Early oral immunotherapy in peanut-allergic preschool children is safe and highly effective

Food Allergen Immunotherapy in Preschool Children: Do We Have the Evidence?

Standard care for the management of food allergies previously centered on allergen avoidance and the treatment of adverse reactions after allergen exposure. An increase in the development of immunotherapy treatments for food allergy has occurred over the past 2 decades, with many centers now offering immunotherapy. Previous studies mainly focused on school-age children in whom food allergies are likely to be persistent. However, there is increasing evidence that delivering immunotherapy for food allergy to preschool-age children may deliver higher rates of success, and that peanut allergen immunotherapy leads the way. Conversely, the natural resolution of food allergies occurs primarily in these younger age groups, resulting in challenges to selecting patients who will ultimately benefit from these treatments. Both immunotherapy and natural history studies reveal the inherent plasticity of the immune system in early life, which may be more amenable to intervention, but this raises a delicate yet unknown balance between the optimal timing of intervention versus waiting for natural resolution of the food allergy. Here we review the evidence for early food allergen immunotherapy in preschoolers, and present the pros and cons of this approach while acknowledging important research gaps in this age group.

The role of biologics in pediatric food allergy and eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders

Continuing insight into the molecular mechanisms of atopic disorders has enabled the development of biologics to precisely target these diseases. Food allergy (FA) and eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGIDs) are driven by similar inflammatory molecular mechanisms and exist along the same atopic disease spectrum. Therefore, many of the same biologics are being investigated to target key drivers of mechanisms shared across the disease states. The enormous potential of biologics for the treatment of FA and EGIDs is highlighted by the significant increases in the number of ongoing clinical trials (more than 30) evaluating their use in these disease states, as well as by the recent US Food and Drug Administration approval of dupilumab for the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis. Here we discuss past and current research into the use of biologics in FA and EGIDs and their potential role in improving treatment options in the future, with the need to have biologics widely clinically available.

Real-World Safety Analysis of Preschool Tree Nut Oral Immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Our group previously described preschool peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT) in a real-world, multicenter setting, suggesting that this therapy is safe for most preschoolers.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the safety and tolerability of tree nut (TN) OIT in preschoolers in the real world.

METHODS

As part of a Canada-wide quality improvement project, TN-OIT (cashew/pistachio, walnut/pecan, hazelnut, almond, and macadamia nut) was performed in preschoolers who had (1) a skin prick test wheal diameter greater than or equal to 3 mm or a specific IgE level greater than or equal to 0.35 kU/L and a convincing objective IgE-mediated reaction or (2) no ingestion history and a specific IgE level greater than or equal to 5 kU/L. Dose escalations were performed every 2 to 4 weeks till a maintenance dose of 300 mg of TN protein was reached. Symptoms were recorded and classified using the modified World Allergy Organization Subcutaneous Immunotherapy Reaction Grading System (1, mildest; 5, fatal).

RESULTS

Of the 92 patients who started TN-OIT from 2018 to 2021, 79 (85.9%) underwent single-food TN-OIT and 13 (14.1%) underwent multifood TN-OIT to 2 (10.8%) or 3 (3.3%) TNs. Eighty-nine (96.7%) patients reached maintenance, and 4 (4.3%) dropped out. Sixty-five (70.7%) patients experienced reactions during buildup: 35 (38.0%) grade 1 reactions, 30 (32.6%) grade 2 reactions, no grade 3 or 4 reactions, and 2 (2.17%) received epinephrine.

CONCLUSIONS

Preschool TN-OIT in a real-world, multicenter setting appears safe and tolerable, with results comparable with our previously reported peanut OIT findings.

Oral Immunotherapy

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an alternative treatment of IgE-mediated food allergy that has been shown to increase tolerance threshold to many of the top food allergens, although this effect may be dependent on age, dose, frequency, and duration. OIT has been shown to be effective and safe in infants, and early initiation can improve rates of desensitization even for those foods whose natural history favors loss of allergy. Studies looking at protocol modification to improve OIT success are ongoing as is the evaluation of clinical tools to help monitor OIT effects.

Treatment for food allergy: Current status and unmet needs

The treatment of food allergy has traditionally relied on avoidance of the offending food(s) and use of emergency medications in the event of accidental exposures. However, this long-standing paradigm is beginning to shift, as a variety of treatment approaches have been and are being developed. This report provides an overview of the past, present, and future landscape of interventional clinical trials for the treatment of food allergy. It focuses on specific issues related to participant characteristics, protocol design, and study end points in the key clinical trials in the literature and examine how differences between studies may impact the clinical significance of the study results. Recommendations are provided for the optimization of future trial designs and focus on specific unmet needs in this rapidly evolving field.

Management of Anaphylaxis During Peanut Oral Immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Peanut oral immunotherapy (POIT) has emerged as an active management option for peanut allergy, with an FDA-approved product now available for therapy. Allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis, can occur during therapy and their management is key in optimizing this treatment and patient outcomes.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this manuscript, we will review the rates of allergic reactions and anaphylaxis in seminal peanut oral immunotherapy research studies. We will examine factors that can alter the risk of anaphylaxis and describe various strategies, including adjunct therapies, that have the potential to mitigate anaphylaxis risk based on published evidence.

RECENT FINDINGS

Rates of anaphylaxis and epinephrine administration vary in different research studies, but there is consensus that most POIT-related allergic reactions are mild or moderate and not severe. Certain external factors (for example, tiredness, exercise, viral illness) as well as uncontrolled allergic co-morbidities (asthma, allergic rhinitis) have been shown to increase the risk of anaphylaxis during OIT. The search of biomarkers who may predict who is at risk for severe allergic reactions is ongoing. Adjunct therapies have shown promise, but further studies are required to optimize their use alongside POIT. Our understanding of anaphylaxis during POIT has increased in recent years, resulting in better management strategies. However, future plans will need to involve all stakeholders, including physicians, patients and families, researchers, public health authorities, and the food, hospitality, and catering industries.

Current and future treatments for peanut allergy

Peanut allergy (PA) is a common, burdensome childhood disease that in most patients continues into adulthood and has historically been untreatable. However, peanut oral immunotherapy (POIT) is increasingly being incorporated into allergy practices, using both the first FDA-approved product, PTAH (previously AR101; Palforzia™, Aimmune Therapeutics), as well as store-bought peanut products. POIT in preschoolers continues to gain more acceptance as evidence accrues that it is a safe and feasible approach that may have distinct advantages. There are many new therapeutic interventions currently under study with a variety of different approaches and potential mechanisms. With respect to other forms of immunotherapy, none are currently approved, but the epicutaneous approach is the most well-studied and others are being actively investigated, including sublingual, subcutaneous, and intralymphatic. Biologics are gaining evidence both as adjunctive treatments to POIT and as monotherapy. Omalizumab is the most widely studied biologic for PA but others also have potential. Looking ahead to a future therapeutic landscape of choice, allergists will need to understand each patient's goal of treatment through shared decision-making and fully evaluate the risks, benefits, and alternatives of each new therapy.

