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.

Prevalence of tree nut allergy in Europe: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

In 2014, the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) published the first systematic review that summarized the prevalence of food allergy (FA) and food sensitization in Europe for studies published 2000-2012. However, only summary estimates for tree nut allergy (TNA) were feasible in that work. In the current update of that systematic review, we summarized the prevalence of tree nut allergy/sensitization to individual tree nuts. Six databases were searched for relevant papers published 2012-2021 and 17 eligible studies were added to the 15 studies already identified between 2000 and 2012, giving a total of 32 studies. Of the investigated tree nuts, meta-analysis was possible for hazelnut, walnut, almond, and in few cases, for cashew, and Brazil nut. The lifetime self-reported prevalence was 0.8% (95% CI 0.5-1.1) for hazelnut and 0.4% (0.2-0.9) for walnut. The point self-reported prevalence was 4.0% (2.9-5.2) for hazelnut, 3.4% (2.0-4.9) for Brazil nut, 2.0% (1.1-2.9) for almond, and 1.8% (1.1-2.5) for walnut. Point prevalence of food challenge-confirmed TNA was 0.04% (0.0-0.1) for hazelnut and 0.02% (0.01-0.1) for walnut. Due to paucity of data, we could not identify any meaningful and consistent differences across age groups and European regions.

The Severity and Frequency of Systemic Reactions to Hazelnut Are Significantly Higher in Hazelnut Allergic Patients Monosensitized to Cor a 8 than in Patients Polysensitized to Cor a 1, Cor a 8, and Cor a 9.

INTRODUCTION: Hazelnuts are a leading trigger of food allergy. To date, several molecular components of hazelnut are available for component-resolved diagnosis. However, little is known about how simultaneous sensitization to multiple allergens affects the severity of the hazelnut-induced reaction. In a previous study, our group demonstrated a lower risk of systemic reactions to peach in patients sensitized to both Pru p 3 and Pru p 1 than in the patient monosensitized to peach LTP. We aimed to assess whether this was also true in hazelnut allergy in a cohort of adult patients. METHODS: Patients were selected based on a history of symptoms such as urticaria, vomiting, diarrhea, asthma, and anaphylaxis indicative of hazelnut IgE-mediated food allergy and graded according to a clinical severity scale. For all patients, specific IgE was determined for Cor a 1 and Cor a 8 and, for most patients, also Cor a 9. Patients were offered an oral food challenge in open format (OFC) with a cocoa-based roasted hazelnut spread on a voluntary basis in order to prescribe an appropriate diet. RESULTS: A total of two hundred and fourteen patients were recruited. Among these, 43 patients were monosensitized to Cor a 8. One hundred and seventy-one patients were sensitized to Cor a 1 (79.9%), and, among them, 48/171 (28.1%) were also Cor a 8 positive. Cor a 9 was evaluated in 124/214 patients, testing positive in 21/124 (16.9%). Patients monosensitized to Cor a 8 experienced systemic reactions more frequently than those sensitized to Cor a 1 ± Cor a 8 (p < 0.00001), with significantly more severe reactions (p < 0.0005) and testing more frequently positive at OFC (p < 0.0001). Regarding Cor a 9, the sensitized patients were significantly younger (p = 0.0013) and showed reactions of similar severity to patients who tested Cor a 9 negative, and these reactions were milder than in patients monosensitized only to Cor a 8. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Sensitization to Cor a 1 seems to protect from the development of the severe systemic reactions induced by Cor a 8 sensitization, Cor a 9 does not influence the severity of symptoms in adult patients. The OFC with roasted hazelnut may help in dietary guidance.

TreEAT trial: Protocol for a randomized controlled trial investigating the efficacy and safety of early introduction of tree nuts for the prevention of tree nut allergy in infants with peanut allergy.

INTRODUCTION: Children with peanut allergy are at increased risk of developing tree nut allergies, which can be severe and for most lifelong. Introduction of peanut in the first year of life can reduce the risk of peanut allergy; however, prevention strategies for tree nut allergies have not been established. We aimed to test the efficacy and safety of a novel strategy, a supervised multi-nut oral food challenge (OFC) compared with standard care for tree nut allergy prevention in infants at high risk of developing tree nut allergy, TreEAT. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: TreEAT is a 2-armed, open-label, randomized, controlled trial (RCT). Infants (n = 212) aged 4-11 months with peanut allergy will be randomized 1:1 at peanut allergy diagnosis to either a hospital-based multi-tree nut (almond, cashew, hazelnut, and walnut) OFC using multi-nut butter or standard care (home introduction of individual tree nuts). All infants will be assessed at age 18 months, with questionnaires and SPT to peanut and tree nuts. Peanut and tree nut OFCs will be performed as required to determine the allergy status for each nut. The primary outcome is tree nut allergy at age 18 months. Secondary outcomes include peanut allergy resolution, proportion, and severity of adverse events related to tree nut ingestion, number and frequency of tree nuts ingested, quality of life and parental anxiety, and allergy-related healthcare visits from randomization to 18 months of age. Analyses will be performed on an intention-to-treat basis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: TreEAT was approved by the Royal Children's Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (#70489). Outcomes will be presented at scientific conferences and disseminated through publication. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04801823.

