A phase II, randomized, double‑blind, parallel‑group, placebo‑controlled oral food challenge trial of Xolair (omalizumab) in peanut allergy

GA2LEN ANACARE consensus statement: Potential of omalizumab in food allergy management

Immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated food allergies are the most common type of food allergy, often causing rapid symptoms after exposure to allergens posing a serious health risk and a high impact on patient's and caregiver's quality of life. Omalizumab, a humanized anti-IgE monoclonal antibody, reduces allergic reactions by binding to circulating IgE. Omalizumab has been successfully used in allergic asthma, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, and chronic urticaria, and was recently approved for treating IgE-mediated food allergies by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This GA2LEN ANACARE Consensus Statement presents our position on the use of omalizumab for treating IgE-mediated food allergies, based on a systematic review and meta-analysis, experience with use for other conditions, and expert consensus achieved via an eDelphi process. Following publication of the recent OUtMATCH study (stage 1) results and subsequent FDA approval, we propose that there is now sufficient evidence to recommend omalizumab as the only drug currently available that can mechanistically reduce IgE-mediated food allergic reactions. We acknowledge that the evidence does not reach the highest level of evidence which would be needed for a guideline recommendation.

Biologics in Food Allergies: Emerging Therapies

Immunoglobuin E (IgE)-mediated food allergies greatly impact patients and their families, causing financial and emotional stress, and placing them at risk for lifethreatening reactions. Until recently, food allergies have been treated with allergen avoidance and emergency treatment of allergic reactions. Omalizumab was recently approved in adults and children greater than one year who are allergic to one or more foods for the prevention of serious allergic reactions in the setting of accidental exposure. Omalizumab also shows promise when combined with oral immunotherapy for possible allergen ingestion. Other classes of biologics and small molecule inhibitors have also demonstrated potential for use in preventing and treating food allergy.

Food allergy yardstick: Where does omalizumab fit?

Food allergy management has greatly evolved in the last several years, moving from passive approaches, such as strict food allergen avoidance, to more active treatments, including regulatory approval of the first specifically indicated immunotherapy product (for peanut) in 2020. In 2024, a second therapy, omalizumab, received regulatory approval for the treatment of 1 or more IgE-mediated food allergies, providing clinicians with multiple treatment options to offer patients and families. With this expanded armamentarium of food allergy treatment options, the practicing clinician requires detailed knowledge of benefits and risks of omalizumab, how omalizumab fits into the management landscape, and how to use shared decision-making to optimize therapy. This yardstick aims to provide the clinician with a review of data leading to omalizumab's food allergy indication and an evidence-based expert opinion approach regarding on how best to use this and other therapies available to optimize patient management.

Animal models of eosinophilic esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis is a chronic inflammatory disorder of the esophagus. Over the past 25 yr, great strides have been made toward understanding its pathogenesis, in part due to studies in several types of animal models. The vast majority of these models have been characterized in mice. In this review, we summarize the histopathological features of eosinophilic esophagitis recapitulated by these animal models, as well as discuss their strengths and weaknesses.

Food Allergy

Food allergy is a growing health problem affecting both pediatric and adult patients. Food allergies are often immunoglobulin E (IgE) mediated but other food-induced non-IgE-mediated diseases exist. Diagnosis of food allergy relies on the combination of clinical and reaction history, skin and IgE testing as well as oral food challenges. Although oral immunotherapy has been able to achieve sustained unresponsiveness in some patients, no cure for food allergies has been found to date. Avoidance of the inciting food as well as availability of epinephrine autoinjectors remains the mainstay of treatment.

A practical guide for implementing omalizumab therapy for food allergy

The recent approval of omalizumab for the treatment of IgE-mediated food allergy is an important step forward for the millions of food allergy patients in the United States. Through the depletion of circulating IgE and the subsequent reduction of FcεR1 on key effector cells, patients increase their tolerance to food allergens. However, omalizumab does not permit patients to eat foods that they are allergic to with impunity. Rather, it protects them from most accidental exposures. In addition, omalizumab does not cure food allergy and has not demonstrated true immunomodulation. Thus, omalizumab might be a lifelong therapy for some patients. Furthermore, there are many important questions and issues surrounding the appropriate administration of omalizumab to treat food allergy, which we discuss. Managing treatment of patients with disease that falls outside the dosing range, assessing treatment response or nonresponse, addressing its appropriateness for patients older than 55, and determining whether immunotherapy plus omalizumab provides any advantage over omalizumab alone all need to be examined. Identifying appropriate patients for this therapy is critical given the cost of biologics. Indeed, not all food allergy patients are good candidates for this therapy. Also, when and how to stop omalizumab therapy in patients who may have outgrown their food allergy needs to be elucidated. Thus, although this therapy provides a good option for patients with food allergies, much information is needed to determine how best to use this therapy. Despite many unanswered questions and issues, we provide clinicians with some practical guidance on implementing this therapy in their patients.

Role of biologics in severe food allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review examine the dynamic landscape of food allergy treatment within the context of emerging biologics. Our purpose is to comprehensively evaluate the potential benefits, challenges, and transformative impact associated with the utilization of biologics in comparison to conventional therapeutic modalities.

RECENT FINDINGS

This document synthesizes recent scientific investigations to various biologics, such as omalizumab, ligelizumab, dupilumab, and tezepelumab, providing a nuanced understanding of their roles in oral immunotherapy, rapid desensitization, and overall food allergy management. Recent studies and clinical trials highlight the impact of anti-IgE treatment on food allergies, revealing critical findings such as dose-related efficacy, facilitation of rapid desensitization in peanut allergies, and the sustained positive outcomes observed in individuals with multifood allergies.

SUMMARY

The use of biologics presents a groundbreaking approach in the treatment of food allergies. The multifaceted action of these agents, along with their potential to overcome the challenges associated with traditional therapies, marks a significant advancement. Despite the persisting challenges of economic constraints and the need for further safety studies, biologics offer a promising avenue for improving the quality of life for individuals with food allergies. Ongoing research and collaborative efforts are imperative to fully realize the transformative potential inherent in these emerging therapeutic frontiers.

