Association between sites and severity of eczema and the onset of cow's milk and egg allergy in children.

BACKGROUND: Cow's milk allergy (CMA) and egg allergy (EA) are common and can reduce quality of life in children. Infantile eczema is a well-established risk factor for the onset of food allergy via transdermal sensitization; however, various types of infantile eczema have not yet been evaluated. Therefore, we assessed the association between CMA and EA and the sites and the severity of infantile eczema.
METHODS: This retrospective study was based on data from patients aged 2-19 years with atopic disease who were treated between July 2015 and March 2019 in a pediatric allergy clinic in Japan. Data regarding the history of IgE-mediated symptoms, eczema in the first year of life, parental history of atopic diseases, and infantile nutrition were collected.
RESULTS: A total of 289 patients were included in the study, of which 81 and 111 children had IgE-mediated CMA and EA, respectively. The rates of CMA and EA were higher in the children with infantile eczema than in those without (30% vs. 9% and 42% vs. 21%). The rate of CMA was also higher in children with eczema on the face. Significant differences were noted in the rate of CMA among children with facial eczema of exudation (adjusted odds ratio 2.398; P = 0.017) and papules (adjusted odds ratio 2.787; P = 0.008), using multivariate analysis.
CONCLUSION: The rate of IgE-mediated CMA was high among children with atopic disease having severe facial eczema during infancy.

Introduction

Food allergy is a frequently occurring disease in children in numerous countries [1]. Cow’s milk and egg are the most frequently reported antigens involved in food allergy, and the incidence of immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated cow’s milk allergy (CMA) and egg allergy (EA) are 2.3% and 2.5% in Europe, respectively [2]. Provided that cow’s milk is the primary source of infantile nutrition following breast milk, the presence of CMA greatly impairs the quality of life of children and their caregivers [3]. Egg is also a key nutrient which provides fatty acids, vitamins and proteins and benefit to child nutrition and brain development [4].

The reported incidence of food allergy ranges from 6% to 10% in Europe, the United States, and Japan [5-7]. The incidence of food allergy has increased to 8% over the past two decades, according to a survey conducted in 98 countries worldwide in the third phase of the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood [1]. Transdermal sensitization is a factor extensively involved in the development of food allergy [8], and interventions aimed at preventing eczema onset are expected to prevent transdermal sensitization [9, 10]. The establishment of effective prevention methods can limit the development of subsequent allergic diseases which is termed as “allergic march” [11].

Notably, early-onset and severe eczema in infancy were reported to be strongly associated with food allergy [8, 12]. However, to the best of our knowledge, no studies have evaluated the relationship of infantile eczema based on the sites involved in or specific types of food allergy. Therefore, the present study aimed to investigate the characteristics of infantile eczema in the first year of life that were associated with CMA onset among atopic children. Additionally, we also investigated the association between infantile eczema and EA.

Materials and methods

This study was retrospective in nature. We collected clinical data of pediatric patients 1) who had single or multiple atopic diseases; 2) who were aged 2–19 years; and 3) who visited the Pediatric Allergy Clinic in National Hospital Organization Nagoya Medical Center, Japan, between July 2015 and March 2019. According to the institutional review board, patients meeting these criteria were enrolled in the study unless their caregivers opted out of data sharing. Patients and caregivers did not provide informed written consent, but they could access detailed information of this study on the website. The study data were collected from electronic medical records with patient identifiers and included infantile eczema, previous immediate allergic symptoms to cow’s milk or egg, history of other atopic diseases, parental history of atopic diseases, parental history of smoking during pregnancy, ingestion of cow milk or its products during breastfeeding period and the first year of life, and age at solid food introduction.

The cow’s milk-specific and egg white-specific serum IgE antibody levels were measured using ImmunoCAP® test (Phadia AB, Uppsala, Sweden) to assess sensitization. In the current study, CMA was defined as positive for cow’s milk-specific IgE antibody ≥0.35 IU/ml accompanied with a history of immediate allergic symptoms after the intake of cow’s milk or its products. EA was also defined as immediate allergic symptom after intake of egg products with positive egg white-specific IgE antibody. We did not include any non-IgE-mediated symptoms to cow’s milk or egg.

Caregivers of all patients were asked whether their children presented with eczema in the first year of life and, if so, to indicate the affected sites including the head, face, trunk, and upper and lower limbs. In particular, data of the presence of symptoms including redness, dryness, exudation and/or papules on the face were collected for children with facial eczema.

