Preventing food allergy: protocol for a rapid systematic review

BACKGROUND: The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology is developing guidelines about how to prevent and manage food allergy. As part of the guidelines development process, a systematic review is planned to examine published research about the prevention of food allergy. This systematic review is one of seven inter-linked evidence syntheses that are being undertaken in order to provide a state-of-the-art synopsis of the current evidence base in relation to epidemiology, prevention, diagnosis and clinical management, and impact on quality of life, which will be used to inform clinical recommendations. The aim of this systematic review will be to assess the effectiveness of approaches for the primary prevention of food allergy. METHODS: Seven bibliographic databases will be searched from their inception to September 30, 2012 for systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, quasi-randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, controlled before-and-after studies, interrupted time series and cohort studies. Cohort studies will be included due to an inability to randomize with interventions such as breastfeeding. Studies that focused on the development of either food sensitization (a proxy measure) or food allergy will also be eligible for inclusion. Studies will be critically appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program and Cochrane Risk of Bias tools, as appropriate. DISCUSSION: There is a lack of rigorous evidence to support recommendations about how to prevent the development of food allergy. It would appear that it is important to see the prevention of food allergy in the context of individual, family and wider factors that may influence its development. There is much left to learn about preventing food allergy, and this is a priority given the high societal and healthcare costs involved. This systematic review will help to further this learning

Position paper of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology

Rhinitis is a common problem in childhood and adolescence and impacts negatively on physical, social and psychological well-being. This position paper, prepared by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Taskforce on Rhinitis in Children, aims to provide evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and therapy of paediatric rhinitis. Rhinitis is characterized by at least two nasal symptoms: rhinorrhoea, blockage, sneezing or itching. It is classified as allergic rhinitis, infectious rhinitis and nonallergic, noninfectious rhinitis. Similar symptoms may occur with other conditions such as adenoidal hypertrophy, septal deviation and nasal polyps. Examination by anterior rhinoscopy and allergy tests may help to substantiate a diagnosis of allergic rhinitis. Avoidance of relevant allergens may be helpful for allergic rhinitis (AR). Oral and intranasal antihistamines and nasal corticosteroids are both appropriate for first-line AR treatment although the latter are more effective. Once-daily forms of corticosteroids are preferred given their improved safety profile. Potentially useful add-on therapies for AR include oral leukotriene receptor antagonists, short bursts of a nasal decongestant, saline douches and nasal anticholinergics. Allergen-specific immunotherapy is helpful in IgE-mediated AR and may prevent the progression of allergic disease. There are still a number of areas that need to be clarified in the management of rhinitis in children and adolescents.publishersversionpublishe

Erratum to: Allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: protocol for a systematic review.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1186/s13601-016-0099-6.]

Safety of a new extensively hydrolysed formula in children with cow's milk protein allergy: a double blind crossover study

BACKGROUND: Formulae for infants with cow's milk protein allergy (CMA) should be based on extensively hydrolysed protein. 'Extensively' however is not strictly defined. Differences in molecular weight and peptide chain length may affect its clinical outcome. We studied the safety of a new extensively hydrolysed casein based formula (Frisolac Allergycare(®): FAC) for children with IgE mediated CMA. METHODS: Thirty children, aged 1.5 – 14.8 years old (median 4.9 years) with persistent CMA were enrolled in this double-blind reference product (Nutramigen(®): NUT) controlled crossover study. All had positive skin prick tests (SPT) and IgE mediated allergy, showing immediate reactions after ingestion of small amounts of milk. Twenty-five children also had positive radio allergen sorbent tests (RAST) to cow's milk. Formulae provided consisted of 80% elementary formula in combination with 20% reference or test product. Crossover periods lasted for two weeks. From both products molecular weight (MALDI-TOF method and HPLC) and peptide chain length distribution (adapted Edman degradation) were determined. RESULTS: Maximum molecular weights of NUT and FAC are 2.1 and 2.56 kDa, respectively. The contribution of free amino acids and small peptides <0.5 kDa is 46% for FAC and 53% for NUT. About 50% of the protein fraction of both products consists of peptides longer than four amino acids. Three children did not complete the study. The other children all tolerated FAC very well; no adverse reactions were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The new extensively hydrolysed casein-based formula (FAC) can safely be used in children with IgE mediated cow's milk allergy

What are the beliefs of pediatricians and dietitians regarding complementary food introduction to prevent allergy?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The timing of complementary food introduction is controversial. Providing information on the timing of dietary introduction is crucial to the primary prevention of food allergy. The American Academy of Pediatrics offers dietary recommendations that were updated in 2008.</p> <p>Objective</p> <p>Identify the recommendations that general pediatricians and registered dietitians provide to parents and delineate any differences in counselling.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A 9-item survey was distributed to pediatricians and dietitians online and by mail. Information on practitioner type, gender, length of practice and specific recommendations regarding complementary food introduction and exposure was collected.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>181 surveys were returned with a 54% response rate from pediatricians. It was not possible to calculate a meaningful dietitian response rate due to overlapping email databases. 52.5% of all respondents were pediatricians and 45.9% were dietitians. The majority of pediatricians and dietitians advise mothers that peanut abstinence during pregnancy and lactation is unnecessary. Dietitians were more likely to counsel mothers to breastfeed their infants to prevent development of atopic dermatitis than pediatricians. Hydrolyzed formulas for infants at risk of developing allergy were the top choice of formula amongst both practitioners. For food allergy prevention, pediatricians were more likely to recommend delayed introduction of peanut and egg, while most dietitians recommended no delay in allergenic food introduction.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In the prophylaxis of food allergy, pediatricians are less aware than dietitians of the current recommendation that there is no benefit in delaying allergenic food introduction beyond 4 to 6 months. More dietitians than pediatricians believe that breastfeeding decreases the risk of atopic dermatitis. Practitioners may benefit from increased awareness of current guidelines.</p

Allergen manufacturing and quality aspects for allergen immunotherapy in Europe and the United States:An analysis from the EAACI AIT Guidelines Project

Adequate quality is essential for any medicinal product to be eligible for marketing. Quality includes verification of the identity, content and purity of a medicinal product in combination with a specified production process and its control. Allergen products derived from natural sources require particular considerations to ensure adequate quality. Here, we describe key aspects of the documentation on manufacturing and quality aspects for allergen immunotherapy products in the European Union and the United States. In some key parts, requirements in these areas are harmonized while other fields are regulated separately between both regions. Essential differences are found in the use of Reference Preparations, or the requirement to apply standardized assays for potency determination. Since the types of products available are different in specific regions, regulatory guidance for such products may also be available in one specific region only, such as for allergoids in the European Union. Region-specific issues and priorities are a result of this. As allergen products derived from natural sources are inherently variable in their qualitative and quantitative composition, these products present special challenges to balance the variability and ensuring batch-to-batch consistency. Advancements in scientific knowledge on specific allergens and their role in allergic disease will consequentially find representation in future regulatory guidelines