Search

In this review, we compare different refractory anaphylaxis (RA) management guidelines focusing on cardiovascular involvement and best practice recommendations, discuss postulated pathogenic mechanisms underlining RA and highlight knowledge gaps and research priorities. There is a paucity of data supporting existing management guidelines. Therapeutic recommendations include the need for the timely administration of appropriate doses of aggressive fluid resuscitation and intravenous (IV) adrenaline in RA. The preferred second-line vasopressor (noradrenaline, vasopressin, metaraminol and dopamine) is unknown. Most guidelines recommend IV glucagon for patients on beta-blockers, despite a lack of evidence. The use of methylene blue or extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is also suggested as rescue therapy. Despite recent advances in understanding the pathogenesis of anaphylaxis, the factors that lead to a lack of response to the initial adrenaline and thus RA are unclear. Genetic factors, such as deficiency in platelet activating factor-acetyl hydrolase or hereditary alpha-tryptasaemia, mastocytosis may modulate reaction severity or response to treatment. Further research into the underlying pathophysiology of RA may help define potential new therapeutic approaches and reduce the morbidity and mortality of anaphylaxis., (© 2024 The Author(s). Clinical & Experimental Allergy published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Epidemiologic data on occupational anaphylaxis is scarce, and there is a need of more knowledge about work-related anaphylactic episodes., Methods: Based on the data of the Anaphylaxis Registry, we identified cases related to occupational exposure and analyzed the elicitors, demographics, severity of clinical reaction and management., Results: Since 2017, 5851 cases with an information about the occupational relation of the anaphylactic episode were registered whereby 225 (3.8%) were assigned to be caused by an occupational allergen. The vast majority of these occupational anaphylaxis cases were caused by insects (n = 186, 82.7%) followed by food (n = 27, 12.0%) and drugs (n = 8, 3.6%). Latex elicited occupational anaphylaxis in only two cases. Beekeepers, gardeners, farmers, and individuals working in professions associated with food handling, for example, employees in restaurants, bakery, pastry, and cooks were most frequently affected. The comparison of the occupational insect venom-induced anaphylaxis to a group of non-occupational insect anaphylaxis in adults (n = 1842) revealed a significant younger age in occupational anaphylaxis (46 vs. 53 years), a predominance of bee-induced cases (38% vs. 17%), and a higher rate of venom immunotherapy in a primary care setting (3.3% vs. 1.3%, p = .044). In the occupational- versus non-occupational adults with food-induced anaphylaxis atopic dermatitis as concomitant atopic disease was observed more frequently (n = 486; 20% vs. 10%), although this was not significant., Conclusion: Our data demonstrate the impact of venom allergy in work-related anaphylaxis. Foods and drugs are less frequently elicitors, and latex-induced occupational anaphylaxis was rare. More data are needed to determine risk factors associated with occupational anaphylaxis., (© 2023 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Anaphylaxis is a serious systemic reaction-data on fatal and near-fatal reactions are limited., Objective: To better understand clinical patterns and risks factors of severe anaphylaxis by a deep analysis of data from fatal and near-fatal anaphylaxis., Methods: Data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry on fatal/near-fatal anaphylactic reactions and national data on anaphylaxis fatalities were investigated., Results: A total of 305 fatal/near-fatal reactions among children and adults including 35 fatalities from the European Anaphylaxis Registry were identified. The most frequent elicitors were drugs, insects, and food. Male patients (66%/60%) were more frequently affected. Male sex, higher age, concomitant mastocytosis, and cardiovascular disease were associated with a more severe outcome. With increasing reaction severity, skin symptoms were less frequently observed (45% of fatal reactions). In parallel, anaphylaxis mortality rates were studied. The data show that anaphylaxis mortality rates increased in Germany from 0.48 (2009) to 0.59 per 1,000,000 population per year (2020). This increase was apparent only in the female population. In this data set, drugs were the most frequent elicitor of anaphylaxis fatalities, and the rate for this increased over time., Conclusions: We identified not only elicitors but also individual factors to be associated with an increased risk of fatal anaphylaxis. Such patients should be recognized and managed with great caution. The increase in drug-induced fatalities points to the need for a better allergological care of patients suffering from drug hypersensitivity., (Copyright © 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

