Food allergy in the Netherlands: differences in clinical severity, causative foods, sensitization and DBPCFC between community and outpatients

Le, Thuy‐My; Hoffen, Els van; Kummeling, Ischa; Potts, James; Ballmer‐Weber, Barbara; Bruijnzeel-Koomen, Carla A.F.M.; Lebens, Ans F.M.; Lidholm, Jonas; Lindner, Titia; Mackie, Alan; Mills, EN Clare; Ree, Ronald van; Vieths, Stefan; Fernández‐Rivas, Montserrat; Burney, Peter; Knulst, André C.

doi:10.1186/s13601-015-0051-1

Cited by 13 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The reported prevalence of food allergy is comparable to the in 1994 reported prevalence of s-rFA or food intolerance among 1483 Dutch adults, which was 12.4% [6] and the in 2015 reported prevalence of self-reported adverse reactions to Europrevall priority foods among 3 864 Dutch adults, which was 10.8% [8]. Although this would suggest that there has been no increase in the prevalence of food allergy over the last 24 years, we cannot exclude such an increase since our study population is larger and older compared to the study of 1994.…”

Section: Plos Onesupporting

confidence: 53%

“…Moreover, the foods listed are more likely to be involved in food intolerance based on a non-allergic adverse reaction and the DBPCFCs protocol was highly different from current standards [7]. In a more recent study, 25% of 3 864 Dutch adults reported adverse reactions to foods [8]. A meta-analysis described the prevalence of FA in European adults using the following definitions; s-rFA, s-rFA accompanied by positive sIgE and challenge proven FA [9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Likely questionnaire-diagnosed food allergy in 78, 890 adults from the northern Netherlands

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background It is challenging to define likely food allergy (FA) in large populations which limited the number of large studies regarding risk factors for FA. Objective We studied the prevalence and characteristics of self-reported FA (s-rFA) in the large, population-based Dutch Lifelines cohort and identified associated risk factors. Methods Likely food allergic cases (LikelyFA) were classified based on questionnaire reported characteristics consistent with FA. Subjects with atypical characteristics were classified as Indeterminate. We investigated 13 potential risk factors for LikelyFA such as birth mode and living on a farm and addressed health-related quality of life (H-RQOL). Results Of the 78, 890 subjects, 12.1% had s-rFA of which 4.0% and 8.1% were classified as Like-lyFA and Indeterminate, respectively. Younger age, female sex, asthma, eczema and nasal allergy increased the risk of LikelyFA (p-value range <1.00*10 −250-1.29*10 −7). Living in a small city/large village or suburb during childhood was associated with a higher risk of Like-lyFA than living on a farm (p-value = 7.81*10 −4 and p = 4.84*10 −4 , respectively). Subjects classified as Indeterminate more often reported depression and burnout compared to those without FA (p-value = 1.46*10 −4 and p = 8.39*10 −13 , respectively). No association was found with ethnicity, (duration of) breastfeeding, birth mode and reported eating disorder. Mental and physical component scores measuring H-RQOL were lower in both those classified as LikelyFA and Indeterminate compared to those without FA.

show abstract

Section: Plos Onesupporting

confidence: 53%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Likely questionnaire-diagnosed food allergy in 78, 890 adults from the northern Netherlands

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this study, we solicited 11011 adult females for self-reported allergy (SrFA) to any of 27 different foods and 21.5% reported sensitivity to one or more foods (Supplementary Table S1 ). That level is much higher than generally accepted estimates of 2–4% for the prevalence of food allergies (FA) based on the diagnostic gold standard of double-blind placebo controlled food challenge (DBPCFC), but not outside of the 10–30% estimates from previous studies that tabulated SrFA status 5 , 6 , 48 – 50 . Although one might presume that a large part of the difference between prevalence rates from SrFA and DBPCFC stems from patient subjectivity, some of the difference may be related to factors that augment allergic reactivity such as NSAID use, alcohol intake, exercise, menstruation cycle, and current pollen allergy season status 51 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

