Review article: safe amounts of gluten for patients with wheat allergy or coeliac disease

For both wheat allergy and coeliac disease the dietary avoidance of wheat and other gluten-containing cereals is the only effective treatment. Estimation of the maximum tolerated amount of gluten for susceptible individuals would support effective management of their disease. Literature was reviewed to evaluate whether an upper limit for gluten content in food, which would be safe for sufferers from both diseases, could be identified. When setting gluten limits for coeliac disease sufferers, the overall potential daily intake should be considered, while for wheat allergy limits should be based on single servings. For coeliac disease sufferers this limit should lie between 10 and 100 mg daily intake. For wheat allergy, lowest eliciting doses for children lie in the lower milligram range, while for adults they are most significantly higher. Gliadins (part of the gluten proteins) not only trigger coeliac disease, but are also major allergens in wheat allergy. Therefore, measurement of gliadins with validated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay methods provides an appropriate marker for assessing gluten and/or wheat protein contents in food. Available data suggest that a maximum gluten content for 'gluten-free' foods could be set, which protects both wheat allergy sufferers and coeliac patients.

Identification of oleosins as major allergens in sesame seed allergic patients

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of sesame allergy is increasing in European countries. Cases of severe allergy lack any evidence of specific immunoglobulin (Ig)Es by prick tests and CAPSystem-FEIA. The reasons for this negativity are unknown.

METHODS

In 32 patients displaying immediate symptoms such as anaphylactic shock, asthma, urticaria, angioedema, sesame allergy was diagnosed by double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) or convincing clinical history. However, 10 patients had negative prick tests and CapSystem-FEIA. The specificity of IgEs was further investigated by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), isoelectrofocalisation (IEF)-blotting, and sodium dodecyl sulfate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) blotting using total sesame extracts and purified fraction of oil bodies. Monospecific rabbit antibodies directed to two oleosin isoforms (15 and 17 kDa) were used.

RESULTS

By ELISA, white sesame seed extract allowed the detection of higher levels of IgE than brown sesame extract. In all sera, numerous bands binding IgEs were detected by IEF or SDS-PAGE. In reducing conditions, two bands (15-17 kDa), could be separated from 2S albumin. Oleosins, present in oil bodies fractions, were recognized by IgEs from all sera.

CONCLUSION

Oleosins are major allergens of sesame seeds and may be relevant to severe anaphylaxis. Falsely negative prick tests could be due to the lack of oleosins in presently available extracts, or to the fact that epitopes might be buried in the inner molecule. Detection tests currently used to identify sesame allergens based on sesame vicillins or other storage proteins could be insufficient for the detection of sesame seed contamination. Oleosins have been named Ses i 4 (17 kDa) and Ses i 5 (15 kDa), in accordance with the IUIS Nomenclature Committee.

Food-dependent exercise-induced anaphylaxis--update and current data

Exercise-induced anaphylaxis (EIA) is defined as the onset of allergic symptoms during, or immediately after, exercise, the clinical signs being various degrees of urticaria, angioedema, respiratory and gastrointestinal signs and even anaphylactic shock. Food-dependent exercise-induced anaphylaxis (FDEIA) introduces food in the syndrome and is revealed by a chronological sequence in which food intake, followed by exercise, induces symptoms after a varying period. When the food intake and the exercise are independent of each other, there are no symptoms. FDEIA is not very frequent. Identifying the culprit food allergen depends on the patient's eating habits. Crustaceans and wheat flour are the two commonest but others foods can be implicated. The patho-physiology of FDEIA has not been clearly established but it appears to result from degranulation of mast cells. As with food allergy, FDEIA diagnosis is based on interview, skin and biological tests and challenge. For the clinical signs of allergy, antihistamines, corticosteroids and epinephrine may be administered. Prophylaxis aims to prevent a recurrence; the patient should be given an emergency kit to deal with any recurrent episode. After the food allergen has been identified, it should be avoided for at least 4 to 5 hours before any exercise.

