A population-based epidemiological study of anaphylaxis using national big data in Korea: trends in age-specific prevalence and epinephrine use in 2010-2014

Natural course of IgE-mediated food allergy in children

The prevalence of food allergy and food-induced anaphylaxis in children is increasing worldwide. Cow's milk, hen's eggs, and wheat allergies in young children have a more favorable prognosis with a relatively early outgrow, while allergies to peanuts, tree nuts, and seafood are more likely to be persistent. Although our understanding of the mechanism underlying the resolution of food allergy is incomplete, the roles of dendritic cells, regulatory T cells, and regulatory B cells are important. Many past studies on the natural course of food allergy were retrospective analyses of specific study groups, but large-scale population-based prospective studies are now being published. This review summarizes recent studies of the natural course of cow's milk, hen's eggs, wheat, peanuts, tree nuts, soy, sesame, and seafood allergies. The potential factors affecting the natural course of food allergy include symptom severity on ingestion, age at diagnosis, allergic comorbidities, skin prick test reaction size or serum food-specific immunoglobulin (Ig) E levels, changes in sensitization degree, IgE epitope specificity, ratio of food-specific IgE to IgG4, food-specific IgA levels, component-resolved diagnostic profile, diet, gut microbiome, and interventions such as immunotherapy. Since food allergy places a significant burden on patients and their caregivers in daily life, clinicians should be able to provide relevant knowledge on the natural course of food allergy, appropriately evaluate its resolution, and offer therapeutic options whenever possible.

Positive Predictive Values of Anaphylaxis Diagnosis in Claims Data: A Multi-Institutional Study in Taiwan

Real-world data sources can facilitate essential understanding of the epidemiological features of anaphylaxis. However, the accuracy of case-identifying definitions based on diagnosis codes for anaphylaxis in healthcare databases remains understudied. We conducted a cross-sectional study analyzing claims data from the largest multi-institutional healthcare system in Taiwan during 2017-2021. We included patients with incident anaphylaxis identified by either ICD-10-CM codes for anaphylaxis (Group 1) or ICD-10-CM codes for severe allergic or drug adverse events and additional modifier codes for acute allergy events (Group 2). We randomly selected 20% of the cases to determine the positive predictive value (PPV) of anaphylaxis case-identifying definitions in Groups 1 and 2 after review of electronic medical records by two physicians. From the original cohort (n = 2,176), we randomly selected 433 patients with either a diagnosis of anaphylaxis (Group 1), or a diagnosis of severe allergic and drug adverse events with additional modifier codes for acute allergy events (Group 2). In Group 1, we judged 135 / 170 patients as true anaphylaxis cases, giving a PPV of 79.4% (95% CI: 73.3-85.5). In Group 2, we judged 47 / 263 patients as true anaphylaxis cases, giving a PPV of 17.9% (95% CI: 13.3-22.5). In conclusion, acceptable PPVs were observed when anaphylaxis cases were identified by ICD-10-CM codes for anaphylaxis, but not by ICD-10-CM codes for severe allergic or drug adverse event with additional modifier codes for acute allergy events. Our multi-institutional findings could serve as a fundamental reference for further studies of anaphylaxis based on real-world healthcare databases.

Risk factors of anaphylaxis in Korea: Identifying drug-induced anaphylaxis culprits using big data

Drug-induced anaphylaxis is a fatal medical condition whose incidence has been increasing continuously. Due to differences between genetic backgrounds and health care systems, different populations may be prone to various causative drugs. Using the Health Insurance Service and Assessment Service database, we investigated culprit drugs for drug-induced anaphylaxis and common medication risk factors in the Korean general population. We collected medical prescription histories within 3 days prior to anaphylaxis between January 2011 and December 2019 from the HIRA database. Designed as a case-crossover study, the attributable visits (case visits) were matched to medical visits (control visits) with the drug sets for each visit. We collected a list of medication risk factors for anaphylaxis and calculated the risk ratio of each agent using the chi-square test and conditional logistic regression analysis. A total of 159,473 individuals were listed in the database with a diagnosis of anaphylaxis in the HIRA from 2011 to 2019. After evaluating the suitability of control visits for matching with a case visit, 8168 subjects and 767 drugs were analyzed. The chi-square analysis identified 31 drugs as potential risk factors for drug-induced anaphylaxis in Korea. After applying a conditional logistic regression analysis for each agent, 5 drugs were found to be the common medication risk factors for drug-induced anaphylaxis: cefaclor, iopromide, iohexol, iomeprol, and tolperisone. We found 5 medication risk factors that showed the highest risk of drug-induced anaphylaxis and their degree of risk using an objective methodology in the Korean general population.

