MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2760327992 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxx120

Updates on early peanut introduction and prevention of peanut allergy

2017· article· en· W2760327992 sur OpenAlexaff
Herman Tam

Notice bibliographique

RevuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2017
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Manitoba
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPeanut allergyMedicineArachis hypogaeaAllergyBiologyFood allergyImmunologyAgronomy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Peanut allergy is estimated to affect 1% to 3% of the population (1) and its prevalence has substantially increased in the past 10 to 15 years (2). It is the leading cause of anaphylaxis and death related to food allergy (3). Recent studies have explored the relationship between dietary introduction and prevention of peanut allergy. In 2008, the American Academy of Pediatrics retracted previous recommendations, and concluded that there was no convincing evidence for early food avoidance to prevent development of allergy (4). In 2011, the Canadian Paediatric Society issued a joint position statement (5) with the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (CSACI) with a recommendation to not delay introduction of solid food beyond 6 months while active introduction at 4 to 6 months of age is ‘still under investigation’. A landmark UK study, Learning Early About Peanut Allergy (LEAP) (6), investigated whether early introduction of peanut-based products prevented allergy in high-risk infants. A total of 640 infants (4 to 11 months) with severe eczema, egg allergy or both were stratified to cohorts based on pre-existing sensitization assessed using skin prick test (SPT): 542 non-sensitized (0 mm wheal) and 98 sensitized (1 mm to 4 mm wheal). Seventy-six infants with SPT wheal greater than 4 mm were excluded due to perceived higher likelihood of reactions. This was a key limitation of the study. The two groups were randomized to regularly consume or completely avoid peanut products until 60 months of age, when peanut allergy was determined using an oral challenge with peanut protein. The prevalence of peanut allergy showed a striking difference of 17% in the avoidance group compared with 3% in the consumption group, with a corresponding number needed to treat of 7.1, intention-to-treat analysis. This effect was demonstrated in both the non-sensitized group (primary prevention) as well as the sensitized group (secondary prevention). The LEAP study is the first prospective, randomized trial that clearly demonstrates early introduction reduces the risk of peanut allergy. The LEAP ON study further demonstrates that peanut allergy prevention persists after a 1-year period of regular consumption in the same cohort (7). An interim consensus statement from nine international allergy societies was issued to highlight the potential benefits (8). It supports dietary introduction of peanut products in high-risk infants between 4 and 11 months of age (level 1 evidence). It also recommends health care providers to consider evaluation by allergists, who can offer oral challenges, in infants with early-onset allergic diseases before initiating peanut introduction. In 2017, a National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases-sponsored expert panel published addendum guidelines (9) specifically for peanut allergy prevention incorporating data from emerging studies (6,7,10). For infants with severe eczema, egg allergy or both, it recommends evaluation by SPT, peanut specific IgE (sIgE) or both prior to peanut introduction at 4 to 6 months. The CSACI endorsed these recommendations (11) and emphasized that peanuts can be introduced at home for the majority of infants, including those with mild to moderate eczema. Also, it addressed several concerns including discrepancy in defining ‘severe eczema’, peanut sIgE testing by non-allergist physicians and timely assessment of infants by subspecialty allergists. Changing the culture from ‘not delay’ to ‘active introduction’ for primary prevention is vital in the setting of increasing peanut allergy. However, health care resources must be ready to accommodate these applications, especially the increasing need for evaluation by an allergist in the large number of high-risk infants at an early age. Further research is required to address the optimum dose, frequency and duration of ingestion to prevent allergy; the prevalence of allergy after cessation of regular consumption; and applications to other allergenic foods. For high-risk infants, early feeding at 4 to 6 months after medical assessment can be an effective intervention in primary prevention of peanut allergy. For non-high-risk infants, delayed introduction beyond 6 months is not recommended.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,005
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,026
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,088

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0050,031
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,002
Bibliométrie0,0030,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0020,002
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0040,006
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0260,006

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,020
Tête enseignante GPT0,318
Écart entre enseignants0,297 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentnon

Explorer davantage

Même revuePaediatrics & Child Health→Même sujetFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research→Travaux en français237 207→