Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Tree nut allergy

Tree nut allergy is an (IgE)-mediated reaction to specific proteins in tree nuts—such as almonds, walnuts, cashews, hazelnuts, pecans, pistachios, nuts, and nuts—distinct from since peanuts are rather than tree-derived. This condition typically manifests upon ingestion, inhalation of nut dust, or skin contact, eliciting symptoms from mild cutaneous reactions like and oral itching to severe systemic responses including , respiratory distress, gastrointestinal upset, and potentially fatal . Unlike many childhood food allergies, tree nut allergy often persists lifelong, with low rates of natural resolution. Prevalence varies by region and diagnostic criteria but affects roughly 0.5% to 1% of the United States population and up to 3% worldwide, with self-reported rates among children tripling in recent decades amid rising food allergy trends. It ranks among the most common and severe food allergies, frequently co-occurring with other IgE-mediated allergies like peanut or shellfish, and is a leading cause of food-induced anaphylaxis fatalities. Management centers on rigorous avoidance of implicated nuts and cross-reactive foods, immediate epinephrine administration for reactions, and allergy testing for confirmation, though diagnostic challenges arise from variable protein stability and cross-sensitization. Emerging data suggest potential prevention through early controlled introduction in infancy, but resolution remains rare without intervention.

Definition and Classification

Core Definition

Tree nut allergy is an adverse immunologic reaction to proteins in tree nuts, primarily mediated by (IgE) antibodies, which trigger the release of and other inflammatory mediators from mast cells and upon exposure. This typically manifests as immediate symptoms including urticaria, , gastrointestinal distress, respiratory compromise, or , a potentially life-threatening systemic response. Tree nuts implicated include almonds, walnuts, cashews, hazelnuts, pecans, pistachios, and Brazil nuts, among others derived from trees rather than ground-growing . Unlike , which involves a , tree nut allergy arises from botanically distinct sources, with only about 40% of affected individuals exhibiting co-sensitization to . Cross-reactivity among tree nuts is common due to shared protein structures like 2S albumins and vicilins, increasing the risk that allergy to one nut extends to others. The U.S. designates tree nuts as one of nine major allergens requiring labeling, excluding items like which rarely provoke reactions. Most cases persist lifelong, with resolution occurring in approximately 10% of children, underscoring the need for strict avoidance and preparedness with epinephrine auto-injectors for severe reactions. relies on clinical history, skin prick testing, and serum IgE levels, as oral challenges carry risk.

Classification Among Food Allergies

Tree nut allergy is an IgE-mediated reaction, involving the production of allergen-specific IgE antibodies that bind to mast cells and upon exposure to tree nut proteins, leading to rapid release of and other mediators. It falls within the category of immediate-onset food allergies, distinct from non-IgE-mediated or mixed mechanisms seen in some cases of cow's or , and is recognized as one of the nine major food allergens under U.S. labeling requirements, grouped with (a ), , eggs, , soy, , crustacean shellfish, and . Among food allergies, tree nut allergy ranks highly in prevalence, affecting roughly 1-3.3% of children in population-based studies, comparable to (2.8% at age six) but exceeding that of (around 2%) or (2-3%) in persistence into adulthood. Unlike transient early-childhood allergies to or , which resolve in 80-90% of cases by school age, tree nut allergy persists lifelong in approximately 75-80% of affected individuals, classifying it as a akin to or . Approximately 40% of those with tree nut allergy also react to , though is limited due to botanical differences, with tree nuts deriving from angiosperm trees or shrubs. In severity, tree nut allergy is associated with elevated risk, accounting for a substantial share of fatal and near-fatal reactions alongside , which together cause over 50% of such events despite lower overall than or allergies. Severe reaction histories occur in about two-thirds of cases, exceeding rates for non-nut allergens, and reactions often involve multiple systems including respiratory and cardiovascular compromise, necessitating epinephrine auto-injectors. This positions tree nut allergy as a high-priority concern in clinical guidelines, with diagnostic challenges arising from variable sensitization patterns across specific nuts (e.g., and predominance).

Specific Tree Nuts Implicated

Tree nut allergies primarily involve IgE-mediated to proteins in seeds derived from trees in the order , , and others, with excluded as they are . The most commonly implicated species include walnuts (), cashews (Anacardium occidentale), almonds (Prunus dulcis), hazelnuts (), pecans (Carya illinoinensis), and pistachios ( vera), accounting for the majority of reported reactions. Brazil nuts (Bertholletia excelsa) and macadamia nuts (Macadamia integrifolia) are less frequent but can trigger severe responses. Prevalence varies regionally; in the United States, and allergies each affect about 0.7% of the population based on self-reported data, surpassing walnuts in some surveys. In , allergy predominates, comprising up to 17-100% of tree nut allergies in affected individuals. and elicit the highest rates of clinical reactivity globally, often leading to . Cross-reactivity is common within botanical families: cashew-allergic individuals react to pistachios in approximately two-thirds of cases due to homologous allergens like Ana o 3 and Pis v 3, while allergy correlates with sensitivity via shared vicilins such as Jug r 2 and Car i 2. Multiple tree nut allergies occur in over 30% of cases, complicating avoidance. Less common nuts like pine nuts (Pinus spp.) may cause photo-contact rather than systemic IgE reactions in some instances.

Epidemiology

Global and Regional Prevalence

The prevalence of tree nut allergy exhibits significant global variation, with self-reported estimates ranging from 0.05% to 4.9% across studies, reflecting differences in methodology, population sampled, and diagnostic criteria. Challenge-confirmed , considered more reliable for establishing true allergy, is substantially lower at approximately 0.04% across all age groups in meta-analyses of food challenges. These discrepancies arise because self-reported data often capture perceived sensitivities or rather than IgE-mediated allergy, while challenge-proven rates require clinical verification and thus yield conservative figures. Higher correlates with Western dietary patterns and , whereas lower rates prevail in regions with delayed or frequent early to nuts. In North America, particularly the United States, population-based surveys indicate a probable tree nut allergy prevalence of 1.14% (95% CI 0.92%-1.35%), derived from telephone interviews confirming symptoms and physician diagnosis. European data from systematic reviews show self-reported point prevalence for specific tree nuts varying by type: hazelnut at 4.0% (95% CI 2.9%-5.2%), walnut at 1.8% (95% CI 1.1%-2.5%), almond at 2.0% (95% CI 1.1%-2.9%), and Brazil nut at 3.4% (95% CI 2.0%-4.9%); challenge-proven rates are markedly lower, such as 0.04% for hazelnut (95% CI 0.0%-0.1%) and 0.02% for walnut (95% CI 0.01%-0.1%). Hazelnut allergy predominates in Central and Northern Europe, affecting 1.4%-3.8% of schoolchildren in some cohorts, often linked to birch pollen cross-reactivity. Australia reports elevated rates for certain nuts, with cashew allergy at 2.6%-2.8% among children aged 6-10 years in challenge-based studies. In and other developing regions, tree nut allergy remains less common, with influenced by , birthplace, and lower nut consumption; for instance, questionnaire surveys in and the reveal minimal rates among Asian populations compared to Western-born counterparts. may elevate risks in Asia, but overall figures lag behind Western estimates, potentially due to protective early exposures or genetic factors. These regional disparities underscore environmental and cultural determinants over purely genetic ones, as evidenced by lower rates among Asian immigrants to high-prevalence countries who retain birthplace protections.
RegionEstimate (Type)Specific NotesSource
Global0.04% (challenge-proven)All ages, meta-analysis
United States1.14% (probable, self-reported)Population-based, includes symptoms
Europe4.0% hazelnut (self-reported point)Varies by nut; challenge-proven <0.1%
Australia2.6%-2.8% cashew (challenge)Children 6-10 years
AsiaLow (<1%, self-reported)Ethnicity/birthplace dependent
Self-reported prevalence of tree nut allergy among children in the United States rose from 0.2% in 1997 to 1.1% in 2008, based on national random digit dial telephone surveys involving over 8,000 households. This increase paralleled a more than doubling in combined rates, from 1.2% to 2.5% over the same period, as documented in longitudinal self-report data. These surveys, while subject to potential overestimation due to reliance on parental recall without clinical confirmation, consistently indicate an upward trajectory, with physician-diagnosed cases in subsequent analyses corroborating the trend through medical record reviews in cohorts like those from the . Beyond the U.S., similar temporal increases have been observed in other regions. In Australia, population-based studies such as reported tree nut allergy prevalence around 1-2% in infants by the 2010s, higher than earlier estimates and linked to rising overall food allergy rates. In Hong Kong, parent-reported tree nut allergy among preschoolers (aged 2-7 years) surged five-fold from 0.13% in 2006 to 0.68% in 2020, across three cross-sectional surveys of over 11,000 children, with the acceleration notable between 2013 and 2020. These patterns align with broader Westernized dietary shifts, though rates remain lower in non-Western developing areas, suggesting environmental or lifestyle factors influencing the rise. Post-2008 data indicate continued escalation, particularly as tree nut allergies persist into adulthood more than many other food allergies. U.S. analyses from 2011 onward show overall food allergy prevalence, including tree nuts, climbing an additional 50% by 2021 compared to 2007 levels, with tree nut cases comprising a growing share due to low resolution rates (under 10% outgrow). Emerging adult-onset cases further contribute, with studies reporting tree nut allergy in up to 1% of adults by the late 2010s, versus negligible rates in prior generations. Disparities persist, with faster increases among certain ethnic groups, such as Black children experiencing a 2.1% per-decade rise versus 1.0% for White children from 1997-2008. Overall, these trends underscore a marked public health shift, with tree nut allergy now affecting 1-3% of children in high-prevalence regions by the 2020s.

Demographic Patterns

Tree nut allergy typically manifests in early childhood, with initial allergic reactions occurring at a median age of 2 years (interquartile range 1-4 years). Prevalence is higher among children than adults, with self-reported rates in U.S. children exceeding those in adults, though many cases persist lifelong due to lower resolution rates compared to allergies like milk or egg. In population studies, tree nut allergy at age 6 years reaches approximately 3.3%, often co-occurring with . Gender patterns show a male predominance in pediatric cases, with peanut and tree nut allergy rates of 1.7% in males under 18 years versus 0.7% in females (P=0.02). This aligns with broader trends in food allergies, where male children exhibit higher incidence, potentially linked to immunological differences in early life. In contrast, adult-onset tree nut allergy and overall prevalence shift toward females, with women more prone to developing or reporting persistent cases. Racial and ethnic variations are evident in U.S. data, with Asian children reporting the highest rates of . Among adults, Black individuals show the highest prevalence of , followed by patterns of higher in Asians and shellfish in Hispanics. These disparities may reflect genetic, environmental, or exposure differences, though self-reported surveys predominate and warrant confirmation via objective testing. White children exhibit relatively higher compared to African American and Latino peers in some cohorts, highlighting potential subgroup heterogeneity.