Real-World Safety Analysis of Preschool Tree Nut Oral Immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Our group previously described preschool peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT) in a real-world, multicenter setting, suggesting that this therapy is safe for most preschoolers. OBJECTIVE: To examine the safety and tolerability of tree nut (TN) OIT in preschoolers in the real world. METHODS: As part of a Canada-wide quality improvement project, TN-OIT (cashew/pistachio, walnut/pecan, hazelnut, almond, and macadamia nut) was performed in preschoolers who had (1) a skin prick test wheal diameter greater than or equal to 3 mm or a specific IgE level greater than or equal to 0.35 kU/L and a convincing objective IgE-mediated reaction or (2) no ingestion history and a specific IgE level greater than or equal to 5 kU/L. Dose escalations were performed every 2 to 4 weeks till a maintenance dose of 300 mg of TN protein was reached. Symptoms were recorded and classified using the modified World Allergy Organization Subcutaneous Immunotherapy Reaction Grading System (1, mildest; 5, fatal). RESULTS: Of the 92 patients who started TN-OIT from 2018 to 2021, 79 (85.9%) underwent single-food TN-OIT and 13 (14.1%) underwent multifood TN-OIT to 2 (10.8%) or 3 (3.3%) TNs. Eighty-nine (96.7%) patients reached maintenance, and 4 (4.3%) dropped out. Sixty-five (70.7%) patients experienced reactions during buildup: 35 (38.0%) grade 1 reactions, 30 (32.6%) grade 2 reactions, no grade 3 or 4 reactions, and 2 (2.17%) received epinephrine. CONCLUSIONS: Preschool TN-OIT in a real-world, multicenter setting appears safe and tolerable, with results comparable with our previously reported peanut OIT findings.

Structure and IgE Cross-Reactivity among Cashew, Pistachio, Walnut, and Peanut Vicilin-Buried Peptides.

Peanut and tree-nut allergies are frequently comorbid for reasons not completely understood. Vicilin-buried peptides (VBPs) are an emerging family of food allergens whose conserved structural fold could mediate peanut/tree-nut co-allergy. Peptide microarrays were used to identify immunoglobulin E (IgE) epitopes from the N-terminus of the vicilin allergens Ara h 1, Ana o 1, Jug r 2, and Pis v 3 using serum from three patient diagnosis groups: monoallergic to either peanuts or cashew/pistachio, or dual allergic. IgE binding peptides were highly prevalent in the VBP domains AH1.1, AO1.1, JR2.1, and PV3.1, but not in AO1.2, JR2.2, JR2.3, and PV3.2 nor the unstructured regions. The IgE profiles did not correlate with diagnosis group. The structure of the VBPs from cashew and pistachio was solved using solution-NMR. Comparisons of structural features suggest that the VBP scaffold from peanuts and tree-nuts can support cross-reactivity. This may help understand comorbidity and cross-reactivity despite a distant evolutionary origin.

Feasibility and Reaction Thresholds of Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Peanut and Nut Food Challenges Using Gingerbread Matrix.

INTRODUCTION: Double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges are an important tool in diagnosing food allergies. PRACTALL recommends a dose-escalation schedule of 3-3,000 mg of food protein and a top dose of at least 2,000 mg to avoid false-negative results. This retrospective observational study tests the thresholds and feasibility using a previously published gingerbread matrix. METHODS: Data of food provocations with peanuts and nuts in children from 2015 to 2019 in the Reinier de Graaf Hospital were analyzed. We performed the food challenge following a schedule of 1, 3, 10, 30, 100, 300, 1,000, and 3,000 mg allergen protein. The feasibility of ingestion of the gingerbread matrix was determined by analyzing the amount of consumed gingerbread. RESULTS: 513 food challenges performed in 365 children (median age 6.9 years) were analyzed. Forty percent (204/513) of the food challenges were positive. Fifteen children already reacted at 1 mg protein (7%), 3 with a grade 3 reaction. The median cumulative amount of gingerbread matrix the children could eat on 1 day was 130.3 g. The median cumulative amount of allergen protein eaten was 2,585 mg; only 49% reached the minimum desired cumulative amount of 3,500 mg allergen protein. Despite that, there were no reported reactions at home in the 86% who introduced the allergen after a negative challenge. CONCLUSION: Seven percent of the children react on a starting dose of 1 mg of food protein. Therefore, when using the PRACTALL guidelines, early responders can be expected. Ingestion of a cumulative dose of 3,500 mg to reach a false-negative rate of maximum 5% is not feasible in most children using the gingerbread matrix. However, the cumulative dose may be reduced without increasing false-negative results, making challenges with the gingerbread matrix feasible for all age groups.

Expression, purification, characterization, and patient IgE reactivity of new macadamia nut iso-allergen.