This guidance updates 2021 GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) recommendations regarding immediate allergic reactions following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and addresses revaccinating individuals with first-dose allergic reactions and allergy testing to determine revaccination outcomes. Recent meta-analyses assessed the incidence of severe allergic reactions to initial COVID-19 vaccination, risk of mRNA-COVID-19 revaccination after an initial reaction, and diagnostic accuracy of COVID-19 vaccine and vaccine excipient testing in predicting reactions. GRADE methods informed rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations. A modified Delphi panel consisting of experts in allergy, anaphylaxis, vaccinology, infectious diseases, emergency medicine, and primary care from Australia, Canada, Europe, Japan, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States formed the recommendations. We recommend vaccination for persons without COVID-19 vaccine excipient allergy and revaccination after a prior immediate allergic reaction. We suggest against >15-minute postvaccination observation. We recommend against mRNA vaccine or excipient skin testing to predict outcomes. We suggest revaccination of persons with an immediate allergic reaction to the mRNA vaccine or excipients be performed by a person with vaccine allergy expertise in a properly equipped setting. We suggest against premedication, split-dosing, or special precautions because of a comorbid allergic history., (Crown Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The severity of anaphylaxis is determined by many factors. The allergenic source as well as the age of the affected individual and the route of allergen exposure encompass the major contributors of the clinical outcome. Moreover, the severity can be modulated further by intrinsic and extrinsic factors. Among these, the genetic predisposition, certain comorbidities such as uncontrolled asthma, and hormonal fluctuations have been proposed as intrinsic and antihypertensive medications or physical activity as extrinsic factors. Recent advances have highlighted immunologic pathways that may exacerbate the response to allergens through receptors on mast cells, basophils, platelets, and other granulocytes. Atopy, platelet-activating factor acetylhydrolase deficiency, hereditary alpha tryptasemia, and clonal mast cell disorders are examples associated with genetic alterations that may predispose to severe anaphylaxis. Identifying risk factors that lower the threshold of reactivity or increase the severity of multisystem reactions is important in the management of this patient population., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Anaphylaxis reactions lie on a spectrum of severity, ranging from relatively mild lower respiratory involvement (depending on the definition of anaphylaxis used) to more severe reactions that are refractory to initial treatment with epinephrine and may rarely cause death. A variety of grading scales exist to characterize severe reactions, but there is a lack of consensus about the optimal approach to define severity. More recently, a new entity called refractory anaphylaxis (RA) has emerged in the literature, characterized by the persistence of anaphylaxis despite initial epinephrine treatment. However, slightly different definitions have been proposed to date. In this Rostrum, we review these definitions as well as data relating to epidemiology, elicitors, risk factors, and management of RA. We propose a need to align the different definitions for RA, to improve epidemiological surveillance, advance our understanding of the pathophysiology of RA, and optimize management strategies to reduce morbidity and mortality., (Copyright © 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Food is one of the most common elicitors of anaphylaxis, with an increasing incidence over recent years., Objectives: To characterize elicitor-specific phenotypes and identify factors enhancing the risk or severity of food-induced anaphylaxis (FIA)., Methods: We analyzed data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry applying an age- and sex-matched analysis of associations (Cramer's V) for single food triggers and calculated odds ratios (ORs) for severe FIA., Results: We identified 3,427 cases of confirmed FIA showing an age-dependent elicitor ranking (for children: peanut, cow's milk, cashew, and hen's egg; and for adults: wheat flour, shellfish, hazelnut, and soy). The age- and sex-matched analysis revealed defined symptom patterns for wheat and cashew. Wheat-induced anaphylaxis was more frequently associated with cardiovascular symptoms (75.7%; Cramer's V = 0.28) and cashew-induced anaphylaxis with gastrointestinal symptoms (73.9%; Cramer's V = 0.20). Furthermore, concomitant atopic dermatitis was slightly associated with anaphylaxis to hen's egg (Cramer's V = 0.19) and exercise was strongly associated with anaphylaxis to wheat (Cramer's V = 0.56). Additional factors influencing the severity were alcohol intake in wheat anaphylaxis (OR = 3.23; CI, 1.31-8.83) and exercise in peanut anaphylaxis (OR = 1.78; CI, 1.09-2.95)., Conclusions: Our data show that FIA is age-dependent. In adults, the range of elicitors inducing FIA is broader. For some elicitors, the severity of FIA seems to be related to the elicitor. These data require confirmation in future studies considering a clear differentiation between augmentation and risk factors in FIA., (Copyright © 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) are adverse drug reactions (ADRs) that are particularly impactful on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and mental health. Although the role of HRQoL as an important patient-reported outcome has been recognized in past years, HRQoL and mental health in patients with ADRs are still poorly investigated., Objective: To evaluate the prevalence, severity, and risk factors of HRQoL and mental health in DHRs, with a particular focus on drug-induced anaphylaxis., Methods: We searched the MEDLINE, Scopus, and American Psychological Association PsycArticles databases to identify all studies up to December 31, 2022 that included subjects with at least one episode of DHR and assessments of mental health and/or quality of life. Results were reported as qualitative and quantitative analyses, with meta-analyses after assessment for risk of bias and heterogeneity., Results: A total of 45 observational studies were included. Overall, a high prevalence of depression (up to 51.4%; odd ratio = 2.94; 95% CI, 1.42-6.10) and anxiety (up to 48%; odd ratio = 3.92; 95% CI, 1.91-8.05) were reported compared with healthy subjects. The HRQoL was significantly affected, especially in the case of drug-induced anaphylaxis (mean score, +5.88; 95% CI, 0.77-10.98)., Conclusions: Despite the scarce and heterogeneous studies on this topic, the review shows that HRQoL and mental health are markedly affected after ADRs. A better assessment of HRQoL and characterization of patients' mental status may improve the efficacy of therapeutic strategies, which should include psychological support., (Copyright © 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Drugs are a frequent cause of severe anaphylactic reactions. Here, we analyze a large dataset on drug induced anaphylaxis regarding elicitors, risk factors, symptoms, and treatment., Methods: Data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry (2007-2019) with 1815 reported cases of drug-induced anaphylaxis were studied accordingly., Results: Drugs are the third most frequent cause of anaphylaxis reported in the Anaphylaxis Registry. Among the eliciting groups of drugs analgesics and antibiotics were far most often reported. Female and senior patients were more frequently affected, while the number of children with DIA was low. DIA patients had symptoms affecting the skin and mucous membranes (n = 1525, 84.02%), the respiratory (n = 1300, 71.63%), the cardiovascular (n = 1251, 68.93%) and the gastrointestinal system (n = 549, 30.25%). Drugs caused significant more severe reactions, occurred more often in medical facilities and led to increased hospitalization rates in comparison to food and insect venom induced anaphylaxis. Adrenaline was used more often in patients with DIA than in anaphylaxis due to other causes. Patients with skin symptoms received more antihistamines and corticosteroids in the acute treatment, while gastrointestinal symptoms led to less adrenaline use., Conclusion: The study contributes to a better understanding of DIA, with a large number of cases from Europe supporting previous data, e.g., analgesics and antibiotics being the most frequent culprits for DIA. Female gender and higher age are relevant risk factors and despite clear recommendations, the emergency treatment of DIA is not administered according to the guidelines., (© 2022 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The Brighton Collaboration (BC) has formulated a number of case definitions which have primarily been applied to adverse events of special interest in the context of vaccine safety surveillance. This is a revision of the 2007 BC case definition for anaphylaxis. Recently, the BC definition has been widely used for evaluating reports of suspected anaphylaxis following COVID-19 vaccination. This has led to debate about the performance of the BC definition in comparison with those from the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease/Food Allergy Anaphylaxis Network (NIAID/FAAN) and the World Allergy Organization (WAO). BC convened an expert working group to revise the case definition based on their usual process of literature review and expert consensus. This manuscript presents the outcome of this process and proposes a revised case definition for anaphylaxis. Major and minor criteria have been re-evaluated with an emphasis on the reporting of observable clinical signs, rather than subjective symptoms, and a clearer approach to the ascertainment of levels of certainty is provided. The BC case definition has also been aligned with other contemporary and international case definitions for anaphylaxis., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The impact on health-related quality of life (HRQL) plays a key role for patients suffering from allergies and anaphylaxis. In this narrative review we review the HRQL in allergic patients suffering from food and venom allergy, both being the most frequent elicitors of severe allergic, potential life-threatening reactions and provide an overview on the current knowledge and identified gaps. The data show that for food and venom allergy standardized assessment tools to measure HRQL are available and have been successfully applied. Our analysis shows that multiple factors can modulate HRQL in these patient groups. These include sociodemographic data like patients' age and sex, fear of accidental reactions but also external factors like the social environment and the appreciation of the seriousness of the condition by others. External factors may have a significant impact on HRQL and should be considered in patient-related outcome assessments to avoid biased measurements possibly affecting the results. The assessment of the quality of life in the context of specific immunotherapy should consider lifestyle factors and ideally, the individual change in HRQL should be measured. Although there are many data indicating a negative impact on HRQL in food allergic children and their caregivers, limited data are existing from adults with food allergy and venom allergic patients from all age groups. Also, the use of standardized questionnaires should be extended to allow for a better comparability of results between studies. Therefore, translation to additional languages is necessary. Taken together, the eliciting allergen, the severity of the allergic disease but moreover multiple external factors impact the outcome in HRQL and should be considered in HRQL assessment., (© 2022 The Authors. Clinical & Experimental Allergy published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Notable scientific developments have taken place in the field of anaphylaxis and urticaria in recent years; they are highlighted in this review. Case-control studies, genome-wide association studies, and large omics analyses have promoted further insights into not only the underlying genetics but also the biomarkers of both anaphylaxis and urticaria. New evidence regarding IgE-dependent and non-IgE-dependent mechanisms of anaphylaxis and urticaria, including the Mas-related G protein-coupled receptor (MRGPR [formerly MRG]) signaling pathway, has been gained. Putative elicitors of anaphylactic reactions in the context of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management and course of chronic urticaria have been reported. Clinical progress has also been made regarding the severity grading and risk factors of anaphylaxis, as well as the distinction of phenotypes and elicitors of both diseases. Furthermore, novel treatment approaches for anaphylaxis and subtypes of urticaria have been assessed, with different outcome and potential for a better disease control or prevention., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Introduction: Anaphylaxis is a severe, potentially fatal multiorgan system manifestation of an allergic reaction. The highest incidence of anaphylaxis is in children and adolescents. Biphasic anaphylaxis (BA) is defined as the recurrence of allergic symptoms after resolution of an initial reaction. It has been reported to occur in 10%-20% of cases within 1-48 hours from the onset of the initial reaction. The dilemma for physicians is determining which patients with resolved anaphylaxis should be observed for BA and for how long. Guidelines for duration of postanaphylaxis monitoring vary, are based on limited evidence and can have unintended negative impacts on patient safety, quality of life and healthcare resources. The objectives of this study are to derive a prognostic model for BA and to develop a risk-scoring system that informs disposition decisions of children who present to emergency departments (ED) with anaphylaxis., Methods and Analysis: This prospective multicentre cohort study will enrol 1682 patients from seven paediatric EDs that are members of the Paediatric Emergency Research Canada network. We will enrol patients younger than 18 years of age with an allergic reaction meeting anaphylaxis diagnostic criteria. Trained ED research assistants will screen, obtain consent and prospectively collect study data. Research assistants will follow patients during their ED visit and ascertain, in conjunction with the medical team, if the patient develops BA. A standardised follow-up survey conducted following study enrolment will determine if a biphasic reaction occurred after ED disposition. Model development will conform to the broad principles of the PROGRESS (Prognosis Research Strategy) framework and reporting will follow the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis Statement., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethics approval has been received from all participating centres. Our dissemination plan focuses on informing clinicians, policy makers and parents of the results through publication in peer-reviewed journals and broadcasting on multiple media platforms., Trial Registration Number: NCT05135377., Competing Interests: Competing interests: All authors have read and understood BMJ policy on declaration of interests and have no relevant interest to declare. ACP is supported by a Tier I University of Ottawa Research Chair. SF is supported by the Alberta Children’s Hospital Professorship in Child Health and Wellness., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

