Search

Importance: Children experiencing anaphylaxis at school may lack access to a personal epinephrine device, prompting recent legislation permitting undesignated (eg, non-student specific) stock epinephrine autoinjector units at school. However, epinephrine device costs vary, and the cost-effectiveness of undesignated school stock epinephrine is uncharacterized to date., Objective: To define value-based strategies for undesignated school stock epinephrine programs., Design, Setting, and Participants: Markov simulations of the Chicago Public Schools system were used over extended time horizons to model 2 school stock epinephrine autoinjector policies to provide access for at-risk students. The dates of the data used in the analysis were September 2017 to June 2018 (the 2017-2018 school year)., Main Outcomes and Measures: This study compared the following 3 strategies: no school undesignated epinephrine supply, school undesignated supplemental epinephrine supply (supplemental model), and school undesignated universal epinephrine supply (universal model). The base-case model assumed a 10-fold reduced fatality risk with having undesignated stock epinephrine units available vs not having undesignated stock epinephrine units available. Costs of school stock epinephrine units available for acquisition by schools were evaluated from a societal perspective. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and total epinephrine acquisition expenses were calculated., Results: Based on Markov simulations of the Chicago Public Schools system (371 382 students), the cost was $107 816 (95% CI, $107 382-$108 250) for no school undesignated epinephrine supply compared with $108 160 (95% CI, $107 725-$108 595) for the supplemental model and $100 397 (95% CI, $99 979-$100 815) for the universal model. Undesignated stock epinephrine improved outcomes, with 26.869 (95% CI, 26.841-26.897) QALYs accrued as the model concluded compared with 26.867 (95% CI, 26.839-26.896) QALYs for the strategy without undesignated stock epinephrine. When comparing supplemental model stock epinephrine to the strategy without undesignated devices, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was high at $268 811 per QALY in the base-case simulation. However, the cost of the supplemental model fell below $100 000 per QALY when the annual undesignated epinephrine acquisition costs did not exceed $338 per school (compared with stock epinephrine unavailability). The universal model dominated all others and was associated with significant cost savings ($7419 per student at risk who would otherwise be prescribed an individual school epinephrine supply)., Conclusions and Relevance: Undesignated school stock epinephrine is cost-effective at device acquisition costs not exceeding $338 per school per year, although a universal model vs a supplemental model is associated with superior health and economic outcomes.

Peanut is an allergenic legume that can cross-react with other plant-based foods, notably other legumes and tree nuts. Peanut-allergic individuals can be both cosensitized and coallergic to such items, requiring foresight when eliciting a clinical history of a reaction, in the diagnostic evaluation of such allergies, and in the counseling of patients as to food avoidances after a diagnosis is made. Legume allergens belong to the Fabaceae family and encompass the cupin, prolamin, PR-10, and lipid transfer protein families, which mediate cross-sensitization including that between peanut and tree nut. Among legumes, the most common patterns of clinical cross-reactivity are between peanut and lupine, peanut and soy, as well as chickpea and lentil, though this is highly dependent on geography and prevalence of these foods in the diet. Issues of cross-sensitization may exist between peanut and certain tree nuts, as well as among tree nuts though such patterns do not always result in clinically relevant allergy. Molecular diagnostic testing may be a future tool to help parse out the aforementioned patterns, but oral food challenges are still the gold standard for accurate diagnosis. Although potential desensitization treatments have emerged for peanut allergy, these have not been developed for other legumes and most tree nuts, and desensitization to peanut has not proven to have an effect on legume cross-sensitization., (Copyright © 2018 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Food allergy is estimated to affect approximately 8% of children in the USA. This is a disease without any known treatment or cure and, for some, a disease that can be quite severe, even life-threatening. While recent advances in potential treatment have made remarkable strides, with two food-targeted immunotherapy products now in phase III trials, perhaps the biggest gains in the field have come in the advent of potential preventative strategies to avoid the development of food allergy in high-risk individuals. There have been multiple, randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) performed in the past 5 years that have demonstrated significant risk reduction from early allergen introduction. These include two trials for early peanut introduction and five trials for early egg introduction in the first year of life. The results indicate that primary prevention of food allergy through early allergen introduction may represent a strategy that could potentially avert tens of thousands of children from becoming food allergic. In support of the data for peanut, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases recently sponsored an addendum to the 2010 food allergy guidelines, specifically recommending peanut be introduced in both high- and standard-risk infants to reduce the risk of developing peanut allergy. To date, no formal recommendations have been made for egg, however. This review will focus on the latest evidence supporting early introduction as a strategy to prevent food allergy, as well as on practical aspects for its successful implementation.

