European guideline (EuroGuiDerm) on atopic eczema - part II: non-systemic treatments and treatment recommendations for special AE patient populations.

The evidence- and consensus-based guideline on atopic eczema was developed in accordance with the EuroGuiDerm Guideline and Consensus Statement Development Manual. Four consensus conferences were held between December 2020 and July 2021. Twenty-nine experts (including clinicians and patient representatives) from 12 European countries participated. This second part of the guideline includes recommendations and detailed information on basic therapy with emollients and moisturizers, topical anti-inflammatory treatment, antimicrobial and antipruritic treatment and UV phototherapy. Furthermore, this part of the guideline covers techniques for avoiding provocation factors, as well as dietary interventions, immunotherapy, complementary medicine and educational interventions for patients with atopic eczema and deals with occupational and psychodermatological aspects of the disease. It also contains guidance on treatment for paediatric and adolescent patients and pregnant or breastfeeding women, as well as considerations for patients who want to have a child. A chapter on the patient perspective is also provided. The first part of the guideline, published separately, contains recommendations and guidance on systemic treatment with conventional immunosuppressive drugs, biologics and janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, as well as information on the scope and purpose of the guideline, and a section on guideline methodology.

European guideline (EuroGuiDerm) on atopic eczema: part I - systemic therapy.

The evidence- and consensus-based guideline on atopic eczema was developed in accordance with the EuroGuiDerm Guideline and Consensus Statement Development Manual. Four consensus conferences were held between December 2020 and July 2021. Twenty-nine experts (including clinicians and patient representatives) from 12 European countries participated. This first part of the guideline includes general information on its scope and purpose, the health questions covered, target users and a methods section. It also provides guidance on which patients should be treated with systemic therapies, as well as recommendations and detailed information on each systemic drug. The systemic treatment options discussed in the guideline comprise conventional immunosuppressive drugs (azathioprine, ciclosporin, glucocorticosteroids, methotrexate and mycophenolate mofetil), biologics (dupilumab, lebrikizumab, nemolizumab, omalizumab and tralokinumab) and janus kinase inhibitors (abrocitinib, baricitinib and upadacitinib). Part two of the guideline will address avoidance of provocation factors, dietary interventions, immunotherapy, complementary medicine, educational interventions, occupational and psychodermatological aspects, patient perspective and considerations for paediatric, adolescent, pregnant and breastfeeding patients.

Latest Developments in the Management of Nut Allergies.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In this review, we sought to describe the most recent advances in the dietary and medical management of peanut and tree nut allergy, including selective introduction and immunotherapy. RECENT FINDINGS: Dietary updates include changes to labeling laws, improved information sources, and new apps for buying foods in shops and overseas to better protect individuals with nut allergies. There are still issues in the management of nut allergies in schools, such as parents having to resort to packed lunches instead of school meals and patients experiencing bullying. Air travel also poses concern, but additional resources are now available to travelers, and recent evidence suggest limited airborne exposure to nuts. The medical management of anaphylaxis is use of epinephrine; however, this remains underutilized. Needle length and administration devices have been recently debated considering the risk of bone penetration vs subcutaneous administration, and autoinjectors seem to deliver higher peak concentrations than syringes. Selective nut introduction has gained momentum in the last 5 years, demonstrating improved quality of life but with the need for motivated parents for continued consumption and available resources for challenges. Immunotherapy to nuts is also a rapidly developing field, with the balance of efficacy and safety being important considerations in the differing modes of administration. SUMMARY: The management of nut allergies is a rapidly developing field, and dietary and medical management have progressed significantly in the last 5 years. Future research directions include improving safety and efficacy of food immunotherapy and examining patients' goals for therapy and treatment outcomes.

Environmental peanut exposure increases the risk of peanut sensitization in high-risk children.

