Intervention Efficacy of Slightly Processed Allergen/Meat in Oral Immunotherapy for Seafood Allergy: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression Analysis in Mouse Models and Clinical Patients
Xinyu Han,Xinya Wang,Xiaotong Chen,Hong Liu,Jingwen Liu,Mary Miu Yee Waye,Guangming Liu,Shitao Rao,Han,Wang,Chen,Liu,Liu,Waye,Liu,Rao
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16050667
IF: 5.9
2024-02-28
Nutrients
Abstract:Background: Seafood allergy is a significant global health concern that greatly impacts a patient's quality of life. The intervention efficacy of oral immunotherapy (OIT), an emerging intervention strategy, for seafood allergy remains controversial. This study aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of slightly processed allergen/meat from fish and crustacea in OIT, both in mouse models and clinical patients. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed in four mainstream databases and the EBSCOhost database to identify all relevant case–control and cohort studies. The aim was to elucidate the intervention efficacy, encompassing various processing methods and assessing the efficacy of multiple major allergens in OIT. Results: The meta-analysis included five case–control studies on crustacean allergens in mouse models and 11 cohort studies on meat from fish and crustacea in clinical patients for final quantitative assessments. In mouse models, crustacean allergen substantially decreased the anaphylactic score after OIT treatment (mean difference (MD) = −1.30, p < 0.01). Subgroup analyses with low-level heterogeneities provided more reliable results for crab species (MD = −0.63, p < 0.01, I2 = 0), arginine kinase allergen (MD = −0.83, p < 0.01, I2 = 0), and Maillard reaction processing method (MD = −0.65, p < 0.01, I2 = 29%), respectively. In clinical patients, the main meta-analysis showed that the slightly processed meat significantly increased the incidence rate of oral tolerance (OT, incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 2.90, p < 0.01). Subgroup analyses for fish meat (IRR = 2.79, p < 0.01) and a simple cooking treatment (IRR = 2.36, p = 0.01) also demonstrated a substantial increase in the incidence rate of OT. Sensitivity and meta-regression analyses successfully identified specific studies contributing to heterogeneity in mouse models and clinical patients, although these studies did not impact the overall significant pooled effects. Conclusions: This meta-analysis provides preliminary evidence for the high intervention efficacy of slightly processed allergen/meat from fish and crustacea in OIT, both in mouse models and clinical patients. The Maillard reaction and cooking processing methods may emerge as potentially effective approaches to treating allergen/meat in OIT for clinical patients, offering a promising and specific treatment strategy for seafood allergy. However, these findings should be interpreted cautiously, and further supporting evidence is necessary.
nutrition & dietetics