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.)

BackgroundThere is a need to support the diagnosis of anaphylaxis by objective markers. miRNAs are promising noncoding RNA species that may serve as serological biomarkers, but their use in diagnosing anaphylaxis has not been systematically studied to our knowledge. We aimed to comprehensively investigate serum biomarker profiles (proteins, lipids, and miRNAs) to support the diagnosis of anaphylaxis.MethodsAdult patients admitted to the emergency room with a diagnosis of anaphylaxis (<3 hours) were included. Blood samples were taken upon emergency room arrival and 1 month later.ResultsNext-generation sequencing of 18 samples (6 patients with anaphylaxis in both acute and nonacute condition, for 12 total samples, and 6 healthy controls) identified hsa-miR-451a to be elevated during anaphylaxis, which was verified by quantitative real-time PCR in the remaining cohort. The random forest classifier enabled us to classify anaphylaxis with high accuracy using a composite model. We identified tryptase, 9α,11β-PGF2, apolipoprotein A1, and hsa-miR-451a as serological biomarkers of anaphylaxis. These predictors qualified as serological biomarkers individually but performed better in combination.ConclusionUnexpectedly, hsa-miR-451a was identified as the most relevant biomarker in our data set. We were also able to distinguish between patients with a history of anaphylaxis and healthy individuals with higher accuracy than any other available model. Future studies will need to verify miRNA biomarker utility in real-life clinical settings.FundingThis work is funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) as part of the clinical research unit (CRU339): Food Allergy and Tolerance (FOOD@) (project number 409525714) and a grant to MW (Wo541-16-2, project number 264921598), as well as by FOOD@ project numbers 428094283 and 428447634.

Background: Despite a better understanding of the epidemiology, pathogenesis, and management of patients with anaphylaxis, there remain knowledge gaps. Enumerating and prioritizing these gaps would allow limited scientific resources to be directed more effectively., Objective: We sought to systematically describe and appraise anaphylaxis knowledge gaps and future research priorities based on their potential impact and feasibility., Methods: We convened a 25-member multidisciplinary panel of anaphylaxis experts. Panelists formulated knowledge gaps/research priority statements in an anonymous electronic survey. Four anaphylaxis themed writing groups were formed to refine statements: (1) Population Science, (2) Basic and Translational Sciences, (3) Emergency Department Care/Acute Management, and (4) Long-Term Management Strategies and Prevention. Revised statements were incorporated into an anonymous electronic survey, and panelists were asked to rate the impact and feasibility of addressing statements on a continuous 0 to 100 scale., Results: The panel generated 98 statements across the 4 anaphylaxis themes: Population Science (29), Basic and Translational Sciences (27), Emergency Department Care/Acute Management (24), and Long-Term Management Strategies and Prevention (18). Median scores for impact and feasibility ranged from 50.0 to 95.0 and from 40.0 to 90.0, respectively. Key statements based on median rating for impact/feasibility included the need to refine anaphylaxis diagnostic criteria, identify reliable diagnostic, predictive, and prognostic anaphylaxis bioassays, develop clinical prediction models to standardize postanaphylaxis observation periods and hospitalization criteria, and determine immunotherapy best practices., Conclusions: We identified and systematically appraised anaphylaxis knowledge gaps and future research priorities. This study reinforces the need to harmonize scientific pursuits to optimize the outcomes of patients with and at risk of anaphylaxis., (Copyright © 2021 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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.)

