COVID-19 vaccine-associated anaphylaxis: A statement of the World Allergy Organization Anaphylaxis Committee

Anafilaxi; COVID-19; PolietilenglicolAnafilaxia; COVID-19; PolietilenglicolAnaphylaxis; COVID-19; Polyethylene glycolVaccines against COVID-19 (and its emerging variants) are an essential global intervention to control the current pandemic situation. Vaccines often cause adverse events; however, the vast majority of adverse events following immunization (AEFI) are a consequence of the vaccine stimulating a protective immune response, and not allergic in etiology. Anaphylaxis as an AEFI is uncommon, occurring at a rate of less than 1 per million doses for most vaccines. However, within the first days of initiating mass vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine BNT162b2, there were reports of anaphylaxis from the United Kingdom and United States. More recent data imply an incidence of anaphylaxis closer to 1:200,000 doses with respect to the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. In this position paper, we discuss the background to reactions to the current COVID-19 vaccines and relevant steps to mitigate against the risk of anaphylaxis as an AEFI. We propose a global surveillance strategy led by allergists in order to understand the potential risk and generate data to inform evidence-based guidance, and thus provide reassurance to public health bodies and members of the public

Allergenicity assessment of genetically modified crops—what makes sense?

GM crops have great potential to improve food quality, increase harvest yields and decrease dependency on certain chemical pesticides. Before entering the market their safety needs to be scrutinized. This includes a detailed analysis of allergenic risks, as the safety of allergic consumers has high priority. However, not all tests currently being applied to assessing allergenicity have a sound scientific basis. Recent events with transgenic crops reveal the fallacy of applying such tests to GM crops

Is oral food challenge useful to avoid complete elimination in Japanese patients diagnosed with or suspected of having IgE-dependent hen's egg allergy? A systematic review

Background: IgE-mediated egg allergy is a common food allergy worldwide. Patients with egg allergy are known to easily achieve tolerance compared to other allergens such as nuts. Oral food challenge (OFC) is often performed on patients diagnosed with or suspected of having IgE-mediated food allergy, but whether hen's egg OFC is useful in IgE-dependent egg allergy patients to avoid complete elimination remains unknown. Methods: We identified articles in which OFCs were performed in Japanese patients diagnosed with or suspected of having IgE-mediated egg allergy. We evaluated whether the OFCs were useful to avoid the complete elimination of eggs by assessing the following: (1) the number of patients who could avoid complete elimination; (2) the number of patients who experienced serious adverse events (SAEs); or (3) adverse events (AEs); (4) improvement in quality of life (QOL); and (5) immunological changes. Results: Fifty-nine articles were selected in the study; all the references were case series or case studies in which OFC was compared to pre-challenge conditions. The overall negative ratio against egg OFC was 62.7%, but an additional 71.9% of OFC-positive patients could take eggs when expanded to partial elimination. Of the 4182 cases, 1146 showed AEs in the OFC, and two cases reached an SAE. Two reports showed an improvement in QOL and immunological changes, although the evidence was weak. Conclusions: OFCs against eggs may be useful to avoid complete elimination, but medical professionals should proceed with the test safely and carefully

Updated full range of Eliciting Dose values for Cow’s milk for use in food allergen risk assessment

Access to Eliciting Doses (ED) for allergens enables advanced food allergen risk assessment. Previously, the full ED range for 14 allergenic foods, including milk, and recommendations for their use were provided (Houben et al., 2020). Additional food challenge studies with cow’s milk-allergic patients added 247 data points to the original dataset. Using the Stacked Model Averaging statistical method for interval-censored data on the 697 individual NOAELs and LOAELs for milk generated an updated full ED distribution. The ED01 and ED05, the doses at which 1% and 5% of the milk-allergic population would be predicted to experience any objective allergic reaction, were 0.3 and 3.2 mg milk protein for the discrete and 0.4 mg and 4.3 mg milk protein for the cumulative dose distribution, respectively. These values are slightly higher but remain within the 95% confidence interval of previously published EDs. We recommend using the updated EDs for future characterization of risks of exposure of milk-allergic individuals to milk protein. This paper contributes to the discussion on the Reference Dose for milk in the recent Ad hoc Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation on Risk Assessment of Food Allergens. It will also benefit harmonization of food allergen risk assessment and risk management globally