Pathophysiology

Immunological Mechanisms

Tree nut allergy primarily manifests as an IgE-mediated type I hypersensitivity reaction, in which the adaptive immune system erroneously recognizes stable proteins from tree nuts as threats. Upon initial sensitization, antigen-presenting cells process and present tree nut-derived peptides to naïve T cells, favoring differentiation into lymphocytes under the influence of a cytokine milieu rich in and . These Th2 cells, along with contributions from , promote B-cell class switching to produce allergen-specific IgE antibodies, which bind to high-affinity receptors on the surface of mast cells and basophils. In the effector phase, subsequent exposure to tree nut allergens cross-links IgE-FcεRI complexes on sensitized mast cells and basophils, triggering rapid degranulation and release of preformed mediators such as histamine, as well as newly synthesized lipid mediators including leukotrienes and prostaglandins. This cascade initiates immediate symptoms through vasodilation, increased vascular permeability, smooth muscle contraction, and nerve stimulation, potentially escalating to systemic anaphylaxis if unchecked. Sensitization routes influence severity: gastrointestinal or cutaneous exposure to digestion-stable allergens typically yields class I responses with potent systemic effects, whereas respiratory cross-sensitization to labile proteins often results in class II reactions confined to milder oral symptoms. Major allergens in tree nuts predominantly comprise seed storage proteins resistant to proteolytic degradation and heat, enabling intact absorption and robust IgE recognition. These include 2S albumins (e.g., in walnut, in hazelnut), which exhibit high IgE-binding capacity and correlate with severe reactions; 7S vicilins (e.g., in walnut); and 11S legumins (e.g., in hazelnut, in cashew), which contribute to cross-reactivity across species due to structural homology. Additional classes involve pathogenesis-related proteins like (e.g., in hazelnut), linked to pollen-food syndrome via conformational epitopes, and lipid transfer proteins (e.g., in hazelnut), which are thermostable and prevalent in Mediterranean cohorts. Cross-reactivity arises from shared epitopes among tree nuts, peanuts, and environmental allergens, complicating monosensitization and amplifying polysensitization risks, though clinical relevance varies by individual IgE affinity.
Tree NutMajor AllergenProtein FamilyImmunological Role
HazelnutCor a 1PR-10Cross-reacts with birch pollen; milder OAS
HazelnutCor a 911S globulinStable; severe systemic reactions
HazelnutCor a 142S albuminHigh IgE affinity; anaphylaxis risk
WalnutJug r 12S albuminDigestion-resistant; potent sensitization
WalnutJug r 411S leguminCross-reactive; contributes to persistence
CashewAna o 311S globulinThermostable; frequent severe elicitor
AlmondPru du 611S globulinStorage protein; IgE-mediated reactivity

Genetic and Environmental Factors

Heritability estimates for tree nut allergy, derived from twin studies, indicate a substantial genetic influence, with monozygotic twins showing significantly higher concordance rates (64-86%) compared to dizygotic twins (7-20%) for peanut and tree nut allergies combined. Familial aggregation further supports this, as siblings of affected individuals face a 10-fold increased risk relative to the general population. Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified loci associated with food allergies, including tree nuts, though most data derive from peanut allergy cohorts due to overlap in sensitization patterns; notable variants include those in the HLA-DR and HLA-DQ regions (e.g., rs7192, rs9275596), which confer risk through altered antigen presentation and Th2 immune skewing, accounting for up to 20% of peanut allergy heritability that extends to tree nuts. Additional candidates include polymorphisms in STAT6, which regulates IL-4/IL-13 signaling critical for IgE class switching, directly linked to nut allergy susceptibility in case-control analyses. C11orf30/EMSY has emerged as a shared risk locus for peanut and broader food allergies, including tree nuts, via meta-analyses of multiple ethnic cohorts. However, tree nut-specific GWAS remain limited, with only 16 genome-wide significant variants identified across food allergies as of 2024, underscoring the polygenic nature but incomplete penetrance without environmental triggers. Environmental factors modulate genetic risk, with early-life atopic diseases—such as eczema (adjusted odds ratio 2.5-4.0), asthma, and egg allergy—strongly predicting tree nut sensitization and clinical reactivity in longitudinal cohorts followed to adulthood. Sensitization to storage proteins (e.g., Cor a 9 in hazelnut, Ara h 2 homologs) rather than whole extracts correlates more robustly with symptoms across tree nuts, influenced by delayed complementary feeding and urban hygiene practices that reduce microbial diversity and promote Th2 dominance per the hygiene hypothesis. Rising prevalence since the 1990s aligns with decreased early allergen exposure, vitamin D insufficiency from indoor lifestyles, and cesarean deliveries disrupting microbiome maturation, though causal links require further randomized validation beyond observational data. Gene-environment interactions, such as filaggrin loss-of-function mutations exacerbating eczema-driven sensitization, amplify risk in atopic families.

Clinical Manifestations

Acute Symptoms

Acute symptoms of tree nut allergy arise from immediate IgE-mediated hypersensitivity reactions, typically onsetting within minutes to 2 hours after ingestion or exposure, and primarily involve mast cell and basophil degranulation releasing histamine and other mediators. These reactions affect multiple organ systems, with cutaneous manifestations being the most prevalent, reported in approximately 89% of cases among affected children, including urticaria, angioedema, and generalized pruritus. Oral symptoms, such as itching or swelling of the lips, tongue, or throat, occur frequently, affecting up to 79% of individuals in clinical cohorts undergoing oral food challenges. Gastrointestinal symptoms are common, manifesting as nausea, vomiting, abdominal cramping, or diarrhea in a substantial proportion of reactions, often alongside skin involvement. Respiratory symptoms, observed in about 52% of pediatric cases, include wheezing, throat tightness, repetitive coughing, or nasal congestion, potentially progressing if untreated. Ocular effects, such as conjunctival injection, tearing, or periorbital edema, may accompany these, though less dominant than dermatologic or oral signs. Symptom severity varies by individual sensitization, dose, and co-factors like exercise, but tree nut reactions are disproportionately likely to be systemic compared to other food allergens.

Anaphylactic Reactions

Anaphylactic reactions to tree nuts represent severe, IgE-mediated type I hypersensitivity responses triggered by exposure to allergenic proteins in nuts such as almonds, walnuts, cashews, and pecans. These reactions arise from cross-linking of IgE antibodies on mast cells and basophils, prompting rapid degranulation and release of inflammatory mediators including histamine, leukotrienes, and prostaglandins, which cause widespread physiological disruption. Symptoms typically manifest within minutes of ingestion, though delayed onset up to 2 hours can occur, and even trace amounts—less than 100 mg—may provoke severe responses due to the potency of tree nut allergens. Common clinical features encompass multi-system involvement: cutaneous effects like generalized urticaria, pruritus, and angioedema; respiratory compromise including laryngeal edema, bronchospasm, wheezing, and stridor; cardiovascular instability such as hypotension, tachycardia, and shock; and gastrointestinal symptoms like nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and diarrhea. A sense of impending doom often accompanies these manifestations, reflecting the acute systemic nature of the event. accounts for 11–40% of food-induced anaphylaxis cases and is associated with high rates of severe reactions, with approximately two-thirds of affected individuals reporting prior severe episodes. Biphasic anaphylaxis, characterized by recurrence of symptoms after apparent resolution—typically within 1–72 hours without re-exposure—occurs in up to 20% of food-related cases and is more prevalent with when the initial reaction involves severe multi-organ symptoms or delayed epinephrine use. Tree nuts contribute to 18–40% of anaphylaxis fatalities, often linked to asthma comorbidity, which amplifies bronchospasm risk, and failure to promptly administer epinephrine, underscoring the need for immediate intervention to mitigate progression to respiratory arrest or cardiovascular collapse.

Diagnosis

Diagnostic Tests and Criteria

Diagnosis of tree nut allergy begins with a thorough clinical history documenting immediate IgE-mediated symptoms, such as oral pruritus, urticaria, gastrointestinal distress, respiratory compromise, or anaphylaxis, occurring reproducibly after ingestion of a specific tree nut. A history of reactions on multiple occasions predicts primary allergy with approximately 80% probability. Skin prick testing (SPT) using fresh extracts of individual tree nuts constitutes a primary in vivo diagnostic method, with a wheal diameter ≥3 mm beyond the negative control denoting positivity. Larger wheals (≥8 mm) yield positive predictive values >95% for clinical reactivity to cashew, , and . SPT demonstrates high but limited specificity, as often precedes or exceeds clinical . Serum-specific IgE (sIgE) assays quantify allergen-specific antibodies, with levels ≥0.35 kU/L indicating requiring clinical contextualization to avoid . Predictive thresholds vary by nut; for , sIgE ≥1.1 kU/L offers 94% and 64% specificity, while requires ≥2.34 kU/L for 79% and 62% specificity. Component-resolved diagnostics targeting stable storage proteins—such as Ana o 3 (; ≥0.4 kU/L, 96% , 94% specificity) or Cor a 14 (; ≥0.64 kU/L, 73% , 95% specificity)—improve specificity, aiding differentiation from in birch-sensitized patients. The oral food challenge (OFC) under supervised medical conditions serves as the reference standard for confirmation, involving progressive dosing of the implicated nut to provoke or exclude reactions. Open OFC is routinely employed for efficiency, with double-blind placebo-controlled variants reserved for equivocal scenarios. Diagnostic criteria mandate integrating history with testing: allergy is affirmed by compatible history plus positive SPT or sIgE (especially at high predictive cutoffs, obviating OFC in select cases), while OFC resolves discrepancies, such as sensitization absent reaction history. Tree nut-specific variations necessitate individualized assessment, as predictive values differ (e.g., robust for cashew/pistachio, weaker for almond/pecan). Re-evaluation via repeat testing or OFC is advised periodically in children to detect potential resolution.

Differential Diagnosis Challenges

Diagnosing tree nut allergy presents significant challenges due to the non-specific nature of symptoms, which overlap with other IgE-mediated food allergies, (), and non-allergic conditions such as irritant reactions or viral illnesses. Symptoms like urticaria, , or gastrointestinal distress can mimic reactions to (a often co-occurring with tree nut allergy), , or finned fish, complicating initial clinical assessment without confirmatory testing. In pediatric populations, where self-reporting is unreliable, parental history may attribute reactions to tree nuts erroneously, especially amid widespread avoidance advice. Skin prick tests (SPT) and serum-specific IgE (sIgE) levels, while useful for screening, exhibit limited predictive accuracy for tree nut allergy, with positive predictive values often below 95% except for cashew and walnut in select studies. Traditional SPT cutoffs (e.g., ≥3 mm wheal) yield high false-positive rates, as sensitization to tree nut proteins occurs in up to 33% of peanut-allergic children without clinical reactivity, leading to unnecessary avoidance and potential overdiagnosis. False negatives also arise, particularly for less common tree nuts like pistachio or pecan, where component-resolved diagnostics (e.g., to Ara h 2 homologs) improve specificity but remain unavailable or unvalidated for all species. Discordant results between history, SPT, and sIgE necessitate oral food challenges (OFC), the diagnostic gold standard, yet OFC protocols vary by nut type, with pass rates exceeding 90% in sensitized patients for many tree nuts, underscoring test over-reliance. A key differential is , or pollen-food , where cross-reacting proteins (e.g., Bet v 1 homologs in birch pollen and ) provoke transient oral pruritus from raw tree nuts like or , but rarely systemic . Distinguishing from true tree nut is critical, as symptoms resolve with cooked nuts (denaturing labile proteins), whereas genuine persists; however, mild oral symptoms in nut exposure warrant allergist evaluation, as they may precede severe reactions in 10-20% of cases. Non-IgE-mediated mimics, such as (), present delayed vomiting but are rarer with tree nuts and lack markers. Double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFC) mitigate bias but are resource-intensive, time-consuming, and carry risk (up to 2-3% per ), limiting accessibility in routine practice. Tree nut diversity (e.g., 9 major types) demands nut-specific evaluation, as to one (e.g., ) predicts others poorly, with co-sensitization rates of 30-50% but clinical lower. Emerging tools like activation tests show promise for higher specificity but lack standardization and widespread validation as of 2023. These hurdles contribute to misdiagnosis, with studies estimating that up to 96% of test-positive individuals for non-primary nuts may tolerate them upon , perpetuating avoidant behaviors without evidence of benefit.

