Non-immunoglobulin E-mediated gastrointestinal food allergic disorders (non-IgE-GI-FA) include food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES), food protein-induced enteropathy (FPE) and food protein-induced allergic proctocolitis (FPIAP), which present with symptoms of variable severity, affecting the gastrointestinal tract in response to specific dietary antigens. The diagnosis of non-IgE-GI-FA is made clinically, and relies on a constellation of typical symptoms that improve upon removal of the culprit food. When possible, food reintroduction should be attempted, with the documentation of symptoms relapse to establish a conclusive diagnosis. Management includes dietary avoidance, nutritional counselling, and supportive measures in the case of accidental exposure. The prognosis is generally favorable, with the majority of cases resolved before school age. Serial follow-up to establish whether the acquisition of tolerance has occurred is therefore essential in order to avoid unnecessary food restriction and potential consequent nutritional deficiencies. The purpose of this review is to delineate the distinctive clinical features of non-IgE-mediated food allergies presenting with gastrointestinal symptomatology, to summarize our current understanding of the pathogenesis driving these diseases, to discuss recent findings, and to address currents gaps in the knowledge, to guide future management opportunities.

No abstract

Peanut IgE‐mediated food allergy is one of the most common food allergies in children with a prevalence that has increased in the past decades in Westernized countries. Peanut allergies can trigger severe reactions and usually persist over time. Peanut‐allergic children and their families are often confronted to processed foods with precautionary allergen labeling (PAL) such as “may contain traces of peanuts,” which are frequently used by the food industry. Patients are generally confused as to whether eating such foods entails a risk of allergic reaction, which can ultimately lead to dietary restrictions and decreased quality of life. Thus, guidance toward eviction of foods with PALs such as “may contain traces of peanuts” is a recurring problem that peanut‐allergic patients address during pediatric allergy consultations with varying attitudes among allergists. Many studies have evaluated peanut contamination in foods with PALs, with generally less than 10% of foods containing detectable levels of peanuts, albeit heterogeneous amounts, with in rare occasions levels that could trigger allergic reactions in certain patients. The risk of reacting to foods with traces varies significantly with threshold, with patients with the lowest reaction thresholds at highest risk, and a dramatic reduction of risk as threshold increases. Thus, risk stratification based on individual reaction threshold may help stratify patients’ risk of reacting to foods with PAL. In clinical practice, a single‐dose 30 mg peanut protein oral food challenge may be an option to stratify peanut‐allergic patients’ risk when introducing foods with PAL, as illustrated by three clinical cases.