Efficacy and safety of hydrolyzed formulas for cow's milk allergy management: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Identifying Children at Risk of Growth and Nutrient Deficiencies in the Food Allergy Clinic

BACKGROUND

Food allergies affect growth in children by decreasing the availability of nutrients through decreased dietary intake, increased dietary needs, food-medication interactions, and psychosocial burden. Guidelines on food allergy management frequently recommend nutrition counseling and growth monitoring of children with food allergies.

OBJECTIVE

To provide clear guidance for clinicians to identify children with food allergies who are at nutritional risk and ensure prompt intervention.

METHODS

We provide a narrative review summarizing information from national and international guidelines, retrospective studies, population studies, review articles, case reports, and case series to identify those with food allergy at greatest nutritional risk, determine the impact of nutritional interventions on growth, and develop guidance for risk reduction in children with food allergies.

RESULTS

Children with food allergies are at increased risk of nutritional deficiencies and poor growth. Nutritional assessment and intervention can improve outcomes. Identifying poor growth is an important step in the nutrition assessment. Therefore, growth should be assessed at each allergy evaluation. Interventions to ensure adequate dietary intake for growth include appropriately prescribed elimination diets, breast-feeding support and assessment, supplemental formula, vitamin and/or mineral supplementation, appropriate milk substitutes, and timely introduction of nutrient-dense complementary foods. Access to foods of appropriate nutritional value is an ongoing concern.

CONCLUSION

Nutrition intervention or referral to registered dietitian nutritionists with additional training and/or experience in food allergy may result in improved growth and nutrition outcomes.

An ESPGHAN Position Paper on the Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention of Cow's Milk Allergy

A previous guideline on cow's milk allergy (CMA) developed by the European Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) was published in 2012. This position paper provides an update on the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of CMA with focus on gastrointestinal manifestations. All systematic reviews and meta-analyses regarding prevalence, pathophysiology, symptoms, and diagnosis of CMA published after the previous ESPGHAN document were considered. Medline was searched from inception until May 2022 for topics that were not covered in the previous document. After reaching consensus on the manuscript, statements were formulated and voted on each of them with a score between 0 and 9. A score of ≥6 was arbitrarily considered as agreement. Available evidence on the role of dietary practice in the prevention, diagnosis, and management of CMA was updated and recommendations formulated. CMA in exclusively breastfed infants exists, but is uncommon and suffers from over-diagnosis. CMA is also over-diagnosed in formula and mixed fed infants. Changes in stool characteristics, feeding aversion, or occasional spots of blood in stool are common and in general should not be considered as diagnostic of CMA, irrespective of preceding consumption of cow's milk. Over-diagnosis of CMA occurs much more frequently than under-diagnosis; both have potentially harmful consequences. Therefore, the necessity of a challenge test after a short diagnostic elimination diet of 2-4 weeks is recommended as the cornerstone of the diagnosis. This position paper contains sections on nutrition, growth, cost, and quality of life.

Growth, tolerance and safety outcomes with use of an extensively hydrolyzed casein-based formula in infants with cow's milk protein allergy

Objective

To evaluate growth, tolerance and safety outcomes with use of an extensively hydrolyzed casein-based formula (eHCF) in infants with cow's milk protein allergy (CMPA).

Methods

A total of 226 infants (mean ± SD age: 106.5 ± 39.5 days, 52.7% were girls) with CMPA who received eHCF comprising at least half of the daily dietary intake were included. Data on anthropometrics [weight for age (WFA), length for age (LFA) and weight for length (WFL) z-scores] were recorded at baseline (visit 1), while data on infant feeding and stool records, anthropometrics and Infant Feeding and Stool Patterns and Formula Satisfaction Questionnaires were recorded at visit 2 (on Days 15 ± 5) and visit 3 (on Days 30 ± 5).

Results

From baseline to visit 2 and visit 3, WFA z-scores (from -0.60 ± 1.13 to -0.54 ± 1.09 at visit 2, and to -0.44 ± 1.05 at visit 3, p < 0.001) and WFL z-scores (from -0.80 ± 1.30 to -0.71 ± 1.22 at visit 2, and to -0.64 ± 1.13 at visit 3, p = 0.002) were significantly increased. At least half of infants never experienced irritability or feeding refusal (55.7%) and spit-up after feeding (50.2%). The majority of mothers were satisfied with the study formula (93.2%), and wished to continue using it (92.2%).

Conclusions

In conclusion, eHCF was well-accepted and tolerated by an intended use population of infants  ≤ 6 months of age with CMPA and enabled adequate volume consumption and improved growth indices within 30 days of utilization alongside a favorable gastrointestinal tolerance and a high level of parental satisfaction.

