Reintroduction of food to a child with SM

I recently put together some recommendations on reintroducing foods to a child with SM who has been exclusively on IV nutrition (TPN) for an extended period of time. I thought you might find some use in it so I have posted it here.

Before people ask, there are no significant publications on children with MCAS because there are not currently unifying diagnostic criteria.

****

Author’s note: I am not a medical doctor. Protocols for reintroducing foods must be developed by the managing care team and tailored to each patient.

There are no large population studies for pediatric systemic mastocytosis. True systemic mastocytosis (in which WHO diagnostic criteria are satisfied) is rare in children. Accordingly, SM in children is generally reported as case reports rather than studies given the population size[i].

Given the lack of in depth literature specifically regarding food challenge in children with SM, I would draw from data in similar situations to identify a safe and appropriate protocol for reintroducing for [name redacted].

There are five scenarios that may contribute insight for food reintroduction in this patient: oral food challenges for FPIES patients; desensitization procedures for delayed hypersensitivity reactions; reintroduction of food after long term parenteral therapy; premedication of patients with mast cell activation disease, including systemic mastocytosis; and mast cell involvement in gastroparesis, ileus and GI dysmotility.

Based upon these scenarios, we can infer the following:

  • Reintroduction of food to this patient should follow a long, repetitive schedule with gradually increasing quantities.
  • Premedication with antihistamines and glucocorticoids to avoid mast cell reaction should be considered.
  • Mast cell activation can directly induce GI dysmotility. Drug management of mast cell activation can suppress impact upon function.
  • Enteral feeds should be gradually increased while parenteral feeds are gradually decreased.
Scenario Application to food reintroduction in a mast cell patient
1 Oral food challenge in setting of FPIES FPIES and food reactions secondary to mast cell disease are both non-IgE mediated and can culminate in shock requiring emergency intervention.
2 Desensitization for delayed drug hypersensitivity reactions Mast cell degranulation and anaphylactic reactions are not type I hypersensitivity reactions. They may also present on a delayed schedule.
3 Reintroduction of food after long term parenteral nutrition Reintroducing food to patients after long term parenteral nutrition may impact GI function. Gradual reintroduction is recommended.
4 Premedication of patients with mast cell activation disease Patients with mast cell activation disease, including systemic mastocytosis, are advised to premedicate prior to all procedures to decrease risk of reaction and anaphylaxis.
5 Mast cell involvement in gastroparesis, ileus, and GI dysmotility Mast cells contribute significantly to GI motility disorders including gastroparesis and ileus.

 

  1. Oral food challenge in patients with food protein induced enterocolitis syndrome (Caubet 2014[ii], Leonard 2011[iii])
  • Food protein induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES) is a severe non –IgE mediated GI food hypersensitivity syndrome.  Patients with FPIES are children. The condition is managed by removing the offending food from the diet for extended periods, usually years.
  • Food challenge in FPIES can result in severe, repetitive vomiting; diarrhea; lethargy; pallor; hypothermia; abdominal distension; and low blood pressure. Not all of these features are universally present for all patients.
  • The following procedure is recommended for oral food challenge in FPIES children:
  • All FPIES oral food challenges must be physician supervised with appropriate supportive care available.
  • Over the first hour, 0.06-0.6 g/kg body weight of food protein should be administered in three equal doses. It should not exceed 3g of total protein or 10g of total food or 100ml of liquid for initial feeding.
  • If patient has no reaction, give a full serving of food as determined by their age.
  • Observe patient for several hours afterward.
  • In the event of severe reaction, administer 1mg/kg methylprednisolone intravenously, up to 60-80 mg total; 20 ml/kg boluses of NS; and epinephrine.
  • Food challenge is considered positive for reaction if patient experiences typical symptoms as a direct result of the challenge.