The study analyses included a comparison of the differences in skin conditions and other factors between children with and without each specific food allergy. Pearson's chi-squared test was used for between-group comparisons and a logistic regression analysis was used to calculate odds ratios. Spearman’s correlation coefficient was calculated for correlation between different sites of infantile eczema. The multiplicity of tests was adjusted by Holm-Bonferroni correction. P-values of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. All statistical analyses were performed using SAS® statistical software version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA).

The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board of the National Hospital Organization Nagoya Medical Center (reference number 2019–008).

Results

A total of 289 children aged 2–19 years were included in the present study. In the study cohort, there were 81 (28%) children with CMA and 111(38%) with EA, and infantile eczema was confirmed in 84% of the children. The demographic data of the study cohort are shown in Table 1. No factor related to infantile nutrition, including sex, parental atopic disease history and parental smoking during pregnancy, were significantly associated with CMA and EA. Although there was no relationship between cow’s milk intake in infancy and CMA (P = 1.000), the proportion of children with cow’s milk intake after 7 months of age was significantly lower in patients with CMA than in those without CMA (11% vs. 37%, P < 0.001). The incidence of CMA was significantly higher in the group with longer breastfeeding periods. However, there was no statistical relationship with cow’s milk intake or breastfeeding period in patients with EA. More than 80% of the children were introduced to solid food between 5 and 7 months of age. None of the children with EA were introduced to solid food before four months of age. There was no significant high prevalence of CMA and EA among the age groups of solid food introduction.

Table 1

Characteristics of the study population.

Characteristics		n	cow's milk allergy		egg allergy
			prevalence (%)	P-value	prevalence (%)	P-value
Sex
	Female	118	28	1.000	34	0.219
	Male	171	28		42
Parental atopic disease
	Yes	252	30	0.218	40	0.185
	No	33	18		27
Atopic dermatitis
	Yes	134	27	0.696	43	0.185
	No	155	29		35
Bronchial asthma
	Yes	72	19	0.070	33	0.331
	No	217	31		40
Smoking during pregnancy
	Yes	93	28	1.000	38	0.896
	No	181	28		39
Cow's milk intake from 0 to 12 months of age
	Yes	174	27	1.000	41	0.886
	No	72	26		39
Cow's milk intake from 0 to 6 months of age
	Yes	167	28	0.879	41	0.783
	No	80	26		39
Cow's milk intake from 7 to 12 months of age
	Yes	85	11	<0.001	35	0.273
	No	152	37		43
Breastfeeding duration in infancy
	0 to 5	42	10	0.011	29	0.204
	6 to 11	38	29		47
	12 and more	179	31		41
Age of solid food introduction
	Before 4 months	8	13	0.598	0	-
	5–7 months	216	29		42
	≥8 months	33	24		33

More than 80% of the children had episodes of infantile eczema. Positive correlations were observed between all eczema site pairs. Strong correlation was found between the upper and lower limbs (correlation coefficient r = 0.83). Moderate correlations were found between the trunk and the upper limb (r = 0.69) and between the trunk and the lower limb (r = 0.65). The other pairs were weakly correlated (all r < 0.40).

CMA and EA incidence were higher in children with infantile eczema than in those without infantile eczema (30% vs. 9% and 42% vs. 21%, respectively) (Table 2). In univariate analysis of the affected sites, CMA incidence was significantly higher in children with eczema on the face than in those without these. However, the factor in CMA and EA was not significant in multivariate analysis (adjusted odd ratio 3.496, P = 0.078).The analysis of the characteristics of face eczema lesions revealed that the incidence of CMA was significantly higher in children with erythema than in those without erythema (33% vs. 20%, P = 0.043); in children with exudation than in those without exudation (40% vs. 22%, P = 0.011); and in those with papules than in those without papules (41% vs. 23%, P = 0.017). These differences in the proportion of CMA based on the presence of exudation and papules remained significant in the multivariate analysis (adjusted odd ratio, 2.398 and 2.787; P = 0.017 and P = 0.008, respectively) (Table 3). In the multivariate analysis, children with any face lesions did not have significantly different proportion of EA as compared to those without it.

Table 2

Association between food allergy and the site of infantile eczema.

