Preparing Patients for Oral Immunotherapy (PPOINT): International Delphi consensus for procedural preparation and consent.

BACKGROUND: Despite the promise of oral immunotherapy (OIT) to treat food allergies, this procedure is associated with potential risk. There is no current agreement about what elements should be included in the preparatory or consent process. OBJECTIVE: We developed consensus recommendations about the OIT process considerations and patient-specific factors that should be addressed before initiating OIT and developed a consensus OIT consent process and information form. METHODS: We convened a 36-member Preparing Patients for Oral Immunotherapy (PPOINT) panel of allergy experts to develop a consensus OIT patient preparation, informed consent process, and framework form. Consensus for themes and statements was reached using Delphi methodology, and the consent information form was developed. RESULTS: The expert panel reached consensus for 4 themes and 103 statements specific to OIT preparatory procedures, of which 76 statements reached consensus for inclusion specific to the following themes: general considerations for counseling patients about OIT; patient- and family-specific factors that should be addressed before initiating OIT and during OIT; indications for initiating OIT; and potential contraindications and precautions for OIT. The panel reached consensus on 9 OIT consent form themes: benefits, risks, outcomes, alternatives, risk mitigation, difficulties/challenges, discontinuation, office policies, and long-term management. From these themes, 219 statements were proposed, of which 189 reached consensus, and 71 were included on the consent information form. CONCLUSION: We developed consensus recommendations to prepare and counsel patients for safe and effective OIT in clinical practice with evidence-based risk mitigation. Adoption of these recommendations may help standardize clinical care and improve patient outcomes and quality of life.

Optimising the management of peanut allergy by targeting immune plasticity.

Randomised controlled trials investigating the efficacy of oral tolerance induction to peanut have enabled detailed comparison of their clinical and immunological success. They have demonstrated that the regular consumption of peanut for at least 2 years by babies who are not allergic enables protection from developing peanut allergy. The LEAP study intervention tested the impact of regular peanut consumption for 4 years and demonstrated a sustained protection against the development of peanut allergy even after 12 months of peanut avoidance from 5 to 6 years of age. The PreventADALL trial introduced multiple allergens into babies' diets from early infancy and reduced the prevalence of food allergy at 3 years, especially by protecting against peanut allergy. Immunological studies from the LEAP cohort demonstrated that regular peanut consumption was associated with a prompt induction of peanut-specific IgG4 and reduced manufacture of peanut and Ara h 2-specific IgE. Even after stopping peanut consumption for 5 years, there continued to be a significant fall in peanut-specific Ara h 2 IgE in the consumption group from 5 to 6 years of age (p < .01). Children who developed peanut allergy by 5 years started to develop increasing sensitisation to linear sequential peanut epitopes from 2.5 years of age, suggesting that putative disease-modifying interventions should commence before 3 years. Data comparing clinical outcomes between children undergoing peanut immunotherapy from infancy suggest that younger children can consume higher portions of peanut without reaction on challenge whilst taking immunotherapy, have fewer side effects and are more likely to enjoy remission of PA. Peanut oral immunotherapy modulates T-cell populations in order to bring about hypo-responsiveness of allergy effector cells. Studies are now needed to characterise and compare different states of immunological tolerance. This will accelerate the design of interventions which can promote primary, secondary and tertiary levels of PA prevention across a range of age groups.

Diagnosis and Management of Pollen Food Allergy Syndrome to Nuts.

Oral allergy syndrome or pollen food allergy syndrome (PFAS) represents a common clinical conundrum when the reported trigger food is a tree nut (usually almond or hazelnut) or peanut. The PFAS may give rise to uncertainty about the potential severity of the future reactions, indications for prescribing epinephrine, and the extent of the necessary dietary avoidance. As a food allergy, secondary to cross-reactivity with airborne pollen, PFAS usually manifests toward the end of the first decade of life as contact urticaria of the oropharyngeal mucous membranes. Molecular allergology facilitates diagnosis and risk stratification by establishing the profile of sensitization. Exclusive sensitization to pathogenesis-related proteins family 10 (PR10) and profilins indicates that signs and symptoms are due to PFAS, whereas sensitization to seed storage proteins with or without sensitization to PR10 and profilins may indicate a more severe primary nut allergy phenotype. Management relies on avoidance of the specific nut trigger, advice on the likelihood of more severe local or systemic symptoms, and treatment of reactions according to the severity. Future studies are needed to better delineate the risk of systemic reactions in individuals with nut PFAS and to establish the role of food or pollen allergen immunotherapy for the prevention or moderation of this condition.