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., (© 2021 European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Older adults, especially men and/or those with diabetes, hypertension, and/or obesity, are prone to severe COVID-19. In some countries, older adults, particularly those residing in nursing homes, have been prioritized to receive COVID-19 vaccines due to high risk of death. In very rare instances, the COVID-19 vaccines can induce anaphylaxis, and the management of anaphylaxis in older people should be considered carefully. An ARIA-EAACI-EuGMS (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma, European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, and European Geriatric Medicine Society) Working Group has proposed some recommendations for older adults receiving the COVID-19 vaccines. Anaphylaxis to COVID-19 vaccines is extremely rare (from 1 per 100,000 to 5 per million injections). Symptoms are similar in younger and older adults but they tend to be more severe in the older patients. Adrenaline is the mainstay treatment and should be readily available. A flowchart is proposed to manage anaphylaxis in the older patients., (© 2021 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Concerns for anaphylaxis may hamper severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) immunization efforts. We convened a multidisciplinary group of international experts in anaphylaxis composed of allergy, infectious disease, emergency medicine, and front-line clinicians to systematically develop recommendations regarding SARS-CoV-2 vaccine immediate allergic reactions. Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, the World Health Organizstion (WHO) global coronavirus database, and the gray literature (inception, March 19, 2021) were systematically searched. Paired reviewers independently selected studies addressing anaphylaxis after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, polyethylene glycol (PEG) and polysorbate allergy, and accuracy of allergy testing for SARS-CoV-2 vaccine allergy. Random effects models synthesized the data to inform recommendations based on the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, agreed upon using a modified Delphi panel. The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine anaphylaxis is 7.91 cases per million (n = 41,000,000 vaccinations; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 4.02-15.59; 26 studies, moderate certainty), the incidence of 0.15 cases per million patient-years (95% CI 0.11-0.2), and the sensitivity for PEG skin testing is poor, although specificity is high (15 studies, very low certainty). We recommend vaccination over either no vaccination or performing SARS-CoV-2 vaccine/excipient screening allergy testing for individuals without history of a severe allergic reaction to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine/excipient, and a shared decision-making paradigm in consultation with an allergy specialist for individuals with a history of a severe allergic reaction to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine/excipient. We recommend further research to clarify SARS-CoV-2 vaccine/vaccine excipient testing utility in individuals potentially allergic to SARS-CoV2 vaccines or their excipients., (Copyright © 2021 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Wheat is one of the most commonly consumed foods and a known elicitor of anaphylaxis in children and adults. Reactions in adults are often cofactor dependent and characterized by a prolonged time between food intake and the onset of symptoms making the diagnosis of wheat anaphylaxis challenging., Objective: To characterize a cohort of patients with the history of wheat anaphylaxis to better understand this atypical phenotype of anaphylaxis., Methods: Data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry from 2007 to 2019 (n = 10,636) including 250 patients (213 adults and 37 children) with a history of anaphylaxis caused by wheat were analyzed., Results: Wheat was the most common food elicitor of anaphylaxis in adults in the registry in Central Europe. Reactions to wheat in adults were frequently associated with exercise as a cofactor (82.8%) and partially delayed (57.5%). Only 36.9% of patients had atopic comorbidities, which was uncommonly low for adult patients allergic to other kinds of foods (63.2%). Anaphylaxis to wheat presented frequently with cardiovascular symptoms (86.7%) including severe symptoms such as loss of consciousness (41%) and less often with respiratory symptoms (53.6%). The reactions to wheat were more severe than reactions to other foods (odds ratio [OR] = 4.33), venom (OR = 1.58), or drugs (OR = 2.11)., Conclusions: Wheat is a relevant elicitor of anaphylaxis in adults in Central Europe. Wheat anaphylaxis is highly dependent on the presence of cofactors and less frequently associated with atopic diseases compared with other food allergies. More data on mechanisms of wheat-induced anaphylaxis are required to develop preventive measures for this potentially life-threatening disease., (Copyright © 2021 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Peanut allergy has a rising prevalence in high-income countries, affecting 0.5%-1.4% of children. This study aimed to better understand peanut anaphylaxis in comparison to anaphylaxis to other food triggers in European children and adolescents., Methods: Data was sourced from the European Anaphylaxis Registry via an online questionnaire, after in-depth review of food-induced anaphylaxis cases in a tertiary paediatric allergy centre., Results: 3514 cases of food anaphylaxis were reported between July 2007 - March 2018, 56% in patients younger than 18 years. Peanut anaphylaxis was recorded in 459 children and adolescents (85% of all peanut anaphylaxis cases). Previous reactions (42% vs. 38%; p = .001), asthma comorbidity (47% vs. 35%; p < .001), relevant cofactors (29% vs. 22%; p = .004) and biphasic reactions (10% vs. 4%; p = .001) were more commonly reported in peanut anaphylaxis. Most cases were labelled as severe anaphylaxis (Ring&Messmer grade III 65% vs. 56% and grade IV 1.1% vs. 0.9%; p = .001). Self-administration of intramuscular adrenaline was low (17% vs. 15%), professional adrenaline administration was higher in non-peanut food anaphylaxis (34% vs. 26%; p = .003). Hospitalization was higher for peanut anaphylaxis (67% vs. 54%; p = .004)., Conclusions: The European Anaphylaxis Registry data confirmed peanut as one of the major causes of severe, potentially life-threatening allergic reactions in European children, with some characteristic features e.g., presence of asthma comorbidity and increased rate of biphasic reactions. Usage of intramuscular adrenaline as first-line treatment is low and needs to be improved. The Registry, designed as the largest database on anaphylaxis, allows continuous assessment of this condition., (© 2021 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

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.)

