Anaphylaxis treatment: current barriers to adrenaline auto‐injector use

Anaphylaxis is a life‐threatening condition that is increasing in prevalence in the developed world. There is universal expert agreement that rapid intramuscular injection of adrenaline is life‐saving and constitutes the first‐line treatment of anaphylaxis. The unpredictable nature of anaphylaxis and its rapid progression makes necessary the availability of a portable emergency treatment suitable for self‐administration. Thus, anaphylaxis treatment guidelines recommend that at‐risk patients are provided with adrenaline auto‐injectors (AAIs). Despite these clear recommendations, current emergency treatment of anaphylaxis continues to be inadequate in many cases. The aim of this review is to highlight the barriers that exist to the use and availability of AAIs and that prevent proper management of anaphylaxis. In addition, we review the characteristics of all AAIs that are presently available in Europe and the USA and discuss the need for regulatory requirements to establish the performance characteristics of these devices.     

Recommendations for the management of food allergies in a preschool/childcare setting and prevention of anaphylaxis

Food allergy and anaphylaxis occur most commonly in children under five, the majority of whom attend preschool and early childcare. Children under five differ significantly from school-aged children, as do their care environments, yet specific strategies for managing food allergies in early childcare settings are generally lacking in existing guidelines and legislation. In this review, we outline the scope of the problem, the unique challenges encountered in the preschool environment and existing policy and legislation in Australia, the US, Canada and the UK. We outline the management guidelines and resources available from specialist societies, and the evidence base for specific management strategies including voluntary versus legislative approaches, staff training and education, banning of foods, and availability of multiple and generic adrenaline auto-injectors. We call for greater uniformity and consistency of policy in regards to the recognition and management of infants and children with food allergy in the preschool environment and specific programmes and policies tailored to this environment.     

Serum basal tryptase may be a good marker for predicting the risk of anaphylaxis in children with food allergy

A relationship between serum basal tryptase (sBT) levels, anaphylactic reactions, and clonal mast cell diseases was shown recently in adults with venom allergy, but the relationship between sBT levels and IgE‐mediated food allergy and anaphylaxis is not known. In this study, children with food allergy (FA; n = 167) were analyzed in two groups according to the presence (FA+/A+; n = 79) or absence of anaphylaxis (FA+/A?; n = 88) and were compared with a control group (n = 113). Median sBT values in FA+/A+, FA+/A?, and control groups were 4.0 ng/ml (2.8–5.8), 3.6 (2.3–4.5), and 3.3 (2.4–4.4), respectively (P = 0.022). sBT measurements higher than the cutoff values of 5.7 and 14.5 were associated with 50% and 90% predicted probabilities, respectively, of moderate to severe anaphylaxis. Children with tree nuts/peanut allergies had significantly higher levels of sBT than children with milk and egg allergy (P = 0.022). Results suggest that sBT levels may predict moderate to severe anaphylaxis in children with food allergy, which may follow a particular pattern according to the food allergy phenotype.     

Identifying and managing patients at risk of severe allergic reactions to food: Report from two iFAAM workshops

Food allergy affects a small but important number of children and adults. Much of the morbidity associated with food allergy is driven by the fear of a severe reaction and fatalities continue to occur. Foods are the commonest cause of anaphylaxis. One of the aims of the European Union‐funded Integrated Approaches to Food Allergen and Allergy Risk Management (iFAAM) project was to improve the identification and management of children and adults at risk of experiencing a severe reaction. A number of interconnected studies within the project have focused on quantifying the severity of allergic reactions; the impact of food matrix, immunological factors on severity of reactions; the impact of co‐factors such as medications on the severity of reactions; utilizing single‐dose challenges to understand threshold and severity of reactions; and community studies to understand the experience of patients suffering real‐life allergic reactions to food. Associated studies have examined population thresholds and co‐factors such as exercise and stress. This paper summarizes two workshops focused on the severity of allergic reactions to food. It outlines the related studies being undertaken in the project indicating how they are likely to impact on our ability to identify individuals at risk of severe reactions and improve their management.     