Omalizumab for the reduction of allergic reactions to foods: a narrative review

The frequency of food allergies varies between 2% and 10%, depending on characteristics including age, region, race, and method of diagnosis self-reported by patients or oral food challenges (OFCs). The most common allergies reported are tree nuts (1.2%), milk (1.9%), peanuts (2.2%), and shellfish (1.3%). Omalizumab injection has now been approved by the FDA for the treatment of immunoglobulin E-mediated food allergies in specific adults and children aged one year or older. This medication reduces the risk of allergic reactions (Type I), which can include anaphylaxis, when an individual accidentally encounters one or more food allergens. Omalizumab functions by binding to IgE and altering IgE-mediated pathways, which lessens IgE's capacity to cause allergic reactions. Promising outcomes from clinical trials and case studies include lowered anaphylactic risk and enhanced tolerance to allergens. Omalizumab, however, may have adverse effects; thus, close observation is required. Overall, this review sheds light on the efficacy, safety, and clinical implications of omalizumab, highlighting its potential as a useful intervention for IgE-mediated food allergies.

A randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled study on the efficacy of Omalizumab on food allergy threshold in children with severe food allergy

BACKGROUND

Food allergy is common in childhood with some children having a low threshold and being difficult to protect from accidental ingestion of the offending food. Therapies for this potentially life-threatening condition are highly needed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of Omalizumab in food-allergic children.

METHODS

This is a single-center, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Food allergic children with a cumulative threshold ≤443 mg food protein at DBPCFC were randomized to Omalizumab (asthma dose) or placebo (3:1). After 3 months, a second DBPCFC was performed (steps 3, 10, 30, 100, 300, 1000, and 3000 mg food protein), followed by a separate open challenge up to 10,000 and 30,000 mg food protein if negative. Responders were defined as ≥2-step increases in threshold. Non-responders received high-dose Omalizumab. A third DBPCFC was performed after 6 months. Skin testing, blood samples, and the severity of atopic co-morbidity were registered during the study and 3 months after treatment.

RESULTS

In total, 20 children were evaluated at 3 months (14 Omalizumab, 6 placebo). All treated with Omalizumab increased their threshold at least two steps and with a significant difference between the Omalizumab and the placebo group (p = .003), although the intended number of included children was not reached. The threshold before Omalizumab treatment was 13-443 mg food protein while the threshold after 3 months of treatment increased up to 44,000 mg (1143-44,000). In the placebo group, two children improved threshold during the study.

CONCLUSION

An increase in the threshold level during Omalizumab treatment significantly improve patient safety and protected all children against small amount of allergen.

Omalizumab for the Treatment of Multiple Food Allergies

BACKGROUND

Food allergies are common and are associated with substantial morbidity; the only approved treatment is oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy.

METHODS

In this trial, we assessed whether omalizumab, a monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, would be effective and safe as monotherapy in patients with multiple food allergies. Persons 1 to 55 years of age who were allergic to peanuts and at least two other trial-specified foods (cashew, milk, egg, walnut, wheat, and hazelnut) were screened. Inclusion required a reaction to a food challenge of 100 mg or less of peanut protein and 300 mg or less of the two other foods. Participants were randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive omalizumab or placebo administered subcutaneously (with the dose based on weight and IgE levels) every 2 to 4 weeks for 16 to 20 weeks, after which the challenges were repeated. The primary end point was ingestion of peanut protein in a single dose of 600 mg or more without dose-limiting symptoms. The three key secondary end points were the consumption of cashew, of milk, and of egg in single doses of at least 1000 mg each without dose-limiting symptoms. The first 60 participants (59 of whom were children or adolescents) who completed this first stage were enrolled in a 24-week open-label extension.

RESULTS

Of the 462 persons who were screened, 180 underwent randomization. The analysis population consisted of the 177 children and adolescents (1 to 17 years of age). A total of 79 of the 118 participants (67%) receiving omalizumab met the primary end-point criteria, as compared with 4 of the 59 participants (7%) receiving placebo (P<0.001). Results for the key secondary end points were consistent with those of the primary end point (cashew, 41% vs. 3%; milk, 66% vs. 10%; egg, 67% vs. 0%; P<0.001 for all comparisons). Safety end points did not differ between the groups, aside from more injection-site reactions in the omalizumab group.

CONCLUSIONS

In persons as young as 1 year of age with multiple food allergies, omalizumab treatment for 16 weeks was superior to placebo in increasing the reaction threshold for peanut and other common food allergens. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03881696.).

The Role of Biologics in the Treatment of Food Allergy

The landscape of food allergy (FA) treatment is poised for a paradigm shift with the emergence of biologic therapies. The Food and Drug Administration approval of a standardized peanut powder for oral immunotherapy in 2020 marked a milestone, signaling a departure from allergen avoidance toward proactive treatment strategies. Although oral immunotherapy has been proven effective in desensitizing patients to specific allergens, there are several limitations such as lacking standardization, a long-time commitment to achieve maintenance, and adverse events. Biologics, including omalizumab, dupilumab, and antialarmins, have shown promise in treating various allergic diseases, including FA. These biologics target the underlying immunologic pathways driving allergic reactions, offering an antigen-agnostic approach. Omalizumab (anti-IgE) has been the most studied biologic in this space and can be used both as an adjunct therapy with oral immunotherapy and as monotherapy. Dupilumab targeting IL-4 and IL-13 also shows promise as an adjunct therapy. The emergence of antialarmins further broadens the spectrum of FA treatment possibilities. Biologics represent a transformative approach to FA treatment, directly addressing the underlying mechanisms. Future research should focus on patient selection criteria, personalized biomarker panels, optimal timing of intervention, and treatment durations.

