Cutaneous adverse food reactions in cats: retrospective evaluation of 17 cases in a dermatology referral population (2001-2011)

Comparison of intradermal and serum testing for environmental allergen-specific immunoglobulin E determination in a laboratory colony of cats with naturally acquired atopic syndrome

BACKGROUND

Allergen testing is used to select antigens included in the desensitisation vaccine. Intradermal skin test (IDT) is the gold standard in cats, yet allergen-specific immunoglobulin (Ig)E serological testing (ASIS) is often used. Feline data are lacking regarding the agreement between IDT and ASIS results.

HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES

The first objective of the study was to establish a colony of cats with naturally acquired feline atopic syndrome (FAS). Further objectives were to define their hypersensitivity disorder to detail the allergen tests results, and to assess similarity between the allergen tests.

ANIMALS

Thirty-five cats with FAS and 10 control cats.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Enrolled cats went through a five phase-screening and quarantine process before joining the colony. An elimination diet trial was performed on all FAS cats. ASIS and IDT were consecutively performed on all cats under sedation.

RESULTS

Reactions to 34 allergens were compiled for the 45 cats. Global sensitivity and specificity of ASIS were 34.7% and 78.9%, respectively. Only flea (ICC = 0.26, p = 0.040) and Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (ICC = 0.48, p < 0.001) allergens had a significant intraclass correlation (weak agreement). Two FAS cats had negative tests including one cat with a concomitant food allergy.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study depicts the first reported colony of cats with naturally acquired FAS. This is the first feline study to compare and show the poor agreement between allergen tests with a panel of 34 allergens. This colony also harbours two cats with FAS with negative allergen tests. These may represent the first described cats with an intrinsic form of atopic syndrome.

2023 AAHA Management of Allergic Skin Diseases in Dogs and Cats Guidelines

These guidelines present a systematic approach to diagnosis, treatment, and management of allergic skin diseases in dogs and cats. The guidelines describe detailed diagnosis and treatment plans for flea allergy, food allergy, and atopy in dogs and for flea allergy, food allergy, and feline atopic skin syndrome in cats. Management of the allergic patient entails a multimodal approach with frequent and ongoing communication with the client. Obtaining a comprehensive history is crucial for diagnosis and treatment of allergic skin diseases, and the guidelines describe key questions to ask when presented with allergic canine and feline patients. Once a detailed history is obtained, a physical examination should be performed, a minimum dermatologic database collected, and treatment for secondary infection, ectoparasites, and pruritus (where indicated) initiated. The process of diagnosing and managing allergic skin disease can be prolonged and frustrating for clients. The guidelines offer recommendations and tips for client communication and when referral to a dermatologist should be considered, to improve client satisfaction and optimize patient outcomes.

Clinical signs and diagnosis of feline atopic syndrome: detailed guidelines for a correct diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Feline atopic syndrome (FAS) describes a spectrum of hypersensitivity disorders characterised by highly diverse clinical presentations including skin, gastrointestinal and respiratory systems. Among these disorders is feline atopic skin syndrome (FASS), in which hypersensitivity is typically associated with environmental allergens, although food allergy may coexist. Involvement of other organ systems (e.g. asthma) also may occur. Because of its highly heterogeneous clinical presentation, diagnosis of FASS can be challenging.

OBJECTIVES

A subgroup of the International Committee on Allergic Diseases of Animals was tasked to summarise the most current information on the clinical presentations of FASS and to develop diagnostic guidelines.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Online citation databases and abstracts from international meetings were searched for publications related to feline allergic conditions. These were combined with expert opinion where necessary.

RESULTS

A total of 107 publications relevant to this review were identified. Compilation of these data enabled development of a detailed description of the clinical features of FASS and development of guidelines focusing on systematic elimination of other skin conditions with similar clinical characteristics. As allergen tests are frequently used by dermatologists to support a clinical diagnosis of FASS, a brief review of these methodologies was also performed.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE

In a similar way to atopic dermatitis in dogs, FASS is a clinical diagnosis based on the presence of compatible clinical signs and exclusion of other diseases with similar clinical features. Elimination or exclusion of fleas/flea allergy, other parasites, infections and food allergy is mandatory before reaching a diagnosis of FASS.

Critically appraised topic on adverse food reactions of companion animals (9): time to flare of cutaneous signs after a dietary challenge in dogs and cats with food allergies

BACKGROUND

At this time, elimination diets followed by oral food challenges (OFCs) represent the "gold standard" for diagnosing skin-manifesting food allergies (FA) in dogs and cats. Regrettably, there is no clear consensus on how long one should wait for clinical signs to flare after an OFC before diagnosing or ruling-out a FA in a dog or a cat.

