Food allergy is defined as abnormal immune response elicited by food intake, in which a variety of clinical symptoms will appear as a result of physiological dysfunction and/or tissue damage. Possible mechanisms for food allergy include gastrointestinal tract barrier damage, failure to induce oral immune tolerance, intrauterine sensitization, and allergen transmission during pregnancy and breastfeeding. Hereditary and environmental factors can also contribute to the disease. Gastrointestinal disorders are the main clinical manifestations of the disease. However, hypoalbuminemia, growth retardation, and even acute circulatory failure or shock may occur in severe cases. Oral food challenges are the "gold standard" for the diagnosis of food allergy. Avoidance and replacement of the responsible food are the only effective treatment options for neonatal food allergy. The use of probiotics can offer protection against the disease.
Food Hypersensitivity ; classification ; diagnosis ; etiology ; therapy ; Humans ; Infant, Newborn ; Milk Hypersensitivity ; diagnosis ; etiology ; therapy

Frequent use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) has been paralleled by increasing occurrence of adverse reactions, which vary from mild local skin rashes or gastric irritation to severe, generalized symptoms and even life-threatening anaphylaxis. NSAID-induced hypersensitivity reactions may involve both immunological and non-immunological mechanisms and should be differentiated from type A adverse reactions. Clinical diagnosis and effective management of a hypersensitive patient cannot be achieved without identifying the underlying mechanism. In this review, we discuss the current classification of NSAID-induced adverse reactions and propose a practical diagnostic algorithm that involves 7 steps leading to the determination of the type of NSAID-induced hypersensitivity and allows for proper patient management.
Anaphylaxis ; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal* ; Aspirin ; Classification* ; Diagnosis* ; Drug Hypersensitivity ; Exanthema ; Humans ; Hypersensitivity*

hypersensitivity are heterogeneous with various presentations including time of symptom onset, organ involvements, and underlying pathophysiology. Having a correct diagnosis can be challenging. Understanding their respective mechanisms as well as developing a comprehensive classification and diagnostic algorithm are pivotal for appropriate management strategy. Treatment modalities are based on the subtypes and severity of hypersensitivity reactions. Insights into the phenotypes and endotypes of hypersensitivity reactions enable personalized management in patients with suboptimal control of disease. This review updated the recent evidence of pathophysiology, classification, diagnostic algorithm, and management of NSAID hypersensitivity reactions.]]>
Angioedema ; Asthma ; Classification ; Diagnosis ; Drug Hypersensitivity ; Humans ; Hypersensitivity ; Phenotype ; Rhinitis ; Urticaria

Monosensitization differs both immunologically and clinically from polysensitization, and specific immunotherapy is more effective in patients sensitized only to a single pollen than in multiple-pollen sensitized patients. To further examine the differences between monosensitized and polysensitized allergies, allergic indices were examined in 68 monosensitized and 62 polysensitized patients with childhood asthma. Measurements included symptom scores, eosinophil counts, skin prick tests, serum total and specific IgE levels, and IL-10 levels, and were used to compare allergic indices between the two groups. Patients were followed for 18 months following immunotherapy to examine the effectiveness of the treatment. Symptom scores and total IgE levels were significantly higher in the polysensitized group than those in the monosensitized group (p<0.05). The levels of skin test response decreased significantly in both groups following immunotherapy. In the monosensitized group, symptom scores and specific IgE levels were significantly reduced after immunotherapy (p<0.05). In the polysensitized group, symptom scores were reduced after immunotherapy (p<0.05), but the degree of reduction was less than that of the monosensitized group (p<0.05). Moreover, in the polysensitized group, specific IgE levels after immunotherapy did not differ from that before immunotherapy. Serum IL-10 levels were not significantly increased after immunotherapy in either group. In conclusion, polysensitized patients tend to show higher allergic indices and immunotherapy might be less effective for these patients.
Skin Tests/*methods ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Reproducibility of Results ; Male ; Hypersensitivity/*classification/*diagnosis ; Humans ; *Health Status Indicators ; Female ; Child ; Asthma/*classification/*diagnosis

Monosensitization differs both immunologically and clinically from polysensitization, and specific immunotherapy is more effective in patients sensitized only to a single pollen than in multiple-pollen sensitized patients. To further examine the differences between monosensitized and polysensitized allergies, allergic indices were examined in 68 monosensitized and 62 polysensitized patients with childhood asthma. Measurements included symptom scores, eosinophil counts, skin prick tests, serum total and specific IgE levels, and IL-10 levels, and were used to compare allergic indices between the two groups. Patients were followed for 18 months following immunotherapy to examine the effectiveness of the treatment. Symptom scores and total IgE levels were significantly higher in the polysensitized group than those in the monosensitized group (p<0.05). The levels of skin test response decreased significantly in both groups following immunotherapy. In the monosensitized group, symptom scores and specific IgE levels were significantly reduced after immunotherapy (p<0.05). In the polysensitized group, symptom scores were reduced after immunotherapy (p<0.05), but the degree of reduction was less than that of the monosensitized group (p<0.05). Moreover, in the polysensitized group, specific IgE levels after immunotherapy did not differ from that before immunotherapy. Serum IL-10 levels were not significantly increased after immunotherapy in either group. In conclusion, polysensitized patients tend to show higher allergic indices and immunotherapy might be less effective for these patients.
Skin Tests/*methods ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Reproducibility of Results ; Male ; Hypersensitivity/*classification/*diagnosis ; Humans ; *Health Status Indicators ; Female ; Child ; Asthma/*classification/*diagnosis

