Standardized food challenges are subject to variability in interpretation of clinical symptoms

Clinical and Translational Allergy

Cornelis K van der Ent²  Carmelo Gabriele²  Yolanda Meijer²  André C Knulst¹  Francine C van Erp² 

[1] Department of (Paediatric) Dermatology and Allergology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands;Department of Paediatric Pulmonology and Allergology, Wilhelmina Children’s Hospital, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, 3508, AB, The Netherlands

关键词: Variability;    Peanut;    Food allergy;    Food challenge;    Diagnostics;    Children;    Allergy;   

Others  :  1092743
DOI  :  10.1186/s13601-014-0043-6

 received in 2014-07-28, accepted in 2014-11-12,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Food challenge tests are the gold standard in diagnosing food allergy. Guidelines provide scoring systems to classify symptoms during challenge and typically recommend that challenges are considered positive when objective symptoms occur. However, currently no standard criteria for the definition of a positive challenge outcome exists and interpretation of food challenges mainly depends on clinical judgment. This study aims to assess inter- and intra-observer variability in outcomes of routinely performed peanut challenges in children.

Methods

All complete food challenge score sheets of double blind placebo controlled peanut challenges performed in 2008-2010 in an academic hospital were included. Score sheets were reassessed independently by three clinical experts including double reassessment in a subset of score sheets. Inter- and intra-observer variability was evaluated using kappa statistics.

Results

We included 191 food challenge score sheets. Inter-observer agreement on overall challenge outcome was moderate (κ = 0.59-0.65) and was fair (κ = 0.31-0.46) on challenges with symptoms. Intra-observer agreement on overall challenge outcome was good (κ = 0.63-0.77) but was moderate (κ = 0.50-0.60) on challenges with symptoms. Subjective symptoms (oral symptoms, abdominal complaints, food aversion) were significantly associated with disagreement between observers.

Conclusions

We demonstrate that, despite strict adherence to guidelines, there is a considerable amount of variability in reassessment of symptoms recorded on food challenges sheets between and within well trained clinicians, especially when subjective symptoms occur.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 van Erp et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Bindslev-Jensen C, Ballmer-Weber BK, Bengtsson U, Blanco C, Ebner C, Hourihane J, Knulst AC, Moneret-Vautrin DA, Nekam K, Niggemann B, Osterballe M, Ortolani C, Ring J, Schnopp C, Werfel T: Standardization of food challenges in patients with immediate reactions to foods–position paper from the European Academy of Allergology and Clinical Immunology. Allergy 2004, 59:690-697.
• [2]Sampson H, Gerthvan Wijk R, Bindslev-Jensen C, Sicherer S, Teuber SS, Burks AW, Dubois AEJ, Beyer K, Eigenmann PA, Spergel JM, Werfel T, Chinchilli VM: Standardizing double-blind, placebo-controlled oral food challenges: American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology-European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology PRACTALL consensus report. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2012, 130:1260-1274.
• [3]Cochrane SA, Salt LJ, Wantling E, Rogers A, Coutts J, Ballmer-Weber BK, Fritsche P, Fernández-Rivas M, Reig I, Knulst A, Le T-M, Asero R, Beyer K, Golding M, Crevel R, Clare Mills EN, Mackie AR: Development of a standardized low-dose double-blind placebo-controlled challenge vehicle for the EuroPrevall project. Allergy 2012, 67:107-113.
• [4]Flinterman AE, Pasmans SG, Hoekstra MO, Meijer Y, Van Hoffen E, Knol EF, Hefle SL, Bruijnzeel-Koomen CA, Knulst AC: Determination of no-observed-adverse-effect levels and eliciting doses in a representative group of peanut-sensitized children. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2006, 117:448-454.
• [5]Altman DG: Practical Statistics for Medical Research. Chapman & Hall/CRC, London; 1991.
• [6]Sampson HA: Anaphylaxis and emergency treatment. Pediatrics 2003, 111(6 Pt 3):1601-1608.
• [7]Saps M, Di Lorenzo C: Interobserver and intraobserver reliability of the Rome II criteria in children. Am J Gastroenterol 2005, 100:2079-2082.
• [8]Nakagawa J, Ouk S, Schwartz B, Schriger DL: Interobserver agreement in emergency department triage. Ann Emerg Med 2003, 41:191-195.
• [9]Baker KM, Brand DA, Hen J: Classifying asthma: disagreement among specialists. Chest 2003, 124:2156-2163.
• [10]Niggemann B: When is an oral food challenge positive? Allergy 2010, 65:2-6.
• [11]Ahrens B, Niggemann B, Wahn U, Beyer K: Positive reactions to placebo in children undergoing double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge. Clin Exp Allergy 2014, 44:572-578.
• [12]Clark AT, Mangat JS, Tay SS, King Y, Monk CJ, White PA, Ewan PW: Facial thermography is a sensitive and specific method for assessing food challenge outcome. Allergy 2007, 62:744-749.
• [13]Ruëff F, Friedl T, Arnold A, Kramer M, Przybilla B: Release of mast cell tryptase into saliva: a tool to diagnose food allergy by a mucosal challenge test? Int Arch Allergy 2011, 155:282-288.
• [14]Glaumann S, Nopp A, Johansson SGO, Borres MP, Nilsson C: Oral peanut challenge identifies an allergy but the peanut allergen threshold sensitivity is not reproducible. PloS one 2013, 8:e53465.
• [15]Järvinen KM, Sicherer SH: Diagnostic oral food challenges: procedures and biomarkers. J Immunol Meth 2012, 383:30-38.
• [16]Caffarelli C, Ricò S, Rinaldi L, Povesi Dascola C, Terzi C, Bernasconi S: Blood pressure monitoring in children undergoing food challenge: association with anaphylaxis. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2012, 108:285-286.