Intervention Efficacy of Slightly Processed Allergen/Meat in Oral Immunotherapy for Seafood Allergy: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression Analysis in Mouse Models and Clinical Patients

Background: Seafood allergy is a significant global health concern that greatly impacts a patient's quality of life. The intervention efficacy of oral immunotherapy (OIT), an emerging intervention strategy, for seafood allergy remains controversial. This study aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of slightly processed allergen/meat from fish and crustacea in OIT, both in mouse models and clinical patients. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed in four mainstream databases and the EBSCOhost database to identify all relevant case-control and cohort studies. The aim was to elucidate the intervention efficacy, encompassing various processing methods and assessing the efficacy of multiple major allergens in OIT. Results: The meta-analysis included five case-control studies on crustacean allergens in mouse models and 11 cohort studies on meat from fish and crustacea in clinical patients for final quantitative assessments. In mouse models, crustacean allergen substantially decreased the anaphylactic score after OIT treatment (mean difference (MD) = -1.30, p < 0.01). Subgroup analyses with low-level heterogeneities provided more reliable results for crab species (MD = -0.63, p < 0.01, I2 = 0), arginine kinase allergen (MD = -0.83, p < 0.01, I2 = 0), and Maillard reaction processing method (MD = -0.65, p < 0.01, I2 = 29%), respectively. In clinical patients, the main meta-analysis showed that the slightly processed meat significantly increased the incidence rate of oral tolerance (OT, incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 2.90, p < 0.01). Subgroup analyses for fish meat (IRR = 2.79, p < 0.01) and a simple cooking treatment (IRR = 2.36, p = 0.01) also demonstrated a substantial increase in the incidence rate of OT. Sensitivity and meta-regression analyses successfully identified specific studies contributing to heterogeneity in mouse models and clinical patients, although these studies did not impact the overall significant pooled effects. Conclusions: This meta-analysis provides preliminary evidence for the high intervention efficacy of slightly processed allergen/meat from fish and crustacea in OIT, both in mouse models and clinical patients. The Maillard reaction and cooking processing methods may emerge as potentially effective approaches to treating allergen/meat in OIT for clinical patients, offering a promising and specific treatment strategy for seafood allergy. However, these findings should be interpreted cautiously, and further supporting evidence is necessary.

Biologics to treat anaphylaxis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this literature review was to review the latest use of biologics in the management of anaphylaxis. The methodology was to highlight both the nonbiologic management of anaphylaxis and the biologic management and how they can be used in conjunction with each other.

RECENT FINDINGS

As the phenotypes and endotypes of anaphylaxis are better portrayed, it furthers our understanding of the mechanisms of anaphylaxis. New applications of existing biologics to the prevention of anaphylaxis are described.

SUMMARY

Anaphylaxis is a potentially life-threatening acute hypersensitivity reaction affecting up to 16.8% of the U.S. population. Acute management entails swift identification, removal of the causative agent, and the prevention of cardiovascular collapse, firstly with epinephrine. Adjunctive treatments such as antihistamines work to prevent anaphylaxis from recurring. Biologic management of anaphylaxis involves the use of large-molecule drugs such as monoclonal antibodies. Omalizumab, an IgG1 monoclonal antibody targeting unbound IgE, is the most prevalent and widely studied biologic in the prevention of anaphylaxis. Other monoclonal antibodies in development or approved for other indications, such as ligelizumab, quilizumab, MEDI4212, and dupilumab, may also have potential for preventing anaphylaxis through various mechanisms.

Jak out of the box: Targeting Bruton's tyrosine kinase, sialic acid-binding immunoglobulin-like lectin-8, and Janus kinase 1 in food allergy

There has been rapid growth in the field of immunoglobulin E-mediated food allergy therapeutics, with 1 US Food and Drug Administration-approved therapy in 2020 and several others in various stages of investigation. Oral immunotherapy is the approach with the longest track record of study and provides desensitization for most individuals undertaking the therapy. However, the therapy must be maintained for continued clinical protection, and adverse effects of the therapy are frequent. There is a need to improve allergen immunotherapy safety and durability and to provide a treatment that can target multiple food allergies. In this review, we discuss novel adjunct therapies that may improve safety, such as omalizumab, Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and agonists of sialic acid-binding immunoglobulin-like lectin-8, which suppress hypersensitivity responses. We also discuss approaches that may improve magnitude or durability of the treatment response, such as dupilumab and Janus kinase 1 inhibitors.

Treatment of food allergy: Oral immunotherapy, biologics, and beyond

The prevalence of food allergy (FA) has been increasing globally and comes with a heavy burden not just economically, but also on quality of life. Although oral immunotherapy (OIT) is effective at inducing desensitization to food allergens, it has several limitations that weaken its success. Limitations include a long duration of build-up, especially when used for multiple allergens, and a high rate of reported adverse events. Furthermore, OIT may not be effective in all patients. Efforts are underway to identify additional treatment options, either as monotherapy or in combination, to treat FA or enhance the safety and efficacy of OIT. Biologics such as omalizumab and dupilumab, which already have US Food and Drug Administration approval for other atopic conditions have been the most studied, but additional biologics and novel strategies are emerging. In this review, we discuss therapeutic strategies including immunoglobulin E inhibitors, immunoglobulin E disruptors, interleukin-4 and interleukin-13 inhibitors, antialarmins, JAK1 and BTK inhibitors, and nanoparticles, and the data surrounding their application in FA and highlighting their potential.

Research Advances in Mast Cell Biology and Their Translation Into Novel Therapies for Anaphylaxis

Anaphylaxis is an acute, potentially life-threatening systemic allergic reaction for which there are no known reliable preventative therapies. Its primary cell mediator, the mast cell, has several pathophysiologic roles and functions in IgE-mediated reactions that continue to be poorly understood. Recent advances in the understanding of allergic mechanisms have identified novel targets for inhibiting mast cell function and activation. The prevention of anaphylaxis is within reach with new drugs that could modulate immune tolerance, mast cell proliferation and differentiation, and IgE regulation and production. Several US Food and Drug Administration-approved drugs for chronic urticaria, mastocytosis, and cancer are also being repurposed to prevent anaphylaxis. New therapeutics have not only shown promise in potential efficacy for preventing IgE-mediated reactions, but in some cases, they are able to inform us about mast cell mechanisms in vivo. This review summarizes the most recent advances in the treatment of anaphylaxis that have arisen from new pharmacologic tools and our current understanding of mast cell biology.

