History Of Anaphylaxis Research Articles

Hereditary alpha tryptasemia: elevated tryptase, female sex, thyroid disorders, and anaphylaxis

IntroductionThe clinical significance of elevated baseline serum tryptase (BST) in the absence of mast cell disorders or allergic reactions has long been unclear. Recently, a genetic variation of the TPSAB1 gene, which among others encodes for alpha tryptase, has been reported and named hereditary alpha tryptasemia (HaT). HaT has been linked to various manifestations, including severe allergic reactions. However, clinical studies are limited. In this study, we aimed to determine HaT prevalence and characterize its clinical manifestations in patients at a specialized allergy center.MethodsFrom January 2022 to December 2023, patients with elevated BST at least once were screened for HaT at the outpatient clinic. A control group included patients with a history of anaphylaxis undergoing specific Hymenoptera immunotherapy. TPSAB1 copy numbers, BST levels, and clinical parameters were assessed and analyzed.ResultsOf 47 patients with elevated BST (≥11.4 µg/L), 93% showed increased TPSAB1 copy numbers. Individuals diagnosed with HaT displayed a BST range between 12.3 and 28.4 µg/L, with 84.1% associated with TPSAB1 duplication and 15.9% with triplication. HaT predominated in women (86.4%) and was associated with thyroid disease (27.3%). Over half had a history of anaphylaxis (54.5%), which was mainly low-grade.DiscussionIn patients with elevated BST but no mastocytosis, the most likely cause of elevated BST was an increase in the copy number of the TPSAB1 gene. A heightened risk of anaphylaxis should be considered. Further research is needed to explore the predominance of women and the emerging link with thyroid disease.

Anaphylactic Reaction With The Measles-Mumps-Rubella Vaccine In A Patient With Cow's Milk Allergy

The most common food allergy in children worldwide is cow's milk allergy. The most known allergens from cow's milk proteins are casein, alpha-lactalbumin, and beta-lactoglobulin. Lactalbumin hydrolysate is used as a stabilizer in the measles mumps rubella (MMR) vaccine originating in India. Different commercial forms of the MMR vaccine are available. While neomycin stabilizes, lactalbumin hydrolysate is used in the other form. We present a patient who was followed up for cow's milk allergy and developed anaphylaxis after the MMR vaccine originating from India. A 4-year-old girl with a history of anaphylaxis with cow's milk whose vaccinations were applied by the routine vaccination schedule in the family health center. Sneezing and urticaria started 1 minute after immunization. The patient presented to the emergency department (within 10 minutes after vaccination) with severe respiratory distress and intercostal retractions. The patient was administered three doses of intramuscular adrenaline, 5 minutes apart, intravenous pheniramine and methylprednisolone, and a nebulizer short-acting beta agonist. Symptoms regressed approximately 40 minutes after hospitalization. In our patient with a history of cow's milk anaphylaxis and lactalbumin-specific immunoglobulin E value of 61.3 kU/L, anaphylactic reaction with MMR vaccine seems to be related to the lactalbumin contained in the vaccine. Families and physicians should be meticulous about reading labels in the follow-up of patients with known food allergies.

The Efficacy and Safety of Stepwise Oral Food Challenge in Children with Cow’s Milk Allergy

Plain Language SummaryStepwise oral food challenge (OFC) tests begin with low doses of allergens, progressing to full doses. This is one of the strategies used to avoid anaphylactic reactions to the reintroduction of allergens. We previously reported the safety and efficacy of hen egg OFC. In this study, we discuss it for cow’s milk (CM) allergy. We included 927 children (median age, 3.2 years) who underwent CM-OFC between 2017 and 2021. The target challenge dose was classified as low (<10 mL), middle (≥10 mL but <100 mL), or full. When the participants reacted to low doses, they underwent very low-dose OFC using baked milk or <1 mL of CM. Positive reactions developed in 210 cases (22.7%), including 69 anaphylactic reactions (7.4%). A lower target dose resulted in more positive OFC results and anaphylaxis. Multivariate analysis indicated that only in low-dose OFCs, higher CM-specific IgE (CM-sIgE) levels, younger age, and complete CM elimination were associated with positive OFC results. Food ladders, an approach to reintroduce allergens, are becoming increasingly popular. Although we believe that OFC is a safer strategy to reintroduce CM to children with CM allergy, our CM-OFCs appeared to develop more anaphylactic reactions than milk ladders. The stepwise OFC reintroduced small amounts of CM, even in cases with high CM-sIgE levels or a history of anaphylaxis. Performing CM-OFC at a younger age, preferably from infancy, with very low doses, similar to milk ladders, may facilitate the safe reintroduction of CM.

