For hazelnut allergy, component testing of Cor a 9 and Cor a 14 is relevant also in birch-endemic areas

The role of pediatricians in the diagnosis and management of IgE-mediated food allergy: a review

Importance

Food allergy can often cause a significant burden on patients, families, and healthcare systems. The complexity of food allergy management requires a multidisciplinary approach involving different types of healthcare providers, including allergists, dieticians, psychologists, nurses, family practitioners and, of particular relevance for this article, pediatric primary caretakers. Pediatricians may be the first-line healthcare providers for food allergy: strategies for management and guideline adherence have been highlighted.

Observations

This review article summarizes the up-to-date recommendations on the role of pediatricians in the diagnosis, management, and prevention of IgE-mediated food allergy. Early introduction of allergenic foods like peanut is known to be of importance to reduce the development of peanut allergy in infants, and pediatricians are essential for educating and supporting parents in this decision. In scenarios of limited allergist availability, as is often the case among rural, Medicaid and minority populations, pediatricians can assist in the evaluation and management of food allergy, and provide action plans, education and counselling for patients and families.

Conclusions and relevance

Pediatric primary caretakers play a key role in the diagnosis, management, and prevention of IgE-mediated food allergy. As more diagnostic tools and therapies in food allergy become available, the need for a multidisciplinary team is paramount to optimize patient care.

Allergen Component Testing: Key in Diagnosing Atypical Pollen-Food Allergy Syndrome

This case report details the complex presentation, diagnosis, and management of a teenager with pollen-food allergen syndrome (PFAS), formerly known as oral allergy syndrome. PFAS, mediated by immunoglobulin E (IgE) antibodies, stems from the cross-reactivity between pollens and uncooked plant-based foods, leading to a spectrum of symptoms, such as itching or tingling of the oral cavity. A UK survey indicated an average PFAS prevalence of 2%, with apples, hazelnuts, and kiwifruit commonly implicated. The presented case involved a 15-year-old girl referred from the respiratory clinic to the allergy clinic due to episodes of sore throat and urticaria rash following Nutella (chocolate paste containing hazelnut) and peanut consumption. Extensive diagnostic measures, including specific IgE testing, skin prick tests, and allergen component testing, revealed cross-reactivity between Bet v 1 and hazelnut allergens. The patient's atopic history, encompassing poorly controlled asthma, allergic rhinitis, and eczema, added layers of complexity to the diagnosis. Management strategies comprised dietary advice, allergen avoidance, and potential consideration of aeroallergen immunotherapy. A comprehensive dietary plan emphasized abstaining from specific foods and raising awareness of potential reactions. The patient, following guidance from the allergy clinic, exhibited improvements in allergic rhinitis and oral symptoms. This case underscores the importance of allergen component testing in diagnosing atypical PFAS presentations and tailoring management plans. Ongoing collaboration between healthcare providers, detailed patient education, and regular follow-ups are crucial for effective PFAS management and long-term care.

Reactivity to allergenic food contaminants: A study on products on the market

BACKGROUND

The frequency and severity of reactions in food-allergic consumers exposed to unintentional food allergen contamination during production is unknown. To warn allergic consumers, it has been suggested for pre-packaged foods to be precautionary labelled when the food allergen contamination may exceed the amount to which 1%-5% of the population could react (ED01-ED05). ED01 for hazelnut and milk have been estimated at 0.1 and 0.2 mg, respectively, by the Voluntary Incidental Trace Allergen Labelling (VITAL) initiative. The respective reference doses recommended by the FAO/WHO Codex consultation are 3 and 2 mg. We evaluated the reactivity to potential traces of milk and hazelnut allergens in allergen-free pre-packaged products by children affected by severe allergies to milk and hazelnuts.

METHODS

Oral Food Challenges with commercially available hazelnut-free wafer biscuits and milk-free chocolate pralines were administered to patients with severe food allergies to hazelnut and cow's milk, respectively. Contamination levels of milk or hazelnut allergens were measured using chromatographic separation interfaced with triple quadrupole mass spectrometry.

