Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Mar 2.
Published in final edited form as: Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2012 Jul 25;109(3):221–222. doi: 10.1016/j.anai.2012.06.020

Poor utility of atopy patch test in predicting tolerance development in food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome

Kirsi M Järvinen *,, Jean-Christoph Caubet *,, Laura Sickles *, Lara S Ford *, Hugh A Sampson *, Anna Nowak-Węgrzyn *
PMCID: PMC3586209  NIHMSID: NIHMS441014  PMID: 22920080

Diagnostic tests are lacking in food protein-induced enterocolitis (FPIES), a non–immunoglobulin E, presumably T cell–mediated food allergy disorder. FPIES typically presents in infancy with profuse vomiting and diarrhea 2 to 4 hours after ingestion of the allergen, combined with a left-shift in peripheral blood leukocytes, occasionally causing profound dehydration, hypotension, and lethargy.1 Chronic exposure results in failure to thrive and hypoalbuminemia.1 FPIES is elicited commonly by milk and soy protein,1 oat, rice, and other foods.2 Oral food challenge (OFC) is performed to follow tolerance development in FPIES, but protracted emesis and dehydration necessitate fluid resuscitation in up to 50% of reactive challenges. Therefore, OFC to confirm the diagnosis of FPIES can be associated with high risk.

The atopy patch test (APT) has been suggested as a promising diagnostic test for FPIES3 based on the potential involvement of allergen-specific T lymphocytes, which have been cloned from APT biopsy specimens,4 in FPIES pathophysiology.5 Furthermore, it was recently shown that cutaneous exposure to food antigens can reprogram gut-homing effector T cells in lymph nodes to express skin-homing receptors, eliciting skin lesions on cutaneous food allergen contact.6 We performed APT in children with FPIES before OFC performed to monitor tolerance development. All these children had a history of reaction suggestive of “typical” FPIES as proposed by Sicherer et al1 (acute onset of severe, repetitive emesis within 1–4 hours of ingestion) to at least 1 of the following foods: milk, soy, oat, or rice. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board. Informed consent was obtained from parents and assent from children when appropriate. A standard APT panel of cow milk, soybean, rice, and oat was performed on each patient within a week before OFC as described previously.3 Briefly, a thick paste of nonfat dried milk powder or soy, rice, or oat flour in normal saline was applied into Finn Chambers placed on the back with Scanpore tape (Allerderm Laboratories, Inc., Petaluma, California). Vanicream (Pharmaceutical Specialities Inc, Rochester, Minnesota) was used as a negative control. Patches were removed after 48 hours; reactions were blindly scored by a study physician at 72 hours. Erythema alone was considered “irritation” (negative); positive reactions included erythema with infiltration (+), or with few papules (++), several papules (+++), and vesicles (++++).7

Inpatient OFCs were performed by administering food in 3 equal doses over a 45-min interval with a peripheral intravenous line in place. The total amount of challenge food was calculated as (0.15–) 0.6 g food protein (or 17.6 mL liquid milk, 20.3 mL liquid soy milk, 9 g infant rice cereal, or 4.5 g infant oat cereal) per kilogram body weight. Positive challenges comprised symptoms and laboratory findings as described previously.8

We performed 38 nonblinded challenges in 25 subjects (15 males, 10 females) at median age of 3.3 years (range, 1.5–16.8 years) (Table 1). Their most recent FPIES reaction had occurred a median of 24.5 months (range, 14.5–79 months) before the OFC. Of the 38 OFCs, 16 (42%) were positive and included vomiting and sometimes other symptoms (Table 1), within a median of 2.5 hours (range, 2–6.2 hours) from the start of the challenge to a total dose in all the patients; only 2 subjects had a positive APT. Among the 23 negative OFCs, 2 subjects had a positive APT. The median age was comparable between those with a positive and negative OFC. The APT had sensitivity of 11.8%, specificity 85.7%, positive predictive value 40%, and negative predictive value 54.5%. A total of 102 tests were done as part of the APT panel to foods other than the offending food; 5 were positive. In 3, food was tolerated; in 2, food had not yet been introduced.

Table 1.