Physicians' Approach to Anaphylaxis in Childhood

METHODS

A questionnaire form consisting of a total of 18 questions was prepared. Six questions concerned demographic data; 7 questions inquired about physician's knowledge level about treatment of anaphylaxis. In the last part, 5 different case scenarios were given, and their diagnoses and treatments were asked.

RESULTS

A total of 120 physicians participated in the study. Of the participants, 66.7% were residents. The rate of correct answer about dose of epinephrine was 57.5%. The rates of making correct diagnoses in anaphylaxis case scenarios 1, 2, and 3 were 60%, 73.3%, and 91.7%, respectively, whereas epinephrine administration rates were 54%, 67.5%, and 92.5%, respectively. When the answers of all these questions given by the residents and specialists and among physicians who updated and did not update were compared, there were no statistically significant differences except epinephrine administration rate and its route (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the current study suggest that physicians' knowledge levels were inadequate in making the diagnosis of anaphylaxis, and physicians use epinephrine in conditions without hypotension or an undefined possible/known allergen contact. Information about epinephrine administration was partially correct. It is currently considered to be the simplest measure to have a written anaphylaxis action plan including diagnostic criteria for anaphylaxis.

Food-induced anaphylaxis morbidity: Emergency department and hospitalization data support preventive strategies

BACKGROUND

Anaphylaxis is a recognized public health issue. There is no doubt that food-induced anaphylaxis (FIA) has tremendous impact on the quality of life of patients and their families and increases direct and indirect costs. FIA is associated with increasing rates of emergency department admissions and hospitalizations and implies the risk of death. Morbidity epidemiological data are a key to tailor public health actions to this non-communicable disease. The aim of this article was to review published morbidity epidemiological data relating to FIA and potential risk factors, in order to provide evidence-based recommendations to reduce the risk of severe adverse outcomes.

METHODS

We identified published studies available in PUBMED/MEDLINE (1966-2020), EMBASE (1980-2020) and CINAHL (1982-2020). The systematic review was carried out using MeSH terms related to FIA ED admissions and hospitalizations.

RESULTS

A total of 25 articles were selected, 80% published in the last 5 years. After critical analysis of methodological and clinical characteristics reported in the data selected, we were able to propose preventive strategies.

CONCLUSION

Anaphylaxis is a recognized public health issue. FIA is associated with increasing rates of ED admissions and hospitalizations and imply in risk of death. More than reviewing and critically interpreting the key patterns related to FIA morbidity published data, we proposed strategies in order to promote quality care of patients suffering from FIA. Our World Health Organization Collaborative Center is deeply involved in this process, and we believe that the proposed strategies will inform future healthcare policies on anaphylaxis. The long-term objective would be to improve clinical care and quality of life of patients and their families, and develop risk-stratified, cost-effective preventive measures.

Recent update on the management of anaphylaxis

Anaphylaxis is a life-threatening systemic allergic reaction presenting various clinical manifestations. Its prevalence has increased in almost all age groups and both sexes. Food, venom, and drugs are major causes in both children and adults; a higher prevalence of food-induced anaphylaxis is noted in children, while a higher prevalence of drug-induced anaphylaxis is noted in adults. The pathogenic mechanism is mediated by immunologic and nonimmunologic mechanisms, where mast cells and basophils are key cells that release mediators. A diagnosis of anaphylaxis is mainly based on clinical symptoms and physical findings; however, an increased serum tryptase level is a useful biomarker. Epinephrine is the first-line drug to treat acute symptoms, and an epinephrine auto-injector should be prescribed for each patient. Antihistamines and systemic corticosteroids are used to relieve symptoms. This review updates current issues in the management of anaphylaxis as well as the new guidelines for proper diagnosis and treatment.