RESULTS

No hazelnut allergic patient showed allergic reactions to exposure to biscuits, nor any milk allergic patient displayed allergic reactions to the dark chocolate praline. While no hazelnut trace was detected in biscuits, the praline was found to be contaminated by milk at concentrations ranging between 8 and 35 mg total protein/kg food. In our dose model, these amounts exceeded 1.5-10 times the VITAL ED01 and reached the threshold suggested by the FAO/WHO Codex consultation.

CONCLUSIONS

Upon the consumption of food products available on the market, many patients with severe food allergies tolerate significantly higher doses of allergen than reference doses indicated in the VITAL system used for precautionary allergen labelling. These doses support the safety of the FAO/WHO recommended reference doses.

Natural History of Hazelnut Allergy and Current Approach to Its Diagnosis and Treatment

Hazelnut allergy is the most prevalent type of nut allergy in Europe, with symptoms that can range from mild, such as hives and itching, to severe, such as anaphylaxis, particularly in patients who are sensitized to highly stable allergens, such as storage proteins. Compared to other types of food allergies, allergies to tree nuts, including hazelnuts, tend to persist throughout life. Although symptoms can appear in early childhood, they often continue into adulthood, with a minority of cases improving during adolescence. Currently, there is no curative treatment available for hazelnut allergy, and patients must adhere to a restrictive diet and carry autoinjective epinephrine. However, oral allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a promising treatment option. Patients can be categorized based on their risk for severe reactions using various clinical, in vivo, and in vitro tests, including component-resolved diagnosis and oral food challenge. This review aims to provide an overview of the current knowledge of the natural history of hazelnut allergy and new approaches for its diagnosis and management.

INFOGEST Digestion Assay of Raw and Roasted Hazelnuts and Its Impact on Allergens and Their IgE Binding Activity

Most of the food allergens sensitized via the gastrointestinal tract resist thermal treatments and digestion, particularly digestion by pepsin. Roasted hazelnuts are more commonly consumed than raw ones. Since no studies have characterized gastric digestion protein fragments of raw and roasted hazelnuts nor their IgE binding properties, we compared these aspects of raw and roasted hazelnuts’ gastric digesta obtained by INFOGEST protocol. Their electrophoretically resolved profiles were probed with hazelnut allergic patients’ sera in 1D and 2D immunoblots. Electrophoretic profiles demonstrated pepsin digestion of all hazelnut allergens to varying extents. While 2D immunoblots indicated that roasting slightly reduced allergenicity, IgE ELISA with the pool of sera showed a slight significant (10%) increase in IgE binding in both gastric digesta. Cor a 9 isolated from the raw and roasted hazelnuts, characterized by far and near CD, remained stable after roasting, with preserved IgE reactivity. Its immunoreactivity contribution by inhibitory ELISA was noticeable in raw and roasted hazelnut digesta; its activity was slightly stronger in the roasted preparations. Roasting has a visible impact on proteins; however, it did not affect overall IgE reactivity. Gastric digestion slightly increases the overall IgE reactivity in raw and roasted hazelnuts, and may therefore impact the profiles of allergens and their fragments available to interact with the immune system in the small intestine.

Multiplex component-based allergen macroarray test is useful to predict clinical reactivity to tree nuts in children

BACKGROUND

In tree nut (TN) allergy, singleplex tests showed the diagnostic utility of rAna o 3, rCor a 14/nCor a 9, and nJug r 1/nJug r 4 for cashew/pistachio, hazelnut, and walnut allergies, respectively. However, disadvantages of the tests include high costs and excessive blood sampling in multi-sensitized patients, and a limited number of components. We investigated the utility of a multiplex macroarray (i.e., the ALEX² test) in TN allergy.

METHODS

In 169 children, skin prick test, the component- and extract-specific IgEs of TNs were investigated for clinical reactivity and tolerance.