Biologicals in IgE-mediated food allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

A better understanding of the most recent scientific literature in the use of biological therapy in the treatment of patients with IgE-mediated food allergy.

RECENT FINDINGS

A systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated safety and effectiveness of omalizumab in the treatment of food allergy. The findings support the potential use of omalizumab as a monotherapy or as an adjunct to oral immunotherapy in IgE-mediated cow's milk allergy. The potential use of other biologics in the management of food allergy is subject of speculation.

SUMMARY

Different biological therapies are under evaluation for food allergic patients. The advance in literature will guide for a personalized treatment in the near future. However, additional research is needed to better understand the best candidate for each treatment, the optimal dose and timing.

Targeting type 2 immunity and the future of food allergy treatment

IgE-mediated food allergy affects 6-8% of the population in the United States. Type 2 immune responses are central to the pathogenesis of food allergy, but type 2 CD4+ T cell responses have been found to be heterogeneous in food allergy suggesting a division of labor between Tfh13 and peTH2 cells in promotion of IgE class switching, modulation of intestinal barrier function, and regulation of mast cell expansion. Oral immunotherapy for the treatment of food allergy incompletely targets subsets of type 2 immunity in a transient manner, but new therapeutics targeting different levels of type 2 immunity are in current or planned trials for food allergy. These new treatments and the basis for their use are the focus of this review.

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.

Food Allergy

Food allergy is a growing health problem affecting both pediatric and adult patients. Food allergies are often immunoglobulin E (IgE) mediated but other food-induced non-IgE-mediated diseases exist. Diagnosis of food allergy relies on the combination of clinical and reaction history, skin and IgE testing as well as oral food challenges. Although oral immunotherapy has been able to achieve sustained unresponsiveness in some patients, no cure for food allergies has been found to date. Avoidance of the inciting food as well as availability of epinephrine autoinjectors remains the mainstay of treatment.

Management of IgE-mediated food allergy in the 21st century

The 21st century has seen the propulsion of research in the field of food allergy, which has driven real changes in the clinical approach. Allergen immunotherapy has been recommended for the active management of food allergy. Data have shown promising additional methods of treatment, including biologics. Efforts have been devoted to the risk stratification of food allergy and the standardization of the assessment of food-allergic severity. Alternative routes of administration of epinephrine are under investigation to minimize any mechanical issue and the fear of injections. Evidence-based guidelines have been published by the main international societies in the field of anaphylaxis and food allergy management and new updates are in preparation. In the coming years, treatment options that are currently in pre-clinical or early clinical evaluation will hopefully lead to safe and effective disease-modifying therapies for food allergy in clinical practice. The identification of reliable biomarkers and the standardization of definitions and measurement approaches, alongside a shared decision-making with patients and families, will be key for the development of personalized care and to help minimize the substantial burden of food allergy.

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.

Omalizumab in IgE-Mediated Food Allergy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

A growing number of studies have shown encouraging results with omalizumab (OMA) as monotherapy and as an adjunct to oral immunotherapy (OMA+OIT) in patients with single/multiple food allergies.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of OMA or OMA+OIT in patients with immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated food allergy.

METHODS

An extensive literature search (inception to December 31, 2020) was performed to identify randomized, controlled, and observational studies that assessed OMA as monotherapy or OMA+OIT in patients with IgE-mediated food allergy. The outcomes were an increase in tolerated dose of foods, successful desensitization, sustained unresponsiveness, immunological biomarkers, severity of allergic reactions to food, quality of life (QoL), and safety. A P less than .05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

In total, 36 studies were included. The OMA monotherapy (vs pre-OMA) significantly increased the tolerated dose of multiple foods; increased the threshold of tolerated dose for milk, egg, wheat, and baked milk; improved QoL; and reduced food-induced allergic reactions (all P < .01). The OMA+OIT significantly increased the tolerated dose of multiple foods (vs placebo and pre-OMA), desensitization (vs placebo+OIT and pre-OMA) (all P ≤ .01), and improved QoL (vs pre-OMA) and immunoglobulin G4 levels (both P < .01). No major safety concerns were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

In IgE-mediated food allergy, OMA can help patients consume multiple foods and allow for food dose escalation. As an adjunct to OIT, OMA can also support high-dose desensitization and higher maintenance doses. Further studies are warranted to empirically evaluate the effect of OMA and confirm these findings.

Systematic review of monotherapy with biologicals for children and adults with IgE-mediated food allergy

Background

Biological therapies relieve symptoms in allergic inflammatory diseases so we systematically reviewed the evidence about whether biological monotherapy could benefit people with IgE-mediated food allergy.

Methods

We searched six bibliographic databases from 1946 to 30 September 2021 for randomised and non-randomised controlled trials about biological monotherapy in people with IgE-mediated food allergy confirmed by oral food challenge. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to narratively summarise findings from three trials with 118 participants. The studies were too heterogeneous and sparse to conduct meta-analysis.

Results

We included one randomised trial about etokimab, one about omalizumab and one about the discontinued TNX-901. All were in people with peanut allergy in the USA, mostly aged 13+ years. There was a trend towards improved tolerance of peanut during treatment, with few side effects. However, we have very low certainty about the evidence due to the small number of trials and participants. No included trial reported on quality of life or cost-effectiveness.

Conclusions

There is not yet enough certainty to support offering etokimab or omalizumab widely for food allergy. Clinicians may consider the merits for individuals, but large randomised trials with standardised measures are needed to confirm the safety, efficacy and most suitable candidates, doses and durations of treatment before more universal use.