Site		n	cow's milk allergy							egg allergy
			prevalence (%)	OR	95%CI	P-value	aOR†	95%CI	P-value	prevalence (%)	OR	95%CI	P-value	aOR†	95%CI	P-value
Any	Y	242	30	4.464	1.322–15.065	0.080	4.726	1.074–20.789	0.200	42	2.763	1.158–6.593	0.110	1.995	0.800–4.975	0.693
	N	34	9							21
Head	Y	120	33	1.652	0.959–2.845	0.282	1.495	0.833–2.684	0.711	43	1.205	0.734–1.978	1.000	0.99	0.583–1.678	1.000
	N	142	23							38
Face	Y	206	33	4.017	1.640–9.836	0.014	3.496	1.302–9.388	0.078	44	2.374	1.222–4.613	0.065	1.881	0.922–3.838	0.496
	N	56	11							25
Trunk	Y	154	29	1.180	0.678–2.051	0.862	1.132	0.622–2.061	1.000	41	1.088	0.658–1.799	1.000	1.024	0.599–1.751	1.000
	N	108	26							39
Upper limbs	Y	155	30	1.250	0.717–2.180	0.862	1.006	0.554–1.827	1.000	40	0.992	0.600–1.640	1.000	0.977	0.571–1.671	1.000
	N	107	25							40
Lower limbs	Y	154	31	1.385	0.792–2.422	0.759	1.124	0.615–2.054	1.000	38	0.837	0.507–1.381	1.000	0.738	0.430–1.266	1.000
	N	108	24							43

Y, yes; N, no; OR, odds ratio; aOR, adjusted odds ratio; CI, confidence interval

P- values were adjusted by Holm- Bonferroni correction.

†adjusted by gender, parental atopic disease, and cow's milk intake during first six months of life

Table 3

Association between food allergy and the lesion of facial eczema.

Eczema		n	cow's milk allergy							egg allergy
			prevalence (%)	OR	95%CI	P-value	aOR†	95%CI	P-value	prevalence (%)	OR	95%CI	P-value	aOR†	95%CI	P-value
Erythema	Y	155	33	1.985	1.108–3.557	0.043	1.647	0.880–3.082	0.237	46	1.919	1.143–3.222	0.055	1.751	1.007–3.044	0.189
	N	106	20							31
Xerosis	Y	93	30	1.214	0.693–2.127	0.498	1.137	0.625–2.068	0.675	44	1.281	0.766–2.143	1.000	1.226	0.716–2.100	1.000
	N	168	26							38
Exudation	Y	86	40	2.357	1.344–4.136	0.011	2.398	1.290–4.455	0.017	42	1.106	0.654–1.869	1.000	1.056	0.600–1.860	1.000
	N	175	22							39
Papule	Y	66	41	2.308	1.275–4.176	0.017	2.787	1.458–5.329	0.008	42	1.129	0.641–1.989	1.000	0.992	0.540–1.822	1.000
	N	195	23							40

Y, yes; N, no; OR, odds ratio; aOR, adjusted odds ratio; CI, confidence interval

P- values were adjusted by Holm- Bonferroni correction.

†adjusted by gender, parental atopic disease, and cow's milk intake during first six months of life

Discussion

The current retrospective study revealed that the presence of severe facial eczema in children with atopic disease was associated with the development of CMA, although there was no association between CMA and eczema at other sites.

The immature skin barrier at this age might underlie the relationship between infantile eczema and food allergy, because an immature skin barrier has been shown to enhance transdermal allergic sensitization and to contribute to the onset of food allergy [13].

In the current study, the proportion of CMA and EA was higher in children with infantile eczema. The maturity of skin barriers is determined by number of horny cells and transepidermal water loss (TEWL); higher TEWL is observed in infancy [14]. Conversely, the TEWL declines and the stratum corneum becomes thicker until the age of four years [14]; small and immature keratinocytes are associated with higher TEWL.

We also found that CMA was significantly more frequent in children with infantile eczema on the face. Next to the skin in the genital areas, face has the smallest horny cells and is one of the locations with highest TEWL in the entire body. In addition, the serine proteases kallikrein 5 and kallikrein 7, which are most abundant in cheek keratinocytes [15], are highly expressed in epidermal keratinocytes; these proteases promote the desquamation of the horny layer, thereby lowering the skin barrier. These factors might underlie much promotion of CMA by severe eczema with exudation or papules.