RESULTS

We searched two databases on October 23, 2019 to look for specific information on the time for a flare of clinical signs to occur during OFCs after elimination diets in dogs and cats with skin-manifesting FAs. Altogether, we reviewed the study results of nine papers that included 234 dogs and four articles containing data from 83 cats. As multiple OFCs could be done in the same patient and not all animals included were subjected to an OFC, we were able to compile 315 and 72 times to flare (TTF) after an OFC in dogs and cats, respectively. When regrouping all cases together, about 9% of dogs and 27% of cats exhibited a flare of clinical signs in the first day after an OFC; 21% of dogs and 29% of cats had such relapse by the end of the second day. The time needed for 50 and 90% of dogs to exhibit a deterioration of clinical signs (TTF50 and TTF90) was 5 and 14, respectively; in cats, these times were 4 and 7 days, respectively. By 14 days after an OFC, nearly all food-allergic patients from both species had had a relapse of clinical signs. These results are limited by the likely under-reporting of flares that occur on the first day immediately following an OFC, the time in which IgE-mediated acute allergic reactions typically develop.

CONCLUSION

Veterinary clinicians performing an OFC need to wait for 14 and 7 days for more than 90% of dogs and cats with a skin-manifesting FA to have a flare of clinical signs, respectively.

What is in commercial cat and dog food? The case for mercury and ingredient testing

Commercial pet foods should be safe for long-term feeding. However, recent recalls and lawsuits have eroded public trust in pet food companies and products. Recent studies have identified high concentrations of mercury, a potent neurotoxin, in pet food products. Here we posit that pet food products require independent testing to verify safety and compliance with developed Food and Drug Administration and Association of American Feed Control Officials standards, and initiate a discussion as to why including quantification of mercury and methylmercury, as well as the identification of adulteration, are important to such testing protocols. The outcomes of these discussions will be multi-faceted: initiating the impetus to investigate the quality and label accuracy of pet foods; ensuring product safety; promoting transparency within the pet food industry; informing veterinary practices regarding pet food recommendations; providing data for evidence-based policy and regulatory enforcement; and working toward fulfilling the National Research Council's call for research that identifies levels of contaminants in animal feeds and residues in human foods.

Critically appraised topic on adverse food reactions of companion animals (7): signalment and cutaneous manifestations of dogs and cats with adverse food reactions

BACKGROUND

Outside of pruritus, there is no clear consensus on the nature and prevalence of cutaneous manifestations of adverse food reactions (AFRs) in dogs and cats.

RESULTS

We searched two databases on August 7, 2018, for articles reporting detailed data on the signalment and clinical signs of at least one dog or cat with a cutaneous AFR (CAFR). We identified 233 and 407 citations from which were selected 32 articles reporting original information. Twenty-two articles included data on 825 dogs with CAFRs. The reported age of onset varied from less than one to 13 years of age; a beginning of signs by 6 or 12 months of age was noted in 22 to 38% of dogs, respectively. The female-to-male ratio also varied considerably. Four breeds (German shepherd dogs, West Highland white terriers, Labrador and golden retrievers) accounted for about 40% of affected dogs. Most dogs diagnosed with a CAFR were pruritic, most often in a generalized pattern, with the ears, feet, and abdomen also being frequently affected; the perineum was uncommonly targeted, however. Canine CAFRs presented mainly as recurrent bacterial skin infections, otitis externa and atopic dermatitis. Twelve articles reported novel information on 210 cats with this syndrome. There was no apparent breed and gender predisposition for feline CAFRs, but cats appeared to develop signs later than dogs with the same syndrome. Most cats with a CAFR were pruritic, especially on the head/face and neck, with the abdomen and ears also commonly involved. Symmetric self-induced alopecia, a head-and-neck self-traumatic dermatitis, miliary dermatitis and variants of eosinophilic diseases were the most common manifestations of feline CAFRs.

CONCLUSIONS

CAFRs affect dogs and cats of any age, any breed, and both genders, with the proportion of juvenile dogs diagnosed about twice that of cats. There are no reliable breed predisposition data. Most patients are pruritic, with half the dogs having generalized pruritus and half the cats scratching their face/head or neck. Canine CAFRs most often manifest as bacterial skin infections, otitis externa or atopic dermatitis; cats with CAFRs will exhibit the expected clinical phenotypes associated with feline hypersensitivity dermatitides.

Critically appraised topic on adverse food reactions of companion animals (6): prevalence of noncutaneous manifestations of adverse food reactions in dogs and cats

BACKGROUND

Many reports describe the cutaneous signs of adverse food reactions (AFR) in the dog and cat. However, various non-cutaneous clinical signs are less well described. Our objective was to systematically evaluate these non-cutaneous signs of AFR in small animals.