Primary Prevention

Early Introduction Strategies

Early introduction of tree nuts during infancy represents a preventive strategy aimed at reducing the risk of developing tree nut allergy by promoting through regular exposure. This approach contrasts with prior recommendations for allergen avoidance, which were based on limited evidence and later disproven by trials showing that delayed exposure may heighten sensitization risk. Current guidelines, informed by high-quality randomized controlled trials on related , advocate introducing tree nuts alongside other solids starting at approximately 4-6 months of age in infants who have begun complementary feeding, provided there are no immediate contraindications such as acute illness. The strongest empirical support for early allergen introduction derives from the Learning Early About (LEAP) trial, a 2015 randomized of 640 high-risk infants (those with severe eczema and/or ) that found regular consumption from 4-11 months reduced prevalence at age 5 by 81% compared to avoidance (1.9% vs. 13.7% adjusted risk). While LEAP focused on , its findings prompted multi-society guidelines extending the principle to other allergens, including tree nuts, due to shared immunological pathways involving Th2-mediated . However, dedicated large-scale trials for tree nuts remain limited; the ongoing TreEat (NCT04801823), initiated in 2021, is evaluating whether early, regular tree nut ingestion from 4 months prevents allergy in 1,200 infants, with primary outcomes pending as of 2025. Extrapolation to tree nuts is thus reasoned from data and smaller observational cohorts, emphasizing causal mechanisms like mucosal immune priming over unsubstantiated delay benefits. Implementation involves offering tree nuts in age-appropriate, low-risk forms to minimize choking hazards, such as smooth butters or finely ground powders mixed into purees, never whole nuts before age 4-5 years. Introduction should occur one nut type at a time (e.g., almond butter first, then walnut after 3-5 days if tolerated) in small initial amounts (e.g., 1/4 teaspoon), escalating to regular servings (e.g., 6-7 grams weekly) if no reaction occurs, under parental observation during daytime. For high-risk infants, pre-introduction screening via skin prick testing or consultation with an allergist is advised to stratify risk, though universal early introduction is increasingly supported for low-risk groups based on population-level data showing reduced overall food allergy rates post-LEAP guideline adoption. Breastfed or formula-fed infants can incorporate these alongside maternal diet considerations, but evidence does not mandate exclusive breastfeeding cessation for prevention. Potential risks include immediate IgE-mediated reactions in already sensitized infants (estimated <1% in unscreened low-risk groups) or non-allergic choking, underscoring the need for preparedness with epinephrine auto-injectors in high-risk cases. Real-world adherence to early introduction has correlated with declining peanut allergy rates, but tree nut-specific longitudinal data are emerging; a 2023 analysis noted sustained tolerance in cohorts exposed early without formal tree nut trials. Guidelines from bodies like the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (AAAAI) and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) prioritize this strategy over prolonged avoidance, citing causal evidence from intervention trials over correlative epidemiology.

Role of Breastfeeding and Diet

The role of breastfeeding in preventing tree nut allergy remains uncertain, with observational studies yielding inconsistent results and limited data specific to tree nuts. Some cohort studies and reviews suggest that prolonged exclusive breastfeeding—particularly beyond 3-6 months—may reduce the overall risk of food sensitization in infants, potentially through modulation of gut microbiota and immune priming, though randomized controlled trials are lacking to confirm causality. However, other analyses, including systematic reviews of high-risk infants, find no significant association between breastfeeding duration and food allergy development, attributing any observed benefits to confounding factors like socioeconomic status or delayed allergen exposure rather than breastfeeding itself. For tree nut allergy specifically, evidence is sparse, with most data extrapolated from broader food allergy cohorts where tree nuts comprise a subset; no large-scale trials isolate breastfeeding's effect on tree nut outcomes. Maternal dietary patterns during lactation do not appear to influence tree nut allergy risk in offspring, and avoidance of tree nuts or other allergens is not recommended. Prospective studies report no link between maternal consumption of peanuts or tree nuts while breastfeeding and increased child sensitization; in fact, one cohort found that maternal peanut intake during lactation, combined with early infant introduction, correlated with the lowest rates of peanut sensitization (1.7%), suggesting possible tolerogenic effects via allergen transfer in breast milk. Breast milk can contain detectable food proteins, including those from nuts, which may promote oral tolerance through low-dose exposure without eliciting reactions in most cases, though this mechanism requires further mechanistic studies in humans. Guidelines from allergy societies, based on systematic reviews, explicitly advise against maternal allergen restriction during breastfeeding for prevention, citing insufficient evidence of benefit and potential nutritional risks. Infant diet during breastfeeding periods should prioritize timely allergen introduction over exclusivity to mitigate allergy risk, aligning with evidence from intervention trials. The EAT study, a randomized trial in breastfed infants, demonstrated that early introduction of allergens like peanuts (from 3 months) reduced allergy rates, with no adverse interaction from ongoing breastfeeding; similar principles extend to tree nuts, though tree nut-specific data lag behind peanuts. Exclusive breastfeeding without complementary feeding may inadvertently delay exposure, potentially heightening sensitization risk in atopic-prone infants, as supported by observational data linking prolonged exclusivity to higher food allergy incidence in some populations. Current expert consensus recommends introducing tree nuts around 6 months in infants without prior reactions, even if breastfeeding continues, to leverage windows of immune plasticity while benefiting from breast milk's general immunomodulatory properties like TGF-β and oligosaccharides. This approach reflects causal evidence from exposure-timing studies rather than correlative breastfeeding data alone.

Management and Acute Care

Avoidance Measures

Strict avoidance of confirmed allergenic tree nuts remains the cornerstone of management for individuals with tree nut allergy, as accidental exposure can trigger severe reactions including anaphylaxis. This entails eliminating foods containing the specific nuts—such as , , , , , , , and others—from the diet, with evidence indicating that adherence reduces reaction incidence. While not all tree nuts cross-react immunologically, clinical guidelines recommend caution with non-allergenic ones due to processing overlaps, and allergists often advise against blanket avoidance only if tolerance is verified via supervised challenges. Food label scrutiny is essential, as the U.S. Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act (FALCPA) of 2004 mandates clear declaration of (e.g., "contains walnuts") in ingredients or via "Contains" statements on packaged goods, covering eight major allergens including tree nuts. Labels must specify the exact nut when grouped under "tree nuts," but voluntary advisory phrases like "may contain tree nuts" signal potential cross-contamination risks from shared manufacturing lines, which affect up to 10-20% of products in surveys of allergen facilities. Consumers should verify for hidden sources such as nut extracts, butters, oils, or derivatives in processed items like cereals, baked goods, and cosmetics. Cross-contamination poses significant risks beyond labels, occurring via shared equipment, utensils, or airborne particles in food preparation, with studies documenting trace nut proteins (e.g., 1-10 mg) eliciting reactions in sensitized individuals. Precautions include using dedicated cookware, inquiring about kitchen practices at restaurants or events, and selecting certified nut-free products where available, though no universal threshold exists for safe trace levels—EU standards limit to 10 mg/kg for some allergens, but U.S. relies on manufacturer declarations. For children, school protocols often involve nut-free zones and staff training to mitigate shared lunch environments. Additional strategies encompass educating caregivers, teachers, and peers on recognition of undeclared exposures (e.g., in Asian cuisine via or walnut sauces), and consulting dietitians for nutrient-balanced alternatives like seeds or legumes to avoid deficiencies in healthy fats. Inhalation or skin contact risks are minimal compared to ingestion, with rare reports of reactions from nut dust in processing plants but negligible in home settings. Patients should carry epinephrine auto-injectors despite avoidance, as lapses occur in 10-15% of cases annually per cohort studies.

Emergency Interventions

The primary emergency intervention for anaphylaxis induced by tree nut exposure is the immediate administration of intramuscular epinephrine, delivered via auto-injector into the anterolateral thigh at a dose of 0.01 mg/kg (maximum 0.5 mg for adults or 0.3 mg for children). This medication acts rapidly to counteract hypotension, bronchospasm, and mucosal edema through alpha- and beta-adrenergic effects, potentially requiring a second dose if symptoms persist after 5-15 minutes. Emergency medical services must be activated concurrently, as epinephrine provides only temporary stabilization. Supportive measures include laying the patient supine with legs elevated if hypotensive (or in recovery position if vomiting), removing any allergen exposure, and providing supplemental oxygen if available. Antihistamines such as diphenhydramine (1 mg/kg IV/IM) and H2 blockers like ranitidine may alleviate urticaria or mild symptoms but do not replace epinephrine and have delayed onset. Corticosteroids (e.g., methylprednisolone 1-2 mg/kg IV) are administered to prevent biphasic reactions, while bronchodilators like albuterol are used for wheezing, and intravenous fluids address hypotension. In cases of respiratory compromise or cardiovascular instability, advanced airway management or vasopressors may be necessary in a hospital setting. Biphasic anaphylaxis, where symptoms recur after initial resolution, occurs in approximately 4-16% of food allergy-induced cases, with higher incidence linked to severe initial reactions or delayed epinephrine administration; for tree nut triggers, observation periods of 6-24 hours in medical facilities are recommended to mitigate this risk. Patients should carry two epinephrine auto-injectors at all times, with prescriptions renewed regularly, and undergo training on device use to ensure effective self-administration.

Advanced Treatments

Immunotherapies

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) represents the primary investigational approach for desensitizing patients with IgE-mediated , involving incremental dosing of allergen under supervision to raise the reaction threshold. Single-nut OIT trials report desensitization rates of 41% for hazelnut (n=170 children), 89% for walnut (n=58), and 88% for cashew (n=50), typically assessed via double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges tolerating 4000 mg protein or equivalent. In a walnut-specific cohort, 89% achieved desensitization to ≥4000 mg walnut protein, with cross-desensitization to pecan in 100% and cashew in 93% of cases, though sustained unresponsiveness required ongoing exposure and was confirmed in only 3 of 3 participants at 450 mg after one year off therapy. Cashew OIT similarly yielded 88% desensitization to 4000 mg protein (~16 cashews), with 100% cross-desensitization to pistachio. Multi-nut OIT protocols, often including tree nuts alongside peanut or milk, demonstrate overall desensitization in 88% of participants, with 53% achieving sustained unresponsiveness to 2000 mg after 2.5 years. Safety profiles indicate frequent mild-to-moderate adverse events during OIT, such as oral itching or gastrointestinal symptoms, occurring in most participants; epinephrine administration ranges from 0% at lower doses to 20% overall, with adjunct reducing reaction severity in multi-nut regimens. In preschoolers (aged <5 years), real-world tree nut OIT in 97 patients showed 70.6% experiencing mild-to-moderate reactions during buildup, 2% requiring epinephrine, and no grade 3 or 4 events, suggesting improved tolerability in younger children due to lower baseline reactivity. Protocols emphasize clinic-based escalation to maintenance doses (e.g., 1200 mg walnut protein), but heterogeneity in study designs precludes meta-analysis, and long-term data on tolerance persistence remain limited compared to . No tree nut OIT is FDA-approved, unlike peanut formulations, positioning it as an off-label or trial-based option. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) offers a lower-risk alternative with allergen held under the tongue, studied primarily for hazelnut in small cohorts: one trial achieved >50% tolerating 20 g after 8 weeks (n unspecified), while Pru p 3-targeted SLIT enabled 1/10 patients to pass a 14 g challenge. Adverse events are confined to oral pruritus, with no epinephrine use reported, though efficacy appears inferior to OIT for threshold elevation. Epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT), patch-based delivery via intact skin, lacks dedicated tree nut trials, with evidence limited to desensitization and preclinical cashew models. Overall, immunotherapies induce desensitization rather than full in most cases, necessitating lifelong avoidance precautions, and patient selection favors those with confirmed single-nut reactivity over polysensitized profiles due to risks.