Structural and functional information about food allergens is essential for understanding the allergenicity of food proteins. All allergens belong to a small number of protein families. Various allergens from different families have been successfully produced recombinantly in E. coli for their characterization and applications in allergy diagnosis and treatment. However, recombinant hexameric 11S seed storage protein has not been reported, although numerous 11S legumins are known to be food allergens, including the recently identified macadamia nut allergen Mac i 2. Here we report the production of a macadamia nut legumin by expressing it in E. coli with a substrate site of HRV 3C protease and cleaving the purified protein with HRV 3C protease. The protease divided the protein into two chains and left a native terminus for the C-terminal chain, resulting in a recombinant hexameric 11S allergen for the first time after the residues upstream to the cleavage site flipped out of the way of the trimer-trimer interaction. The 11S allergens are known to have multiple isoforms in many species. The present study removed an obstacle in obtaining homogeneous allergens needed for studying allergens and mitigating allergenicity. Immunoreactivity of the protein with serum IgE confirmed it to be a new isoform of Mac i 2.

Predictors of anaphylaxis to peanut and tree nuts in a Mediterranean population.

Background: Peanuts (PN) and tree nuts (TN) are major causes of anaphylaxis worldwide. We aimed to determine the clinical and demographic characteristics associated with anaphylaxis in patients sensitized to PN and/or TN in a Mediterranean population. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study, which included 198 patients allergic to PN and/or TN (allergy symptoms plus specific immunoglobulin E [sIgE] sensitization), evaluated in consultations from January 2015 to December 2020. Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression models were developed, including demographic, clinical, and laboratory data as independent variables, and anaphylaxis to each PN and/or TN as a dependent variables. Results: Anaphylaxis was associated with an earlier age of onset of allergy to PN, cashew and/or pistachio, and pine nut allergy but not to other TN allergies. Gender, atopic comorbidities, and cofactors were not associated with PN and/or TN anaphylaxis. Anaphylaxis to PN, cashew and/or pistachio, and pine nut were associated with reactivity to a fewer number of PN and/or TN foods. Although sIgE sensitization to lipid transfer proteins (LTP) was highly prevalent in our population, only seed storage protein (SSP) positivity was associated with anaphylaxis in PN allergy. The absence of pathogenesis-related protein family 10 sensitization correlated with PN and hazelnut anaphylaxis. A higher level of sIgE to almond extract predicted anaphylaxis but the level of sIgE to other PN and/or TN extracts did not predict it. Conclusion: The high prevalence of sensitization to the pan-allergen LTP did not seem to have a significant impact in PN and/or TN allergy severity in our study. Instead, other factors, such as early age of onset and positivity for SSPs, seem to strongly associate with anaphylaxis to specific PN and/or TN. These findings may contribute to individual risk assessment in these populations.

Tree nut allergy: a systematic review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Systematic scoping review, focusing on randomized clinical trials of recent research addressing tree nut allergy. RECENT FINDINGS: This review addresses published, unpublished, and re-analyzed studies on tree nut allergy definition, epidemiology, etiology, diagnosis, prognosis, and therapy. SUMMARY: The importance of tree nut allergy spans nations, economies, and cultures. While broad themes in epidemiology, etiology, diagnosis, prognosis, and therapy are emerging, the next major advance in tree nut allergy will require large, robust studies to deliver results important to patients and families.

Macadamia nut-specific IgE levels for predicting anaphylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Despite the high risk of anaphylaxis in patients with a macadamia nut allergy (MdA), little is known about the significance of macadamia nut-specific immunoglobulin E (Md-sIgE). Thus, this study aimed to investigate the utility of Md-sIgE for predicting anaphylaxis. METHODS: Children with suspected MdA who visited our hospital were included. MdA was defined as either failing the 3-g macadamia nut (Md) oral food challenge (OFC) or confirming obvious immediate symptoms following Md ingestion. Non-MdA was defined as passing the 3-g Md OFC. RESULTS: A total of 41 children (29 [71%] males) with a median age of 7.7 years were included. The median Md-sIgE level was 2.23 kUA /L. Among the 21 children diagnosed with MdA, eight and 13 children did (An group) and did not (non-An group) develop anaphylaxis. Twenty children were included in the non-MdA group. The Md-sIgE level was significantly higher in the An group relative to the others (7.97 vs. 1.92 kUA /L, p < .001). Furthermore, the Md-sIgE level was significantly higher in the An group than in the non-An group (7.97 vs. 1.92 kUA /L, p = .02). However, there was no significant difference in the Md-sIgE between the non-An and non-MdA groups (1.92 vs. 1.90 kUA /L, p > .99). The area under the curve for predicting anaphylaxis in Md-sIgE was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.83-1.00), and the optimal cut-off value was 3.76 kUA /L. CONCLUSION: Md-sIgE levels were useful in predicting anaphylaxis. Above the cut-off value, we emphasize paying careful attention to the risk of anaphylaxis.