6810 Successful Insulin Allergy Desensitization To Humalog During The Second Trimester Of Pregnancy

Abstract Disclosure: J. Noreña: None. S. Seav: None. S. Jiang: None. S. McGhee: None. M. Tan: None. M. Basina: None. Background: Insulin allergy is rare, occurring in only 0.1 to 3% of people with insulin-treated diabetes. During pregnancy, this incidence is even lower due to a relative immunosuppressive state. Currently, there are no standardized insulin allergy desensitization protocols for this specific patient population. Clinical Case: A 39-year-old female (G4P3003) with T2DM and multiple prior medication allergies presented to the antepartum unit in her 17th week of pregnancy due to hyperglycemia and reported insulin allergy to NPH insulin.Patient was initially diagnosed with gestational diabetes during her third pregnancy, requiring NPH insulin which she seemed to tolerate well at the time. She remained medication-free for two years post-delivery but later developed T2DM with an A1c of 6.8%. Metformin and Jardiance, previously prescribed, were discontinued upon confirmation of her current pregnancy. She opted to manage her diabetes through diet and exercise alone, but her A1c rose to 7.0%, prompting the initiation of NPH.Following the first dose of NPH at home, she experienced a localized burning sensation at the injection site associated with facial flushing, followed by a diffuse, pruritic, erythematous rash on her face, chest, abdomen, and bilateral arms. Due to her history of anaphylaxis to other drugs (mainly antibiotics), she was admitted to the hospital for monitoring. Inpatient attempts with lower doses of NPH and then a trial of glargine triggered new rash episodes. Work-up revealed negative insulin antibodies, low IgG, and a normal CBC. She was started on Humalog to cover basal dose administered every 6 hours and additional prandial injections, which she tolerated prior to discharge. One week later, she developed a new local erythematous reaction at the Humalog injection site followed by a generalized rash which led to her readmission.Allergy was consulted and facilitated a successful desensitization protocol to Humalog. The protocol included escalating doses of insulin administered every 30 minutes (0.1u, 0.2u, 0.4u, 0.8u, 1u, 2u, 3u, 3u) to achieve a pre-determined cumulative dose of 10.5 units. Patient tolerated the protocol well and was discharged with q6h Humalog for basal coverage in addition to prandial doses with plan to transition to insulin pump therapy with Humalog soon. Conclusion: This unique case demonstrates how insulin desensitization can be a safe and successful strategy to help achieve insulin tolerance and glycemic control during pregnancy. Election of an insulin, such as Humalog, that can achieve the one-hour post-prandial glucose target during pregnancy and also provide effective basal coverage should be considered as desensitization can only be done with one insulin type at a time. Presentation: 6/2/2024

Omalizumab reduces anaphylactic reactions and allows food introduction in food-allergic in children with severe asthma: An observational study.

In Europe, Omalizumab (anti-IgE) is indicated for the treatment of moderate to severe asthma, but not for IgE-mediated food allergy (FA). We assessed the impact of Omalizumab on efficacy, safety, and quality of life (FA-QoL) in patients with moderate to severe asthma and who have a history of anaphylaxis to peanut, tree nuts, fish, egg, milk, and/or wheat. Food-allergic children (6-18 years) with moderate to severe asthma underwent oral food challenges (OFCs) to establish the threshold of reaction to the culprit food(s) at baseline (T0) and at 4-month intervals (T1, T2, and T3) during their first year of treatment with Omalizumab. We recorded the number and severity of food-allergic reactions, Asthma Control Test (ACT) scores, FA-QoL, and total IgE levels. In 65 patients allergic to 107 foods, the No Observed Adverse Events Level (NOAEL) at T1 increased: 243- and 488-fold for fresh and baked milk, respectively; 172- and 134-fold for raw and baked egg; 245-fold for hazelnut; 55-fold for peanut; 31-fold for wheat; and 10-fold for fish. Full tolerance was achieved in 66.4% of OFCs at T1, 58.3% at T2, and 75% at T3. Ninety-five foods were liberalized in the diet of 55 patients; the remaining 12 were introduced by 10 patients at least in traces. Throughout the study, 40 out of 65 were able to get a free diet. ACT increased from 17 (Q1-Q3: 15-17) to 23.6 (Q1-Q3: 23-25). The FA-QoL score in children ≤12 years decreased from 4.63 ± 0.74 to 2.02 ± 1.13, and in adolescents from 4.68 ± 0.92 to 1.90 ± 1.50. During Omalizumab therapy, a safe reintroduction of allergenic foods is feasible. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT06316414.

