Search

Background & Aims: Diagnostic histological criteria for autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) have not been clearly established. Previously published criteria focused mainly on chronic AIH, in which inflammatory changes mainly occur in portal/periportal regions and may not be applicable to acute presentation of AIH, in which inflammatory changes are typically predominantly lobular in location. International consensus criteria for the diagnosis and assessment of disease severity in both acute and chronic AIH are thus urgently needed. Methods: Seventeen expert liver pathologists convened at an international workshop and subsequently used a modified Delphi panel approach to establish consensus criteria for the histopathological diagnosis of AIH. Results: The consensus view is that liver biopsy should remain standard for diagnosing AIH. AIH is considered likely, if there is a predominantly portal lymphoplasmacytic hepatitis with more than mild interface activity and/or more than mild lobular hepatitis in the absence of histological features suggestive of another liver disease. AIH is also considered likely if there is predominantly lobular hepatitis with or without centrilobular necroinflammation and at least one of the following features: portal lymphoplasmacytic hepatitis, interface hepatitis or portal-based fibrosis, in the absence of histological features suggestive of another liver disease. Emperipolesis and hepatocellular rosettes are not regarded as being specific for AIH. Conclusions: The criteria proposed in this consensus statement provide a uniform approach to the histological diagnosis of AIH, which is relevant for patients with an acute as well as a chronic presentation and to more accurately reflect the current understanding of liver pathology in AIH. © 2022 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd

Since the World Allergy Organization (WAO) Diagnosis and Rationale against Cow's Milk Allergy (DRACMA) Guidelines were published 10 years ago, new evidence has accumulated about the diagnosis, therapy, and specific immunotherapy for cow's milk allergy (CMA). For this reason, WAO has felt the need to update the guidelines. We introduce here this update. The new DRACMA guidelines aim to comprehensively address the guidance on diagnosis and therapy of both IgE non-IgE-mediated forms of cow's milk allergy in children and adults. They will be divided into 18 chapters, each of which will be dedicated to an aspect. The focus will be on the meta-analyzes and recommendations that will be expressed for the 3 most relevant clinical aspects: (a) the diagnostic identification of the condition; (b) the choice of the replacement formula in case of CMA in infancy when the mother is not able to breastfeed, and (c) the use of specific immunotherapy for cow's milk protein allergy. © 2021 The Author(s)

Background: The prevalence of cow's milk allergy (CMA) is approximately 2–4.5% in infants and less than 0.5% in adults. Most children outgrow cow's milk allergy in early childhood, particularly that to the baked milk products. Immunotherapy with unheated cow's milk has been used as a treatment option for those who have not yet outgrown CMA, but the benefits must be balanced with the adverse effects. Objective: These evidence-based guidelines from the World Allergy Organization (WAO) intend to support patients, clinicians, and others in decisions about the use of oral and epicutaneous immunotherapy for the treatment of IgE-mediated CMA. Methods: WAO formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to include the views of all stakeholders and to minimize potential biases from competing interests. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline-development process, including updating or performing systematic evidence reviews. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used, including GRADE Evidence-to-Decision frameworks, which were subject to public comment. Results: After a careful review of the summarized evidence and thorough discussions the WAO guideline panel suggests: a) using oral immunotherapy with unheated cow's milk in those individuals with confirmed IgE-mediated CMA who value the ability to consume controlled quantities of milk more than avoiding the large adverse effects of therapy, b) not using oral immunotherapy with unheated cow's milk in those who value avoiding large adverse effects of therapy more than the ability to consume controlled quantities of milk, c) using omalizumab in those starting oral immunotherapy with unheated cow's milk, d) not using oral immunotherapy with baked cow's milk in those who do not tolerate both unheated and baked milk, and e) not using epicutaneous immunotherapy outside of a research setting. The recommendations are labeled “conditional” due to the low certainty about the health effects based on the available evidence. Conclusions: Clinicians, patients, and their family members might want to discuss all the potential desirable and undesirable effects of oral immunotherapy for IgE-mediated CMA and integrate them with the patients' values and preferences before deciding on a treatment option. More robust research is needed to determine with greater certainty which interventions are likely to be the most beneficial with the least harms, and to develop safer, low-cost, and equitable treatments. © 2022 The Authors