Food allergy in Primary Care Overview & update 2019 - Dr Heidi Northover Consultant Paediatrician

Page created by Eddie Hawkins
 
CONTINUE READING
Food allergy in Primary Care Overview & update 2019 - Dr Heidi Northover Consultant Paediatrician
Food allergy in Primary Care
   Overview & update 2019
                 Dr Heidi Northover
            Consultant Paediatrician
Food allergy in Primary Care Overview & update 2019 - Dr Heidi Northover Consultant Paediatrician
Intended learning outcomes
To gain a better understanding of;

    Food allergy in children, including nut & egg allergy.
    Risk of allergy, death due to allergy
    Most recent guidance on prescribing and use of adrenaline
     auto-injectors
    The use and abuse of allergy tests, when should siblings
     be tested?
Food allergy in Primary Care Overview & update 2019 - Dr Heidi Northover Consultant Paediatrician
Food allergy in Primary Care Overview & update 2019 - Dr Heidi Northover Consultant Paediatrician
The extent of the problem
UK is in top three countries in the world for the
highest incidence of allergy

   In the last decade, the cases of food allergies have doubled
   Number of hospitalisations caused by severe allergic
    reactions has increased 7-fold (EAACI, 2015)
   Nearly 20% of the UK adults consider themselves to have a
    food allergy or intolerance:
     •
Food allergy in Primary Care Overview & update 2019 - Dr Heidi Northover Consultant Paediatrician
Childhood allergy in context
       How common are allergies?
       How common is death from allergy?
       What is responsible for most childhood
        anaphylaxis?
       Most childhood deaths are associated with which
        allergen?
       Who is at highest risk of death due to allergy?
          Toddlers or teenagers?
Food allergy in Primary Care Overview & update 2019 - Dr Heidi Northover Consultant Paediatrician
Childhood allergy in context
       Allergies are common; 1:10 ‐15
       Death from allergies are rare; 1:10 million
       ~20% of adults believe they have a food allergy;
           only 2‐5% truly do
          10% children have raised IgE to peanut but only
          1% children have a clinical reaction when exposed
           to peanut
       Food accounts for 90% childhood anaphylaxis
Food allergy in Primary Care Overview & update 2019 - Dr Heidi Northover Consultant Paediatrician
Anaphylaxis &
deaths due to food allergy

   Majority of deaths associated with nuts, especially
    peanuts

   Combined mortality results from UK, USA &
    Sweden over 14 year period;

       46 deaths in children; 34 due to peanuts or tree
        nuts
       3/46 in children < 5 years of age, 1 to milk, 1 to egg
       43/46 > 5 years
Food allergy in Primary Care Overview & update 2019 - Dr Heidi Northover Consultant Paediatrician
Deaths due to food allergy
   Risk to all food allergic people:
     Risk   of death is 1.81 micromorts
   100+ times more likely to die in RTC than from food
    anaphylaxis
   Those < 19 years of age; higher risk group
     Risk   is 3.25 micromorts
   Still more likely to be murdered!
   Higher risk individuals;
     Asthma,    teenagers, previous history of anaphylaxis
Food allergy in Primary Care Overview & update 2019 - Dr Heidi Northover Consultant Paediatrician
Responsible foods
   In the UK, 9 foods are responsible for 90% of allergic
    reactions to food.
   Together, peanuts and tree nuts allergens account for 70-90%
    of reported fatal food-induced anaphylaxis.
   Around 2% of children are allergic to eggs and 2%-3% to cow's
    milk.
   After peanuts and tree nuts, milk is the third most common
    food allergen to cause life-threatening anaphylaxis.
   Approximately 40% of infants and young children with eczema
    suffer from food allergy.
   Natural history of food allergy varies with the food; is it
    transient or lifelong?
   Prevalence varies with exposure; sesame seed & birds’nests.
   Allergenicity varies with degree of cooking & processing of
    food.
Food allergy in Primary Care Overview & update 2019 - Dr Heidi Northover Consultant Paediatrician
Top 9 food allergens in UK; responsible
for 90% allergic reactions
  1.   Peanuts     Lifelong (>80%)
  2.   Tree nuts   Lifelong
  3.   Milk        Transient
  4.   Egg         Transient
  5.   Soya        Transient
  6.   Wheat       Transient
  7.   Finfish     Lifelong
  8.   Shellfish   Lifelong
  9.   Sesame      Lifelong (>80%)
Egg allergy
   Prevalence approximately 2% in children & 0.1% in adults
   First presentation usually in infancy; typically present within
    minutes of first apparent exposure to egg white:
        Urticaria and/or angio-oedema
        Vomiting
        Wheeze with rapid onset
   70% will out grow by 5 years of age
   Most reactions are mild, with facial urticaria only.
   More severe reactions with significant respiratory symptoms are
    less common
   75% of children with an egg allergy can eat plain cakes & biscuits
    containing egg
   History of more severe reaction to egg more likely to have
    persistent disease
   Should be referred to a specialist service
Vaccinations and egg allergy

