Search

Idiopathic anaphylaxis (IA) remains a frustrating challenge for both patients and physicians. The aim of this paper is to focus on IA in pediatric ages and suggest possible diagnostic algorithms according to specific age ranges (infants, children, and adolescents). In fact, in a variable percentage of patients, despite extensive diagnostic tests, the cause of anaphylactic episodes cannot be identified. Moreover, the lack of a unanimous IA definition requires a careful and detailed diagnostic workup. Prompt recognition of signs and symptoms, especially in younger children, and an accurate clinical history often allow a choice of the most appropriate diagnostic tests and a correct differential diagnosis., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Anaphylaxis is a life-threatening reaction characterized by the acute onset of symptoms involving different organ systems and requiring immediate medical intervention. The incidence of fatal food anaphylaxis is 0.03 to 0.3 million/people/year. Most fatal food-induced anaphylaxis occurs in the second and third decades of life. The identified risk factors include the delayed use of epinephrine, the presence of asthma, the use of recreational drugs (alcohol, nicotine, cannabis, etc.), and an upright position. In the United Kingdom (UK) and Canada, the reported leading causal foods are peanuts and tree nuts. In Italy, milk seems to be the most common cause of fatal anaphylaxis in children < 18 years. Fatal food anaphylaxis in Italian children and adolescents almost always occurs outside and is characterized by cardiorespiratory arrest; auto-injectable adrenaline intramuscular was available in few cases. Mortality from food anaphylaxis, especially in children, is a very rare event with stable incidence, but its risk deeply impacts the quality of life of patients with food allergy and their families. Prevention of fatal food anaphylaxis must involve patients and their families, as well as the general public, public authorities, and patients' associations., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

The 21st century has seen the propulsion of research in the field of food allergy, which has driven real changes in the clinical approach. Allergen immunotherapy has been recommended for the active management of food allergy. Data have shown promising additional methods of treatment, including biologics. Efforts have been devoted to the risk stratification of food allergy and the standardization of the assessment of food-allergic severity. Alternative routes of administration of epinephrine are under investigation to minimize any mechanical issue and the fear of injections. Evidence-based guidelines have been published by the main international societies in the field of anaphylaxis and food allergy management and new updates are in preparation. In the coming years, treatment options that are currently in pre-clinical or early clinical evaluation will hopefully lead to safe and effective disease-modifying therapies for food allergy in clinical practice. The identification of reliable biomarkers and the standardization of definitions and measurement approaches, alongside a shared decision-making with patients and families, will be key for the development of personalized care and to help minimize the substantial burden of food allergy., (© 2022 The Authors. Clinical & Experimental Allergy published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