Wheat flour allergy: an entire diagnostic tool for complex allergy

Wheat proteins are involved in respiratory allergy, contact allergy and food allergy. Wheat allergens involve in these pathologies are well-known. However, establishment of wheat allergy diagnostic can be sometimes difficult on account of the complex allergenic composition of skin prick test (SPT) solutions of wheat flour. Therefore, we have studied specific IgE reactivity from patient sera with wheat food allergy, and characterized allergenic composition of wheat SPT solutions by specific antibodies directed to wheat allergens. The results showed that 20 of the 25 sera analyzed contained specific IgE to at least one wheat protein fraction. Among positive sera, 75% have specific IgE to water/salt soluble fraction, 85% to native gluten fractions and 65% to wheat isolate fraction. The results showed also that SPT solutions of wheat flour contained major food allergens from each allergenic fraction. These results highlighted the importance of using fractions, which constitute the whole wheat allergenic pattern, during specific IgE reactivity analyses. Moreover, we have observed that wheat isolate extract (results of food industrial process) contained not only modified allergens (neo-allergens) involve of specific food allergy to wheat isolate but also some native allergens involve in wheat food allergy. Thus, these results showed the importance to use, for wheat in vivo diagnosis together wheat SPT solutions (gluten extract and wheat isolate) in order to differentiate wheat food allergy to specific wheat isolate allergy.

The risk of systemic reactions to skin prick-tests using food allergens: CICBAA data and literature review

Prick-tests to foods are usually carried out as the first step in the diagnosis of food allergy. Severe anaphylaxis accounts for 4.9 % of allergies in children and occurs more frequently in adults, raising the possibility of systemic reactions to prick-tests in highly sensitized people. Several studies published in the literature have used commercial extracts. As for airborne allergens, concentrations causing a skin reaction of 15 mm do not present a risk of systemic reactions. Prick-tests to native foods--prick-in-prick tests--have been less extensively studied. The CICBAA1 data, from 1,138 food allergic patients of all ages, cover 34,905 prick-in-prick tests to foods. The wheal of these prick-tests has been regulary registered. The risk of systemic reactions can be evaluated at 0.008 %. There were no severe reactions and anti-histamine and corticosteroid therapy were sufficient. These results are similar to those of the large study in 2000 carried out by Devenney in neonates (0.005%). A review of the literature reveals only a few severe reactions in adults. The authors draw attention to the necessary precautions: temporary contra-indication for skin prick-tests in children and adults with grade 3 or 4 asthma, with particular attention to such foods as all kinds of nuts, fish, etc.

Intraoperative anaphylaxis: verba volant, scripta manent!

We describe a case of intraoperative gelatine-induced anaphylaxis whose diagnosis was delayed as the use of gelatine during surgical procedures was omitted for two times in patient's medical records. The subject is a 66-year old woman, with a negative medical history of atopy, food and drug allergy, with arterial hypertension on a course of beta-blockers and with bladder carcinoma requiring surgery. The patient had tolerated both general and local anaesthesia on several previous occasions. On the first occasion she experienced arterial fibrillation secondary to a severe episode of hypotension following local anaesthesia, while on a course of beta-blockers. On the second occasion she developed a very severe episode of hypotension followed by the outbreak of a generalised rash during general anaesthesia. The tryptase sera level was 109 mg/L one hour after the reaction had subsided, while the basal values were normal. On the third occasion the patient redeveloped severe hypotension and a generalised rash during general anaesthesia. The allergological work-up was negative, except for intradermal test with gelatine. A study of the intra-cellular cytokines in blood lymphocytes showed a production of IL4 from CD4+ lymphocytes after stimulation by gelatine. The patient underwent a successive surgical procedure without any adverse event.

Identification of IgE-binding epitopes on gliadins for patients with food allergy to wheat

BACKGROUND

Food allergy to wheat induces different symptoms as atopic eczema/dermatitis syndrome (AEDS), urticaria and more severe reactions as wheat-dependent exercise-induced anaphylaxis (WDEIA). Different gliadin classes are involved in this allergy but IgE-binding epitopes are known only on omega5-gliadins and for WDEIA cases.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to identify IgE-binding epitopes on several gliadin classes and for several patients with different symptoms and ages.

METHODS

Eleven sera were analysed by pepscan with overlapping synthetic peptides.

