An update on the controversy around offering oral immunotherapy to peanut-allergic children outside of research

The Future of Food Allergy Management: Advancements in Therapies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review current and future treatment options for IgE-mediated food allergy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent years have seen major developments in both allergen-specific and allergen-non-specific treatment options, with the first FDA-approved peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT) product becoming available in 2020. In addition to OIT, other immunotherapy modalities, biologics, adjunct therapies, and novel therapeutics are under investigation. Food allergy is a potentially life-threatening condition associated with a significant psychosocial impact. Numerous products and protocols are under investigation, with most studies focusing on OIT. A high rate of adverse events, need for frequent office visits, and cost remain challenges with OIT. Further work is needed to unify outcome measures, develop treatment protocols that minimize adverse events, establish demographic and clinical factors that influence candidate selection, and identify patient priorities.

Food Immunotherapy: Dissecting Current Guidelines and Navigating the Gray Zone

Food allergy is a common, chronic disease that is burdensome for patients and families, with multiple dietary and social limitations and a significant psychological impact stemming from the fear of accidental exposures and potentially severe, life-threatening reactions. Until recently, the only management option consisted of strict food avoidance. Food allergen immunotherapy (food AIT) has emerged as an alternative, active intervention to strict food avoidance, with a multitude of research studies supporting its efficacy and good safety profile. Food AIT results in a raise of allergenic threshold, which provides several benefits to food-allergic patients, including protection from accidental exposures, potentially decreased severity of allergic reactions on unintentional exposures, and improvement in quality of life. In the last few years, multiple independent reports have been published proposing strategies to implement food oral immunotherapy in U.S. clinics, although formal guidelines are currently lacking. Because food immunotherapy is gaining traction, popularity, and interest among both patients and health care providers, many physicians look for guidance on how to implement this intervention in their daily practice. In other parts of the world, use of this treatment has prompted the development of various guidelines from allergy societies. This rostrum discusses currently available guidelines on food AIT from different areas of the world, describes and comments on their similarities and differences, and highlights unmet needs in this area of therapy.

Peanut (Arachis hypogaea) allergen powder-dnfp for the mitigation of allergic reactions to peanuts in children and adolescents

INTRODUCTION

Peanut allergy can result in severe, sometimes fatal hypersensitivity reactions that place a considerable burden on the lives of patients. This article reviews the first approved immunotherapy for the mitigation of allergic reactions following accidental peanut exposure, peanut (Arachis hypogaea) allergen powder-dnfp (PTAH; Palforzia®, Aimmune Therapeutics).

AREAS COVERED

This article highlights the unmet need for patients with peanut allergy, describes the therapeutic landscape, and reviews the development of and clinical data for PTAH.

EXPERT OPINION

PTAH offers a standardized preparation of peanut allergen, with a tolerability and efficacy profile clearly defined through its robust clinical development and trial program. In children 4-17 years old, PTAH provides a standardized, approved product that many clinicians sought prior to initiating oral immunotherapy. PTAH reduced the likelihood of more severe reactions following exposure to peanut protein; although peanut avoidance remains essential, PTAH will enable more individuals with peanut allergy to participate in activities of daily life with less anxiety.

Oral Immunotherapy for Food-Allergic Children: A Pro-Con Debate

The prevalence of food allergy has increased in recent years, especially in children. Allergen avoidance, and drugs in case of an allergic reaction, remains the standard of care in food allergy. Nevertheless, increasing attention has been given to the possibility to treat food allergy, through immunotherapy, particularly oral immunotherapy (OIT). Several OIT protocols and clinical trials have been published. Most of them focus on children allergic to milk, egg, or peanut, although recent studies developed protocols for other foods, such as wheat and different nuts. OIT efficacy in randomized controlled trials is usually evaluated as the possibility for patients to achieve desensitization through the consumption of an increasing amount of a food allergen, while the issue of a possible long-term sustained unresponsiveness has not been completely addressed. Here, we evaluated current pediatric OIT knowledge, focusing on the results of clinical trials and current guidelines. Specifically, we wanted to highlight what is known in terms of OIT efficacy and effectiveness, safety, and impact on quality of life. For each aspect, we reported the pros and the cons, inferable from published literature. In conclusion, even though many protocols, reviews and meta-analysis have been published on this topic, pediatric OIT remains a controversial therapy and no definitive generalized conclusion may be drawn so far. It should be an option provided by specialized teams, when both patients and their families are prone to adhere to the proposed protocol. Efficacy, long-term effectiveness, possible role of adjuvant therapies, risk of severe reactions including anaphylaxis or eosinophilic esophagitis, and impact on the quality of life of both children and caregivers are all aspects that should be discussed before starting OIT. Future studies are needed to provide firm clinical and scientific evidence, which should also consider patient reported outcomes.

Caregiver perceptions and attitudes associated with oral immunotherapy on social media

Background: Caregiver values and preferences with regard to oral immunotherapy (OIT) for treatment of food allergies are not widely reported. Understanding caregiver perspectives is integral to establishing shared decision-making in the treatment of food allergy. Objective: We aimed to understand caregiver opinions that may influence caregivers in their decisions about OIT through social media. Methods: We searched a popular parenting web site for posts related to OIT from December 2008 to September 2019. We applied a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses framework to review posts for inclusion, performed thematic content analysis to determine common themes, and calculated frequencies for each theme and subtheme. Posts and comments were included if they contained discussions about OIT for immunoglobulin E-mediated food allergy and were excluded if they were duplicates, comments from an original post from the original user, or comments on a nonrelevant original post. Results: Of 1300 posts and comments retrieved, 174 were included (13%). Most were excluded because they did not directly address OIT for food allergy. Relevant posts could fall into multiple themes and were categorized under three main themes: attitudes (n = 128, "I am scared to do OIT but scared not to!"), logistics (n = 168, "We will be doing this once LO [little one] is a little older"), and questions (n = 32, "How does it work?"). Conclusion: Caregivers communicate with each other through social media, expressing attitudes, logistics, and questions about OIT. Understanding these lay perspectives may help guide clinicians in counseling and engage caregivers in decision-making.

How to Incorporate Oral Immunotherapy into Your Clinical Practice

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to discuss how to best incorporate oral immunotherapy into your clinical practice based on recent evidence and guidelines, and address controversies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Oral immunotherapy is the food immunotherapy treatment with the most literature supporting its use. Recent data from both randomized clinical trials and real-world studies show OIT is especially safe and effective in preschoolers, while avoidance may be less safe than previously thought. OIT guidelines support its use outside of research. Oral immunotherapy can be safely and effectively incorporated into your clinical practice, with careful planning and consideration of scenarios where benefits outweigh risks. Baseline oral food challenges are necessary in clinical trials, but in clinical practice, these are best done when the history is unclear due to resource limitations. There is a role for both regular food and FDA-approved products. Future research should focus on optimizing safety and adherence in the real-world setting.

Immunological Outcomes of Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy in Food Allergy

IgE-mediated food allergies are caused by adverse immunologic responses to food proteins. Allergic reactions may present locally in different tissues such as skin, gastrointestinal and respiratory tract and may result is systemic life-threatening reactions. During the last decades, the prevalence of food allergies has significantly increased throughout the world, and considerable efforts have been made to develop curative therapies. Food allergen immunotherapy is a promising therapeutic approach for food allergies that is based on the administration of increasing doses of culprit food extracts, or purified, and sometime modified food allergens. Different routes of administration for food allergen immunotherapy including oral, sublingual, epicutaneous and subcutaneous regimens are being evaluated. Although a wealth of data from clinical food allergen immunotherapy trials has been obtained, a lack of consistency in assessed clinical and immunological outcome measures presents a major hurdle for evaluating these new treatments. Coordinated efforts are needed to establish standardized outcome measures to be applied in food allergy immunotherapy studies, allowing for better harmonization of data and setting the standards for the future research. Several immunological parameters have been measured in food allergen immunotherapy, including allergen-specific immunoglobulin levels, basophil activation, cytokines, and other soluble biomarkers, T cell and B cell responses and skin prick tests. In this review we discuss different immunological parameters and assess their applicability as potential outcome measures for food allergen immunotherapy that may be included in such a standardized set of outcome measures.

Peanut Allergy: New Advances and Ongoing Controversies

Peanut allergy is one of the most common food allergies in children, with increasing prevalence over time. The dual-allergen exposure hypothesis now supports transcutaneous sensitization to peanut as a likely pathophysiologic mechanism for peanut allergy development. As a result, there is emerging evidence that early peanut introduction has a role in peanut allergy prevention. Current first-line diagnostic tests for peanut allergy have limited specificity, which may be enhanced with emerging tools such as component-resolved diagnostics. Although management of peanut allergy includes avoidance and carrying an epinephrine autoinjector, risk of fatal anaphylaxis is extremely low, and there is minimal risk related to cutaneous or inhalational exposure. Quality of life in children with peanut allergy requires significant focus. Moving forward, oral and epicutaneous immunotherapy are emerging and exciting tools that may have a role to play in desensitization to peanut.

CSACI guidelines for the ethical, evidence-based and patient-oriented clinical practice of oral immunotherapy in IgE-mediated food allergy

Background

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an emerging approach to the treatment of patients with IgE-mediated food allergy and is in the process of transitioning to clinical practice.

Objective

To develop patient-oriented clinical practice guidelines on oral immunotherapy based on evidence and ethical imperatives for the provision of safe and efficient food allergy management.

Materials and methods

Recommendations were developed using a reflective patient-centered multicriteria approach including 22 criteria organized in five dimensions (clinical, populational, economic, organizational and sociopolitical). Data was obtained from: (1) a review of scientific and ethic literature; (2) consultations of allergists, other healthcare professionals (pediatricians, family physicians, nurses, registered dieticians, psychologists, peer supporters), patients and caregivers; and patient associations through structured consultative panels, interviews and on-line questionnaire; and (3) organizational and economic data from the milieu of care. All data was synthesized by criteria in a multicriteria deliberative guide that served as a platform for structured discussion and development of recommendations for each dimension, based on evidence, ethical imperatives and other considerations.

