes for milk, egg and peanut allergy rather than in trial results. A systematic search and a narrative review of AIT controlled clinical trials and large case series was conducted. A total of 63 manuscripts met inclusion criteria, corresponding to 23, 21 and 22 studies of milk, egg and peanut AIT, respectively. The most common AIT efficacy outcome was desensitization, mostly defined as tolerating a maintenance phase dose, or reaching a particular dose upon successful exit oral food challenge (OFC). However, a large degree of heterogeneity was identified regarding the dose quantity defining this outcome. Sustained unresponsiveness and patient-reported outcomes (e.g. quality of life) were explored less frequently, and to date have been most rigorously described for peanut AIT versus other allergens. Change in allergen threshold assessed by OFC remains the most common efficacy measure, but OFC methods suffer from heterogeneity and methodological disparity. This review has identified multiple heterogeneous outcomes related to measuring the efficacy of AIT. Efforts to better standardize and harmonize which outcomes, and how to measure them must be carried out to help in the clinical development of safe and efficacious food allergy treatments.


Assuntos
Dessensibilização Imunológica , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar , Criança , Humanos , Dessensibilização Imunológica/métodos , Qualidade de Vida , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar/terapia , Alérgenos , Alimentos , Arachis/efeitos adversos
2.
Clin Transl Allergy ; 14(1): e12326, 2024 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38282192

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Immunoglobulin E (IgE) and immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4) to peanut and its components may influence the clinical reactivity to peanut. Allergen-specific immunotherapy is known for modifying both IgE and IgG4. Peanut oral immunotherapy may influence these serological parameters. METHODS: Exploratory analyses of serological data from participants receiving peanut (Arachis hypogaea) allergen powder-dnfp (PTAH) and placebo in the double-blind, randomized, phase 3 PALISADE trial were conducted to evaluate potential relationships between peanut-specific and peanut component-specific (Ara h 1, Ara h 2, Ara h 3, Ara h 6, Ara h 8, and Ara h 9) IgE and IgG4 levels and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 269 participants (PTAH, n = 202; placebo, n = 67) were analyzed. No relationship was observed between specific IgE and IgG4 levels at screening and maximum tolerated peanut protein dose during screening or response status during exit double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC). In PTAH-treated participants, no relationship was observed between IgE and IgG4 levels at screening and maximum symptom severity during exit DBPCFC. Postscreening ratios (ie, postscreening/screening) in the PTAH group were significant at the end of updosing and exit visit for most components. Postscreening changes in specific IgE levels were more pronounced with PTAH versus placebo for most components. CONCLUSIONS: Specific IgE and IgG4 levels at screening are not correlated with screening or exit DBPCFC results, and are not predictive of clinical response to PTAH. Peanut (Arachis hypogaea) allergen powder-dnfp contains the relevant and immunodominant allergens, inducing immunological changes with the treatment. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02635776.

3.
Allergy ; 78(12): 3057-3076, 2023 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37815205

RESUMO

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.


Assuntos
Hipersensibilidade Alimentar , Criança , Humanos , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar/diagnóstico , Testes Cutâneos , Imunoglobulina E , Alérgenos , Pólen
4.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract ; 11(7): 2069-2079.e7, 2023 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36990430

