Sublingual immunotherapy for peanut allergy: Long-term follow-up of a randomized multicenter trial

Food Sublingual Immunotherapy: Safety and Simplicity of a Real Food Updosing Protocol

BACKGROUND

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) using food extracts is safe and effective in desensitizing patients with food allergy, yet not often used in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

To propose a cost-effective, expedited SLIT protocol using real food.

METHODS

Patients with food allergy aged 5 to 50 years (median, 11 years) initiated food SLIT in a single-clinic setting. The daily maintenance dose was 4 to 11 mg protein in 0.1 to 0.5 mL volume, depending on the food. Some foods were available in liquid form at the local grocery (milk, egg white liquid, and cashew/walnut/sunflower/hazelnut milk), whereas others were prepared in the office using flour and 50% glycerin saline (peanut/sesame/wheat). The first cohort of 20 patients began dosing at a 1:1000 dilution, the next 30 patients at 1:100 dilution. An exercise challenge was performed in a subset of patients on maintenance dosing to evaluate the need for a predose or postdose rest period.

RESULTS

The 1:1000 and 1:100 cohorts both completed day 1 without adverse reactions beyond itchy mouth. There were no systemic reactions requiring epinephrine throughout the study period and 88% reached their maintenance dose. Skin testing of 6-month-old peanut flour solution was not diminished from fresh solution and similar to food extract. Exercise challenge test results in 12 patients were negative.

CONCLUSIONS

Allergen extract food SLIT as used in published trials has limitations of cost and multiple office visits. Inexpensive real food, at the same or slightly higher protein dose, was well tolerated in 4 updose visits, a minimum of a week apart. Unlike food oral immunotherapy, a predose or postdose rest period may not be necessary.

Sublingual immunotherapy for allergy to shrimp: the nine-year clinical experience of a Midwest Allergy-Immunology practice

BACKGROUND

Diet restrictions and fear of adverse reactions put a significant burden on the nutrition, growth and life style of children and adults with food allergies. While various disease-modifying options are pursued, there are so far no published clinical data on immunotherapy for crustaceans. The efficacy and safety of desensitization to crustaceans by means of sublingual immunotherapy is assessed for the first time in this study with a view of validating it as a clinical-practice modality.

METHODS

Charts of a Midwest Allergy-Immunology practice from the period January 2014-June 2023 were reviewed to identify patients with allergy to shrimp treated with sublingual immunotherapy and to retrospectively evaluate their responses to oral challenge.

RESULTS

Sixty-six patients were identified who had been treated by sublingual immunotherapy for either systemic or localized reactions to shrimp. Demographics and relevant comorbidities were consistent with those of the atopic population. Sublingual immunotherapy with serially diluted mixtures was initiated at 64-320 ng/dose and was gradually escalated to 0.5 mg/dose three times a day. The sublingual immunotherapy course ranged from 5 to 72 months (average: 51 months), following which, 18 patients underwent shrimp oral challenge. No systemic reactions occurred upon challenge; no patient required epinephrine. Tolerance of target dose equal to or exceeding 42 g shrimp was achieved in 11 patients (61%), seven of whom had originally presented with systemic reactions to crustaceans. Seven patients (38%) developed one or more of the following localized reactions: oral itching, nasal symptoms, localized perioral hives, localized hives at pressure points, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain upon exposure to a cumulative dose of 39.2-148.2 g of shrimp during the 4 h of the challenge. Five of these patients had originally presented with systemic reactions to crustaceans. Five of the 7 patients who developed localized symptoms during the challenge were subsequently placed on routine exposure to 12-20 g shrimp every other day. Two patients continued sublingual immunotherapy but declined routine exposure to shrimp every other day because they had no intention to incorporate crustaceans to their routine diet. On repeat challenge 6-9 months after original challenge, all five patients who had routine exposure to 12-20 g shrimp every other day tolerated the procedure to target dose without any symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Desensitization to shrimp by sublingual immunotherapy appears to be safe and effective as shown in this study. Whether the immune modification induced by sublingual immunotherapy is permanent resulting in sustained tolerance, or the achieved degree of desensitization depends on regular exposure is not known; therefore, following challenge, regular consumption three-four times per week was recommended.

Safety and Effectiveness of Bypassing Oral Immunotherapy Buildup With an Initial Phase of Sublingual Immunotherapy for Higher-Risk Food Allergy

BACKGROUND

Because of its favorable safety, sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for food allergy has been proposed as an alternative treatment for those in whom oral immunotherapy (OIT) is of higher risk-older children, adolescents, adults, and those with a history of severe reactions. Although safe, SLIT has been shown to be less effective than OIT.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the safety of multifood SLIT in pediatric patients aged 4 to 18 years and the effectiveness of bypassing OIT buildup with an initial phase of SLIT.

METHODS

Patients aged 4 to 18 years were offered (multi)food SLIT. Patients built up to 2 mg protein SLIT maintenance over the course of 3 to 5 visits under nurse supervision. After 1 to 2 years of daily SLIT maintenance, patients were offered a low-dose oral food challenge (OFC) (cumulative dose, 300 mg protein) with the goal of bypassing OIT buildup.

RESULTS

Between summer 2020 and winter 2023, 188 patients were enrolled in SLIT (median age, 11 years). Four patients (2.10%) received epinephrine during buildup and went to the emergency department, but none experienced grade 4 (severe) reaction. A subset of 20 patients had 50 low-dose OFCs to 300 mg protein and 35 (70%) OFCs were successful, thereby bypassing OIT buildup.

CONCLUSIONS

In combination with very favorable safety of SLIT, with no life-threatening reactions and few reactions requiring epinephrine, we propose that an initial phase of SLIT to bypass supervised OIT buildup be considered for children in whom OIT is considered to be of higher risk.