Background: Venom-induced anaphylaxis (VIA) is a common, potentially life-threatening hypersensitivity reaction associated with (1) a specific symptom profile, 2) specific cofactors, and 3) specific management. Identifying the differences in phenotypes of anaphylaxis is crucial for future management guidelines and development of a personalized medicine approach., Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the phenotype and risk factors of VIA., Methods: Using data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry (12,874 cases), we identified 3,612 patients with VIA and analyzed their cases in comparison with sex- and age-matched anaphylaxis cases triggered by other elicitors (non-VIA cases [n = 3,605])., Results: VIA more frequently involved more than 3 organ systems and was associated with cardiovascular symptoms. The absence of skin symptoms during anaphylaxis was correlated with baseline serum tryptase level and was associated with an increased risk of a severe reaction. Intramuscular or intravenous epinephrine was administered significantly less often in VIA, in particular, in patients without a history of anaphylaxis. A baseline serum tryptase level within the upper normal range (8-11.5 ng/mL) was more frequently associated with severe anaphylaxis., Conclusion: Using a large cohort of VIA cases, we have validated that patients with intermediate baseline serum tryptase levels (8-11 ng/mL) and without skin involvement have a higher risk of severe VIA. Patients receiving β-blockers or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors had a higher risk of developing severe cardiovascular symptoms (including cardiac arrest) in VIA and non-VIA cases. Patients experiencing VIA received epinephrine less frequently than did cases with non-VIA., (Copyright © 2020 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. All rights reserved.)

Background: Reduced levels of prostaglandin E 2 (PGE 2 ) contribute to aspirin-induced hypersensitivity. COX inhibitors are also frequent cofactors in anaphylaxis. Whether alterations in the PGE 2 system contribute to anaphylaxis independently of COX inhibitor intake is unclear., Objective: Our aim was to test the hypothesis that relative PGE 2 deficiency predisposes to anaphylaxis., Methods: Sera from 48 patients with anaphylaxis and 27 healthy subjects were analyzed for PGE 2 levels and correlated against severity; 9α,11β-PGF 2 and PGI 2 metabolites were measured for control purposes. PGE 2 stabilization by 15-hydroxyprostaglandin dehydrogenase inhibitor or EP2 or EP4 receptor agonists were used in a murine model of passive systemic anaphylaxis. FcεRI-triggered mediator release was determined in bone marrow-derived cultured mast cells (MCs) and human skin-derived MCs. Signaling was studied by Western blot analysis., Results: Patients with anaphylaxis were characterized by markedly reduced PGE 2 levels vis-à-vis healthy subjects, whereas prostacyclin metabolite levels were diminished only weakly, and 9α,11β-PGF 2 levels conversely increased. PGE 2 was negatively correlated with severity. Lower PGE 2 levels and higher susceptibility to anaphylaxis were also found in C57BL/6 mice vis-à-vis in Balb/c mice. Stabilization of PGE 2 level by 15-hydroxyprostaglandin dehydrogenase inhibitor protected mice against anaphylaxis. Exogenous PGE 2 attenuated bone marrow-derived cultured MC activation through EP2 and EP4 receptors. EP2 and EP4 agonism also curbed FcεRI-mediated degranulation of human MCs. Mechanistically, PGE 2 interfered with the phosphorylation of phospholipase C gamma-1 and extracellular signal-regulated kinase., Conclusions: Homeostatic levels of PGE 2 attenuate MC activation via EP2/EP4 and protect against anaphylaxis. Relative deficiency of PGE 2 predisposes to anaphylaxis in humans and mice, whereas PGE 2 stabilization protects against anaphylactic reactions., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Anaphylaxis is an immediate hypersensitivity reaction. However, a biphasic course with the second onset of symptoms can occur hours after the initial phase. Little is known about the causes of biphasic anaphylaxis making the identification of patients at risk difficult., Objective: To identify factors predisposing for biphasic anaphylaxis for the better understanding of these reactions., Methods: Data from the Anaphylaxis Registry (from 11 countries) including 8736 patients with monophasic and 435 biphasic anaphylaxis were analyzed., Results: The rate of biphasic reactions in this large cohort was 4.7%. The identified risk factors were reaction severity (grade III/IV vs grade II: odds ratio [OR] = 1.34; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1-1.62); multiorgan involvement; skin, gastrointestinal, severe respiratory, and cardiac symptoms; anaphylaxis caused by peanut/tree nut (OR = 1.78; 95% CI: 1.38-2.23) or an unknown elicitor (OR = 1.96; 95% CI: 1.41-2.72); exercise as a cofactor (OR = 1.44; 95% CI: 1.17-1.78); chronic urticaria as a comorbidity (OR = 2.12; 95% CI: 1.19-3.78); a prolonged interval between the contact with the elicitor and start of primary symptoms (OR for >30 vs <30 min: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.08-1.76); and antihistamine treatment (OR = 1.52; 95% CI: 1.14-2.02)., Conclusion: A biphasic course of anaphylaxis occurs more frequently in severely affected patients with multiorgan involvement. However, we identified multiple additional predictors, suggesting that the pathogenesis of biphasic reactions is more complex than being a rebound of a severe primary reaction., (Copyright © 2020 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with a history of anaphylaxis are at risk of future anaphylactic reactions. Thus, secondary prevention measures are recommended for these patients to prevent or attenuate the next reaction., Methods: Data from the Anaphylaxis Registry were analyzed to identify secondary prevention measures offered to patients who experienced anaphylaxis. Our analysis included 7788 cases from 10 European countries and Brazil., Results: The secondary prevention measures offered varied across the elicitors. A remarkable discrepancy was observed between prevention measures offered in specialized allergy centers (84% of patients were prescribed adrenaline autoinjectors following EAACI guidelines) and outside the centers: Here, EAACI guideline adherence was only 37%. In the multivariate analysis, the elicitor of the reaction, age of the patient, mastocytosis as comorbidity, severity of the reaction, and reimbursement/availability of the autoinjector influence physician's decision to prescribe one., Conclusions: Based on the low implementation of guidelines concerning secondary prevention measures outside of specialized allergy centers, our findings highlight the importance of these specialized centers and the requirement of better education for primary healthcare and emergency physicians., (© 2019 The Authors. Allergy published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Mobile health (mHealth) uses mobile communication devices such as smartphones and tablet computers to support and improve health-related services, data and information flow, patient self-management, surveillance, and disease management from the moment of first diagnosis to an optimized treatment. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology created a task force to assess the state of the art and future potential of mHealth in allergology. The task force endorsed the "Be He@lthy, Be Mobile" WHO initiative and debated the quality, usability, efficiency, advantages, limitations, and risks of mobile solutions for allergic diseases. The results are summarized in this position paper, analyzing also the regulatory background with regard to the "General Data Protection Regulation" and Medical Directives of the European Community. The task force assessed the design, user engagement, content, potential of inducing behavioral change, credibility/accountability, and privacy policies of mHealth products. The perspectives of healthcare professionals and allergic patients are discussed, underlining the need of thorough investigation for an effective design of mHealth technologies as auxiliary tools to improve quality of care. Within the context of precision medicine, these could facilitate the change in perspective from clinician- to patient-centered care. The current and future potential of mHealth is then examined for specific areas of allergology, including allergic rhinitis, aerobiology, allergen immunotherapy, asthma, dermatological diseases, food allergies, anaphylaxis, insect venom, and drug allergy. The impact of mobile technologies and associated big data sets are outlined. Facts and recommendations for future mHealth initiatives within EAACI are listed., (© 2019 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Refractory anaphylaxis (unresponsive to treatment with at least two doses of minimum 300 μg adrenaline) is a rare and often fatal hypersensitivity reaction. Comprehensive data on its definition, prevalence, and risk factors are missing. Using the data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry (11,596 cases in total) we identified refractory anaphylaxis cases ( n = 42) and analyzed these in comparison to a control group of severe anaphylaxis cases ( n = 4,820). The data show that drugs more frequently elicited refractory anaphylaxis (50% of cases, p < 0.0001) compared to other severe anaphylaxis cases (19.7%). Cases elicited by insects ( n = 8) were more often due to bees than wasps in refractory cases (62.5 vs. 19.4%, p = 0.009). The refractory cases occurred mostly in a perioperative setting (45.2 vs. 9.05, p < 0.0001). Intramuscular adrenaline (as a first line therapy) was administered in 16.7% of refractory cases, whereas in 83.3% of cases it was applied intravenously (significantly more often than in severe anaphylaxis cases: 12.3%, p < 0.0001). Second line treatment options (e.g., vasopression with dopamine, methylene blue, glucagon) were not used at all for the treatment of refractory cases. The mortality rate in refractory anaphylaxis was significantly higher (26.2%) than in severe cases (0.353%, p < 0.0001). Refractory anaphylaxis is associated with drug-induced anaphylaxis in particular if allergens are given intravenously. Although physicians frequently use adrenaline in cases of perioperative anaphylaxis, not all patients are responding to treatment. Whether a delay in recognition of anaphylaxis is responsible for the refractory case or whether these cases are due to an overflow with mast cell activating substances-requires further studies. Reasons for the low use of second-line medication (i.e., methylene blue or dopamine) in refractory cases are unknown, but their use might improve the outcome of severe refractory anaphylaxis cases., (Copyright © 2019 Francuzik, Dölle-Bierke, Knop, Scherer Hofmeier, Cichocka-Jarosz, García, Lang, Maris, Renaudin and Worm.)

