Outcomes reported in randomized controlled trials for mixed and non‐IgE‐mediated food allergy: Systematic review

Background Mixed and non‐IgE‐mediated food allergy is a subset of immune‐mediated adverse food reactions that can impose a major burden on the quality of life of affected patients and their families. Clinical trials to study these diseases are reliant upon consistent and valid outcome measures that are relevant to both patients and clinicians, but the degree to which such stringent outcome reporting takes place is poorly studied. Objective As part of the Core Outcome Measures for Food Allergy (COMFA) project, we identified outcomes reported in randomized clinical trials (RCT) of treatments for mixed or non‐IgE‐mediated food allergy. Design In this systematic review, we searched the Ovid, MEDLINE and Embase databases for RCTs in children or adults investigating treatments for food protein‐induced enterocolitis syndrome, food protein‐induced allergic proctocolitis, food protein‐induced enteropathy and eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders including eosinophilic esophagitis [EoE], eosinophilic gastritis and eosinophilic colitis published until 14 October 2022. Results Twenty‐six eligible studies were identified, with 23 focused on EoE (88%). Most interventions were corticosteroids or monoclonal antibodies. All EoE studies assessed patient‐reported dysphagia, usually using a non‐validated questionnaire. Twenty‐two of 23 EoE studies used peak tissue eosinophil count as the primary outcome, usually using a non‐validated assessment method, and other immunological markers were only exploratory. Thirteen (57%) EoE studies reported endoscopic outcomes of which six used a validated scoring tool recently recommended as a core outcome for EoE trials. Funding source was not obviously associated with likelihood of an RCT reporting mechanistic versus patient‐reported outcomes. Only 3 (12%) RCTs concerned forms of food allergy other than EoE, and they reported on fecal immunological markers and patient‐reported outcomes.ConclusionsOutcomes measured in clinical trials of EoE and non‐IgE‐mediated food allergy are heterogeneous and largely non‐validated. Core outcomes for EoE have been developed and need to be used in future trials. For other forms of mixed or non‐IgE‐mediated food allergies, core outcome development is needed to support the development of effective treatments

The need for improved transition and services for adolescent and young adult patients with allergy and asthma in all settings

Adolescence is a challenging time for both patients and healthcare providers. Adolescent patients need to learn all the knowledge and skills required to competently and confidently self-manage their allergy and asthma. They have to negotiate the challenging transition from being children, whose medical care is supervised by their parents, to independent expert adult patients. Although adolescent and young adult patients appear to be very robust, the reality is that they have often had a poor experience of medical care and are at surprisingly high risk of morbidity and mortality.</p

Biomarkers of severity and threshold of allergic reactions during oral peanut challenges

Background: oral food challenge (OFC) is the criterion standard to assess peanut allergy (PA), but it involves a risk of allergic reactions of unpredictable severity.Objective: our aim was to identify biomarkers for risk of severe reactions or low dose threshold during OFC to peanut.Methods: we assessed Learning Early about Peanut Allergy study, Persistance of Oral Tolerance to Peanut study, and Peanut Allergy Sensitization study participants by administering the basophil activation test (BAT) and the skin prick test (SPT) and measuring the levels of peanut-specific IgE, Arachis hypogaea 2–specific IgE, and peanut-specific IgG4, and we analyzed the utility of the different biomarkers in relation to PA status, severity, and threshold dose of allergic reactions to peanut during OFC.Results: when a previously defined optimal cutoff was used, the BAT diagnosed PA with 98% specificity and 75% sensitivity. The BAT identified severe reactions with 97% specificity and 100% sensitivity. The SPT, level of Arachis hypogaea 2–specific IgE, level of peanut-specific IgE, and IgG4/IgE ratio also had 100% sensitivity but slightly lower specificity (92%, 93%, 90%, and 88%, respectively) to predict severity. Participants with lower thresholds of reactivity had higher basophil activation to peanut in vitro. The SPT and the BAT were the best individual predictors of threshold. Multivariate models were superior to individual biomarkers and were used to generate nomograms to calculate the probability of serious adverse events during OFC for individual patients.Conclusions: the BAT diagnosed PA with high specificity and identified severe reactors and low threshold with high specificity and high sensitivity. The BAT was the best biomarker for severity, surpassed only by the SPT in predicting threshold. Nomograms can help estimate the likelihood of severe reactions and reactions to a low dose of allergen in individual patients with PA