IL-4 receptor alpha signaling alters oral food challenge and immunotherapy outcomes in mice

BACKGROUND

Food allergy diagnosis and management causes a number of social and emotional challenges for individuals with food allergies and their caregivers. This has led to increased interest in developing approaches to accurately predict food allergy diagnosis, severity of food allergic reactions, and treatment outcomes. However, the utility of these approaches is somewhat conflicting.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to develop and utilize a murine model that mimics the disease course of food allergy diagnosis and treatment in humans and to identify biomarkers that predict reactivity during food challenge (FC) and responsiveness during oral immunotherapy (OIT) and how these outcomes are modified by genetics.

METHODS

Skin-sensitized intestinal IL-9 transgenic (IL9Tg) and IL9Tg mice backcrossed onto the IL-4RαY709F background received a single intragastric exposure of egg antigen (ovalbumin), underwent oral FC and OIT; food allergy severity, mast cell activation, and ovalbumin-specific IgE levels were examined to determine the predictability of these outcomes in determining reactivity and treatment outcomes.

RESULTS

Subcutaneous sensitization and a single intragastric allergen challenge of egg antigen to BALB/c IL9Tg mice and Il4raY709F IL9Tg induced a food allergic reaction. Enhanced IL-4Rα signaling altered the symptoms induced by the first oral exposure, decreased the cumulative antigen dose, increased the severity of reaction during oral FC, and altered the frequency of adverse events and OIT outcomes. Biomarkers after first oral exposure indicated that only the severity of the initial reaction significantly correlated with cumulative dose of oral FC.

CONCLUSION

Collectively, these data indicate that single nucleotide polymorphisms in IL-4Rα can alter clinical symptoms of food allergic reactions, severity, and reactive dose during FC and OIT, and that severity of first reaction can predict the likelihood of reaction during FC in mice with IL-4Rα gain of function.

Oral tolerance and oral immunotherapy for food allergy: Evidence for common mechanisms?

Food allergies affect up to 10% of the US population, can be life-threatening, and have a significant negative impact on quality of life. Delayed dietary introduction of foods in childhood can hinder the induction of oral tolerance, an active regulatory response to foods that prevents the development of food allergy. Some children outgrow their food allergies naturally, while many others have persistent, lifelong food allergy for which there are few therapeutic options. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is a therapeutic approach of giving increasing amounts of food to attempt to desensitize the allergic individual. In this review, we focus on the immune mechanisms common to oral tolerance and response to oral immunotherapy, with the objective of determining whether true tolerance can be achieved after food allergy has been established.

The potential role of preventive and therapeutic immunonutrition strategies for pediatric food allergy: A mini-review

Food allergy (FA) represents one of the main chronic conditions of the pediatric population. The gut microbiome (GM)-immune system axis is a milestone in affecting FA susceptibility. The dynamic and bidirectional crosstalk between the GM and immune system starts early in life, and it is deeply modulated during the first 1,000 days of life. Nutritional factors during this crucial period mainly influence the proper GM-immune system development and function across the lifespan, with potential beneficial or detrimental effects on health status. Immunonutrition strategies, applied from conception, could represent an innovative target for prevention and treatment of pediatric FA. Here we described the potential role of preventive and therapeutic immunonutrition strategies for pediatric FA, highlighting putative future perspectives in this field.

An overview of the current state of food desensitization

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To highlight the current evidence on food desensitization in children with food allergy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Food Allergen Specific Immunotherapy (FA-AIT) is currently recognised as a treatment option for treating children with allergy at least to the main common foods (i.e. milk, egg and peanut). The oral route of administration has been proven to be the most effective in achieving desensitisation. Efforts are devoted to overcome the current unmet needs mainly related to safety issues and long-term efficacy, as well as adherence to the treatment and improvement of health-related quality of life. In this perspective, alternative routes of administration and adjunctive treatments are under investigation.

SUMMARY

The future of food allergy management is a personalised approach based on a shared decision-making that takes into account the needs of patients and families. Health professionals will be able to offer multiple treatment options, including FA-AIT with adjunctive or alternative therapies. Thus, patients should be correctly identified, using validated predictive factors, in order to select appropriate candidates for these therapies.

Oral tolerance to prevent anti-drug antibody formation in protein replacement therapies

Protein based therapeutics have successfully improved the quality of life for patients of monogenic disorders like hemophilia, Pompe and Fabry disease. However, a significant proportion of patients develop immune responses towards intravenously infused therapeutic protein, which can complicate or neutralize treatment and compromise patient safety. Strategies aimed at circumventing immune responses following therapeutic protein infusion can greatly improve therapeutic efficacy. In recent years, antigen-based oral tolerance induction has shown promising results in the prevention and treatment of autoimmune diseases, food allergies and can prevent anti-drug antibody formation to protein replacement therapies. Oral tolerance exploits regulatory mechanisms that are initiated in the gut associated lymphoid tissue (GALT) to promote active suppression of orally ingested antigen. In this review, we outline general perceptions and current knowledge about the mechanisms of oral tolerance, including tissue specific sites of tolerance induction and the cells involved, with emphasis on antigen presenting cells and regulatory T cells. We define several factors, such as cytokines and metabolites that impact the stability and expansion potential of these immune modulatory cells. We highlight preclinical studies that have been performed to induce oral tolerance to therapeutic proteins or enzymes for single gene disorders, such as hemophilia or Pompe disease. These studies mainly utilize a transgenic plant-based system for oral delivery of antigen in conjugation with fusion protein technology that favors the prevention of antigen degradation in the stomach while enhancing uptake in the small intestine by antigen presenting cells and regulatory T cell induction, thereby promoting antigen specific systemic tolerance.

CD8+ T cell differentiation status correlates with the feasibility of sustained unresponsiveness following oral immunotherapy

While food allergy oral immunotherapy (OIT) can provide safe and effective desensitization (DS), the immune mechanisms underlying development of sustained unresponsiveness (SU) following a period of avoidance are largely unknown. Here, we compare high dimensional phenotypes of innate and adaptive immune cell subsets of participants in a previously reported, phase 2 randomized, controlled, peanut OIT trial who achieved SU vs. DS (no vs. with allergic reactions upon food challenge after a withdrawal period; n = 21 vs. 30 respectively among total 120 intent-to-treat participants). Lower frequencies of naïve CD8⁺ T cells and terminally differentiated CD57⁺CD8⁺ T cell subsets at baseline (pre-OIT) are associated with SU. Frequency of naïve CD8⁺ T cells shows a significant positive correlation with peanut-specific and Ara h 2-specific IgE levels at baseline. Higher frequencies of IL-4⁺ and IFNγ⁺ CD4⁺ T cells post-OIT are negatively correlated with SU. Our findings provide evidence that an immune signature consisting of certain CD8⁺ T cell subset frequencies is potentially predictive of SU following OIT.