Genome-wide association study of self-reported food reactions in Japanese identifies shrimp and peach specific loci in the HLA-DR/DQ gene region

Khor

Morino²,

Nakazono

et al. 2018

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Food allergy is an increasingly important health problem in the world. Several genome-wide association studies (GWAS) focused on European ancestry samples have identified food allergy-specific loci in the HLA class II region. We conducted GWAS of self-reported reactivity with common foods using the data from 11011 Japanese women and identified shrimp and peach allergy-specific loci in the HLA-DR/DQ gene region tagged by rs74995702 (P = 6.30 × 10−17, OR = 1.91) and rs28359884 (P = 2.3 × 10−12, OR = 1.80), respectively. After HLA imputation using a Japanese population-specific reference, the most strongly associated haplotype was HLA-DRB1*04:05-HLA-DQB1*04:01 for shrimp allergy (P = 3.92 × 10−19, OR = 1.99) and HLA-DRB1*09:01-HLA-DQB1*03:03 for peach allergy (P = 1.15 × 10−7, OR = 1.68). Additionally, both allergies’ associated variants were eQTLs for several HLA genes, with HLA-DQA2 the single eQTL gene shared between the two traits. Our study suggests that allergy to certain foods may be related to genetic differences that tag both HLA alleles having particular epitope binding specificities as well as variants modulating expression of particular HLA genes. Investigating this further could increase our understanding of food allergy aetiology and potentially lead to better therapeutic strategies for allergen immunotherapies.

show abstract

“…Risk communication is expected within the food industry, but it is not mandatory, so providing the industry with sensitive tests that can detect allergens at concentrations as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) is the best way to ensure that unintentional allergen presence in food is monitored. In order for consumers to be entirely confident that their food is free from allergens, it is necessary to manufacture easy to use assays to detect unwanted allergen presence so that consumers do not have to rely on recall or notification data to maintain their avoidance diets [ 93 , 94 ]. A consumer-friendly allergen test that can be based on a smart-detector could provide consistent, essential information for the allergic individual, regardless of the quality of product labelling.…”

Section: Background On Food Allergensmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consumer-friendly food allergen detection: moving towards smartphone-based immunoassays

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this critical review, we provide a comprehensive overview of immunochemical food allergen assays and detectors in the context of their user-friendliness, through their connection to smartphones. Smartphone-based analysis is centered around citizen science, putting analysis into the hands of the consumer. Food allergies represent a significant worldwide health concern and consumers should be able to analyze their foods, whenever and wherever they are, for allergen presence. Owing to the need for a scientific background, traditional laboratory-based detection methods are generally unsuitable for the consumer. Therefore, it is important to develop simple, safe, and rapid assays that can be linked with smartphones as detectors to improve user accessibility. Smartphones make excellent detection systems because of their cameras, embedded flash functions, portability, connectivity, and affordability. Therefore, this review has summarized traditional laboratory-based methods for food allergen detection such as enzyme-linked-immunosorbent assay, flow cytometry, and surface plasmon resonance, and the potential to modernize these methods by interfacing them with a smartphone readout system, based on the aforementioned smartphone characteristics. This is the first review focusing on smartphone-based food-allergen detection methods designed with the intention of being consumer-friendly. Graphical abstractA smartphone-based food allergen detection system in three easy steps (1) sample preparation, (2) allergen detection on a smartphone using antibodies, which then transmits the data wirelessly, (3) analytical results sent straight to smartphone Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s00216-018-0989-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Food allergy in the Netherlands: differences in clinical severity, causative foods, sensitization and DBPCFC between community and outpatients

Cited by 13 publications

References 19 publications

Likely questionnaire-diagnosed food allergy in 78, 890 adults from the northern Netherlands

Likely questionnaire-diagnosed food allergy in 78, 890 adults from the northern Netherlands

Genome-wide association study of self-reported food reactions in Japanese identifies shrimp and peach specific loci in the HLA-DR/DQ gene region

Consumer-friendly food allergen detection: moving towards smartphone-based immunoassays

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About