Cost-effectiveness of infant hypoallergenic formulas to manage cow's milk protein allergy in France

BACKGROUND

Clinician's choice of hypoallergenic formulas in the first-line management of cow's milk protein allergy (CMPA) should be informed by evidence on clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE

We compare the cost-effectiveness of amino acid-based formula (AAF), extensively hydrolyzed casein formula with Lactobacillus rhamnosus Gorbach Goldin (EHCF+LGG), extensively hydrolyzed whey formula (EHWF), and rice hydrolyzed formula (RHF) in non-breastfed children in France.

METHODS

Immunotolerance and atopic manifestations' prevalence were based on a prospective non-randomized study with a 36-month follow-up. Resource utilization was sourced from a survey of French clinicians, and unit costs were based on national data. Costs and health consequences were discounted at 2.5% annually. Results were reported using the Collective and French National Health Insurance perspectives.

RESULTS

Children receiving EHCF+LGG were predicted to require less healthcare resources, given their reduced prevalence of CMPA symptoms at 3 years. In the base case, EHCF+LGG led to savings of at least €674 per child compared to AAF, EHWF, and RHF at 3 years, from both perspectives. Nutrition had the highest economic burden in CMPA, driven by hypoallergenic formulas and dietetic replacements costs. Results were robust to one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

EHCF+LGG was associated with more symptom-free time, higher immune tolerance, and lower costs.

Managing Cow's Milk Protein Allergy in Indonesia: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Hypoallergenic Milk Formulas from the Private Payers' Perspective

Background: Cow's milk protein allergy is very common in early childhood. Extensively hydrolyzed formulas are recommended in the first-line management of cow's milk protein allergy in non-breastfed children. Choice of formulas should be informed by efficacy and cost data. Objectives: This study aims to compare the cost-effectiveness of extensively hydrolyzed casein formula with Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus Gorbach Goldin (EHCF+LGG), extensively hydrolyzed whey formula (EHWF), amino acid formula, and soy formula in the first-line management of cow's milk protein allergy in non-breastfed children in Indonesia. Methods: A trial-based decision analytic cohort model was adapted to simulate the occurrence of cow's milk protein allergy symptoms or being symptom free. The model was based on a prospective nonrandomized study that followed up children for 36 months. Costs and health consequences were discounted at 3% annually. Resources required to manage cow's milk protein allergy and unit costs for clinical appointments and exams were based on a panel of 15 clinicians, from a private payers' perspective. Other unit costs were based on publicly available national data. Results were reported as cost per additional child free from allergic manifestations or per additional immunotolerant child at 3 years, and per life-years under the same conditions. Uncertainty was assessed using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Results: Children receiving EHCF+LGG were associated with more symptom-free time, a higher probability of cow's milk tolerance at 3 years, and lower healthcare resources and transportation use when compared with children receiving other formulas (with 38%-49% lower costs). Formula costs were lower for soy, but EHCF+LGG was predicted to save 9% and 54% of overall costs compared with extensively hydrolyzed whey formula and amino acid formula, respectively. Results were robust to sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: Use of EHCF+LGG resulted in more symptom-free time and the highest 3-year probability of cow's milk tolerance. It also led to healthcare resource and transportation savings when compared with other hypoallergenic milk formulas. Soy formula remained an alternative if formula price represents a major constraint.

Cow's milk allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To highlight the most recent insights on cow's milk allergy (CMA), its treatment, and management.

RECENT FINDINGS

CMA is one of the most common food allergies among children. Burdened by the risk for fatal reaction, CMA may imply also a severe impairment of health-related quality of life at individual and family level as well as well as individual and societal costs. The updated Diagnosis and Rationale for Action against Cow's Milk Allergy series is going to provide a series of manuscripts that will offer a comprehensive state-of-the-art specifically on CMA, including international evidence-based recommendations. The current results from randomized clinical trials highlight that oral immunotherapy may be effective by itself in providing desensitization. Preliminary data suggest that biologicals such as omalizumab may be able to increase the threshold of reactivity to milk or several foods (if multiple food allergies) without requiring allergen exposure. Breastfeeding is the first choice for infants with CMA. Extensively hydrolyzed formula and amino-acid formula are valid alternatives and may be particularly helpful when eliminating multiple foods, with severe complex gastrointestinal food allergies, eosinophilic esophagitis, severe eczema, or symptoms while exclusively breastfeeding. Heed is needed to ensure the formula is nutritionally sufficient. Due to a high degree of cross-reactivity with cow's milk proteins and risk for allergic reactions, goats' milk or other mammals' milk should not be used.

SUMMARY

The adoption and implementation of evidence-based recommendations may guide a proper diagnostics and management and awaited advances in knowledge will allow the development of a personalized treatment tailored on the specific CMA patient's profile.