A multicenter anaphylaxis registry in Korea: Clinical characteristics and acute treatment details from infants to older adults

Background

Although the prevalence of anaphylaxis is increasing worldwide, the large-scale studies in Asia evaluating anaphylaxis in all age groups are limited. We aimed to collect more precise and standardized data on anaphylaxis in Korea using the first multicenter web-based registry.

Methods

Twenty-two departments from 16 hospitals participated from November 2016 to December 2018. A web-based case report form, designed by allergy specialists, was used to collect anaphylaxis data.

Results

Within the 2-year period, 558 anaphylaxis cases were registered. The age of registered patients ranged from 2 months to 84 years, and 60% were aged <18 years. In children and adolescents, foods (84.8%) were the most common cause of anaphylaxis, followed by drugs (7.2%); in adults, drugs (58.3%) were the most common cause, followed by foods (28.3%) and insect venom (8.1%). The onset time was ≤10 min in 37.6% of patients. Among the 351 cases registered via the emergency department (ED) of participating hospitals, epinephrine was administered to 63.8% of patients. Among those receiving epinephrine in the ED, 13.8% required 2 or more epinephrine shots. Severe anaphylaxis accounted for 23.5% cases (38.1% in adults; 13.7% in children); patients with drug and insect venom-induced anaphylaxis had higher rates of severe anaphylaxis.

Conclusion

This multicenter registry provides data on anaphylaxis for all age groups for the first time in Asia. The major causes and severity of anaphylaxis were remarkably different according to age group, and the acute treatment features of anaphylaxis in the EDs were examined in detail.

Global Trends in Anaphylaxis Epidemiology and Clinical Implications

The true global scale of anaphylaxis remains elusive, because many episodes occur in the community without presentation to health care facilities, and most regions have not yet developed reliable systems with which to monitor severe allergic events. The most robust data sets currently available are based largely on hospital admissions, which are limited by inherent issues of misdiagnosis, misclassification, and generalizability. Despite this, there is convincing evidence of a global increase in rates of all-cause anaphylaxis, driven largely by medication- and food-related anaphylaxis. There is no evidence of parallel increases in global all-cause anaphylaxis mortality, with surprisingly similar estimates for case-fatality rates at approximately 0.5% to 1% of fatal outcomes for hospitalizations due to anaphylaxis across several regions. Studying regional patterns of anaphylaxis to certain triggers have provided valuable insights into susceptibility and sensitizing events: for example, the link between the mAb cetuximab and allergy to mammalian meat. Likewise, data from published fatality registers can identify potentially modifiable risk factors that can be used to inform clinical practice, such as prevention of delayed epinephrine administration, correct posturing during anaphylaxis, special attention to populations at risk (such as the elderly on multiple medications), and use of venom immunotherapy in individuals at risk of insect-related anaphylaxis.

Anaphylaxis - Lessons learnt when East meets West

The rapidly increasing prevalence of allergic disorders over the past 2 decades highlights the need to understand the epidemiology of anaphylaxis. In Europe, the United States, and Australia, the incidence of anaphylaxis is estimated to be between 60 and 950 cases per 100 000 population, with a lifetime prevalence of anaphylaxis of 0.05%-2%. The incidence appears to be increasing over time. Although the existing Asian literature is heterogeneous and limited by under-reporting, it also suggests a similar increasing trend in anaphylaxis incidence in Asia. Anaphylaxis triggers in Asia, such as the predominance of shellfish and wheat in older children and adolescents, differ from those seen in Western populations. Triggers unique to Asia such as traditional Chinese medications, galacto-oligosaccharides, and food delicacies have also been reported. Low usage of adrenaline as first-line treatment of anaphylaxis is evident across all countries and is particularly concerning. There is a need to establish prospective, standardized protocols for anaphylaxis data collection and reporting, to enhance the collective understanding of anaphylaxis and its burden, gaps in management and to identify areas for future research and intervention in each region. Understanding of the underlying reasons explaining the difference between East and West will facilitate future primary preventive strategies.