New Approaches to Food Allergy Immunotherapy

Food allergy is an increasing public health problem in children and adults. In addition to the risk of potentially severe reactions, food allergy can have a significant burden on quality of life, nutrition, cost of living, and social activities. Traditionally, treatment has primarily included strict food allergen avoidance and use of emergency medications to treat an allergic reaction. However, in recent years, there have been significant strides in the advancement of food allergy treatment, including the approval of the first and only approved therapy (peanut oral immunotherapy) for food allergy in 2020. Clinical trials have primarily focused on food allergen immunotherapy (oral, epicutaneous, sublingual). Building off of a foundation of promising data supporting the efficacy of food oral immunotherapy and our greater understanding of the underlying mechanism of immunotherapy, newer approaches, including alternative routes of delivery, adjuncts to therapy, modified allergens, and utilization in younger patients, aim to provide safer and more effective treatment approaches to the millions of patients burdened by food allergy.

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.

Desensitization and remission after peanut sublingual immunotherapy in 1- to 4-year-old peanut-allergic children: A randomized, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Prior studies of peanut sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) have suggested a potential advantage with younger age at treatment initiation.

OBJECTIVE

We studied the safety and efficacy of SLIT for peanut allergy in 1- to 4-year-old children.

METHODS

Peanut-allergic 1- to 4-year-old children were randomized to receive 4 mg peanut SLIT versus placebo. Desensitization was assessed by double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) after 36 months of treatment. Participants desensitized to at least 443 mg peanut protein discontinued therapy for 3 months and then underwent DBPCFC to assess for remission. Biomarkers were measured at baseline and longitudinally during treatment.

RESULTS

Fifty participants (25 peanut SLIT, 25 placebo) with a median age of 2.4 years were enrolled across 2 sites. The primary end point of desensitization was met with actively treated versus placebo participants having a significantly greater median cumulative tolerated dose (4443 mg vs 143 mg), higher likelihood of passing the month 36 DBPCFC (60% vs 0), and higher likelihood of demonstrating remission (48% vs 0). The highest rate of desensitization and remission was seen in 1- to 2-year-olds, followed by 2- to 3-year-olds and 3- to 4-year-olds. Longitudinal changes in peanut skin prick testing, peanut-specific IgG4, and peanut-specific IgG4/IgE ratio were seen in peanut SLIT but not placebo participants. Oropharyngeal itching was more commonly reported by peanut SLIT than placebo participants. Skin, gastrointestinal, upper respiratory, lower respiratory, and multisystem adverse events were similar between treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

Peanut SLIT safely induces desensitization and remission in 1- to 4-year-old children, with improved outcomes seen with younger age at initiation.

Updates in food allergen immunotherapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Food allergies are on the rise. Though allergen avoidance and management of acute reactions have been the backbone of therapy, complete avoidance and timely acute care is often not feasible. Food allergen immunotherapy (FAIT) is a novel and evolving treatment option intended to induce desensitization and potential sustained unresponsiveness (SU) to food allergens. This review addresses the methods, mechanisms, efficacy, and adverse effects of oral immunotherapy (OIT), sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), and epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) for food allergens in the published literature.

RECENT FINDINGS

Single FAIT has been most extensively studied in peanut, milk, and hen's egg allergic patients and has been successful in achieving desensitization in treated individuals through various modalities. Long-term data regarding SU is limited; however, current data suggests subsets of patients may be more likely to achieve SU compared to others. Other studies are actively assessing multifood AIT and novel FAIT protocols with adjunctive therapies.

SUMMARY

Food allergy constitutes a prevalent problem with far-reaching consequences. The emergence of FAIT may mitigate the burden of food allergy. Current evidence is promising for specific allergens and pediatric patient populations. Future studies are needed to further assess efficacy between different modalities of immunotherapy for food allergens across an age continuum.

Immune response evolution in peanut epicutaneous immunotherapy for peanut-allergic children

BACKGROUND

Epicutaneous immunotherapy with investigational Viaskin™ Peanut 250 μg (DBV712) has demonstrated statistically superior desensitization versus placebo in peanut-allergic children in clinical trials. It is unclear whether serologic biomarkers predict response.

METHODS

Serum-specific IgG4 and IgE (whole peanut and components) from subjects enrolled in the phase 3 Efficacy and Safety of Viaskin Peanut in Children With IgE-Mediated Peanut Allergy study were examined by exploratory univariate and multivariate analyses to determine trajectories and predictors of treatment response, based upon peanut protein eliciting dose (ED) at Month (M) 12 double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge.

RESULTS

Among Viaskin Peanut-treated subjects, peanut sIgG4 significantly increased from baseline through M12 and peanut sIgE peaked at M3 and fell below baseline by M12, with sIgG4 and sIgE peanut components mirroring these trajectories. Placebo subjects had no significant changes. By univariate analysis, M12 peanut sIgG4/sIgE was higher in treatment responders (p < 0.001) and had highest area under the curve (AUC) for predicting ED ≥300 mg and ≥1000 mg (AUC 69.5% and 69.9%, respectively). M12 peanut sIgG4/sIgE >20.1 predicted M12 ED ≥300 mg (80% positive predictive value). The best performing component was Ara h 1 sIgE <15.7 kUA /L (AUC 66.5%). A multivariate model combining Ara h 1 and peanut sIgG4/sIgE had an AUC of 68.2% (ED ≥300 mg) and 67.8% (ED ≥1000 mg).

CONCLUSIONS

Peanut sIgG4 rise most clearly differentiated Viaskin Peanut versus placebo subjects. sIgG4/sIgE ratios >20.1 and the combination of Ara h 1 and peanut sIgG4/sIgE had moderate ability to predict treatment response and could potentially be useful for clinical monitoring. Additional data are needed to confirm these relationships.