Detection and management of milk allergy: Delphi consensus study

BACKGROUND

There is significant overdiagnosis of milk allergy in young children in some countries, leading to unnecessary use of specialized formula. This guidance, developed by experts without commercial ties to the formula industry, aims to reduce milk allergy overdiagnosis and support carers of children with suspected milk allergy.

METHODS

Delphi study involving two rounds of anonymous consensus building and an open meeting between January and July 2021. Seventeen experts in general practice, nutrition, midwifery, health visiting, lactation support and relevant areas of paediatrics participated, located in Europe, North America, Middle East, Africa, Australia and Asia. Five authors of previous milk allergy guidelines and seven parents provided feedback.

FINDINGS

Participants agreed on 38 essential recommendations through consensus. Recommendations highlighted the importance of reproducibility and specificity for diagnosing milk allergy in children with acute or delayed symptoms temporally related to milk protein ingestion; and distinguished between children directly consuming milk protein and exclusively breastfed infants. Consensus was reached that maternal dietary restriction is not usually necessary to manage milk allergy, and that for exclusively breastfed infants with chronic symptoms, milk allergy diagnosis should only be considered in specific, rare circumstances. Consensus was reached that milk allergy diagnosis does not need to be considered for stool changes, aversive feeding or occasional spots of blood in stool, if there is no temporal relationship with milk protein ingestion. When compared with previous guidelines, these consensus recommendations resulted in more restrictive criteria for detecting milk allergy and a more limited role for maternal dietary exclusions and specialized formula.

INTERPRETATION

These new milk allergy recommendations from non-conflicted, multidisciplinary experts advise narrower criteria, more prominent support for breastfeeding and less use of specialized formula, compared with current guidelines.

World Allergy Organization (WAO) Diagnosis and Rationale for Action against Cow's Milk Allergy (DRACMA) Guidelines update – I – Plan and definitions

Since the World Allergy Organization (WAO) Diagnosis and Rationale against Cow's Milk Allergy (DRACMA) Guidelines were published 10 years ago, new evidence has accumulated about the diagnosis, therapy, and specific immunotherapy for cow's milk allergy (CMA). For this reason, WAO has felt the need to update the guidelines.

We introduce here this update. The new DRACMA guidelines aim to comprehensively address the guidance on diagnosis and therapy of both IgE non-IgE-mediated forms of cow's milk allergy in children and adults. They will be divided into 18 chapters, each of which will be dedicated to an aspect. The focus will be on the meta-analyzes and recommendations that will be expressed for the 3 most relevant clinical aspects: (a) the diagnostic identification of the condition; (b) the choice of the replacement formula in case of CMA in infancy when the mother is not able to breastfeed, and (c) the use of specific immunotherapy for cow's milk protein allergy.

Developments in the field of allergy in 2020 through the eyes of Clinical and Experimental Allergy

While 2020 will be remembered for the global coronavirus pandemic, there were also important advances in the field of allergy. In this review article, we summarize key findings reported in Clinical and Experimental Allergy during 2020. We hope this provides readers with an accessible snapshot of the work published in our journal during this time.

Hydrolysed Formulas in the Management of Cow's Milk Allergy: New Insights, Pitfalls and Tips

An allergy to cow's milk requires the avoidance of cow's milk proteins and, in some infants, the use of a hypoallergenic formula. This review aims to summarize the current evidence concerning different types of hydrolysed formulas (HF), and recommendations for the treatment of IgE- and non-IgE-mediated cow's milk allergy and functional gastrointestinal disorders in infancy, for which some dietary intervention and HF may be of benefit to both immune and motor mechanisms. Current guidelines recommend cow's milk protein (i.e., whey or casein) extensively hydrolysed formula (eHF) as the first choice for cow's milk allergy treatment, and amino acid formulas for more severe cases or those with reactions to eHF. Rice hydrolysed formulas (rHF) have also become available in recent years. Both eHF and rHF are well tolerated by the majority of children allergic to cow's milk, with no concerns regarding body growth or adverse effects. Some hydrolysates may have a pro-active effect in modulating the immune system due to the presence of small peptides and additional components, like biotics. Despite encouraging results on tolerance acquisition, evidence is still not conclusive, thus hampering our ability to draw firm conclusions. In clinical practice, the choice of hypoallergenic formula should be based on the infant's age, the severity, frequency and persistence of symptoms, immune phenotype, growth pattern, formula cost, and in vivo proof of tolerance and efficacy.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Hypoallergenic Milk Formulas for the Management of Cow's Milk Protein Allergy in the United Kingdom