This rapid review summarizes the most up to date evidence about the risk factors for severe food-induced allergic reactions. We searched three bibliographic databases for studies published between January 2010 and August 2021. We included 88 studies and synthesized the evidence narratively, undertaking meta-analysis where appropriate. Significant uncertainties remain with respect to the prediction of severe reactions, both anaphylaxis and/or severe anaphylaxis refractory to treatment. Prior anaphylaxis, an asthma diagnosis, IgE sensitization or basophil activation tests are not good predictors. Some molecular allergology markers may be helpful. Hospital presentations for anaphylaxis are highest in young children, yet this age group appears at lower risk of severe outcomes. Risk of severe outcomes is greatest in adolescence and young adulthood, but the contribution of risk taking behaviour in contributing to severe outcomes is unclear. Evidence for an impact of cofactors on severity is lacking, although food-dependent exercise-induced anaphylaxis may be an exception. Some medications such as beta-blockers or ACE inhibitors may increase severity, but appear less important than age as a factor in life-threatening reactions. The relationship between dose of exposure and severity is unclear. Delays in symptom recognition and anaphylaxis treatment have been associated with more severe outcomes. An absence of prior anaphylaxis does not exclude its future risk., (© 2022 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Food anaphylaxis is commonly elicited by unintentional ingestion of foods containing the allergen above the tolerance threshold level of the individual. While labeling the 14 main allergens used as ingredients in food products is mandatory in the EU, there is no legal definition of declaring potential contaminants. Precautionary allergen labeling such as "may contain traces of" is often used. However, this is unsatisfactory for consumers as they get no information if the contamination is below their personal threshold. In discussions with the food industry and technologists, it was suggested to use a voluntary declaration indicating that all declared contaminants are below a threshold of 0.5 mg protein per 100 g of food. This concentration is known to be below the threshold of most patients, and it can be technically guaranteed in most food production. However, it was also important to assess that in case of accidental ingestion of contaminants below this threshold by highly allergic patients, no fatal anaphylactic reaction could occur. Therefore, we performed a systematic review to assess whether a fatal reaction to 5mg of protein or less has been reported, assuming that a maximum portion size of 1kg of a processed food exceeds any meal and thus gives a sufficient safety margin., Methods: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched until 24 January 2021 for provocation studies and case reports in which one of the 14 major food allergens was reported to elicit fatal or life-threatening anaphylactic reactions and assessed if these occurred below the ingestion of 5mg of protein. A Delphi process was performed to obtain an expert consensus on the results., Results: In the 210 studies included, in our search, no reports of fatal anaphylactic reactions reported below 5 mg protein ingested were identified. However, in provocation studies and case reports, severe reactions below 5 mg were reported for the following allergens: eggs, fish, lupin, milk, nuts, peanuts, soy, and sesame seeds., Conclusion: Based on the literature studied for this review, it can be stated that cross-contamination of the 14 major food allergens below 0.5 mg/100 g is likely not to endanger most food allergic patients when a standard portion of food is consumed. We propose to use the statement "this product contains the named allergens in the list of ingredients, it may contain traces of other contaminations (to be named, e.g. nut) at concentrations less than 0.5 mg per 100 g of this product" for a voluntary declaration on processed food packages. This level of avoidance of cross-contaminations can be achieved technically for most processed foods, and the statement would be a clear and helpful message to the consumers. However, it is clearly acknowledged that a voluntary declaration is only a first step to a legally binding solution. For this, further research on threshold levels is encouraged., (© 2021 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Anaphylaxis is a clinical emergency which all healthcare professionals need to be able to recognize and manage. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Anaphylaxis multidisciplinary Task Force has updated the 2014 guideline. The guideline was developed using the AGREE II framework and the GRADE approach. The evidence was systematically reviewed and recommendations were created by weighing up benefits and harms. The guideline was peer-reviewed by external experts and reviewed in a public consultation. The use of clinical criteria to identify anaphylaxis is suggested with blood sampling for the later measurement of tryptase. The prompt use of intramuscular adrenaline as first-line management is recommended with the availability of adrenaline autoinjectors to patients in the community. Pharmacokinetic data should be provided for adrenaline autoinjector devices. Structured, comprehensive training for people at risk of anaphylaxis is recommended. Simulation training and visual prompts for healthcare professionals are suggested to improve the management of anaphylaxis. It is suggested that school policies reflect anaphylaxis guidelines. The evidence for the management of anaphylaxis remains mostly at a very low level. There is an urgent need to prioritize clinical trials with the potential to improve the management of patients at risk of anaphylaxis., (© 2021 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Purpose of Review: To provide the most recent insights in the use of biologicals in the treatment of patients with anaphylaxis., Recent Findings: There is evidence that biologics such as omalizumab may be safe and effective in preventing anaphylactic reactions in patients at high risk mainly because of severe food allergy or desensitization procedures to food, airborne allergen, drugs, or hymenoptera venom., Summary: Further knowledge will guide the adoption and implementation of any new therapy including biologics for anaphylaxis according to the stratification of risk/benefits., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

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., (© 2020 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Hymenoptera venom allergy (HVA) is one of the most frequent causes of anaphylaxis following a bee, vespid or ant sting. Real-life data regarding the management of HVA in children are lacking. To address this unmet need, we carried out a survey defining the current management of HVA in children among pediatric allergists in Italy. Educational investments on the improvement of the management of pediatric patients with HVA are urgently needed, and our analysis represents a relevant instrument in targeting a roadmap with this aim. The time for pediatric allergists to take action has come, and a task force from the Rare Allergic Diseases Commission of the Italian Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology is working on the topic to improve pediatricians' knowledge and optimize the care of these patients., (Copyright © 2020 SEICAP. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) for food allergy entails a risk of adverse reactions, including anaphylaxis. This safety concern is the major barrier for OIT to become a therapeutic option in clinical practice. The high heterogeneity in safety reporting of OIT studies prevents setting the safety profile accurately. An international consensus is needed to facilitate the analysis of large pooled clinical data with homogeneous safety reporting, that together with integrated omics, and patients/families' opinions, may help stratify the patients' risk and needs, and help developing safe(r) individualized care pathways. This will give OIT the right place in the food allergy therapy., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

IgE-mediated food allergy (FA) has been emerging as a public health priority, mainly in children. It represents a heavy burden for the entire society and not only for the patients and their families. There is evidence that in children with persistent FA, at least to cow's milk, hen's egg, and peanut, oral immunotherapy (OIT) may increase the reaction threshold to food allergen(s), while receiving active therapy (the so-called "desensitization"). Furthermore, OIT protects patients from the occurrence of severe reactions in the event of accidental ingestion of the culprit food during treatment. However, many gaps are still unsolved, including safety issues, identification of predictive biomarkers, and post-desensitization efficacy. This article briefly summarizes the current evidence and the main needs in OIT to stimulate the development of longitudinal, prospective, well-designed studies able to fill the current gaps soon., (© 2020 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)