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Food is one of the most common elicitors of anaphylaxis, with an increasing incidence over recent years. OBJECTIVES: To characterize elicitor-specific phenotypes and identify factors enhancing the risk or severity of food-induced anaphylaxis (FIA). METHODS: We analyzed data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry applying an age- and sex-matched analysis of associations (Cramer's V) for single food triggers and calculated odds ratios (ORs) for severe FIA. RESULTS: We identified 3,427 cases of confirmed FIA showing an age-dependent elicitor ranking (for children: peanut, cow's milk, cashew, and hen's egg; and for adults: wheat flour, shellfish, hazelnut, and soy). The age- and sex-matched analysis revealed defined symptom patterns for wheat and cashew. Wheat-induced anaphylaxis was more frequently associated with cardiovascular symptoms (75.7%; Cramer's V = 0.28) and cashew-induced anaphylaxis with gastrointestinal symptoms (73.9%; Cramer's V = 0.20). Furthermore, concomitant atopic dermatitis was slightly associated with anaphylaxis to hen's egg (Cramer's V = 0.19) and exercise was strongly associated with anaphylaxis to wheat (Cramer's V = 0.56). Additional factors influencing the severity were alcohol intake in wheat anaphylaxis (OR = 3.23; CI, 1.31-8.83) and exercise in peanut anaphylaxis (OR = 1.78; CI, 1.09-2.95). CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that FIA is age-dependent. In adults, the range of elicitors inducing FIA is broader. For some elicitors, the severity of FIA seems to be related to the elicitor. These data require confirmation in future studies considering a clear differentiation between augmentation and risk factors in FIA.


Assuntos
Anafilaxia , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar , Bovinos , Humanos , Feminino , Animais , Anafilaxia/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar/diagnóstico , Galinhas , Farinha , Triticum , Alérgenos , Sistema de Registros , Arachis
5.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract ; 11(4): 1134-1146, 2023 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36529441

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: A growing number of studies have shown encouraging results with omalizumab (OMA) as monotherapy and as an adjunct to oral immunotherapy (OMA+OIT) in patients with single/multiple food allergies. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of OMA or OMA+OIT in patients with immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated food allergy. METHODS: An extensive literature search (inception to December 31, 2020) was performed to identify randomized, controlled, and observational studies that assessed OMA as monotherapy or OMA+OIT in patients with IgE-mediated food allergy. The outcomes were an increase in tolerated dose of foods, successful desensitization, sustained unresponsiveness, immunological biomarkers, severity of allergic reactions to food, quality of life (QoL), and safety. A P less than .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: In total, 36 studies were included. The OMA monotherapy (vs pre-OMA) significantly increased the tolerated dose of multiple foods; increased the threshold of tolerated dose for milk, egg, wheat, and baked milk; improved QoL; and reduced food-induced allergic reactions (all P < .01). The OMA+OIT significantly increased the tolerated dose of multiple foods (vs placebo and pre-OMA), desensitization (vs placebo+OIT and pre-OMA) (all P ≤ .01), and improved QoL (vs pre-OMA) and immunoglobulin G4 levels (both P < .01). No major safety concerns were identified. CONCLUSIONS: In IgE-mediated food allergy, OMA can help patients consume multiple foods and allow for food dose escalation. As an adjunct to OIT, OMA can also support high-dose desensitization and higher maintenance doses. Further studies are warranted to empirically evaluate the effect of OMA and confirm these findings.


Assuntos
Hipersensibilidade Alimentar , Omalizumab , Humanos , Animais , Omalizumab/uso terapêutico , Qualidade de Vida , Imunoglobulina E , Dessensibilização Imunológica/métodos , Administração Oral , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar/tratamento farmacológico , Alérgenos , Leite
7.
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol ; 129(6): 758-768.e4, 2022 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35973655

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials (PALISADE [ARC003], ARTEMIS [ARC010]) proving efficacy and safety of peanut (Arachis hypogaea) allergen powder-dnfp (PTAH) have used double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFCs) to screen for eligibility and to evaluate efficacy. In routine clinical practice, individuals with peanut allergy do not always undergo food challenges to confirm diagnosis or determine candidacy for treatment. OBJECTIVE: To describe PTAH safety and tolerability in participants selected by clinical history and peanut sensitization parameters not undergoing DBPCFCs during trials and to compare findings with previously published data. METHODS: RAMSES (ARC007) was a 6-month, phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in children aged 4 to 17 years with physician-confirmed peanut allergy. ARC011 was the subsequent 6-month follow-on maintenance PTAH study. The primary end point for RAMSES and ARC011 was the frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs). We descriptively compared baseline characteristics and safety outcomes from RAMSES and ARC011 to participants undergoing DBPCFCs in phase 3 PALISADE and ARTEMIS trials. RESULTS: In 506 patients randomized to study treatment, baseline characteristics appeared balanced among groups. Proportion of participants with at least 1 AE was 55% for PTAH vs 33.9% for placebo during initial dose escalation and 98.8% vs 94.0% during updosing, respectively. Most participants with AEs had mild or moderate events. The most common AEs were gastrointestinal. Comparisons to pooled PALISADE and ARTEMIS data revealed higher baseline median peanut-specific immunoglobulin E and skin prick test values for RAMSES participants. Safety outcomes during trial periods were comparable. CONCLUSION: Safety data from clinically selected children with peanut allergy receiving PTAH do not seem different from those in phase 3 trials requiring DBPCFC to enter trials.