Results

The deliberative grid included 162 articles from the literature and media reviews and data from consultations involving 85 individuals. Thirty-eight (38) recommendations were made for the practice of oral immunotherapy for the treatment of IgE mediated food allergy, based on evidence and a diversity of ethical imperatives. All recommendations were aimed at fostering a context conducive to achieving objectives identified by patients and caregivers with food allergy. Notably, specific recommendations were developed to promote a culture of shared responsibility between patients and healthcare system, equity in access, patient empowerment, shared decision making and personalization of OIT protocols to reflect patients' needs. It also provides recommendations to optimize organization of care to generate capacity to meet demand according to patient choice, e.g. OIT or avoidance. These recommendations were made acknowledging the necessity of ensuring sustainability of the clinical offer in light of various economic considerations.

Conclusions

This innovative CPG methodology was guided by patients' perspectives, clinical evidence as well as ethical and other rationales. This allowed for the creation of a broad set of recommendations that chart optimal clinical practice and define the conditions required to bring about changes to food allergy care that will be sustainable, equitable and conducive to the well-being of all patients in need.

Unmet needs of children with peanut allergy: Aligning the risks and the evidence

BACKGROUND

Peanut allergy is a potentially severe and lifelong allergy, with few effective treatments or preventive measures.

OBJECTIVE

To convene an expert panel of allergists, pediatricians, and advocates to discuss and highlight unmet needs in the prevention and management of peanut allergies.

METHODS

Literature searches of PubMed were performed. The panel evaluated published data on the prevention of peanut allergy, treatment of existing peanut allergy, and management of reactions after unintentional peanut exposures.

RESULTS

The following key unmet needs in the prevention and management of peanut allergy were identified: (1) enhancing and optimizing implementation of early peanut introduction as a means of preventing the development of peanut allergy, (2) developing knowledge translation strategies regarding the safety and efficacy data for current and emerging immunotherapies for peanut-allergic children to support their use in clinical practice, and (3) promoting understanding of true exposure risk in allergic individuals and ensuring access to epinephrine for unintentional exposures that provoke severe reactions. Practitioners should help educate caregivers about the actual risks associated with peanut allergy and its prevention and management so that treatment decisions can be evidence based rather than fear based. Support tools are needed to help address caregiver goals, expectations, and psychological barriers, as well as identify facilitators for prevention and treatment strategies.

CONCLUSION

There are significant unmet needs in our understanding of peanut allergy; addressing these needs will help to enhance understanding of how to most effectively prevent and treat peanut allergy, as well as educate the food-allergic and nonallergic community regarding current evidence-based practices.

Emerging Food Allergy Treatments

Immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated food allergy affects up to 8% of the pediatric population and occurs when a person develops antibodies to specific food proteins resulting in immediate reaction upon ingestion of the food in question. Current treatment revolves around strict allergen avoidance and prompt treatment of systemic, anaphylactic reactions with injectable epinephrine. However, despite strict avoidance, unexpected reactions are a significant problem. Therefore, therapeutic options for treatment of food allergy are in high demand. This article focuses on emerging therapies including oral immunotherapy, sublingual immunotherapy, epicutaneous immunotherapy, and possible adjunct therapies for the treatment and desensitization of IgE-mediated food allergy. [Pediatr Ann. 2019;48(12):e468-e472.].

First Real-World Safety Analysis of Preschool Peanut Oral Immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

In 2017, a clinical trial of 37 subjects demonstrated that preschool peanut oral immunotherapy (P-OIT) was safe, with predominantly mild symptoms reported and only 1 moderate reaction requiring epinephrine.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to examine whether these findings would be applicable in a real-world setting.

METHODS

As part of a Canada-wide quality improvement project, community and academic allergists administered P-OIT to preschool-age children who had (1) skin prick test wheal diameter greater than or equal to 3 mm or specific IgE level greater than or equal to 0.35 kU/L and history of reaction and/or positive baseline oral food challenge, or (2) no ingestion history and specific IgE level greater than or equal to 5 kU/L. Over 16 to 22 weeks, patients had biweekly clinic visits for updosing, and consumed the dose daily at home between visits. Target maintenance dose was 300 mg peanut protein. Symptoms were classified using a modified World Allergy Organization Subcutaneous Immunotherapy Reaction Grading System (1 mildest, 5 fatal).

RESULTS

Of 270 patients who started P-OIT in the period 2017 to 2018, 243 reached maintenance, and 27 dropped out (10.0%); 67.8% of patients experienced reactions during buildup: 36.3% grade 1, 31.1% grade 2, and 0.40% grade 4. Eleven patients (4.10%) received epinephrine (10 patients received 1 dose, 1 patient received epinephrine on 2 separate days), representing 2.23% of reactions (12 of 538) and 0.029% of doses (12 of 41,020).

CONCLUSIONS

We are the first group to describe preschool P-OIT in a real-world multicenter setting. The treatment appears to be safe for the vast majority of patients because symptoms were generally mild and very few reactions received epinephrine; however, life-threatening reactions in a minority of patients (0.4%) can still occur.