Protocol design and synopsis: Omalizumab as Monotherapy and as Adjunct Therapy to Multiallergen OIT in Children and Adults with Food Allergy (OUtMATCH)

Background

Food allergy is common and causes substantial morbidity and even mortality. Safe and effective treatments for food allergy would therefore be highly desirable, especially for individuals with multiple food allergies.

Objectives

Our aim was to describe a phase 3 study on treatment of patients with multiple food allergies with omalizumab.

Methods

The study was developed as a collaboration between the Consortium for Food Allergy Research, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and 2 industry sponsors (Genentech and Novartis).

Results

The study is currently under way, enrolling participants from age 1 year to age 55 years who are allergic to peanut and at least 2 other foods (including milk, egg, wheat, cashew, hazelnut, and walnut). The study is designed to address 3 major questions. First, stage 1 will study the potential value of omalizumab for the treatment of patients with peanut allergy and at least 2 other common food allergens. Second, stage 2 will directly compare treatment of patients with multifood allergies using omalizumab as monotherapy versus treatment with omalizumab-facilitated multiallergen oral immunotherapy in which omalizumab is used as an adjunctive treatment. Third, stage 3 will address the longer-term outcomes following these treatment approaches, including the introduction of dietary forms of the study foods to induce or maintain desensitization.

Conclusions

This phase 3 study will provide important information on the potential of omalizumab to treat patients with multiple food allergies.

Kinetics of basophil hyporesponsiveness during short-course peanut oral immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) leads to suppression of mast cell and basophil degranulation along with changes in the adaptive immune response.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to determine how rapidly these effects occur during OIT and more broadly, the kinetics of basophil and mast cell suppression throughout the course of therapy.

METHODS

Twenty participants, age 4 to 12 years, were enrolled in a peanut OIT trial and assessed for desensitization and sustained unresponsiveness after 9 months of therapy. Blood was collected 5 times in the first month and then intermittently throughout to quantify immunoglobulins and assess basophil activation by CD63, CD203c, and phosphorylated SYK (pSYK).

RESULTS

Twelve of 16 participants that completed the trial were desensitized after OIT, with 9 achieving sustained unresponsiveness after discontinuing OIT for 4 weeks. Basophil hyporesponsiveness, defined by lower CD63 expression, was detected as early as day 90. pSYK was correlated with CD63 expression, and there was a significant decrease in pSYK by day 250. CD203c expression remained unchanged throughout therapy. Interestingly, although basophil activation was decreased across the cohort during OIT, basophil activation did not correlate with individual clinical outcomes. Serum peanut-specific IgG4 and IgA increased throughout therapy, whereas IgE remained unchanged.

CONCLUSIONS

Suppression of basophil activation occurs within the first 90 days of peanut OIT, ultimately leading to suppression of signaling through pSYK.

Biomarkers and mechanisms of tolerance induction in food allergic patients drive new therapeutic approaches

Immunotherapy for food-allergic patients has been effective in inducing desensitization in some populations, but long-term tolerance has remained an elusive target. A challenge facing our field is how to differentiate immune markers that are impacted by immunotherapy from those that are critical biomarkers of tolerance. Data from recent clinical trials have identified several biomarkers and mechanisms for achieving tolerance. These biomarkers include younger age, lower food-specific IgE, lower food component-specific IgE, specific linear epitope profiles, and subsets of food-specific CD4+ T cells. Additional biomarkers under investigation for their relevance in tolerance induction include TCR repertoires, gastrointestinal and skin microbiome, and local tissue immunity. This mini-review highlights recent advances in understanding biomarkers and mechanisms of tolerance induction in food immunotherapy and how these are influencing clinical trial development.

The Case for Prompt Salvage Infant Peanut Oral Immunotherapy Following Failed Primary Prevention

Recent guideline recommendations have shifted from recommending prolonged avoidance of allergenic foods in the first 3 years of life to a primary prevention approach involving the deliberate early introduction to infants at risk of developing food allergy. Despite this, some infants, especially those with severe eczema who are at highest risk for developing peanut allergy, fail to receive the preventative benefits of early peanut introduction due to hesitancy and other factors. Difficulty adhering to regular ingestion after introduction further reduces the effectiveness of primary prevention. As emerging real-world evidence has demonstrated that performing peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT) among infants is effective and safe, peanut OIT could be a treatment option for infants with peanut allergy. This review discusses the benefits, risks, and barriers to offering peanut OIT to infants who fail primary prevention strategies. We propose the novel concept that infants with peanut allergy be offered peanut OIT as soon as possible after failed peanut introduction through a shared decision-making process with the family, where there is a preference for active management rather than avoidance.

Biomarkers in oral immunotherapy

Food allergy (FA) is a global health problem that affects a large population, and thus effective treatment is highly desirable. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has been showing reasonable efficacy and favorable safety in most FA subjects. Dependable biomarkers are needed for treatment assessment and outcome prediction during OIT. Several immunological indicators have been used as biomarkers in OIT, such as skin prick tests, basophil and mast cell reactivity, T cell and B cell responses, allergen-specific antibody levels, and cytokines. Other novel indicators also could be potential biomarkers. In this review, we discuss and assess the application of various immunological indicators as biomarkers for OIT.

Transitioning peanut oral immunotherapy to clinical practice

Peanut allergy is on the rise in industrialized countries, affecting 1%-4.5% of children and generally persisting into adulthood. It is associated with a risk of severe anaphylaxis and is one of the major causes of food allergy-induced deaths. Health-related quality of life is significantly impaired for patients and affected families due to food restrictions attributable to omnipresent precautionary allergen labeling, constant risk of potentially life-threatening reactions, and limitation of social activities. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has emerged as a valid treatment option for patients with IgE-mediated peanut allergy, with randomized controlled trials and real-life studies showing a high rate of desensitization and a favorable safety profile, especially in young children. Ultimately, the decision to initiate peanut OIT relies on a multidisciplinary shared decision-making process, involving open, personalized and evidence-based discussions with patients and their caregivers.

Insights into Microbiome and Metabolic Signatures of Children Undergoing Peanut Oral Immunotherapy

Background: Peanut oral immunotherapy has emerged as a novel, active management approach for peanut-allergic sufferers, but limited data exist currently on the role of the microbiome in successful desensitization. Objective: We examined the oral and gut microbiome in a cohort of 17 children undergoing peanut oral immunotherapy with the aim to identify the microbiome signatures associated with successful desensitization. We also set out to characterize their fecal metabolic profiles after successful therapy. Methods: Participants gradually built up their daily dose from 2 mg (starting dose) to 300 mg (maintenance dose) within approximately 40 weeks. We collected a buccal and stool specimen from each subject at two different time points: at baseline and post-therapy (1 month after reaching maintenance). The oral (buccal) and gut (fecal) microbiome was characterized based on sequencing of 16S rRNA gene amplicons with Illumina MiSeq. Fecal short chain fatty acid levels were measured using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Results: We report increased alpha diversity of the oral microbiome post-therapy and have also identified a significant increase in the relative abundance of oral Actinobacteria, associated with the desensitized state. However, the baseline gut microbiome did not differ from the post-therapy. Additionally, fecal short chain fatty acids increased after therapy, but not significantly. Conclusion: Our research adds to the limited current knowledge on microbiome and metabolic signatures in pediatric patients completing oral immunotherapy. Post-therapy increased trends of fecal fatty acid levels support a role in modulating the allergic response and potentially exerting protective and anti-inflammatory effects alongside successful desensitization. A better understanding of the microbiome-related mechanisms underlying desensitization may allow development of smarter therapeutic approaches in the near future. Clinical implication: The oral microbiome composition is altered following successful peanut oral immunotherapy, with a significant increase in alpha diversity and the relative abundance of phylum Actinobacteria. Capsule summary: Significant microbiome changes in children completing peanut immunotherapy include increase in alpha-diversity and overrepresentation of Actinobacteria in the oral microbiome, and increased trends for fecal short chain fatty acids, suggesting a protective effect against the allergic response.