Biologic Agents like Omalizumab

Omalizumab, a recombinant humanized IgG1 targeting free (IgE), serves as a biologic agent for managing IgE-mediated tree nut allergy by reducing circulating IgE levels and downregulating high-affinity IgE receptors (FcεRI) on effector cells such as mast cells and . This mechanism attenuates immediate responses triggered by tree nut allergens, potentially increasing the provocative dose required to elicit reactions during oral challenges. Approved by the U.S. in February 2024 for reducing allergic reaction risks in IgE-mediated food allergies—including tree nuts—in patients aged 1 year and older, omalizumab is dosed subcutaneously every 2 to 4 weeks based on body weight and baseline IgE levels, typically for at least 16 weeks to assess response. Clinical trials demonstrate 's efficacy in desensitization for nut allergy, often as monotherapy or adjunct to oral (OIT). In the phase 3 OUtMATCH (2024-2025 data), omalizumab enabled 67% of participants with multi-food allergies—including nuts—to tolerate cumulative doses without moderate-to-severe symptoms during double-blind -controlled food challenges, versus 7% on placebo, with sustained protection observed up to 3 grams of protein equivalents for allergens like cashews and walnuts. A 2024 multicenter study involving children aged 1-17 years with allergies to , nuts, , , and found that 16 weeks of omalizumab monotherapy raised median reaction thresholds for nuts from 100 mg to over 1,000 mg of protein in 69% of cases, facilitating safer allergen introduction post-treatment. Real-world retrospective analyses in adults confirm tolerability, with omalizumab alone or combined with OIT yielding desensitization rates of 70-83% to 2-gram challenges for nuts and other foods, alongside reduced severity. Compared to OIT, monotherapy exhibits superior outcomes for multi-food allergies like tree nut combinations, with phase 3 from 2025 showing higher desensitization (e.g., 68% rate) and fewer systemic , as OIT often provokes gastrointestinal and events in 30-50% of tree nut cases. Adjunctive use accelerates OIT up-dosing, shortening desensitization timelines from months to weeks while mitigating risks, though long-term data indicate wanes upon discontinuation, necessitating indefinite therapy for sustained benefit. Safety profiles are robust, with injection-site in 45% and in <1%, but monitoring for rare is required; no increased risk has been linked in cohorts. Other biologics, such as anti-IL-4/IL-13 agents like , show preliminary promise in eosinophil-driven subsets but lack specific approval or robust tree nut data, positioning as the primary biologic option.

Prognosis and Natural Course

Persistence and Resolution

Tree nut allergies demonstrate marked persistence, with most cases enduring lifelong and resolution occurring in only about 10% of affected individuals, primarily during childhood. Longitudinal data from a of 516 patients with confirmed tree nut allergy, followed for up to 18 years, revealed that 9% lost clinical sensitivity to at least one tree nut , while 9% developed new allergies to additional tree nuts. Higher estimates of resolution, around 20% by adulthood, have been reported in broader reviews encompassing and tree nut allergies combined, though tree nut-specific persistence exceeds that of transiently allergic foods like or milk.00543-7/fulltext) Resolution rates vary by nut type and allergy pattern; for instance, isolated allergies to single tree nuts (e.g., or ) show modestly higher tolerance acquisition than multispecies reactivity, where outgrowing is uncommon. In one analysis, no patients who resolved tree nut allergy had histories of reacting to more than two species, underscoring multisensitization as a predictor of lifelong persistence. and allergies exhibit particularly low remission, with tolerance rarely developing post-adolescence. Adult-onset or persistent childhood allergies seldom remit, contrasting with pediatric cases where early reassessment via oral food challenges may identify tolerance in select low-risk profiles, such as those with declining skin prick test wheal sizes or low specific IgE levels. Recurrence after apparent resolution remains possible but infrequent, emphasizing the need for supervised reintroduction rather than self-testing. Overall, the causal basis for persistence likely involves sustained Th2 immune skewing and cross-reactive epitopes among tree nuts, limiting spontaneous desensitization without intervention.

Factors Influencing Outcomes

The persistence of tree nut , which affects resolution rates estimated at around 14% in pediatric cohorts, is influenced by initial symptom severity, with anaphylactic reactions at serving as a key predictor of non-resolution. Distinct clinical profiles, including a history of , polysensitization to multiple tree nuts, and concurrent aeroallergen , strongly correlate with prolonged allergy duration and reduced likelihood of spontaneous . Age at plays a role, as earlier onset—particularly in infancy—tends to forecast persistence, potentially due to entrenched immune dysregulation during critical developmental windows. Comorbid atopic conditions further modulate outcomes, with diagnosed by age one elevating the risk of sustained tree nut allergy through enhanced skin barrier disruption and Th2-skewed immune priming. and show mixed effects; while they do not uniformly impede resolution, severe or uncontrolled exacerbates reaction intensity in sensitized individuals, linking to higher risk during exposure. in early childhood emerges as an additional risk factor for tree nut persistence into adulthood, likely reflecting shared pathways in IgE-mediated sensitization to storage proteins like vicilins. Immunological markers, such as elevated specific IgE levels to tree nut components (e.g., Cor a 9 in or Pru du 6 in ), predict poorer prognosis by indicating high-affinity antibody binding and reactivity thresholds less amenable to desensitization. Polysensitization to storage proteins across nuts correlates with and reduced outgrowing rates, contrasting with monosensitization profiles that occasionally resolve. Genetic predispositions, though less quantified, interact with environmental exposures; for instance, mutations underlying amplify overall allergy trajectories, indirectly worsening tree nut outcomes via impaired epithelial integrity. Severe reaction outcomes are heighted by cofactors like exercise or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs during accidental exposure, which lower reaction thresholds in asthmatic patients, underscoring the need for management to mitigate life-threatening events. Longitudinal data indicate that while 20-30% of tree nut allergies may wane with age in select cases, multifactorial persistence dominates, with only targeted immunological assessments reliably stratifying individual prognosis.

Regulatory Frameworks

Food Labeling Requirements

In the United States, the Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act (FALCPA) of 2004, as amended by the FASTER Act of 2021, mandates that manufacturers declare major food —including tree nuts—on packaged food labels either parenthetically in the ingredient list or via a separate "Contains" statement specifying the type. Tree nuts must be identified by their specific common or usual name (e.g., "almonds" or "walnuts"), with the scientific name if applicable, rather than the generic term "tree nuts." FDA guidance finalized on January 6, 2025, clarifies that only 12 tree nut species warrant mandatory labeling as major food allergens due to evidence of clinical cross-reactivity and prevalence: almond (Prunus dulcis), Brazil nut (Bertholletia excelsa), cashew (Anacardium occidentale), chestnut (Castanea spp.), hazelnut (Corylus spp.), macadamia nut (Macadamia integrifolia, M. tetraphylla), pecan (Carya illinoinensis), pine nut (Pinus spp.), pistachio (Pistacia vera), walnut (Juglans spp.), hickory nut (Carya spp.), and ginkgo nut (Ginkgo biloba). Coconut, shea nut, and lychee nut are excluded, as scientific data indicate low allergenicity risk. In the , Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 requires that prepackaged foods list ingredients that are allergens—including tree nuts—in the ingredients list with clear legibility, such as bold print or contrasting color, to emphasize their presence. The specified tree nuts are almonds (Amygdalus communis L.), hazelnuts (), walnuts (), cashews (), pecan nuts (Carya illinoinensis (Wangenh.) C. Koch), Brazil nuts (Bertholletia excelsa), pistachio nuts (Pistacia vera), and macadamia or nuts (Macadamia ternifolia L.). For non-prepackaged foods, businesses must provide equivalent written or verbal allergen information upon request. Other jurisdictions, such as under the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations (amended 2019), require similar declaration of tree nuts as a priority allergen, specifying types like almonds and walnuts, with emphasized formatting. and mandate declaration of tree nuts among 10 allergens via the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code, using bold or underlined text. Internationally, standards recommend voluntary but clear labeling of tree nuts as part of the "Big 8" allergens to facilitate global trade, though mandatory requirements vary.

Trace Contamination Standards

Trace contamination standards for tree nut allergens address the unintended presence of these proteins in food products due to cross-contact during , , or shared facilities, distinct from intentional ingredients requiring mandatory declaration. In the United States, the (FDA) classifies tree nuts as one of eight major food s under the Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act of 2004, mandating clear labeling only when tree nuts are deliberate components. For trace contamination, no federally enforced quantitative thresholds—such as (ppm)—exist, leaving precautionary allergen labeling (PAL) statements like "may contain traces of tree nuts" as a voluntary practice dependent on manufacturers' risk assessments and adherence to current good practices (cGMP). The FDA explicitly advises against using PAL to substitute for proper controls, emphasizing validation of cleaning procedures and to minimize cross-contact risks. In January 2025, the FDA finalized guidance refining the scope of tree nuts subject to allergen labeling, limiting it to 12 clinically relevant species—including , , , , , , , , and —while excluding , shea nut, and lychee nut based on low allergenicity evidence from clinical data. This update aims to reduce over-labeling while prioritizing high-risk nuts, though trace contamination handling remains unchanged without binding limits. Empirical studies indicate tree nut proteins can persist through processing, with elicitation doses varying widely; for instance, lowest observed adverse effect levels (LOAELs) for and range from 0.1 to 10 mg of protein in challenge tests, informing voluntary risk-based decisions but not regulatory standards. European Union regulations under Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 require allergens, including tree nuts, to be highlighted (e.g., in bold) in lists if intentionally present, even in traces, but provide no specific thresholds for unintentional cross-contamination. Precautionary labeling is allowed to indicate potential traces, guided by and rather than mandatory disclosure, with enforcement focusing on overall obligations. This approach contrasts with stricter limits for non-allergen contaminants like (20 threshold), reflecting the variable individual sensitivities in tree nut allergies, where population-based reference doses are not codified. Other jurisdictions employ structured voluntary frameworks; Australia's Voluntary Incidental Trace Allergen Labelling (VITAL) program, updated to version 4.0 in 2024, sets action levels derived from clinical data, classifying most tree nuts (e.g., , , ) at a 10 mg/kg reference dose for "no special labeling" if below, escalating to warnings for higher risks like at lower thresholds due to potency. These levels, based on distributions of individual threshold doses from oral food challenges, promote consistency but remain non-binding globally. The absence of harmonized international standards contributes to precautionary over-labeling, with surveys showing up to 50% of products bearing PAL despite undetectable allergens, potentially eroding consumer confidence in avoidance strategies.

Societal and Economic Dimensions

Public Health Burden

Tree nut allergy contributes substantially to the global burden of food allergies, primarily through its high potential for severe reactions including , alongside notable in developed regions. Worldwide estimates range from less than 1% to approximately 3%, varying by age, diagnostic criteria, and geography. , combined and tree nut allergy affects about 1.1% of the , or roughly 3 million people, with self-reported rates among children more than tripling between and 2008. European data indicate as the predominant tree nut , with overall tree nut allergy rates often exceeding 1% in pediatric populations. The clinical burden is amplified by the allergens' association with life-threatening outcomes; tree nuts rank among the leading triggers of fatal and near-fatal food-induced . In analyses of fatal cases, and tree nuts accounted for at least 46% of incidents (86 out of 187 deaths in one review spanning multiple decades). from tree nuts frequently necessitates emergency interventions, contributing to broader hospitalization rates, though specific tree nut figures remain lower than for medications yet underscore the need for epinephrine access. Mortality remains rare but impactful, with case fatality rates for hospitalized patients ranging from 0.14% overall to higher in intensive care settings. Economically, tree nut allergy drives substantial direct and indirect costs, particularly in high-prevalence areas like the , where childhood food allergies collectively impose an estimated $25 billion annual burden, including medical care, lost , and special diets. Tree nut cases represent about 15% of diagnosed pediatric food allergies, amplifying per-case expenses due to frequent epinephrine prescriptions and avoidance measures. , such as parental work absences and school accommodations, further elevate the societal toll, though data specific to tree nuts often overlap with analyses given their co-occurrence in up to 23% of cases.