Systematic review and meta-analyses on the accuracy of diagnostic tests for IgE-mediated food allergy.

The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is updating the Guidelines on Food Allergy Diagnosis. We aimed to undertake a systematic review of the literature with meta-analyses to assess the accuracy of diagnostic tests for IgE-mediated food allergy. We searched three databases (Cochrane CENTRAL (Trials), MEDLINE (OVID) and Embase (OVID)) for diagnostic test accuracy studies published between 1 October 2012 and 30 June 2021 according to a previously published protocol (CRD42021259186). We independently screened abstracts, extracted data from full texts and assessed risk of bias with QUADRAS 2 tool in duplicate. Meta-analyses were undertaken for food-test combinations for which three or more studies were available. A total of 149 studies comprising 24,489 patients met the inclusion criteria and they were generally heterogeneous. 60.4% of studies were in children ≤12 years of age, 54.3% were undertaken in Europe, ≥95% were conducted in a specialized paediatric or allergy clinical setting and all included oral food challenge in at least a percentage of enrolled patients, in 21.5% double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges. Skin prick test (SPT) with fresh cow's milk and raw egg had high sensitivity (90% and 94%) for milk and cooked egg allergies. Specific IgE (sIgE) to individual components had high specificity: Ara h 2-sIgE had 92%, Cor a 14-sIgE 95%, Ana o 3-sIgE 94%, casein-sIgE 93%, ovomucoid-sIgE 92/91% for the diagnosis of peanut, hazelnut, cashew, cow's milk and raw/cooked egg allergies, respectively. The basophil activation test (BAT) was highly specific for the diagnosis of peanut (90%) and sesame (93%) allergies. In conclusion, SPT and specific IgE to extracts had high sensitivity whereas specific IgE to components and BAT had high specificity to support the diagnosis of individual food allergies.

Basophil activation test as predictor of severity and threshold of allergic reactions to egg.

BACKGROUND: Identifying patients at risk of severe allergic reactions and/or low threshold of reactivity is very important, particularly for staple foods like egg. METHODS: One hundred and fifty children underwent double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) to baked egg (BE), skin prick testing and blood collection for serology and basophil activation test (BAT). Patients who passed BE DBPCFC underwent loosely cooked egg (LCE) DBPCFC. Severity of allergic reactions was classified following Practall guidelines and threshold dose was determined during DBPCFC. RESULTS: Sixty out of 150 (40%) children reacted to BE and 16 out of 77 (21%) to LCE on DBPCFC. Considering DBPCFC to BE, 23 children (38%) had severe reactions and 33 (55%) reacted to 0.13 g or less of egg protein (low threshold group). Two children (2 out of 16 = 12%) had severe reactions to LCE. Demographic, clinical and most immunological features were not significantly different between severe/non-severe BE reactors or low/high threshold groups. Severe BE reactors had higher ovomucoid-sIgE (p = .009) and higher BAT to BE (p = .001). Patients with lower threshold to BE had higher IgE-specific activity (p = .027) and BAT to egg (p = .007) but lower severity score (p = .008). Optimal cut-offs for ovomucoid-sIgE had 100% sensitivity, 35% specificity and 60% accuracy and for BAT 76% sensitivity, 74% specificity and 75% accuracy to identify BE severe reactors. Optimal cut-offs for specific activity had 70% sensitivity, 68% specificity and 69% accuracy and for BAT 70% sensitivity, 72% specificity and 71% accuracy to identify low threshold patients. CONCLUSIONS: BAT was the best biomarker to predict severity and threshold of allergic reactions to BE and can be useful when making decisions about management of egg allergy.