   Cultured on derivatives of hens egg
        MMR
        Yellow fever
        Influenza
   Skin prick testing; poor predictive value as a screening tool
   Serum IgE testing
   Egg ladder; Introduction of well-cooked egg can help to induce
    immune tolerance
   https://www.bsaci.org/Guidelines/egg-allergy
   https://www.bsaci.org/Guidelines/MMREggRecommendations.pdf
The egg ladder

https://www.thh.nhs.uk/documents/_Patients/PatientLeaf
lets/paediatrics/allergies/PI414_Egg-Ladder-1.pdf
Nut allergy
Tree nuts   Peanut relatives = legumes

Brazil      Peas

Hazel       Beans

Almond      Soya (edamame)

Cashew      Lentils

Pistachio   Carob

Walnut      Liquorice

Macadamia
Peanut allergy    (Ground nuts, monkey nuts, arachis)

     Common (1:100 people)
     Most common cause of fatal & non fatal
      anaphylaxis to food
     Most allergies to peanut are lifelong
     Typically cause acute, IgE mediated reactions
      (Type 1 hypersensitivity)
     Other names for peanuts; BEWARE!
Management of food allergy

    Allergen avoidance
    Emergency treatment/action plans including
     antihistamine for all
        Cetirizine or desloratidine; non sedating,
         long acting
        Piriton; sedating, short acting
    Adrenaline auto injector pens; Epipen ®
     JEXT® Emerade®
Adrenaline auto-injectors (AAI)

   New BSACI guidance October 2016
   AAP update on use of adrenaline in anaphylaxis 2017

   Primary care guidelines
BSACI Joint statement;
              key recommendations

   Prescribe an AAIP as soon as possible after a suspected anaphylactic
    reaction
   Give training on how and when to use an AAIP
   Aim is to start treatment early, without waiting for help.
   Refer to an allergy specialist for a comprehensive risk assessment & a
    personal care plan, including the practical steps to minimise potential
    risks in everyday life.
   Sample action plans available on BSACI website
   Number of AAIPs
        BSACI has not made a blanket recommendation on the number of auto-injectors
         anyone should carry as this should be based on a risk assessment.
   Every patient should have a personally tailored management plan, which
    should determine whether one, two (or no) auto-injectors should be
    prescribed.
BSACI guideline:
Ewan et al Clinical and Experimental Allergy;
Volume 46, Issue 10 October 2016
American Academy of Pediatrics guidance (2017)

   Adrenaline/epinephrine is the first-line treatment for anaphylaxis.
   Use in patients with significant airway involvement or hypotension,
    occurring as part of an anaphylactic reaction.
   All other medications, including antihistamines and
    bronchodilators such as salbutamol, provide adjunctive treatment
    but do not replace adrenaline.
   Do not hesitate to use adrenaline for possible anaphylaxis, even in
    the absence of proof that patients' symptoms are the result of an
    allergic reaction.
   Delays in using adrenaline may lead to more severe and treatment
    resistant anaphylaxis.
   Adrenaline in appropriate doses is safe, there are no absolute
    contraindications to its use in anaphylaxis.

Adrenaline auto-injectors;
    who should have one?
   Those patients who should be considered for adrenaline auto-injectors
    include;
        Severe systemic reactions, where the allergen cannot be easily
         avoided
        Allergic to high-risk allergens, for example nuts with other risk
         factors (such as asthma), even if the reaction was relatively mild
        Who had a reaction in response to trace amounts of allergen/trigger
        Who cannot easily avoid the allergen
        With continuing risk of anaphylaxis (e.g. food-dependent exercise-
         induced)
        With idiopathic anaphylaxis or exercise induced anaphylaxis
        Strongly positive skin prick tests
        With significant co-factors e.g. asthma requiring brown inhalers
        Teenagers (high risk group)
        (Parents insist)
How much should be used?
   JEXT/Epipen Junior = 150 ug
   JEXT/Epipen = 300 ug
   In a healthcare setting; up to 500 ug in a teenager/adult
   Adrenaline should be given in the muscle of the mid-
    outer thigh because that helps achieve peak efficacy
    and is safer than injecting a bolus intravenously.
   Emerade

https://www.sps.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Summary-of-the-key-
differences-between-3-presentations-of-adrenaline-prefilled-syringes-
final.pdf
Emerade
   In the UK, BNF/NICE recommend 500 mcg in adults and
    children over 12 years for self-administration
   UK Resuscitation guidelines for healthcare providers
    recommend 500 mcg for most patients above 12 years.
   Emerade is available in a 150, 300 and 500 mcg dose (5-10
    ug/kg)
   Longer needle
   Longer shelf life of 30 months
   No upper temperature limits
   Remove needle cap and inject
   Keep in place for 5 seconds
   Rub area
   Call 999
   Lie down unless difficulty breathing
   The prescriber must take responsibility for training

Training videos
    https://www.emerade-bausch.co.uk/patient/how-to-use-emerade

    http://www.epipen.co.uk/ hcp/supporting-patients/

    https://hcp.jext.co.uk/about-jext/video-demonstrations/
Management of anaphylaxis

   Call for help
   Lie patient flat
   Raise legs
   Oxygen
   Adrenaline im
   Then fluid bolus
   Chlorphenamine
   Hydrocortisone iv
Lily aged 2 years
   Mother made home made
    brownies containing hazelnuts and
    Nutella (hazelnut spread)
   Eaten Ferrero Rocher chocolates
    before without problems
   Ate a brownie for breakfast, went
    to school
                                           Gave her Piriton – little effect
 Came home and felt ‘hot’ – mum
                                     Repeated Piriton – little effect
  took her uniform off – covered in
  red itchy blotchy rash             Went to bed- rash improved
                                      overnight
 No complaints from school
                                     Ate another brownie the next
                                      morning – rash returned
                                           Referred ? Hazelnut allergy

     History – what was unusual?
What was unusual?

   Eaten hazelnuts before?
   Was able to go to school?
   Rash appeared over a period of hours?
   Felt hot when she came home?
   Piriton had little effect?
   Rash improved overnight?
   She ate another brownie the next morning?
Allergy testing

    Can I have some allergy tests doctor?
    Jack has peanut allergy. Can his baby sister
     be tested too?
Allergy testing
Reminder
      10% children have raised IgE to peanut but only
      1% children have a clinical reaction when exposed to peanut
      SPT to egg: poor predictive value as a screening tool
Using and interpreting allergy tests

 Allergy   tests provide supportive evidence
 Should  only be used if there is evidence from
  the history to suggest the responsible
  allergen
 They   should not be used as a screening test
 Used incorrectly there is a significant risk of
  misinterpretation of the results/misdiagnosis
 SPT  and SSIgE give a prediction of likelihood
  of reaction not severity
Using allergy tests with a clinical history

                          Likelihood of clinical allergy from specific IgE

Likelihood of clinical   Low (15 Ku/L)
allergy from history                         15 Ku/L)

High, eg urticaria &     Possible allergy    Probable allergy      ALLERGY
wheeze on more than
one exposure

Intermediate eg urticaria Possible allergy   Possible allergy      Probable allergy
on one exposure

Low eg non IgE           No allergy             Possible allergy   Possible allergy
symptoms
NICE recommendations
   Do not carry out allergy testing without first taking
    an allergy focused clinical history.
   Based on the results of the allergy-focused clinical
    history, if IgE mediated allergy is suspected:
   Offer a skin prick test and/or blood tests for specific
    IgE antibodies to the suspected foods and likely co-
    allergens.
   Interpret the results of tests in the context of
    information from the allergy-focused clinical history.

   Do not use atopy patch testing or oral food
    challenges to diagnose IgE-mediated food allergy in
    primary care or community settings
   Do not use allergy testing ‘to screen’ for allergy.
Allergy tests; which are valid in the
diagnosis of food allergy?

  Skin prick tests
  Oral food challenge
  Hair analysis
  VEGA testing
  Serum specific IgE
  IgG4
  York test
  Patch testing
Allergy tests; which are valid in the
diagnosis of food allergy?
  Skin prick tests
  Oral food challenge
  Hair analysis
  VEGA testing
  Serum specific IgE
  (RAST, Immunocap)
  IgG4
  York test
  Patch testing
Evidence based allergy tests

    Skin prick tests; cheap, instant results, almost any food
     can be tested (prick- prick)
    Serum specific IgE; “RAST” or Immunocap; one blood test,
     risk free, more expensive, delayed results
    Gold standard: Oral food challenge; but labour intensive
     and slow
      Avoid antihistamines for 5 days before
      Pin-head size amount
      Pea size amount
      Double every 15 min until normal portion tolerated
      Observe for 2 hrs after food has been eaten

    Patch testing; only useful for contact dermatitis
Cost of allergy tests per person
(8 allergens)

              Skin prick test*   Blood test**
Test cost     £1.70              £96.00
Staff cost    £44.49             £30.97
Consumables   £1.08
Total cost    £47.27             £126.97
Molecular allergy or component
resolved diagnosis (MA or CRD)
   Maps the allergen sensitization of a patient at a molecular level;
    increased accuracy in allergy diagnosis & prognosis.
   Currently more than 130 allergenic molecules commercially available
    for in vitro testing.
   Enables three key aspects of allergy diagnosis:
        Resolves genuine versus cross-reactive sensitization in poly-sensitized
         patients, thereby improving the understanding of triggering allergens.
        Assessment of, in selected cases, the risk of severe, systemic versus mild,
         local reactions in food allergy, thereby reducing unnecessary anxiety for
         the patient and the need for food challenge testing.
        Identifies patients and triggering allergens for specific immunotherapy
         (SIT).
Use of Ara h1, 2 & 3 in peanut allergy
Component resolved specific IgE testing for peanut allergy more
accurately identifies patients with peanut allergy than the routine use
of peanut extract–specific IgE serology or skin prick testing.

Among the peanut component proteins, IgE antibodies to Ara h2, and to
a much lesser extent Ara h1, Ara h3, Ara h6, and Ara h9, have been
identified as the major driver of clinically relevant allergy.

Sensitization to Ara h2 is found in up to 90% of patients with clinical
peanut allergy. Ara h2 in particular, is considered a risk marker for
severe allergic reactions.

In a patient with positive IgE test to peanut, prognosis can be very
different depending on whether the sensitization is linked to a Bet v 1-
like protein (major allergen component of white birch pollen), a seed
storage protein (Ara h2), or an lipid-transfer protein (LTP).
Peanut FC & IgE tests

 RAST – specific peanut IgE

 Positive IgE to team
 The team is dangerous
 The team is a threat
 13 players or components to the threat
 Is one more dangerous & significant than the others?
Component resolved diagnosis
                                        RAST/SSIgE
                                        13 players or components to
                                        the threat
                                        Is one more dangerous &
                                        significant than the others?

Component resolved diagnosis tells us that ….
Only 4 players are a real threat
The others may look like a threat (perhaps one is the twin
brother of a star player in another team?) or be
insignificant/harmless
San Antonio – testing the siblings
 of food allergic children
Conclusions:
   False-positive results could lead to food avoidance, which
    can increase the risk of developing an allergy down the
    road.* LEAP
   Many children are sensitized to a food, so they will have a
    positive test result, but that does not mean they have a
    true food allergy (peanuts)
   The presence of sIgE reflects allergic sensitization
    and not necessarily clinical allergy.
Chicago Family Cohort food allergy study

   478 children with confirmed food allergy, and 642 of their siblings.
   Caregivers completed detailed screening histories for both the
    allergic child and the siblings.
   Skin prick testing (SPT) & serum specific IgE (sIgE) on siblings
   Cow’s milk, egg white, soybean, wheat, peanut, walnut, sesame
    seed, fish mix, and shellfish mix.
Results
   34% of the siblings had no sensitization to foods and no clinical
    symptoms
   53% had sensitization to food (potential for false positive in > 50%)
   13% had an actual food allergy
LEAP study- Gideon Lack et al

   Introduction of peanut-containing foods into the diets of
    high-risk infants (early onset atopic disease eg egg allergy or
    severe eczema) aged between 4 and 11 months.

Found
   Early, sustained consumption of peanut products was
    associated with a substantial & significant decrease in the
    development of peanut allergy in high-risk infants.
   Conversely, peanut avoidance was associated with a greater
    frequency of clinical peanut allergy than was peanut
    consumption.
   Delaying introduction can be associated with an increased
    risk for peanut allergy.
Lily– what was unusual?
   Had eaten hazelnuts before without problems
   Rash appeared over hours – not typical of type 1 reactions
   Piriton didn’t seem to help
So what next?
 SPT to hazelnut (positive is >3mm greater than control)
    Negative control 0 mm, positive control 8 mm
    Hazelnut 0 mm
 Serum specific IgE – total = 780 Ku/L
    Hazelnut, brazil, cashew, walnut, pistachio < 0.35
     (negative
Physical signs of allergic disease
Physical signs of allergic disease

 Dermatographism;
   Form of physical urticaria to touch & pressure.
   Unknown cause
 Allergic shiners
 Dennie Morgan folds
 Lick eczema
 Allergic mannerisms
    Allergic salute
    Side swipe
Any questions?
You can also read