 

  1. Desensitization for delayed hypersensitivity medication reactions (Scherer 2014[iv], Leoung 2001[v])
  • There are no controlled studies available on desensitization for delayed reactions to drugs.
  • Described procedures have timespans ranging from hours to weeks.
  • Patients who initially failed rapid protocols have succeeded using slower procedures.
  • It may take 2-3 days before hypersensitivity symptoms develop in a delayed reaction.
  • Long protocols with repetitive, gradually escalating dosing are recommended.
  • Antihistamine prophylaxis is often recommended. Drug and dosing vary.
  • The following procedure describes an example of a gradually escalating dosing:

Dose escalation for desensitization, adapted from antibiotic desensitization procedure

(Leoung 2001)[v]

Dosing level Drug portion Frequency of daily dosing
1 12.5% QD
2 25% BID
3 37.5% TID
4 50% BID
5 75% TID
6 100% QD

 

  1. Reintroduction of food after long term parenteral nutrition (Hartl 2009[vi], Oley Foundation)
  • Long term TPN may increase intestinal permeability.
  • Long term TPN may result in diminished enzymatic activity in GI mucosa.
  • The Oley Foundation suggests decreasing parenteral nutrition by 25% while increasing enteral feeds by 25% as the patient tolerates.

 

  1. Premedication of patients with mast cell activation disease (Castells 2016[vii])
  • Mast cell patients are recommended to premedicate for all procedures using H1 and H2 antihistamines, glucocorticoids, and leukotriene receptor antagonists.

 

  1. Mast cell involvement in gastroparesis, ileus, and GI dysmotility (Nguyen 2015[viii], de Winter 2012[ix])
  • Mast cells can be activated by a number of pathways which do not involve IgE, including neuropeptides, complement factors, cytokines and hormones.
  • Mast cells in the GI tract are closely associated with afferent nerve endings.
  • Mast cell behavior in the GI tract is largely controlled by the central nervous system.
  • Mast cells are directly involved in GI dysmotility disorders including gastroparesis and ileus.
  • Mast cell activation and population may be upregulated in the setting of GI inflammation.

[i] Lange M, et al. (2012) Mastocytosis in children and adults: clinical disease heterogeneity. Arch med Sci, 8(3): 533-541.

[ii] Caubet JC, et al. (2014) Clinical features and resolution of food protein induced enterocolitis syndrome: 10-year experience. J Allergy Clin Immunol, 134(2): 382-389.

[iii] Leonard S, et al. (2011) Food protein induced enterocolitis syndrome: an update on natural history and review of management. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol, 107:95-101.

[iv] Scherer K, et al. (2013) Desensitization in delayed drug hypersensitivity reactions – an EAACI position paper of the Drug Allergy Interest Group. European Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 68(7): 844-852.

[v] Leoung GS, et al. (2011) Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMZ) Dose Escalation versus direct rechallenge for Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia prophylaxis in human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients with previous adverse reaction to TMP-SMZ. Journal of Infectious Diseases, 184:992-997.

[vi] Hartl WH, et al. (2009) Complications and monitoring – Guidelines on Parenteral Nutrition, Chapter 11. Gen Med Sci, 7:Doc17.

[vii] http://www.tmsforacure.org/documents/ER_Protocol.pdf

[viii] Nguyen LA, et al. (2015) Clinical presentation and pathophysiology of gastroparesis. Gastroenterol Clin N Am, 44: 21-30.

[ix] de Winter BY, et al. (2012) Intestinal mast cells in gut inflammation and motility disturbances. Biochimica et Biophysica Act, 1822: 66-73.

Food allergy series: FPIES (part 2)

FPIES is usually diagnosed clinically. Endoscopy and biopsy are not necessary to diagnose, but is sometimes done to rule out other conditions.

Scopes have shown a variety of inflammatory changes in the GI tract of FPIES kids. Diffuse colitis, friable mucosa, rectal ulceration and bleeding have been observed.  Increased levels of TNFa and decreased receptors for TGF-b have been found in the GI tract. Baseline intestinal absorption is usually normal.

Biopsies have shown villous atrophy, tissue edema, crypt abscesses, increased white blood cells, including eosinophils and mast cells, and IgM and IgA containing plasma cells. Radiology showed air fluid levels (collection of both fluid and gas in the intestines), narrowing and thickening of the mucosa in the rectum and sigmoid colon and thickening of the circular folds in the small intestine. When surgery has been performed, distension of the small bowel and thickening of the jejunum has been seen.

Food specific IgE is not usually present. In one study, 21% of patients with solid food FPIES had detectable food specific IgE. 18-30% with FPIES to cow’s milk or soy have IgE for it. If IgE is found, the course of FPIES is longer. One study found a decrease in food specific IgG4 in FPIES patients along with an increase in food specific IgA.