Assuntos
Arachis , Hipersensibilidade a Amendoim , Criança , Humanos , Arachis/efeitos adversos , Dessensibilização Imunológica/efeitos adversos , Alérgenos , Testes Cutâneos , Método Duplo-Cego , Administração Oral , Fatores Imunológicos
8.
Allergy ; 77(6): 1852-1862, 2022 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35001400

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: There is substantial interest in immunotherapy and biologicals in IgE-mediated food allergy. METHODS: We searched six databases for randomized controlled trials about immunotherapy alone or with biologicals (to April 2021) or biological monotherapy (to September 2021) in food allergy confirmed by oral food challenge. We pooled the data using random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: We included 36 trials about immunotherapy with 2126 mainly child participants. Oral immunotherapy increased tolerance whilst on therapy for peanut (RR 9.9, 95% CI 4.5.-21.4, high certainty); cow's milk (RR 5.7, 1.9-16.7, moderate certainty) and hen's egg allergy (RR 8.9, 4.4-18, moderate certainty). The number needed to treat to increase tolerance to a single dose of 300 mg or 1000 mg peanut protein was 2. Oral immunotherapy did not increase adverse reactions (RR 1.1, 1.0-1.2, low certainty) or severe reactions in peanut allergy (RR 1,6, 0.7-3.5, low certainty), but may increase (mild) adverse reactions in cow's milk (RR 3.9, 2.1-7.5, low certainty) and hen's egg allergy (RR 7.0, 2.4-19.8, moderate certainty). Epicutaneous immunotherapy increased tolerance whilst on therapy for peanut (RR 2.6, 1.8-3.8, moderate certainty). Results were unclear for other allergies and administration routes. There were too few trials of biologicals alone (3) or with immunotherapy (1) to draw conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: Oral immunotherapy improves tolerance whilst on therapy and is probably safe in peanut, cow's milk and hen's egg allergy. More research is needed about quality of life, cost and biologicals.


Assuntos
Hipersensibilidade a Ovo , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar , Alérgenos , Animais , Bovinos , Galinhas , Dessensibilização Imunológica/efeitos adversos , Dessensibilização Imunológica/métodos , Feminino , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar/terapia , Humanos , Imunoglobulina E , Qualidade de Vida
9.
Allergy ; 77(2): 357-377, 2022 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34343358

RESUMO

Anaphylaxis is a clinical emergency which all healthcare professionals need to be able to recognize and manage. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Anaphylaxis multidisciplinary Task Force has updated the 2014 guideline. The guideline was developed using the AGREE II framework and the GRADE approach. The evidence was systematically reviewed and recommendations were created by weighing up benefits and harms. The guideline was peer-reviewed by external experts and reviewed in a public consultation. The use of clinical criteria to identify anaphylaxis is suggested with blood sampling for the later measurement of tryptase. The prompt use of intramuscular adrenaline as first-line management is recommended with the availability of adrenaline autoinjectors to patients in the community. Pharmacokinetic data should be provided for adrenaline autoinjector devices. Structured, comprehensive training for people at risk of anaphylaxis is recommended. Simulation training and visual prompts for healthcare professionals are suggested to improve the management of anaphylaxis. It is suggested that school policies reflect anaphylaxis guidelines. The evidence for the management of anaphylaxis remains mostly at a very low level. There is an urgent need to prioritize clinical trials with the potential to improve the management of patients at risk of anaphylaxis.