Update on clinical research for food allergy treatment

The incidence of IgE-mediated food allergy (FA) has continued to increase over the years which places substantial burden on patient health and quality of life. With no cure for this disease, the mainstay of management has been allergen avoidance. However, there have been advancements in FA treatment in recent years with multiple clinical trials utilizing novel and innovative therapeutic strategies. A landmark event came in 2020 with the first drug approval for food allergy with the approval of a product for peanut oral immunotherapy. In addition to oral immunotherapy, different delivery systems of immunotherapy (SLIT, EPIT) are being studied in addition to probiotics, biologic agents - used as monotherapy and as an adjunct, and modified allergens has taken place with the hope to further enhance existing therapeutic options. The hope through these continued developments is for therapies to emerge that will provide a more comprehensive benefit to this patient population.

The future of food allergy: Challenging existing paradigms of clinical practice

The field of food allergy has seen tremendous change over the past 5-10 years with seminal studies redefining our approach to prevention and management and novel testing modalities in the horizon. Early introduction of allergenic foods is now recommended, challenging the previous paradigm of restrictive avoidance. The management of food allergy has shifted from a passive avoidance approach to active interventions that aim to provide protection from accidental exposures, decrease allergic reaction severity and improve the quality of life of food-allergic patients and their families. Additionally, novel diagnostic tools are making their way into clinical practice with the goal to reduce the need for food challenges and assist physicians in the-often complex-diagnostic process. With all the new developments and available choices for diagnosis, prevention and therapy, shared decision-making has become a key part of medical consultation, enabling patients to make the right choice for them, based on their values and preferences. Communication with patients has also become more complex over time, as patients are seeking advice online and through social media, but the information found online may be outdated, incorrect, or lacking in context. The role of the allergist has evolved to embrace all the above exciting developments and provide patients with the optimal care that fits their needs. In this review, we discuss recent developments as well as the evolution of the field of food allergy in the next decade.

Open-label study of the efficacy, safety, and durability of peanut sublingual immunotherapy in peanut-allergic children

BACKGROUND

Studies on the efficacy of peanut sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) are limited. The durability of desensitization after SLIT has not been well described.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 4-mg peanut SLIT and persistence of desensitization after SLIT discontinuation.

METHODS

Challenge-proven peanut-allergic 1- to 11-year-old children were treated with open-label 4-mg peanut SLIT for 48 months. Desensitization after peanut SLIT was assessed by a 5000-mg double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC). A novel randomly assigned avoidance period of 1 to 17 weeks was followed by the DBPCFC. Skin prick test results immunoglobulin levels, basophil activation test results, TH1, TH2, and IL-10 cytokines were measured longitudinally. Safety was assessed through patient-reported home diaries.

RESULTS

Fifty-four participants were enrolled and 47 (87%) completed peanut SLIT and the 48-month DBPCFC per protocol. The mean successfully consumed dose (SCD) during the DBPCFC increased from 48 to 2723 mg of peanut protein after SLIT (P < .0001), with 70% achieving clinically significant desensitization (SCD > 800 mg) and 36% achieving full desensitization (SCD = 5000 mg). Modeled median time to loss of clinically significant desensitization was 22 weeks. Peanut skin prick test; peanut-specific IgE, IgG4, and IgG4/IgE ratio; and peanut-stimulated basophil activation test, IL-4, IL-5, IL-13, IFN-γ, and IL-10 changed significantly compared with baseline, with changes seen as early as 6 months. Median rate of reaction per dose was 0.5%, with transient oropharyngeal itching being the most common, and there were no dosing symptoms requiring epinephrine.

CONCLUSIONS

In this open-label, prospective study, peanut SLIT was safe and induced clinically significant desensitization in most of the children, lasting more than 17 weeks after discontinuation of therapy.

EAACI Molecular Allergology User's Guide 2.0

Since the discovery of immunoglobulin E (IgE) as a mediator of allergic diseases in 1967, our knowledge about the immunological mechanisms of IgE-mediated allergies has remarkably increased. In addition to understanding the immune response and clinical symptoms, allergy diagnosis and management depend strongly on the precise identification of the elicitors of the IgE-mediated allergic reaction. In the past four decades, innovations in bioscience and technology have facilitated the identification and production of well-defined, highly pure molecules for component-resolved diagnosis (CRD), allowing a personalized diagnosis and management of the allergic disease for individual patients. The first edition of the "EAACI Molecular Allergology User's Guide" (MAUG) in 2016 rapidly became a key reference for clinicians, scientists, and interested readers with a background in allergology, immunology, biology, and medicine. Nevertheless, the field of molecular allergology is moving fast, and after 6 years, a new EAACI Taskforce was established to provide an updated document. The Molecular Allergology User's Guide 2.0 summarizes state-of-the-art information on allergen molecules, their clinical relevance, and their application in diagnostic algorithms for clinical practice. It is designed for both, clinicians and scientists, guiding health care professionals through the overwhelming list of different allergen molecules available for testing. Further, it provides diagnostic algorithms on the clinical relevance of allergenic molecules and gives an overview of their biology, the basic mechanisms of test formats, and the application of tests to measure allergen exposure.

Combined LTP Sublingual and Oral Immunotherapy in LTP Syndrome: Efficacy and Safety

INTRODUCTION

SLIT for the treatment of plant food allergies has been demonstrated to be safe but less effective than OIT, but the latter is associated with more adverse reactions. The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a new protocol starting with SLIT-peach followed by OIT with commercial peach juice in patients with LTP syndrome.