Partial Egg Consumption Modifies the Diagnostic Performance of Allergy Tests to Predict Outcome of Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Food Challenges to Egg.

BACKGROUND: Many children are consuming some egg when they are diagnosed with egg allergy. We hypothesized that egg consumption could modify the diagnostic performance of allergy tests. OBJECTIVE: To stratify diagnostic performance of tests according to egg consumption status. METHODS: The BAT2 study (NCT03309488) participants underwent oral food challenge (OFC), food-frequency questionnaires, skin prick test (SPT), specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) and specific immunoglobulin G4 (sIgG4) and basophil activation test (BAT). RESULTS: At study entry, 45% of participants reported partial egg consumption ("consumers") and 55% were avoiding egg strictly ("avoiders"). Avoiders had larger SPT (P < .001), higher BAT to egg (P < .001), sIgE to egg white (EW; P = .001) and to ovalbumin (OVA; P = .001), but not to ovomucoid (P = .231). Consumers had higher levels of sIgG4 to all egg allergens (P < .001) than avoiders. In consumers, the test with the best diagnostic performance was BAT (area under the curve [AUC] = .912) followed by SPT to raw egg (AUC = 0.805), EW-sIgE (AUC = 0.738), and OVA-sIgE (AUC = 0.732). In avoiders, the best tests were BAT (AUC = 0.834) and EW-sIgE (AUC = 0.833) followed by OVA-sIgE (AUC = 0.793) and SPT to EW (AUC=0.789). Using 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity cut-offs, the proportion of patients requiring OFC were 33% for BAT, 53% for SPT to raw egg, 61% for OVA-sIgE, and 73% for EW-sIgE for consumers; and 73% for BAT, 79% for EW-sIgE, and 93% for SPT to EW for avoiders. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic performance of tests is influenced by the immunomodulatory effect of egg consumption. BAT is the most reliable test and reduced the need for OFC, particularly in partial egg consumers.

Long-term safety and immunologic outcomes of daily oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy.

Background: Oral immunotherapy containing peanut (Arachis hypogaea) allergen powder-dnfp (PTAH) (Palforzia [Aimmune Therapeutics, Brisbane, Calif]) for 9 to 12 months resulted in higher tolerated amounts of peanut protein in PTAH-treated individuals aged 4 to 17 years with peanut allergy than in placebo-treated participants. Objective: We aimed to describe additional long-term pooled safety data and changes in peanut sensitization markers from baseline through approximately 5 years of treatment. Methods: The results from 6 clinical trials of PTAH (3 controlled and 3 open-label extension studies [N = 1227]) were pooled, and analysis of safety outcomes and immunologic data was performed. The PTAH doses were administered sequentially as follows: initial dose escalation (dose increased to 6 mg over 2 days), updosing (dose increased every 2 weeks to 300 mg for a minimum of 6 months), and maintenance dosing (300 mg per day). Results: There was a trend toward decreased adverse events (AEs) at years 1 and 2 that was maintained up to 5 years, with 94% of patients experiencing mild or moderate AEs and only 13% discontinuing PTAH use because of AEs overall. Gastrointestinal symptoms were the most commonly reported treatment-related AEs. A downward trend in systemic allergic reactions was also reported. PTAH treatment resulted in reduced levels of peanut-specific IgE after the first year and increased levels of peanut-specific IgG4, with a lowered peanut-specific IgE:IgG4 ratio. A reduction in median peanut skin prick test wheal diameter was observed (11.50 mm at baseline vs 5.75 mm at year 5). Conclusion: Long-term immunomodulation without any new safety signals was reported with PTAH immunotherapy in the largest safety data set and longest treatment duration for oral immunotherapy published to date.

Diagnostic utility of allergy tests to predict baked egg and lightly cooked egg allergies compared to double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges.