Frequency of food allergy in Europe:an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Food allergy (FA) is increasingly reported in Europe, however, the latest prevalence estimates were based on studies published a decade ago. The present work provides the most updated estimates of the prevalence and trends of FA in Europe. Databases were searched for studies published between 2012 and 2021, added to studies published up to 2012. In total, 110 studies were included in this update. Most studies were graded as moderate risk of bias. Pooled lifetime and point prevalence of self-reported FA were 19.9% (95% CI 16.6–23.3) and 13.1% (95% CI 11.3–14.8), respectively. The point prevalence of sensitization based on specific IgE (slgE) was 16.6% (95% CI 12.3–20.8), skin prick test (SPT) 5.7% (95% CI 3.9–7.4), and positive food challenge 0.8% (95% CI 0.5–0.9). While lifetime prevalence of self-reported FA and food challenge positivity only slightly changed, the point prevalence of self-reported FA, sIgE and SPT positivity increased from previous estimates. This may reflect a real increase, increased awareness, increased number of foods assessed, or increased number of studies from countries with less data in the first review. Future studies require rigorous designs and implementation of standardized methodology in diagnosing FA, including use of double-blinded placebo-controlled food challenge to minimize potential biases

Prevalence estimates of eight big food allergies in Europe: Updated systematic review and meta-analysis

In 2014, the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology published prevalence estimates for food allergy (FA) and food sensitization (FS) to the so-called eight big food allergens (i.e. cow's milk, egg, wheat, soy, peanut, tree nuts, fish and shellfish) in Europe for studies published between 2000 and 2012. The current work provides 10-year updated prevalence estimates for these food allergens. A protocol was registered on PROSPERO before starting the research (reference number CRD42021266657). Six databases were searched for studies published 2012–2021, added to studies published up to 2012, resulting in a total of 93 studies. Most studies were graded as at moderate risk of bias. The overall pooled estimates for all age groups of self-reported lifetime prevalence were as follows: cow's milk (5.7%, 95% confidence interval 4.4–6.9), egg (2.4%, 1.8–3.0), wheat (1.6%, 0.9–2.3), soy (0.5%, 0.3–0.7), peanut (1.5%, 1.0–2.1), tree nuts (0.9%, 0.6–1.2), fish (1.4%, 0.8–2.0) and shellfish (0.4%, 0.3–0.6). The point prevalence of food challenge-verified allergy were as follows: cow's milk (0.3%, 0.1–0.5), egg (0.8%, 0.5–1.2), wheat (0.1%, 0.01–0.2), soy (0.3%, 0.1–0.4), peanut (0.1%, 0.0–0.2), tree nuts (0.04%, 0.02–0.1), fish (0.02%, 0.0–0.1) and shellfish (0.1%, 0.0–0.2). With some exceptions, the prevalence of allergy to common foods did not substantially change during the last decade; variations by European regions were observed

Diagnosing, managing and preventing anaphylaxis:Systematic review

Background This systematic review used the GRADE approach to compile evidence to inform the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology's (EAACI) anaphylaxis guideline. Methods We searched five bibliographic databases from 1946 to 20 April 2020 for studies about the diagnosis, management and prevention of anaphylaxis. We included 50 studies with 18 449 participants: 29 randomized controlled trials, seven controlled clinical trials, seven consecutive case series and seven case-control studies. Findings were summarized narratively because studies were too heterogeneous to conduct meta-analysis. Results It is unclear whether the NIAID/FAAN criteria or Brighton case definition are valid for immediately diagnosing anaphylaxis due to the very low certainty of evidence. There was also insufficient evidence about the impact of most anaphylaxis management and prevention strategies. Adrenaline is regularly used for first-line emergency management of anaphylaxis but little robust research has assessed its effectiveness. Newer models of adrenaline autoinjectors may slightly increase the proportion of people correctly using the devices and reduce time to administration. Face-to-face training for laypeople may slightly improve anaphylaxis knowledge and competence in using autoinjectors. We searched for but found little or no comparative effectiveness evidence about strategies such as fluid replacement, oxygen, glucocorticosteroids, methylxanthines, bronchodilators, management plans, food labels, drug labels and similar. Conclusions Anaphylaxis is a potentially life-threatening condition but, due to practical and ethical challenges, there is a paucity of robust evidence about how to diagnose and manage it

A practical toolbox for the effective transition of adolescents and young adults with asthma and allergies - an EAACI Position paper

Adolescence is a critical stage of rapid biological, emotional and social change and development. Adolescents and young adults (AYA) with asthma and allergies need to develop the knowledge and skills to self-manage their health independently. Healthcare professionals (HCP), parents and their wider network play an essential role in supporting AYA in this process. Previous work showed significant limitations in transition care across Europe. In 2020, the first evidence-based guideline on effective transition for AYA with asthma and allergies was published by EAACI. We herein summarize practical resources to support this guideline's implementation in clinical practice. For this purpose, multi-stakeholder Task Force members searched for resources in peer review journals and grey literature. These resources were included if relevant and of good quality, and were pragmatically rated for their evidence-basis and user friendliness. Resources identified covered a range of topics and targeted healthcare professionals, AYA, parents/carers, schools, workplace, and wider community. Most resources were in English, web-based and had limited evidence-basis. This position paper provides a valuable selection of practical resources for all stakeholders to support effective transitional care for AYA with asthma and allergies. Future research should focus on developing validated, patient-centred tools to further assist evidence-based transition care