Food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES) is an under-recognized non-IgE-mediated gastrointestinal food allergy. The diagnosis of FPIES is based on clinical history, sequential symptoms and the timing, after excluding other possible causes. It is definitively diagnosed by an oral food challenge test. Unfortunately, the diagnosis of FPIES is frequently delayed because of non-specific symptoms and insufficient definitive diagnostic biomarkers. FPIES is not well recognized by clinicians; the affected infants are often mismanaged as having viral gastroenteritis, food poisoning, sepsis, or a surgical disease. Familiarity with the clinical features of FPIES and awareness of the indexes of suspicion for FPIES are important to diagnose FPIES. Understanding the recently defined clinical terms and types of FPIES is mandatory to suspect and correctly diagnose FPIES. The aim of this review is to provide a case-driven presentation as a guide of how to recognize the clinical features of FPIES to improve diagnosis and management of patients with FPIES.
Biomarkers ; Classification ; Diagnosis ; Enterocolitis* ; Food Hypersensitivity* ; Foodborne Diseases ; Gastroenteritis ; Humans ; Infant ; Recognition (Psychology) ; Sepsis

PURPOSE: A new classification of gastrointestinal food allergy was published, but the changes of terminology between previously reported terms and the new ones were in a state of disorder. This has resulted in confusion between medical communication and diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. The clinical observations of infants presenting with gastrointestinal cow milk allergy (GI-CMA) were performed, and the changes in the terminology reviewed through the published Korean literature. METHODS: Between March 2003 and July 2003, data from 37 consecutive infants with GI-CMA, aged 2 weeks to 15 months, were reviewed. The challenge and elimination test of cow milk, and the endoscopic and histologic findings, were used for the seven subdivisions of GI-CMA according to a new classification on the basis of patients' ages, clinical manifestations and location of gastrointestinal lesions. RESULTS: The 37 patients had a mean age of 5.4+/-4.8 months, with those observed in 26 (70.3%) of patients being below 6 months of age. The seven final diagnoses were; cow milk protein-induced enterocolitis (CMPIE) in 12 (32.4%), cow milk protein proctitis (PROC) in 12 (32.4%), IgE-mediated (IGE) in 6 (16.2%), gastroesophageal reflux-associated cow milk allergy (GERA) in 5 (13.5%) and eosinophilic gastroenterocolitis in 2 (5.4%). CMPIE was revealed as the typical type in 7 (18.9%) and the atypical type in 5 (13.5%), and all of typical CMPIE revealed cow milk protein-induced enteropathy. The mean age at symptom onset was 4.3+/-0.8 months, and for those with typical and atypical CMPIE, and PROC and GERA were 3.8+/-4.6, 10.4+/-3.8, 3.4+/-3.9 and 7.8+/-5.7 months, respectively (p<0.05). The period from onset of symptom to diagnosis was 2.4+/-3.3 (0.5~12) months, with those observed in atypical CMPIE and GERA being over 3months. Although the birth weights in all patients were within the 10~90 percentile range, the body weights on diagnoses were below the 3 percentile in 48.6%; IGE 16.7%, EOS 0%, typical CMPIE 85.7%, atypical CMPIE 60.0%, PROC 25.0% and GERA 100% (p<0.05). Through the review of the Korean literature, 8 case reports and 14 original articles for GI-CMA were found. CONCLUSION: GI-CMA is not a rare clinical disorder and is subdivided into seven categories on the basis of the patient's age, clinical manifestations and location of the gastrointestinal lesions. The terms for GI-CMA are changing with new classifications, and careful approaches are necessary for medical communications.
Birth Weight ; Body Weight ; Child* ; Classification* ; Diagnosis ; Enterocolitis ; Eosinophils ; Food Hypersensitivity ; Humans ; Immunoglobulin E ; Infant ; Milk Hypersensitivity* ; Milk Proteins ; Milk* ; Proctitis