Assuntos
Anafilaxia , Anafilaxia/diagnóstico , Anafilaxia/etiologia , Anafilaxia/terapia , Epinefrina/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Triptases
11.
Allergy ; 77(6): 1736-1750, 2022 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34741557

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Food anaphylaxis is commonly elicited by unintentional ingestion of foods containing the allergen above the tolerance threshold level of the individual. While labeling the 14 main allergens used as ingredients in food products is mandatory in the EU, there is no legal definition of declaring potential contaminants. Precautionary allergen labeling such as "may contain traces of" is often used. However, this is unsatisfactory for consumers as they get no information if the contamination is below their personal threshold. In discussions with the food industry and technologists, it was suggested to use a voluntary declaration indicating that all declared contaminants are below a threshold of 0.5 mg protein per 100 g of food. This concentration is known to be below the threshold of most patients, and it can be technically guaranteed in most food production. However, it was also important to assess that in case of accidental ingestion of contaminants below this threshold by highly allergic patients, no fatal anaphylactic reaction could occur. Therefore, we performed a systematic review to assess whether a fatal reaction to 5mg of protein or less has been reported, assuming that a maximum portion size of 1kg of a processed food exceeds any meal and thus gives a sufficient safety margin. METHODS: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched until 24 January 2021 for provocation studies and case reports in which one of the 14 major food allergens was reported to elicit fatal or life-threatening anaphylactic reactions and assessed if these occurred below the ingestion of 5mg of protein. A Delphi process was performed to obtain an expert consensus on the results. RESULTS: In the 210 studies included, in our search, no reports of fatal anaphylactic reactions reported below 5 mg protein ingested were identified. However, in provocation studies and case reports, severe reactions below 5 mg were reported for the following allergens: eggs, fish, lupin, milk, nuts, peanuts, soy, and sesame seeds. CONCLUSION: Based on the literature studied for this review, it can be stated that cross-contamination of the 14 major food allergens below 0.5 mg/100 g is likely not to endanger most food allergic patients when a standard portion of food is consumed. We propose to use the statement "this product contains the named allergens in the list of ingredients, it may contain traces of other contaminations (to be named, e.g. nut) at concentrations less than 0.5 mg per 100 g of this product" for a voluntary declaration on processed food packages. This level of avoidance of cross-contaminations can be achieved technically for most processed foods, and the statement would be a clear and helpful message to the consumers. However, it is clearly acknowledged that a voluntary declaration is only a first step to a legally binding solution. For this, further research on threshold levels is encouraged.


Assuntos
Anafilaxia , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar , Alérgenos/análise , Anafilaxia/diagnóstico , Anafilaxia/etiologia , Anafilaxia/prevenção & controle , Animais , Ovos , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar/diagnóstico , Rotulagem de Alimentos , Humanos
12.
Allergy ; 77(5): 1545-1558, 2022 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34716996

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The heterogeneity and lack of validation of existing severity scores for food allergic reactions limit standardization of case management and research advances. We aimed to develop and validate a severity score for food allergic reactions. METHODS: Following a multidisciplinary experts consensus, it was decided to develop a food allergy severity score (FASS) with ordinal (oFASS) and numerical (nFASS) formats. oFASS with 3 and 5 grades were generated through expert consensus, and nFASS by mathematical modeling. Evaluation was performed in the EuroPrevall outpatient clinic cohort (8232 food reactions) by logistic regression with request of emergency care and medications used as outcomes. Discrimination, classification, and calibration were calculated. Bootstrapping internal validation was followed by external validation (logistic regression) in 5 cohorts (3622 food reactions). Correlation of nFASS with the severity classification done by expert allergy clinicians by Best-Worst Scaling of 32 food reactions was calculated. RESULTS: oFASS and nFASS map consistently, with nFASS having greater granularity. With the outcomes emergency care, adrenaline and critical medical treatment, oFASS and nFASS had a good discrimination (receiver operating characteristic area under the curve [ROC-AUC]>0.80), classification (sensitivity 0.87-0.92, specificity 0.73-0.78), and calibration. Bootstrapping over ROC-AUC showed negligible biases (1.0 × 10-6 -1.23 × 10-3 ). In external validation, nFASS performed best with higher ROC-AUC. nFASS was strongly correlated (R 0.89) to best-worst scoring of 334 expert clinicians. CONCLUSION: FASS is a validated and reliable method to measure severity of food allergic reactions. The ordinal and numerical versions that map onto each other are suitable for use by different stakeholders in different settings.