Cow’s milk and egg are the most common antigen involved in IgE-mediated food allergy in Japan [7]. Early intake of egg white and peanuts is recommended to prevent the development of IgE-mediated allergy [16]. In addition, the introduction of milk between four and six months of age was reported to prevent the onset of CMA [17]. Delaying the introduction of solid foods is not recommended for any children, even those with high allergy risk [18]. Most children in the present study had already been introduced to solid foods during the recommended periods before the first visit. Prior to the introduction of these recommendations, many caregivers had already started introducing the milk proteins before introducing the solid foods, which allowed the infants to have the opportunity to have contact with cow’s milk on their skin in early life. Severe eczema on the face associated with damaged keratinocytes might have enhanced the sensitisation to cow’s milk during infancy due to contact with the lesions. The results from previous studies suggest that earlier and more severe eczema in infancy might be due to more frequent food allergy [8, 12].

The current study showed that the rate of CMA was significantly lower in the children who were initiated on cow’s milk intake after 7 months of age; however, the rate of EA was not significantly different in these children. Children with CMA were expected to have fewer opportunities for cow’s milk intake, suggesting that most of the children developed CMA within 6 months of age because there was no correlation with cow’s milk intake in the first year of life. The presence of CMA might have also prolonged the breastfeeding period; therefore, the initiation of cow’s milk intake up to six months of age was included as a covariate in multivariate analysis.

The current study has several limitations. First, the retrospective study design did not allow us to determine the potential causal relationship between severe facial eczema and food allergy. We asked caregivers regarding the presence of eczema in the first year of life at the first visit when their children were 2 years or more of age. Therefore, most children were considered to have developed CMA after infantile eczema. Second, we did not include the age at introduction of egg as a covariate because this information was not included in the electronic medical records. Although most children in the current study had started solid food after 5 months of age, few children are introduced to egg products in early infancy. We cannot deny that the EA results could have been different with direct information about egg intake. However, we believe that it did not have a major effect on the CMA results. Third, we did not analyze details regarding the duration of breastfeeding or cow’s milk intake. The results revealed that the proportion of CMA was not dependent on the duration of breastfeeding or the cow’s milk intake at the age of six months, suggesting that the exclusive intake of breast milk, while not preventative against CMA, might prevent the overall development of atopic diseases. Finally, the current study cohort was limited to atopic children. It remains unclear whether the study findings can be expanded to the general population. However, we could observe specific relationship of eczema with CMA, but not with EA, in atopic children.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the present retrospective study revealed that the incidence of IgE-mediated CMA was higher in atopic children with severe facial eczema during the first year of life. The cause-effect relationship between severe facial eczema and CMA and the relationship with other food allergies require evidence from future birth cohort studies.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

16 Jul 2020

PONE-D-20-18145

Association between sites and severity of eczema and the onset of cow’s milk and egg allergy in children

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Futamura,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by 9/15/2020. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Linglin Xie

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. In ethics statement in the manuscript and in the online submission form, please provide additional information about the patient records used in your retrospective study. Specifically, please ensure that you have discussed whether all data were fully anonymized before you accessed them and/or whether the IRB or ethics committee waived the requirement for informed consent. If patients provided informed written consent to have data from their medical records used in research, please include this information.

3.

We note that you have indicated that data from this study are available upon request. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions.

In your revised cover letter, please address the following prompts:

a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially identifying or sensitive patient information) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent.

b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. Please see http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c181.long for guidelines on how to de-identify and prepare clinical data for publication. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories.

We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Major comments:

This article is a retrospective study on the association between CMA and EA and the sites and severity of infantile eczema. The study analyzed the data from patients aged 2 – 19 years with atopic disease and was treated in a pediatric allergy clinic. The data analysis has several limitations based on their experimental design, but the authors have clearly stated these limitations in their discussion. The data analyses support their conclusions that IgE-mediated CMA was positively correlated with severe facial eczema during infancy among children with atopic disease.

One major issue with the statistical analyses is that the author conducted multiple tests during their analyses. At the same time, they used a threshold P-value of 0.05 for significance, a typical cut-off when doing a single test. I would suggest that they use an adjusted p-value instead to control the false positive rate for this multiple test case.

Minor comments:

Line 204: It is not very clear why the limitation would allow the authors to observe the relationship they mentioned. Maybe the authors could make the expression clearer for the readers.