The management of anaphylaxis in childhood: position paper of the European academy of allergology and clinical immunology

Anaphylaxis is a growing paediatric clinical emergency that is difficult to diagnose because a consensus definition was lacking until recently. Many European countries have no specific guidelines for anaphylaxis. This position paper prepared by the EAACI Taskforce on Anaphylaxis in Children aims to provide practical guidelines for managing anaphylaxis in childhood based on the limited evidence available. Intramuscular adrenaline is the acknowledged first-line therapy for anaphylaxis, in hospital and in the community, and should be given as soon as the condition is recognized. Additional therapies such as volume support, nebulized bronchodilators, antihistamines or corticosteroids are supplementary to adrenaline. There are no absolute contraindications to administering adrenaline in children. Allergy assessment is mandatory in all children with a history of anaphylaxis because it is essential to identify and avoid the allergen to prevent its recurrence. A tailored anaphylaxis management plan is needed, based on an individual risk assessment, which is influenced by the child's previous allergic reactions, other medical conditions and social circumstances. Collaborative partnerships should be established, involving school staff, healthcare professionals and patients' organizations. Absolute indications for prescribing self-injectable adrenaline are prior cardiorespiratory reactions, exercise-induced anaphylaxis, idiopathic anaphylaxis and persistent asthma with food allergy. Relative indications include peanut or tree nut allergy, reactions to small quantities of a given food, food allergy in teenagers and living far away from a medical facility. The creation of national and European databases is expected to generate better-quality data and help develop a stepwise approach for a better management of paediatric anaphylaxis.     

Peanut-induced anaphylaxis in children and adolescents: Data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry

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.

     

EAACI Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Guidelines: managing patients with food allergy in the community

The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Guidelines, managing patients with food allergy (FA) in the community, intend to provide guidance to reduce the risk of accidental allergic reactions to foods in the community. This document is intended to meet the needs of early‐childhood and school settings as well as providers of non‐prepackaged food (e.g., restaurants, bakeries, takeaway, deli counters, and fast‐food outlets) and targets the audience of individuals with FA, their families, patient organizations, the general public, policymakers, and allergists. Food allergy is the most common trigger of anaphylaxis in the community. Providing children and caregivers with comprehensive information on food allergen avoidance and prompt recognition and management of allergic reactions are of the utmost importance. Provision of adrenaline auto‐injector devices and education on how and when to use these are essential components of a comprehensive management plan. Managing patients at risk of anaphylaxis raises many challenges, which are specific to the community. This includes the need to interact with third parties providing food (e.g., school teachers and restaurant staff) to avoid accidental exposure and to help individuals with FA to make safe and appropriate food choices. Education of individuals at risk and their families, their peers, school nurses and teachers as well as restaurant and other food retail staff can reduce the risk of severe/fatal reactions. Increased awareness among policymakers may improve decision‐making on legislation at local and national level.     

Should children with a history of anaphylaxis to foods undergo challenge testing?

Background Data on the frequency of resolution of anaphylaxis to foods are not available, but such resolution is generally assumed to be rare. Objective To determine whether the frequency of negative challenge tests in children with a history of anaphylaxis to foods is frequent enough to warrant challenge testing to re‐evaluate the diagnosis of anaphylaxis, and to document the safety of this procedure. Methods All children (n=441) who underwent a double‐blind, placebo‐controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) between January 2003 and March 2007 were screened for symptoms of anaphylaxis to food by history. Anaphylaxis was defined as symptoms and signs of cardiovascular instability, occurring within 2 h after ingestion of the suspected food. Results Twenty‐one children were enrolled (median age 6.1 years, range 0.8–14.4). The median time interval between the most recent anaphylactic reaction and the DBPCFC was 4.25 years, range 0.3–12.8. Twenty‐one DBPCFCs were performed in 21 children. Eighteen of 21 children were sensitized to the food in question. Six DBPCFCs were negative (29%): three for cows milk, one for egg, one for peanut, and one for wheat. In the positive DBPCFCs, no severe reactions occurred, and epinephrine administration was not required. Conclusions This is the first study using DBPCFCs in a consecutive series of children with a history of anaphylaxis to foods, and no indications in dietary history that the food allergy had been resolved. Our study shows that in such children having specific IgE levels below established cut‐off levels reported in other studies predicting positive challenge outcomes, re‐evaluation of clinical reactivity to food by DBPCFC should be considered, even when there are no indications in history that anaphylaxis has resolved. DBPCFCs can be performed safely in these children, although there is a potential risk for severe reactions.     

Health-related quality of life in food and venom induced anaphylaxis and role of influencing factors

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.