METHODS

This was a prospective, noncontrolled, open study on patients with LTP syndrome who are not sensitized to storage proteins. SLIT peach ALK was followed by OIT with Granini^® peach juice after 40 days of the SLIT maintenance phase. At home, the Granini^® juice dose was progressively increased during the 42 days until reaching 200 ml. After achieving the maximum dose, an open oral food challenge was carried out with the food that had caused the most severe reaction. If negative, the patient was instructed to progressively introduce the foods that were avoided before starting immunotherapy at home. Patients were reviewed 1 month later. The quality-of-life questionnaire FAQLQ-AF was completed at the beginning of the study and one month after the final challenge.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients were included, most of them with LTP anaphylaxis. Peach SLIT was well tolerated in 80.5%, and OIT with Granini^® was well tolerated in 85%, with no severe adverse reactions. The final provocation was successful in 39/45 (86.6%). One month after the final provocation, 42/45 (93.3%) patients had no dietary restrictions. FAQLA-AF was significantly reduced.

CONCLUSIONS

This combination of peach SLIT and OIT with commercial peach juice provides a new, fast, effective, and safe immunotherapy option for selected patients with LTP syndrome who are not allergic to storage proteins, improving their quality of life. This study suggests that cross-desensitization relative to the nsLTPs of several plant foods can be achieved by using Prup3.

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.

An overview of the current state of food desensitization

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

SUMMARY

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

Immunotherapy Effectiveness in Treating Peanut Hypersensitivity: A Systemic Review

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

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

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

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

The Basophil Activation Test for Clinical Management of Food Allergies: Recent Advances and Future Directions

The basophil activation test (BAT) is an ex vivo functional assay that measures by flow cytometry the degree of basophil degranulation after stimulation with an allergen. In recent years, there has been an increased interest in the diagnostic value of the BAT as it has the potential to mimic the clinical phenotype of sIgE sensitized patients, in contrast to allergen-specific IgE levels. This diagnostic potential would be of particular interest for food allergies present early in life such as peanut, cow’s milk and eggs, which require an expensive, time-consuming and patient unfriendly oral food challenge (OFC) for diagnosis. However, routine applications of the BAT for clinical use are not yet feasible due to the lack of standardized protocols and large clinical validation studies. This review will summarize the current data regarding the application of the BAT in food allergy (FA) for cow’s milk, egg and peanut, being the most common causes of FA in children. Additionally, it will discuss the hurdles for widespread clinical use of the BAT and possible future directions for this diagnostic procedure.

Oral Immunotherapy for Children with Cow's Milk Allergy

Cow's milk allergy (CMA) is one of the most common IgE-dependent food allergies in children. Some children develop severe and persistent CMA, with near-fatal reactions after exposure to trace amounts of cow's milk (CM). Because milk and dairy products are included in various processed food products, it is difficult to completely remove milk, which negatively affects the quality of life of children with CMA. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) can alleviate food allergen-induced anaphylaxis under continuous ingestion of a little of the causative food. Children with severe CMA may benefit from OIT, but the treatment requires a long time and poses a risk of anaphylaxis. Moreover, in recent years, new therapies, including omalizumab, sublingual immunotherapy, and epicutaneous immunotherapy, have played the role of optional OIT. In this review, we present the current methods of and other attempts at OIT, and discuss OIT for safely treating CMA.

Basophil activation test in food allergy: is it ready for real-time?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Utilization of basophil activation in the diagnosis and monitoring of food allergy has gained increasing recognition. An ex-vivo functional assay, basophil activation reflects clinical reactivity, thereby providing clinically relevant insights. Moreover, as a biomarker of reactivity and tolerance, basophil activation testing (BAT) may provide a useful tool for management of food allergies. Despite its utility, significant limitations of BAT have prevented widespread use. Addressing these limitations will increase the future application and adoption of BAT in food allergy.

RECENT FINDINGS

A number of clinical trials in the past few years have demonstrated the use of BAT in the diagnosis and treatment of food allergy. Specifically, BAT has been found to be a biomarker of tolerance.

SUMMARY

Basophil activation testing is an effective biomarker for diagnosis and monitoring of food allergy.

From Allergen Molecules to Molecular Immunotherapy of Nut Allergy: A Hard Nut to Crack

Peanuts and tree nuts are two of the most common elicitors of immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated food allergy. Nut allergy is frequently associated with systemic reactions and can lead to potentially life-threatening respiratory and circulatory symptoms. Furthermore, nut allergy usually persists throughout life. Whether sensitized patients exhibit severe and life-threatening reactions (e.g., anaphylaxis), mild and/or local reactions (e.g., pollen-food allergy syndrome) or no relevant symptoms depends much on IgE recognition of digestion-resistant class I food allergens, IgE cross-reactivity of class II food allergens with respiratory allergens and clinically not relevant plant-derived carbohydrate epitopes, respectively. Accordingly, molecular allergy diagnosis based on the measurement of allergen-specific IgE levels to allergen molecules provides important information in addition to provocation testing in the diagnosis of food allergy. Molecular allergy diagnosis helps identifying the genuinely sensitizing nuts, it determines IgE sensitization to class I and II food allergen molecules and hence provides a basis for personalized forms of treatment such as precise prescription of diet and allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT). Currently available forms of nut-specific AIT are based only on allergen extracts, have been mainly developed for peanut but not for other nuts and, unlike AIT for respiratory allergies which utilize often subcutaneous administration, are given preferentially by the oral route. Here we review prevalence of allergy to peanut and tree nuts in different populations of the world, summarize knowledge regarding the involved nut allergen molecules and current AIT approaches for nut allergy. We argue that nut-specific AIT may benefit from molecular subcutaneous AIT (SCIT) approaches but identify also possible hurdles for such an approach and explain why molecular SCIT may be a hard nut to crack.

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.

Precision medicine for cow's milk immunotherapy in clinical practice

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Several novel immunotherapies have recently been reported for the treatment of cow's milk allergy (CMA). However, systematic methods for the selection of immunotherapy in clinical practice have not been investigated. In this review, we have provided suggestions for safe and effective immunotherapy for patients with CMA.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies on cow's milk immunotherapy, using lower target doses, heated or baked cow's milk, combination treatment with adjuvants, or various routes of immunotherapy, included school-aged children with severe allergies, infants, and patients with mild CMA. These patients were administered various maintenance doses for various time periods. In the selection of immunotherapy, it would be useful to consider the patient's age and CMA severity at baseline: threshold dose, history of cow's milk anaphylaxis, and cow's milk-specific IgE levels.

