Gender, prick test size and rAra h 2 sIgE level may predict the eliciting dose in patients with peanut allergy: Evidence from the Mirabel survey

Oral Food Challenge in Children with Tree Nut and Peanut Allergy: The Predictive Value of Diagnostic Tests

Food allergy (FA) affects approximately 6-8% of young children, with a peak prevalence at approximately one year of age. Tree nut and peanut allergies are among the main causes of anaphylaxis in the world. The gold standard for the diagnosis of FAs is the oral food challenge (OFC). Other diagnostic tests used in the clinical practice are skin prick tests (SPTs) and laboratory tests to measure out the presence of serum specific IgE (sIgE). In this narrative review, we collect the current evidence of the predictive value (PV) of SPTs and sIgE for the outcome of the OFCs. In literature, data are conflicting as to whether increasing sIgE concentration and wheal size in SPTs correlate with OFC outcomes. Most studies included in our review have shown that in vivo and in vitro tests may predict OFC outcomes with variable PV, but data are not conclusive; therefore, the OFC currently remains the gold standard for FA diagnosis.

Integrating oral immunotherapy into clinical practice

In 2020, the first food allergy treatment, an oral immunotherapy (OIT) product for peanut allergy, was approved by the Food and Drug Administration, and a peanut epicutaneous immunotherapy patch was under review. As food allergy therapies become available and widespread, allergy offices will need to adjust practices to be able to offer their patients these new treatments. OIT is an intensive therapy that requires commitment from patients and their families, and open communication with the practice is paramount. OIT may not be the right therapy for every patient, and although identifying good candidates is still an area rich for research opportunity, experience from cohorts and clinical trials provides some insight. It is important to understand the scope of practice for each member of the OIT team based on state regulations for a particular location. Staffing and space will likely dictate how many patients at an individual office could be on active OIT at one time. Emergency medications, supplies, and protocols must be in place. Screening, scheduling, visit procedures, monitoring, home dosing, dose modifications, safety precautions, adverse reactions, and maintenance will be addressed in this article. Finally, adjunct therapies under investigation will be reviewed.

Developments allergy in 2019 through the eyes of Clinical and Experimental Allergy, Part II clinical allergy

In the second of two linked articles, we describe the development in clinical as described by Clinical & Experimental Allergy and other journals in 2019. Epidemiology, clinical allergy, asthma and rhinitis are all covered. In this article, we described the development in the field of allergy as described by Clinical and Experimental Allergy in 2019. Epidemiology, clinical allergy, asthma and rhinitis are all covered.

Two Different Composite Markers Predict Severity and Threshold Dose in Peanut Allergy

BACKGROUND

Safe and cost-effective biological surrogate markers to evaluate the severity and threshold dose of peanut allergy (PA) reactions during an oral food challenge (OFC) are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate biological markers associated with the severity and threshold dose of an allergic reaction during an OFC in a population of children with PA.

METHODS

Demographic and biological parameters of children with peanut OFC and basophil activation test (BAT) results were collected. Patients were stratified into 2 severity groups (mild-to-moderate and severe) and 2 cumulative threshold dose groups: low (LCTG) ≤100 mg crushed peanut and high >100 mg.

RESULTS

Among the 68 children included, there was a 96% concordance between the OFC and BAT result for the diagnosis of PA. Of the 56 children with a positive OFC and BAT to peanut (median age: 8.8 years), the severity of an allergic reaction and the cumulative threshold dose were not correlated (P = .24). Higher Ara h 2-specific IgE and FcεRI-positive control values were both associated with severe reactions to peanut. Combining these 2 markers led to a 92% sensitivity (84%-97%) and an 82% specificity (71%-89%) for severe reactions in all subjects. For children in the LCTG, a 4-variable composite marker, including age, normalized basophil sensitivity (EC₅₀), and FcεRI- and fMLP-positive control values, resulted in a 97% sensitivity (89%-99%) and 61% specificity (49%-71%).

CONCLUSION

Distinct composite markers including BAT allergen-specific and non-allergen-specific parameters appear to be associated with severity and cumulative threshold dose in children with PA.

Emerging Food Allergy Biomarkers

The management of food allergy is complicated by the lack of highly predictive biomarkers for diagnosis and prediction of disease course. The measurement of food-specific IgE is a useful tool together with clinical history but is an imprecise predictor of clinical reactivity. The gold standard for diagnosis and clinical research is a double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge. Improvement in our understanding of immune mechanisms of disease, development of high-throughput technologies, and advances in bioinformatics have yielded a number of promising new biomarkers of food allergy. In this review, we will discuss advances in immunoglobulin measurements, the utility of the basophil activation test, T-cell profiling, and the use of -omic technologies (transcriptome, epigenome, microbiome, and metabolome) as biomarker tools in food allergy.