RESULTS

Sera from five patients with anaphylaxis, urticaria or WDEIA, displayed strong IgE-binding to sequential epitopes of the repetitive domains of alphabeta, gamma, omega2 or omega5-gliadins with two immunodominant epitopes on omega5-gliadin and a consensus motif of the type QQX1PX2QQ (X1 being L, F, S or I and X2 Q, E or G). One patient allergic to deamidated wheat proteins also had IgE to a repetitive peptide of gamma and omega2-gliadins of the type QPQQPFP. Sera from four patients with AEDS detected no linear epitopes on gliadins, despite the fact that they contained specific IgE to alpha, beta, gamma or omega-gliadins. One child with AEDS recognized cysteine-containing sequences in the nonrepetitive domains of alphabeta and gamma-gliadins.

CONCLUSION

B epitopes in wheat allergy were different from B epitopes of coeliac disease. Differences exist in IgE-binding epitopes between patients with food allergy to wheat. IgE from those suffering from WDEIA, anaphylaxis and urticaria detected sequential epitopes in the repetitive domain of gliadins whereas IgE from AEDS patients probably recognized conformational epitopes.

Identification of IgE-binding epitopes on gliadins for patients with food allergy to wheat

BACKGROUND

Food allergy to wheat induces different symptoms as atopic eczema/dermatitis syndrome (AEDS), urticaria and more severe reactions as wheat-dependent exercise-induced anaphylaxis (WDEIA). Different gliadin classes are involved in this allergy but IgE-binding epitopes are known only on omega5-gliadins and for WDEIA cases.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to identify IgE-binding epitopes on several gliadin classes and for several patients with different symptoms and ages.

METHODS

Eleven sera were analysed by pepscan with overlapping synthetic peptides.

RESULTS

Sera from five patients with anaphylaxis, urticaria or WDEIA, displayed strong IgE-binding to sequential epitopes of the repetitive domains of alphabeta, gamma, omega2 or omega5-gliadins with two immunodominant epitopes on omega5-gliadin and a consensus motif of the type QQX1PX2QQ (X1 being L, F, S or I and X2 Q, E or G). One patient allergic to deamidated wheat proteins also had IgE to a repetitive peptide of gamma and omega2-gliadins of the type QPQQPFP. Sera from four patients with AEDS detected no linear epitopes on gliadins, despite the fact that they contained specific IgE to alpha, beta, gamma or omega-gliadins. One child with AEDS recognized cysteine-containing sequences in the nonrepetitive domains of alphabeta and gamma-gliadins.

CONCLUSION

B epitopes in wheat allergy were different from B epitopes of coeliac disease. Differences exist in IgE-binding epitopes between patients with food allergy to wheat. IgE from those suffering from WDEIA, anaphylaxis and urticaria detected sequential epitopes in the repetitive domain of gliadins whereas IgE from AEDS patients probably recognized conformational epitopes.

Epidemiology of life-threatening and lethal anaphylaxis: a review

Severe anaphylaxis is a systemic reaction affecting two or more organs or systems and is due to the release of active mediators from mast cells and basophils. A four-grade classification routinely places 'severe' anaphylaxis in grades 3 and 4 (death could be graded as grade 5). Studies are underway to determine the prevalence of severe and lethal anaphylaxis in different populations and the relative frequencies of food, drug, latex and Hymenoptera anaphylaxis. These studies will also analyse the risk arising from the lack of preventive measures applied in schools (personalized management protocols) and from the insufficient use of self-injected adrenalin. Allergy-related conditions may account for 0.2-1% of emergency consultations. Severe anaphylaxis affects 1-3 per 10 000 people, but for the United States and Australia figures are even higher. It is estimated to cause death in 0.65-2% of patients, i.e. 1-3 per million people. An increased prevalence has been revealed by monitoring hospitalized populations by reference to the international classification of disease (ICD) codes. The relative frequency of aetiological factors of allergy (food, drugs, insects and latex) varies in different studies. Food, drug and Hymenoptera allergies are potentially lethal. The risk of food-mediated anaphylaxis can be assessed from the number of personalized management protocols in French schools: 0.065%. Another means of assessment may be the rate of adrenalin prescriptions. However, an overestimation of the anaphylaxis risk may result from this method (0.95% of Canadian children). Data from the literature leads to several possibilities. First, a definition of severe anaphylaxis should be agreed. Secondly, prospective, multicentre enquiries, using ICD codes, should be implemented. Moreover, the high number of anaphylaxis cases for which the aetiology is not identified, and the variation in aetiology in the published series, indicate that a closer cooperation between emergency specialists and allergists is essential.