BACKGROUND: Double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFC) are the gold-standard to diagnose food allergy. However, they can cause allergic reactions of unpredictable severity. We assessed accuracy of current and new diagnostic tests compared to DBPCFC to baked egg (BE) and to lightly cooked egg (LCE). METHODS: Children aged 6 months to 15 years were assessed for possible egg allergy as part of the BAT2 study (NCT03309488). They underwent clinical assessment, skin prick test (SPT), specific IgE (sIgE) and basophil activation test (BAT). The results of the tests were compared with DBPCFC outcomes to both BE and LCE. RESULTS: A total of 150 children underwent DBPCFC to BE, 60 (40%) reacted to and 85 (57%) tolerated BE and 5 (3%) had inconclusive oral food challenges (OFC). Seventy-seven children tolerant to BE had DBPCFC to LCE and 16 reacted. The test within each modality with the best diagnostic performance for BE allergy was as follows: SPT to egg white (EW) (AUC = 0.726), sIgE to EW (AUC = 0.776) and BAT to egg (AUC = 0.783). BAT (AUC = 0.867) was the best test in the younger than 2 years age group. Applying 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity cut-offs, followed by OFC, resulted in 100% diagnostic accuracy. BAT enabled the greatest reduction in OFC (41%). Using sIgE followed by BAT allowed to reduce the number of BATs performed by about 30% without significantly increasing the number of OFC. CONCLUSIONS: The best diagnostic test was BAT to egg in terms of diagnostic accuracy and reduction in number of OFC. Using sIgE to EW followed by BAT required fewer BATs with sustained OFC reduction and diagnostic accuracy.

IgE-Mediated Shellfish Allergy in Children.

Shellfish, including various species of mollusks (e.g., mussels, clams, and oysters) and crustaceans (e.g., shrimp, prawn, lobster, and crab), have been a keystone of healthy dietary recommendations due to their valuable protein content. In parallel with their consumption, allergic reactions related to shellfish may be increasing. Adverse reactions to shellfish are classified into different groups: (1) Immunological reactions, including IgE and non-IgE allergic reactions; (2) non-immunological reactions, including toxic reactions and food intolerance. The IgE-mediated reactions occur within about two hours after ingestion of the shellfish and range from urticaria, angioedema, nausea, and vomiting to respiratory signs and symptoms such as bronchospasm, laryngeal oedema, and anaphylaxis. The most common allergenic proteins involved in IgE-mediated allergic reactions to shellfish include tropomyosin, arginine kinase, myosin light chain, sarcoplasmic calcium-binding protein, troponin c, and triosephosphate isomerase. Over the past decades, the knowledge gained on the identification of the molecular features of different shellfish allergens improved the diagnosis and the potential design of allergen immunotherapy for shellfish allergy. Unfortunately, immunotherapeutic studies and some diagnostic tools are still restricted in a research context and need to be validated before being implemented into clinical practice. However, they seem promising for improving management strategies for shellfish allergy. In this review, epidemiology, pathogenesis, clinical features, diagnosis, and management of shellfish allergies in children are presented. The cross-reactivity among different forms of shellfish and immunotherapeutic approaches, including unmodified allergens, hypoallergens, peptide-based, and DNA-based vaccines, are also addressed.

Developing a Prediction Model for Determination of Peanut Allergy Status in the Learning Early About Peanut Allergy (LEAP) Studies.

BACKGROUND: The Learning Early About Peanut Allergy (LEAP) study team developed a protocol-specific algorithm using dietary history, peanut-specific IgE, and skin prick test (SPT) to determine peanut allergy status if the oral food challenge (OFC) could not be administered or did not provide a determinant result. OBJECTIVE: To investigate how well the algorithm determined allergy status in LEAP; to develop a new prediction model to determine peanut allergy status when OFC results are not available in LEAP Trio, a follow-up study of LEAP participants and their families; and to compare the new prediction model with the algorithm. METHODS: The algorithm was developed for the LEAP protocol before the analysis of the primary outcome. Subsequently, a prediction model was developed using logistic regression. RESULTS: Using the protocol-specified algorithm, 73% (453/617) of allergy determinations matched the OFC, 0.6% (4/617) were mismatched, and 26% (160/617) participants were nonevaluable. The prediction model included SPT, peanut-specific IgE, Ara h 1, Ara h 2, and Ara h 3. The model inaccurately predicted 1 of 266 participants as allergic who were not allergic by OFC and 8 of 57 participants as not allergic who were allergic by OFC. The overall error rate was 9 of 323 (2.8%) with an area under the curve of 0.99. The prediction model additionally performed well in an external validation cohort. CONCLUSION: The prediction model performed with high sensitivity and accuracy, eliminated the problem of nonevaluable outcomes, and can be used to estimate peanut allergy status in the LEAP Trio study when OFC is not available.