Reviewer #2: This manuscript describes a retrospective study about the relationship between eczema and cow milk or egg allergy in children. It demonstrated that the incidence of infantile eczema is higher in subjects with cow milk allergy, especially facial eczema. However, major concerns are also noticed as listed:

1. Language editing is recommended. Such as the usage of “whereas” in the Discussion section

2. Does the paper consider any potential correlation between different sites of infantile eczema? The paper mentioned 289 subjects are involved in the study, while according to Table 2, there seems to be a few subjects with multiple sites of infantile eczema.

3. In the Conclusion section, the paper states that the incidence of IgE-mediated CMA is higher in atopic children during their first year. However, in the “Material and methods” section, it says the collected data were from 2-19 years old patients. Meanwhile, I could not find any data mentioning any significant difference of CMA incidence during their first year.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Yushu Qin

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

14 Sep 2020

Reviewer #1: Major comments:

This article is a retrospective study on the association between CMA and EA and the sites and severity of infantile eczema. The study analyzed the data from patients aged 2 – 19 years with atopic disease and was treated in a pediatric allergy clinic. The data analysis has several limitations based on their experimental design, but the authors have clearly stated these limitations in their discussion. The data analyses support their conclusions that IgE-mediated CMA was positively correlated with severe facial eczema during infancy among children with atopic disease.

One major issue with the statistical analyses is that the author conducted multiple tests during their analyses. At the same time, they used a threshold P-value of 0.05 for significance, a typical cut-off when doing a single test. I would suggest that they use an adjusted p-value instead to control the false positive rate for this multiple test case.

RESPONSE: We appreciate your suggestion. We have adjusted the p-values in Table 2 and 3 by Holm-Bonferroni correction and have added the following sentence in the Materials and Methods section; “The multiplicity of tests was adjusted by Holm-Bonferroni correction.” We have also changed the text accordingly.

Minor comments:

Line 204: It is not very clear why the limitation would allow the authors to observe the relationship they mentioned. Maybe the authors could make the expression clearer for the readers.

RESPONSE: We agree that the meaning of that sentence was not clear for readers. We have changed it to “However, we could observe specific relationship of eczema with CMA, but not with EA, in atopic children.”

Reviewer #2: This manuscript describes a retrospective study about the relationship between eczema and cow milk or egg allergy in children. It demonstrated that the incidence of infantile eczema is higher in subjects with cow milk allergy, especially facial eczema. However, major concerns are also noticed as listed:

1. Language editing is recommended. Such as the usage of “whereas” in the Discussion section.

RESPONSE: We appreciate your recommendation. We have asked the language review to the company again and attach the certificate of English editing.

2. Does the paper consider any potential correlation between different sites of infantile eczema? The paper mentioned 289 subjects are involved in the study, while according to Table 2, there seems to be a few subjects with multiple sites of infantile eczema.

RESPONSE: We have analyzed the correlation between different sites of eczema. The results are presented below:

Spearman’s correlation coefficient of each site of infantile eczema (see the attached file)

We have added the following sentences in the Materials and Methods and in the Results; “Spearman’s correlation coefficient was calculated for correlation between different sites of infantile eczema” and “Positive correlations were observed between all eczema site pairs. Strong correlations were found between the upper and lower limbs (correlation coefficient r = 0.83) and moderate correlations were found between the trunk and the upper limb (r = 0.69) and between the trunk and the lower limb (r = 0.65). The other pairs were weakly correlated (all r < 0.40).”

3. In the Conclusion section, the paper states that the incidence of IgE-mediated CMA is higher in atopic children during their first year. However, in the “Material and methods” section, it says the collected data were from 2-19 years old patients. Meanwhile, I could not find any data mentioning any significant difference of CMA incidence during their first year.

RESPONSE: We have mentioned “Caregivers of all patients were asked whether their children presented with eczema in the first year of life” in the Materials and Methods. However, for clearer expression, we have changed the prior sentence to “The study data were collected from electronic medical records and included infantile eczema, previous immediate allergic symptoms…”

Submitted filename: Response_to_Reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.

7 Oct 2020

Association between sites and severity of eczema and the onset of cow’s milk and egg allergy in children

PONE-D-20-18145R1

Dear Dr. Futamura,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Linglin Xie

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

9 Oct 2020

PONE-D-20-18145R1

Association between sites and severity of eczema and the onset of cow’s milk and egg allergy in children

Dear Dr. Futamura:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Linglin Xie

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE