Statistics from Altmetric.com
This review is of the ‘Addendum guidelines for the prevention of peanut allergy in the United States: report of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases–sponsored expert panel’. We aim to summarise the key recommendations for the prevention of peanut allergy (PA) for general paediatricians to use in their day-to-day practice.
The prevalence of PA has risen significantly across the developed world over the past few decades, with a recent estimate of around 2% among UK children.1 Severe reactions to peanut are rare, but PA remains a leading cause of fatal food-related anaphylaxis. While there have been important advances in peanut desensitisation, primary prevention remains the most attractive strategy for addressing this rise.
Information about current guideline
The guideline outlines current recommendations on the prevention of PA in infants at various risk levels in the USA. The guideline was developed by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases alongside 25 professional organisations, federal agencies and patient advocacy groups and was overseen by an expert panel of 26 members. It was published in September 2016 following a landmark clinical trial suggesting that early introduction of peanut to infants can help prevent the development of PA2 (box 1).
http://www.jacionline.org/article/S0091-6749(16)31222-2/fulltext Link to full guideline: Addendum guidelines for the prevention of peanut allergy in the United States: report of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases-sponsored expert panel
Learning Early About Peanut (LEAP) study
Link to full text: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1414850#t=article
Enquiring About Tolerance (EAT) study
Link to full text: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1514210#t=article
A previous national guideline for the diagnosis and management of food allergy in the USA was published in December 2010.3 This guideline did not offer any specific strategies for the prevention of food allergies due to a lack of evidence from studies at the time. It did state that …
Contributors All authors contributed equally to writing this review guideline.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.