Short-Term Active Safety Surveillance of the Spikevax and Nuvaxovid Priming Doses in Australia.

Australia commenced administration of the Spikevax (Moderna mRNA-1273) COVID-19 vaccine in August 2021 and Nuvaxovid (Novavax NVX-CoV2373) in January 2022. This study describes the short-term safety profile of priming doses of the Spikevax and Nuvaxovid vaccines given between September 2021 and September 2023. Online surveys were sent via AusVaxSafety, Australia's active vaccine safety surveillance system, three and eight days after vaccination. A total of 131,775 day 3 surveys were sent, with a response rate of 38.5% (N = 50,721). A total of 43,875 day 8 surveys matched with day 3 survey responses were sent, with a response rate of 71.5% (N = 31,355). Half (50.7%) of respondents reported any adverse event following immunisation (AEFI) in the 0-3 days after vaccination and 24.6% reported any AEFI 4-7 days after vaccination. Fatigue, local pain, headache, and myalgia were the most frequently reported symptoms for both vaccines in both periods. After adjusting for respondent characteristics, vaccination clinic type, jurisdiction, and medical conditions, the odds for reporting AEFI increased with age from 16-19 years to highest odds at 30-39 years, after which it declined. Females had greater odd of reporting AEFI than males across most age groups, vaccine types, and doses. Respondents with a history of anaphylaxis had greater odds of reporting any AEFI (adjusted OR range: 1.50-2.86). A total of 3.1% of respondents reported seeking medical review 0-3 days after vaccination. This study affirms the short-term safety of Spikevax and Nuvaxovid COVID-19 vaccine priming doses in a large sample in Australia.

Comparing Skin and Serum Testing to Direct Challenge Outcomes in Children With β-Lactam Allergies

BackgroundThere is a scarcity of prospective studies investigating the relative roles of skin prick and intradermal testing, serum-specific Immunoglobulin E, and extended oral challenges in diagnosing children with reported beta-lactam allergies. ObjectiveTo determine the sensitivity and specificity of skin testing and serum-specific Immunoglobulin E in children with beta-lactam allergies, with immediate and non-immediate historic reactions. MethodsFour hundred children with parent-reported beta-lactam allergies were recruited into an open-label prospective study. Detailed allergy histories were collected. Those with medically observed and documented histories of anaphylaxis, requiring epinephrine, or SCARs were excluded. In total, 380 children underwent all testing modalities and a direct provocation test. Each child was followed up for a minimum of three years. ResultsTrue allergy in children was uncommon, 8·3% reacted to the direct provocation challenge or the 5-day extended oral provocation challenge. Children reporting cephalosporin allergy or a reaction within one year were more likely to react to direct provocation testing. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of skin testing was 12·5%, 98·8% and 20·0% for direct challenge outcomes, 4·76%, 99·0% and 25·0% for extended challenge outcomes, and 6·9%, 99·0% and 40·0% for both challenges combined. Follow-up investigations revealed that 5·7% of children had a mild repeat reaction and 2·7% continued to avoid the culprit despite successful delabeling. The relabeling rate for children readmitted to hospital was 15% with the relabeing being unfounded. ConclusionGenuine beta-lactam allergies were rare, with over 90% of children effectively delabeled. Skin and serum-specific Immunoglobulin E testing did not aid the diagnosis of beta-lactam antibiotic allergy in children, regardless of medical history. Extended oral challenges proved valuable in confirming allergies and boosted parental confidence.

Behavior and Parenting Stress Characteristics in Young Children With Severe Food Allergies According to the Severity Score System.

Limited knowledge exists regarding the psychosocial characteristics of young Asian children affected by food allergies (FAs) and their caregivers. This study aims to assess the usefulness of the Food Allergy Severity Score (FASS) system in evaluating the risk of emotional impacts on young children and caregivers who are dealing with severe FA. Children between 2 and 10 years of age who were diagnosed with FA and following an elimination diet were enrolled in the study. The FASS, Korean Parenting Stress Index, and Korean Behavior Assessment System for Children-2 were used for evaluating the above mentioned risk. Among the 75 participants, 64.0% had a history of anaphylaxis, and 56.0% reported multiple FAs. A total of 160 cases of FASS was documented across 21 types of food and classified as mild (n = 5, 1.07), moderate (n = 100, 2.01-4.01), or severe (n = 55, 4.24-6.84). The concordance of calculated- and stakeholder interpreted-FASS was moderate (kappa 0.587). Children with severe FASS (sFASS) showed increased risk for functional communication (relative risk [RR], 1.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.99-2.48) and increased parental reinforcement (RR, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.91-2.14). Their caregivers exhibited reduced levels of demandingness (RR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.37-0.94) and role restriction (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.39-0.98). Receiver operating characteristic curves suggested that functional communication (numeric FASS cutoff, 3.47; area under the curve [AUC], 0.695), withdrawal (cutoff, 3.40; AUC, 0.657), developmental social disorders (cutoff, 3.96; AUC, 0.648), and reinforces parent (cutoff, 3.15; AUC, 0.646) were possibly be affected. The FASS provides an objective tool to assess pediatric FA severity. Early psychosocial intervention for young children with severe FASS and their caregivers may improve prognosis by identifying possible adaptive skill deficiencies and excessive parenting stresses.

Immunological and molecular study in children with combined immunodeficiency.

Background. Severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) is a form of immunodeficiencies (PID), caused by molecular defects. These defects can restrict the development and function of lymphocytes. Early diagnosis and treatment of SCID can lead to disease-free survival. This study aims to investigate some of the possible underlying genetic defects in a group of Egyptian infants and children with clinical and immunological profiles suggestive of SCID. Methods. This study included eighty patients who showed clinical warning signs of immunodeficiency. Subjects were thoroughly examined clinically. Laboratory evaluation included immunoglobulins serum levels and flow cytometric assessment of immune cells. This testing showed an altered immune profile in thirty patients. They had decreased T and/or B lymphocytes or natural killer cells. DNA extraction was done for those cases. The coding regions of the RAG1 gene and RAG2 gene was investigated for hot spot mutations by sequencing technique guided by the patient clinical evaluation, inheritance pattern, immunophenotyping by flow cytometric analysis of lymphocyte subsets, and serum immunoglobulins level detection. Results. Results showed novel and previously reported variants (mutation, polymorphism), they were found in 18 cases which include variants in the RAG1 gene (E880K, A960A, H249R, S913R, K820R, V782G), and variants in the RAG2 gene (P501T, L514M, rs10836573, cDNA.2129A>T). Conclusions. To evaluate SCID patients completely, mutation gene analysis is highly required and recommended.

Dietary Advancement Therapy Using Milk and Egg Ladders Among Children With a History of Anaphylaxis

BackgroundAnaphylaxis is increasing in recent years, with common triggers in infants being milk and eggs. Currently the mainstay of treatment for milk and/or egg allergy is strict avoidance. Recently new therapies have emerged including stepwise introduction of allergens via a ladder approach. The suitability of infants for the ladders is debated. ObjectiveThis study aims to focus on the use of food ladders in children with anaphylaxis to egg or milk. MethodsRetrospective review of paediatric patients diagnosed with IgE-mediated milk and/or egg allergy between 2011-2021. Inclusion and exclusion criteria applied. Anaphylaxis defined as per the World Allergy Organisation amended criteria 2020. Data analysis utilised SPSS Version 28. Results1552 patient charts reviewed, 1094 excluded (n=458). 70 infants had anaphylaxis at diagnosis (milk n=36, egg n=34). 77.8%-85.2% with anaphylaxis successfully completed the ladder, 88.9-92.9% without anaphylaxis were successful. Children who successfully completed the ladder did so at similar rates. 20.6-50% children presenting with anaphylaxis at diagnosis experienced allergic symptoms during treatment, compared to 17.3-40.7% without anaphylaxis. Reactions were mild, mostly cutaneous and not requiring medical attention. Patients experiencing allergic symptoms while on the ladder were less likely to successfully complete treatment. ConclusionMilk and egg ladders are a safe and effective way of inducing tolerance in infants, including those with a history of anaphylaxis at diagnosis. There are no obvious predictors for who will experience allergic reactions while on the ladder, however these children are less likely to complete the ladder so parents should be educated in management of mild allergic reactions at home.

