Databases searched:
Records exported to Reference Manager (to main database: 'mustard_allergy'):
((KE = 'MUSTARD' OR KE = 'MUSTARD GREENS' OR KE = 'MUSTARD SEED OILS' OR KE = 'MUSTARD SEEDS') OR (CONTAINS(AF,'mustard* or sinapis or "brassica alba" or "brassica juncea" or "brassica nigra"'))) AND ((KE = 'ALLERGIES' OR KE = 'INTOLERANCE' OR KE = 'ANAPHYLAXIS' OR KE = 'URTICARIA') OR (CONTAINS(AF,'allerg* or hypersensi* or intoleran* or anaphyla* or urticaria* or hive*')) OR (CONTAINS(AF,'"food challenge*" or "food rechallenge"')))
PY: 1988-now
Figueroa et al. (2005) conducted a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, food challenge (DBPCFC) study in 38 subjects (age: 21.9 ± 8.6 years old) who had a reported history of allergic reactions to mustard. The control group consisted of subjects paired for age and sex, who had dust-mite allergies. The study included a clinical questionnaire, skin prick tests (SPT) with panels of aero-allergens and foods, serum extraction for in vitro tests, analysis of total IgE and specific IgE to mugwort pollen, mustard, cabbage, cauliflower, broccoli, and other foods and a double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge followed by an open challenge.
A commercial yellow mustard sauce was masked in a natural yoghurt-based vehicle, containing a mixture of vanilla, lemon juices, sugar and yellow colouring. The mustard sauce was composed of water, S. alba seeds (14% w/v), vinegar, salt, turmeric, paprika and cloves, and the sauce was free of sulphites. Apart from mustard, all patients tolerated all of the ingredients in both the mustard sauce and the vehicle. Subjects were randomly assigned to either the mustard or placebo (vehicle) group.
Subjects were challenged with increasing doses, 80, 240, 800, 2400 and 6480 mg of mustard sauce, during 15-min intervals until symptoms appeared or a cumulative dose of 10 g of mustard sauce was administered. Subjects who had negative results during the blind challenge were free to participate in an open feeding study of up to 25 g of mustard sauce. There was a 2-hour interval between the first (blind) and second (open) part of the oral challenges. A mustard allergy was considered positive if the subject had symptoms after a challenge with mustard and not after a challenge with the placebo.
Of the 38 patients included in the study, 11% had a previous history of systemic anaphylaxis. Food challenges were not performed when a subject had a history of severe anaphylaxis to mustard (adverse reaction involving at least three target organs or with demonstrated vascular collapse). Fourteen patients did not undergo DBPCFC because of either severe symptoms (n = 4) or because of denial of consent (n = 10). Therefore, the DBPCFC was performed in 24 of the 38 patients. Of the 24 subjects who underwent the DBPCFC, 14 subjects (58%) were considered to have responded positive for a mustard allergy.
Oral allergy syndrome (OAS) was the most frequent symptom observed (71%) among subjects, characterized by pruritus and mild angioedema of the lips, tongue, palate and throat, followed by a rapid resolution of symptoms. One patient showed angioedema and bronchial asthma after mustard ingestion and another subject reacted with systemic anaphylaxis. All patients completely recovered within 90 minutes after symptomatic treatment.
The mean cumulative reactive dose of mustard sauce (±SD) was 891.4 ± 855.2 mg, equivalent to 124.8 ± 119.7 mg of mustard. Patients with positive outcomes showed significantly greater mustard SPT results than those with negative outcomes (8.2 ± 3.7 vs 5.3 ± 2.4 mm, P < 0.05). The receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis yielded a cut-off value for commercial mustard SPT of 8 mm, with a specificity of 90% (95% CI, 55.5- 98.3) and a sensitivity of 50% (95% CI, 23.1-76.9).
A significant association between mustard hypersensitivity and mugwort pollen sensitization was found (97% of patients) with a partial cross-reactivity demonstrated by in vitro inhibition assays. All patients showed sensitization to other members of Brassicaceae family and cross-reactivity among them was also confirmed. Moreover, significant associations with nut (97%), leguminous (95%), corn (79%), and Rosaceae fruit (90%) sensitizations were also observed. Approximately 40% of these food sensitizations were symptomatic, including food-dependent exercise-induced anaphylaxis in six patients (2%).
Conclusions by the authors indicated that "mustard allergy is a not-uncommon disorder that can induce severe reactions" and that the significant associations with mugwort pollinosis and several plant derived food allergies suggests that a "new mustard-mugwort allergy syndrome" may exist. They also point out a relationship between this syndrome and food-dependent exercise-induced anaphylaxis.
Morisset et al. (2003) conducted the first DBPCFC prospective study to assess the allergenicity of mustard. Thirty subjects (28 children and two adults) were included in this study, subjects ages ranged from 3-20 years and 11 females and 19 males participated. Twenty-seven (27/30) subjects were screened for mustard-specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) using radioallergosorbent test (RAST). Twenty-four subjects participated in a DBPCFC and 6 subjects participated in a single-blind, placebo-controlled, food challenge (SBPCFC). A history of food allergies were suspected among the subjects based on a history of urticaria and angioedema, atopic dermatitis, asthma, abdominal pain, and episodes of diarrhea. For inclusion to the study, subjects were selected on the basis of a positive prick test (SPT) to ground mustard seeds (Brassica nigra), mustard flour (B. juncea), metabisulfite-free strong mustard seasoning (B. juncea) and a commercialized extract (B. nigra).