Oral desensitization therapy for peanut allergy induces dynamic changes in peanut-specific immune responses

BACKGROUND

The PALISADE study, an international, phase 3 trial of peanut oral immunotherapy (POIT) with AR101, resulted in desensitization in children and adolescents who were highly allergic to peanut. An improved understanding of the immune mechanism induced in response to food allergen immunotherapy would enable more informed and effective therapeutic strategies. Our main purpose was to examine the immunological changes in blood samples from a subset of peanut-allergic individuals undergoing oral desensitization immunotherapy with AR101.

METHODS

Blood samples obtained as part of enrollment screening and at multiple time points during PALISADE study were used to assess basophil and CD4+ T-cell reactivity to peanut.

RESULTS

The absence of clinical reactivity to the entry double-blinded placebo-controlled peanut challenge (DBPCFC) was accompanied by a significantly lower basophil sensitivity and T-cell reactivity to peanut compared with DBPCFC reactors. At baseline, peanut-reactive TH2A cells were observed in many but not all peanut-allergic patients and their level in peripheral blood correlates with T-cell reactivity to peanut and with serum peanut-specific IgE and IgG4 levels. POIT reshaped circulating peanut-reactive T-cell responses in a subset-dependent manner. Changes in basophil and T-cell responses to peanut closely paralleled clinical benefits to AR101 therapy and resemble responses in those with lower clinical sensitivity to peanut. However, no difference in peanut-reactive Treg cell frequency was observed between groups.

CONCLUSION

Oral desensitization therapy with AR101 leads to decreased basophil sensitivity to peanut and reshapes peanut-reactive T effector cell responses supporting its potential as an immunomodulatory therapy.

Immunological changes during desensitization with cow's milk: how differ from natural tolerance or nonallergic state?

BACKGROUND

Oral immunotherapy(OIT) is a novel allergen-specific treatment for food allergies.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of OIT on blocking antibodies, T cell regulation, and cytokine response during IgE-mediated cow's milk allergy(CMA) treatment.

METHODS

Fifty-seven children with Ig-E-mediated CMA who were followed in pediatric allergy outpatient clinic and 18 healthy children were included.The children were evaluated in four groups: OIT group, elimination group (patients receiving dairy elimination diet), tolerance group(patients who developed tolerance), healthy control group. Milk-specific IgE, IgG4, and IgA levels, cow's milk induration diameters in skin prick test, CD4+CD25+FoxP3+Treg cell percentages, mRNA expressions, and IL-10,TGF-β,IL-2,IL-4,IL-13 cytokine levels were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 42.6±39(6-201) months, 63.6%(n=49) of patients were girls. We observed an increase in total IgE levels(p=0.02) and a decrease in cow's-milk sIgE (p=0.08,NS), specific-IgA(p<0.01), and IgG4(p<0.01) levels at 2 months after the maintenance phase of OIT. In addition, the immune response after OIT treatment, which had a 100% clinical success rate, was notable for similar CD4+CD25+FoxP3+cell percentages(p=0.6), and increased IL-10(p=0.04) levels and increased but statistically nonsignificant TGF-β levels(p=0.17) compared with those before treatment.FoxP3 mRNA expression was similar to that of patients who developed natural tolerance. Pre-treatment and post-treatment FoxP3 mRNA-FoxP3 flow cytometric expressions were positively correlated with TGF-β concentrations in the OIT group.

CONCLUSION

A successful immune response to OIT was shown, possibly through the blockage of IgE-mediated allergen presentation by blocking antibodies, marked IL-10 cytokine response, and TGF-β response.FoxP3 mRNA expression was similar to the natural tolerance mechanism, but more studies are needed.

Variations in protocol development during oral immunotherapy

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) protocols are not standardized, and a wide heterogeneity exists in the literature. OIT protocol variables include the initiation approach (fixed dose versus oral food challenge), buildup speed (slow versus fast), target maintenance dose (low versus high target dose), type of food used, and use of adjuvants among other variables. Most protocols start with an initial escalation day, which is a series of extremely low doses to safely identify the patients who are most allergic, followed by a buildup period over several months to years until the final target maintenance dose is achieved. Doses are generally increased every 1-2 weeks by a factor of 1.25 to 2 and are adapted based on the patient's symptoms. Protocols are increasingly favoring low-maintenance doses over traditional high maintenance doses, although this needs to be discussed and adapted based on the patient's preferences. Accelerated OIT schedules with using a short treatment of omalizumab can be considered in severe food allergy cases.

Optimal patient selection for oral immunotherapy

Standard criteria for ideal patient selection with food oral immunotherapy (OIT) have yet to be determined. Although there are a handful of contraindications to consider before recommending OIT, most patients with confirmed immunoglobulin E-mediated food allergies are appropriate candidates. Success rates of OIT can vary widely and be influenced by several factors. Choosing the most appropriate candidate for an OIT program can mitigate risks and provide the best chance for patients to be successful.

Food allergy: History, definitions and treatment approaches

Allergen-specific immunotherapy for the treatment of immunoglobulin E mediated food allergies, specifically oral, epicutaneous, and sublingual immunotherapies, are promising options that may provide an alternative to strict avoidance of the dietary allergen. Of these potential therapies, oral immunotherapy is the furthest along in development, with strong evidence of efficacy in clinical trials, and has achieved regulatory approval. Nevertheless, oral immunotherapy may not be a suitable therapy for some patients due to the risk of adverse effects. In contrast to oral immunotherapy, epicutaneous and sublingual immunotherapies have demonstrated modest efficacy in clinical trials, with a favorable adverse effect profile, which suggests that these therapies may be possible contenders to oral immunotherapy in certain clinical situations. Familiarity with the various treatment approaches is vital for guiding patients and families as more therapeutic modalities become available for use outside of the research setting.

A practical focus on peanut oral immunotherapy

A new era of active treatment for food allergy has arrived because patients with peanut allergy are increasingly able to access options for oral immunotherapy (OIT). This milestone is a culmination of years of clinical research and represents a major inflection point for the field because it will have dramatic impacts on allergy practice. In this review, we provide a brief review of the literature as well as practical guidance with concern for the use of U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved peanut OIT as well as shelf-bought products.

