In less than half a century, allergy, originally perceived as a rare disease, has become a major public health threat, today affecting the lives of more than 60 million people in Europe, and probably close to one billion worldwide, thereby heavily impacting the budgets of public health systems. More disturbingly, its prevalence and impact are on the rise, a development that has been associated with environmental and lifestyle changes accompanying the continuous process of urbanization and globalization. Therefore, there is an urgent need to prioritize and concert research efforts in the field of allergy, in order to achieve sustainable results on prevention, diagnosis and treatment of this most prevalent chronic disease of the 21^stcentury.The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is the leading professional organization in the field of allergy, promoting excellence in clinical care, education, training and basic and translational research, all with the ultimate goal of improving the health of allergic patients. The European Federation of Allergy and Airways Diseases Patients’ Associations (EFA) is a non‐profit network of allergy, asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disorder (COPD) patients’ organizations. In support of their missions, the present EAACI Position Paper, in collaboration with EFA, highlights the most important research needs in the field of allergy to serve as key recommendations for future research funding at the national and European levels.Although allergies may involve almost every organ of the body and an array of diverse external factors act as triggers, there are several common themes that need to be prioritized in research efforts. As in many other chronic diseases, effective prevention, curative treatment and accurate, rapid diagnosis represent major unmet needs. Detailed phenotyping/endotyping stands out as widely required in order to arrange or re‐categorize clinical syndromes into more coherent, uniform and treatment‐responsive groups. Research efforts to unveil the basic pathophysiologic pathways and mechanisms, thus leading to the comprehension and resolution of the pathophysiologic complexity of allergies will allow for the design of novel patient‐oriented diagnostic and treatment protocols. Several allergic diseases require well‐controlled epidemiological description and surveillance, using disease registries, pharmacoeconomic evaluation, as well as large biobanks. Additionally, there is a need for extensive studies to bring promising new biotechnological innovations, such as biological agents, vaccines of modified allergen molecules and engineered components for allergy diagnosis, closer to clinical practice. Finally, particular attention should be paid to the difficult‐to‐manage, precarious and costly severe disease forms and/or exacerbations. Nonetheless, currently arising treatments, mainly in the fields of immunotherapy and biologicals, hold great promise for targeted and causal management of allergic conditions. Active involvement of all stakeholders, including Patient Organizations and policy makers are necessary to achieve the aims emphasized herein.

There are several methods to read skin prick test results in type-I allergy testing. A commonly used method is to characterize the wheal size by its ‘average diameter’. A more accurate method is to scan the area of the wheal to calculate the actual size. In both methods, skin prick test (SPT) results can be corrected for histamine-sensitivity of the skin by dividing the results of the allergic reaction by the histamine control. The objectives of this study are to compare different techniques of quantifying SPT results, to determine a cut-off value for a positive SPT for histamine equivalent prick -index (HEP) area, and to study the accuracy of predicting cashew nut reactions in double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) tests with the different SPT methods. Data of 172 children with cashew nut sensitisation were used for the analysis. All patients underwent a DBPCFC with cashew nut. Per patient, the average diameter and scanned area of the wheal size were recorded. In addition, the same data for the histamine-induced wheal were collected for each patient. The accuracy in predicting the outcome of the DBPCFC using four different SPT readings (i.e. average diameter, area, HEP-index diameter, HEP-index area) were compared in a Receiver-Operating Characteristic (ROC) plot. Characterizing the wheal size by the average diameter method is inaccurate compared to scanning method. A wheal average diameter of 3 mm is generally considered as a positive SPT cut-off value and an equivalent HEP-index area cut-off value of 0.4 was calculated. The four SPT methods yielded a comparable area under the curve (AUC) of 0.84, 0.85, 0.83 and 0.83, respectively. The four methods showed comparable accuracy in predicting cashew nut reactions in a DBPCFC. The ‘scanned area method’ is theoretically more accurate in determining the wheal area than the ‘average diameter method’ and is recommended in academic research. A HEP-index area of 0.4 is determined as cut-off value for a positive SPT. However, in clinical practice, the ‘average diameter method’ is also useful, because this method provides similar accuracy in predicting cashew nut allergic reactions in the DBPCFC. Trial registration: Trial number NTR3572

The disparity between reported and diagnosed food allergy makes robust diagnosis imperative. The allergy‐focussed history is an important starting point, but published literature on its efficacy is sparse. Using a structured approach to connect symptoms, suspected foods and dietary intake, a multi‐disciplinary task force of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology developed paediatric and adult diet history tools. Both tools are divided into stages using traffic light labelling (red, amber and green). The red stage requires the practitioner to gather relevant information on symptoms, atopic history, food triggers, foods eaten and nutritional issues. The amber stage facilitates interpretation of the responses to the red‐stage questions, thus enabling the practitioner to prepare to move forward. The final green stage provides a summary template and test algorithm to support continuation down the diagnostic pathway. These tools will provide a standardised, practical approach to support food allergy diagnosis, ensuring that all relevant information is captured and interpreted in a robust manner. Future work is required to validate their use in diverse age groups, disease entities and in different countries, in order to account for differences in health care systems, food availability and dietary norms.

Immune-globulin E (IgE)-mediated food allergy is characterized by a variety of clinical entities within the gastrointestinal tract, skin and lungs, and systemically as anaphylaxis. The default response to food antigens, which is antigen specific immune tolerance, requires exposure to the antigen and is already initiated during pregnancy. After birth, tolerance is mostly acquired in the gut after oral ingestion of dietary proteins, whilst exposure to these same proteins via the skin, especially when it is inflamed and has a disrupted barrier, can lead to allergic sensitization. The crosstalk between the skin and the gut, which is involved in the induction of food allergy, is still incompletely understood. In this review, we will focus on mechanisms underlying allergic sensitization (to food antigens) via the skin, leading to gastrointestinal inflammation, and the development of IgE-mediated food allergy. Better understanding of these processes will eventually help to develop new preventive and therapeutic strategies in children.