The rationale for development of ligelizumab in food allergy

Food allergy (FA) is a growing healthcare problem worldwide and the rising prevalence in many countries can be attributed to lifestyle, environmental, and nutritional changes. Immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated FA is the most common form of FA affecting approximately 3%-10% of adults and 8% of children across the globe. Food allergen-induced immediate hypersensitivity reactions mediated by IgE and high-affinity IgE receptor (FcεRI) complexes on mast cells and basophils are a major hallmark of the disease. FA can affect several aspects of health-related quality of life and impose a substantial financial burden on patients and healthcare systems. Although currently there is one United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA)-approved treatment for peanut allergy (Palforzia), the main treatment approaches are based on allergen avoidance and symptom management. Thus, there is an urgent need for more effective and ideally disease-modifying strategies. Given the crucial role of IgE in FA, anti-IgE monoclonal antibodies are considered promising therapeutic agents. Talizumab was the first humanized anti-IgE antibody to demonstrate substantial protection against allergic reactions from accidental peanut exposure by substantially increasing the peanut reactivity threshold on oral food challenge. However, development of talizumab was discontinued and further trials were performed using omalizumab. In double-blind, Phase 2, placebo-controlled trials in patients with multi-FAs, sustained dosing with omalizumab, or omalizumab in combination with oral immunotherapy, enabled rapid desensitization to multiple trigger foods. In this review, we describe the development of ligelizumab (a derivative of talizumab), a next generation, humanized monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, its existing clinical evidence, and its potential in the management of FA. When compared with omalizumab, ligelizumab binds with ∼88-fold higher affinity for human IgE and recognizes a different epitope that substantially overlaps with the binding site of FcεRI. These properties translate into a high potency to block IgE/FcεRI signaling in both in vitro and in vivo studies. Given its efficient suppression of IgE levels, good safety and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile, ligelizumab clearly warrants further studies for the potential management of FA.

Managing food allergy: GA2LEN guideline 2022

Food allergy affects approximately 2-4% of children and adults. This guideline provides recommendations for managing food allergy from the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA2LEN). A multidisciplinary international Task Force developed the guideline using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II framework and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. We reviewed the latest available evidence as of April 2021 (161 studies) and created recommendations by balancing benefits, harms, feasibility, and patient and clinician experiences. We suggest that people diagnosed with food allergy avoid triggering allergens (low certainty evidence). We suggest that infants with cow's milk allergy who need a breastmilk alternative use either hypoallergenic extensively hydrolyzed cow's milk formula or an amino acid-based formula (moderate certainty). For selected children with peanut allergy, we recommend oral immunotherapy (high certainty), though epicutaneous immunotherapy might be considered depending on individual preferences and availability (moderate certainty). We suggest considering oral immunotherapy for children with persistent severe hen's egg or cow's milk allergy (moderate certainty). There are significant gaps in evidence about safety and effectiveness of the various strategies. Research is needed to determine the best approaches to education, how to predict the risk of severe reactions, whether immunotherapy is cost-effective and whether biological therapies are effective alone or combined with allergen immunotherapy.

Allergen immunotherapy and/or biologicals for IgE-mediated food allergy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

There is substantial interest in immunotherapy and biologicals in IgE‐mediated food allergy.

Methods

We searched six databases for randomized controlled trials about immunotherapy alone or with biologicals (to April 2021) or biological monotherapy (to September 2021) in food allergy confirmed by oral food challenge. We pooled the data using random‐effects meta‐analysis.

Results

We included 36 trials about immunotherapy with 2126 mainly child participants. Oral immunotherapy increased tolerance whilst on therapy for peanut (RR 9.9, 95% CI 4.5.–21.4, high certainty); cow's milk (RR 5.7, 1.9–16.7, moderate certainty) and hen's egg allergy (RR 8.9, 4.4–18, moderate certainty). The number needed to treat to increase tolerance to a single dose of 300 mg or 1000 mg peanut protein was 2.

Oral immunotherapy did not increase adverse reactions (RR 1.1, 1.0–1.2, low certainty) or severe reactions in peanut allergy (RR 1,6, 0.7–3.5, low certainty), but may increase (mild) adverse reactions in cow's milk (RR 3.9, 2.1–7.5, low certainty) and hen's egg allergy (RR 7.0, 2.4–19.8, moderate certainty). Epicutaneous immunotherapy increased tolerance whilst on therapy for peanut (RR 2.6, 1.8–3.8, moderate certainty). Results were unclear for other allergies and administration routes.

There were too few trials of biologicals alone (3) or with immunotherapy (1) to draw conclusions.

Conclusions

Oral immunotherapy improves tolerance whilst on therapy and is probably safe in peanut, cow's milk and hen's egg allergy. More research is needed about quality of life, cost and biologicals.

Life-threatening anaphylaxis in children with cow's milk allergy during oral immunotherapy and after treatment failure

BACKGROUND

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is a promising therapeutic approach for children with persistent IgE-mediated cow's milk allergy (CMA) but data are still limited.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the prevalence of life-threatening anaphylaxis in children with persistent CMA undergoing OIT and to evaluate potential risk factors.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study among children with persistent CMA undergoing OIT over a 20-year period, following a specific Oral Tolerance Induction protocol. Adverse reactions during the whole period and data on long-term outcome were registered. Descriptive and nondescriptive statistics were used to describe data.

RESULTS

Three hundred forty-two children were evaluated. During OIT, 12 children (3.5%) presented severe anaphylactic reactions that needed an adrenaline injection. None required intubation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, or showed a fatal outcome. Five of them abandoned OIT, five reached unrestricted diet and the others are still undergoing OIT. As far as outcome is concerned, 51.2% reached an unrestricted diet; 13.5% are at the build-up stage; and 28.0% (97 patients) stopped the OIT. Among these 96 children, 6.3% experienced a severe reaction induced by accidental ingestion of milk with two fatal outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of life-threatening reactions was nearly two times lower (3.5% vs. 6.3%) among patients assuming milk during OIT than in those who stopped the protocol. A trend in favor of more severe reactions, requiring ICU admission, or fatal, was shown in patients who stopped OIT.