Advances in drug allergy, urticaria, angioedema, and anaphylaxis in 2018

Many notable advances in drug allergy, urticaria, angioedema, and anaphylaxis were reported in 2018. Broad-spectrum antibiotic use and, consequently, antibiotic resistance are widespread, and algorithms to clarify β-lactam allergy and optimize antibiotic use were described. Meaningful data emerged on the pathogenesis of delayed drug hypersensitivity reactions. Progress not only in defining biomarkers but also in understanding the effect on quality of life and developing better treatments has been made for patients with chronic idiopathic urticaria. Patients with hereditary angioedema (HAE) have gained additional access to highly efficacious therapies, with associated improvements in quality of life, and some progress was made in our understanding of recurrent angioedema in patients with normal laboratory results. Guidelines have defined clear goals to help providers optimize therapies in patients with HAE. The epidemiology and triggers of anaphylaxis and the mechanisms underlying anaphylaxis were elucidated further. In summary, these disorders (and labels) cause substantial burdens for individual persons and even society. Fortunately, publications in 2018 have informed on advancements in diagnosis and management and have provided better understanding of mechanisms that potentially could yield new therapies. This progress should lead to better health outcomes and paths forward in patients with drug allergy, urticaria, HAE, and anaphylaxis.

Underuse of Epinephrine for Pediatric Anaphylaxis Victims in the Emergency Department: A Population-based Study

Purpose

Epinephrine is a key drug for treating anaphylaxis; however, its underuse is still a significant issue worldwide. The objective of this study was to compare epinephrine use between pediatric and adult patients who were treated with anaphylaxis in the emergency department (ED).

Methods

The data were retrieved from the National Sample Cohort of South Korea, which contains claim data from the National Health Insurance Service. We included patients who visited the ED with a discharge code of anaphylaxis between 2004 and 2013. We assessed prescription information of epinephrine, antihistamine and systemic steroid, previous medical history and discharge disposition from the ED. The study population was categorized based on age at the visit.

Results

A total of 175 pediatric and 1,605 adult patients with anaphylaxis were identified. Only 42 (24%) of the pediatric patients were treated with epinephrine, while 592 (36.9%) of the adult patients were treated with epinephrine (P = 0.001). Furthermore, the pediatric patients were less likely to be treated with systemic steroid than the adult patients (6.9% vs. 12.3%, P = 0.047). The odds ratios for the administration of epinephrine relative to the baseline in the 19-65 age group were 0.34 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15–0.67), 0.56 (95% CI, 0.28–1.03) and 0.79 (95% CI, 0.45–1.33) in the < 7, 7–12 and 13–18 age groups, respectively.

Conclusions

The pediatric patients with anaphylaxis experienced a lower rate of epinephrine injection use than the adult patients and the injection use decreased as age decreased.

Common causes of emergency department visits for anaphylaxis in Korean community hospitals: A cross-sectional study

Anaphylaxis can cause death and requires immediate management. For prevention and education programs for anaphylaxis, it is important to be aware of the common triggering factors. We investigated the triggers of anaphylaxis in the emergency departments (EDs) of community hospitals in Korea.Patients who visited the EDs of 7 community hospitals for anaphylaxis from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2016 were enrolled. Anaphylaxis was defined according to the World Allergy Organization criteria and identified via a thorough review of the medical records of patients who were diagnosed with anaphylaxis (ICD-10 codes: T780, T782, T805, and T886) at the ED or administered epinephrine in the ED. Triggers of anaphylaxis were also evaluated by a review of the medical records.We identified 1021 ED visits for anaphylaxis. The incidence of anaphylaxis ED visits was 0.08%. The triggers of ED visits for anaphylaxis were bee venom (55.0%), foods (21.3%), and drugs (13.2%); 9.6% of cases were idiopathic. However, food was the most common trigger among the patients aged <20 years old. The frequency of ED visits for anaphylaxis was highest in summer (47.9%), followed by autumn (28.2%), spring (12.3%), and winter (11.6%). The incidence of anaphylaxis ED visits was highest in August, during which bee venom was the trigger for 80% of anaphylaxis cases. For the 55 patients with repeat ED visits for anaphylaxis, Bee venom was also the most common trigger.The number of ED visits for anaphylaxis showed marked seasonal variation, peaking in summer. Bee venom was the most common trigger for adults and the main reason for seasonal variations of anaphylaxis ED visits in Korean community hospitals.