FPIES is managed by removing the offending food. Exclusive breastfeeding can be protective. If not breastfed, use of casein hydrolysate formula is recommended. Less commonly, amino acid formula or IV fluids may be needed. Doctors recommend introducing yellow vegetables and fruits as solids rather than cereal at six months of age. Grains, legumes and poultry should be avoided for the first year of life. Once tolerance is established to one food in a high risk category, like grains, the child is more likely to tolerate other foods in the same category.

Oral food challenges (OFC) should be undertaken to determine if tolerance to the food has been achieved. A conservative approach recommends challenges every 18-24 months in patients without recent symptoms. OFCs are high risk procedures for FPIES children. The following procedure should be observed:

  • Any FPIES OFC must be physician supervised. Generally, inpatient settings are preferred, but if an outpatient setting can provide appropriate supportive care, it may be acceptable. Intravenous access should be secured prior to beginning and IV fluids and medications should be immediately available in case of reaction. ICU care is not recommended unless there is a history of near fatal reactions.
  • Blood should be drawn immediately before beginning the OFC to provide baseline complete count count and neutrophil count.
  • Over the first hour, 0.06-0.6g/kg body weight of food protein should be administered in three equal doses. It should not exceed 3g of total protein or 10g of total food or 100ml of liquid for initial feeding.
  • If patient has no reaction, give a full serving of food as determined by their age.
  • Observe patient for several hours afterward.
  • In the event of reaction, administer 20 ml/kg boluses of normal saline.
  • In the event of severe reaction, including repetitive vomiting, profuse diarrhea, lethargy, hypotension or hypothermia, administer 1 mg/kg methylprednisolone intravenously, up to 60-80mg total. About 50% of patients who react to FPIES OFCs will need IV fluids and steroids.
  • Epinephrine must be available during FPIES OFCs for treatment of hypotension and shock. In FPIES cases, epinephrine does not resolve vomiting and lethargy.
  • In children with positive skin tests and/or food specific IgE, antihistamines should also be available during OFCs.
  • Blood should be drawn six hours after OFC to compare to baseline values. If patient has diarrhea, stool guaiac tests should be done, and stool samples should be tested for white bloods, red blood cells and eosinophils in feces.

An OFC is considered either positive or negative. Positive means there is a reaction. Negative means there is not. It is positive if the patient experiences vomiting, lethargy or diarrhea in an appropriate time frame. In the absence of symptoms, if the neutrophil count is over 3500/ul, or white blood cells, frank or occult blood, and/or eosinophils are present in feces, the challenge is still considered positive.  More than 10 leukocytes/hpf in gastric juice at the 3 hour mark has been suggested as a positive marker, but needs further investigation. In the study that noted this marker, gastric juice was obtained via orogastric feeding tubes.

One study looked at the resolution of FPIES over a ten year period. 160 subjects were included in the study. 54% were male. Median age of diagnosis was 15 months. 180 OFCs were done for 82 patients, of which 30% had obtained an FPIES diagnosis based on previous OFCs. 44% of patients reacted to cow’s milk; 41% to soy; 22.5% to rice; and 16% to oat. 65% had only one food sensitivity, 26% had two, and 9% had three or more. Most had some form of atopic disease and 39% had detectable food specific IgE. 24% had IgE specific for the food causative for their FPIES reaction. Of the patients with IgE for cow’s milk, 41% of them moved from an FPIES reaction type to an IgE allergy reaction type.

60% of FPIES cases resolve by three years of age. This finding is an average and different populations see much different results. In South Korea, 90% of patients resolve by three years of age. In the US, only 25% resolve by this age. The differences observed are thought to be due to other factors, such as the frequency of food specific IgE and atopic disease. The median age for FPIES resolution depended largely on the food: 4.7 years for rice, 4 years for oat, 6.7 years for soy, 5.1 years for milk. If milk IgE was present, the patient did not become tolerant of milk during the course of study.

FPIES overwhelmingly affects very young children. However, there are rare cases of older children and adults developing FPIES at a later age. These cases involve fish and shellfish as the offending foods.

 

References:

Leonard, Stephanie, Nowak-Wegrzyn, Anna. Food protein induced enterocolitis syndrome: an update on natural history and review of management. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2011; 107:95-101.

Caubet, Jean Christoph, et al. Clinical features and resolution of food protein induced enterocolitis syndrome : 10-year experience. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2014; 134(2): 382-389.