Anaphylaxis
is reported to occur with increasing frequency in infants. An illustrated Rostrum
on the diagnosis, treatment, and long-term management of anaphylaxis in this
age group has been published by Simons and Sampson (J Allergy Clin Immunol 2015;135: 1125-31).
Foods
such as milk, egg, and peanut are by far the most common triggers of anaphylaxis
in infancy, although medications and other triggers can also be implicated. Infants
with anaphylaxis typically present with sudden onset of skin signs such as
generalized urticaria, respiratory symptoms such as cough, wheeze, stridor, and
dyspnea, and/or gastrointestinal symptoms such as persistent vomiting.
Clinical
criteria for diagnosis of anaphylaxis are validated for use in children and
adults, but have not yet been validated for use in infants. A high index of
suspicion is required to diagnose anaphylaxis in babies, as they cannot
describe symptoms such as itching, and signs of infant anaphylaxis such as
flushing, dysphonia, incontinence, and behavior changes (irritability,
somnolence) also occur in healthy infants.
The
differential diagnosis of anaphylaxis in infancy includes unique entities such
as congenital abnormalities of the respiratory tract or gastrointestinal tract,
and food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome. Epinephrine injection is the
treatment of choice in both clinical and community settings.
Co-morbidities
that increase the risk of severe anaphylaxis are not well-defined, but probably
include croup, bronchiolitis, or asthma; likewise, amplifying co-factors are
not well-defined in this age group.
Long-term
management focuses on follow-up with a physician, preferably an
allergy/immunology specialist who can train caregivers of infants to recognize
and treat anaphylaxis in the community and help them to prevent anaphylaxis
episodes.
Epinephrine
auto-injectors (EAIs) are under-prescribed and under-used for anaphylaxis in
infants. In a study in which a minority of infants with severe anaphylaxis were
treated with epinephrine, reasons for not using it included failure to
recognize anaphylaxis symptoms and being afraid to inject epinephrine.
Strict
avoidance of exposure to culprit allergens (as confirmed by skin prick tests and
specific IgE measurements) prevents recurrences but requires sustained vigilance
from all the infant’s caregivers. Natural desensitization to foods such as milk
or egg eventually occurs in many infants and children, especially those with
mild initial reactions and low levels of sensitization.
Simons
and Sampson have outlined specific goals for research on anaphylaxis in
infancy. These include validation of the clinical criteria for diagnosis,
studies of infant co-morbidities and amplifying co-factors that increase the
risk of severe anaphylaxis, development of EAIs containing a 0.1 mg epinephrine
dose suitable for this age group, and inclusion of infants in prospective
studies of immune modulation to prevent anaphylaxis.
Question
for the authors: In addition to being alert to the possibility of some infants
eventually undergoing natural desensitization to milk or egg and helping to facilitate
this desensitization, what other possibilities for prevention of anaphylaxis in
infants do you see?
Answer:
In an important prospective randomized trial in carefully-selected, high-risk infants
age 4-11 months (Du Toit G et al, N Engl
J Med 2015;372:803-13), early introduction of peanut significantly
decreased the frequency of the development of peanut allergy and modulated
immune responses to peanut. Although it remains to be proven whether these
findings can be translated to other foods such as milk and egg and additional questions
need to be addressed, this research suggests that the increase in prevalence of
food-induced anaphylaxis in infants might eventually be halted.