Anaphylactic Reaction to Inulin: First Identification of Specific IgEs to an Inulin Protein Compound

BACKGROUND

A woman with a past history of allergy to artichoke presented with two episodes of immediate allergic reactions, one of which was a severe anaphylactic shock after eating two types of health foods containing inulin.

RESULTS

Dot blot assay techniques identified specific IgEs to artichoke, to yoghurt F, and to a heated BSA + inulin product. Dot blot inhibition techniques confirmed the anti-inulin specificity of specific IgE.

CONCLUSIONS

The absence of a positive reaction to an unheated milk-inulin mixture indicates the probability of protein-inulin binding. There is no cross-reactivity with the carbohydrates of the glycosylated allergens.

Prevalence of peanut sensitization in a population of 4,737 subjects--an Allergo-Vigilance Network enquiry carried out in 2002

A total of 4,737 people consulting allergologists were routinely tested for peanut sensitization. The study involved 84 allergologists in the Allergo-Vigilance Network over a period of 30-60 consecutive days. Investigation procedures were identical. Results classified subjects into four groups according to the clinical history and prick-tests to common inhalants: group 1: subjects suspected of having a food allergy; group 2: subjects with ongoing atopic disease; group 3: subjects with an underlying predisposition to atopy, as showed by one or more positive results to prick-tests with airborne allergens; group 4: non atopic subjects. The sensitization rates were 22.7%, 8.7%, 4%, and 0.4% respectively. Assuming that 25% of the French population is allergic the rate of sensitization to peanut in the general population should be between 1% and 2.5%. Considering a ratio of 3.3 between sensitization and clinical allergy as plausible, the prevalence of peanut allergy could be 0.3% to 0.75% of the French population. This figure is lower than that for the UK, the US and Canada (0.8% to 1.5%). The correlation between the data in this study and those from previous epidemiological studies validates the methodology used in this type of enquiry. One of the aims of the Allergo-Vigilance Network set up in 2001 is to collect data from a large number of people. We present here the results of a study carried out in 2002 by 84 allergologists in the Allergo-Vigilance Network. The primary aim was to assess the prevalence of peanut sensitization in the French population seeking treatment for various allergic disorders. The second objective was to determine whether there was any difference in risk of peanut sensitization in people with ongoing atopic disease, in those with an underlying predisposition to atopy (shown by positive prick-tests) and finally in non atopic people.

A consensus protocol for the determination of the threshold doses for allergenic foods: how much is too much?

BACKGROUND

While the ingestion of small amounts of an offending food can elicit adverse reactions in individuals with IgE-mediated food allergies, little information is known regarding these threshold doses for specific allergenic foods. While low-dose challenge trials have been conducted on an appreciable number of allergic individuals, a variety of different clinical protocols were used making the estimation of the threshold dose very difficult.

OBJECTIVE

A roundtable conference was convened to develop a consensus clinical protocol for low-dose challenge trials for the estimation of threshold doses for specific allergenic foods.

METHODS

In May 2002, 20 clinical allergists and other interested parties were invited to participate in a roundtable conference to develop consensus of the key elements of a clinical protocol for low-dose challenge trials.

RESULTS

A consensus protocol was developed. Patients with convincing histories of food allergies and supporting diagnostic evidence including past challenge trials or high CAP-RAST scores can be enrolled in low-dose challenge trials. Care must be taken with younger patients to assure that they have not outgrown their food allergy. An approach was developed for the medication status of patients entering such trials. Challenge materials must be standardized, for example, partially defatted peanut flour composed of equal amounts of the three major varieties of peanuts (Florunner, Virginia, Spanish). Challenge materials must be appropriately blinded with sensory evaluation used to confirm the adequacy of blinding. A double-blind, placebo-controlled design should be used for low-dose challenge trials. Low-dose challenge trials would begin at doses of 10 microg of the allergenic food and would continue with doses of 100 microg and 1 mg followed by specific higher doses up to 100 mg depending upon the expert judgement of the physician; even higher doses might be applied to assure that the patient is indeed reactive to the particular food. A 30-min time interval would be used between doses, and reactive doses would be expressed as both discrete and cumulative doses. The goal of each challenge would be to develop objective symptoms; trials should not be discontinued on the basis of subjective symptoms only. Statistically, a minimum of 29 patients would be enrolled in low-dose challenge trials for each allergenic food because 0 reactors out of 29 patients at a particular dose allow the conclusion that there is 95% certainty that 90% of allergic individuals will not react to that dose.