Assuntos
Hipersensibilidade Alimentar , Alérgenos , Área Sob a Curva , Alimentos , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar/diagnóstico , Humanos , Curva ROC
13.
Allergy ; 77(3): 991-1003, 2022 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34320250

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The benefit of daily administration of Peanut (Arachis hypogaea) Allergen Powder-dnfp (PTAH)-formerly AR101-has been established in clinical trials, but limited data past the first year of treatment are available. This longitudinal analysis aimed to explore the impact of continued PTAH therapeutic maintenance dosing (300 mg/day) on efficacy, safety/tolerability, and food allergy-related quality of life. METHODS: We present a subset analysis of PALISADE-ARC004 participants (aged 4-17 years) who received 300 mg PTAH daily for a total of ~1.5 (Group A, n = 110) or ~2 years (Group B, n = 32). Safety assessments included monitoring the incidence of adverse events (AEs), accidental exposures to food allergens, and adrenaline use. Efficacy was assessed by double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC); skin prick testing; peanut-specific antibody assays; and Food Allergy Quality of Life Questionnaire (FAQLQ) and Food Allergy Independent Measure (FAIM) scores. RESULTS: Continued maintenance with PTAH increased participants' ability to tolerate peanut protein: 48.1% of completers in Group A (n = 50/104) and 80.8% in Group B (n = 21/26) tolerated 2000 mg peanut protein at exit DBPCFC without dose-limiting symptoms. Immune biomarkers showed a pattern consistent with treatment-induced desensitization. Among PTAH-continuing participants, the overall and treatment-related exposure-adjusted AE rate decreased throughout the intervention period in both groups. Clinically meaningful improvements in FAQLQ and FAIM scores over time suggest a potential link between increased desensitization as determined by the DBPCFC and improved quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that daily PTAH treatment for peanut allergy beyond 1 year leads to an improved safety/tolerability profile and continued clinical and immunological response.


Assuntos
Hipersensibilidade Alimentar , Hipersensibilidade a Amendoim , Administração Oral , Adolescente , Alérgenos , Arachis/efeitos adversos , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Dessensibilização Imunológica/efeitos adversos , Dessensibilização Imunológica/métodos , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar/etiologia , Humanos , Fatores Imunológicos , Hipersensibilidade a Amendoim/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidade a Amendoim/etiologia , Hipersensibilidade a Amendoim/terapia , Qualidade de Vida
14.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract ; 9(11): 4075-4086.e5, 2021 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34293502