SUMMARY

Considering the risks and benefits for patients with CMA, appropriate treatment should be selected based on the current evidence. Low-dose oral immunotherapy may be useful in clinical practice for school-aged children with severe CMA. Additional studies are needed to assess the indications for immunotherapy to select appropriate treatments in real-life settings.

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

Not available.

Treatment Approaches to Food Allergy

IgE-mediated food allergies affect both children and adults and are associated with dramatic decreases in the quality of life. In the majority of cases, food allergens have to be avoided which may be difficult, particularly in patients who suffer from life-threatening symptoms following the ingestion of minimal doses of food allergens. Several novel therapeutic approaches have been studied during the recent past and are summarized in this review. Therapies with novel therapeutic monoclonal antibodies, innovative allergen-specific immunotherapies using subcutaneous, sublingual, or epicutaneous routes, and oral immunotherapies leading to increases of individual thresholds of tolerable foods upon their continuous ingestion showed promising results which may change future management strategies in moderate to severe food allergy.

Regulatory Requirements for the Quality of Allergen Products for Allergen Immunotherapy of Food Allergy

Purpose of Review

Medicinal products for allergen immunotherapy (AIT) of food allergies have gained enormous momentum in recent years. With this new class of products entering marketing authorization procedures, compliance to regulatory requirements becomes a critical element. Here, an overview is provided on specific requirements and aspects concerning the quality control and manufacturing of these products.

Recent Findings

Recent developments in the field of AIT for food allergies are divers, including products for oral, epicutaneous, and subcutaneous application, most notably targeting egg, milk, and peanut allergy. As the source materials for food AIT product are typically produced for food consumption and not for medicinal purposes, unique challenges arise in the manufacturing processes and controls of these medicinal products. Individual approaches are needed to assure acceptable quality, including control of relevant quantitative and qualitative characteristics. Major characteristics for quality verification include determination of protein content, total allergenic activity, and major allergen content. The applied manufacturing processes need to be established such that relevant process parameters are kept within justified limits and consistency of produced batches is assured.

Summary

Allergen products for food AIT present specific challenges with respect to quality aspects that differentiate them from other commonly available AIT products. While established regulation is available and provides clear guidance for most aspects, other issues require consideration of new and individual settings relevant here. Consequently, as experience grows, respective amendments to currently available guidance may be needed.

Oral Mucosa as a Potential Site for Diagnosis and Treatment of Allergic and Autoimmune Diseases

Most prevalent food allergies during early childhood are caused by foods with a high allergenic protein content, such as milk, egg, nuts, or fish. In older subjects, some respiratory allergies progressively lead to food-induced allergic reactions, which can be severe, such as urticaria or asthma. Oral mucosa remodeling has been recently proven to be a feature of severe allergic phenotypes and autoimmune diseases. This remodeling process includes epithelial barrier disruption and the release of inflammatory signals. Although little is known about the immune processes taking place in the oral mucosa, there are a few reports describing the oral mucosa-associated immune system. In this review, we will provide an overview of the recent knowledge about the role of the oral mucosa in food-induced allergic reactions, as well as in severe respiratory allergies or food-induced autoimmune diseases, such as celiac disease.

Bayesian hierarchical evaluation of dose-response for peanut allergy in clinical trial screening

Risk-based labeling based on the minimal eliciting doses (EDs) in sensitized populations is a potential replacement for precautionary allergen labeling of food allergens. We estimated the dose-response distribution for peanut allergen using data from double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFCs) conducted in the US at multiple sites, testing a population believed to be similar to the general U.S. food allergic population. Our final (placebo-adjusted) dataset included 548 challenges of 481 subjects. Bayesian hierarchical analysis facilitated model fitting, and accounted for variability associated with various levels of data organization. The data are best described using a complex hierarchical structure that accounts for inter-individual variability and variability across study locations or substudies. Bayesian model averaging could simultaneously consider the fit of multiple models, but the Weibull model dominated so strongly that model averaging was not needed. The ED01 and ED05 (and 95% credible intervals) are 0.052 (0.021, 0.13) and 0.49 (0.22, 0.97) mg peanut protein, respectively. Accounting for challenges with severe reactions at the LOAEL, by using the dose prior to the LOAEL as the new LOAEL, the ED01 drops to 0.029 (0.014, 0.074) mg peanut protein. Our results could aid in establishing improved food labeling guidelines in the management of food allergies.

Epicutaneous immunotherapy for treatment of peanut allergy: Follow-up from the Consortium for Food Allergy Research

BACKGROUND

Consortium for Food Allergy Research investigators previously reported 52-week outcomes from a randomized controlled trial of peanut epicutaneous immunotherapy, observing modest and statistically significant induction of desensitization, highest in children ages 4 to 11 years.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate changes in efficacy, safety, and mechanistic parameters following extended open-label peanut epicutaneous immunotherapy.

METHODS

Peanut-allergic participants (4-25 years) received 52 weeks of placebo (PLB), Viaskin Peanut 100 μg (VP100) or 250 μg (VP250), and then crossed over to VP250 for PLB (PLB-VP250) and VP100 (VP100-VP250) participants and continued treatment for VP250 participants (total = 130 weeks of active epicutaneous immunotherapy). Efficacy was assessed by double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (5044 mg peanut protein), and adherence, safety, and mechanistic parameters were evaluated.