PEGylated liposomes for diagnosis of polyethylene glycol allergy

Polyethylene glycol (PEG) is a nonprotein polymer that is present in its native (unbound) form as an excipient in a range of products. It is increasingly being utilized clinically in the form of PEGylated liposomal medications and vaccines. PEG is the cause of anaphylaxis in a small percentage of drug reactions; however, diagnosis of PEG allergy is complicated by the variable and poor diagnostic performance of current skin testing protocols. We assessed the diagnostic performance of PEGylated lipid medications as an alternative to currently described tests that use medications containing PEG excipients. Nine patients with a strong history of PEG allergy were evaluated by skin testing with a panel of PEG-containing medications and with a PEGylated lipid nanoparticle vaccine (BNT162b2). Reactivity of basophils to unbound and liposomal PEG was assessed exvivo, and specificity of basophil responses to PEGylated liposomes was investigated with a competitive inhibition assay. More detailed information is provided in this article's Methods section in the Online Repository available at www.jacionline.org. Despite compelling histories of anaphylaxis to PEG-containing medications, only 2 (22%) of 9 patients were skin test positive for purified PEG or their index reaction-indicated PEG-containing compound. Conversely, all 9 patients were skin test positive or basophil activation test positive to PEGylated liposomal BNT162b2 vaccine. Concordantly, PEGylated liposomal drugs (BNT162b2 vaccine and PEGylated liposomal doxorubicin), but not purified PEG2000, consistently induced basophil activation exvivo in patients with PEG allergy but not in nonallergic controls. Basophil reactivity to PEGylated nanoparticles competitively inhibited by preincubation of basophils with native PEG2000. Presentation of PEG on the surface of a lipid nanoparticle increases its invivo and exvivo allergenicity, and improves diagnosis of PEG allergy.

Factors effecting natural course of egg allergy.

Background. There is limited data about the natural course of egg allergy in the literature. We aimed to analyze the factors that can affect the tolerance or persistence of egg allergy. Methods. A total number of 126 IgE- mediated egg allergic patient who had data about tolerance gaining were included in the study. Demographic and laboratory data were recorded retrospectively. Kaplan-Meier curves was used for estimation of resolution and the factors related to resolution by Cox regression model. Results. Among 126 patients 81 (64.2%) had gained tolerance with a median survival time of 48 months (min 12- max 121). Tolerance was gained in 22.2% (28) of these patients in the first 2 years, in 46.8% (49) 2-6 years, 3.1% (4) between 7-12 years. In univariate analysis, no history of anaphylaxis (at initiation or during OFC) (Hazard ratio 2.193; 95%CI 1.309-3.674, p = 0.003), baseline sIgE level less than 8.2 (Hazard ratio 11.292; 95%CI 2.766-46.090, p = 0.001) and baseline egg SPT less than 11 mm (Hazard ratio 2.906; 95%CI 1.424-5.930, p = 0.003) were found to be related to earlier resolution of egg allergy. In multivariate analysis only anaphylaxis was significantly related to later resolution (Hazard ratio: 6.547; 95%CI 15.80-27.434, p = 0.01). Conclusions. Higher levels of egg sIgE, skin prick test induration and anaphylaxis at onset or during oral food challenge, can give hint about persistence of egg allergy.

Anaphylaxis: first clinical presentation, subsequent referral practise, and suspected elicitor—an observational study

Anaphylaxis is an allergic manifestation characterised by rapid onset and progression. Rapid treatment may be challenging in patients with atypical symptoms or no previous history of anaphylaxis. This study aimed to describe the clinical prehospital presentation of first-time anaphylactic patients. To help target educational initiatives, we sought to identify which groups of medical professionals are most likely to encounter first-time anaphylactic patients and investigated the referral pattern for suspected anaphylactic patients for specialised treatment. A retrospective register-based study from the Region of Southern Denmark. Patients referred to the Allergy Centre, Odense University Hospital, from 2019 to 2021 were included. The medical records were manually reviewed for first contact with the emergency departments or the emergency medical service. 444 patients with suspected anaphylaxis were referred. 226 patients had grade 3–5 systemic allergic reactions as classified by the World Allergy Organisation; 90% had cutaneous symptoms, 63% symptoms from the central nervous system, 42% gastrointestinal symptoms, 40% cardiovascular symptoms, 36% had upper-airway symptoms, and 36% had lower-airway symptoms. Patients treated prehospitally had a significantly more severe degree of anaphylaxis than patients only treated within the hospital. More than half of the patients with suspected anaphylaxis were referred to the Allergy Centre from the emergency departments. Patients with allergies progressing to severe anaphylaxis most often are treated prehospitally before transport to emergency departments. From the emergency departments, they are referred to the allergy centre. Education concerning the immediate treatment of severe anaphylaxis should primarily be targeted towards prehospital care providers.