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: There is no current consensus on assigning severity to food-induced allergic reactions, for example, to assess the efficacy of allergen immunotherapy. Existing severity scores lack the capability to discriminate between non-anaphylaxis reactions of different severities. Attempts are ongoing to develop a more discriminatory score, which should ideally be data-driven and validated in multiple cohorts. OBJECTIVE: To undertake an exercise using best-worst scaling (BWS) to define a potential gold standard against which severity scoring of food-induced allergic reactions can be refined. METHODS: We undertook a global survey to better understand how health care professionals rate the severity of food-induced allergic reactions, using BWS methodology. Respondents were given a number of patient case vignettes describing real-world allergic reactions and asked to select the pair that, in their opinion, reflected the maximum difference in severity. Responses were then modeled and a preference score (representing severity) determined for each scenario. Scenarios were also scored using existing published scoring systems and the scores compared with the BWS score using Spearman r correlation and Cohen kappa. Given the differences in definitions of anaphylaxis globally, we also evaluated differences in BWS ranking depending on the geographical location of respondents. RESULTS: We received 334 complete responses, 183 (55%) from Europe and 65 (20%) from North America. Perception of severity of some reactions appeared to be affected by geographical location. The comparison of BWS ranking with current grading systems identified significant issues that varied from one grading system to another, such as prominence to some symptoms (eg, vomiting) that skew grading when using scoring systems not designed for food allergy. In general, current scoring systems poorly discriminate against more mild symptoms and often overestimate their severity. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide a methodology free of user scale bias to help define a potential, consensus-driven gold standard that can be used to guide and validate the development of improved grading systems to score food-induced allergic symptoms and highlight areas for education where there is the potential to miscategorize severity.


Assuntos
Anafilaxia , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar , Alérgenos , Anafilaxia/diagnóstico , Dessensibilização Imunológica , Alimentos , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar/diagnóstico , Humanos
15.
Allergol Int ; 70(4): 463-470, 2021 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34175213

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Primary hazelnut allergy is a common cause of anaphylaxis in children, as compared to birch-pollen associated hazelnut allergy. Population-based data on hazelnut and concomitant birch-pollen allergy in children are lacking. We aimed to investigate the prevalence of primary and pollen-associated hazelnut allergy and sensitization profiles in school-aged children in Berlin, Germany. METHODS: 1570 newborn children were recruited in Berlin in 2005-2009. The school-age follow-up (2014-2017) was based on a standardized web-based parental questionnaire and clinical evaluation by a physician including skin prick tests, allergen specific immunoglobulin E serum tests and placebo-controlled double-blind oral food challenges, if indicated. RESULTS: 1004 children (63.9% response) participated in the school-age follow-up assessment (52.1% male). For 1.9% (n = 19, 95%-confidence interval 1.1%-2.9%) of children their parents reported hazelnut-allergic symptoms, for half of these to roasted hazelnut indicating primary hazelnut allergy. Symptoms of birch-pollen allergy were reported for 11.6% (n = 116 95%-CI 9.7%-13.7%) of the children. Both birch-pollen allergy and hazelnut allergy associated symptoms affected 0.6% (n = 6, 95%-CI 0.2%-1.3%) of children. Assessment of allergic sensitization was performed in 261 participants and showed that almost 20% of these children were sensitized to hazelnut, being the most frequent of all assessed food allergens, or birch-pollen, the majority to both. CONCLUSIONS: Based on parental reports hazelnut-allergic symptoms were far less common than sensitization to hazelnut. This needs to be considered by physicians to avoid unnecessary changes in diet due to sensitization profiles only, especially when there is a co-sensitization to hazelnut and birch-pollen.


Assuntos
Alérgenos/imunologia , Antígenos de Plantas/imunologia , Betula/imunologia , Corylus/imunologia , Hipersensibilidade a Noz/epidemiologia , Pólen/imunologia , Rinite Alérgica Sazonal/epidemiologia , Criança , Feminino , Alemanha/epidemiologia , Humanos , Masculino , Hipersensibilidade a Noz/diagnóstico , Rinite Alérgica Sazonal/diagnóstico , Inquéritos e Questionários
16.
Clin Transl Allergy ; 11(3): e12010, 2021 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34025983