BACKGROUND: In the Emergency Department (ED), diagnosis and management of anaphylaxis are challenging with at least 50% of anaphylaxis episodes misdiagnosed when the diagnostic criteria of current guidelines are not used.OBJECTIVE: Objective of our study was to assess anaphylaxis diagnosis and management in patients presenting to the ED.METHODS: Retrospective chart review conducted on patients presenting to The Medical City Hospital ED, the Philippines from 2013–2015 was done. Cases were identified based on International Statistical Classification of Diseases, 10th revision coding for either anaphylaxis or other allergic related diagnosis. Cases fitting the definition of anaphylaxis as identified by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease and the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network (NIAID/FAAN) were included. Data collected included demographics, signs and symptoms, triggers and management.RESULTS: A total of 105 cases were evaluated. Incidence of anaphylaxis for the 3-year study period was 0.03%. Of the 105 cases, 35 (33%) were diagnosed as “urticaria” or “hypersensitivity reaction” despite fulfilling the NIAID/FAAN anaphylaxis criteria. There was a significant difference in epinephrine administration between those given the diagnosis of anaphylaxis versus misdiagnosed cases (61 [87%] vs. 12 [34%], χ² = 30.77, p < 0.01); and a significant difference in time interval from arrival at the ED to epinephrine administration, with those diagnosed as anaphylaxis (48%) receiving epinephrine within 10 minutes, versus ≥ 60 minutes for most of the misdiagnosed group (χ² = 52.97, p < 0.01).CONCLUSION: Despite current guidelines, anaphylaxis is still misdiagnosed in the ED. Having an ED diagnosis of anaphylaxis significantly increases the likelihood of epinephrine administration, and at a shorter time interval.
Anaphylaxis ; Classification ; Clinical Coding ; Communicable Diseases ; Demography ; Diagnosis ; Emergencies ; Emergency Service, Hospital ; Epinephrine ; Food Hypersensitivity ; Hospitals, Urban ; Humans ; Hypersensitivity ; Incidence ; Philippines ; Retrospective Studies ; Tertiary Care Centers

Mast cells, which are major effector cells in allergic reactions, are found in the perivascular spaces of most tissues and contain pro-inflammatory and vasoactive mediators. These mediators are released after IgE receptor cross-linking induced by allergens or other stimuli, including anaphylatoxins (C3a and C5a), aggregated IgG, certain drugs, venoms, and physical stimuli (pressure and temperature changes), as well as cytokines and neuropeptides. The excess release of these mediators can cause variable allergic symptoms and signs, such as bronchospasm, itching, flushing, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, vascular instability, and anaphylaxis. Furthermore, mast cell disorders may involve either excessive proliferation of mast cells or abnormal mast cell reactivity. Mast cell disorders can be broadly divided into 3 types: primary, secondary, and idiopathic. All of these disorders present with signs and symptoms of mast cell activation and differ in severity and involvement of various organ systems. The best characterized primary disorder is mastocytosis. Systemic and cutaneous forms of the disease are well described. Secondary disorders include typical allergic diseases and some types of urticarial diseases. In this article, the biochemical characteristics of mast cells and the role of mast cells in allergic inflammation, as well as the classification, diagnosis, and management of mast cell-related disorders, will be reviewed.
Abdominal Pain ; Allergens ; Allergy and Immunology ; Anaphylatoxins ; Anaphylaxis ; Bronchial Spasm ; Classification ; Cytokines ; Diagnosis ; Diarrhea ; Flushing ; Hypersensitivity ; Immunoglobulin E ; Immunoglobulin G ; Inflammation* ; Mast Cells* ; Mastocytosis ; Nausea ; Neuropeptides ; Pruritus ; Venoms ; Vomiting

PURPOSE: Atopic Dermatitis (AD) is a chronically relapsing inflammatory skin disease. Generally, aeroallergens and food allergens can exacerbate symptoms in AD. Currently they are divided into two groups: one is an IgE mediated form and the other is a non-IgE mediated form. This study focused upon clinical manifestations of two distinct forms of AD. METHODS: We evaluated 110 patients (male: 58, female: 52) with AD. All patients had visited Masan Samsung Hospital from June 2002 to February 2005. The patients were divided into 2 sub-groups according to their serum total IgE and specific IgE levels. The serum total IgE and specific IgE to Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, Dermatophagoides farinae, Egg white, Cow's milk and Soybean were measured by the Pharmacia CAP-FEIA system. Metacholine provocation tests were conducted to reveal bronchial hyper-responsiveness and ARIA guidelines for diagnosis of AR were applied. RESULTS: Our study showed more female predominance in non IgE-mediated atopic dermatitis patients and showed higher total eosinophil count in IgE-mediated atopic dermatitis. (P< 0.05) There was no difference in frequency of asthma between two groups (P> 0.05), but allergic rhinitis was significantly predominant in non IgE-mediated atopic dermatitis patients. (P< 0.05) CONCLUSION: Female was more predominant in non IgE-mediated atopic dermatitis patients and IgE-mediated atopic dermatitis patients showed higher total eosinophil count and more frequency of allergic rhinitis.
Allergens ; Asthma ; Child* ; Classification* ; Dermatitis, Atopic* ; Dermatophagoides farinae ; Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus ; Diagnosis ; Egg White ; Eosinophils ; Female ; Humans ; Hypersensitivity, Immediate ; Immunoglobulin E* ; Milk ; Rhinitis ; Skin Diseases ; Soybeans