For the oral challenges mustard seasoning was used which contained 33% mustard seeds and was free of metabisulfite or other spices and flavoring. The taste of mustard was masked in very cold soft drinks and the soft drinks were used as the placebo. The amount of mustard seasoning tested was selected on the basis of routine consumption. Increasing doses of 10, 30, 100, 300, and 900 mg of mustard seasoning were administered every 20 minutes until a cumulative dose of 1340 mg of mustard seasoning was obtained. There was a 24-h interval between the administration of the mustard seasoning and the placebo.
Seven of the 30 subjects (23%) who participated in food challenges were considered positive. The mean skin prick test results in the positive and negative subjects were as follows: 5.5 mm vs 5.9 mm for the commercialized extract; 10.9 mm vs 5.8 mm for B. nigra ground seeds (P < 0.01), 9.9 mm vs 7.1 mm for B. juncea flour (n.s. P > 0.25) and 11.5 mm vs 9.1 mm for the metabisulfite-free mustard seasoning (n.s. P > 0.1). The mean specific IgE values determined by RAST were higher but not significantly different. The SPT conducted with different mustards showed increasing reactivity in the following order: 5.8 mm (1.5-15) for the commercialized extract, 6.9 mm (0.5-18) for B. nigra ground seeds, 7.9 mm (1-20) for B. juncea flour, and 9.7 mm (3-20) for the metabisulfite free strong mustard seasoning. The difference in mean diameters of wheals induced by SPT with the commercialized extract and the strong mustard seasoning were statistically significant (P < 0.005). The mean of mustard specific-IgE values was 8.7 KU/l (0.35-72.4).
The authors concluded that positive skin prick tests and the presence of specific IgE were not predictive of the mustard allergy and suggested that positive results from a SBPCFC or a DBPCFC should be required before recommending avoidance diets. They also noted that the seriousness of certain reactions argues for an informative labeling because mustard is often a masked in many manufactured sauces.
Rance et al. (2000 & 2001) investigated 36 children, 22 males and 14 females, aged 10 months to 15 years (average age 5.5 years) with a positive mustard SPT using an open or single-blind, placebo controlled food challenge (SBPCFC). The initial presenting clinical features among subjects were atopic dermatitis (52%), and urticaria and/or angioedema (37%), and asthma (9%). In one subject laryngeal edema with oral allergy syndrome and rhinoconjunctivitis (2%) was observed. No anaphylaxis was reported among subjects. First-degree family atopy was reported for 29 of the 36children (81%). Subjects were compared to 22 control subjects who did not have a history of food allergies.
Children were tested with increasing doses of 1, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 250, and 500 mg of mustard. The administration of the mustard and the placebo were separated by a 4-hour interval. The type, source or protein concentration of mustard used in the challenge was not specified. Symptoms that developed within a few minutes to 2 h after the last dose of the food challenge were considered for the diagnosis.
Fifteen children of 36 entered in the study (42%) were confirmed to be allergic to mustard (positive SBPCFC) and 21 children were non-allergic (negative SBPCFC). The cumulative reactive dose by open challenge or SBPCFC varied from 1 to 936 mg. No reactions to placebo were observed. The mean cumulative reactive dose was 153 mg. The reactions observed during the SBPCFC were urticaria (14 cases), rhinoconjunctivitis (three cases), angioedema (one case), oral allergy syndrome (one case), and eczema (one case). There was no significant difference in the food allergies and associated inhalant allergen sensitizations between the two groups. In the allergic group, the mean wheal diameter for mustard SPT was 8.8 mm and the median concentration of mustard serum (s) IgE 14.8 kU/l.
The authors noted that 8 of the 15 positive reactions to mustard (53%) reported a history of symptoms after mustard ingestion starting under 3 years of age. Authors suggest that sensitization to mustard may occur in utero or during lactation.
The medical terms used throughout the document and tables are listed below alphabetically. The source of the definition is captured in the endnotes.
i
MedicineNet.com © 1996-2009 website: http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/hp.asp
ii Johansson, S.G.O., Hourihane, J.O'B., Bourset, J., Bruijnzeel-Koomen, C., Dreborg, S., Haahtela, T., Kowalski, M.L., Mygind, N., Ring, J., van Cauwenberge, P., van Hage-Hamsten, M., and Wuthrich, B. (2001) A revised Nomenclature for Allergy: An EAACI position statement from the EAACI nomenclature task force. Allergy 56: 813-824.
iii
Merk Manuals: Online Medical Library, Last full review/revision September 2008 website: http://www.merck.com
iv
YourDictionary.com © 1996-2009 website: http://www.yourdictionary.com/ Citing: Webster's New World College Dictionary, Copyright © 2005 by Wiley Publishing, Inc., Cleveland, Ohio. Used by arrangement with John Wiley & Sons, Inc.