RESULTS

At week 130, desensitization success was achieved in 1 of 20 (5%) PLB-VP250, 5 of 24 (20.8%) VP100-VP250, and 9 of 25 (36%) VP250 participants, with median successfully consumed dose change from baseline of 11.5 mg, 141.5 mg, and 400 mg, respectively. Median age (years) for week 130 desensitization success was 6.2 years (interquartile range, 5.2-9.1) versus 9.4 years (interquartile range, 7.6-12.8) for failures (P < .001). Adherence was 96%. Adverse reactions were predominantly local patch-site reactions. Significant increases in peanut- and Ara h2-specific IgG4 observed at week 52 persisted to week 130. By a post hoc analysis, there were no statistically significant increases from week 52 to week 130 in either desensitization success or successfully consumed dose.

CONCLUSIONS

Extended treatment with VP250 was well tolerated, and desensitization observed at week 52 persisted between weeks 52 and 130. Treatment success was observed predominantly in younger participants, with younger age at initiation of active therapy an important predictor of success.

IgE-mediated food allergy throughout life

Food allergy (FA) has become an increasing problem throughout the world. Over the last 2 decades, the frequency of FA has increased in both children and adults. The prevalence differs according to the research methodology, age, and geographic regions, ranging between 2.0% and 10.0%. The most common form of FA is immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated FA. In this form, patients may present with life-threatening conditions, such as anaphylaxis, or milder conditions, such as urticaria, angioedema, sneezing, and nausea alone. The gold standard in the diagnosis of FA is oral provocation tests. Epidermal skin prick tests and specific IgE measurements, as well as component-resolved diagnostic techniques are helpful in the diagnosis and follow-up of patients. In this review, the epidemiology, diagnosis, follow-up, and prognosis of IgE-mediated FA in children and adults were discussed and some specific forms of FA, such as pollen FA syndrome, alpha-gal allergy, and food-dependent exercise-induced anaphylaxis were explained.

Emerging Therapies for Peanut Allergy

Peanut allergy (PA) is a food allergy that causes an IgE-mediated type I hypersensitivity reaction. PA has become an increasing public health burden, with 2% of American children reported to have this condition in 2010. Current guidelines recommend allergen avoidance, patient education, and administration of H1 antihistamines, β2-agonists, or epinephrine based on the severity of reaction. In this review article, emerging therapies for PA are evaluated for their potential role in treating PA. Oral, epicutaneous, and sublingual immunotherapies have completed clinical trials with promising efficacy. In particular, Palforzia (AR101) is an oral immunotherapy that received Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approval in January 2020 and Viaskin Peanut is an epicutaneous immunotherapy with an anticipated FDA decision date by August 5, 2020. Furthermore, adjuvant combinations with either probiotics or anti-IgE receptor antagonists have shown an improved efficacy and safety profile compared to oral immunotherapy alone. However, immunotherapy-induced adverse reaction rates are high due to the risks associated with intentional allergen exposure. These results suggest that peanut immunotherapy has a promising role in the treatment of PA, although further studies are needed before its incorporation into standard of care.

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.

Basophil Activation as Marker of Clinically Relevant Allergy and Therapy Outcome

For some years now the basophil activation test (BAT) using flow cytometry has emerged as a powerful tool and sensitive marker that can be used to detect clinically relevant allergies, provide information on the severity of an allergic reaction, and monitor therapies. Compared to other in vitro diagnostic tests, BAT seems to have a better informative value in terms of clinical relevance. In general, the BAT can be used for the diagnosis of the most common forms of IgE-mediated allergy such as hymenoptera venom allergy, inhalant allergy, food allergy, and drug allergy. Various basophil markers and parameters have been established which, depending on the trigger of the respective allergy, can provide information on the clinical relevance of sensitization, on the development of natural tolerance, on trigger thresholds, and on the severity of the allergic reaction. The BAT also serves as a suitable follow-up instrument for various therapeutic approaches such as specific immunotherapy, desensitization protocols, or use of anti-IgE-antibodies for the various diseases. Quality controls for routine use, standardization, and automatization are expected to expand the range of applications for the above-mentioned indications.

Oral and sublingual immunotherapy for food allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To critically appraise the recent most relevant studies in the rapidly advancing field of food oral and sublingual immunotherapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Food allergen-specific immunotherapy via oral (OIT) and sublingual route (SLIT) increases the threshold of reactivity to peanut, cow's milk, egg, wheat, and many other foods in the majority of the treated individuals. This desensitized state is contingent upon the continued ingestion of the maintenance doses of the food. Permanent oral tolerance is achievable in a smaller subset of the treated individuals. The optimal duration of therapy has not been firmly established but is likely dependent on the phenotype (severity and persistence). Efficacy of food-OIT is superior compared with SLIT, whereas the safety of OIT is less favorable. Standardization of treatment protocols, maintenance dosing, duration of therapy, target populations and harmonization of the outcomes are top priorities at this stage.

SUMMARY

OIT and SLIT represent two different routes of food allergen-specific immunotherapy. Although significant progress has been made in the last decade, both treatment modalities are still in the very early stages of development and further investigations are necessary to optimize the protocols and improve safety while maximizing efficacy.

Eosinophilic esophagitis during sublingual and oral allergen immunotherapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this review is to discuss the current evidence regarding the development of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) in individuals undergoing oral and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for both food and environmental allergens. Cumulative incidence of EoE in patients on allergen immunotherapy for peanut, milk, and egg is estimated.

RECENT FINDINGS

De novo development of EoE in patients undergoing oral and SLIT has been demonstrated on the scale of case reports and prospective randomized trials. However, few individuals with EoE-like symptoms during immunotherapy undergo endoscopy, and the long-term outcomes of immunotherapy-associated EoE are unknown.

SUMMARY

Evidence exists to suggest that allergen immunotherapy could place individuals at risk for the development of EoE, the true incidence of which may vary depending on antigen exposure and methods used to define the condition.