CONCLUSION

A consensus protocol was developed. Using this protocol, it will be possible to estimate threshold doses for allergenic foods, the lowest amount that elicits mild, objective symptoms in highly sensitive individuals.

Immediate hypersensitivity to chlorhexidine: literature review

Chlorhexidine, an antiseptic belonging to family of biguanides, is used extensively in the medical and surgical environment. Late onset hypersensitivity and eczema occur regularly and are well documented events. Conversely, immediate hypersensitivity, sometimes taking the form of acute urticaria that can result in anaphylactic shock, is rarer. These manifestations can occur during contact of the skin or mucosa with chlorhexidine. Out of the fifty case reports of chlorhexidine-related anaphylaxis published worldwide over the past ten years, fifteen occurred during surgery. Signs generally appear from 15 to 45 minutes after the start of anesthesia. If there is any suspicion of immediate allergy to chlorhexidine, prick-tests or even intradermal reaction (IDR) techniques are highly recommended. In the event of confirmed allergy to chlorhexidine, strict eviction is required, bearing in mind that over a hundred medicinal products currently on the French market contain chlorhexidine.

Severe food anaphylaxis: 107 cases registered in 2002 by the Allergy Vigilance Network

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of food allergies increases, relating to diet modifications. The consumption of new foods--exotic foods or foods originally used for animal feed, new proteins, neo allergens due to the use of new technologies and soon, Genetically Modified Foods--are in the spotlight.

OBJECTIVE

It is essential to develop a system of food allergy vigilance encompassing the full range of foods being consumed. Understanding this imperative leads logically to the suggestion of developing an allergy vigilance network taking advantage of the ongoing experience of allergists "on the ground".

METHODS

The French Allergy Vigilance Network is subscribed to by 302 allergologists (267 of whom are French). The aims of the Network are to record cases of severe anaphylaxis, to establish an epidemiological data bank from prospective multicenter studies, and to monitor the allergic risk from novel foods.

RESULTS

In 2002, 107 cases of severe anaphylaxis were recorded: anaphylactic shock--59.8% (one fatal), systemic reaction--18.7%, laryngeal angio-edema--15.9%, acute severe asthma--5.6% (one fatal). The main allergens identified were peanuts, nuts, shellfish, lupine flour and wheat flour. Action has been taken as a result: information by industry on inadequate labeling, withdrawal of wrongly labeled batches, and university hospital centers have been encouraged to establish the allergenic safety of their catering services.

CONCLUSION

Setting up such a network in other countries would lead to a significant advance in knowledge of the peculiarities of allergies relating to a wide variety of eating habits.

[Idiopathic anaphylaxis]

Idiopathic anaphylaxis (IA) has been described as a clinical entity by North America authors. The symptoms are brisk and relapsing episodes of angioedema, urticaria, bronchospasm, digestive symptoms, cardio-vascular collapse. Adults, females more than males, are mainly concerned. The seriousness is linked to laryngeal angioedema or to hypotension. Nevertheless lethality is rare. The first step of the procedure is aimed at the detection of several rare pathologies mimicking IA: the paroxystic capillary leak syndrome induced by a monoclonal gammapathy or by a release of cytokines, a carcinoid syndrome, cutaneous or visceral mastocytosis, hereditary or acquired deficiency of C1 esterase inhibitor, relapsing benign flushes and factitious anaphylaxis. These diseases being excluded, the diagnosis of anaphylaxis is established, and the diagnostic process searches for exceptional causes: food allergy elicited by unusual trophallergens, exercise-induced anaphylaxis, allergy to parasitic antigens, to inhalants, or hormonal allergy. The negativity of thorough investigations establishes the plausibility of IA. Several unconfirmed pathogenic hypotheses have been put forward: abnormal easiness to non specific release of mediators from mast cells and/or basophils, anti-IgE antibodies as a specific kind of auto-immunity, angiotensin II deficiency. Treatment of emergency relies on self-administration of epinephrine. A daily therapeutic regimen using corticosteroids and anti-H1 drugs is currently prescribed and can be efficient, but no randomized studies have asserted the validity of this management. The lack of immunological studies, contrasting with numerous clinical reports, questions whether IA is really an entity or solely anaphylaxis in search of unknown eliciting allergenic agents.