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.).

Post hoc analysis examining symptom severity reduction and symptom absence during food challenges in individuals who underwent oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy: results from three trials.

PURPOSE: Peanut allergy and its current management, involving peanut avoidance and use of rescue medication during instances of accidental exposure, are burdensome to patients and their caregivers and can be a source of stress, uncertainty, and restriction. Physicians may also be frustrated with a lack of effective and safe treatments other than avoidance in the current management of peanut allergy. Efficacy, determined using double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFCs), of oral immunotherapy with peanut (Arachis hypogaea) allergen powder-dnfp (PTAH; Palforzia®) was demonstrated versus placebo in children and adolescents aged 4 to 17 years in multiple phase 3 trials; continued benefit of PTAH was shown in a follow-on trial. The DBPCFC is a reproducible, rigorous, and clinically meaningful assessment accepted by regulatory authorities to evaluate the level of tolerance as an endpoint for accidental exposures to peanut in real life. It also provides useful clinical and patient-relevant information, including the amount of peanut protein an individual with peanut allergy can consume without experiencing dose-limiting symptoms, severity of symptoms, and organs affected upon ingestion of peanut protein. We explored symptoms of peanut exposure during DBPCFCs from phase 3 and follow-on trials of PTAH to further characterize treatment efficacy from a perspective relevant to patients, caregivers, and clinicians. METHODS: Symptom data recorded during screening and/or exit DBPCFCs from participants aged 4 to 17 years receiving PTAH or placebo were examined post hoc across three PTAH trials (PALISADE [ARC003], ARC004 [PALISADE follow-on], and ARTEMIS [ARC010]). The maximum peanut protein administered as a single dose during DBPCFCs was 1000 mg (PALISADE and ARTEMIS) and 2000 mg (ARC004). Symptoms were classified by system organ class (SOC) and maximum severity. Endpoints were changes in symptom severity and freedom from symptoms (ie, asymptomatic) during DBPCFC. Relative risk (RR) was calculated for symptom severity by SOC and freedom from symptoms between groups; descriptive statistics were used to summarize all other data. RESULTS: The risk of any respiratory (RR 0.42 [0.30-0.60], P < 0.0001), gastrointestinal (RR 0.34 [0.26-0.44], P < 0.0001), cardiovascular/neurological (RR 0.17 [0.08-0.39], P < 0.001), or dermatological (RR 0.33 [0.22-0.50], P < 0.0001) symptoms was significantly lower in participants treated with PTAH versus placebo upon exposure to peanut at the end of the PALISADE trial (ie, exit DBPCFC). Compared with placebo-treated participants (23.4%), the majority (76.3%) of PTAH-treated participants had no symptoms at the exit DBPCFC when tested at the peanut protein dose not tolerated (ie, reactive dose) during the screening DBPCFC. Significantly higher proportions of PTAH-treated participants were asymptomatic at doses ≤ 100 mg in the exit DBPCFC compared with placebo-treated participants (PALISADE: 69.35% vs 12.10%, RR 5.73 [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.55-9.26]; P < 0.0001; ARTEMIS: 67.42% vs 13.95%, RR 4.83 [95% CI 2.28-10.25]; P < 0.0001); findings were similar at peanut protein doses ≤ 1000 mg (PALISADE: RR 15.56 [95% CI 5.05-47.94]; P < 0.0001; ARTEMIS: RR 34.74 [95% CI 2.19-551.03]; P < 0.0001). In ARC004, as the period of PTAH maintenance became longer, greater proportions of participants were asymptomatic at doses of peanut protein ≤ 1000 mg in the exit DBPCFC (from 37.63% after ~ 6 months of maintenance treatment [exit DBPCFC of PALISADE] to 45.54% after ~ 13 months and 58.06% after ~ 20 months of overall PTAH maintenance treatment). CONCLUSIONS: PTAH significantly reduced symptom severity due to exposure to peanut, which is clinically relevant. When exposed to peanut, participants with peanut allergy treated with PTAH rarely had moderate or severe respiratory or cardiovascular/neurological symptoms. Oral immunotherapy with PTAH appears to reduce frequency and severity of allergic reactions in individuals with peanut allergy after accidental exposure to peanut and may enable them and their families to have an improved quality of life. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02635776, registered 17 December 2015, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02635776?term=AR101&draw=2&rank=7 ; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02993107, registered 08 December 2016, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02993107?term=AR101&draw=2&rank=6 ; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03201003, registered 22 June 2017, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03201003 ? term = AR101&draw = 2&rank = 9.