Sublingual immunotherapy for food allergy and its future directions

Food allergy is an important medical problem with increasing prevalence throughout the world. Different approaches of food immunotherapy are being investigated including oral, epicutaneous and sublingual routes. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for food allergy involves placement of glycerinated allergen under the tongue daily to achieve allergen-specific desensitization. SLIT has been studied in the treatment of hazelnut, peach, apple, milk and peanut allergies with substantial focus on the treatment of peanut allergy. Phase II studies have shown SLIT for treatment of peanut allergy increases the tolerated dose of peanut by a substantial margin with fewer and less severe side effects than other modalities. This review discusses the mechanisms of SLIT, early studies of its use in food allergy and larger randomized controlled trials for treatment of peanut allergy. Future directions using the mechanisms involved in SLIT include oral mucosal immunotherapy for peanut allergy.

Production of allergen-specific immunotherapeutic agents for the treatment of food allergy

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (IT) is emerging as a viable avenue for the treatment of food allergies. Clinical trials currently investigate raw or slightly processed foods as therapeutic agents, as trials using food-grade agents can be performed without the strict regulations to which conventional drugs are subjected. However, this limits the ability of standardization and may affect clinical trial outcomes and reproducibility. Herein, we provide an overview of methods used in the production of immunotherapeutic agents for the treatment of food allergies, including processed foods, allergen extracts, recombinant allergens, and synthetic peptides, as well as the physical and chemical processes for the reduction of protein allergenicity. Commercial interests currently favor producing standardized drug-grade allergen extracts for therapeutic use, and clinical trials are ongoing. In the near future, recombinant production could replace purification strategies since it allows the manufacturing of pure, native allergens or sequence-modified allergens with reduced allergenicity. A recurring issue within this field is the inadequate reporting of production procedures, quality control, product physicochemical characteristics, allergenicity, and immunological properties. This information is of vital importance in assessing therapeutic standardization and clinical safety profile, which are central parameters for the development of future therapeutic agents.

Food allergy immunotherapy: Oral immunotherapy and epicutaneous immunotherapy

IgE-mediated food allergy remains a significant and growing problem across the globe. Of the various treatment modalities, oral immunotherapy (OIT) and epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) have been the best studied. Across various studies of OIT for egg, milk, and peanut allergy, strong levels of desensitization have been shown. With egg and peanut OIT, a limited remission, or sustained unresponsiveness (SU), has further been demonstrated. These advances have been further validated by successful phase 2 and phase 3 studies of peanut OIT. EPIT, using daily administrations of a proprietary patch, demonstrated efficacy as well as safety and tolerability in parallel phase 2 studies; however, its phase 3 study did not meet its primary efficacy outcome. Despite its good track record of desensitization, the safety and tolerability of OIT has remained a question. EPIT, on the other hand, has proven safe and tolerable; however, the adequacy of its desensitization has remained to be determined. As OIT and EPIT continue their march toward regulatory review, optimizations for immunotherapy and novel therapies continue to be developed providing hope for food allergy patients everywhere.

Can food allergy be cured? What are the future prospects?

Food allergies have become a significant heath burden as prevalence continues to rise, affecting 6%-13% of the global population. In the absence of drugs approved by regulatory agencies, the current standard of care remains avoidance of allergenic foods and management of acute allergic reactions with antihistamines and epinephrine autoinjectors. Allergen immunotherapy has been shown to increase the threshold of reactivity in the majority of food-allergic individuals. However, challenges include long treatment periods, high rates of adverse reactions, and lack of permanence of desensitization and established protocols. To address these limitations, adjunctive allergen-specific immunotherapy, vaccines, and non-allergen-specific therapies (eg, monoclonal antibodies) are being explored. The future of food allergy treatment is promising with a number of clinical trials in progress. Currently, although desensitization can be achieved for the majority of individuals with food allergy through immunotherapy, continued ingestion of allergen is needed for most individuals to maintain desensitization. Further understanding of the mechanisms of food allergy and identification of biomarkers to distinguish between temporary and permanent resolution of allergies is needed before a cure, where reactivity to the allergen is permanently lost enabling the individual to consume the allergen in any amount at any time, can be envisioned.

Vaccine against peanut allergy based on engineered virus-like particles displaying single major peanut allergens

BACKGROUND

Peanut allergy is a severe and increasingly frequent disease with high medical, psychosocial, and economic burden for affected patients and wider society. A causal, safe, and effective therapy is not yet available.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to develop an immunogenic, protective, and nonreactogenic vaccine candidate against peanut allergy based on virus-like particles (VLPs) coupled to single peanut allergens.

METHODS

To generate vaccine candidates, extracts of roasted peanut (Ara R) or the single allergens Ara h 1 or Ara h 2 were coupled to immunologically optimized Cucumber Mosaic Virus-derived VLPs (CuMVtt). BALB/c mice were sensitized intraperitoneally with peanut extract absorbed to alum. Immunotherapy consisted of a single subcutaneous injection of CuMVtt coupled to Ara R, Ara h 1, or Ara h 2.

RESULTS

The vaccines CuMVtt-Ara R, CuMVtt-Ara h 1, and CuMVtt-Ara h 2 protected peanut-sensitized mice against anaphylaxis after intravenous challenge with the whole peanut extract. Vaccines did not cause allergic reactions in sensitized mice. CuMVtt-Ara h 1 was able to induce specific IgG antibodies, diminished local reactions after skin prick tests, and reduced the infiltration of the gastrointestinal tract by eosinophils and mast cells after oral challenge with peanut. The ability of CuMVtt-Ara h 1 to protect against challenge with the whole extract was mediated by IgG, as shown via passive IgG transfer. FcγRIIb was required for protection, indicating that immune complexes with single allergens were able to block the allergic response against the whole extract, consisting of a complex allergen mixture.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that vaccination using single peanut allergens displayed on CuMVtt may represent a novel therapy against peanut allergy with a favorable safety profile.