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Discovered and described 40 years ago, non-specific lipid transfer proteins (nsLTP) are present in many plant species and play an important role protecting plants from stressors such as heat or drought. In the last 20 years, sensitization to nsLTP and consequent reactions to plant foods has become an increasing concern. AIM: The aim of this paper is to review the evidence for the structure and function of nsLTP allergens, and cross-reactivity, sensitization, and epidemiology of nsLTP allergy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Task Force, supported by the European Academy of Allergy & Clinical Immunology (EAACI), reviewed current evidence and provide a signpost for future research. The search terms for this paper were "Non-specific Lipid Transfer Proteins", "LTP syndrome", "Pru p 3", "plant food allergy", "pollen-food syndrome". RESULTS: Most nsLTP allergens have a highly conserved structure stabilised by 4-disulphide bridges. Studies on the peach nsLTP, Pru p 3, demonstrate that nsLTPs are very cross-reactive, with the four major IgE epitopes of Pru p 3 being shared by nsLTP from other botanically related fruits. These nsLTP allergens are to varying degrees resistant to heat and digestion, and sensitization may occur through the oral, inhaled or cutaneous routes. In some populations, Pru p 3 is the primary and sole sensitizing allergen, but many are poly-sensitised both to botanically un-related nsLTP in foods, and non-food sources of nsLTP such as Cannabis sativa, Platanus acerifolia, (plane tree), Ambrosia artemisiifolia (ragweed) and Artemisia vulgaris (mugwort). Initially, nsLTP sensitization appeared to be limited to Mediterranean countries, however more recent studies suggest clinically relevant sensitization occurs in North Atlantic regions and also countries in Northern Europe, with nsLTP sensitisation profiles being broadly similar. DISCUSSION: These robust allergens have the potential to sensitize and provoke symptoms to a large number of plant foods, including those which are raw, cooked or processed. It is unknown why some sensitized individuals develop clinical symptoms to foods whereas others do not, or indeed what other allergens besides Pru p 3 may be primary sensitising allergens. It is clear that these allergens are also relevant in non-Mediterranean populations and there needs to be more recognition of this. CONCLUSION: Non-specific LTP allergens, present in a wide variety of plant foods and pollens, are structurally robust and so may be present in both raw and cooked foods. More studies are needed to understand routes of sensitization and the world-wide prevalence of clinical symptoms associated with sensitization to these complex allergens.

17.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract ; 9(7): 2844-2852.e5, 2021 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33831620

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Wheat is one of the most commonly consumed foods and a known elicitor of anaphylaxis in children and adults. Reactions in adults are often cofactor dependent and characterized by a prolonged time between food intake and the onset of symptoms making the diagnosis of wheat anaphylaxis challenging. OBJECTIVE: To characterize a cohort of patients with the history of wheat anaphylaxis to better understand this atypical phenotype of anaphylaxis. METHODS: Data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry from 2007 to 2019 (n = 10,636) including 250 patients (213 adults and 37 children) with a history of anaphylaxis caused by wheat were analyzed. RESULTS: Wheat was the most common food elicitor of anaphylaxis in adults in the registry in Central Europe. Reactions to wheat in adults were frequently associated with exercise as a cofactor (82.8%) and partially delayed (57.5%). Only 36.9% of patients had atopic comorbidities, which was uncommonly low for adult patients allergic to other kinds of foods (63.2%). Anaphylaxis to wheat presented frequently with cardiovascular symptoms (86.7%) including severe symptoms such as loss of consciousness (41%) and less often with respiratory symptoms (53.6%). The reactions to wheat were more severe than reactions to other foods (odds ratio [OR] = 4.33), venom (OR = 1.58), or drugs (OR = 2.11). CONCLUSIONS: Wheat is a relevant elicitor of anaphylaxis in adults in Central Europe. Wheat anaphylaxis is highly dependent on the presence of cofactors and less frequently associated with atopic diseases compared with other food allergies. More data on mechanisms of wheat-induced anaphylaxis are required to develop preventive measures for this potentially life-threatening disease.