Background: Food allergy is an important public health problem because it affects children and adults, can be severe and even life-threatening, and may be increasing in prevalence. Beginning in 2008, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, working with other organizations and advocacy groups, led the development of the first clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and management of food allergy. A recent landmark clinical trial and other emerging data suggest that peanut allergy can be prevented through introduction of peanut-containing foods beginning in infancy., Objectives: Prompted by these findings, along with 25 professional organizations, federal agencies, and patient advocacy groups, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases facilitated development of addendum guidelines to specifically address the prevention of peanut allergy., Results: The addendum provides 3 separate guidelines for infants at various risk levels for the development of peanut allergy and is intended for use by a wide variety of health care providers. Topics addressed include the definition of risk categories, appropriate use of testing (specific IgE measurement, skin prick tests, and oral food challenges), and the timing and approaches for introduction of peanut-containing foods in the health care provider's office or at home. The addendum guidelines provide the background, rationale, and strength of evidence for each recommendation., Conclusions: Guidelines have been developed for early introduction of peanut-containing foods into the diets of infants at various risk levels for peanut allergy., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Food allergy is an important public health problem because it affects children and adults, can be severe and even life-threatening, and may be increasing in prevalence. Beginning in 2008, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, working with other organizations and advocacy groups, led the development of the first clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and management of food allergy. A recent landmark clinical trial and other emerging data suggest that peanut allergy can be prevented through introduction of peanut-containing foods beginning in infancy., Objectives: Prompted by these findings, along with 25 professional organizations, federal agencies, and patient advocacy groups, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases facilitated development of addendum guidelines to specifically address the prevention of peanut allergy., Results: The addendum provides 3 separate guidelines for infants at various risk levels for the development of peanut allergy and is intended for use by a wide variety of health care providers. Topics addressed include the definition of risk categories, appropriate use of testing (specific IgE measurement, skin prick tests, and oral food challenges), and the timing and approaches for introduction of peanut-containing foods in the health care provider's office or at home. The addendum guidelines provide the background, rationale, and strength of evidence for each recommendation., Conclusions: Guidelines have been developed for early introduction of peanut-containing foods into the diets of infants at various risk levels for peanut allergy., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Food allergy is an important public health problem because it affects children and adults, can be severe and even life-threatening, and may be increasing in prevalence. Beginning in 2008, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, working with other organizations and advocacy groups, led the development of the first clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and management of food allergy. A recent landmark clinical trial and other emerging data suggest that peanut allergy can be prevented through introduction of peanut-containing foods beginning in infancy., Objectives: Prompted by these findings, along with 25 professional organizations, federal agencies, and patient advocacy groups, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases facilitated development of addendum guidelines to specifically address the prevention of peanut allergy., Results: The addendum provides three separate guidelines for infants at various risk levels for the development of peanut allergy and is intended for use by a wide variety of health care providers. Topics addressed include the definition of risk categories, appropriate use of testing (specific IgE measurement, skin prick tests, and oral food challenges), and the timing and approaches for introduction of peanut-containing foods in the health care provider's office or at home. The addendum guidelines provide the background, rationale, and strength of evidence for each recommendation., Conclusions: Guidelines have been developed for early introduction of peanut-containing foods into the diets of infants at various risk levels for peanut allergy., (Published 2017. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.)

Background: Food allergy is an important public health problem because it affects children and adults, can be severe and even life-threatening, and may be increasing in prevalence. Beginning in 2008, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, working with other organizations and advocacy groups, led the development of the first clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and management of food allergy. A recent landmark clinical trial and other emerging data suggest that peanut allergy can be prevented through introduction of peanut-containing foods beginning in infancy., Objectives: Prompted by these findings, along with 25 professional organizations, federal agencies, and patient advocacy groups, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases facilitated development of addendum guidelines to specifically address the prevention of peanut allergy., Results: The addendum provides 3 separate guidelines for infants at various risk levels for the development of peanut allergy and is intended for use by a wide variety of health care providers. Topics addressed include the definition of risk categories, appropriate use of testing (specific IgE measurement, skin prick tests, and oral food challenges), and the timing and approaches for introduction of peanut-containing foods in the health care provider's office or at home. The addendum guidelines provide the background, rationale, and strength of evidence for each recommendation., Conclusions: Guidelines have been developed for early introduction of peanut-containing foods into the diets of infants at various risk levels for peanut allergy., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Recommendations for the timing of introducing major food allergens, such as peanut, into the diet of at-risk infants have undergone major changes in the past decade. The most substantial modification has been a shift toward advice that delaying beyond 4 to 6 months does not prevent and might actually increase the risk of food allergy. The Learning Early About Peanut (LEAP) study published last year provided strong evidence that early peanut introduction with regular ingestion has a potentially dramatic benefit. Although there is little current doubt of the effectiveness of early peanut introduction, many unanswered questions remain. Previous guidelines defined infants at risk as those with a first-degree relative with allergic disease, whereas the LEAP study defined high risk as severe eczema or egg allergy. The LEAP study chose to screen infants but did not have a comparison group randomized without screening. In the following case-based discussion, we explore the complexities of LEAP implementation for the practicing allergist. These include nonuniformity in the literature for defining at-risk infants, difficulties in assessing eczema severity objectively, variable adherence to current guidelines, proposed peanut screening methods contrasting with existing food allergy guidelines to not routinely screen before ingestion, unclear interpretation of positive test results if screened, risks of screening extending to foods not studied in the LEAP study, and uncertainties about the optimal dose and duration of peanut once introduced., (Copyright © 2016 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)