Patient selection for milk and egg ladders using a food ladder safety checklist

A food ladder is a form of home-based dietary advancement therapy that gradually increases exposure to an allergenic food through the gradual introduction of egg or milk containing food with increasing quantity and allergenicity from extensively heated forms, such as baked goods, to less processed products. While widely considered safe, the food ladder is not risk-free and most of the egg and milk ladder studies only included preschoolers with mild egg and milk allergies, and with no or well-controlled asthma. We propose a Food Ladder Safety Checklist to assist with patient selection using “4 A's” based on available evidence for food ladders, including Age, active or poorly controlled Asthma, history of Anaphylaxis, and Adherence.

Could Age and Oral Challenge Outcomes Identify High-Risk Patients During Cow's Milk Oral Immunotherapy?

Objective: Severe immunglobuline E (IgE)-mediated reactions during oral immunotherapy (OIT) are major obstacles to treatment. The present study aimed to evaluate and identify clinical and laboratory biomarkers of adverse events during OIT among children with cow's milk (CM) allergy. Study Design: Eighty-six children older than 36 months who had undergone OIT with milk were enrolled. Clinical data, oral food challenge (OFC) test results, and laboratory data were recorded retrospectively. Results: The median duration of the build-up phase of OIT was 19 weeks (min 10-max 40) and the duration of the maintenance phase was 86.5 (min 1-max 132) months. A total of 11,767 CM doses were administered during the build-up phase and adverse reactions were seen in 62 (73.8%) patients with reactions registered for 157 doses among 11,767 (1/75 doses). The number of reactions during the maintenance phase was 41 (47.6%) in 24 (27.9%) patients. There was a significant reduction in the number of reactions (P = 0.000) between the build-up phase and maintenance phase. Adverse reactions and anaphylaxis were higher for patients who had cough during OFC (P = 0.003, P = 0.002, respectively) during the build-up phase and also during the maintenance phase too (P = 0.000). Evaluation for all reactions and anaphylaxis (during build-up and maintenance) with Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis showed class IV-VI of CM-specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE), casein-sIgE and cough during OFC were significantly associated with increased probability of reaction and anaphylaxis. Younger age at onset of OIT was associated with risk reduction (0.017). Conclusion: Laboratory data and reactions during the OFC (especially cough) can help to identify high-risk patients during OIT.

Phase 2, randomized multi oral immunotherapy with omalizumab 'real life' study

BACKGROUND

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is frequently discontinued due to adverse events (AEs) and current data suggests that lowering OIT doses can minimize severity and frequency of AEs. However, the minimum daily dose that can enable desensitization and induce immune responses in multi-food OIT (mOIT) is unknown.

METHODS

Participants aged 2-25 years with multi-food allergies were pretreated with fixed-dose omalizumab (150 mg, 3 doses, every 4 weeks), and randomized 1:1 to receive mOIT to a total maintenance dose of either 300 or 1200 mg total protein, (total dose includes at least two and up to a max of five allergens) and then transitioned to real-food protein equivalents after 18 weeks of treatment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of subjects with increases in IgG4/IgE ratio of at least 2 allergens by ≥25% from baseline after 18 weeks of therapy. The primary efficacy and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population.

RESULTS

Sixty participants were enrolled across two sites. Seventy percent of participants in both arms showed changes in sIgG4/sIgE ratio in at least 2 allergens with no difference between the treatment groups (OR [95% CI] = 1.00 [0.29, 3.49]). Overall, there were no differences in AEs between the 300 and 1200 mg groups (19% vs. 17%, p = .69), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that plasma marker changes are induced early, even at a total protein dose of 300 mg inclusive of multiple allergens when mOIT is combined with fixed-dose omalizumab. Identification of optimal mOIT dosing with adjunct omalizumab is needed for the long-term success of OIT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03181009).

Current insights: a systemic review of therapeutic options for peanut allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

With increasing prevalence of peanut allergy (PA) globally and the greater risk of potential reactions occurring due to the leading role of nuts in food products, PA has become a significant public health concern over the past decade, affecting up to 5 million of the US adult population. This review details updates and advances in prevalence, diagnosis, and immunotherapies that have occurred over the past year.

RECENT FINDINGS

Therapeutic and diagnostic advances remain at the forefront of research and have continued to push the food allergy (FA) field forward to provide a promising role in the detection and treatment of PA. The FA field has researched significant advances in peanut immunotherapy, biomarker diagnosis, and quality of life (QoL) improvement.

SUMMARY

Given the burden and consequences for individuals with PA, these advances delivered in clinical practice can significantly improve the QoL of individuals with PA and their caregivers. Ongoing studies will continue to investigate long-term outcome measures of desensitisation and effective management plans tailored to the families' needs.

A three-stage design for allergen immunotherapy trials

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) may require up to 5 years to complete. These lengthy trials may be complicated by high and potentially differential dropouts, especially among participants who perceive that they are receiving placebo. We propose a three-stage design in which the placebo group in Stage 1 crosses over to receive active treatment in Stage 2. In Stage 3, AIT is discontinued to determine whether benefit is maintained post-treatment. We apply inferential statistics to support the three-stage design for clinical trials to determine clinical efficacy, treatment response over time, and sustained response to AIT.

METHODS

The proposed framework constitutes a series of hypothesis tests for comparing treatment responses at the end of each stage. A simulation study was performed to illustrate the statistical properties under varying statistical missing mechanisms and effect sizes.

RESULTS

The statistical properties in terms of bias and statistical power were consistent with what are expected from conventional analyses. Specifically, the extent of bias depended on the missing mechanism and magnitude. The statistical powers were largely driven by effect and sample sizes as well as prespecified success margins. As an illustration, assuming relative treatment differences of 25% and stagewise dropout rate of 15%, a sample size of 200 per group may achieve 93% power to demonstrate a treatment effect and 60% power to demonstrate a maintained response post-treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Inferential statistics support our proposed study design for evaluating benefits of AIT over time and inform clinical understanding and decisions.

The Economic Burden of Food Allergy: What We Know and What We Need to Learn

Purpose of Review

Food allergy management and treatment require dietary modification, are associated with significant burdens, and affect food choices and behaviours. Emerging therapies, such as oral immunotherapy (OIT), provide a glimmer of hope for those living with the condition. Some burdens have received substantial focus, whereas many knowledge gaps on the significance of other impacts, including economic burden, remain.

Recent Findings

Evidence from many countries, but disproportionately from the United States, supports that food allergy carries significant healthcare and societal costs. Early introduction for the prevention of food allergies is theoretically cost-effective, but remains largely undescribed. Unique considerations, such as those to cow’s milk protein allergy, which affects a substantial proportion of infants, and adrenaline autoinjectors, which have a high cost-per-use, require a balance between cost-effectiveness to the healthcare system and adverse outcomes. Household costs have largely been explored in two countries, but owing to different healthcare structures and costs of living, comparisons are difficult, as are generalisations to other countries. Stock epinephrine in schools may present a cost-effective strategy, particularly in economically disadvantaged areas. Costs relating to OIT must be examined within both immediate benefits, such as protection from anaphylaxis, and long-term benefits, such as sustained unresponsiveness.

