Background Food insecurity (FI), limited availability of or access to nutritional foods, is linked to poor child/caregiver health. We examined FI in food‐allergic and non‐food‐allergic children to determine whether dietary limitations associated with food allergy increases risk of FI. Methods Food‐allergic and non‐food‐allergic children (1‐17 years) were recruited from Arkansas Children's Hospital allergy/asthma clinics. The USDA Food Security Survey, the Newest Vital Sign Health Literacy (HL) questionnaire, and the Food Allergy Impact Scale QOL survey were administered. Logistic regression and analysis of covariance models were utilized for data analysis. Results Subjects (n = 650) included 325 food‐allergic and 325 non‐food‐allergic children. Overall rate of FI was 21.5% (food allergic 22.2% and non‐food allergic 20.9%) with no significant difference in the prevalence of FI between groups (OR = 1.30; 95% CI 0.86‐1.96; P = 0.21). FI was increased in households of children with both milk and egg allergy when compared to those without food allergy and those with single food allergy (OR = 2.5; 95% CI 1.4‐4.6; P = 0.003). Mean HL rates were higher in the food‐secure vs food‐insecure groups (mean diff = 0.31; 95% CI 0.03‐0.59; P = 0.03). Among food‐allergic children, QOL was better in the food‐secure vs food‐insecure group (mean diff = 0.61; 95% CI 0.002‐1.23; P = 0.049). Conclusion Food allergy to milk and egg was associated with increased risk of household FI. Food‐insecure participants had lower HL than their food‐secure counterparts. Further work is needed to define risks associated with FI among food‐allergic children to improve screening and management strategies.

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

Asthma is a heterogeneous syndrome that might be better described as a constellation of phenotypes or endotypes, each with distinct cellular and molecular mechanisms, rather than as a singular disease. One of these phenotypes is eosinophilic asthma. As the development of eosinophilic inflammation is categorically dependent on the biological activity of Interleukin (IL)-5, IL-5 antagonism became an obvious target for therapy in this phenotype. Early trials of monoclonal antibodies targeting the biological activity of IL-5, including reslizumab, mepolizumab, and benralizumab, were performed on asthmatics with no concern for evidence of eosinophilia. These trials were largely unsuccessful. However, during these trials, researchers recognized the need to quantify eosinophilia in asthma subjects in order to identify those asthmatics in whom these medications would be more likely to improve symptoms and lung function. Using biomarkers, such as sputum and blood eosinophilia, recent studies of these medications have shown improvements in blood and sputum eosinophilia, forced expiratory volume in 1 second, and quality of life assessments as well as reducing occurrences of exacerbations. Moving forward, better and less invasive biomarkers of eosinophilia are necessary to ensure that the correct patients are chosen to receive these medications to receive maximal benefit.

In this cohort study of hospitalized patients with linked medical record data, we developed International Classification of Diseases (ICD) criteria that accurately identified laboratory-confirmed, severe influenza hospitalizations (positive predictive value [PPV] 80%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 71-87%), which we validated through medical record documentation. These criteria identify patients with clinically important influenza illness outcomes to inform evaluation of preventive and therapeutic interventions and public health policy recommendations.