Characteristics of the study population and test results according to the trigger fooda

Age at symptoms (mo) Initial symptoms Age at last reaction (mo) Age at testing (mo) OFC symptomsb APT SPT/sIgEc Other foods reported as causing FPIES Atopic dermatitis
Milk (n = 12) 0.25–14 V 12, L 4, D 3 0.5–51 18–109 V 8, D 1, HT 1, none 4 Pos 1, Neg 11 Pos 1/ Pos 1 Soy 4, beef 2, rice 2, none 5 Present 6, absent 6
Soy (n = 14) 1–18 V 13, D 6, L 5, S 2, n/a 1 1–161 17–201 V 5, L 1, none 9 Pos 2, Neg 12 Pos 1/ Pos 1 Milk 6, beef 1, rice 1, none 7 Present 6, absent 8
Oat (n = 4) 4–7.5 V 4, D 2, L 2 4–12 24–56 V 2, none 2 Pos 1, Neg 3 Pos 0/ Pos 0 Milk 2, rice 2, Sweet potato 1, wheat 1, none 1 Present 2, absent 2
Rice (n = 8) 4–7 V 8, D3, L4, S 1 3–17 17–79 V 1, none 7 Pos 0, Neg 7 Pos 0/ Pos 0 Milk 2, wheat 1, oat 1, sweet potato 1, rice 1, none 4 Present 4, absent 4

Abbreviations: D, diarrhea; HT, hypotension; L, lethargy; S, shock; V, vomiting; n/a, not applicable (never ingested the food but avoided due to FPIES to other foods).

Results are expressed as a range for the ages shown, otherwise as number of patients.

a

For APT, only palpable infiltration including edema and eczema was considered as a positive (Pos) test.

b

Median increase in peripheral blood polymorphonuclear cells in positive oral food challenges was 4,000/mm3, range 1,600–13,200/mm3.

c

Positive SPT is defined as wheal diameter at least 3 mm and positive specific IgE as >0.35 kU/L (UniCAP, ThermoFischer Scientific, Portage, Michigan).

The discrepancy compared with the report by Fogg et al (sensitivity of 100%, specificity 71%, positive predictive value 75%, negative predictive value 100%)3 may be attributable to the fact that we considered only palpable infiltration as a positive reaction, as recommended by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology/Global Allergy and Asthma European Network.7 The median age in the study by Fogg et al3 was younger, and the median time since the most recent reaction was shorter (12 months, range 4–29 months), which could represent a group of children with more “active” disease. However, their reaction rate was not significantly higher than ours (48.5% vs 42%). It is possible that the activation capacity of responsible T cells diminishes over time resulting in a negative APT. However, this was not the case in the gut mucosa during a positive OFC.

In conclusion, APTs to common food allergens have poor utility in the follow-up prediction of outgrowing FPIES in children.

Acknowledgments

We thank Sally Noone, RN, and Jessica Chao, RN, for their technical assistance.

Funding Sources: K.M. Järvinen has received funding from NIH K12 HD052890-03. L.S. Ford is supported in part by the 2010 AAAAI/Elliot and Roslyn Jaffe Third-Year Fellowship Food Allergy Research Award at Mount Sinai School of Medicine. H.A. Sampson is supported in part by grants from the NIH, AI44236 and AI066738. A. Nowak-Wegrzyn is supported in part by a grant from NIH NIAID AI059318. The project was supported in part by Grant Number CTSA ULI RR 029887 from the National Center for Research Resources (NCRR), a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of NCRR or NIH.

Footnotes

Disclosures: Authors have nothing to disclose.

References

  • 1.Sicherer SH, Eigenmann PA, Sampson HA. Clinical features of food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome. J Pediatr. 1998;133:214–219. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3476(98)70222-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Nowak-Wegrzyn A, Sampson HA, Wood RA, Sicherer SH. Food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome caused by solid food proteins. Pediatrics. 2003;111:829–835. doi: 10.1542/peds.111.4.829. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Fogg MI, Brown-Whitehorn TA, Pawlowski NA, Spergel JM. Atopy patch test for the diagnosis of food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome. Pediatr Allergy Immunol. 2006;17:351–355. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-3038.2006.00418.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Sager N, Feldmann A, Schilling G, Kreitsch P, Neumann C. House dust mite-specific T cells in the skin of subjects with atopic dermatitis: frequency and lymphokine profile in the allergen patch test. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1992;89:801–810. doi: 10.1016/0091-6749(92)90434-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Van Sickle GJ, Powell GK, McDonald PJ, Goldblum RM. Milk- and soy protein-induced enterocolitis: evidence for lymphocyte sensitization to specific food proteins. Gastroenterology. 1985;88:1915–1921. doi: 10.1016/0016-5085(85)90019-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Oyoshi MK, Elkhal A, Scott JE, et al. Epicutaneous challenge of orally immunized mice redirects antigen-specific gut-homing T cells to the skin. J Clin Invest. 2011;121:2210–2220. doi: 10.1172/JCI43586. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Turjanmaa K, Darsow U, Niggemann B, Rancé F, Vanto T, Werfel T. EAACI/ GA2LEN position paper: present status of the atopy patch test. Allergy. 2006;61:1377–1384. doi: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2006.01136.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Sicherer SH. Food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome: clinical perspectives. Review. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2000;30(Suppl):S45–S49. doi: 10.1097/00005176-200001001-00007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES