Immunology and allergy

Clinical Articles iconClinical Articles

Eating nuts at least three times a week reduces the risk of developing atrial fibrillation, Swedish researchers report.For the first time it has been shown that nut consumption has a linear, dose-response association with atrial fibrillation. The findings of this long-term, prospective study of over 60,000 adults, showed people who ate nuts three or more times a week were 18% less likely to develop AF than their non-nut-consuming counterparts.The study, published in the BMJ journal, Heart also found those adults with a moderate consumption of nuts (defined as up to 1-2 times a week) had a reduced risk of heart failure, but this benefit disappeared if the intake was greater than this.The study authors said it was already known that nut consumption was beneficial to heart health.“Meta-analyses of prospective studies have shown that nut consumption is inversely associated with death from cardiovascular disease, total coronary heart disease and total stroke,” they wrote.However, what was not known was exactly which cardiac conditions nut consumption affected and which outcomes it influenced. So back in 1997, they got this large cohort of men and women to complete a Food Frequency Questionnaire and then followed them up for the next 17 years utilising data from the much-admired Swedish National Patient and Death registers.In addition to nuts’ protective effect against atrial fibrillation and, to some degree heart failure, the study findings also seemed to suggest that eating nuts reduced the risk of non-fatal myocardial infarction and abdominal aortic aneurysm but this association did not hold true once confounders were taken into account.There was no link found between nut consumption and any other cardiovascular condition namely aortic valve stenosis, ischaemic stroke or intracerebral haemorrhage.Researchers suggested that nuts were effective through their anti-inflammatory and antioxidant effect, their ability to improve endothelial function and reduce LDL-cholesterol levels.They also said that the overall consumption of nuts among this study population was very low, maybe too low to have a meaningful effect on cholesterol levels. By far the majority of participants either didn’t report eating nuts at all or ate them only one to three times a month.But this may represent an opportunity for intervention.“Since only a small percentage of this population had moderate (about 5%) or high (<2%) nut consumption, even a small increase in nut consumption may have large potential to lead to a reduction in incidence of atrial fibrillation and heart failure in this population,” the study authors concluded.Ref: doi:10.1136/heartjnl-2017-312819

Clinical Articles iconClinical Articles

Infants receiving acid suppressive medications are more than twice as likely to develop food allergies later in life, US researchers say.Findings from a large retrospective study, analysing data from almost 800,000 children, showed that being prescribed either an H2 receptor antagonist or a proton pump inhibitor in the first six months more than doubled the risk of developing a food allergy (hazard ratios of 2.18 and 2.59 respectively) when they got older.Similarly, the use of these medications was also found to associated with an increased risk of other allergies as well, including medication allergy (HR 1.70 and 1.84), anaphylaxis (HR 1.50 and 1.45) and, to a lesser extent, allergic rhinitis and asthma.As part of the same study, the researchers also looked at antibiotics in the first six months and, perhaps unsurprisingly found a link between this type of medication and developing an allergic condition. In the case of antibiotics, children were more likely to develop allergic respiratory conditions such as asthma and allergic rhinitis than food allergies.The findings have biological plausibility, the researchers said in JAMA.Acid suppressive medications inhibit the breakdown of ingested protein which, in turn facilitates IgE antibody production increasing the sensitivity to ingested antigens. The medications also, by definition, interfere with histamine which researchers now believe has a greater role in modulating immune system functioning than previously thought.The association between increased allergy and antibiotics, on the other hand supports findings from previous studies, and is thought to be related to the effect of the antibiotics on the gut bacteria or microbiome. It is one of a number of reasons why there has been growing pressure on clinicians to try to avoid prescribing antibiotics to infants.“While there has been increasing recognition of the potential risks of antibiotic use during infancy, H2 [receptor antagonists] and PPIs are considered to be generally safe and are commonly prescribed for children younger than a year,” the study authors say.Among the almost 800,000 children included in the study, 7.6% had been prescribed a H2 receptor antagonist in infancy and 1.7% had had a PPI.The researchers did concede that a limitation of this study could be ‘the potential bias from reverse causality’. Namely an infant’s symptoms of a food allergy could have originally been misdiagnosed as gastro-oesophageal reflux necessitating acid suppression, or early symptoms of asthma could have mistakenly been thought to be an indicator of a bacterial respiratory infection.However, the authors say, this is unlikely to be the whole story. Such scenarios cannot explain the increased rates of anaphylaxis or urticaria or medication allergy. And many food allergies don’t develop until well after the first six months so it would be unlikely that allergy would have caused the symptoms experienced by an infant.All in all, best practice, according to these researchers is to minimise the use of acid suppressive medications and antibiotics in children, particularly in children less than six months old.“This study provides further impetus that antibiotics and anti-suppressive medications should be used during infancy only in situations of clear clinical benefit,” they concluded.

Clinical Articles iconClinical Articles

One of the new class of biologics may have a pivotal role in desensitising children with severe food allergies, US researchers say.That was the conclusion after their placebo-controlled study showed that a preliminary short course of the monoclonal antibody, omalizumab (Xolair) improved the safety and efficacy of oral immunotherapy in children with multiple severe Ig-E mediated food allergies.Admittedly the study was small, involving only 48 children aged 4-15 years, and only looked at children with Ig-E mediated allergies to multiple foods but the implications, the study authors say are important.These patients are a highly atopic population who are at risk of near-fatal or fatal food allergic reactions to multiple foods. There is plenty of evidence that oral immunotherapy is effective for single food desensitisation. However there has been little proof that immunotherapy works in children with allergies to multiple foods, and these are the ones more likely to accidentally ingest a food that may trigger anaphylaxis. Children with multiple food allergies are also far more likely to be unable to tolerate the oral immunotherapy.So in this phase 2 trial, those children in the treatment group were given omalizumab for eight weeks before commencing oral immunotherapy against a range of allergens including peanuts, cows milk and several different tree nuts. Outcomes were assessed by a food challenge at week 36 that looked at the ability to tolerate 2g of the trigger food.At the 36 week mark, 83% of children could now tolerate the allergenic food in the omalizumab-primed group compared with only 33% in the placebo group.  It also appeared that omalizumab was well-tolerated with no serious or severe adverse events occurring in those who received it.The impact of these findings on the lives of affected children should not be underestimated, the researchers suggest in The Lancet Gastroenterology and Hepatology.“[The] ability to increase an individual’s threshold of food ingestion to a serving of protein [for example] is important for their nutrition and overall quality of life,” they wrote.The study had its limitations, namely it remains unknown if the desensitisation was sustained but the finding that the anti-IgE cover made the oral immunotherapy more tolerable and therefore more effective is a major though incremental advance in the management of this increasingly prevalent condition.Ref:Lancet Gastroenterology and Hepatology. Published Online Dec 11, 2017http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/52468-1253(17)30392-8

Upcoming Healthed Webcast

Abnormal Liver Function Test Interpretation

Tuesday 31st March, 7pm - 9pm AEDT

Speaker

Dr Emily Nash

Gastroenterologist and Hepatologist; Chris O'Brien Lifehouse; Clinical Associate Lecturer, University of Sydney

Join Dr Emily Nash for their lecture where they will offer a framework to interpret abnormal LFTS and suggest diagnostic algorithms to help determine the most appropriate next step.