We review the history of the classification and coding changes for anaphylaxis and provide current and perspective information in the field. In 2012, an analysis of Brazilian data demonstrated undernotification of anaphylaxis-related deaths because of the difficulties of coding using the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision. This work triggered strategic international actions supported by the Joint Allergy Academies and the International Classification of Diseases World Health Organization (WHO) leadership to update the classification of allergic disorders for the International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11), which resulted in construction of the pioneer "Allergic and hypersensitivity conditions" chapter. The usability of the new framework has been tested by evaluating the same data published in 2012 from the ICD-11 perspective. Coding accuracy was much improved, reaching 95% for definite anaphylaxis. As the results were provided to the WHO Mortality Reference Group, coding rules have been changed, allowing anaphylaxis to be recorded as an underlying cause of death in official mortality statistics. The mandatory use of ICD-11 from January 2022 for documenting cause of death could have 2 immediate consequences: (1) the reported number of anaphylaxis-related deaths might increase because of more appropriate coding and (2) the cross-sectional and longitudinal mortality data generated might ultimately lead to a better understanding of anaphylaxis epidemiology and improved health policies directed at reducing anaphylaxis-related mortality., (Copyright © 2019 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Anaphylaxis is a potentially fatal allergic reaction. However, many patients at risk of anaphylaxis who should permanently carry a life-saving epinephrine auto injector (EAI) do not carry one at the moment of allergen exposure. The proximity-based emergency response communities (ERC) strategy suggests speeding EAI delivery by alerting patient-peers carrying EAI to respond and give their EAI to a nearby patient in need., Objectives: This study had two objectives: (1) to analyze 10,000 anaphylactic events from the European Anaphylaxis Registry (EAR) by elicitor and location in order to determine typical anaphylactic scenarios and (2) to identify patients' behavioral and spatial factors influencing their response to ERC emergency requests through a scenario-based survey., Methods: Data were collected and analyzed in two phases: (1) clustering 10,000 EAR records by elicitor and incident location and (2) conducting a two-center scenario-based survey of adults and parents of minors with severe allergy who were prescribed EAI, in Israel and Germany. Each group received a four-part survey that examined the effect of two behavioral constructs-shared identity and diffusion of responsibility-and two spatial factors-emergency time and emergency location-in addition to sociodemographic data. We performed descriptive, linear correlation, analysis of variance, and t tests to identify patients' decision factors in responding to ERC alerts., Results: A total of 53.1% of EAR cases were triggered by food at patients' home, and 46.9% of them were triggered by venom at parks. Further, 126 Israeli and 121 German participants completed the survey and met the inclusion criteria. Of the Israeli participants, 80% were parents of minor patients with a risk of anaphylaxis due to food allergy; their mean age was 32 years, and 67% were women. In addition, 20% were adult patients with a mean age of 21 years, and 48% were female. Among the German patients, 121 were adults, with an average age of 47 years, and 63% were women. In addition, 21% were allergic to food, 75% were allergic to venom, and 2% had drug allergies. The overall willingness to respond to ERC events was high. Shared identity and the willingness to respond were positively correlated (r=0.51, P<.001) in the parent group. Parents had a stronger sense of shared identity than adult patients (t 243 = -9.077, P<.001). The bystander effect decreased the willingness of all patients, except the parent group, to respond (F 1,269 =28.27, P<.001). An interaction between location and time of emergency (F 1,473 =77.304, P<.001) revealed lower levels of willingness to respond in strange locations during nighttime., Conclusions: An ERC allergy app has the potential to improve outcomes in case of anaphylactic events, but this is dependent on patient-peers' willingness to respond. Through a two-stage process, our study identified the behavioral and spatial factors that could influence the willingness to respond, providing a basis for future research of proximity-based mental health communities., (©Michal Gaziel Yablowitz, Sabine Dölle, David G Schwartz, Margitta Worm. Originally published in JMIR Mhealth and Uhealth (http://mhealth.jmir.org), 22.08.2019.)