Immunologic and pathologic characterization of a novel swine biomedical research model for eosinophilic esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic allergy-mediated condition with an increasing incidence in both children and adults. Despite EoE's strong impact on human health and welfare, there is a large unmet need for treatments with only one recently FDA-approved medication for EoE. The goal of this study was to establish swine as a relevant large animal model for translational biomedical research in EoE with the potential to facilitate development of therapeutics. We recently showed that after intraperitoneal sensitization and oral challenge with the food allergen hen egg white protein (HEWP), swine develop esophageal eosinophilia-a hallmark of human EoE. Herein, we used a similar sensitization and challenge treatment and evaluated immunological and pathological markers associated with human EoE. Our data demonstrate that the incorporated sensitization and challenge treatment induces (i) a systemic T-helper 2 and IgE response, (ii) a local expression of eotaxin-1 and other allergy-related immune markers, (iii) esophageal eosinophilia (>15 eosinophils/0.24 mm²), and (iv) esophageal endoscopic findings including linear furrows and white exudates. Thereby, we demonstrate that our sensitization and oral challenge protocol not only induces the underlying immune markers but also the micro- and macro-pathological hallmarks of human EoE. This swine model for EoE represents a novel relevant large animal model that can drive translational biomedical research to develop urgently needed treatment strategies for EoE.

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.

Update on omalizumab in allergen immunotherapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the most relevant studies in the advancing field of omalizumab in allergen immunotherapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Omalizumab has been used in combination with inhalant, venom, and food allergen immunotherapy. These studies suggest that omalizumab can decrease the time required to reach maintenance dosing and adverse events. However, severe adverse events do still occur. Limited long-term data suggests that there is a risk for increased reactivity after stopping omalizumab.

SUMMARY

Omalizumab in conjunction with immunotherapy has shown promising results for the treatment of allergic rhinitis, venom hypersensitivity, and food allergy, especially in the reduction of adverse events. Larger randomized, placebo-controlled trials are needed to better understand optimal dosing and duration, cost--benefit analysis, ideal patients, and long-term benefits. This combination therapy has the potential to improve treatment, particularly for high-risk patients.

Strategies for choosing a biologic for your patient with allergy or asthma

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the therapeutic effects and safety of biologics either approved or in clinical development for asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, urticaria, nasal polyps, atopic dermatitis, and eosinophilic esophagitis. This review attempts to provide some guidance when choosing among agents.

DATA SOURCES

Recently published articles obtained through PubMed database searches including research articles, review articles, and case reports.

STUDY SELECTIONS

PubMed database searches were conducted using the following keywords: biologics, asthma, COPD, urticaria, atopic dermatitis, food allergy, nasal polyps, and eosinophilic esophagitis.

RESULTS

The approval of omalizumab by the Food and Drug Administration in 2003 for patients with asthma paved the way for the development of multiple biologics for a variety of respiratory and allergic diseases. Agents approved by the Food and Drug Administration include mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab, and several more are in the late stages of clinical development. Owing to the overlap in the pathogenesis of respiratory and allergic diseases, many of these biologics target multiple respiratory and allergic diseases simultaneously.

CONCLUSION

The numerous biologic options have made the selection of the best biologic for each patient a potential conundrum for clinicians. Adequate point of care biomarkers to facilitate personalized medical therapy are generally lacking. Furthermore, although clinically effective and generally safe, none of the biologics discussed in this review have induced long-standing disease remission. Nevertheless, these agents have given us the opportunity to treat the most severe patients and to better understand the biology of respiratory and allergic diseases. As knowledgeable physicians, we should embrace and be educated on these novel therapies and the pathways they target.

Biologics as treatment options for anaphylaxis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide the most recent insights in the use of biologicals in the treatment of patients with anaphylaxis.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is evidence that biologics such as omalizumab may be safe and effective in preventing anaphylactic reactions in patients at high risk mainly because of severe food allergy or desensitization procedures to food, airborne allergen, drugs, or hymenoptera venom.

SUMMARY

Further knowledge will guide the adoption and implementation of any new therapy including biologics for anaphylaxis according to the stratification of risk/benefits.

Pathogenesis of IgE-mediated food allergy and implications for future immunotherapeutics

Our understanding of the immune basis of food allergy has grown rapidly in parallel with the development of new immune-targeted interventions for the treatment of food allergy. Local tissue factors, including the composition of skin and gastrointestinal microbiota and production of Th2-inducing cytokines (TSLP, IL-33, and IL-25) from barrier sites, have been shown not only to contribute to the development of food allergy, but also to act as effective targets for treatment in mice. Ongoing clinical trials are testing the targeting of these factors in human disease. There is a growing understanding of the contribution of IL-13 to the induction of high-affinity IgE and the need for continual T-cell help in the maintenance of long-lived IgE. This provides a strong rationale to test biologics targeting both IL-4 and IL-13 in the treatment of established food allergy. Various forms of allergen immunotherapy for food allergy have clearly shown that low specific IgE and elevated specific IgG4 are predictive of sustained treatment effect. Treatments that mimic that immune response, for example, lowering IgE, with monoclonal antibodies such as omalizumab, or administering allergen-specific IgG, are in various stages of investigation. As we gain more opportunities to use immune-modifying treatments for the treatment of food allergy, studies of the immune and clinical response to those interventions will continue to rapidly advance our understanding of the immune basis of food allergy and tolerance.

