Food hypersensitivity by inhalation

Though not widely recognized, food hypersensitivity by inhalation can cause major morbidity in affected individuals. The exposure is usually more obvious and often substantial in occupational environments but frequently occurs in non-occupational settings, such as homes, schools, restaurants, grocery stores, and commercial flights. The exposure can be trivial, as in mere smelling or being in the vicinity of the food. The clinical manifestations can vary from a benign respiratory or cutaneous reaction to a systemic one that can be life-threatening. In addition to strict avoidance, such highly-sensitive subjects should carry self-injectable epinephrine and wear MedicAlert® identification. Asthma is a strong predisposing factor and should be well-controlled. It is of great significance that food inhalation can cause de novo sensitization

Skin testing versus radioallergosorbent testing for indoor allergens

BACKGROUND: Skin testing (ST) is the most common screening method for allergy evaluation. Measurement of serum specific IgE is also commonly used, but less so by allergists than by other practitioners. The sensitivity and specificity of these testing methods may vary by type of causative allergen and type of allergic manifestation. We compared ST reactivity with serum specific IgE antibodies to common indoor allergens in patients with respiratory allergies. METHODS: 118 patients (3 mo-58 yr, mean 12 yr) with allergic rhinitis and/or bronchial asthma had percutaneous skin testing (PST) supplemented by intradermal testing (ID) with those allergens suspected by history but showed negative PST. The sera were tested blindly for specific IgE antibodies by the radioallergosorbent test (Phadebas RAST). The allergens were D. farinae (118), cockroach (60), cat epithelium (90), and dog epidermal (90). Test results were scored 0–4; ST ≥ 2 + and RAST ≥ 1 + were considered positive. RESULTS: The two tests were in agreement (i.e., either both positive or both negative) in 52.2% (dog epidermal) to 62.2% (cat epithelium). When RAST was positive, ST was positive in 80% (dog epidermal) to 100% (cockroach mix). When ST was positive, RAST was positive in 16.3% (dog epidermal) to 50.0% (D. farinae). When RAST was negative, ST was positive in 48.5% (cat epithelium) to 69.6% (D. farinae). When ST was negative, RAST was positive in 0% (cockroach) to 5.6% (cat epithelium). The scores of ST and RAST showed weak to moderate correlation (r = 0.24 to 0.54). Regardless of history of symptoms on exposure, ST was superior to RAST in detecting sensitization to cat epithelium and dog epidermal. CONCLUSION: For all four indoor allergens tested, ST was more sensitive than RAST. When both tests were positive, their scores showed poor correlation. Sensitizations to cat epithelium and dog epidermal are common, even in subjects who claimed no direct exposure

World Allergy Organization (WAO) diagnosis and rationale for action against Cow\u27s milk allergy (DRACMA) guidelines update – X – breastfeeding a baby with cow\u27s milk allergy

Cow’s milk allergy is rare in exclusively breastfed infants. To support the continuation of breastfeeding an infant after diagnosis with a cow’s milk allergy, it is critical to examine the evidence for and against any form of cow’s milk elimination diet for lactating mothers. In this narrative review, we highlight the lack of high-quality evidence, hence subsequent controversy, regarding whether the minuscule quantities of cow’s milk proteins detectable in human milk cause infant cow’s milk allergy symptoms. Current clinical practice recommendations advise a 2–4 week trial of maternal cow’s milk dietary elimination for: a) IgE-mediated cow’s milk allergy only if the infant is symptomatic on breastfeeding alone; b) non-IgE-mediated associated symptoms only if the history and examination strongly suggest cow’s milk allergy; and c) infants with moderate to severe eczema/ atopic dermatitis, unresponsive to topical steroids and sensitized to cow’s milk protein. There should be a clear plan for home reintroduction of cow’s milk into the maternal diet for a period of 1 week to determine that the cow’s milk elimination is responsible for resolution of symptoms, and then subsequent reoccurrence of infant symptoms upon maternal cow’s milk reintroduction. The evidence base to support the use of maternal cow’s milk avoidance for the treatment of a breastfed infant with cow’s milk allergy is of limited strength due to a lack of high-quality, adequately powered, randomised controlled trials. It is important to consider the consequences of maternal cow’s milk avoidance on reducing immune enhancing factors in breast milk, as well as the potential nutritional and quality of life impacts on the mother. Referral to a dietitian is advised for dietary education, along with calcium and vitamin D supplementation according to local recommendations, and a maternal substitute milk should be advised. However, for most breastfed infants with cow’s milk allergy maternal cow’s milk dietary elimination will not be required, and active support of the mother to continue breastfeeding is essentia

History of food allergy and where we are today

The food allergy (FA) entity went through a long difficult road which led to much delay in its recognition. After long periods of denial and misdiagnosis, it attained its current designation as food hypersensitivity or allergy. This review will briefly address the evolution of the FA entity from the early BC era until our 21st century and highlight the milestones in the main aspects of diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and research.A great recognition of the allergy specialty was gained by the discovery of its main mediator –immunoglobulin E in 1967 – which also helped in classifying FA into IgE-mediated (immediate-type) and non-IgE-mediated. The cause of the increasing prevalence during the past few decades may be attributed to an increased food consumption and the consequences of modern lifestyle (the hygiene hypothesis).In addition to a skillful medical history-taking, helpful tests have been developed involving the skin or blood. The scratch test was modified to the prick test and in certain instances prick-by-prick. The use of intradermal test has been markedly reduced. Blood testing began by measuring specific-IgE antibodies (sIgE) in the serum using the radioallergosorbent test which went through multiple modifications to avoid radioisotope material and increase the test's sensitivity. The test was advanced to measure sIgE to individual allergen components. Recently, cellular tests were developed in the form of basophil activation or mast cell activation. In most cases, FA needs verification by appropriately-designed challenge testing.Regarding treatment, strict avoidance remains the basic approach. Certain food-labeling regulations led to some improvement in the problem of hidden food allergens but more is desired. Recently some protocols for oral immunotherapy (OIT) showed reasonable safety and efficacy in preventing reactions to accidental exposures. The protocol for peanut has been approved in the United States and other foods are expected to follow. Epicutaneous immunotherapy showed higher safety and promising efficacy. Sublingual immunotherapy might follow as well. Studies on the use of certain biologicals, alone or in combination of OIT, showed promising findings. Very recently, omalizumab was approved in the United States for patients with multiple FA. A major change in the strategy of prevention is the benefit of introducing allergenic foods at an early age (4–6 months). Research on FA markedly flourished in recent decades with increasing numbers of investigators, funding, publications, and education. Despite the major strides, still more awaits exploration with expected better understanding and practice of FA

Food Allergy Diagnosis

While food hypersensitivity can be a life-threatening problem, its scope is yet to be fully developed. More work is needed to further define its parameters but basic food hypersensitivity has been significantly clarified in the decade of the 80\u27s to become standard practice for most updated allergists. Studies related to inhalation of food antigens remains within the purview of research centers as does other immunologic processes. The diagnosis of food hypersensitivity remains dependent on the medical history with test like elimination diets, skin testing, and RAST. Double-blind, placebo-controlled, food challenges (DBPCFC) provide the most definitive support for the association between certain symptoms and a specific food