Background: Elicitors and symptoms of anaphylaxis are age dependent. However, little is known about typical features of anaphylaxis in patients aged 65 years or more. Methods: The data from the Network for Online Registration of Anaphylaxis (NORA) considering patients aged ≥65 (elderly) in comparison to data from adults (18-64 years) regarding elicitors, symptoms, comorbidities, and treatment measures were analyzed. Results: We identified 1,123 elderly anaphylactic patients. Insect venoms were the most frequent elicitor in this group ( p < 0.001), followed by drugs like analgesics and antibiotics. Food allergens elicited less frequently anaphylaxis ( p < 0.001). Skin symptoms occurred less frequently in elderly patients (77%, p < 0.001). The clinical symptoms were more severe in the elderly (51% experiencing grade III/IV reactions), in particular when skin symptoms ( p < 0.001) were absent. Most strikingly, a loss of consciousness (33%, p < 0.001) and preexisting cardiovascular comorbidity (59%, p < 0.001) were more prevalent in the elderly. Finally, adrenaline was used in 30% of the elderly (vs. 26% in the comparator group, p < 0.001) and hospitalization was more often required (60 vs. 50%, p < 0.001). Discussion and Conclusion: Anaphylaxis in the elderly is often caused by insect venoms and drugs. These patients suffer more often from cardiovascular symptoms, receive more frequently adrenaline and require more often hospitalization. The data indicate that anaphylaxis in the elderly tends to be more frequently life threatening and patients require intensified medical intervention. The data support the need to recognize anaphylaxis in this patient group, which is prone to be at a higher risk for a fatal outcome.

Background: Anaphylaxis hospitalizations are increasing in many countries, in particular for medication and food triggers in young children. Food-related anaphylaxis remains an uncommon cause of death, but a significant proportion of these are preventable., Aim: To review published epidemiological data relating to food-induced anaphylaxis and potential risk factors of fatal and/or near-fatal anaphylaxis cases, in order to provide strategies to reduce the risk of severe adverse outcomes in food anaphylaxis., Methods: We identified 32 published studies available in MEDLINE (1966-2017), EMBASE (1980-2017), CINAHL (1982-2017), using known terms and synonyms suggested by librarians and allergy specialists., Results: Young adults with a history of asthma, previously known food allergy particularly to peanut/tree nuts are at higher risk of fatal anaphylaxis reactions. In some countries, cow's milk and seafood/fish are also becoming common triggers of fatal reactions. Delayed adrenaline injection is associated with fatal outcomes, but timely adrenaline alone may be insufficient. There is still a lack of evidence regarding the real impact of these risk factors and co-factors (medications and/or alcohol consumption, physical activities, and mast cell disorders)., Conclusions: General strategies should include optimization of the classification and coding for anaphylaxis (new ICD 11 anaphylaxis codes), dissemination of international recommendations on the treatment of anaphylaxis, improvement of the prevention in food and catering areas, and dissemination of specific policies for allergic children in schools. Implementation of these strategies will involve national and international support for ongoing local efforts in relationship with networks of centres of excellence to provide personalized management (which might include immunotherapy) for the most at-risk patients., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Epinephrine autoinjectors for intramuscular administration are the treatment of choice for self-medicating severe allergic reactions. Data from the anaphylaxis registry shows that patients rarely use their epinephrine pens. Pharmacists play a key role as liaison between prescribers and patients., Patients and Methods: Using a standardized questionnaire, the objective of the present study was to assess the level of knowledge among pharmacists regarding anaphylaxis and its treatment. Data derived from 213 pharmacists was included in the study., Results: Our data reveals that pharmacists consider anaphylaxis to be a disorder that is associated with an impairment in quality of life. The most common triggers of anaphylaxis according to pharmacists (insect venom, foods, and drugs) correspond to those listed in the anaphylaxis registry. Based on the survey, pharmacists readily recognize anaphylactic reactions from case descriptions. However, there are still knowledge deficits with respect to the management of anaphylaxis and current guidelines., Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the level of knowledge among pharmacists with regard to anaphylaxis warrants improvement. As this professional group plays a crucial part in the care of patients with allergic disorders, future measures should be aimed at strengthening this role by raising awareness and introducing training modules., (© 2018 Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft (DDG). Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Current guidelines recommend intramuscular administration of epinephrine as the first-line drug for the emergency treatment of severe allergic reactions (anaphylaxis), but no randomized trial evidence supports this consensus., Objective: We aimed to assess anaphylaxis treatment practices over 10 years, covering several European regions, all allergen sources, and all age groups., Methods: The European Anaphylaxis Register tracks elicitors, symptoms, emergency treatment, diagnostic workups, and long-term counseling for anaphylaxis incidents through web-based data entry from tertiary allergy specialists, covering information from the emergency respondent, patient, tertiary referral, and laboratory/clinical test results., Results: We analyzed 10,184 anaphylaxis incidents. In total, 27.1% of patients treated by a health professional received epinephrine and, in total, 10.5% received a second dose. Successful administration was less frequent in German-speaking countries (minimum 19.6%) than in Greece, France, and Spain (maximum 66.7%). Over the last decade, epinephrine administration from a health professional almost doubled to reach 30.6% in 2015-2017, half of which was applied intramuscularly. A total of 14.7% of lay- or self-treated cases were treated with an autoinjector. Of those without treatment, 22.4% carried a device for administration. No change in successful administration by lay emergency respondents was found over the last 10 years. Of the reaction and patient characteristics analyzed, only clinical severity considerably influenced the likelihood of receiving epinephrine, with 66.9% of successful administrations in near-fatal (grade IV) reactions., Conclusions: Despite clear recommendations, only a small proportion of anaphylaxis incidents are treated with epinephrine. We demonstrated a slight increase in treated patients when handled by professionals, but stagnation in lay- or self-treated anaphylaxis. The reaction circumstances, the respondent's professional background, and patient characteristics did not explain which reactions were treated., (Copyright © 2018 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Anaphylaxis is the most serious manifestation of an immediate allergic reaction and the most common emergency event in allergology. Adrenaline (epi- nephrine) is the mainstay of acute pharmacotherapy for this complication. Although epinephrine has been in use for more than a century, physicians and patients are often unsure and inadequately informed about its proper administration and dosing in everyday situations., Methods: This review is based on pertinent publications from the period 1 January 2012 to 30 September 2017 that were retrieved, on the basis of the existing guide- lines of 2007 and 2014, by a PubMed search employing the keywords "anaphylaxis treatment," "allergic shock," "adrenaline," and "epinephrine," as well as on further ar- ticles from the literature., Results: Adrenaline/epinephrine administration often eliminates all manifestations of anaphylaxis. The method of choice for administering it (except in intensive-care medicine) is by intramuscular injection with an autoinjector; this is mainly done to treat reactions of intermediate severity. The injection is given in the lateral portion of the thigh and can be repeated every 10-15 minutes until there is a response. The dose to be administered is 300-600 µg for an adult or 10 µg/kg for a child. The risk of a serious cardiac adverse effect is lower than with intravenous administration. There have not been any randomized controlled trials on the clinical efficacy of ephi- nephrine in emergency situations. The use of an autoinjector should be specially practiced in advance., Conclusion: The immediate treatment of patients with anaphylaxis is held to be ad- equate, yet major deficiencies remain in their further diagnostic evaluation, in the prescribing of emergency medications, and in patient education. Further research is needed on cardiovascular involvement in anaphylaxis and on potential new thera- peutic approaches.