Summary

Although the absolute costs differ by region/country and type of food allergy, a consistent pattern persists: food allergy is a costly condition, to those who live with it, and the multiple stakeholders with which they interact.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40521-022-00306-5.

Real-life experience with hazelnut oral immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Hazelnut oral immunotherapy (H-OIT), a promising alternative to hazelnut-free diet for patients with hazelnut allergy, has not been extensively studied.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effectiveness of H-OIT for children with hazelnut allergy.

METHODS

Retrospective medical record review of children treated by H-OIT in the University Hospital of Lyon (France) was reported. Clinical and laboratory data were collected, and the satisfaction of the children treated by H-OIT was evaluated using a questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 70 patients treated by H-OIT for an immunoglobulin E-mediated hazelnut allergy (94.3%) or an immunoglobulin E sensitization to hazelnut (5.7%) were included. Among these, 22.9% entered the maintenance phase at 1-year consultation and 60.0% entered the maintenance phase during the study period. At home, 57.1% of the patients experienced at least 1 adverse effect and 2.9% experienced severe systemic allergic reactions. Among the 212 oral food challenges conducted at hospital, 3.3% led to severe systemic reactions and epinephrine was used 4 times. A total of 21.4% of children discontinued treatment; aversion to hazelnut was the main reason. There were 42 children aged 8 years or more and their parents who answered the questionnaire. H-OIT was considered a strain for children but effective and was recommended to other children with allergy.

CONCLUSION

H-OIT seemed to be effective and well accepted by children. This is counterbalanced by a high rate of H-OIT discontinuation, mainly owing to aversion to hazelnut, and an important rate of adverse reactions, which are however mostly mild.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04841850.

Oral immunotherapy for food allergy in children: is it worth it?

INTRODUCTION

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is effective at inducing desensitization in food-allergic individuals, and is a valid therapeutic option for those allergic to peanut, cow's milk and egg. However, there is a high rate of dose-related adverse events, and at least one fatality to OIT has been reported.

AREAS COVERED

We provide an update on the broader framework of issues which will impact on the availability and uptake of OIT.

EXPERT OPINION

The need for standardized products remains controversial. A licensed product exists for peanut-OIT, but OIT can also be safely achieved using peanut-containing foods at much lower cost. For other allergens, OIT can only be done with non-pharma products - something which has been done safely for over 2 decades. There is a need to develop personalized protocols for OIT, particularly for the 20% of patients unable to tolerate standard OIT. Cost-effectiveness is dependent on improved quality of life, but evidence for this is currently lacking, and is a key evidence gap. OIT is likely to be cost-effective, particularly if noncommercial products are used. There may be a trade-off: in patients with lower reaction thresholds, a commercial product may be needed for initial updosing, until a level of desensitization is achieved when they can be switched to natural food products.

Tolerance induction through non-avoidance to prevent persistent food allergy (TINA) in children and adults with peanut or tree nut allergy: rationale, study design and methods of a randomized controlled trial and observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Peanuts (PN) and tree nuts (TN) are among the most frequent elicitors of food allergy and can lead to life-threatening reactions. The current advice for allergic patients is to strictly avoid the offending food independently of their individual threshold level, whereas sensitized patients without allergic symptoms should frequently consume the food to avoid (re-)development of food allergy. The aim of this trial is to investigate (I) whether the consumption of low allergen amounts below the individual threshold may support natural tolerance development and (II) to what extent regular allergen consumption in sensitized but tolerant subjects prevents the (re-)development of PN or TN allergy.

METHODS

The TINA trial consisting of (part I) a randomized, controlled, open, parallel group, single-center, superiority trial (RCT), and (part II) a prospective observational exploratory cohort study. Children and adults (age 1-67 years) with suspected or known primary PN and/or TN allergy will undergo an oral food challenge (OFC) to determine their clinical reactivity and individual threshold. In the RCT, 120 PN or TN allergic patients who tolerate ≥100 mg of food protein will be randomized (1:1 ratio) to consumption of products with low amounts of PN or TN on a regular basis or strict avoidance for 1 year. The consumption group will start with 1/100 of their individual threshold, increasing the protein amount to 1/50 and 1/10 after 4 and 8 months, respectively. The primary endpoint is the clinical tolerance to PN or TN after 1 year assessed by OFC. In the cohort study, 120 subjects sensitized to PN and/or TN but tolerant are advised to regularly consume the food and observed for 1 year. The primary endpoint is the maintenance of clinical tolerance to PN and/or TN after 1 year assessed by challenging with the former tolerated cumulative dose.

DISCUSSION

This clinical trial will help to determine the impact of allergen consumption versus avoidance on natural tolerance development and whether the current dietary advice for PN or TN allergic patients with higher threshold levels is still valid.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trials Register; ID: DRKS00016764 (RCT), DRKS00020467 (cohort study). Registered on 15 January 2020, http://www.drks.de .

Food allergy and hypersensitivity reactions in children and adults-A review

Adverse reactions after food intake are commonly reported and a cause of concern and anxiety that can lead to a very strict diet. The severity of the reaction can vary depending on the type of food and mechanism, and it is not always easy to disentangle different hypersensitivity diagnoses, which sometimes can exist simultaneously. After a carefully taken medical history, hypersensitivity to food can often be ruled out or suspected. The most common type of allergic reaction is immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated food allergy (prevalence 5-10%). Symptoms vary from mild itching, stomach pain, and rash to severe anaphylaxis. The definition of IgE-mediated food allergy is allergic symptoms combined with specific IgE-antibodies, and therefore only IgE-antibodies to suspected allergens should be analyzed. Nowadays, methods of molecular allergology can help with the diagnostic process. The most common allergens are milk and egg in infants, peanut and tree nuts in children, and fish and shellfish in adults. In young children, milk/egg allergy has a good chance to remit, making it important to follow up and reintroduce the food when possible. Other diseases triggered by food are non-IgE-mediated food allergy, for example, eosinophilic esophagitis, celiac disease, food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome, and hypersensitivity to milk and biogenic amines. Some of the food hypersensitivities dominate in childhood, others are more common in adults. Interesting studies are ongoing regarding the possibilities of treating food hypersensitivity, such as through oral immunotherapy. The purpose of this review was to provide an overview of the most common types of food hypersensitivity reactions.

Probiotic peanut oral immunotherapy versus oral immunotherapy and placebo in children with peanut allergy in Australia (PPOIT-003): a multicentre, randomised, phase 2b trial

BACKGROUND

Oral immunotherapy is effective at inducing desensitisation to allergens and induces sustained unresponsiveness (ie, clinical remission) in a subset of patients, but causes frequent reactions. We aimed to investigate whether addition of a probiotic adjuvant improved the efficacy or safety of peanut oral immunotherapy.