Might biologics serve to interrupt the atopic march?

The atopic march was described more than 20 years ago on the basis of initial observations, and it is now seen in prospective studies. The concept has evolved and is now considered to be the progression of atopic dermatitis to other atopic conditions, including asthma, allergic rhinitis, food allergy, and eosinophilic esophagitis in a nonlinear fashion. The progression can include some or all of the aforementioned atopic conditions. The pathogenesis is part of the classic type 2 inflammatory process involving IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13 preceded by induction of the alarmins (thymic stromal lymphopoietin, IL-33, and IL-25), leading to production of IgE in a genetically predisposed individual. The development of new biologics that interact with T2 pathway represent possible ways to prevent or modify the atopic march.

Prevalence of and risk factors for nutritional deficiency and food allergy in a cohort of 21 patients with Netherton syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Netherton syndrome (NS; OMIM: 256500) is a rare autosomal recessively inherited disease due to SPINK5 mutations. Hair and inflammatory skin involvement are variable along with allergies. Morbidity and mortality are high, particularly in infancy. A detailed clinical analysis of a NS patient cohort should broaden the understanding of nutritional challenges and allergic comorbidities. METHODS: In this retrospective monocentric cohort study, medical and dietetic records of pediatric NS patients, presenting between 1999 and 2018, were reviewed. The severity of skin involvement was assessed according to the extent of the body surface area (BSA) affected by erythema. RESULTS: We identified 21 patients with NS (median age 11.6 years). Within the first 6 months of life, requirements for fluid and kcals/protein were high for all patients (average 228 ml/kg/day) and infants had an average of 1.9 feed changes (range 0-4) due to food intolerance. Clinical evidence for IgE-mediated food allergy was present in 84.2% (16/19 children, 2 no data) with a range of 1-12 food allergies per patient. In 75%, more than one food had to be avoided. Specific IgE levels were falsely positive in 38.3% and 8/18 patients (44.4%). One-third (5/15; 6 no data) of patients, all with severe disease, had anaphylactic reactions following ingestion of fish (n = 2), sesame (n = 1), cow's milk (n = 1), and both peanut and egg (n = 1). CONCLUSIONS: Our data emphasize feeding difficulties in children with NS and reveal an unexpectedly higher prevalence of food allergies that gives evidence to the importance of early coordinated multidisciplinary care for overcoming these challenges in NS.

Defining the window of opportunity and target populations to prevent peanut allergy.

