Food-Induced Anaphylaxis: Data From the European Anaphylaxis Registry.

BACKGROUND: Food is one of the most common elicitors of anaphylaxis, with an increasing incidence over recent years. OBJECTIVES: To characterize elicitor-specific phenotypes and identify factors enhancing the risk or severity of food-induced anaphylaxis (FIA). METHODS: We analyzed data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry applying an age- and sex-matched analysis of associations (Cramer's V) for single food triggers and calculated odds ratios (ORs) for severe FIA. RESULTS: We identified 3,427 cases of confirmed FIA showing an age-dependent elicitor ranking (for children: peanut, cow's milk, cashew, and hen's egg; and for adults: wheat flour, shellfish, hazelnut, and soy). The age- and sex-matched analysis revealed defined symptom patterns for wheat and cashew. Wheat-induced anaphylaxis was more frequently associated with cardiovascular symptoms (75.7%; Cramer's V = 0.28) and cashew-induced anaphylaxis with gastrointestinal symptoms (73.9%; Cramer's V = 0.20). Furthermore, concomitant atopic dermatitis was slightly associated with anaphylaxis to hen's egg (Cramer's V = 0.19) and exercise was strongly associated with anaphylaxis to wheat (Cramer's V = 0.56). Additional factors influencing the severity were alcohol intake in wheat anaphylaxis (OR = 3.23; CI, 1.31-8.83) and exercise in peanut anaphylaxis (OR = 1.78; CI, 1.09-2.95). CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that FIA is age-dependent. In adults, the range of elicitors inducing FIA is broader. For some elicitors, the severity of FIA seems to be related to the elicitor. These data require confirmation in future studies considering a clear differentiation between augmentation and risk factors in FIA.

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.

Risk Factors and Characteristics of Biphasic Anaphylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is an immediate hypersensitivity reaction. However, a biphasic course with the second onset of symptoms can occur hours after the initial phase. Little is known about the causes of biphasic anaphylaxis making the identification of patients at risk difficult. OBJECTIVE: To identify factors predisposing for biphasic anaphylaxis for the better understanding of these reactions. METHODS: Data from the Anaphylaxis Registry (from 11 countries) including 8736 patients with monophasic and 435 biphasic anaphylaxis were analyzed. RESULTS: The rate of biphasic reactions in this large cohort was 4.7%. The identified risk factors were reaction severity (grade III/IV vs grade II: odds ratio [OR] = 1.34; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1-1.62); multiorgan involvement; skin, gastrointestinal, severe respiratory, and cardiac symptoms; anaphylaxis caused by peanut/tree nut (OR = 1.78; 95% CI: 1.38-2.23) or an unknown elicitor (OR = 1.96; 95% CI: 1.41-2.72); exercise as a cofactor (OR = 1.44; 95% CI: 1.17-1.78); chronic urticaria as a comorbidity (OR = 2.12; 95% CI: 1.19-3.78); a prolonged interval between the contact with the elicitor and start of primary symptoms (OR for >30 vs <30 min: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.08-1.76); and antihistamine treatment (OR = 1.52; 95% CI: 1.14-2.02). CONCLUSION: A biphasic course of anaphylaxis occurs more frequently in severely affected patients with multiorgan involvement. However, we identified multiple additional predictors, suggesting that the pathogenesis of biphasic reactions is more complex than being a rebound of a severe primary reaction.

Secondary prevention measures in anaphylaxis patients: Data from the anaphylaxis registry.

BACKGROUND: Patients with a history of anaphylaxis are at risk of future anaphylactic reactions. Thus, secondary prevention measures are recommended for these patients to prevent or attenuate the next reaction. METHODS: Data from the Anaphylaxis Registry were analyzed to identify secondary prevention measures offered to patients who experienced anaphylaxis. Our analysis included 7788 cases from 10 European countries and Brazil. RESULTS: The secondary prevention measures offered varied across the elicitors. A remarkable discrepancy was observed between prevention measures offered in specialized allergy centers (84% of patients were prescribed adrenaline autoinjectors following EAACI guidelines) and outside the centers: Here, EAACI guideline adherence was only 37%. In the multivariate analysis, the elicitor of the reaction, age of the patient, mastocytosis as comorbidity, severity of the reaction, and reimbursement/availability of the autoinjector influence physician's decision to prescribe one. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the low implementation of guidelines concerning secondary prevention measures outside of specialized allergy centers, our findings highlight the importance of these specialized centers and the requirement of better education for primary healthcare and emergency physicians.

Refractory Anaphylaxis: Data From the European Anaphylaxis Registry.