Combining Anti-IgE Monoclonal Antibodies and Oral Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Food Allergy

Immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated food allergy is a real public health problem worldwide. The prevalence of food allergy is particularly high in children. Patients with food allergy experience high morbidity with a change in quality of life due to the risk of severe anaphylaxis. Current treatment options are poor. Allergen avoidance is widely recommended but exposes patients to accidental ingestion. Oral immunotherapy is also used in patients with food allergies to the most common allergens. Oral immunotherapy consists of a daily administration of small, gradually increasing amounts of allergens to induce desensitisation. This procedure aims at inducing immune tolerance to the ingested food allergens. However, some patients experience adverse reactions and discontinue oral immunotherapy.Given that IgE plays a crucial role in food allergy and anti-IgE are effective in allergic asthma, the use of anti-IgE therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) such as omalizumab has been assessed in food allergy patients. The use of omalizumab as a monotherapy in food allergy has not been extensively studied but looks promising. There is more published evidence regarding the effect of omalizumab and oral immunotherapy in food allergy. Given the promising results of oral immunotherapy regarding sustained tolerance in clinical trials and the potential capacity of omalizumab to reduce symptoms in case of accidental exposure, a strategy combining oral immunotherapy with omalizumab pre-treatment has been suggested as a safer option in patients with severe food allergy compared to isolated therapy. Omalizumab seems useful in ensuring safer administration of oral immunotherapy with the oral immunotherapy maintenance dose being reached more rapidly. Quality-of-life improvement is greater with oral immunotherapy + omalizumab compared to oral immunotherapy alone. Moreover, sustained unresponsiveness is achieved more frequently with omalizumab. Considering that precision medicine and personalised therapy are major goals for allergic diseases, predictive biomarkers are crucial in order to identify food allergy patients more likely to benefit from anti-IgE therapies.

Novel Approaches in the Inhibition of IgE-Induced Mast Cell Reactivity in Food Allergy

Allergy is an IgE-dependent type-I hypersensitivity reaction that can lead to life-threatening systemic symptoms such as anaphylaxis. In the pathogenesis of the allergic response, the common upstream event is the binding of allergens to specific IgE, inducing cross-linking of the high-affinity FcεRI on mast cells, triggering cellular degranulation and the release of histamine, proteases, lipids mediators, cytokines and chemokines with inflammatory activity. A number of novel therapeutic options to curb mast cell activation are in the pipeline for the treatment of severe allergies. In addition to anti-IgE therapy and allergen-specific immunotherapy, monoclonal antibodies targeted against several key Th2/alarmin cytokines (i.e. IL-4Rα, IL-33, TSLP), active modification of allergen-specific IgE (i.e. inhibitory compounds, monoclonal antibodies, de-sialylation), engagement of inhibitory receptors on mast cells and allergen-specific adjuvant vaccines, are new promising options to inhibit the uncontrolled release of mast cell mediators upon allergen exposure. In this review, we critically discuss the novel approaches targeting mast cells limiting allergic responses and the immunological mechanisms involved, with special interest on food allergy treatment.

Oral immunotherapy in severe cow's milk allergic patients treated with omalizumab: Real life survey from a Spanish registry

BACKGROUND

Oral immunotherapy is a frequent treatment for the management of food allergies, but adverse events (AE) are common. This study assessed the outcome of cow's milk oral immunotherapy (MOIT) in severe cow`s milk-allergic patients treated with omalizumab in a real-life setting.

METHODS

OmaBASE was a national, multicenter, open, and observational registry that collected clinical, immunologic, and treatment from patients with food allergy receiving omalizumab.

RESULTS

Data derived from 58 patients aged 10.3 years (IQR 6.3-13.2) and median milk-specific IgE 100 kU_A /L at the start of omalizumab treatment. Most had experienced anaphylaxis by accidental exposures (70.7%) and had asthma (81.0%). Omalizumab in monotherapy induced tolerance to ≥6000 mg of cow's milk protein (CMP) to 34.8% of patients tested by oral food challenge. Omalizumab combined with MOIT conferred desensitization to ≥6000 mg of CMP to 83.0% of patients. Omalizumab withdrawal triggered more AE (P = .013) and anaphylaxis (P = .001) than no discontinuation. Anaphylaxis was observed in 36.4% of patients who discontinued omalizumab, and more in those with sudden (50.0%) rather than progressive (12.5%) discontinuation. At database closure, 40.5% of patients who had completed follow-up tolerated CMP without omalizumab (7.2% 1500-4500 mg; 33.3% ≥6000 mg).

CONCLUSION

Milk oral immunotherapy initiated under omalizumab allows the desensitization of subjects with severe cow's milk allergy even after omalizumab discontinuation. However, discontinuation of omalizumab can lead to severe AE and should be carefully monitored.

Successful treatment of a patient with adult food allergy and severe asthma using omalizumab

Food allergy is a typical immediate-onset allergic disease in which symptoms are provoked by exposure to the sensitized antigens. Although previous reports have shown that omalizumab has helped children with egg or milk allergy achieve oral immunotherapy safely, there is still no established method for induction of remission in adult food allergy. A 51-year-old woman with oral steroid-dependent severe asthma was treated with omalizumab for 6 years. She had shellfish and wheat food allergy and oral allergy syndrome induced by kiwi and other foods associated with latex-fruit syndrome. Since omalizumab treatment, her food allergy symptoms had disappeared. After 7 years of this treatment, disseminated erythema suddenly appeared; omalizumab was discontinued because of suspected drug-induced eruption. After omalizumab interruption, she felt an itching sensation in her throat with worsened asthma control immediately after wheat ingestion. Readministration of omalizumab improved these symptoms. Thus, we raised the possibility that omalizumab not only improved asthma control but also induced pharmacological remission of the patient's food allergy. Omalizumab may be considered as a treatment option for adult patients with food allergies and severe asthma.

Update of the S2k guideline on the management of IgE-mediated food allergies

Not available.

Monoclonal Antibodies in Treating Food Allergy: A New Therapeutic Horizon

Food allergy (FA) is a pathological immune response, potentially deadly, induced by exposure to an innocuous and specific food allergen. To date, there is no specific treatment for FAs; thus, dietary avoidance and symptomatic medications represent the standard treatment for managing them. Recently, several therapeutic strategies for FAs, such as sublingual and epicutaneous immunotherapy and monoclonal antibodies, have shown long-term safety and benefits in clinical practice. This review summarizes the current evidence on changes in treating FA, focusing on monoclonal antibodies, which have recently provided encouraging data as therapeutic weapons modifying the disease course.

The use of biologics in food allergy

BACKGROUND

Food allergy continues to pose problems due to its increased frequency and its increasingly high severity. In this context, alongside the traditional avoidance strategies of allergenic foods and desensitization through the cautious progression of exposure to foods in the context of oral immunotherapy (OIT), alternative strategies have made their way in the last decades. We review the possibilities of intervention in food allergy with the use of biological drugs capable of interfering with the synthesis of IgE, with their mechanisms of action, or with complex biological mechanisms that lead to the establishment of a food allergy.