Assuntos
Anafilaxia , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar , Hipersensibilidade a Trigo , Adulto , Alérgenos , Anafilaxia/diagnóstico , Anafilaxia/epidemiologia , Antígenos de Plantas , Criança , Europa (Continente) , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar/epidemiologia , Gliadina , Humanos , Imunoglobulina E , Triticum , Hipersensibilidade a Trigo/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidade a Trigo/epidemiologia
18.
Allergy ; 76(10): 2952-2964, 2021 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33811358

RESUMO

Older adults, especially men and/or those with diabetes, hypertension, and/or obesity, are prone to severe COVID-19. In some countries, older adults, particularly those residing in nursing homes, have been prioritized to receive COVID-19 vaccines due to high risk of death. In very rare instances, the COVID-19 vaccines can induce anaphylaxis, and the management of anaphylaxis in older people should be considered carefully. An ARIA-EAACI-EuGMS (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma, European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, and European Geriatric Medicine Society) Working Group has proposed some recommendations for older adults receiving the COVID-19 vaccines. Anaphylaxis to COVID-19 vaccines is extremely rare (from 1 per 100,000 to 5 per million injections). Symptoms are similar in younger and older adults but they tend to be more severe in the older patients. Adrenaline is the mainstay treatment and should be readily available. A flowchart is proposed to manage anaphylaxis in the older patients.


Assuntos
Anafilaxia , COVID-19 , Idoso , Anafilaxia/etiologia , Anafilaxia/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Epinefrina , Humanos , Masculino , SARS-CoV-2
19.
World Allergy Organ J ; 14(3): 100503, 2021 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33767801

RESUMO

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The term "Food Allergy" refers to a complex global health problem with a wide spectrum of severity. However, a uniform definition of severe food allergy is currently missing. This systematic review is the preliminary step towards a state-of-the-art synopsis of the current evidence relating to the severity of IgE-mediated food allergy; it will inform attempts to develop a consensus to define food allergy severity by clinicians and other stakeholders. METHODS: We undertook a mixed-methods systematic review, which involved searching 11 international biomedical databases for published studies from inception to 31 December 2019. Studies were independently screened against pre-defined eligibility criteria and critically appraised by established instruments. The substantial heterogeneity of included studies precluded meta-analyses and, therefore, narrative synthesis of quantitative and qualitative data was performed. RESULTS: We found 23 studies providing eligible primary data on symptom-specific severity of food allergic reactions, and 31 previously published symptom-severity scoring systems referred to food allergic reactions. There were seven studies which assessed quality-of-life measures in patients (and family members) with different food allergy severity and two studies that investigated the economic burden of food allergy severity. Overall, the quality and the global rating of all included studies were judged as being moderate. CONCLUSIONS: There is heterogeneity among severity scoring systems used and even outcomes considered in the context of severity of food allergy. No score has been validated. Our results will be used to inform the development of an international consensus to define the severity of food allergy. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: A protocol was prospectively registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database with the registration number CRD42020183103 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#recordDetails).

20.
Allergy ; 76(8): 2433-2446, 2021 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33655502

RESUMO

Sensitization to one or more non-specific lipid transfer proteins (nsLTPs), initially thought to exist mainly in southern Europe, is becoming accepted as a cause of allergic reactions to plant foods across Europe and beyond. The peach nsLTP allergen Pru p 3 is a dominant sensitizing allergen and peaches a common food trigger, although multiple foods can be involved. A frequent feature of reactions is the requirement for a cofactor (exercise, alcohol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, Cannabis sativa) to be present for a food to elicit a reaction. The variability in the food and cofactor triggers makes it essential to include an allergy-focused diet and clinical history in the diagnostic workup. Testing on suspected food triggers should also establish whether sensitization to nsLTP is present, using purified or recombinant nsLTP allergens such as Pru p 3. The avoidance of known trigger foods and advice on cofactors is currently the main management for this condition. Studies on immunotherapy are promising, but it is unknown whether such treatments will be useful in populations where Pru p 3 is not the primary sensitizing allergen. Future research should focus on the mechanisms of cofactors, improving diagnostic accuracy and establishing the efficacy of immunotherapy.


Assuntos
Antígenos de Plantas , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar , Alérgenos , Reações Cruzadas , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidade Alimentar/terapia , Humanos , Imunoglobulina E , Lipídeos , Proteínas de Plantas
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...