Management of food allergy based on oral food challenge.

Food allergy is a growing health problem that affects both patients and society in multiple ways. Despite the emergence of novel diagnostic tools, such as component-resolved diagnostics (CRD) and basophil activation tests (BAT), oral food challenge (OFC) still plays an indispensable role in the management of food allergies. This review aimed to highlight the indications and safety concerns of conducting an OFC and to provide insights into post-OFC management based on recent findings. Standardized OFC protocols have regional diversification, especially in Japan and Western countries. Recent studies suggested that the interval between doses should be at least more than an hour. Furthermore, applying a stepwise method tailored to the patient's specific immunoglobulin E level and history of anaphylaxis seems to mitigate these risks. Recent surveys have shown that, following a positive OFC, options other than strict avoidance are also selected. OFC serves diverse purposes, yet the risks it carries warrant caution. The stepwise protocol appears promising for its safety. Subthreshold consumption following OFC shows potential; however, further research on its efficacy and safety is required. Management following OFC should be tailored and well discussed between clinicians and patients.

Off-Label Yellow Fever and Hepatitis A Vaccination in Traveling Children.

There are few data on yellow fever (YF) and hepatitis A (HA) off-label vaccination. Given the rising trend of travel to endemic countries, there is a growing necessity to broaden vaccination coverage among the pediatric population. For this reason, we aim to assess the adverse effects associated with off-label vaccination, with the ultimate purpose of expanding the vaccine spectrum. We analyzed ambispectively ninety-four children under 12 months of age who received YF or HA off-label vaccines. The YF vaccine was administered to children aged 6-9 months and those allergic to eggs (with a prior negative prick test and no history of anaphylaxis), while the HA vaccine was given to children aged 6-12 months. Overall, 71 (75%) were vaccinated against YF, and 57 (60%) against HA; 34 against both. All of them fulfilled off-label vaccination criteria. No immediate adverse effects (AEs) were reported. Mild common AEs (diarrhea, fever, or malaise) were experienced by 10.8% of patients within 10 days after vaccination. The rate of AEs associated with off-label vaccination for HA and YF is low, suggesting that the vaccines could be considered safe.

Risk Factors for Severe Seafood Allergy Among Adults in an Urban City in Vietnam.

Increasing seafood consumption is associated with more frequent reports of food allergy. Little is known about seafood allergy (SFA) among adults in Vietnam. We investigated the characteristics of individuals with SFA and the risk factors for severe SFA. A cross-sectional, web-based survey was conducted among individuals aged ≥ 18 years from universities in Ho Chi Minh City (Vietnam) between December 2021 and July 2022. The survey was based on a structured, validated questionnaire related to FA. Strict definitions of "convincing allergy" were used. Multivariate analysis was used to estimate the risk factors for severe SFA after adjusting for covariates. Data were analyzed using JASP (v.0.16.3) and SPSS (v.22.0). Totally, 1038 out of 2137 (48.57%) individuals completed the questionnaire, of whom 285 (27.46%) had reported SFA. Convincing SFA accounted for 20.13% (209/1038) of the cases, with convincing shellfish allergy being more common than fish allergy. Participants with comorbid shellfish and fish allergy had higher prevalence of atopic dermatitis, peanut/nut allergy, other food allergy, and cutaneous and upper airway symptoms compared to participants with shellfish allergy (p < 0.05). The spectrum of reactive seafood was diverse and characterized by local species. The age of symptom onset was most commonly during late childhood and adolescence, with most reactions persisting into adulthood. A history of anaphylaxis, comorbid peanut, and tree nut allergy, and ≥3 allergens were associated with severe SFA. Features of causative, coexisting seafood allergy, and risk factors for severe SFA were demonstrated, which can provide a reference for future studies.

Executive Summary of Clinical Practice Guideline on Immunotherapy for Inhalant Allergy.