RESULTS

We searched two databases (MEDLINE and Web of Science) for pertinent references on non-cutaneous signs of adverse food reactions. Among 117 and 764 articles found in the MEDLINE and Web of Science databases, respectively, we selected 47 articles that reported data related to non-cutaneous clinical signs of AFR. Gastrointestinal signs, symmetrical lupoid onychitis, conjunctivitis, sneezing, and anaphylaxis were reported to be associated with AFR in dogs and gastrointestinal and respiratory signs, conjunctivitis, and hyperactive behaviour in cats. In Border terriers with paroxysmal gluten-sensitive dyskinesia, an underlying AFR should be considered. Of these clinical signs diarrhoea and frequent defecation were most frequently reported to be diet-responsive in dogs; in the cat, these were vomiting and diarrhoea.

CONCLUSIONS

An elimination diet should be considered early in the work-up of dogs and cats with chronic vomiting and diarrhoea. Other non-cutaneous signs occur less commonly because of AFRs.

Comparing immediate-type food allergy in humans and companion animals-revealing unmet needs

Adverse food reactions occur in human as well as veterinary patients. Systematic comparison may lead to improved recommendations for prevention and treatment in both. In this position paper, we summarize the current knowledge on immediate-type food allergy vs other food adverse reactions in companion animals, and compare this to the human situation. While the prevalence of food allergy in humans has been well studied for some allergens, this remains to be investigated for animal patients, where owner-reported as well as veterinarian-diagnosed food adverse reactions are on the increase. The characteristics of the disease in humans vs dogs, cats, and horses are most often caused by similar, but sometimes species-dependent different pathophysiological mechanisms, prompting the specific clinical symptoms, diagnoses, and treatments. Furthermore, little is known about the allergen molecules causative for type I food allergy in animals, which, like in human patients, could represent predictive biomarkers for risk evaluation. The definite diagnosis of food allergy relies-as in humans-on elimination diet and provocation tests. Besides allergen avoidance in daily practice, novel treatment options and tolerization strategies are underway. Taken together, numerous knowledge gaps were identified in veterinary food allergy, which need to be filled by systematic comparative studies.

Critically appraised topic on adverse food reactions of companion animals (3): prevalence of cutaneous adverse food reactions in dogs and cats

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of cutaneous adverse food reactions (CAFRs) in dogs and cats is not precisely known. This imprecision is likely due to the various populations that had been studied. Our objectives were to systematically review the literature to determine the prevalence of CAFRs among dogs and cats with pruritus and skin diseases.

RESULTS

We searched two databases for pertinent references on August 18, 2016. Among 490 and 220 articles respectively found in the Web of Science (Science Citation Index Expanded) and CAB Abstract databases, we selected 22 and nine articles that reported data usable for CAFR prevalence determination in dogs and cats, respectively. The prevalence of CAFR in dogs and cats was found to vary depending upon the type of diagnoses made. Among dogs presented to their veterinarian for any diagnosis, the prevalence was 1 to 2% and among those with skin diseases, it ranged between 0 and 24%. The range of CAFR prevalence was similar in dogs with pruritus (9 to 40%), those with any type of allergic skin disease (8 to 62%) and in dogs diagnosed with atopic dermatitis (9 to 50%). In cats presented to a university hospital, the prevalence of CAFR was less than 1% (0.2%), while it was fairly homogeneous in cats with skin diseases (range: 3 to 6%), but higher in cats with pruritus (12 to 21%) than in cats with allergic skin disease (5 to 13%).

CONCLUSIONS

Among dogs and cats with pruritus and those suspected of allergic skin disease, the prevalence of CAFR is high enough to justify this syndrome to be ruled-out with a restriction (elimination)-provocation dietary trial. This must especially be considered in companion animals with nonseasonal pruritus or signs of allergic dermatitis.

Critically appraised topic on adverse food reactions of companion animals (2): common food allergen sources in dogs and cats

BACKGROUND

To diagnose cutaneous adverse food reactions (CAFRs) in dogs and cats, dietary restriction-provocation trials are performed. Knowing the most common offending food allergens for these species would help determining the order of food challenges to optimize the time to diagnosis.

RESULTS

The search for, and review and analysis of the best evidence available as of January 16, 2015 suggests that the most likely food allergens contributing to canine CAFRs are beef, dairy products, chicken, and wheat. The most common food allergens in cats are beef, fish and chicken.

CONCLUSIONS

In dogs and cats, after a period of dietary restriction leading to the complete remission of clinical signs, food challenges to diagnose CAFR should begin with beef and dairy products, the most commonly recognized food allergens in these two species.