BACKGROUND: High household peanut consumption is associated with the development of peanut allergy, especially when peanut allergic cases are compared against atopic controls; thus, environmental peanut exposure (EPE) may be a risk factor for peanut sensitization and allergy. In this study, we explored the relationship between EPE and school-age peanut sensitization in a population-based cohort. METHODS: Maternal bed dust was collected postnatally, and EPE was quantified using a polyclonal peanut ELISA. Peanut sensitization was assessed by specific IgE to peanut extract and sIgE to peanut protein component allergens Ara h 1, 2 or 3 ≥ 0.35kU/L (primary peanut sensitization). Initial nested case-control analysis was performed comparing peanut-sensitized cases against high-risk controls (matched for parental atopy) (n = 411) using a conditional regression analysis. This was followed by whole cohort analysis (n = 1878) comparing EPE against peanut sIgE sensitization at ages 4 and 8 years using generalized estimating equations and against primary peanut sensitization at age 8 years using a logistic regression model. Finally, a subgroup analysis was performed comparing the impact of EPE in peanut-sensitized vs egg-sensitized, peanut-tolerant individuals using logistic regression analysis. Levels of EPE were compared between groups using the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: In the nested case-control analysis, a higher level of EPE around birth was associated with peanut-specific IgE sensitization at age 4 years (OR=1.41, 95% CI:1.05-1.90) and primary peanut sensitization at age 8 years (OR=2.11, 95% CI:1.38-3.22) compared against high-risk controls. When the whole BAMSE cohort was assessed, EPE was no longer associated with peanut sensitization; however, on subgroup analysis, EPE was associated with primary peanut sensitization when compared against egg-sensitized peanut-tolerant controls with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.44 per unit EPE (95% CI:1.06-1.94). There was no significant interaction between EPE and FLG loss-of-function mutations, egg sensitization at age 4 years, infantile eczema or parental atopy on peanut sensitization. CONCLUSIONS: Higher levels of environmental exposure to peanut in the first few months of life appear to increase the probability of developing school-age peanut sensitization in atopic children (based on egg sensitization and parental atopy).

EAACI Molecular Allergology User's Guide.

The availability of allergen molecules ('components') from several protein families has advanced our understanding of immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated responses and enabled 'component-resolved diagnosis' (CRD). The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) Molecular Allergology User's Guide (MAUG) provides comprehensive information on important allergens and describes the diagnostic options using CRD. Part A of the EAACI MAUG introduces allergen molecules, families, composition of extracts, databases, and diagnostic IgE, skin, and basophil tests. Singleplex and multiplex IgE assays with components improve both sensitivity for low-abundance allergens and analytical specificity; IgE to individual allergens can yield information on clinical risks and distinguish cross-reactivity from true primary sensitization. Part B discusses the clinical and molecular aspects of IgE-mediated allergies to foods (including nuts, seeds, legumes, fruits, vegetables, cereal grains, milk, egg, meat, fish, and shellfish), inhalants (pollen, mold spores, mites, and animal dander), and Hymenoptera venom. Diagnostic algorithms and short case histories provide useful information for the clinical workup of allergic individuals targeted for CRD. Part C covers protein families containing ubiquitous, highly cross-reactive panallergens from plant (lipid transfer proteins, polcalcins, PR-10, profilins) and animal sources (lipocalins, parvalbumins, serum albumins, tropomyosins) and explains their diagnostic and clinical utility. Part D lists 100 important allergen molecules. In conclusion, IgE-mediated reactions and allergic diseases, including allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, asthma, food reactions, and insect sting reactions, are discussed from a novel molecular perspective. The EAACI MAUG documents the rapid progression of molecular allergology from basic research to its integration into clinical practice, a quantum leap in the management of allergic patients.

Dietary management of peanut and tree nut allergy: what exactly should patients avoid?

Peanut and tree nut allergies are the commonest cause of life-threatening food-allergic reactions and significantly affect quality of life in children and their families. Dietary nut avoidance and provision of emergency medication is currently the mainstay of treatment. Nut avoidance has consequences on both quality of life and nutrition. We review the terminology that may cause confusion and lead to unnecessary dietary restrictions. In peanut or tree nut-allergic children, introduction of specific nuts to which the child is not allergic may improve quality of life and should be considered in patients with multiple foods allergies, vegan or ethnic-specific diets, in whom nuts are an important source of protein. Nut-allergic consumers do not just need to avoid foods containing nuts as an ingredient, but also contend with pre-packed foods which frequently have precautionary allergen labelling (PAL) referring to possible nut contamination. Although the published rate of peanut contamination in 'snack' foods with PAL (see Box ) ranges from 0.9-32.4%, peanut contamination in non-snack items with PAL is far less common. We propose that in some peanut-allergic patients (depending on history of reactivity to trace levels of peanut, reaction severity, other medical conditions, willingness to always carry adrenaline, etc.), consideration may be given to allow the consumption of non-snack foods containing PAL following discussion with the patient's (and their family's) specialist. More work is needed to provide consumers with clearer information on the risk of potential nut contamination in pre-packed food. We also draw attention to the change in legislation in December 2014 that require mandatory disclosure of allergens in non-pre-packed foods.