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the therapeutic exposure to an allergen or allergens selected by clinical assessment and allergy testing to decrease allergic symptoms and induce immunologic tolerance. Inhalant AITis administered to millions of patients for allergic rhinitis (AR) and allergic asthma (AA) and is most commonly delivered as subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Despite its widespread use, there is variability in the initiation and delivery of safe and effective immunotherapy, and there are opportunities for evidence-based recommendations for improved patient care. The purpose of this clinical practice guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities and provide clinicians trustworthy, evidence-based recommendations regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. Specific goals of the guideline are to optimize patient care, promote safe and effective therapy, reduce unjustified variations in care, and reduce risk of harm. The target patients for the guideline are any individuals aged 5 years and older with AR, with or without AA, who are either candidates for immunotherapy or treated with immunotherapy for their inhalant allergies. The target audience is all clinicians involved in the administration of immunotherapy. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence-based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the guideline development group. It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. The statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experience and assessment of individual patients. The guideline development group made a strong recommendation that (Key Action Statement [KAS] 10) the clinician performing allergy skin testing or administering AIT must be able to diagnose and manage anaphylaxis. The guideline development group made recommendations for the following KASs: (KAS 1) Clinicians should offer or refer to a clinician who can offer immunotherapy for patients with AR with or without AA if their patients' symptoms are inadequately controlled with medical therapy, allergen avoidance, or both, or have a preference for immunomodulation. (KAS 2A) Clinicians should not initiate AIT for patients who are pregnant, have uncontrolled asthma, or are unable to tolerate injectable epinephrine. (KAS 3) Clinicians should evaluate the patient or refer the patient to a clinician who can evaluate for signs and symptoms of asthma before initiating AIT and for signs and symptoms of uncontrolled asthma before administering subsequent AIT. (KAS 4) Clinicians should educate patients who are immunotherapy candidates regarding the differences between SCIT and SLIT (aqueous and tablet) including risks, benefits, convenience, and costs. (KAS 5) Clinicians should educate patients about the potential benefits of AIT in (1) preventing new allergen sensitization, (2)reducing the risk of developing AA, and (3) altering the natural history of the disease with continued benefit after discontinuation of therapy. (KAS 6) Clinicians who administer SLIT to patients with seasonal AR should offer pre- and co-seasonal immunotherapy. (KAS 7) Clinicians prescribing AIT should limit treatment to only those clinically relevant allergens that correlate with the patient's history and are confirmed by testing. (KAS 9) Clinicians administering AIT should continue escalation or maintenance dosing when patients have local reactions to AIT. (KAS 11) Clinicians should avoid repeat allergy testing as an assessment of the efficacy of ongoing AIT unless there is a change in environmental exposures or a loss of control of symptoms. (KAS 12) For patients who are experiencing symptomatic control from AIT, clinicians should treat for a minimum duration of 3 years, with ongoing treatment duration based on patient response to treatment. The guideline development group offered the following KASs as options: (KAS 2B) Clinicians may choose not to initiate AIT for patients who use concomitant beta-blockers, have a history of anaphylaxis, have systemic immunosuppression, or have eosinophilic esophagitis (SLIT only). (KAS 8) Clinicians may treat polysensitized patients with a limited number of allergens.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Immunotherapy for Inhalant Allergy.