Policy Debates and Controversies

Policies surrounding tree nut allergies often revolve around the tension between protecting affected individuals from potentially life-threatening exposures and avoiding disproportionate restrictions on the general population. In educational settings, the implementation of nut-free zones or outright bans has been contentious, with proponents arguing they safeguard the estimated 1-2% of children with tree nut allergies, while opponents highlight limited efficacy and burdens on non-allergic students. A 2017 analysis of over 1,000 U.S. schools revealed that epinephrine administrations for nut-related occurred at similar rates in self-designated peanut-free (which often extend to tree nuts) and non-restricted environments, attributing persistent incidents to trace residues, cross-contamination, or undisclosed allergens rather than overt bans alone. This has fueled debates over whether such policies foster a false sense of security, potentially discouraging vigilant personal management like epinephrine auto-injector carrying, and impose economic costs on schools for enforcement without commensurate risk reduction. Ethical frameworks in school policy underscore utilitarian conflicts, pitting the welfare of allergic minorities against the freedoms and nutritional choices of the majority, with some analyses questioning the proportionality of broad prohibitions given that most reactions stem from home-prepared foods or non-compliance rather than cafeteria servings. Racial and socioeconomic disparities in policy adoption further complicate matters; schools in higher-minority, lower-income areas, which report elevated allergy rates, are more likely to enact restrictive measures, raising equity concerns about resource allocation and potential stigmatization of affected students. In , disputes intensify over in-flight nut service and accommodation requests, exemplified by ' 2025 decision to offer nut-based snacks, which drew criticism from advocacy groups for endangering passengers despite airline assurances of optional distribution. refutes claims of widespread airborne transmission, with a 2024 review finding no evidence that tree nut proteins disperse via ventilation systems; instead, risks arise from direct with residues on surfaces or shared snacks, mitigated by pre-flight cleaning protocols and individual precautions. Public backlash against requests for cabin-wide announcements or de facto nut-free flights labels them as overly burdensome on fellow travelers, with data indicating such measures rarely prevent reactions attributable to personal items or prior contamination. Broader regulatory shifts, such as revised guidance encouraging early introduction of tree nuts to infants—contrasting prior avoidance strategies—have sparked retrospective controversies, as studies link delayed exposure to higher rates, prompting scrutiny of institutional recommendations that may have exacerbated without empirical grounding. Food labeling regulations under the FDA's Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act mandate declaration of tree nuts but exclude precautionary advisories from legal requirements, leading to debates over voluntary "may contain" warnings that can induce consumer desensitization or unnecessary avoidance, particularly as 2025 updates clarified exclusions like from tree nut categorization to refine accuracy.

Research Frontiers

Etiological Investigations

Tree nut allergy arises from IgE-mediated reactions triggered by exposure to specific proteins in tree nuts, leading to and degranulation upon re-exposure. This process involves initial , where antigen-presenting cells process nut proteins, promoting a T helper 2 (Th2)-biased that drives B-cell production of allergen-specific IgE antibodies. Key allergenic proteins include heat- and digestion-stable seed storage proteins such as 2S albumins (e.g., Jug r 1 in , Ana o 3 in ) and 11S globulins (e.g., Cor a 9 in ), which resist denaturation during cooking or processing, contributing to the persistence and severity of reactions. Lipid transfer proteins (LTPs, e.g., Cor a 8) and profilins also play roles, with LTPs implicated in severe and profilins in milder oral allergy syndromes via with pollens like . Sensitization typically occurs early in life, often by age 2, through routes including gastrointestinal , cutaneous , or , though the exact pathways remain under investigation. among tree nuts (e.g., between and due to shared epitopes) and with complicates etiology, as up to 50% of tree nut-allergic individuals react to multiple . Genetic predisposition contributes significantly, with familial aggregation showing a 7-fold increased if a or sibling has nut allergy, and twin studies estimating at 82% for , a proxy for tree nut mechanisms. genes include HLA class II alleles (e.g., DRB1*07 associated with apple allergy and extended to nuts via linked STAT6 polymorphisms influencing severity) and IL-10 variants (-1082AA raising 2.5-fold in cohorts). (FLG) loss-of-function mutations, present in 20-30% of atopic populations, impair epidermal barrier integrity, heightening susceptibility to penetration. Environmental factors, particularly impaired skin barrier function in conditions like (affecting 15-20% of children), enable epicutaneous , where disrupted allows nut proteins to access immune cells like Langerhans cells, eliciting Th2 cytokines (IL-4, IL-13, TSLP). Children with severe early eczema face up to 50% risk of developing food allergies by age 1, per population studies. The dual exposure hypothesis posits that non-oral routes (skin, airway) promote , while timely oral exposure fosters , supported by mouse models and human data showing reduced allergy incidence with skin barrier interventions like emollients. This framework, initially evidenced for , extends to tree nuts given overlapping profiles and rising prevalence linked to modern hygiene, delayed introductions, and urban exposures. Co-factors such as concurrent allergies (e.g., or ) and microbiome further modulate risk, though causal links require longitudinal validation.

Novel Therapeutic Developments

In 2024, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved (Xolair), an anti-IgE , as the first medication to reduce allergic reactions from accidental exposure to multiple foods, including tree nuts such as and walnuts. In the phase 3 OUtMATCH trial, involving children and adolescents aged 1-17 years with allergies to and at least two other foods (including tree nuts), 16-20 weeks of omalizumab treatment enabled 41% of participants to tolerate at least 1,000 mg of cashew protein without dose-limiting symptoms, compared to 3% in the placebo group; for walnuts, 64% achieved this threshold versus 13% in placebo. A sub-study of the demonstrated 's superiority over oral (OIT) for multi-food allergies, including tree nuts like cashews, walnuts, and hazelnuts, with 36% of omalizumab-treated participants tolerating 2 grams of protein plus two other allergens (such as tree nuts) versus 19% with OIT; omalizumab also resulted in fewer discontinuations due to adverse reactions (0% versus 25%). While omalizumab primarily facilitates desensitization rather than sustained unresponsiveness, its every 2-4 weeks offers a lower-risk profile than daily OIT dosing. Investigational OIT protocols for specific tree nuts continue to show promise in desensitization but limited . A 2025 study of OIT in children reported high efficacy in achieving desensitization to (with most tolerating challenge doses post-treatment) and a safety profile comparable to other nut OITs, though it did not induce desensitization to co-allergens like walnuts or . Similarly, OIT has desensitized up to 88% of treated patients to 4,000 mg protein in controlled trials, with potential extensions to due to , but requires careful monitoring for reactions. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) emerges as a lower-risk alternative to OIT for tree nuts, with ongoing trials targeting multi-nut desensitization. The CASCADES study evaluates SLIT safety and efficacy in children aged 1-11 years, assessing immune markers and oral challenges after 6 months. A 2024 grant-funded initiative at explores simultaneous SLIT for multiple tree nuts, aiming to address feasibility and safety in pediatric populations where OIT risks are higher. Preclinical data suggest epicutaneous (EPIT) potential for nuts, as EPIT protected cashew-sensitized mice from in a 2020 model, building on approved EPIT; however, human trials for nuts remain in early stages. Emerging adjuncts, such as boiled nut preparations, may enhance OIT tolerability by reducing allergenicity while preserving .

References

  1. [1]
    Current perspectives on tree nut allergy: a review - PMC - NIH
    Mar 26, 2018 · Tree nut (TN) allergy is common and often severe. It has become an important health concern as availability and consumption have increased.
  2. [2]
    Everything You Need to Know About Tree Nut Allergy
    Tree nut allergy is one of the nine most common food allergies, affecting roughly 0.5 to 1% of the U.S. population. Tree nuts grow on trees, whereas peanuts ...Missing: prevalence | Show results with:prevalence
  3. [3]
    Tree nut allergens - PubMed
    However, they are also a potent source of allergenic proteins inducing IgE mediated hypersensitivity often causing serious, life-threatening reactions. The ...
  4. [4]
    Tree Nut Allergy in Children—What Do We Know? —A Review - NIH
    Nov 21, 2024 · Tree nuts are among major allergenic foods, and allergies to them are frequently linked to severe and potentially life-threatening reactions.
  5. [5]
    Tree nut allergy - PMC - PubMed Central - NIH
    Sep 24, 2021 · Allergies to tree nuts usually start in childhood, but unlike other food allergies, they rarely fade away and generally persist throughout life.Missing: definition management
  6. [6]
    Facts and Statistics - FoodAllergy.org
    In the United States, the prevalence of self-reported peanut or tree nut allergy in children more than tripled between 1997 and 2008. ... An analysis of health ...
  7. [7]
    Prevalence and natural history of tree nut allergy - ScienceDirect
    Tree nut allergy prevalence varies by age, region, and food allergy definition, and ranges from less than 1% to approximately 3% worldwide.Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
  8. [8]
    A retrospective study of peanut and tree nut allergy - NIH
    Peanut (PN) and tree nut (TN) allergies are among the leading causes of fatal food-induced anaphylaxis and are increasing in prevalence, especially in ...
  9. [9]
    Managing nut-induced anaphylaxis: challenges and solutions - PMC
    Oct 29, 2015 · Management of anaphylaxis includes not only treatment of symptoms during a reaction, but strict dietary avoidance and education on potential situations.
  10. [10]
    Recent advances in the management of nut allergy - PubMed Central
    Jan 13, 2021 · Epidemiological data have shown that the prevalence ranges between 0.05% and 4.9% for tree nut and between 0.5% and 3% for peanut. These large ...
  11. [11]
    Recent advances in diagnosing and managing nut allergies with ...
    Apr 11, 2022 · The prevalence of almond allergy among people with tree nut allergy is estimated to be almost 50%, yet the prevalence of food-challenge-defined ...
  12. [12]
    IgE-mediated food allergy
    Sep 12, 2018 · Food allergy is defined as an adverse immunologic response to a food protein ... In contrast, allergy to peanut, tree nuts, fish, and shellfish ...
  13. [13]
    Tree Nut - FoodAllergy.org
    These tree nuts are not the same as peanut (only 40% of children with tree nut allergies have an allergy to peanut), which grows underground and is a legume ...
  14. [14]
    Food Allergen Labeling Guidance for Industry - FDA
    Mar 26, 2025 · Also, several tree nuts, including coconut, are no longer considered major food allergens and do not appear on the list of major food allergens ...
  15. [15]
    Tree Nuts: A Top 9 Food Allergen | FAACT
    Tree nut allergy often have a cross-reactivity with other different types of tree nuts. Additionally, there is some small risk of cross-reactivity with peanut, ...
  16. [16]
    Tree nut allergens - ScienceDirect.com
    Tree nuts are a potent and frequent allergen source inducing IgE mediated food allergic reactions which can cause serious and sometimes even fatal reactions.
  17. [17]
    [PDF] Evaluating the Public Health Importance of Food Allergens Other ...
    ... IgE-mediated allergic reaction to one food allergen. (e.g., cashews, which are a tree nut) also experiences IgE-mediated allergic reactions to another food ...<|separator|>
  18. [18]
    Patterns of tree nut sensitization and allergy in the first 6 years of life ...
    Aug 29, 2018 · We found the prevalence of tree nut allergy at age 6 years (3.3%) to be as common as that of peanut allergy (2.8%), with cashew the most common ...
  19. [19]
    Prevalence of food allergies - FARRP - University of Nebraska–Lincoln
    Thus, peanuts and tree nut allergy together account for over 1% of food ... IgE-mediated food allergies are more common among infants and young children ...
  20. [20]
    IgE-Mediated Food Allergies | Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
    IgE-mediated food allergies cause your child's immune system to react abnormally when exposed to one or more specific foods such as milk, egg, wheat or nuts.
  21. [21]
    Food Allergies | Causes, Symptoms & Treatment | ACAAI Public ...
    New research indicates that up to 25 percent of children may outgrow their peanut allergy, with slightly fewer expected to outgrow a tree nut allergy.
  22. [22]
    Prevalence and Severity of Food Allergies Among US Adults
    Jan 4, 2019 · A history of severe reactions was most commonly observed among participants with convincing peanut (67.8%; 95% CI, 64.2%-71.1%) and tree nut ( ...
  23. [23]
    From Allergen Molecules to Molecular Immunotherapy of Nut Allergy
    Peanuts and tree nuts are two of the most common elicitors of immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated food allergy. Nut allergy is frequently associated with systemi...
  24. [24]
    Prevalence and natural history of tree nut allergy
    however, more recent survey data reports almond (0.7%) and cashew (0.7%) as the most common individual tree nut allergies in the United States.17 ...
  25. [25]
    The Prevalence of Tree Nut Allergy: A Systematic Review - PubMed
    Prevalence of individual tree nut allergies varied significantly by region with hazelnut the most common tree nut allergy in Europe, walnut and cashew in the ...
  26. [26]
    Multiple nut allergies more common than previously thought
    Aug 5, 2020 · Cashew and pistachio allergies were the most highly correlated, followed by walnut and pecan. The relationships varied though, as 97% of ...
  27. [27]
    Prevalence and natural history of tree nut allergy
    Feb 7, 2020 · Tree nut allergies have emerged as 1 of the biggest clinical challenges and research priorities in food allergy. Together with peanut, tree nuts ...
  28. [28]
    Recent advances in the management of nut allergy
    Peanut/tree nut allergy is common and has been associated with particularly severe reactions. Epidemiological data have shown that the prevalence ranges ...
  29. [29]
    Epidemiology of food allergy | Allergo Journal International
    Jul 9, 2025 · Peanuts and tree nuts were the most common triggers for food ... Nut allergy prevalence and differences between asian-born children ...
  30. [30]
    A population-based study on peanut, tree nut, fish, shellfish, and ...
    The prevalence of probable peanut allergy was 0.93% (95% CI, 0.74%-1.12%); tree nut, 1.14% (95% CI, 0.92%-1.35%); fish, 0.48% (95% CI, 0.34%-0.61%); shellfish, ...
  31. [31]
    Prevalence of tree nut allergy in Europe: A systematic review and ...
    Oct 4, 2023 · We have recently updated the frequency estimates on FA/sensitization in Europe, including summary estimates for tree nut allergy (TNA) and ...Abstract · INTRODUCTION · RESULTS · DISCUSSION
  32. [32]
    How Different Parts of the World Provide New Insights Into Food ...
    A population-based questionnaire survey on peanut and tree nut allergy in Singapore and the Philippines found that both ethnicity and place of birth were ...
  33. [33]
    Food allergy in a changing dietary landscape: A focus on the Asia ...
    Aug 11, 2024 · Peanut and tree nut allergies are found to be more common in Westernized countries but remain low in the developing regions of Asia. The ...
  34. [34]
    Rate of Childhood Peanut Allergies More than Tripled ... - Mount Sinai
    Tree nut allergies alone in children also increased from 0.2 percent in 1997 to 1.1 percent in 2008. Sesame allergy was reported in 0.1 percent of children and ...
  35. [35]
    Temporal Trends and Racial/Ethnic Disparity in Self-reported ... - NIH
    Mar 1, 2015 · Prevalence of peanut and tree nut allergy in the United States determined by means of a random digit dial telephone survey: A 5-year follow ...
  36. [36]
  37. [37]
    Trends in food allergy among Hong Kong preschoolers
    Sep 1, 2025 · Notably, allergic reactions to egg, peanut, tree nuts, and shellfish increased significantly over 15 years, with peanut and tree nut allergies ...
  38. [38]
    Epidemiology and Burden of Food Allergy - PMC - NIH
    Tree nut allergy prevalence was estimated to be 1.1% in 2008, compared to ... INCIDENCE AND PREVALENCE OF PEANUT ALLERGY IN CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS IN THE UNITED ...
  39. [39]
    Prevalence of peanut and tree nut allergy in the United ... - PubMed
    A male predominance of peanut-TN allergy was reported in children younger than 18 years (1.7% vs 0.7%, P =.02), and a female predominance was reported among ...
  40. [40]
    Understanding sex differences in the allergic immune response to food
    Jul 6, 2022 · Analysis of existing food allergy demographics found that they occur more frequently in male children and adult females, which is comparable to ...
  41. [41]
    Prevalence and characteristics of peanut allergy in US adults
    Feb 9, 2021 · Tree nut allergy was the most common comorbid food allergy among adults with PA, followed by shellfish allergy (Table IV). Convincing allergy to ...
  42. [42]
    Prevalence of food allergy differs by race, ethnicity, income - Healio
    Jun 22, 2023 · Black children had the highest rate of peanut allergy, and Asian children had the highest rate of tree nut allergy.
  43. [43]
    Racial, Ethnic, and Socioeconomic Differences in Food Allergies in ...
    Jun 14, 2023 · In addition, Asian adults reported the highest rate of peanut allergy and shellfish allergy, Black adults reported the highest rate of tree nut ...
  44. [44]
    Racial, Ethnic, and Socioeconomic Differences in Food Allergies in ...
    Jun 14, 2023 · In addition, Asian adults reported the highest rate of peanut allergy and shellfish allergy, Black adults reported the highest rate of tree nut ...
  45. [45]
    Food Allergy Burden Higher in Black, Hispanic, and Asian Americans
    Jun 14, 2023 · Among adults, peanut and shellfish allergies were highest in Asian respondents, tree nut allergy was highest in Black individuals, and Hispanic ...
  46. [46]
    Food Allergies: Why They Differ Among Racial and Ethnic Groups
    Nov 15, 2024 · ... Hispanic adults; and tree nut allergies are more common in Black adults. ... The Learning Early About Peanut Allergy Study: The Benefits of ...Missing: gender | Show results with:gender
  47. [47]
    African-American, White, Latino Children Have Different Food ...
    The only allergen more common among white children than African American and Latino children was tree nut. Tree nut allergies are distinct from peanut allergy ...
  48. [48]
    IgE-mediated food allergy - PMC - NIH
    Sep 12, 2018 · Peanut and tree nuts are responsible for the most serious allergic reactions and food-allergy related fatalities [15, 16]. Children with AD tend ...
  49. [49]
    Cross-reactive epitopes and their role in food allergy
    Mar 15, 2023 · Multiple sensitizations to tree nuts complicate the diagnosis and management of patients allergic to peanut and tree nut. This review discusses ...
  50. [50]
    Genetics of peanut allergy: a twin study - PubMed - NIH
    Conclusions: The significantly higher concordance rate of peanut allergy among monozygotic twins suggests strongly that there is a significant genetic influence ...
  51. [51]
    Current Insights Into The Genetics Of Food Allergy - PMC
    The most recent GWAS of PA tested for genetic determinants of PA in the Learning Early About Peanut Allergy (LEAP) study, and was the only GWAS to 'control' for ...
  52. [52]
    Genome-wide association study identifies peanut allergy-specific ...
    Feb 24, 2015 · This GWAS provides convincing evidence that the HLA-DR and -DQ gene region, as tagged by rs7192 or rs9275596, harbours significant genetic risk ...
  53. [53]
    Genome-wide association study and meta-analysis in multiple ...
    This study identifies multiple novel loci as risk factors for PA and food allergy and establishes C11orf30 as a risk locus for both PA and food allergy.
  54. [54]
    Food Allergy Genetics and Epigenetics: A Review of Genome‐Wide ...
    Dec 19, 2024 · We specifically focus on the results of genome-wide association studies in food allergy, which have identified 16 genetic variants that reach ...Missing: tree nut
  55. [55]
    Prevalence and early‐life risk factors for tree nut sensitization and ...
    Aug 6, 2021 · All blood samples collected at 24 years of age were analysed for two mixes of common nuts and peanut: fx1® (peanut, hazelnut, Brazil nut, almond ...
  56. [56]
    Eczema, asthma, egg allergy among early-life risk factors for tree nut ...
    Sep 13, 2021 · Preschool children with egg allergy, eczema or asthma appeared at increased risk for tree nut symptoms and storage protein sensitization in early adulthood.
  57. [57]
    Prevalence and early-life risk factors for tree nut sensitization and ...
    Aug 6, 2021 · Sensitization to storage proteins was more strongly associated with symptoms than sensitization to whole extract for all tree nuts evaluated.
  58. [58]
