Management of food allergy based on oral food challenge.

IF 3 4区 医学 Q2 ALLERGY
Seijiro Ishibashi, Noriyuki Yanagida, Sakura Sato, Motohiro Ebisawa
{"title":"Management of food allergy based on oral food challenge.","authors":"Seijiro Ishibashi, Noriyuki Yanagida, Sakura Sato, Motohiro Ebisawa","doi":"10.1097/ACI.0000000000000980","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Food allergy is a growing health problem that affects both patients and society in multiple ways. Despite the emergence of novel diagnostic tools, such as component-resolved diagnostics (CRD) and basophil activation tests (BAT), oral food challenge (OFC) still plays an indispensable role in the management of food allergies. This review aimed to highlight the indications and safety concerns of conducting an OFC and to provide insights into post-OFC management based on recent findings.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Standardized OFC protocols have regional diversification, especially in Japan and Western countries. Recent studies suggested that the interval between doses should be at least more than an hour. Furthermore, applying a stepwise method tailored to the patient's specific immunoglobulin E level and history of anaphylaxis seems to mitigate these risks. Recent surveys have shown that, following a positive OFC, options other than strict avoidance are also selected.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>OFC serves diverse purposes, yet the risks it carries warrant caution. The stepwise protocol appears promising for its safety. Subthreshold consumption following OFC shows potential; however, further research on its efficacy and safety is required. Management following OFC should be tailored and well discussed between clinicians and patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":10956,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Allergy and Clinical Immunology","volume":" ","pages":"153-159"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Allergy and Clinical Immunology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ACI.0000000000000980","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose of review: Food allergy is a growing health problem that affects both patients and society in multiple ways. Despite the emergence of novel diagnostic tools, such as component-resolved diagnostics (CRD) and basophil activation tests (BAT), oral food challenge (OFC) still plays an indispensable role in the management of food allergies. This review aimed to highlight the indications and safety concerns of conducting an OFC and to provide insights into post-OFC management based on recent findings.

Recent findings: Standardized OFC protocols have regional diversification, especially in Japan and Western countries. Recent studies suggested that the interval between doses should be at least more than an hour. Furthermore, applying a stepwise method tailored to the patient's specific immunoglobulin E level and history of anaphylaxis seems to mitigate these risks. Recent surveys have shown that, following a positive OFC, options other than strict avoidance are also selected.

Summary: OFC serves diverse purposes, yet the risks it carries warrant caution. The stepwise protocol appears promising for its safety. Subthreshold consumption following OFC shows potential; however, further research on its efficacy and safety is required. Management following OFC should be tailored and well discussed between clinicians and patients.

基于口服食物挑战的食物过敏管理。
审查目的:食物过敏是一个日益严重的健康问题,对患者和社会造成多方面的影响。尽管出现了新的诊断工具,如成分分辨诊断法(CRD)和嗜碱性粒细胞活化试验(BAT),但口服食物挑战法(OFC)在食物过敏的治疗中仍发挥着不可或缺的作用。本综述旨在强调进行口服食物挑战的适应症和安全问题,并根据最新研究结果对口服食物挑战后的管理提出见解:最近的研究结果:标准化的 OFC 方案具有地区多样性,尤其是在日本和西方国家。最近的研究表明,两次给药之间的间隔至少应超过一小时。此外,根据患者特定的免疫球蛋白 E 水平和过敏性休克病史采用分步法似乎可以降低这些风险。最近的调查显示,OFC 阳性后,患者也会选择严格回避以外的其他方法。分步方案在安全性方面似乎很有希望。OFC 后的次阈值消耗显示出了潜力,但还需要进一步研究其有效性和安全性。OFC 后的管理应量身定制,并在临床医生和患者之间进行充分讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
3.60%
发文量
109
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: This reader-friendly, bimonthly resource provides a powerful, broad-based perspective on the most important advances from throughout the world literature. Featuring renowned guest editors and focusing exclusively on one to three topics, every issue of Current Opinion in Allergy and Clinical Immunology delivers unvarnished, expert assessments of developments from the previous year. Insightful editorials and on-the-mark invited reviews cover key subjects such as upper airway disease; mechanisms of allergy and adult asthma; paediatric asthma and development of atopy; food and drug allergies; and immunotherapy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信