This European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology guideline provides recommendations for diagnosing IgE‐mediated food allergy and was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. Food allergy diagnosis starts with an allergy‐focused clinical history followed by tests to determine IgE sensitization, such as serum allergen‐specific IgE (sIgE) and skin prick test (SPT), and the basophil activation test (BAT), if available. Evidence for IgE sensitization should be sought for any suspected foods. The diagnosis of allergy to some foods, such as peanut and cashew nut, is well supported by SPT and serum sIgE, whereas there are less data and the performance of these tests is poorer for other foods, such as wheat and soya. The measurement of sIgE to allergen components such as Ara h 2 from peanut, Cor a 14 from hazelnut and Ana o 3 from cashew can be useful to further support the diagnosis, especially in pollen‐sensitized individuals. BAT to peanut and sesame can be used additionally. The reference standard for food allergy diagnosis is the oral food challenge (OFC). OFC should be performed in equivocal cases. For practical reasons, open challenges are suitable in most cases. Reassessment of food allergic children with allergy tests and/or OFCs periodically over time will enable reintroduction of food into the diet in the case of spontaneous acquisition of oral tolerance.

This European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) guideline provides recommendations for the management of IgE‐mediated food allergy and was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. Following the confirmation of IgE‐mediated food allergy diagnosis, allergen avoidance and dietary advice (with support of a specialised dietitian, if possible) together with the provision of a written treatment plan, education on the recognition of allergic symptoms and prescription of medication including adrenaline using an auto‐injector are essential. Patients with significant anxiety and requirement for coping strategies may benefit from support from a clinical psychologist. As immunomodulatory interventions, omalizumab is suggested for treatment of IgE‐mediated food allergy in children from the age of 1 and adults; and oral allergen‐specific immunotherapy is recommended for children and adolescents with peanut allergy and suggested for milk and egg allergies (generally after 4 years of age for milk and egg). Sublingual and epicutaneous immunotherapy are suggested for peanut allergy but are not yet available at the point of care. Future research into disease modifying treatments for IgE‐mediated food allergy are highly needed, with standardised and patient‐focused protocols and outcomes.

Background: Discovered and described 40 years ago, non‐specific lipid transfer proteins (nsLTP) are present in many plant species and play an important role protecting plants from stressors such as heat or drought. In the last 20 years, sensitization to nsLTP and consequent reactions to plant foods has become an increasing concern.Aim: The aim of this paper is to review the evidence for the structure and function of nsLTP allergens, and cross‐reactivity, sensitization, and epidemiology of nsLTP allergy.Materials and Methods: A Task Force, supported by the European Academy of Allergy & Clinical Immunology (EAACI), reviewed current evidence and provide a signpost for future research. The search terms for this paper were “Non‐specific Lipid Transfer Proteins”, “LTP syndrome”, “Pru p 3”, “plant food allergy”, “pollen‐food syndrome”.Results: Most nsLTP allergens have a highly conserved structure stabilised by 4‐disulphide bridges. Studies on the peach nsLTP, Pru p 3, demonstrate that nsLTPs are very cross‐reactive, with the four major IgE epitopes of Pru p 3 being shared by nsLTP from other botanically related fruits. These nsLTP allergens are to varying degrees resistant to heat and digestion, and sensitization may occur through the oral, inhaled or cutaneous routes. In some populations, Pru p 3 is the primary and sole sensitizing allergen, but many are poly‐sensitised both to botanically un‐related nsLTP in foods, and non‐food sources of nsLTP such as Cannabis sativa, Platanus acerifolia, (plane tree), Ambrosia artemisiifolia (ragweed) and Artemisia vulgaris (mugwort). Initially, nsLTP sensitization appeared to be limited to Mediterranean countries, however more recent studies suggest clinically relevant sensitization occurs in North Atlantic regions and also countries in Northern Europe, with nsLTP sensitisation profiles being broadly similar.Discussion: These robust allergens have the potential to sensitize and provoke symptoms to a large number of plant foods, including those which are raw, cooked or processed. It is unknown why some sensitized individuals develop clinical symptoms to foods whereas others do not, or indeed what other allergens besides Pru p 3 may be primary sensitising allergens. It is clear that these allergens are also relevant in non‐Mediterranean populations and there needs to be more recognition of this.Conclusion: Non‐specific LTP allergens, present in a wide variety of plant foods and pollens, are structurally robust and so may be present in both raw and cooked foods. More studies are needed to understand routes of sensitization and the world‐wide prevalence of clinical symptoms associated with sensitization to these complex allergens.