    The rise of food allergy: Environmental factors and emerging ...
    Apr 16, 2016 · The majority of patients with peanut or tree nut allergy experienced their first reaction the first time that the food was knowingly ingested, ...
  59. [59]
    Type I Hypersensitivity Reaction - StatPearls - NCBI Bookshelf - NIH
    Aug 3, 2025 · Clinical manifestations range from mild symptoms, including allergic rhinitis, urticaria, and atopic dermatitis, to severe, potentially life- ...
  60. [60]
    Clinical features of acute allergic reactions to peanut and tree nuts in ...
    Eighty-nine percent of the reactions involved the skin (urticaria, angioedema), 52% the respiratory tract (wheezing, throat tightness, repetitive coughing, ...
  61. [61]
    Patterns of Clinical Reactivity in a Danish Cohort of Tree Nut Allergic ...
    Mar 27, 2022 · A feasibility study demonstrated that hazelnut, walnut, cashew nut, pistachio nut, almond, and peanut were the most common nuts causing allergic ...
  62. [62]
    Nut allergies: MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia
    Symptoms · Hives (urticaria) · Skin rashes · Itching of the mouth, throat, eyes, skin, or any other area · Stomach cramps, diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting · Stuffy ...Missing: acute | Show results with:acute
  63. [63]
    [PDF] Tree nuts anaphylaxis in preschool age children
    Symptoms are typically immunoglobulin E (IgE) mediated and arise from a massive mediator release from mast cells and basophils de- granulation, usually ...
  64. [64]
    Peanut and tree nut allergy - The Royal Children's Hospital
    Severe allergic reaction (anaphylaxis) · difficulty with breathing and/or noisy breathing · wheeze or persistent cough · swelling of the tongue · swelling and/or ...
  65. [65]
    Food-induced Anaphylaxis and Oral Allergy Syndrome
    Apr 1, 2008 · Symptoms include coughing, wheezing, chest tightness, sense of impeding doom, and cutaneous reactions within minutes of contact with an allergen ...Clinical Features Of Food... · Oral Allergy Syndrome · Therapy For Food Allergy...<|separator|>
  66. [66]
    Biphasic Reactions Are More Likely When Symptoms of Initial ...
    Jun 22, 2021 · Peanut, tree nuts, milk and egg were the culprit food that most commonly triggered biphasic reactions. These are also, in descending order, the ...
  67. [67]
    Fatal Anaphylaxis: Epidemiology and Risk Factors - PubMed
    Apr 7, 2021 · The presence of asthma and peanut or tree nut allergy is associated with higher risk for severe or fatal anaphylaxis from foods.
  68. [68]
    Fatal Anaphylaxis: Mortality Rate and Risk Factors - PMC - NIH
    Sep 1, 2017 · Delayed epinephrine administration is a risk factor; common triggers are nuts, seafood, and in children, milk.
  69. [69]
    EAACI guidelines on the diagnosis of IgE‐mediated food allergy
    Oct 10, 2023 · Foods commonly implicated in IgE-mediated food allergy: cow's milk, egg, wheat, soya, sesame, peanut, tree nuts, fish, shellfish, legumes, ...
  70. [70]
    [PDF] BSACI guideline for the diagnosis and management of peanut and ...
    Non-IgE-mediated immunological reactions to nuts will not be discussed in this guideline [4, 5]. Background and epidemiology. Peanut and tree nut allergy were ...
  71. [71]
    Diagnostic accuracy of skin prick testing in children with tree nut ...
    We identified the SPT weal diameters that predicted a positive food challenge with >95% accuracy (cashew, hazel nut, walnut, and sesame: ≥8 mm). We could not ...<|separator|>
  72. [72]
    Tree Nut Allergy in Children—What Do We Know? —A Review - MDPI
    Tree nut allergies typically develop later than peanut allergies, with peak occurrence estimated at 36 months for tree nuts and 14 months for peanuts [8]. These ...Tree Nut Allergy In... · 2. Prevalence · 11. Management
  73. [73]
    The need for improved tree nut allergy diagnostics
    May 1, 2021 · This systematic review outlines the current strengths and limitations of the available diagnostic tests for tree nuts.
  74. [74]
    Tree nut allergy diagnosis poses challenges - Healio
    Nov 9, 2019 · Another test discussed, the double-blind placebo control food challenge, is the “gold standard” when it comes to diagnosing tree nut allergy. ...Missing: differential | Show results with:differential
  75. [75]
    Food Allergies: Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prevention - AAFP
    Peanut allergy, the most common (2%), is the leading cause of life-threatening anaphylaxis. Children are likely to outgrow allergies to egg, cow's milk, wheat, ...
  76. [76]
    The Accuracy of Diagnostic Testing in Determining Tree Nut Allergy
    Overall, the accuracy of diagnostic testing was only reasonable, with 95% positive predictive values established in a small number of tree nuts.
  77. [77]
    Characteristics of Tree Nut Challenges in Tree Nut Allergic and Tree ...
    Aug 9, 2018 · Conclusion. TN challenges are frequently passed in TN-sensitized patients with or without a history of prior TN reactivity, despite TN SPT ≥3 ...
  78. [78]
    Oral food challenge outcomes differ in individual tree nuts
    Jun 15, 2021 · Thus, identifying specific IgE (sIgE) levels predictive of OFC outcomes for individual tree nuts would be important to help guide clinical ...
  79. [79]
    Diagnosis and Management of Pollen Food Allergy Syndrome to Nuts
    Oral allergy syndrome or pollen food allergy syndrome (PFAS) represents a common clinical conundrum when the reported trigger food is a tree nut (usually ...
  80. [80]
    Food Allergy: Common Causes, Diagnosis, and Treatment
    Oral allergy syndrome (also known as pollen food allergy syndrome) is caused by allergen proteins that share homology between environmental pollens and fruits, ...
  81. [81]
    Oral Allergy Syndrome Symptoms, Diagnosis & Treatment | AAAAI
    If mouth itching is noted with nuts, you should see an allergist /immunologist because mild mouth symptoms may signal a more serious allergic reaction to nuts. ...
  82. [82]
    Food Allergies: Detection and Management - AAFP
    Jun 15, 2008 · The oral allergy syndrome is more common than anaphylactic reactions to food, but symptoms are transient and limited to the mouth and throat.
  83. [83]
    Improving Diagnostic Accuracy in Food Allergy - PMC - NIH
    These tests alone are by no means definitive, and it is not uncommon for patients to tolerate a food even with markedly elevated SPT and sIgE results.
  84. [84]
    Oral food challenge with a mix of tree nuts for IgE-mediated nuts ...
    Jan 22, 2025 · This study enrolled 145 children with peanut or tree nut allergies for an OFC. In patients with peanut IgE-mediated allergy and negative SPT to ...
  85. [85]
    The Impact of Tree Nut Oral Food Challenges on Quality of Life and ...
    Tree nut oral food challenges and a targeted nut avoidance diet improve food allergy related quality of life in select groups.
  86. [86]
    Investigating the accuracy, risk impact, and cost-effectiveness of ...
    Feb 9, 2017 · The limitations of conventional methods for diagnosing food allergy have stimulated promising developments in molecular-based diagnostic ...
  87. [87]
    Tree Nut Allergies May Be Massively Overdiagnosed
    Apr 21, 2017 · A new study by a team of allergists suggests that those tests aren't as accurate as we think—meaning tree nut allergies may be massively ...
  88. [88]
    Primary prevention of food allergy: beyond early introduction
    Dec 19, 2024 · Most infant feeding guidelines focus on the importance of early introduction of allergenic foods in infants at around age 4–6 months.<|separator|>
  89. [89]
  90. [90]
    Prevention of Food Allergy: The Significance of Early Introduction
    4.2.​​ Learning Early About Peanut Allergy (LEAP) is the landmark study showing that early introduction of peanut to infants at high risk of FA was effective in ...
  91. [91]
    The TreEat Study- Can Early Introduction of Tree Nuts Prevent Tree ...
    The safety and effectiveness of an early and regular ingestion strategy for the prevention of tree nut allergy has not been formally evaluated and it is known ...
  92. [92]
    The allergen-specificity of early peanut consumption and the impact ...
    Apr 1, 2019 · Early introduction of dietary peanut in high-risk infants with severe eczema and/or egg allergy prevented peanut allergy at 5 years of age in the LEAP Study.
  93. [93]
  94. [94]
    To feed or not to feed? Food allergy prevention in infants | Pursuit
    Feb 23, 2023 · Although there is no cure for food allergies, proper food introduction during early childhood has been shown to help prevent them.
  95. [95]
    Early tree nut introduction in an infant with multiple food allergies
    May 17, 2022 · Increased rates of peanut and tree nut aspiration as a possible consequence of allergy prevention by early introduction. J Allergy Clin Immunol: ...
  96. [96]
    [PDF] Addendum Guidelines for the Prevention of Peanut Allergy in the ...
    Conclusions: Guidelines have been developed for early introduction of peanut-containing foods into the diets of infants at various risk levels for peanut ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  97. [97]
    Real-World LEAP Implementation - PMC - NIH
    Apr 8, 2022 · The LEAP study showed a substantial reduction in peanut allergy among children with eczema and/or egg allergy by introducing peanut in the ...
  98. [98]
    The Effect of Breastfeeding on Food Allergies in Newborns and Infants
    Jun 12, 2023 · The protective role of breastfeeding has a positive effect on allergy prevention, which is opposed by the early introduction of solid foods.
  99. [99]
    Dietary exposures and allergy prevention in high-risk infants
    Apr 30, 2022 · Some studies have supported breastfeeding as a means to prevent allergy, while others have found no association [32,33,34]. Limitations in the ...
  100. [100]
    Maternal Diet during Pregnancy and Lactation and Risk of ... - NCBI
    Lactation: No study assessed the relationship between maternal peanut, tree nut and seed consumption during lactation and risk of food allergy in the child.
  101. [101]
    Reduced risk of peanut sensitization following exposure through ...
    Sep 12, 2017 · We sought to investigate the relationship between maternal peanut consumption while breast-feeding, timing of direct peanut introduction, and peanut ...
  102. [102]
    Breastfeeding: Maternally Transferred Allergens in Breast Milk
    May 26, 2022 · This review describes breastmilk in its composition and provides data on the identification of food allergens therein including human and mouse studies.
  103. [103]
    Prevention of food allergy in infancy: the role of maternal ...
    There is no role for maternal dietary modifications during pregnancy or lactation, such as allergen avoidance, as a means of infant allergy prevention.
  104. [104]
    Randomized Trial of Introduction of Allergenic Foods in Breast-Fed ...
    Mar 4, 2016 · We evaluated whether the early introduction of allergenic foods in the diet of breast-fed infants would protect against the development of food allergy.
  105. [105]
    Tree Nut | Causes, Symptoms & Treatment | ACAAI Public Website
    a serious, rapid-onset allergic reaction that may ...Overview · Management And Treatment · Tree Nuts And Peanuts
  106. [106]
    Nut allergy guidelines discourage complete avoidance - The BMJ
    Jun 5, 2017 · Patients with peanut or tree nut allergy should not be advised to avoid all nuts, the first single guidance on managing and preventing nut allergy recommends.
  107. [107]
    Food Allergies | FDA
    Sep 22, 2025 · This law identified eight foods as major food allergens: milk, eggs, fish, Crustacean shellfish, tree nuts, peanuts, wheat, and soybeans.Frequently Asked Questions · Guidance for Industry · Guidance document
  108. [108]
    [PDF] How to Read Food Labels if You Have Food Allergies
    When the food allergen is part of a larger group of foods, like tree nuts, the label must also name the specific food included. For example: Contains: tree nuts ...
  109. [109]
    Food Labels: Read It Before You Eat It!
    5. Tree nuts (for example: almonds, cashews, pistachios, pecans, walnut, hazelnut; but the FDA also requires the specific identification of tree nuts that are ...
  110. [110]
    Avoiding Cross-Contact - FoodAllergy.org
    Cross-contact occurs when an allergen is inadvertently transferred from a food containing an allergen to a food that does not contain the allergen.
  111. [111]
    Tree Nut Allergy Diet for Children
    The Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act (FALCPA) requires U.S. packaged food items to state clearly on the label if they contain tree nuts.Missing: avoidance | Show results with:avoidance
  112. [112]
    Environmental food exposure: what is the risk of clinical reactivity ...
    Nov 1, 2019 · Patients and consumers often question the risk of cross contact between peanut and tree nuts during production of these foods. The authors ...
  113. [113]
    Tree Nut Allergy: Causes, Symptoms & Treatment - Cleveland Clinic
    Jul 21, 2025 · Tree nut allergies are when your body has an allergic reaction when you eat tree nuts. This reaction could include hives, vomiting or swelling.
  114. [114]
    Anaphylaxis: Recognition and Management - AAFP
    Sep 15, 2020 · A multicenter study on anaphylaxis caused by peanut, tree nuts, and seeds in children and adolescents. ... Evaluating the management of ...
  115. [115]
    Epinephrine for First-aid Management of Anaphylaxis | Pediatrics
