Oral Immunotherapy for Peanut Allergy: Multipractice Experience With Epinephrine-treated Reactions

Current Status of Potential Therapies for IgE-Mediated Food Allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The goal of this review is to provide the reader with an updated summary of published trial data regarding the use of oral immunotherapy (OIT), sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), and epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) for treatment of IgE-mediated food allergies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Data from phase 2 trials for treatment of peanut allergy with OIT and EPIT reveal an increase in the threshold of reactivity for peanut-allergic children. Compared to EPIT, OIT promotes a greater increase in the threshold of reactivity; however, adverse events are more common with OIT. OIT, EPIT, and SLIT appear to modulate the immune response for some food-allergic individuals. Data regarding utility for treatment of food allergies regardless of modality is limited to few foods, as is investigation into treatment of food-allergic infants, young children, and adults. Future trials are likely to focus on young children, food allergies other than peanut, and treatment of multifood-allergic individuals.

Allergen-Specific Immunotherapies for Food Allergy

With rising prevalence of food allergy (FA), allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) for FA has become an active area of research in recent years. In AIT, incrementally increasing doses of inciting allergen are given with the goal to increase tolerance, initially through desensitization, which relies on regular exposure to allergen. With prolonged therapy in some subjects, AIT may induce sustained unresponsiveness, in which tolerance is retained after a period of allergen avoidance. Methods of AIT currently under study in humans include oral, sublingual, epicutaneous, and subcutaneous delivery of modified allergenic protein, as well as via DNA-based vaccines encoding allergen with lysosomal-associated membrane protein I. The balance of safety and efficacy varies by type of AIT, as well as by targeted allergen. Age, degree of sensitization, and other comorbidities may affect this balance within an individual patient. More recently, AIT with modified proteins or combined with immunomodulatory therapies has shown promise in making AIT safer and/or more effective. Though methods of AIT are neither currently advised by experts (oral immunotherapy [OIT]) nor widely available, AIT is likely to become a part of recommended management of FA in the coming years. Here, we review and compare methods of AIT currently under study in humans to prepare the practitioner for an exciting new phase in the care of food allergic patients in which improved tolerance to inciting foods will be a real possibility.

Food allergy: A review and update on epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, prevention, and management

This review provides general information to serve as a primer for those embarking on understanding food allergy and also details advances and updates in epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment that have occurred over the 4 years since our last comprehensive review. Although firm prevalence data are lacking, there is a strong impression that food allergy has increased, and rates as high as approximately 10% have been documented. Genetic, epigenetic, and environmental risk factors are being elucidated increasingly, creating potential for improved prevention and treatment strategies targeted to those at risk. Insights on pathophysiology reveal a complex interplay of the epithelial barrier, mucosal and systemic immune response, route of exposure, and microbiome among other influences resulting in allergy or tolerance. The diagnosis of food allergy is largely reliant on medical history, tests for sensitization, and oral food challenges, but emerging use of component-resolved diagnostics is improving diagnostic accuracy. Additional novel diagnostics, such as basophil activation tests, determination of epitope binding, DNA methylation signatures, and bioinformatics approaches, will further change the landscape. A number of prevention strategies are under investigation, but early introduction of peanut has been advised as a public health measure based on existing data. Management remains largely based on allergen avoidance, but a panoply of promising treatment strategies are in phase 2 and 3 studies, providing immense hope that better treatment will be imminently and widely available, whereas numerous additional promising treatments are in the preclinical and clinical pipeline.

Oral immunotherapy for food allergy: A Spanish guideline. Egg and milk immunotherapy Spanish guide (ITEMS GUIDE). Part 2: Maintenance phase of cow milk (CM) and egg oral immunotherapy (OIT), special treatment dosing schedules. Models of dosing schedules of OIT with CM and EGG

INTRODUCTION

Cow's milk and egg are the most frequent causes of food allergy in the first years of life. Treatments such as oral immunotherapy (OIT) have been investigated as an alternative to avoidance diets. No clinical practice guides on the management of OIT with milk and egg are currently available.

OBJECTIVES

To develop a clinical guide on OIT based on the available scientific evidence and the opinions of experts.

METHODS

A review was made of studies published in the period between 1984 and June 2016, Doctoral Theses published in Spain, and summaries of communications at congresses (SEAIC, SEICAP, EAACI, AAAAI), with evaluation of the opinion consensus established by a group of experts pertaining to the scientific societies SEICAP and SEAIC.

RESULTS

Recommendations have been established regarding the indications, requirements and practical aspects of the different phases of OIT, as well as special protocols for patients at high risk of suffering adverse reactions.

CONCLUSIONS

A clinical practice guide is presented for the management of OIT with milk and egg, based on the opinion consensus of Spanish experts.

Update on Potential Therapies for IgE-Mediated Food Allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Food allergy is common, affecting up to 8% of children in the USA. Currently, therapy is limited to avoidance of the implicated allergen and availability of self-injectable epinephrine. However, several new approaches to food allergy are under investigation. This article reviews the published data on these new approaches.

RECENT FINDINGS

Oral immunotherapy, in which allergic subjects are exposed to increasing amounts of antigen, can be accomplished in the majority of allergic individuals. However, this approach is not a cure as most patients will react after cessation of regular intake. In addition, there is a high rate of side effects. Other approaches include epicutaneous immunotherapy, therapy with anti-IgE medications, and use of Chinese herbs. Several novel approaches on food allergy are under study. At the current time, these approaches show promise for preventing severe reactions to accidental exposures. However, there is little evidence that current approaches will represent a true cure for food allergy.

Novel baseline predictors of adverse events during oral immunotherapy in children with peanut allergy

BACKGROUND

Though peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT) is a promising investigational therapy, its potential is limited by substantial adverse events (AEs), which are relatively understudied.

OBJECTIVE

A retrospective analysis was conducted, pooling data from 3 pediatric peanut OIT trials, comprising the largest analysis of peanut OIT safety to date.

METHODS

We pooled data from 104 children with peanut allergy from 3 peanut OIT studies. We catalogued AEs from parental reports, daily symptom diaries, and dose escalations. We included events that were considered likely related to OIT and identified potential baseline predictors of higher AE rates using generalized linear regression models.

RESULTS

Eighty percent of subjects experienced likely related AEs during OIT (72% during buildup and 47% during maintenance). Of these AEs, over 90% occurred while at home. Approximately 42% of subjects experienced systemic reactions, and 49% experienced gastrointestinal symptoms. Twenty percent of subjects dropped out, with half (10% of the overall group) due to persistent gastrointestinal symptoms. Baseline allergic rhinitis (AR) and peanut SPT wheal size were significant predictors of higher overall AE rates. SPT wheal size predicted increased gastrointestinal AEs, and AR predicted increased systemic reactions. Over the course of OIT, 61% of subjects received treatment for likely related AEs, 59% with antihistamines and 12% with epinephrine.

CONCLUSIONS

Peanut OIT is associated with frequent AEs, with rates declining over time, and most graded mild. However, systemic reactions and intolerable gastrointestinal AEs do occur and are significantly associated with AR and peanut SPT wheal size, respectively. Further study is needed of predictive biomarkers and the overall risks and benefits of OIT.

The Prevalence of Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Pediatric Patients with IgE-Mediated Food Allergy

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an allergic inflammatory disease that is triggered by food allergens and characterized by progressive esophageal dysfunction. Recently, EoE has been identified in patients who underwent oral immunotherapy (OIT) for IgE-mediated food allergy, suggesting an association.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to ascertain whether significant associations exist between IgE-mediated food allergies and EoE.

METHODS

Using the analysis of electronic medical record data and manual chart review, we examined our subspecialty care network of 35,528 children and adolescents to identify and characterize patients with IgE-mediated and EoE food allergy. The most common food allergens were defined, and the prevalence of EoE in patients with IgE-mediated food allergy was determined. Logistic regression was used to measure the extent to which IgE-mediated food allergy to specific foods is associated with EoE.

RESULTS

The most common causes of EoE were milk, soy, egg, grains, and meats, an allergen pattern that is distinct from that of IgE-mediated food allergy. The prevalence of EoE in patients with IgE-mediated food allergy was higher than that reported in the general population (4.7% vs 0.04%). The distribution of IgE-mediated food allergens in patients with EoE was similar to that of the general population, and IgE-mediated allergy to egg (2.27; 1.91-2.64), milk (4.19; 3.52-4.97), or shellfish (1.55; 1.24-1.92) was significantly associated with an EoE diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support a clinical association between these conditions that has implications for the management of children with food allergy, and particular relevance to patients undergoing OIT.

Active treatment for food allergy

Food allergy has grown in rapidly in prevalence, currently affecting 5% of adults and 8% of children. Management strategy is currently limited to 1) food avoidance and 2) carrying and using rescue intramuscular epinephrine/adrenaline and oral antihistamines in the case of accidental ingestion; there is no FDA approved treatment. Recently, oral, sublingual and epicutaneous immunotherapy have been developed as active treatment of food allergy, though none have completed phase 3 study. Efficacy and safety studies of immunotherapy have been variable, though there is clearly signal that immunotherapy will be a viable option to desensitize patients. The use of bacterial adjuvants, anti-IgE monoclonal antibodies, and Chinese herbal formulations either alone or in addition to immunotherapy may hold promise as future options for active treatment. Active prevention of food allergy through early introduction of potentially offending foods in high-risk infants will be an important means to slow the rising incidence of sensitization.

Oral Immunotherapy for Food Allergy

Food allergy is a potentially life-threatening condition with no approved therapies, apart from avoidance and injectable epinephrine for acute allergic reactions. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an experimental treatment in which food-allergic patients consume gradually increasing quantities of the food to increase their threshold for allergic reaction. This therapy carries significant risk of allergic reactions. The ability of OIT to desensitize patients to particular foods is well-documented, although the ability to induce tolerance has not been established. This review focuses on recent studies for the treatment of food allergies such as cow's milk, hen's egg, and peanut.

Local Side Effects of Sublingual and Oral Immunotherapy

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is increasingly used worldwide, and several products have been recently registered as drugs for respiratory allergy by the European Medicine Agency and the Food and Drug Administration. Concerning inhalant allergens, the safety of SLIT is overall superior to that of subcutaneous immunotherapy in terms of systemic adverse events. No fatality has been ever reported, and episodes of anaphylaxis were described only exceptionally. Looking at the historical and recent trials, most (>90%) adverse events are "local" and confined to the site of administration. For this reason, a specific grading system has been developed by the World Allergy Organization to classify and describe local adverse events. There is an increasing amount of literature concerning oral desensitization for food allergens, referred to as oral immunotherapy. Also, in this case, local side effects are predominant, although systemic adverse events are more frequent than with inhalant allergens. We review herein the description of local side effects due to SLIT, with a special focus on large trials having a declared sample size calculation. The use of the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities nomenclature for adverse events is mentioned in this context, as recommended by regulatory agencies. It is expected that a uniform classification/grading of local adverse events will improve and harmonize the surveillance and reporting on the safety of SLIT.

Clinical and laboratory 2-year outcome of oral immunotherapy in patients with cow's milk allergy

Studies examining the long-term effect of oral immunotherapy in food-allergic patients are limited. We investigated cow's milk-allergic patients, >6 months after the completion of oral immunotherapy (n = 197). Questionnaires, skin prick tests, and basophil activation assays were performed. Of the 195 patients contacted, 180 (92.3%) were consuming milk protein regularly. Half experienced adverse reactions, mostly mild. Thirteen patients (6.7%) required injectable epinephrine. Higher reaction rate after immunotherapy was associated with more anaphylactic episodes before treatment and a lower starting dose (OR = 2.1, P = 0.035 and OR = 2.3, P = 0.035, respectively). Reaction rate in patients who were 6-15 months, 15-30 months, or >30 months post-treatment decreased from 0.28/month to 0.21/month to 0.15/month, respectively (P < 0.01). Milk-induced %CD63 and %CD203c expression was significantly lower in patients >24 months vs in patients <24 months post-treatment (P = 0.038 and P = 0.047, respectively). In conclusion, many patients experience mild adverse reactions after completing oral immunotherapy and some require injectable epinephrine. Progressive desensitization, both clinically and in basophil reactivity, occurs over time.

Current Options for the Treatment of Food Allergy

Food allergy is increasing in prevalence; as a result, there is intense focus on developing safe and effective therapies. Current methods of specific immunotherapy include oral, sublingual, and epicutaneous, while nonspecific methods that have been investigated include: Chinese herbal medicine, probiotics, and anti-IgE antibodies. Although some studies have demonstrated efficacy in inducing desensitization, questions regarding safety and the potential for achieving immune tolerance remain. Although some of these therapies demonstrate promise, further investigation is required before their incorporation into routine clinical practice.

Epicutaneous immunotherapy for food allergy as a novel pathway for oral tolerance induction

Epicutaneous immunotherapy is a developing technique, aiming at desensitizing patients with food allergy with less risks that oral ingestion or injection could generate. Several clinical trials have been performed and are currently running, in milk and peanut allergy, assessing the safety of the technique and its efficacy. Preclinical models indicate a major role in the mechanisms of desensitization, for example, Tregs and epigenetic modifications.

Oral immunotherapy for food allergy: mechanisms and role in management

With the emergence of food allergy as an important public health problem, it has become clear that there is an unmet need in regard to treatment. In particular, IgE-mediated food allergy that is associated with risk of fatal anaphylaxis has been the subject of multiple studies in the past decade. The growing body of evidence derived from multiple centres and various study designs indicates that for IgE-mediated food allergy, immunomodulation through food immunotherapy is possible; however, the extent of protection afforded by such treatment is highly variable. At this time, the capacity for food immunotherapy to restore permanent tolerance to food has not been demonstrated conclusively. This review will discuss these topics as they apply to the most important studies of food oral immunotherapy.

Recent advances in immunotherapy and vaccine development for peanut allergy

Peanut allergy is a common problem and can be the cause of severe, life-threatening allergic reactions. It rarely resolves, with the majority of patients carrying the disease onto adulthood. Peanut allergy poses a significant burden on the quality of life of sufferers and their families, which results mainly from the fear of accidental peanut ingestion, but is also due to dietary and social restrictions. Current standard management involves avoidance, patient education and provision of emergency medication, for use in allergic reactions, when they occur. Efforts have been made to develop a vaccine for peanut allergy. Recent developments have also highlighted the use of immunotherapy, which has shown promise as an active form of treatment and may present a disease-modifying therapy for peanut allergy. So far, results, especially from oral immunotherapy studies, have shown good efficacy in achieving desensitization to peanut with a good safety profile. However, the capacity to induce long-term tolerance has not been demonstrated conclusively yet and larger, phase III studies are required to further investigate safety and efficacy of this intervention. Peanut immunotherapy is not currently recommended for routine clinical use or outside specialist allergy units.

Pharmacologic options for the treatment and management of food allergy

Food allergy affects approximately 5% of adults and 8% of children in developed countries, and there is currently no cure. Current pharmacologic management is limited to using intramuscular epinephrine or oral antihistamines in response to food allergen exposure. Recent trials have examined the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous, oral, sublingual, and epicutaneous immunotherapy, with varying levels of efficacy and safety demonstrated. Bacterial adjuvants, use of anti-IgE monoclonal antibodies, and Chinese herbal formulations represent exciting potential for development of future pharmacotherapeutic agents. Ultimately, immunotherapy may be a viable option for patients with food allergy, although efficacy and safety are likely to be less than ideal.

Oral immunotherapy for the treatment of food allergy

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an emerging new therapy for food allergy. With multiple small exploratory trials and some large randomized-controlled phase 2 trials recently published and under way, there is a clear progress and interest toward making this a treatment option for patients suffering from food allergies. However, there are still many questions to be answered and parameters to fine-tune before OIT becomes an accepted option outside of the research setting. This review covers the main milestones in the development of OIT for food allergy and further discusses important specific issues that will have direct impact on its clinical application. More specifically, previous publications showing evidence for the induction of tolerance are specifically reviewed and varying safety, tolerability and efficacy parameters from previous reports are also discussed.