Introduction: Patients experiencing anaphylaxis who do not recover after treatment with intramuscular adrenaline are regarded as suffering from refractory anaphylaxis. The incidence of refractory anaphylaxis is estimated to range between 3-5% of anaphylaxis cases. The risk factors for refractory anaphylaxis are unknown. Areas covered: In the present analysis, we aimed to evaluate the management and risk factors of refractory anaphylaxis to highlight possible clinical implications for updating current management algorithms. Expert commentary: According to international guidelines, adrenaline given through the intramuscular (i.m.) route is a rapid and safe treatment but may be insufficient. Therefore, defined standardized treatment protocols for such cases of refractory anaphylaxis are needed to optimize the treatment. Point-of-care diagnostics may enable doctors to identify patients experiencing severe, refractory anaphylaxis early in order to initiate intensified critical care treatment.

Anaphylactic reactions due to food occur in the context of food allergy and, together with venom and drugs, are the most frequent elicitors of severe allergic reactions. In small children the most frequent elicitors of severe allergic reactions according to data from the anaphylaxis registry are hen's egg and milk, whereas in school children peanut and hazelnut are frequent elicitors of allergic reactions. Other frequent elicitors of anaphylactic reactions in childhood are wheat and soy. In adults the most frequent elicitors of severe allergic reactions due to food, based on data from the anaphylaxis registry, are wheat, soy, celery, shellfish and hazelnut. Rare elicitors of food-induced anaphylaxis in German-speaking countries are mustard and cabbage. However, the panel of rare elicitors of food-induced anaphylaxis show regional differences. As of March 2015, 17 cases of fatal anaphylaxis were registered and among these seven were food-induced. Co-factors can either trigger the elicitation of a severe allergic reaction or affect its severity. Among such co-factors are physical activity, the intake of certain drugs, and psychological stress. The data on the role of cofactors is sparse. The management of food-induced anaphylaxis includes acute management according to current guidelines, but also long-term management, which should include educational measures regarding treatment but also information about the food allergen in daily life.

Food allergy is a common health problem and can cause anaphylaxis. Avoidance of the offending food allergen is still the mainstay therapeutic approach. In this study, we investigated the role of plasma cell reduction by proteasome inhibition in a murine model of food allergy and examined the impact of this treatment on the systemic and local immune response. For this purpose, intestinal anaphylaxis was induced in BALB/c mice with the food allergen hazelnut, in conjunction with different adjuvants (alum and Staphylococcal enterotoxin B SEB) and different administration routes (oral and intraperitoneal). In both models, allergy symptoms were observed, but the clinical severity was more pronounced in the hazelnut-alum model than in the hazelnut-SEB model. Accordingly, allergen-specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) against hazelnut was detectable, and mast cell protease-1 in serum was increased after allergen provocation. Treatment with the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib reduced plasma cells and resulted in an abolishment of hazelnut allergen-specific IgE, which was associated with amelioration of clinical symptoms as well as a significant decrease in both CD19(+) and follicular B lymphocytes. Our data demonstrate the importance of allergen-specific IgE in food allergy and point to B cells as potential therapeutic targets for its treatment., (© 2016 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.)

Background: Anaphylaxis in children and adolescents is a potentially life-threatening condition. Its heterogeneous clinical presentation and sudden occurrence in virtually any setting without warning have impeded a comprehensive description., Objective: We sought to characterize severe allergic reactions in terms of elicitors, symptoms, emergency treatment, and long-term management in European children and adolescents., Methods: The European Anaphylaxis Registry recorded details of anaphylaxis after referral for in-depth diagnosis and counseling to 1 of 90 tertiary allergy centers in 10 European countries, aiming to oversample the most severe reactions. Data were retrieved from medical records by using a multilanguage online form., Results: Between July 2007 and March 2015, anaphylaxis was identified in 1970 patients younger than 18 years. Most incidents occurred in private homes (46%) and outdoors (19%). One third of the patients had experienced anaphylaxis previously. Food items were the most frequent trigger (66%), followed by insect venom (19%). Cow's milk and hen's egg were prevalent elicitors in the first 2 years, hazelnut and cashew in preschool-aged children, and peanut at all ages. There was a continuous shift from food- to insect venom- and drug-induced anaphylaxis up to age 10 years, and there were few changes thereafter. Vomiting and cough were prevalent symptoms in the first decade of life, and subjective symptoms (nausea, throat tightness, and dizziness) were prevalent later in life. Thirty percent of cases were lay treated, of which 10% were treated with an epinephrine autoinjector. The fraction of intramuscular epinephrine in professional emergency treatment increased from 12% in 2011 to 25% in 2014. Twenty-six (1.3%) patients were either admitted to the intensive care unit or had grade IV/fatal reactions., Conclusions: The European Anaphylaxis Registry confirmed food as the major elicitor of anaphylaxis in children, specifically hen's egg, cow's milk, and nuts. Reactions to insect venom were seen more in young adulthood. Intensive care unit admissions and grade IV/fatal reactions were rare. The registry will serve as a systematic foundation for a continuous description of this multiform condition., (Copyright © 2015 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)