METHODS

PPOIT-003, a multicentre, randomised, phase 2b trial, was conducted in three tertiary hospitals in Australia (Adelaide [SA], Melbourne [VIC], and Perth [WA]) in children aged 1-10 years, weighing more than 7 kg, with peanut allergy confirmed by a double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (cumulative 4950 mg dose of peanut protein) and positive peanut skin prick test (≥3 mm) or peanut-specific IgE (≥0·35 kU/L). Children were randomly assigned (2:2:1) to receive probiotic and peanut oral immunotherapy (PPOIT), placebo probiotic and peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT), or placebo probiotic and placebo OIT (placebo) for 18 months, and were followed up until 12 months after completion of treatment. Oral immunotherapy consisted of increasing doses of peanut protein (commercially available food-grade 12% defatted peanut flour [50% peanut protein]) until a 2000 mg daily maintenance dose was reached. The probiotic adjuvant was a daily dose of 2 × 10¹⁰ colony-forming units of the probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus ATCC 53103. Placebo immunotherapy comprised maltodextrin, brown food colouring, and peanut essence, and placebo probiotic was maltodextrin. Dual primary outcomes were 8-week sustained unresponsiveness, defined as no reaction to a cumulative dose of 4950 mg peanut protein at treatment completion and 8 weeks after treatment completion, in the PPOIT versus placebo groups and the PPOIT versus OIT groups, analysed by intention to treat. Safety endpoints were adverse events during the treatment phase, and peanut ingestion and reactions in the 12-month post-treatment period. This study is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, 12616000322437.

FINDINGS

Between July 4, 2016, and Sept 21, 2020, 201 participants were enrolled and included in the intention-to-treat analysis. 36 (46%) of 79 children in the PPOIT group and 42 (51%) of 83 children in the OIT group achieved sustained unresponsiveness compared with two (5%) of 39 children in the placebo group (risk difference 40·44% [95% CI 27·46 to 53·42] for PPOIT vs placebo, p<0·0001), with no difference between PPOIT and OIT (-5·03% [-20·40 to 10·34], p=0·52). Treatment-related adverse events were reported in 72 (91%) of 79 children in the PPOIT group, 73 (88%) of 83 children in the OIT group, and 28 (72%) of 39 children in the placebo group. Exposure-adjusted incidence of adverse events was 10·58 in the PPOIT group, 11·36 in the OIT, and 2·09 in the placebo group (ratio 0·92 [95% CI 0·85 to 0·99] for PPOIT vs OIT, p=0·042; 4·98 [4·11-6·03] for PPOIT vs placebo, p<0·0001; 5·42 [4·48-6·56] for OIT vs placebo, p<0·0001), with differences seen primarily in gastrointestinal symptoms and in children aged 1-5 years. During the 12-month post-treatment period, 60 (85%) of 71 participants in the PPOIT group, 60 (86%) of 70 participants in the OIT group, and six (18%) of 34 participants in the placebo group were eating peanut; rescue epinephrine use was infrequent (two [3%] of 71 in the PPOIT group, four [6%] of 70 in the OIT group, and none in the placebo group).

INTERPRETATION

Both PPOIT and OIT were effective at inducing sustained unresponsiveness. Addition of a probiotic did not improve efficacy of OIT, but might offer a safety benefit compared with OIT alone, particularly in preschool children.

FUNDING

National Health and Medical Research Council Australia and Prota Therapeutics.

Food immunotherapy practice: Nation differences across Europe, the FIND project

BACKGROUND

Food allergen immunotherapy (FA-AIT) practice is known to vary globally. This project aims to identify and characterize European centres performing FA-AIT.

METHODS

An EAACI task force conducted an online survey to gather relevant information regarding FA-AIT practice and setting-specific resources after reviewing the published literature and congress abstracts throughout Europe.

RESULTS

We identified 102 FA-AIT centres in 18 countries; only Spain (n = 39) and France (n = 16) had ≥10 such centres. Overall, most facilities were hospital-based (77.5%), publicly funded (80.4%) and delivered FA-AIT as routine clinical care (80.4%). On average, departments had 3 allergists/paediatric allergists and 2 nurses. Surveyed centres had provided FA-AIT for a median of 9 years [1-24] to a median of 105 [5-2415] patients. The estimated total number of treated patients was 24875, of whom 41.3% received AIT for milk, 34.2% egg, 12.8% peanut and 11.7% other foods. Anaphylaxis to AIT doses requiring over 4-6 h of observation was reported by 70.6% of centres, ICU admissions by 10.8% and eosinophilic esophagitis by 45.1%. Quality of life and sustained unresponsiveness were evaluated in 20.6% and 54.9% of centres, respectively. The main contraindications for food AIT were severe asthma (57%-63%), eosinophilic esophagitis (56%-48%) and age below 5 years (47%-41%).

CONCLUSIONS

In Europe, FA-AIT is provided mostly in clinical practice. Significant variation is seen in the number of centres per country, facility characteristics and inclusion/exclusion criteria, and in certain aspects of protocols. Potential inequality in access to AIT has been identified as well as the need for education and guidance for treatment standardization.

Immunotherapy Effectiveness in Treating Peanut Hypersensitivity: A Systemic Review

Peanut hypersensitivity is one of the top causes of food-related allergic responses and death in high-income countries. As a result, the goal of this study was to see if various forms of immunotherapies can help reduce the severity of peanut hypersensitivity reactions.

From 2019 to 2021, a systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, Wiley online library, and Science Direct was done. Peanut immunotherapy (PIT) clinical trials were considered. There were 19 trials with a total of 1565 participants. Twelve were on oral immunotherapy (OIT), two on sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), two on subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT), two on epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT), and one was a comparison of SLIT and OIT.

Desensitization was achieved by 74.3% of those who received OIT, 11% of those who received SLIT, 61% of those who received SCIT, and 49% of those who received EPIT. The majority of adverse events (AE) were mild to moderate. Those requiring epinephrine, on the other hand, were moderate to severe and were more common in the therapy groups.

This systematic review showed that the current PIT regimens can accomplish desensitization regardless of the route of administration, with an acceptable safety profile.

Efficacy and safety of oral immunotherapy in children aged 1-3 years with peanut allergy (the Immune Tolerance Network IMPACT trial): a randomised placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND

For young children with peanut allergy, dietary avoidance is the current standard of care. We aimed to assess whether peanut oral immunotherapy can induce desensitisation (an increased allergic reaction threshold while on therapy) or remission (a state of non-responsiveness after discontinuation of immunotherapy) in this population.

METHODS

We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in five US academic medical centres. Eligible participants were children aged 12 to younger than 48 months who were reactive to 500 mg or less of peanut protein during a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC). Participants were randomly assigned by use of a computer, in a 2:1 allocation ratio, to receive peanut oral immunotherapy or placebo for 134 weeks (2000 mg peanut protein per day) followed by 26 weeks of avoidance, with participants and study staff and investigators masked to group treatment assignment. The primary outcome was desensitisation at the end of treatment (week 134), and remission after avoidance (week 160), as the key secondary outcome, were assessed by DBPCFC to 5000 mg in the intention-to-treat population. Safety and immunological parameters were assessed in the same population. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03345160.