Background: Cow's milk protein allergy (CMPA) is the most common food allergy in early childhood. In most children CMPA resolves by age 5 or 6; however, if not treated correctly can provoke nutritional deficiency resulting in poor growth. Management consists of excluding cow's milk from the diet, with hypoallergenic formulas (or non-dairy alternatives) being introduced to meet nutritional requirements. Objectives: To compare the cost-effectiveness of hypoallergenic formulas in reducing allergic manifestations and promoting immune tolerance in infants with immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated symptoms of CMPA. Methods: A trial-based decision analytic cohort model was developed to simulate the occurrence of urticaria, eczema, asthma, rhinoconjunctivitis, or being symptom-free in infants with CMPA in the United Kingdom. Amino acid-based formula (AAF), extensively hydrolysed casein formula containing Lactobacillus rhamnosus Gorbach Goldin (EHCF+LGG), extensively hydrolysed whey formula (EHWF), and soy formula (SF) were compared using the National Health Service (NHS) perspective, 3-year time horizon and 3.5% discount rate for cost and health consequences. Hypoallergenic formulas comparative efficacy was sourced from a prospective cohort study. Resources required to manage allergic symptoms were sourced from published literature, validated by a UK clinician, and applied to UK cost resources. Results were reported as cost per additional child free from allergic manifestations at 3 years and cost per additional immune tolerant child at 3 years. Results: In the base case, infants receiving EHCF+LGG were associated with lower NHS resource use and improved CMPA tolerance. Over the 3-year treatment period, savings of £119, £476, and £1094 were achieved with EHCF+LGG compared to SF, EHWF and AAF, respectively. Infant formula accounted for the largest proportion of resource consumption averaging 44% for all comparators, with a minimum of 31% for SF and a maximum of 53% for AAF over 3 years. General practitioners' visits constituted the second highest cost component, approximately 17% of total costs across comparators. The results were robust to deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: Compared to AAF, SF, and EHWF hypoallergenic formulas, EHCF+LGG was the most cost-effective, associated with lower total costs and contributing to a higher proportion of children being symptom-free and developing immune tolerance 3-years after diagnosis.

Nutritional Management With a Casein-Based Extensively Hydrolysed Formula in Infants With Clinical Manifestations of Non-IgE-Mediated CMPA Enteropathies and Constipation

Background: The majority of mixed-fed infants with non-IgE-mediated cow's milk protein allergy (CMPA) enteropathies are managed with an extensively hydrolysed cow's milk based infant formula (eHF). Given the high variability in peptide distribution of available eHFs, it is important to understand the suitability of a specific product in the management of distinct phenotypes.

Objective: To assess the symptom resolution of various phenotypes of clinical manifestations of CMPA enteropathies and constipation managed by a casein-based eHF.

Methods: The data of 20 full-term infants (n = 15 with non-IgE-mediated CMPA and n = 5 with constipation) attending a paediatric allergy clinic in Cyprus and managed with a casein-based eHF were retrospectively analysed.

Results: Based on the clinical symptoms and history, infants were classified into the following phenotypes: (a) 11/15 (73.3%) FPIAP, (b) 3/15 (20%) FPIES, and (c) 1/15 (6.7%) severe diarrhoea. Overall, 14 (93.3%) patients were successfully managed with the casein-based eHF and 1 (6.7%) required an AAF. This formula was effective in 91% of patients with FPIAP, in 100% with FPIES and with diarrhoea. Three (60%) patients with constipation responded to the eHF.

Conclusion: This case-series report supports the efficacy of a particular casein-based eHF for the nutritional management of non-IgE mediated CMPA enteropathies.

Impact of Diet on Symptoms of the Irritable Bowel Syndrome

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), with its key features of abdominal pain and disturbed bowel habit, is thought by both patients and clinicians to be strongly influenced by diet. However, the complexities of diet have made identifying specific food intolerances difficult. Eating disorders can masquerade as IBS and may need specialist treatment. While typical food allergy is readily distinguished from IBS, the mechanisms of gut-specific adverse reactions to food are only just being defined. These may include gut-specific mast cell activation as well as non-specific activation by stressors and certain foods. Visceral hypersensitivity, in some cases mediated by mast cell activation, plays a key part in making otherwise innocuous gut stimuli painful. Rapidly fermented poorly absorbed carbohydrates produce gaseous distension as well as short-chain fatty acids and lowering of colonic pH which may cause symptoms in IBS patients. Limiting intake of these in low FODMAP and related diets has proven popular and apparently successful in many patients. Existing diet, colonic microbiota and their metabolic products may be helpful in predicting who will respond. Wheat intolerance may reflect the fact that wheat is often a major source of dietary FODMAPs. It may also be either a forme fruste of coeliac disease or non-specific immune activation. Wheat exclusion can be successful in some of these patients. More research is needed to fully understand the mechanisms of food intolerances and how to best ameliorate them in a personalised medicine approach to diet in IBS.