METHODS

Repeated Entrez PubMed searches using the template algorithm "Food allergy" and "biologics" or "Omalizumab" or "Dupilumab" or "milk desensitization" or "oral tolerance induction" or "oral immunotherapy" or "Etokimab" or "Tezepelumab" or "Quilizumab" or "Ligelizumab" or "Tralokinumab" or "Nemolizumab" or "Mepolizumab" or "Reslizumab" or "Benralizumab". The authors' clinical experience in paediatric allergy units of University hospitals was also drawn upon.

RESULTS

The landscape in this context has changed dramatically over the past 10 years. We have acquired knowledge mainly on the effect of different types of anti-IgE treatments in poliallergic patients with food allergy, and in patients treated with OIT. However, other mediators are being targeted by specific biologic treatments. Among them, the alarmins Il-33 and TSLP, IL-4 and IL-13, eosinophil-related molecules as IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-12, and mostly IL-5, and integrins involved in the pathogenesis of eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs), as SIGLEC-8.

CONCLUSIONS

The ever-better knowledge of the mechanisms of food allergy allowing these developments will improve not only the perspective of patients with the most serious immediate food allergies such as anaphylaxis, but also those of patients with related diseases such as atopic dermatitis, eosinophilic esophagitis, and EGIDs. Biologics are also intended to complement OIT strategies that have developed over the years.

Omalizumab as monotherapy for food allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To familiarize the reader with the most recent insights in the use of Omalizumab (monoclonal anti-immunoglobulin E) monotherapy in the treatment of patients with severe food allergy.

RECENT FINDINGS

The current data from early stage clinical trials show that Omalizumab may be safe and effective by itself in providing desensitization to one or several foods without requiring allergen exposure.

SUMMARY

In the near future, advances in knowledge will guide the adoption and implementation of any new therapy for food allergy and allow the development of a personalized treatment tailored on the specific patient's profile.

One Hundred Ten Years of Allergen Immunotherapy: A Broad Look Into the Future

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease-modifying treatment option for patients with type 1-mediated allergic diseases such as allergic rhinitis/rhinoconjunctivitis with/without allergic asthma. Although many innovations have been developed since the first clinical report of Noon et al in 1911, the improvement of clinical efficacy and tolerability of this treatment is still an important unmet need. Hence, much progress has been made in the characterization of the cell types, cytokines, and intracellular signaling events involved in the development, maintenance, and regulation of allergic reactions, and also in the understanding of the mechanisms of tolerance induction in AIT. This comprehensive review aims to summarize the current innovative approaches in AIT, but also gives an outlook on promising candidates of the future. On the basis of an extensive literature review, integrating a clinical point of view, this article focuses on recent and future innovations regarding biologicals, allergen-derived peptides, recombinant allergens, "Toll"-like receptor agonists and other adjuvants, and novel application routes being developed for future AIT.

Conducting an Oral Food Challenge: An Update to the 2009 Adverse Reactions to Foods Committee Work Group Report

Oral food challenges are an integral part of an allergist's practice and are used to evaluate the presence or absence of allergic reactivity to foods. A work group within the Adverse Reactions to Foods Committee of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology was formed to update a previously published oral food challenge report. The intention of this document was to supplement the previous publication with additional focus on safety, treatment of IgE-mediated allergic reactions, guidance for challenges in infants and adults, psychosocial considerations for children and families participating in an oral food challenge, specific guidance for baked milk or baked egg challenges, masking agents and validated blinding recipes for common food allergens, and recommendations for conducting and interpreting challenges in patients with suspected food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome. Tables and figures within the report and an extensive online appendix detail age-specific portion sizes, appropriate timing for antihistamine discontinuation, serum and skin test result interpretation, written consents, and instructional handouts that may be used in clinical practice.

Food Allergy: Catering for the Needs of the Clinician

The practice of food allergy (FA) for clinicians has boomed, with a dramatic rise in the number of patients and families seeking care and with many advances on several fronts. The practice itself sometimes is evidence-based science and sometimes an art of pattern and phenotype recognition. This article examines the tools for diagnosis and management and therapy options available to physicians providing care for patients with FA. The article touches on pressing needs of clinicians and highlights the rapid and important movements in national and international support and advances that will have a positive impact on the field of FA.

Biologics in food allergy: up-to-date

Introduction: In recent years, the advent of immunotherapy has remarkably improved the management of IgE-mediated food allergy. However, some barriers still exist. Therefore, the effort of researchers aims to investigate new perspectives in the field of non-allergen specific therapy, also based on the current knowledge of the pathogenesis of this disease.Areas covered: This review aims to focus on the role of biologics as a treatment option in patients with IgE-mediated food allergy. These agents are characterized by their ability to inactivate the Th2 pro-inflammatory pathways. Biologics can be used both alone and in association with immunotherapy. Monoclonal antibodies targeting IgE, the IL-4/IL-13 axis, IL-5, and alarmins have been proposed and investigated for treating food allergy.Expert opinion: The clinical efficacy and safety of biologics have been demonstrated in several preclinical studies and randomized controlled trials. Future studies are still required to address current unmet needs, including the identification of the optimal dose to be used by ensuring the effectiveness of therapy.

Biologics and Novel Therapies for Food Allergy

Food allergy is a significant public health burden affecting around 10% of adults and 8% of children. Although the first peanut oral immunotherapy product received Food and Drug Administration approval in 2020, there is still an unmet need for more effective therapeutic options that minimize the risk of anaphylaxis, nutritional deficiencies, and patient's quality of life. Biologics are promising modalities, as they may improve compliance, target multiple food allergies, and treat other concomitant atopic diseases. Although omalizumab has been evaluated extensively, most biologics are more novel and have broader immunologic impact. Careful evaluation of their safety profile should therefore be conducted.