Epicutaneous immunotherapy

The Hydrogel Based Allergen-Coated Gold Nanoparticles for Topical Administration: A Possible Epicutaneous Immunotherapy in Pollen-Sensitized Mice?

BACKGROUND

The rapid uptake of antigens by antigen-presenting cells (APCs) and their migration to draining lymph nodes in the initial hours after antigen administration in epicutaneous allergen specific immunotherapy (EPIT) prompted us to investigate whether the topical administration of allergens without patch application could alleviate allergy in pollen-sensitized mice. We evaluated the immunotherapeutic effect of topically administering hydrogel-based Gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) loaded with a total extract of Platanus orientalis pollen (Pla. ext (50 μg)-AuNPs) on intact skin.

METHODS

Mice sensitized to P. orientalis pollen were divided into three groups and treated with Pla. ext (50 μg)-AuNPs: 1) patch with Pla. ext (50 μg)-AuNPs, 2) patch with Pla. ext (50 μg)-AuNPs in combination with hydrogel, and 3) topical application of Pla. ext (50 μg)-AuNPs in combination with hydrogel. The immunotherapeutic effects were evaluated by measuring serum specific and total IgE antibodies, total cell and eosinophil count in nasopharyngeal lavage fluid, cytokines in the supernatants of re-stimulated splenocytes by the total extract, and histological examination of lung and nasal mucosa.

RESULTS

Topical administration of Pla. ext (50 μg)-AuNPs, like patch-based administration, significantly downregulated specific and total IgE and IL-4 production, promoted secretion of IFN-γ and IL-10, markedly reduced the number of inflammatory cells, particularly eosinophils, in nasopharyngeal lavage fluid (p < .05), and inhibited inflammation and pathological damage in lung and nasal mucosa.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that topical administration of AuNPs loaded with P. orientalis total pollen extract on intact skin could be a potential application for EPIT in the P. orientalis pollen -sensitized mice.

Food Allergen Immunotherapy in the Treatment of Patients with IgE-Mediated Food Allergy

The prevalence of allergic diseases, including food allergy, is increasing, especially in developed countries. Implementation of an elimination diet is not a sufficient therapeutic strategy in patients with food allergy, whose quality of life is significantly impaired. In recent years, new effective therapeutic strategies have been developed, such as the application of oral, sublingual, and epicutaneous immunotherapy. Oral immunotherapy is the most often applied strategy because of its effectiveness and ease of application, with an acceptable safety profile. The effectiveness of oral immunotherapy in patients with egg, cow's milk, and peanut allergy has been proven both in terms of raising of the threshold and the development of tolerance, and in some patients, the development of sustainable unresponsiveness. Although oral immunotherapy is an effective treatment for food allergy, several limitations, including a long duration and a significant rate of reported adverse events, reduces its success. Therefore, new therapeutic options, such as treatment with biologicals, either as combinations with food allergen immunotherapy or as monotherapy with the aim of improving the efficacy and safety of treatment, are being investigated.

Preclinical evaluation of alternatives to oral immunotherapy for food allergies

The increasing food allergy incidence has led to significant interest in developing therapies for allergic diseases. Oral allergen-specific immunotherapy (OIT) is a recently FDA-approved therapeutic to treat peanut allergies. OIT utilizes daily allergen dosing to reduce allergic reactions to peanuts. However, there is diminished enthusiasm for daily OIT, potentially due to the strict regimen required to induce desensitization and the risks of severe adverse events. Thus, there remains a need for safe and effective food allergy treatments that are well-received by allergic individuals. Preclinical research studies investigate methods to induce allergen desensitization in animals and support clinical studies that address the limitations of current food allergy OIT. Because allergic reactions are triggered by allergen doses above an individual's activation threshold, immunotherapy regimens that induce allergen desensitization with lower allergen doses or without the requirement of daily administrations may expand the use of food allergy immunotherapy. Administering allergen immunotherapy by alternative routes is a strategy to induce desensitization using lower allergen doses than OIT. Several animal models have evaluated oral, sublingual, epicutaneous, and intranasal immunotherapy routes to treat food allergies. Each immunotherapy route may require different allergen doses, formulations, and treatment schedules to induce desensitization. This article will discuss scientific findings from food allergy immunotherapy animal studies that utilize various immunotherapy routes to induce allergen desensitization to support future clinical studies that enhance the safety and efficacy of allergen immunotherapy to treat food allergies.

Microneedle array patches for allergen-specific immunotherapy

The incidence of allergies has been steadily increasing in recent years. Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) represents the only approach capable of inducing long-term immune tolerance toward allergens. However, the clinical success of AIT is limited by efficacy or safety concerns related to the administration route. Therapeutic delivery in the skin appears promising, given the presence of immune cells in the skin and the relatively low level of systemic distribution that occurs with this delivery method. However, the stratum corneum greatly limits this route. In this regard, the use of microneedles has been proposed to improve the delivery of therapeutics into the skin. In this review, we discuss recent developments in the use of microneedles for AIT, highlighting avenues for future research.

Recent Updates of Immunotherapy for Allergic Rhinitis in Children

Purpose of Review

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a novel treatment approach with disease-modifying and preventative benefits that are not shared with other strategies for treating allergic illnesses. It has been demonstrated to be safe and effective in children. This review provides the most recent information on AIT in children as well as any pertinent updates.

Recent Findings

Although there is not a standard way to begin AIT, there are clear indications for AIT. Each case needs to be evaluated on its own by weighing the pros and downsides. AIT has been proven to significantly improve symptoms and quality of life in children with allergic illness, reduce medication use, stop the development of new allergen sensitizations, and stop the progression of allergic rhinitis to asthma. Novel approaches are under investigation to overcome some known AIT disadvantages.

Summary

This review provides a thorough summary of the most recent research and updates on AIT in children.

Microneedle Transdermal Drug Delivery Systems for Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy, Skin Disease Treatment, and Vaccine Development

Transdermal drug delivery systems (TDDSs) overcome the hurdle of an intact skin barrier by penetrating the skin to allow molecules through. These systems reduce side effects associated with conventional hypodermic needles. Here, we introduce novel microneedle (MN) TDDSs that enhance drug delivery by creating micron-sized pores across the skin. Many MN TDDSs designed to deliver a diverse array of therapeutics, including allergen-specific immunotherapy, skin disease treatments, and vaccines, are under pre-clinical and clinical trials. Although epicutaneous approaches are emerging as new options for treating food allergy in many clinical trials, MN TDDSs could provide a more efficient and convenient route to deliver macromolecules. Furthermore, MN TDDSs may allow for safe vaccine delivery without permanent scars. MN TDDSs are a major emerging strategy for delivering novel vaccines and treatments for diseases, including skin diseases, allergic diseases, and so on.

Recent Advances in Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy in Humans: A Systematic Review

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is presumed to modulate the natural course of allergic disease by inducing immune tolerance. However, conventional AITs, such as subcutaneous immunotherapy and sublingual immunotherapy, require long treatment durations and often provoke local or systemic hypersensitivity reactions. Therefore, only <5% of allergy patients receive AIT as second-line therapy. Novel administration routes, such as intralymphatic, intradermal and epicutaneous immunotherapies, and synthetic recombinant allergen preparations have been evaluated to overcome these limitations. We will review the updated views of diverse AIT methods, and discuss the limitations and opportunities of the AITs for the treatment of allergic diseases in humans.

Allergic Rhinitis: What Do We Know About Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy?

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is an IgE-mediated disease that is characterized by Th2 joint inflammation. Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is indicated for AR when symptoms remain uncontrolled despite medication and allergen avoidance. AIT is considered to have been effective if it alleviated allergic symptoms, decreased medication use, improved the quality of life even after treatment cessation, and prevented the progression of AR to asthma and the onset of new sensitization. AIT can be administered subcutaneously or sublingually, and novel routes are still being developed, such as intra-lymphatically and epicutaneously. AIT aims at inducing allergen tolerance through modification of innate and adaptive immunologic responses. The main mechanism of AIT is control of type 2 inflammatory cells through induction of various functional regulatory cells such as regulatory T cells (Tregs), follicular T cells (Tfr), B cells (Bregs), dendritic cells (DCregs), innate lymphoid cells (IL-10⁺ ILCs), and natural killer cells (NKregs). However, AIT has a number of disadvantages: the long treatment period required to achieve greater efficacy, high cost, systemic allergic reactions, and the absence of a biomarker for predicting treatment responders. Currently, adjunctive therapies, vaccine adjuvants, and novel vaccine technologies are being studied to overcome the problems associated with AIT. This review presents an updated overview of AIT, with a special focus on AR.

The Efficacy and Safety of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy for Allergic Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the effect and safety of epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) for allergic diseases.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, CQ VIP Database, Wanfang Data, and international trial register from their inception to July 29, 2019, without language restrictions, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared EPIT versus no EPIT for allergen-triggered allergic reactions. We assessed certainty of evidence by the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

Ten RCTs with 1,085 participants (aged from 10 months to 65 years) comparing EPIT with placebo for peanut, cow milk, or grass-pollen allergy met the eligibility criteria. A substantial benefit in terms of desensitization in EPIT group was more likely for peanut or cow milk protein allergy (risk ratio [RR] 2.34, 95% CI 1.69-3.23; I2 = 0%; high certainty evidence). EPIT increased local-treatment-related adverse events (L-TRAE; RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.03-2.36; I2 = 82%; moderate certainty evidence). But there were no significantly increased risk of any TRAEs (low certainty evidence) or systemic-TRAEs (S-TRAEs; very low certainty evidence) in EPIT group. The incidence rate of serious AEs, the use of rescue medications, and anaphylactic reactions stratified by organ systems including skin and mucosa, eyes and upper respiratory, lower respiratory, and gastrointestinal system in EPIT group were similar to placebo group. In subgroup analysis, desensitization of EPIT was significantly effective in peanut allergy (RR 2.29, 95% CI 1.64-3.21; I2 = 0%) and children <12 years (RR 2.85, 95% CI 1.92-4.24; I2 = 0%) with high certainty evidence. Only epicutaneous grass-pollen immunotherapy significantly increased the risk of S-TRAE (RR 4.65, 95% CI 1.10-19.64; I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSION

The systematic review suggests that EPIT might induce desensitization in peanut allergy and an increased risk of local AEs. These findings should be interpreted with caution owing to the limited study and heterogeneity. More data in the older (children ≥12 years and adults) and other allergic diseases are needed.