Journal of food allergy最新文献

Background: Current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and influenza vaccination-related knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors remain poorly understood among U.S. children with food allergy, and, particularly, those from non-Hispanic Black, Latinx, and lower-income backgrounds who bear a disproportionate burden by allergic disease. These data are especially relevant due to historical vaccine hesitancy in children with food allergy and an initial contraindication for those with severe allergic reactions to be vaccinated against COVID-19.

Objective: We sought to characterize COVID-19 and influenza vaccination-related knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors in a racially, ethnically, and socioeconomically diverse longitudinal cohort of caregiver-child dyads with immunoglobulin E-mediated food allergy.

Methods: We leveraged the National Institutes of Health supported FORWARD cohort, which consists of non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic/Latinx children diagnosed with food allergy to assess COVID-19 testing, vaccination, and influenza vaccine concern and utilization through administering a one-time institutional review board approved survey.

Results: Non-Hispanic Black participants were less likely than non-Hispanic White participants to be vaccinated (odds ratio [OR] 0.25 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.08-0.75]) or tested (OR 0.33 [95% CI, 0.13-0.85]) for COVID-19 and have the intention to vaccinate their children for influenza (OR 0.42 [95% CI, 0.18-0.98]). More than one-third of the participants reported that they believed that their child was at greater risk of complications from COVID-19 vaccination due to a food allergy. There were racial and/or ethnic disparities in the belief that COVID vaccines contain allergenic ingredients; more Hispanic/Latinx (37%) and Black (37%) than White (22%) participants reported this belief (p = 0.02).

Conclusion: The present findings of disparities in vaccination-related knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors across racial and/or ethnic, and household income strata suggested that initial reports of COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy within the population with food allergy may be further exacerbated by well-documented racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic differences in vaccine hesitancy, potentially leading to a greater infectious disease burden in these vulnerable populations. This highlights a need for targeted education and outreach among members of these communities who are living with food allergy.

Background: The prevalence of pediatric food allergies is increasing. Although pediatric residents are frontline providers for children with food allergies, little is known about pediatric residents' educational experiences and comfort with infant and toddler food allergy.

Methods: An anonymous online needs assessment survey was created and distributed to 64 residents in one residency program. The survey explored residents' knowledge sources, experience, and comfort in diagnosing, treating, and counseling patients with regard to food allergy and anaphylaxis.

Results: Fifty-one pediatric residents (79.7%) completed the survey. Pediatric residents who had formal engagement with allergy-trained clinicians had 8.27 times the odds (odds ratio 8.27 [95% confidence interval, 1.16-59.01]; p = 0.035) of feeling comfortable in treating infant and toddler anaphylaxis compared with those who did not feel comfortable.

Conclusion: These findings suggest that a standardized pediatric residency curriculum, in partnership with pediatric allergists, may present enhanced educational opportunities for pediatric residents.

Background: Legume and sesame are emerging food allergens. The utility of specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) testing to predict clinical reactivity to these allergens is not well described.

Objective: To describe clinical outcomes and sIgE in sesame and legume oral food challenges (OFC).

Methods: We performed a retrospective review of 74 legume and sesame OFCs between 2007 and 2017 at the Ann and Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago. Clinical data, OFC outcome, and sIgE to legume and sesame were collected. Receiver operating characteristic curves and logistic regression models that predicted OFC outcome were generated.

Results: Twenty-eight patients (median age, 6.15 years) passed legume OFC (84.9%), and 25 patients (median age, 5.91 years) passed sesame OFC (61.0%). The median sIgE to legume was 1.41 kUA/L and, to sesame, was 2.34 kUA/L. In patients with failed legume OFC, 60.0% had cutaneous symptoms, 20.0% had gastrointestinal symptoms, and 20.0% had anaphylaxis. Of these reactions, 80.0% were controlled with antihistamine alone and 20.0% required epinephrine. In patients for whom sesame OFC failed, 50.0% had cutaneous symptoms, 12.5% had gastrointestinal symptoms, and 37.50% had anaphylaxis. Of these reactions, 6.3% required epinephrine, 31.3% were controlled with diphenhydramine alone, and 63.50% required additional epinephrine or prednisone.

Conclusion: Most OFCs to legumes were passed and reactions to failed legume OFCs were more likely to be nonsevere. Sesame OFC that failed was almost twice as likely compared with legume OFC that failed, and reactions to sesame OFC that failed were often more severe. Sesame sIgE did not correlate with OFC outcome.

Food additives are naturally occurring or synthetic substances that are added to food to modify the color, taste, texture, stability, or other characteristics of foods. These additives are ubiquitous in the food that we consume on a daily basis and, therefore, have been the subject of much scrutiny about possible reactions. Despite these concerns, the overall prevalence of food additive reactions is 1-2%, with a minority of the wide variety of symptoms attributed to food-additive exposure being reproduced by double-blind placebo controlled challenges. Reactions can be broadly classified into either immunoglobulin E (IgE)- and non-IgE-mediated reactions, with natural additives accounting for most IgE-mediated reactions, and both natural and synthetic additives being implicated in the non-IgE-mediated reactions. Reactions that include asthma exacerbations, urticaria and/or angioedema, or anaphylaxis with ingestion of a food additive are most deserving of further allergy evaluation. In this article, we discussed the different types of adverse reactions that have been described to various food additives. We also reviewed the specifics of how to evaluate and diagnose a food additive allergy in a clinic setting.