FINDINGS

Between Aug 13, 2013, and Oct 1, 2015, 146 children, with a median age of 39·3 months (IQR 30·8-44·7), were randomly assigned to receive peanut oral immunotherapy (96 participants) or placebo (50 participants). At week 134, 68 (71%, 95% CI 61-80) of 96 participants who received peanut oral immunotherapy compared with one (2%, 0·05-11) of 50 who received placebo met the primary outcome of desensitisation (risk difference [RD] 69%, 95% CI 59-79; p<0·0001). The median cumulative tolerated dose during the week 134 DBPCFC was 5005 mg (IQR 3755-5005) for peanut oral immunotherapy versus 5 mg (0-105) for placebo (p<0·0001). After avoidance, 20 (21%, 95% CI 13-30) of 96 participants receiving peanut oral immunotherapy compared with one (2%, 0·05-11) of 50 receiving placebo met remission criteria (RD 19%, 95% CI 10-28; p=0·0021). The median cumulative tolerated dose during the week 160 DBPCFC was 755 mg (IQR 0-2755) for peanut oral immunotherapy and 0 mg (0-55) for placebo (p<0·0001). A significant proportion of participants receiving peanut oral immunotherapy who passed the 5000 mg DBPCFC at week 134 could no longer tolerate 5000 mg at week 160 (p<0·001). The participant receiving placebo who was desensitised at week 134 also achieved remission at week 160. Compared with placebo, peanut oral immunotherapy decreased peanut-specific and Ara h2-specific IgE, skin prick test, and basophil activation, and increased peanut-specific and Ara h2-specific IgG4 at weeks 134 and 160. By use of multivariable regression analysis of participants receiving peanut oral immunotherapy, younger age and lower baseline peanut-specific IgE was predictive of remission. Most participants (98% with peanut oral immunotherapy vs 80% with placebo) had at least one oral immunotherapy dosing reaction, predominantly mild to moderate and occurring more frequently in participants receiving peanut oral immunotherapy. 35 oral immunotherapy dosing events with moderate symptoms were treated with epinephrine in 21 participants receiving peanut oral immunotherapy.

INTERPRETATION

In children with a peanut allergy, initiation of peanut oral immunotherapy before age 4 years was associated with an increase in both desensitisation and remission. Development of remission correlated with immunological biomarkers. The outcomes suggest a window of opportunity at a young age for intervention to induce remission of peanut allergy.

FUNDING

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, Immune Tolerance Network.

The Role of Diet Modification in Atopic Dermatitis: Navigating the Complexity

Diet has long been understood to have an intricate association with atopic dermatitis, although much remains unelucidated. Skin barrier dysfunction with dysbiosis and consequent impairment of immune tolerance likely underly the pathogenesis of coincident atopic dermatitis and food allergy. There is a wide range of possible skin reactions to food, complicating the diagnosis and understanding of food allergies. Many patients, parents, and providers incorrectly suspect diet as causative of atopic dermatitis symptoms and many have tried elimination diets. This frequently leads to inaccurate labeling of food allergies, contributing to a dangerous spiral of inappropriate testing, referrals, and dietary changes, while neglecting established atopic dermatitis treatment essentials. Alternatively, certain dietary supplements or the introduction of certain foods may be beneficial for atopic dermatitis management or prevention. Greater consensus on the role of diet among providers of patients with atopic dermatitis is strongly encouraged to improve the management of atopic dermatitis.

Oral Immunotherapy in Food Allergy: A Critical Pediatric Perspective

There is evidence that in children with persistent IgE-mediated food allergy (FA) to cow's milk, hen's egg, and peanut, oral allergen-specific immunotherapy (OIT) may increase the reaction threshold to the culprit food allergen(s). OIT may protect patients from the occurrence of severe reactions in case of accidental ingestion of the culprit food during treatment. Notwithstanding, many gaps are still unsolved, including safety issues, identification of predictive biomarkers, and post-desensitization efficacy. In this perspective, the use of omalizumab (Anti-IgE monoclonal antibody) has been proposed as an adjunctive treatment to OIT in order to reduce the risk of allergic reactions related to OIT. This review aims to summarize the current evidence and unmet needs on OIT in children with FA to enhance the development of longitudinal, prospective, and well-designed studies able to fill the current gaps soon.

Advances, Practical Implementation, and Unmet Needs Regarding Oral Immunotherapy for Food Allergy

Treatment of food allergy is a rapidly changing landscape, with arguably, the most significant advancement in recent years, the transition of oral immunotherapy (OIT) to clinical practice. As an innovation, OIT is a phase of rapidly increasing demand, particularly for some allergens such as peanut, egg, and milk, which have substantial evidence of efficacy. However, significant questions remain about how to best treat multiple food allergies and less common food allergies and how to optimize long-term safety and efficacy. This review summarizes the currently available resources for integrating food allergy OIT into clinical practice and focuses on the multiple remaining unmet needs such as providing an approach for OIT to food allergens for which there is no or limited evidence; practical issues related to food allergy treatment particularly when it is not going well; long-term outcomes and follow-up after OIT; and strategies to help meet the impending increase in demand.

Oral Immunotherapy in Children: Clinical Considerations and Practical Management

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) in pediatric patients provides an alternative option to the current standard of care in food allergy, which is allergen avoidance and reactive treatment. Because patients are exposed to one or more food allergens during treatment, OIT is associated with adverse events and can be a cumbersome process for children, their caregivers, and clinicians. However, there have been an overwhelming number of studies that show high efficacy in both single- and multi-allergen OIT, and that quality of life is greatly improved for both patients and their families after undergoing immunotherapy. This review discusses clinical considerations for OIT in pediatrics, including efficacy and safety, practical management, and future directions of treatment.

Food allergy across the globe

The prevalence of food allergy (FA) is increasing in some areas of the globe, highlighting the need for better strategies for prevention, diagnosis, and therapy. In the last few decades, we have made great strides in understanding the causes and mechanisms underlying FAs, prompting guideline updates. Earlier guidelines recommended avoidance of common food allergens during pregnancy and lactation and delaying the introduction of allergenic foods in children aged between 1 and 3 years. Recent guidelines for allergy prevention recommend consumption of a healthy and diverse diet without eliminating or increasing the consumption of allergenic foods during pregnancy or breast-feeding. Early introduction of allergenic foods is recommended by most guidelines for allergy prevention after a period of exclusive breast-feedng (6 months [World Health Organization] or 4 months [European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology]). New diagnostics for FA have been developed with varied availability of these tests in different countries. Finally, the first oral immunotherapy drug for FA was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency in 2020. In this review, we will address the global prevalence of FA, our current understanding of the causes of FA, and the latest guidelines for preventing, diagnosing, and treating FA. We will also discuss similarities and differences between FA guidelines.