    Mar 1, 2017 · Early treatment of food-induced anaphylaxis with epinephrine is associated with a lower risk of hospitalization. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract .
  116. [116]
    Emergency treatment of anaphylaxis: concise clinical guidance - PMC
    Intramuscular (IM) adrenaline is the most important treatment of anaphylaxis and should be given as early as possible. If ABC problems persist, a second dose ...
  117. [117]
    Incidence of Biphasic Anaphylactic Reactions
    ... peanut(26%, N524), tree nut(14%, N513), dairy(14%, N513), seafood(7%, N56), and mixed nuts(5%, N55). 59%(N554) reported a known history of food allergy(FA).
  118. [118]
    Biphasic anaphylaxis in a Canadian tertiary care centre - NIH
    Feb 8, 2025 · The incidence of biphasic reactions in this cohort was 15.94% and the average second-phase onset was 19.0 h. In biphasic reactivity, it appears ...
  119. [119]
    Current options in the management of tree nut allergy: A systematic ...
    May 10, 2024 · This systematic review comprehensively describes current and exploratory therapeutic options for the desensitization of patients with IgE-mediated tree nut ...
  120. [120]
    Oral immunotherapy for food allergy: Translation from studies ... - NIH
    Feb 3, 2023 · Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is now recognized as an alternative active treatment to strict food avoidance in certain patients with IgE-mediated food allergy.
  121. [121]
    Food oral immunotherapy - PMC - NIH
    Feb 12, 2025 · The safety of peanut and tree nut OIT in preschoolers ... Efficacy and safety of oral immunotherapy in children aged 1–3 years with peanut ...
  122. [122]
    A practical guide for implementing omalizumab therapy for food allergy
    Apr 8, 2024 · Omalizumab has been approved for allergen agnostic treatment of one or more IgE-mediated food allergies. In the OUtMATCH trial, all subjects ...Omalizumab's Mechanism Of... · Addressing Critical... · Omalizumab Therapy...
  123. [123]
    Clinical Trials | XOLAIR® (omalizumab) for Food Allergy
    XOLAIR protected 68% of patients vs 5% of patients treated with placebo from moderate to severe allergic symptoms. This means they did not have moderate to ...
  124. [124]
    Omalizumab treats multi-food allergy better than oral immunotherapy
    Mar 3, 2025 · A clinical trial has found that the medication omalizumab, marketed as Xolair, treated multi-food allergy more effectively than oral immunotherapy (OIT).
  125. [125]
    Multicenter Study Finds Treatment Omalizumab May Help Patients ...
    Feb 25, 2024 · A 16-week course of treatment with omalizumab increased the amount of peanut, tree nuts, egg, milk and wheat that children as young as 1 year old with multi- ...
  126. [126]
    Efficacy of omalizumab in food allergic adults - A retrospective analysis
    Apr 3, 2025 · Our real-world evidence data indicate efficacy and tolerability of OMA for the treatment of IgE-mediated food allergy with and without OIT.
  127. [127]
    Phase III study shows Xolair may be more effective with fewer side ...
    Mar 2, 2025 · Phase III study shows Xolair may be more effective with fewer side effects than oral immunotherapy for the treatment of food allergies · First- ...
  128. [128]
    Omalizumab Is Superior to Oral Immunotherapy Food Allergy Study
    Feb 10, 2025 · Food allergy treatment with omalizumab resulted in better outcomes with fewer adverse effects than oral immunotherapy according to new research.
  129. [129]
    Omalizumab in the Management of Food Allergy
    Aug 6, 2025 · Omalizumab therapy has high efficacy and safety in the treatment of food allergies in children. The results of the studies analyzed showed that ...<|separator|>
  130. [130]
    The natural history of tree nut allergy - ScienceDirect.com
    Although 20% of children outgrow peanut allergy, the natural history of tree nut (TN) allergy has not been well studied.
  131. [131]
    How do we know when peanut and tree nut allergy have resolved ...
    Aug 4, 2010 · It is important to note that none of the patients whose tree nut allergy resolved had a history of reacting to more than two different tree nuts ...Peanut Allergy Resolution · Predictors Of Peanut Allergy... · Tree Nut Allergy Resolution<|separator|>
  132. [132]
    Mechanisms that define transient versus persistent food allergy - PMC
    Feb 1, 2020 · ... tree nut allergy, with one report of a resolution rate of 9%. The occurrence of spontaneous resolution, even with peanut and tree nut ...
  133. [133]
    Natural course of IgE-mediated food allergy in children
    Jun 14, 2023 · The factors believed to affect the tolerance development or persistence of food allergy include symptom severity on ingestion, age at diagnosis ...
  134. [134]
    The Natural History and Risk Factors for the Development of Food ...
    Feb 28, 2024 · Although tree nut allergies are reportedly less prevalent than peanut allergy, tree nut allergies have a similar natural history profile, though ...
  135. [135]
    The natural history of tree nut allergy
    Although 20% of children outgrow peanut allergy, the natural history of tree nut (TN) allergy has not been well studied.<|separator|>
  136. [136]
    Food Allergens - International Regulatory Chart - FARRP
    May 13, 2025 · Non-EU Countries adopting EU allergen labeling regulations: Iceland ... regulations except regulates tree nuts rather than walnut only).
  137. [137]
    Global Perspectives on Allergen Labeling: Harmonization of ... - NIH
    The "Big Eight" allergenic foods (milk, eggs, peanuts, tree nuts, shellfish, fish, soybeans, and wheat) recommended by the Codex Alimentarius form the basis of ...
  138. [138]
    Update to FDA Guidance for Food Allergen Labeling - FoodAllergy.org
    Feb 7, 2025 · The FDA has reduced its list of tree nuts requiring food allergen labeling to 12 types of tree nut (previously 23 types). These are the tree ...
  139. [139]
    [PDF] Approaches to Establish Thresholds for Major Food Allergens and ...
    Several cases of anaphylaxis have been described for a variety of processed nut-containing products, suggesting that tree nuts in general retain allergenic ...
  140. [140]
    [PDF] Annex 2 - Allergen Labelling - European Commission's Food Safety
    Jun 29, 2018 · In the EU we have a defined list for tree nuts: almonds, hazelnuts, walnuts, cashews, pecan, Brazil nuts, pistachio nuts, macadamia or ...
  141. [141]
    [PDF] VITAL 4.0 Summary and FAQs
    on Risk Assessment of Food Allergens to review and establish allergen threshold levels. ... for specific tree nuts (Brazil nut, macadamia nut or Queensland nut, ...
  142. [142]
    Time to ACT-UP: Update on precautionary allergen labelling (PAL)
    Sep 25, 2024 · Soy and peanut will be considered as separate allergens, and tree nuts will need to be specified by name. Currently, almost 100 countries have ...<|separator|>
  143. [143]
    Prevalence of peanut and tree nut allergy in the US determined by a ...
    Peanut and/or TN allergy affects approximately 1.1% of the general population, or about 3 million Americans, representing a significant health concern.
  144. [144]
    Nut Allergy - ECARF
    In Europe, most people with tree nut allergies are allergic to hazelnuts, while in the U.S., walnuts and cashews are the tree nuts that most frequently trigger ...
  145. [145]
    Fatal food anaphylaxis in adults and children
    Mar 5, 2024 · At least 46% of deaths were triggered by peanut or tree nuts (86 of 187, including 35 deaths in 1992–98). Cow's milk was responsible for 17 ...
  146. [146]
    Hospitalizations for Food-Induced Anaphylaxis Between 2016 and ...
    Aug 27, 2024 · Mortality is estimated to range from 0.03 to 0.3 per million inhabitants per year, figures significantly lower than those found for other causes ...<|separator|>
  147. [147]
    Incidence of fatal food anaphylaxis in people with food allergy - NIH
    Asthma is commonly cited as a risk factor for fatal food anaphylaxis, but ... Factors predicting anaphylaxis to peanuts and tree nuts in patients referred to a ...
  148. [148]
    The Economic Impact of Childhood Food Allergy in the United States
    Sep 16, 2013 · Tree nut. 15.0 (13.1-17.1). Fin fish. 6.2 (4.4-8.7). Shellfish. 18.6 ... The psychological burden of peanut allergy as perceived by adults ...
  149. [149]
    The global burden of illness of peanut allergy: A comprehensive ...
    Nov 20, 2020 · Peanut allergy (PA) currently affects approximately 2% of the general population of Western nations and may be increasing in prevalence.
  150. [150]
    Impact of School Peanut-Free Policies on Epinephrine Administration
    Both self-designated peanut-free schools and schools banning peanuts from being served in school or brought from home reported allergic reactions to nuts.
  151. [151]
    Should Peanut Be Banned in Schools? - ScienceDirect.com
    Sicherer et al. The US Peanut and Tree Nut Allergy Registry: characteristics of reactions in schools and day care ... Current controversies and future prospects ...
  152. [152]
    [PDF] Managing Peanut Allergies In Schools: Ethical And Policy Issues
    majority of which are due to allergies to peanuts or tree nuts (Lee, Sheffer 2003; Rudders et al. 2010). Peanut allergies have a genetic basis, although the ...Missing: debates | Show results with:debates
  153. [153]
    Racial and Socioeconomic Differences in School Peanut-Free Policies
    Jan 1, 2021 · Schools with more minority and low SES students may have higher peanut/tree nut allergy rates, which might prompt more restrictive policies.Missing: controversy | Show results with:controversy
  154. [154]
    “Have you gone nuts?”: Southwest Airlines faces backlash and ...
    Oct 18, 2025 · Why nut allergies are different. The broader debate over nuts on planes is not new. Some argue that people with severe allergies should take ...
  155. [155]
    Flying with nut and other food allergies: unravelling fact from fiction
    There is no evidence that peanut or tree nut allergens are spread through aircraft cabin ventilation systems. Rather, the main risks are due to either failure ...Missing: controversies | Show results with:controversies
  156. [156]
    Nut bans no help to allergic air passengers, experts say - BBC
    Oct 15, 2024 · Nut bans little help to allergic air passengers · Early peanut butter can give lifelong allergy defence · 'Allergy law would make people like me ...
  157. [157]
  158. [158]
    Unintended Consequences of Allergen Food Labeling
    However, current FDA guidance underscores that precautionary allergen labeling “should not be used as a substitute for adhering to current good manufacturing ...
  159. [159]
    FDA Finalizes Two Guidance Documents Related to Food Allergens
    Jan 7, 2025 · FDA no longer considers coconut and cola/kola nut to be “tree nuts” for purposes of allergen labeling. The agency also now excludes the ...
  160. [160]
    Genetics of Food allergy - PMC - PubMed Central - NIH
    Significant associations with peanut allergy were reported previously for the HLA class II DR beta 1(HLA-DRB1), DQ beta 1(HLA-DQB1) and DP beta 1(HLA-DPB1) gene ...
  161. [161]
    Epicutaneous sensitization in the development of food allergy
    These studies highlight the role that a disrupted skin barrier plays in the development of FA, and which may also contribute towards the severity of reactions. ...
  162. [162]
    An update to the dual allergen exposure hypothesis
    Jun 6, 2021 · A dysregulated skin barrier is postulated to be an induction site of food allergy in humans, especially in individuals with atopic dermatitis.
  163. [163]
    FDA Approves First Medication to Help Reduce Allergic Reactions to ...
    Feb 16, 2024 · Xolair is the first FDA-approved medication to reduce allergic reactions to more than one type of food after accidental exposure.
  164. [164]
    Omalizumab for the Treatment of Multiple Food Allergies
    Feb 25, 2024 · Omalizumab treatment for 16 weeks was superior to placebo in increasing the reaction threshold for peanut and other common food allergens.Missing: tree | Show results with:tree
  165. [165]
    Oral immunotherapy for hazelnut allergy does not yield other tree ...
    Apr 21, 2025 · Hazelnut oral immunotherapy was safe and effective, but cross-desensitization for patients who also had walnut and cashew allergy was unlikely, ...
  166. [166]
    Cashew oral immunotherapy for desensitizing cashew-pistachio ...
    Results: Forty-four of 50 OIT-treated patients (88%) compared to 0% in controls tolerated a dose of 4000 mg cashew protein at the end of the study (odds ratio ...Missing: trial | Show results with:trial<|separator|>
  167. [167]
    Study Details | UNC Cashew Sublingual Immunotherapy
    The CASCADES study will investigate the safety and efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for the treatment of cashew allergy in children ages 1-11 ...
  168. [168]
    Kim Receives $1-Million Grant for Novel Multi-nut Allergy Treatment ...
    Nov 5, 2024 · The safety seen with SLIT for peanut allergy, commonly recognized as one of the most severe allergies, makes it ideal for multiple tree nut ...
  169. [169]
    Epicutaneous immunotherapy protects cashew-sensitized mice from ...
    In the meantime, Phase III study results suggest investigational epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) may be a relevant and safe treatment for peanut allergy and ...
  170. [170]
    Advances in Treating Nut Allergies and Detecting Sesame Allergens
    Feb 4, 2025 · Advances in Treating Nut Allergies and Detecting Sesame Allergens ... Researchers are building on the success of the Boiled Oral Peanut ...Missing: 2020-2025 | Show results with:2020-2025