Refractory anaphylaxis (unresponsive to treatment with at least two doses of minimum 300 µg adrenaline) is a rare and often fatal hypersensitivity reaction. Comprehensive data on its definition, prevalence, and risk factors are missing. Using the data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry (11,596 cases in total) we identified refractory anaphylaxis cases (n = 42) and analyzed these in comparison to a control group of severe anaphylaxis cases (n = 4,820). The data show that drugs more frequently elicited refractory anaphylaxis (50% of cases, p < 0.0001) compared to other severe anaphylaxis cases (19.7%). Cases elicited by insects (n = 8) were more often due to bees than wasps in refractory cases (62.5 vs. 19.4%, p = 0.009). The refractory cases occurred mostly in a perioperative setting (45.2 vs. 9.05, p < 0.0001). Intramuscular adrenaline (as a first line therapy) was administered in 16.7% of refractory cases, whereas in 83.3% of cases it was applied intravenously (significantly more often than in severe anaphylaxis cases: 12.3%, p < 0.0001). Second line treatment options (e.g., vasopression with dopamine, methylene blue, glucagon) were not used at all for the treatment of refractory cases. The mortality rate in refractory anaphylaxis was significantly higher (26.2%) than in severe cases (0.353%, p < 0.0001). Refractory anaphylaxis is associated with drug-induced anaphylaxis in particular if allergens are given intravenously. Although physicians frequently use adrenaline in cases of perioperative anaphylaxis, not all patients are responding to treatment. Whether a delay in recognition of anaphylaxis is responsible for the refractory case or whether these cases are due to an overflow with mast cell activating substances-requires further studies. Reasons for the low use of second-line medication (i.e., methylene blue or dopamine) in refractory cases are unknown, but their use might improve the outcome of severe refractory anaphylaxis cases.

New trends in anaphylaxis.

This review presents the current trends in anaphylaxis management discussed at the fourth International Network for Online-Registration of Anaphylaxis (NORA) conference held in Berlin in April 2017. Current data from the anaphylaxis registry show that Hymenoptera venom, foods, and pharmaceutical drugs are still among the most frequent triggers of anaphylaxis. Rare triggers include chicory, cardamom, asparagus, and goji berries. A meta-analysis on recent trends in insect venom anaphylaxis demonstrated for the first time that, although data on the efficacy of insect venom immunotherapy is limited, the occurrence of severe reactions upon repeated sting events can be prevented and patients' quality of life improved. Molecular diagnostics of insect venom anaphylaxis have significantly improved diagnostic sensitivity and specificity. Self-treatment of anaphylaxis is of great importance. Recent data from the anaphylaxis registry show an increase (from 23% in 2012 to 29% in 2016) in the use of adrenaline as recommended in the guidelines. A survey on the implementation of guidelines conducted among the centers reporting to the anaphylaxis registry highlights the extent to which the guideline has been perceived and implemented. Reports on a variety of cases in the anaphylaxis registry illustrate the diversity of this potentially life-threatening reaction. Component-resolved diagnostics can help to specify sensitization profiles in anaphylaxis, particularly in terms of the risk for severe reactions. Recent studies on anaphylaxis awareness show that training methods are effective; nevertheless, target groups and learning methods need to undergo further scientific investigation in coming years.

Anaphylaxis in children and adolescents: The European Anaphylaxis Registry.

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis in children and adolescents is a potentially life-threatening condition. Its heterogeneous clinical presentation and sudden occurrence in virtually any setting without warning have impeded a comprehensive description. OBJECTIVE: We sought to characterize severe allergic reactions in terms of elicitors, symptoms, emergency treatment, and long-term management in European children and adolescents. METHODS: The European Anaphylaxis Registry recorded details of anaphylaxis after referral for in-depth diagnosis and counseling to 1 of 90 tertiary allergy centers in 10 European countries, aiming to oversample the most severe reactions. Data were retrieved from medical records by using a multilanguage online form. RESULTS: Between July 2007 and March 2015, anaphylaxis was identified in 1970 patients younger than 18 years. Most incidents occurred in private homes (46%) and outdoors (19%). One third of the patients had experienced anaphylaxis previously. Food items were the most frequent trigger (66%), followed by insect venom (19%). Cow's milk and hen's egg were prevalent elicitors in the first 2 years, hazelnut and cashew in preschool-aged children, and peanut at all ages. There was a continuous shift from food- to insect venom- and drug-induced anaphylaxis up to age 10 years, and there were few changes thereafter. Vomiting and cough were prevalent symptoms in the first decade of life, and subjective symptoms (nausea, throat tightness, and dizziness) were prevalent later in life. Thirty percent of cases were lay treated, of which 10% were treated with an epinephrine autoinjector. The fraction of intramuscular epinephrine in professional emergency treatment increased from 12% in 2011 to 25% in 2014. Twenty-six (1.3%) patients were either admitted to the intensive care unit or had grade IV/fatal reactions. CONCLUSIONS: The European Anaphylaxis Registry confirmed food as the major elicitor of anaphylaxis in children, specifically hen's egg, cow's milk, and nuts. Reactions to insect venom were seen more in young adulthood. Intensive care unit admissions and grade IV/fatal reactions were rare. The registry will serve as a systematic foundation for a continuous description of this multiform condition.