Literature DB >> 25900644

Objective eliciting doses of peanut-allergic adults and children can be combined for risk assessment purposes.

R J B Klemans1, W M Blom2, F C van Erp3, L J N Masthoff1, C M Rubingh2, C K van der Ent3, C A F M Bruijnzeel-Koomen1, G F Houben2, S G M A Pasmans1,4, Y Meijer3, A C Knulst1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To improve food labelling strategies, information regarding eliciting doses (EDs) and the effect of patient characteristics on these EDs is necessary.
OBJECTIVE: To establish EDs for objective and subjective symptoms and analyse the effect of sensitization levels and other patient characteristics on threshold distribution curves (TDCs).
METHODS: Threshold data from 100 adults and 262 children with a positive food challenge were analysed with interval-censoring survival analysis (ICSA) and fitted to a TDC from which EDs could be extracted. Possible influencing factors were analysed as covariates by ICSA. A hazard ratio (HR) was calculated in case of a significant effect.
RESULTS: TDCs for both objective and subjective symptoms were significantly different between adults and children (P < 0.001). Objective ED05 values, however, were comparable (2.86 mg peanut protein in adults and 6.38 mg in children). Higher levels of sIgE to Ara h 2 and peanut extract were associated with a larger proportion of patient groups reacting to a dose increase with objective symptoms (adults and children) or subjective symptoms (adults, in children a trend). Age had a similar effect in children (HR 1.05 for objective symptoms and 1.09 for subjective symptoms). Gender had no effect on TDCs. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Subjective and objective TDCs were different between adults and children, but objective ED05 values were comparable, meaning that threshold data from children and adults can be combined for elaboration of reference doses for risk assessment. Higher sIgE levels to Ara h 2 and peanut extract were associated with a larger proportion of both patient groups to react to a certain dose increase.
© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  eliciting dose; food challenge; peanut allergy; risk assessment; threshold distribution curve

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25900644     DOI: 10.1111/cea.12558

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Exp Allergy        ISSN: 0954-7894            Impact factor:   5.018


  4 in total

1.  Effect of sleep deprivation and exercise on reaction threshold in adults with peanut allergy: A randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Shelley Dua; Monica Ruiz-Garcia; Simon Bond; Stephen R Durham; Ian Kimber; Clare Mills; Graham Roberts; Isabel Skypala; James Wason; Pamela Ewan; Robert Boyle; Andrew Clark
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2019-07-15       Impact factor: 10.793

2.  Using data from food challenges to inform management of consumers with food allergy: A systematic review with individual participant data meta-analysis.

Authors:  Nandinee Patel; Daniel C Adelman; Katherine Anagnostou; Joseph L Baumert; W Marty Blom; Dianne E Campbell; R Sharon Chinthrajah; E N Clare Mills; Bushra Javed; Natasha Purington; Benjamin C Remington; Hugh A Sampson; Alexander D Smith; Ross A R Yarham; Paul J Turner
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2021-02-09       Impact factor: 10.793

3.  A Food, a Bite, a Sip: How Much Allergen Is in That?

Authors:  Melanie Kok; Astrid Compagner; Ina Panneman; Aline Sprikkelman; Berber Vlieg-Boerstra
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2021-02-10       Impact factor: 5.717

Review 4.  Using Component-Resolved Diagnostics in the Management of Peanut-Allergic Patients.

Authors:  F C van Erp; R J B Klemans; Y Meijer; C K van der Ent; A C Knulst
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Allergy       Date:  2016-04-07
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.