RESULTS

The predictors (AUC = 0.962-0.749) of clinical reactivity to cashew, pistachio, hazelnut, and walnut were rPis v 1/rAna o 3, rPis v 1/rAna o 3/nPis v 2/nPis v 3, rCor a 14/nCor a 11/nCor a 9, and nJug r 1/nJug r 2/nJug r 6/nJug r 4, respectively. More than 93% of the patients with clinical reactivity to pistachio/cashew, hazelnut and walnut had positivity of (≥0.3 kU_A/L) rPis v 1/rAna o 3, rCor a 14 and nJug r 1/nJug r 2, respectively. The highest accuracies of clinical reactivity to culprit nut were obtained with combination of rPis v 1, sIgE and SPT positivities for cashew/pistachio, rPis v 1 ≥ 1.0 kU_A/L for pistachio, rCor a 14 ≥ 1.0 kU_A/L for hazelnut and combination of nJug r 1 and nJug r 2 positivities for walnut, respectively. Also, higher concentrations of rPis v 1 (≥15.0 kU_A/L), rCor a 14 (≥5.0 kU_A/L) and nJug r 1/nJug r 2 (≥15.0 kU_A/L) had %100 specificity and PPV in predicting clinical reactivity to cashew, hazelnut and walnut, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiplex macroarray test is useful and reliable in the diagnosis of TN allergy in children, confirms and expands existing knowledge, and can be used as a stand-alone tool in the bottom-up diagnostic approach.

Managing the allergy and asthma epidemic in 2020s-Lessons from the Finnish experience

In Finland, a systematic public health programme was implemented from 2008 to 2018 to mitigate the burden of allergic disorders by revisiting the prevention strategy. Allergy health and contacts with natural environment were emphasized to promote immunological and psychological resilience instead of poorly justified avoidance. Allergy management practices were improved and low‐valued recommendations for care, for example for food allergy, were revised. Patients and families were empowered to use guided self‐management to proactively stop symptom exacerbations. A professional non‐governmental organization implemented the nationwide education for healthcare and patient NGOs for patients, families and lay public. In healthcare, the work supporting allergic patients and families was organized towards common goals and integrated into everyday work without extra costs. Reaching the predefined goals was followed by employing the national healthcare registers and questionnaire surveys. Governmental bodies contributed with kick‐off funding, which was supplemented by private funding. International collaboration, for example with the European patient organization (EFA), increased awareness of the Finnish action and predisposed it for peer review. The 10‐year results are favourable, patients are less disabled, practices and attitudes in healthcare have changed, and major cost savings have been obtained. Views of the lay public and patients are slow to move, however. Local multidisciplinary allergy teams were set up to continue the activities also after the Programme. Changes in environment and lifestyle in the last 50 years are the main reasons for the allergy rise. The Finnish experience may help to manage allergic diseases, improve nature relatedness in the fast‐urbanizing world, combat nature loss and reduce the disease burden.

Food allergy across the globe

The prevalence of food allergy (FA) is increasing in some areas of the globe, highlighting the need for better strategies for prevention, diagnosis, and therapy. In the last few decades, we have made great strides in understanding the causes and mechanisms underlying FAs, prompting guideline updates. Earlier guidelines recommended avoidance of common food allergens during pregnancy and lactation and delaying the introduction of allergenic foods in children aged between 1 and 3 years. Recent guidelines for allergy prevention recommend consumption of a healthy and diverse diet without eliminating or increasing the consumption of allergenic foods during pregnancy or breast-feeding. Early introduction of allergenic foods is recommended by most guidelines for allergy prevention after a period of exclusive breast-feedng (6 months [World Health Organization] or 4 months [European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology]). New diagnostics for FA have been developed with varied availability of these tests in different countries. Finally, the first oral immunotherapy drug for FA was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency in 2020. In this review, we will address the global prevalence of FA, our current understanding of the causes of FA, and the latest guidelines for preventing, diagnosing, and treating FA. We will also discuss similarities and differences between FA guidelines.