Large scale genotyping study for asthma in the Japanese population

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Asthma is a complex phenotype that is influenced by both genetic and environmental factors. Genome-wide linkage and association studies have been performed to identify susceptibility genes for asthma. These studies identified new genes and pathways implicated in this disease, many of which were previously unknown.</p> <p>Objective</p> <p>To perform a large-scale genotyping study to identify asthma-susceptibility genes in the Japanese population.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We performed a large-scale, three-stage association study on 288 atopic asthmatics and 1032 controls, by using multiplex PCR-Invader assay methods at 82,935 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) (1^ststage). SNPs that were strongly associated with asthma were further genotyped in samples from asthmatic families (216 families, 762 members, 2^ndstage), 541 independent patients, and 744 controls (3^rdstage).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>SNPs located in the 5' region of <it>PEX19 </it>(rs2820421) were significantly associated with <it>P </it>< 0.05 through the 1^stto the 3^rdstage analyses; however, the <it>P </it>values did not reach statistically significant levels (combined, <it>P </it>= 3.8 × 10^-5; statistically significant levels with Bonferroni correction, <it>P </it>= 6.57 × 10^-7). SNPs on <it>HPCAL1 </it>(rs3771140) and on <it>IL18R1 </it>(rs3213733) were associated with asthma in the 1^stand 2^ndstage analyses, but the associations were not observed in the 3^rdstage analysis.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>No association attained genome-wide significance, but several loci for possible association emerged. Future studies are required to validate these results for the prevention and treatment of asthma.</p

Time to revisit the definition and clinical criteria for anaphylaxis?

Anaphylaxis represents the severe end of the spectrum of allergic reactions. A number of different definitions for anaphylaxis are currently foundin the literature (Table 1).[1-6]Manydefine anaphylaxis as a life-threatening reaction. However, data from large case series and patient registries have demonstrated that despite the fact thatthe vast majority of anaphylaxisreactionsare not treated appropriately with prompt administration of epinephrine/adrenaline, ingeneral this does not result in increased mortality or morbidity(such as hospitalization);[7-9]this observation is also consistent with national epidemiological datafor food anaphylaxis, which indicate that fatal anaphylaxis is a rare (but unpredictable) event.[10-12]Therefore, the majority of anaphylaxis reactions cannot be described as life-threatening in themselves,althoughdue to our inability to predict severity of reaction, [12]we emphasise that all anaphylaxis must be appropriately treated with intramuscular epinephrine/adrenaline. Both the descriptions used by the Australasian Society of Clinical Immunology and Allergy (ASCIA)[4] and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID)[5] refer to anaphylaxis as a serious allergic reaction, and acknowledge the spectrum of severity in terms of identifying the potential for anaphylaxis to be life-threatening

Evaluation of oral immunotherapy efficacy and safety by maintenance dose dependency: A multicenter randomized study

Background Generally, oral immunotherapy (OIT) aims for daily administration. Recently, the efficacy of treatment with OIT at a low dose has been reported. However, the optimal dose and the evaluation of dose-dependent OIT outcome have not been described. Methods A multicenter, parallel, open-labeled, prospective, non-placebo controlled, randomized study enrolled 101 Japanese patients for treatment with OIT. We hypothesized that target dose OIT would induce short-term unresponsiveness (StU) earlier than reduced dose OIT. StU was defined as no response to 6200 mg whole egg, 3400 mg milk, and 2600 mg wheat protein, as evaluated by oral food challenge after 2-week ingestion cessation. To compare the two doses of OIT efficacy, the maximum ingestion doses during the maintenance phase of OIT were divided into 100%-dose or 25%-dose groups against their target StU dose, respectively. A total of 51 patients were assigned to the 100%-dose group [hen's egg (HE) = 26, cow's milk (CM) = 13, wheat = 12] and 50 to the 25%-dose group (HE = 25, CM = 13, wheat = 12). Primary outcome was established by comparing StU at 1 year. Secondary outcome was StU at 2 years and established by comparing allergic symptoms and immunological changes. Results The year 1 StU rates (%) for the 100%- and 25%-dose groups were 26.9 vs. 20.0 (HE), 7.7 vs. 15.4 (CM), and 50.0 vs. 16.7 (wheat), respectively. The year 2 StU rates were 30.8 vs. 36.0 (HE), 7.7 vs. 23.1 (CM), and 58.3 vs. 58.3 (wheat), respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in StU between years 1 and 2. The total allergic symptom rate in the 25%-dose group was lower than that in the 100%-dose group for egg, milk, and wheat. Antigen-specific IgE levels for egg-white, milk, and wheat decreased at 12 months. Conclusions Reduced maintenance dose of egg OIT showed similar therapeutic efficacy to the target dose. However, we were not able to clearly demonstrate the efficacy, particularly for milk and wheat. Reducing the maintenance dose for eggs, milk, and wheat may effectively lower the symptoms associated with their consumption compared to the target OIT dose. Furthermore, aggressive reduction of the maintenance dose might be important for milk and wheat, compared to the 25%-dose OIT