Anaphylaxis has been defined as a 'severe, life-threatening generalized or systemic hypersensitivity reaction'. However, data indicate that the vast majority of foodtriggered anaphylactic reactions are not life-threatening. Nonetheless, severe lifethreatening reactions do occur and are unpredictable. We discuss the concepts surrounding perceptions of severe, life-threatening allergic reactions to food by different stakeholders, with particular reference to the inclusion of clinical severity as a factor in allergy and allergen risk management. We review the evidence regarding factors that might be used to identify those at most risk of severe allergic reactions to food, and the consequences of misinformation in this regard. For example, a significant proportion of food-allergic children also have asthma, yet almost none will experience a fatal food-allergic reaction; asthma is not, in itself, a strong predictor for fatal anaphylaxis. The relationship between dose of allergen exposure and symptom severity is unclear. While dose appears to be a risk factor in at least a subgroup of patients, studies report that individuals with prior anaphylaxis do not have a lower eliciting dose than those reporting previous mild reactions. It is therefore important to consider severity and sensitivity as separate factors, as a highly sensitive individual will not necessarily experience severe symptoms during an allergic reaction. We identify the knowledge gaps that need to be addressed to improve our ability to better identify those most at risk of severe food-induced allergic reactions.

The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Guidelines, managing patients with food allergy (FA) in the community, intend to provide guidance to reduce the risk of accidental allergic reactions to foods in the community. This document is intended to meet the needs of early-childhood and school settings as well as providers of non-prepackaged food (e.g., restaurants, bakeries, takeaway, deli counters, and fast-food outlets) and targets the audience of individuals with FA, their families, patient organizations, the general public, policymakers, and allergists. Food allergy is the most common trigger of anaphylaxis in the community. Providing children and caregivers with comprehensive information on food allergen avoidance and prompt recognition and management of allergic reactions are of the utmost importance. Provision of adrenaline auto-injector devices and education on how and when to use these are essential components of a comprehensive management plan. Managing patients at risk of anaphylaxis raises many challenges, which are specific to the community. This includes the need to interact with third parties providing food (e.g., school teachers and restaurant staff) to avoid accidental exposure and to help individuals with FA to make safe and appropriate food choices. Education of individuals at risk and their families, their peers, school nurses and teachers as well as restaurant and other food retail staff can reduce the risk of severe/fatal reactions. Increased awareness among policymakers may improve decision-making on legislation at local and national level.

No abstract

IgE sensitization tests, such as skin prick testing and serum-specific IgE, have been used to diagnose IgE-mediated clinical allergy for many years. Their prime drawback is that they detect sensitization which is only loosely related to clinical allergy. Many patients therefore require provocation tests to make a definitive diagnosis; these are often expensive and potentially associated with severe reactions. The likelihood of clinical allergy can be semi-quantified from an IgE sensitization test results. This relationship varies though according to the patients' age, ethnicity, nature of the putative allergic reaction and coexisting clinical diseases such as eczema. The likelihood of clinical allergy can be more precisely estimated from an IgE sensitization test result, by taking into account the patient's presenting features (pretest probability). The presence of each of these patientspecific factors may mean that a patient is more or less likely to have clinical allergy with a given test result (post-test probability). We present two approaches to include pretest probabilities in the interpretation of results. These approaches are currently limited by a lack of data to allow us to derive pretest probabilities for diverse setting, regions and allergens. Also, cofactors, such as exercise, may be necessary for exposure to an allergen to result in an allergic reaction in specific IgE-positive patients. The diagnosis of IgE-mediated allergy is now being aided by the introduction of allergen component testing which may identify clinically relevant sensitization. Other approaches are in development with basophil activation testing being closest to clinical application.Allergy 71 (2016) 1540-1551

Precautionary allergen labelling (PAL) was introduced by the food industry to help manage and communicate the possibility of reaction from the unintended presence of allergens in foods. However, in its current form, PAL is counterproductive for consumers with food allergies. This review aims to summarize the perspectives of all the key stakeholders (including clinicians, patients, food industry and regulators), with the aim of defining common health protection and risk minimization goals. The lack of agreed reference doses has resulted in inconsistent application of PAL by the food industry and in levels of contamination that prompt withdrawal action by enforcement officers. So there is a poor relationship between the presence or absence of PAL and actual reaction risk. This has led to a loss of trust in PAL, reducing the ability of consumers with food allergies to make informed choices. The result has been reduced avoidance, reduced quality of life and increased risk-taking by consumers who often ignore PAL. All contributing stakeholders agree that PAL must reflect actual risk. PAL should be transparent and consistent with rules underpinning decision-making process being communicated clearly to all stakeholders. The use of PAL should indicate the