Advances in allergic skin disease, anaphylaxis, and hypersensitivity reactions to foods, drugs, and insects in 2014

This review highlights some of the research advances in anaphylaxis; hypersensitivity reactions to foods, drugs, and insects; and allergic skin diseases that were reported in the Journal in 2014. Studies on food allergy suggest worrisomely high rates of peanut allergy and food-induced anaphylaxis-related hospitalizations. Evidence is mounting to support the theory that environmental exposure to peanut, such as in house dust, especially with an impaired skin barrier attributed to atopic dermatitis (AD) and loss of function mutations in the filaggrin gene, is a risk factor for sensitization and allergy. Diagnostic tests are improving, with early studies suggesting the possibility of developing novel cellular tests with increased diagnostic utility. Treatment trials continue to show the promise and limitations of oral immunotherapy, and mechanistic studies are elucidating pathways that might define the degree of efficacy of this treatment. Studies have also provided insights into the prevalence and characteristics of anaphylaxis and insect venom allergy, such as suggesting that baseline platelet-activating factor acetylhydrolase activity levels are related to the severity of reactions. Advances in drug allergy include identification of HLA associations for penicillin allergy and a microRNA biomarker/mechanism for toxic epidermal necrolysis. Research identifying critical events leading to skin barrier dysfunction and the polarized immune pathways that drive AD have led to new therapeutic approaches in the prevention and management of AD.

In vitro evaluation of digestive and endolysosomal enzymes to cleave CML-modified Ara h 1 peptides

Ara h 1 is a major peanut allergen. Processing-induced modifications may modulate the allergenic potency of Ara h 1. Carboxymethyl lysine (CML) modifications are a commonly described nonenzymatic modification on food proteins. In the current study, we tested the ability of digestive and endolysosomal proteases to cleave CML-modified and unmodified Ara h 1 peptides. Mass spectrometric analyses of the digested peptides demonstrate that carboxymethylation of lysine residues renders these peptides refractory to trypsin digestion. We did not detect observable differences in the simulated gastric fluid or endolysosomal digestion between the parental and CML-modified peptides. One of the tested peptides contains a lysine residue previously shown to be CML modified laying in a previously mapped linear IgE epitope, but we did not observe a difference in IgE binding between the modified and parental peptides. Our findings suggest a molecular mechanism for the increased resistance of peanut allergens modified by thermal processing, such as Ara h 1, to digestion in intestinal fluid after heating and could help explain how food processing-induced modifications may lead to more potent food allergens by acting to protect intact IgE epitopes from digestion by proteases targeting lysine residues.

Treatment with oleic acid reduces IgE binding to peanut and cashew allergens

Oleic acid (OA) is known to bind and change the bioactivities of proteins, such as α-lactalbumin and β-lactoglobulin in vitro. The objective of this study was to determine if OA binds to allergens from a peanut extract or cashew allergen and changes their allergenic properties. Peanut extract or cashew allergen (Ana o 2) was treated with or without 5mM sodium oleate at 70°C for 60 min (T1) or under the same conditions with an additional overnight incubation at 37°C (T2). After treatment, the samples were dialyzed and analyzed by SDS-PAGE and for OA content. IgE binding was evaluated by ELISA and western blot, using a pooled serum or plasma from individuals with peanut or cashew allergies. Results showed that OA at a concentration of 5mM reduced IgE binding to the allergens. Peanut sample T2 exhibited a lower IgE binding and a higher OA content (protein-bound) than T1. Cashew allergen T2 also showed a reduction in IgE binding. We conclude that OA reduces the allergenic properties of peanut extract and cashew allergen by binding to the allergens. Our findings indicate that OA in the form of sodium oleate may be potentially useful as a coating to reduce the allergenic properties of peanut and cashew allergens.

Sublingual (SLIT) versus oral immunotherapy (OIT) for food allergy

Food allergy is a common condition for which the only currently approved treatments are avoidance of the allergenic food and the administration of emergency medications upon accidental exposure. Over the past 10 years, significant advances have been made in the field of food immunotherapy, with efforts focusing on allergen exposure via the oral mucosa. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) are the two modalities that have been most extensively studied, and this article will review recent advances in our knowledge of the efficacy and safety of these treatments.

Oral and sublingual immunotherapy for food allergy

IgE-mediated food allergy is a potentially life-threatening allergic disease with an increase in prevalence in developed countries over the past 15 years. Currently, there are no approved forms of therapy and the standard of care is dietary restriction and ready access to emergency medications, such as self-injectable epinephrine and antihistamines. Allergen-specific modalities of treatment currently being studied include oral immunotherapy (OIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Both forms demonstrate the ability to desensitize patients to a variety of specific food allergens and show great promise. However, more research is needed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of OIT and SLIT prior to routine use in clinical practice.

Allergist-reported trends in the practice of food allergen oral immunotherapy

Food allergen oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an experimental, immune-modifying therapy that may induce clinical desensitization in some patients. OIT is still in early phase clinical research, but some providers may offer OIT as a clinical service. To understand the current practices of allergists who perform OIT, an online survey was sent by e-mail to members of the American Academy of Allergy Asthma & Immunology. Among 442 respondents, 61 reported participating in using OIT (13.8%), including 28 in nonacademic settings. Informed consent for OIT was obtained by 91.3%, institutional review board approval by 47.7% and Investigational New Drug approval by 38.1%. Compared with nonacademic participants, more academic participants used peanut OIT, obtained institutional review board and Investigational New Drug (P < .0001 respectively), and challenged patients before entry (P = .008). More nonacademic providers billed the patient or insurance for reimbursement (P < .0001). Low reported regard for the importance for US Food and Drug Administration approval or a standardized product (increased odds), and a high regard for better safety data (decreased odds) were associated with considering offering OIT as a service. Significant differences exist with OITs that occur in academic versus nonacademic settings. Further assessment is needed regarding the different motivations and practice styles among providers who offer OIT and those who are considering doing so.

Diagnosis and management of food allergies: new and emerging options: a systematic review

It is reported that 6% of children and 3% of adults have food allergies, with studies suggesting increased prevalence worldwide over the last few decades. Despite this, our diagnostic capabilities and techniques for managing patients with food allergies remain limited. We have conducted a systematic review of literature published within the last 5 years on the diagnosis and management of food allergies. While the gold standard for diagnosis remains the double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge, this assessment is resource intensive and impractical in most clinical situations. In an effort to reduce the need for the double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge, several risk-stratifying tests are employed, namely skin prick testing, measurement of serum-specific immunoglobulin E levels, component testing, and open food challenges. Management of food allergies typically involves allergen avoidance and carrying an epinephrine autoinjector. Clinical research trials of oral immunotherapy for some foods, including peanut, milk, egg, and peach, are under way. While oral immunotherapy is promising, its readiness for clinical application is controversial. In this review, we assess the latest studies published on the above diagnostic and management modalities, as well as novel strategies in the diagnosis and management of food allergy.

Multiple-allergen oral immunotherapy improves quality of life in caregivers of food-allergic pediatric subjects

BACKGROUND

Food allergy (FA) negatively affects quality of life in caregivers of food-allergic children, imposing a psychosocial and economic burden. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is a promising investigational therapy for FA. However, OIT can be a source of anxiety as it carries risk for allergic reactions. The effect of OIT with multiple food allergens (mOIT) on FA-specific health-related quality of life (HRQL) has never been studied in participants with multiple, severe food allergies. This study is the first to investigate the effects of mOIT on FA-related HRQL in caregivers of pediatric subjects.

METHODS

Caregiver HRQL was assessed using a validated Food Allergy Quality of Life - Parental Burden (FAQL-PB) Questionnaire (J Allergy Clin Immunol 114(5):1159-1163, 2004). Parents of participants in two single-center Phase I clinical trials receiving mOIT (n = 29) or rush mOIT with anti-IgE (omalizumab) pre-treatment (n = 11) completed the FAQL-PB prior to study intervention and at 2 follow-up time-points (6 months and 18 months). Parents of subjects not receiving OIT (control group, n = 10) completed the FAQL-PB for the same time-points.

RESULTS

HRQL improved with clinical (change < -0.5) and statistical (p < 0.05) significance in the mOIT group (baseline mean 3.9, 95% CI 3.4-4.4; 6-month follow-up mean 2.5, 95% CI 2.0-3.0; 18-month follow-up mean 1.8, 95% CI 1.4-2.1) and rush mOIT group (baseline mean 3.9, 95% CI 3.1-4.7; 6-month follow-up mean 1.7, 95% CI 0.9-2.6; 18-month follow-up mean 1.3, 95% CI 0.3-2.4). HRQL scores did not significantly change in the control group (n = 10).

CONCLUSION

Multi-allergen OIT with or without omalizumab leads to improvement in caregiver HRQL, suggesting that mOIT can help relieve the psychosocial and economic burden FA imposes on caregivers of food-allergic children.