Advances and highlights in allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a growing public health, medical and economic problem worldwide. The current review describes the major discoveries related to AR during the past 2 years, including risk factors for the prevalence of AR, the corresponding diagnostic strategy, precise underlying immunological mechanisms, and efficient therapies for AR during the ongoing global "coronavirus disease 2019" (COVID-19) pandemic. The review further attempts to highlight future research perspectives. Increasing evidence suggests that environmental exposures, climate changes, and lifestyle are important risk factors for AR. Consequently, detailed investigation of the exposome and the connection between environmental exposures and health in the future should provide better risk profiles instead of single predictors, and also help mitigate adverse health outcomes in allergic diseases. Although patients with dual AR, a newly defined AR phenotype, display perennial and seasonal allergens-related nasal symptoms, they are only allergic to seasonal allergens, indicating the importance of measuring inflammation at the local sites. Herein, we suggest that a combination of precise diagnosis in local sites and traditional diagnostic methods may enhance the precision medicine-based approach for management of AR; however, this awaits further investigations. Apart from traditional treatments, social distancing, washing hands, and disinfection are also required to better manage AR patients in the ongoing global COVID-19 pandemic. Despite recent advances in understanding the immune mechanisms underlying the effects of allergen immunotherapy (AIT), further understanding changes of cell profiles after AIT and accurately evaluate the efficacy of AIT are required.

Component-Resolved Diagnosis of Hazelnut Allergy in Children

Hazelnuts commonly elicit allergic reactions starting from childhood and adolescence, with a rare resolution over time. The definite diagnosis of a hazelnut allergy relies on an oral food challenge. The role of component resolved diagnostics in reducing the need for oral food challenges in the diagnosis of hazelnut allergies is still debated. Therefore, three electronic databases were systematically searched for studies on the diagnostic accuracy of specific-IgE (sIgE) on hazelnut proteins for identifying children with a hazelnut allergy. Studies regarding IgE testing on at least one hazelnut allergen component in children whose final diagnosis was determined by oral food challenges or a suggestive history of serious symptoms due to a hazelnut allergy were included. Study quality was assessed by the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. Eight studies enrolling 757 children, were identified. Overall, sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve and diagnostic odd ratio of Cor a 1 sIgE were lower than those of Cor a 9 and Cor a 14 sIge. When the test results were positive, the post-test probability of a hazelnut allergy was 34% for Cor a 1 sIgE, 60% for Cor a9 sIgE and 73% for Cor a 14 sIgE. When the test results were negative, the post-test probability of a hazelnut allergy was 55% for Cor a 1 sIgE, 16% for Cor a9 sIgE and 14% for Cor a 14 sIgE. Measurement of IgE levels to Cor a 9 and Cor a 14 might have the potential to improve specificity in detecting clinically tolerant children among hazelnut-sensitized ones, reducing the need to perform oral food challenges.

Hazelnut Allergy

Background and Objectives: Hazelnuts are frequently involved in IgE-mediated reactions and represent the main culprit of nut allergy in Europe. The clinical presentation varies from mild symptoms limited to the oropharynx [oral allergy syndrome (OAS)], due to the cross-reaction with homologues in pollen allergens and more severe events caused by the primary sensitization to highly stable molecules contained in hazelnuts. The aim of this review is to summarize the most relevant concepts in the field of hazelnut allergy and to provide a practical approach useful in the clinical practice Materials and Methods: References were identified by PubMed searches dating from January 2000 up to November 2020 using the search terms: “component resolved diagnosis” and “Hazelnut allergy. Results: The storage proteins Cor a 9 and Cor a 14 resulted highly specific for primary hazelnut allergy and strongly associated with severe reactions, while the cross reactive Cor a 1, an homolog of the birch Bet v1, were related to OAS. Any cut-off has shown a specificity and sensitivity pattern as high as to replace the oral food challenge (OFC), which still remains the gold standard in the diagnosis of hazelnut allergy. To date there is still no definitive treatment. Hazelnut free-diet and treatment of symptoms with emergency management, including the prescription of auto-injective epinephrine, still represent the main approach. Oral allergen immunotherapy (AIT) appears a promising therapeutic strategy and the definition of individual clinical threshold would be useful for sensitized individuals, caregivers, and physicians to reduce social limitation, anxiety, and better manage food allergy. Conclusions: An accurate diagnostic work-up including clinical history, in vivo and in vitro test including component resolved diagnosis and OFC are essential to confirm the diagnosis, to assess the risk of a severe reaction, and to prescribe an adequate diet and treatment.