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the therapeutic exposure to an allergen or allergens selected by clinical assessment and allergy testing to decrease allergic symptoms and induce immunologic tolerance. Inhalant AITis administered to millions of patients for allergic rhinitis (AR) and allergic asthma (AA) and is most commonly delivered as subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Despite its widespread use, there is variability in the initiation and delivery of safe and effective immunotherapy, and there are opportunities for evidence-based recommendations for improved patient care. The purpose of this clinical practice guideline (CPG) is to identify quality improvement opportunities and provide clinicians trustworthy, evidence-based recommendations regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. Specific goals of the guideline are to optimize patient care, promote safe and effective therapy, reduce unjustified variations in care, and reduce the risk of harm.The target patients for the guideline are any individuals aged 5 years and older with AR, with or without AA, who are either candidates for immunotherapy or treated with immunotherapy for their inhalant allergies. The target audience is all clinicians involved in the administration of immunotherapy. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence-based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the guideline development group (GDG). It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. The statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experience and assessment of individual patients. The GDG made a strong recommendation that (Key Action Statement [KAS] 10) the clinician performing allergy skin testing or administering AIT must be able to diagnose and manage anaphylaxis. The GDG made recommendations for the following KASs: (KAS 1) Clinicians should offer or refer to a clinician who can offer immunotherapy for patients with AR with or without AA if their patients'symptoms are inadequately controlled with medical therapy, allergen avoidance, or both, or have a preference for immunomodulation. (KAS 2A) Clinicians should not initiate AIT for patients who are pregnant, have uncontrolled asthma, or are unable to tolerate injectable epinephrine. (KAS 3) Clinicians should evaluate the patient or refer the patient to a clinician who can evaluate for signs and symptoms of asthma before initiating AIT and for signs and symptoms of uncontrolled asthma before administering subsequent AIT. (KAS 4) Clinicians should educate patients who are immunotherapy candidates regarding the differences between SCIT and SLIT (aqueous and tablet) including risks, benefits, convenience, and costs. (KAS 5) Clinicians should educate patients about the potential benefits of AIT in (1) preventing new allergen sensitizations, (2) reducing the risk of developing AA, and (3) altering the natural history of the disease with continued benefit after discontinuation of therapy. (KAS 6) Clinicians who administer SLIT to patients with seasonal AR should offer pre- and co-seasonal immunotherapy. (KAS 7) Clinicians prescribing AIT should limit treatment to only those clinically relevant allergens that correlate with the patient's history and are confirmed by testing. (KAS 9) Clinicians administering AIT should continue escalation or maintenance dosing when patients have local reactions (LRs) to AIT. (KAS 11) Clinicians should avoid repeat allergy testing as an assessment of the efficacy of ongoing AIT unless there is a change in environmental exposures or a loss of control of symptoms. (KAS 12) For patients who are experiencing symptomatic control from AIT, clinicians should treat for a minimum duration of 3 years, with ongoing treatment duration based on patient response to treatment. The GDG offered the following KASs as options: (KAS 2B) Clinicians may choose not to initiate AIT for patients who use concomitant beta-blockers, have a history of anaphylaxis, have systemic immunosuppression, or have eosinophilic esophagitis (SLIT only). (KAS 8) Clinicians may treat polysensitized patients with a limited number of allergens.

Safety of EUS latex balloon use in patients with a latex allergy

Balloons are used in endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) to improve visualization. However, data on the safety of latex balloons in patients with latex allergies is limited, and non-latex alternatives can be costly. We aimed to investigate the safety of latex balloon use during EUS. A retrospective review was conducted at a tertiary center between 2019-2022. Patients with reported latex allergies who underwent linear EUS were included. Baseline demographics, EUS characteristics, and adverse events were collected. The primary outcome was the rate of adverse events. 87 procedures were performed on 57 unique patients (mean age 65.3± 14.5 years). Latex balloons were used in 59 procedures (67.8%), with only 8 procedures (13.6%) using prophylactic medications. No adverse events occurred during or after procedures, regardless of medication use or history of anaphylaxis. The use of EUS latex balloons in patients with a latex allergy was associated with no adverse events.

Risk Factors for Refractory Anaphylaxis in the Emergency Department

Background: Anaphylaxis is a serious allergic reaction that has a rapid onset and can result in death. Identifying the factors that trigger anaphylaxis and increase its severity is important for preventing refractory anaphylaxis (RA). In this study, we aimed to determine the factors associated with an increased risk of developing RA. Preventive measures to reduce the frequency and intensity of anaphylactic events are essential to provide the best care for allergic patients. Aggravating factors can trigger or increase the severity of anaphylaxis and therefore need to be recognized and avoided.Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data of 1378 patients over the age of 18 who were diagnosed with anaphylaxis in our clinic between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2024. We divided the patients into two groups: anaphylaxis and RA. We evaluated the patients’ clinical characteristics in the ED, demographic information, and elicitors that caused anaphylaxis.Results: Of the 1384 anaphylaxis patients included in the study, 46 (3.3%) were diagnosed as RA. We determined that having a history of anaphylaxis is the most important determinant of the increased risk of RA. Having a history of anaphylaxis (OR: 2.87, 95% CI: 1.71–5.72), beta‐blockers/ACEI use (OR: 2.47, 95% CI: 1.71–5.42), IV contrast agent (OR: 2.33, 95% CI: 1.64–5.39), and low blood pressure or related symptoms (OR: 2.34, 95% CI: 1.67–5.43) were more frequently associated with severe reactions.Conclusion: We found that having low blood pressure or related symptoms, a known history of anaphylaxis, beta‐blockers/ACEI, and IV contrast agent are risk factors for RA. To prevent mortality and morbidity in patients with this risk factor, early interventions such as rapidly repeating epinephrine doses and rapid fluid resuscitation should not be avoided.