BACKGROUND: Peanut allergy affects 1% to 2% of European children. Early introduction of peanut into the diet reduces allergy in high-risk infants. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the optimal target populations and timing of introduction of peanut products to prevent peanut allergy in the general population. METHODS: Data from the Enquiring About Tolerance (EAT; n = 1303; normal risk; 3-year follow-up; ISRCTN14254740) and Learning Early About Peanut Allergy study (LEAP; n = 640; high risk; 5-year follow-up; NCT00329784) randomized controlled trials plus the Peanut Allergy Sensitization (PAS; n = 194; low and very high risk; 5-year follow-up) observational study were used to model the intervention in a general population. Peanut allergy was defined by blinded peanut challenge or diagnostic skin prick test result. RESULTS: Targeting only the highest-risk infants with severe eczema reduced the population disease burden by only 4.6%. Greatest reductions in peanut allergy were seen when the intervention was targeted only to the larger but lower-risk groups. A 77% reduction in peanut allergy was estimated when peanut was introduced to the diet of all infants, at 4 months with eczema, and at 6 months without eczema. The estimated reduction in peanut allergy diminished with every month of delayed introduction. If introduction was delayed to 12 months, peanut allergy was only reduced by 33%. CONCLUSIONS: The preventive benefit of early introduction of peanut products into the diet decreases as age at introduction increases. In countries where peanut allergy is a public health concern, health care professionals should help parents introduce peanut products into their infants' diet at 4 to 6 months of life.

Epidermal differentiation complex genetic variation in atopic dermatitis and peanut allergy.

BACKGROUND: Deleterious variation in the epidermal differentiation complex (EDC) on chromosome 1 is a well-known genetic determinant of atopic dermatitis (AD) and has been associated with risk of peanut allergy (PA) in population-based studies. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to determine the effect of genetic variation in the EDC on AD trajectory and risk of PA in early life. METHODS: Genome sequencing was used to measure genetic variation in the EDC in the Learning Early about Peanut Allergy (LEAP) study participants. Association tests were done to identify gene- and variant-level predicted deleterious variation associated with AD severity by using the Scoring Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) tool (n = 559) at baseline and each follow-up visit, as well as PA and food allergy in peanut avoiders (n = 275). Predicted deleterious variants included missense variants that were frameshift insertions, frameshift deletions, stop-gain mutations, or stop-loss mutations. Associations between variant load, SCORAD score, and PA were tested by using linear and generalized linear regression models. RESULTS: The genes FLG, FLG2, HRNR, and TCHH1 harbored the most predicted deleterious variation (30, 6, 3, and 1 variant, respectively). FLG variants were associated with SCORAD score at all time points; 4 variants (R1798X, R501X, S126X, and S761fs) drove the association with SCORAD score at each time point, and higher variant load was associated with greater AD severity over time. There was an association between these variants and PA, which remained significant independent of baseline AD severity (odds ratio = 2.63 [95% CI = 1.11-6.01] [P = .02]). CONCLUSIONS: Variation in FLG predicted to be deleterious is associated with AD severity at baseline and longitudinally and has an association with PA independent of baseline severity.

Early introduction of peanut reduces peanut allergy across risk groups in pooled and causal inference analyses.

BACKGROUND: The Learning Early About Peanut allergy (LEAP) study has shown the effectiveness of early peanut introduction in prevention of peanut allergy (PA). In the Enquiring About Tolerance (EAT) study, a statistically significant reduction in PA was present only in per-protocol (PP) analyses, which can be subject to bias. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to combine individual-level data from the LEAP and EAT trials and provide robust evidence on the bias-corrected, causal effect of early peanut introduction. METHOD: As part of the European Union-funded iFAAM project, this pooled analysis of individual pediatric patient data combines and compares effectiveness and efficacy estimates of oral tolerance induction among different risk strata and analysis methods. RESULTS: An intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis of pooled data showed a 75% reduction in PA (p < .0001) among children randomized to consume peanut from early infancy. A protective effect was present across all eczema severity groups, irrespective of enrollment sensitization to peanut, and across different ethnicities. Earlier age of introduction was associated with improved effectiveness of the intervention. In the pooled PP analysis, peanut consumption reduced the risk of PA by 98% (p < .0001). A causal inference analysis confirmed the strong PP effect (89% average treatment effect relative risk reduction p < .0001). A multivariable causal inference analysis approach estimated a large (100%) reduction in PA in children without eczema (p = .004). CONCLUSION: We demonstrate a significant reduction in PA with early peanut introduction in a large group of pooled, randomized participants. This significant reduction was demonstrated across all risk subgroups, including children with no eczema. Furthermore, our results point to increased efficacy of the intervention with earlier age of introduction.