Immunoglobulin E (IgE)-Mediated Food Allergy in Children: Epidemiology, Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, Prevention, and Management

A food allergy is an immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated hypersensitive reaction to food, which consists in the appearance of allergic symptoms; it can vary from common urticaria to even fatal anaphylaxis. The prevalence of food allergies has been increasing in the past twenty years and it represents a major public health problem in industrialized countries. The mechanism that leads to food allergies is the lack of immunologic and clinical tolerance to food allergens. The diagnosis of IgE-mediated food allergies is based on the combined use of a detailed medical history, in-vivo, and in-vitro research of specific IgE, the elimination diet, and the double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge. The only currently available treatment for allergies is the strict elimination diet. This type of attitude, which we could define as “passive”, does not overcome the risk of accidental reactions due to involuntary intake of the culprit food. For food allergy management, an “active” approach is urgently needed, such as specific allergen immunotherapy, which is currently under development and only used for research purposes. This article aims to give an updated review of IgE-mediated food allergies in pediatric populations in terms of epidemiology, pathogenesis, prevention, diagnosis, and management.

Current Controversies and Future Prospects for Peanut Allergy Prevention, Diagnosis and Therapies

Peanut allergy has increased substantially in the past few decades, both in developed and developing countries. Peanut allergy has become a major public health concern, affecting up to 1 in 50 children, with repercussions for school and airline policies. Recent research findings have shown that, contrary to the long-standing teaching of "delayed" introduction of allergens, early introduction of peanut protein is of benefit as an allergy prevention strategy, especially in high-risk cases. Ideal dose, frequency and duration of "proactive" peanut therapy for maximum protection remain to be determined in order for it to become acceptable and practical on a large scale. Logistics around widespread screening of high-risk patients remain complex. The correct diagnosis of peanut allergy is crucial and diagnostic tests have been fine-tuned in the past 2 decades in order to help differentiate true allergy from false-positive sensitization through cross-reactivity. Component-resolved diagnostics have become routinely available, and the use of basophil activation tests has increased, although standardization and availability remain issues. Future tests, including epitope testing and histamine-release assays, promise to be even more specific in ruling out false positives and reducing the need for incremental food challenges. Stringent peanut avoidance and prompt treatment of reactions remain the cornerstone of treatment. The concept of exposing the allergic body to small amounts of peanut protein in a cautious, orderly, escalating fashion in the form of desensitization has been widely applied in the past 10-15 years, mainly in the research domain, but of late spilling over into every-day practice. However, desensitization does not equate to a cure, and has significant safety concerns and practical ramifications; probably requiring lifelong-controlled peanut ingestion for ongoing protection. Further strategies to enhance the safety and efficacy of immunotherapy are under exploration, many with a non-specific immune-modifying effect. Despite recent advances in peanut allergy, we still need to go back to basics with accurate diagnosis, nutritional counselling, well-organized allergy action plans and accessible emergency kits.

Approach to Patients with Allergic Rhinitis: Testing and Treatment

This article evaluates the role of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) in the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR). AIT has been shown to be effective in treating AR symptoms with resultant improvements in overall quality of life, comorbid illnesses, and medication requirements. Persistent clinical benefits have been shown years after AIT treatment discontinuation. AIT may prevent the progression of AR to asthma. AIT may more cost-effective than pharmacotherapy. Multiple individual studies and systematic reviews provide strong evidence for the clinical effectiveness of AIT in the treatment of AR. Cost-effectiveness and disease modification of AIT compared with standard drug treatment are additional advantages.

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.].

The clinical and immune outcomes after food allergen immunotherapy emphasizing the development of tolerance

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The present review serves to outline the direction of food allergy immunotherapy research with an emphasis on clinical and immunologic outcomes. It helps to delineate sustained unresponsiveness achieved from food immunotherapy as the clinical outcome most similar to immune tolerance.

RECENT FINDINGS

We will discuss the difference between immune tolerance, desensitization, and sustained unresponsiveness in relation to food immunotherapy by discussing the clinical and immunologic changes which have been recently discovered.

SUMMARY

Research has recently shown that oral immunotherapy is most efficacious clinically at achieving desensitization to a food and sustained unresponsiveness.

Long-term sublingual immunotherapy for peanut allergy in children: Clinical and immunologic evidence of desensitization

BACKGROUND

Peanut sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for 1 year has been shown to induce modest clinical desensitization in allergic children. Studies of oral immunotherapy, epicutaneous immunotherapy, and SLIT have suggested additional benefit with extended treatment.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to investigate the safety, clinical effectiveness, and immunologic changes with long-term SLIT in children with peanut allergy.

METHODS

Children with peanut allergy aged 1 to 11 years underwent extended maintenance SLIT with 2 mg/d peanut protein for up to 5 years. Subjects with peanut skin test wheals of less than 5 mm and peanut-specific IgE levels of less than 15 kU/L were allowed to discontinue therapy early. Desensitization was assessed through a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) with up to 5000 mg of peanut protein after completion of SLIT dosing. Sustained unresponsiveness was further assessed by using identical DBPCFCs after 2 to 4 weeks without peanut exposure.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven of 48 subjects completed 3 to 5 years of peanut SLIT, with 67% (32/48) successfully consuming 750 mg or more during DBPCFCs. Furthermore, 25% (12/48) passed the 5000-mg DBPCFC without clinical symptoms, with 10 of these 12 demonstrating sustained unresponsiveness after 2 to 4 weeks. Side effects were reported with 4.8% of doses, with transient oropharyngeal itching reported most commonly. Side effects requiring antihistamine treatment were uncommon (0.21%), and no epinephrine was administered. Peanut skin test wheals, peanut-specific IgE levels, and basophil activation decreased significantly, and peanut-specific IgG4 levels increased significantly after peanut SLIT.

CONCLUSION

Extended-therapy peanut SLIT provided clinically meaningful desensitization in the majority of children with peanut allergy that was balanced with ease of administration and a favorable safety profile.