Background: There is substantial interest in immunotherapy and biologicals in IgE‐mediated food allergy.Methods: We searched six databases for randomized controlled trials about immunotherapy alone or with biologicals (to April 2021) or biological monotherapy (to September 2021) in food allergy confirmed by oral food challenge. We pooled the data using random‐effects meta‐analysis.Results: We included 36 trials about immunotherapy with 2126 mainly child participants. Oral immunotherapy increased tolerance whilst on therapy for peanut (RR 9.9, 95% CI 4.5.–21.4, high certainty); cow's milk (RR 5.7, 1.9–16.7, moderate certainty) and hen's egg allergy (RR 8.9, 4.4–18, moderate certainty). The number needed to treat to increase tolerance to a single dose of 300 mg or 1000 mg peanut protein was 2.Oral immunotherapy did not increase adverse reactions (RR 1.1, 1.0–1.2, low certainty) or severe reactions in peanut allergy (RR 1,6, 0.7–3.5, low certainty), but may increase (mild) adverse reactions in cow's milk (RR 3.9, 2.1–7.5, low certainty) and hen's egg allergy (RR 7.0, 2.4–19.8, moderate certainty). Epicutaneous immunotherapy increased tolerance whilst on therapy for peanut (RR 2.6, 1.8–3.8, moderate certainty). Results were unclear for other allergies and administration routes.There were too few trials of biologicals alone (3) or with immunotherapy (1) to draw conclusions.Conclusions: Oral immunotherapy improves tolerance whilst on therapy and is probably safe in peanut, cow's milk and hen's egg allergy. More research is needed about quality of life, cost and biologicals.

Background: The benefit of daily administration of Peanut (Arachis hypogaea) Allergen Powder‐dnfp (PTAH)—formerly AR101—has been established in clinical trials, but limited data past the first year of treatment are available. This longitudinal analysis aimed to explore the impact of continued PTAH therapeutic maintenance dosing (300 mg/day) on efficacy, safety/tolerability, and food allergy‐related quality of life.Methods: We present a subset analysis of PALISADE‐ARC004 participants (aged 4–17 years) who received 300 mg PTAH daily for a total of ~1.5 (Group A, n = 110) or ~2 years (Group B, n = 32). Safety assessments included monitoring the incidence of adverse events (AEs), accidental exposures to food allergens, and adrenaline use. Efficacy was assessed by double‐blind, placebo‐controlled food challenge (DBPCFC); skin prick testing; peanut‐specific antibody assays; and Food Allergy Quality of Life Questionnaire (FAQLQ) and Food Allergy Independent Measure (FAIM) scores.Results: Continued maintenance with PTAH increased participants’ ability to tolerate peanut protein: 48.1% of completers in Group A (n = 50/104) and 80.8% in Group B (n = 21/26) tolerated 2000 mg peanut protein at exit DBPCFC without dose‐limiting symptoms. Immune biomarkers showed a pattern consistent with treatment‐induced desensitization. Among PTAH‐continuing participants, the overall and treatment‐related exposure‐adjusted AE rate decreased throughout the intervention period in both groups. Clinically meaningful improvements in FAQLQ and FAIM scores over time suggest a potential link between increased desensitization as determined by the DBPCFC and improved quality of life.Conclusions: These results demonstrate that daily PTAH treatment for peanut allergy beyond 1 year leads to an improved safety/tolerability profile and continued clinical and immunological response.