Epicutaneous immunotherapy for the treatment of peanut allergy in children and young adults

New evidence in food allergies treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To acknowledge, the newly available treatments for food allergy described in the latest scientific literature, such as oral immunotherapy (OIT), biologics and the combination of them in managing patients with IgE-mediated food allergies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies suggest that OIT and biologics, alone or together, can have a role as disease-modifying treatments for food allergies. The FDA has recently approved omalizumab as a treatment for food allergy. Other biologics are currently under evaluation and further studies are needed to assess the efficacy and safety of these therapies.

SUMMARY

The allergology scenario is rapidly evolving, the recent introduction and approval of new therapeutic strategies such as biotechnological drugs and allergen immunotherapy is changing the therapeutic paradigm: we are witnessing a shift from a strategy based on avoiding the trigger and reversing an allergic reaction already in progress, to one that aims to modify the natural history of the disease by acting on the immunological mechanisms that determine it. This approach is consistent with the modern perspective of a personalized patient-tailored medicine. In this opinion review, we will provide a brief analysis of current and future therapeutic options for IgE-mediated food allergy, focusing on OIT, biologics and their combination.

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.

Neutralizing IgG4 antibodies are a biomarker of sustained efficacy after peanut oral immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Clinical efficacy of oral immunotherapy (OIT) has been associated with the induction of blocking antibodies, particularly those capable of disrupting IgE-allergen interactions. Previously, we identified mAbs to Ara h 2 and structurally characterized their epitopes.

OBJECTIVE

We investigated longitudinal changes during OIT in antibody binding to conformational epitopes and correlated the results with isotype and clinical efficacy.

METHODS

We developed an indirect inhibitory ELISA using mAbs to block conformational epitopes on immobilized Ara h 2 from binding to serum immunoglobulins from peanut-allergic patients undergoing OIT. We tested the functional blocking ability of mAbs using passive cutaneous anaphylaxis in mice with humanized FcεRI receptors.

RESULTS

Diverse serum IgE recognition of Ara h 2 conformational epitopes are similar before and after OIT. Optimal inhibition of serum IgE occurs with the combination of 2 neutralizing mAbs (nAbs) recognizing epitopes 1.2 and 3, compared to 2 nonneutralizing mAbs (non-nAbs). After OIT, IgG4 nAbs, but not IgG1 or IgG2 nAbs, increased in sustained compared to transient outcomes. Induction of IgG4 nAbs occurs after OIT only in those with sustained efficacy. Murine passive cutaneous anaphylaxis after sensitization with pooled human sera is significantly inhibited by nAbs compared to non-nAbs.

CONCLUSIONS

Serum IgE conformational epitope diversity remains unchanged during OIT. However, IgG4 nAbs capable of uniquely disrupting IgE-allergen interactions to prevent effector cell activation are selectively induced in OIT-treated individuals with sustained clinical efficacy. Therefore, the induction of neutralizing IgG4 antibodies to Ara h 2 are clinically relevant biomarkers of durable efficacy in OIT.

Advancing immunotherapy using biomaterials to control tissue, cellular, and molecular level immune signaling in skin

Immunotherapies have been transformative in many areas, including cancer treatments, allergies, and autoimmune diseases. However, significant challenges persist in extending the reach of these technologies to new indications and patients. Some of the major hurdles include narrow applicability to patient groups, transient efficacy, high cost burdens, poor immunogenicity, and side effects or off-target toxicity that results from lack of disease-specificity and inefficient delivery. Thus, there is a significant need for strategies that control immune responses generated by immunotherapies while targeting infection, cancer, allergy, and autoimmunity. Being the outermost barrier of the body and the first line of host defense, the skin presents a unique immunological interface to achieve these goals. The skin contains a high concentration of specialized immune cells, such as antigen-presenting cells and tissue-resident memory T cells. These cells feature diverse and potent combinations of immune receptors, providing access to cellular and molecular level control to modulate immune responses. Thus, skin provides accessible tissue, cellular, and molecular level controls that can be harnessed to improve immunotherapies. Biomaterial platforms - microneedles, nano- and micro-particles, scaffolds, and other technologies - are uniquely capable of modulating the specialized immunological niche in skin by targeting these distinct biological levels of control. This review highlights recent pre-clinical and clinical advances in biomaterial-based approaches to target and modulate immune signaling in the skin at the tissue, cellular, and molecular levels for immunotherapeutic applications. We begin by discussing skin cytoarchitecture and resident immune cells to establish the biological rationale for skin-targeting immunotherapies. This is followed by a critical presentation of biomaterial-based pre-clinical and clinical studies aimed at controlling the immune response in the skin for immunotherapy and therapeutic vaccine applications in cancer, allergy, and autoimmunity.

Implementing Food Oral Immunotherapy Into Clinical Practice: Quality and Safety Perspectives From a US Academic Center

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an accessible procedure for practicing allergy/immunology providers, yet rigorous safety standards are limited in the clinical setting. By exploring the transition from research to clinical practice OIT, we review relevant safety considerations necessary for the clinical provider. We offer a perspective on clinical benefits and considerations at the individual, collaboration, and policy levels from the vantage of a large academic OIT program, and we propose several practical start-up checklists and clerical considerations for practicing providers. Awareness of the local population and front-end planning is necessary to improve the accessibility of this procedure in clinical practice among racial and socioeconomic minority populations. Sharing and merging OIT protocols, procedural methods, and electronic medical record order sets may increase harmonization among OIT-providing institutions and further our abilities to pool safety and outcomes data, ultimately enhancing the safety and efficacy of clinical OIT.

Local nasal immunotherapy with birch pollen-galactomannan conjugate-containing ointment in mice and humans

BACKGROUND

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease-modifying treatment for immunoglobulin (Ig) E-mediated allergy. Owing to the high prevalence and early onset of hay fever and pollen-food allergy syndrome (PFAS), a safer and simpler treatment method than conventional AIT is needed. To develop a local nasal immunotherapy using an ointment containing hypoallergenic pollen and assess its efficacy in mice and healthy humans.

METHODS

Hypoallergenicity was achieved by combining pollen and galactomannan through the Maillard reaction to create birch pollen-galactomannan conjugate (BP-GMC). The binding of galactomannan to Bet v 1 was confirmed using electrophoresis and Western blotting (WB). Binding of specific IgE antibodies to BP-GMC was verified using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and basophil activation test (BAT). The localization of BP-GMC absorption was confirmed using a BALB/c mouse model. BP-GMC mixed with white petrolatum was intranasally administered to 10 healthy individuals (active drugs, 8; placebo, 2) for 14 days.

RESULTS

In electrophoresis and WB, no 17-kDa band was observed. In ELISA and BAT, BP-GMC did not react to specific IgE but was bound to IgA and IgG. In the mouse model, BP-GMC was detected in nasopharyngeal-associated lymphoid tissues. In the active drug group, the salivary-specific IgA level significantly increased on day 15 (p = 0.0299), while the serum-specific IgG level significantly increased on day 85 (p = 0.0006).

CONCLUSIONS

The BP-GMC ointment rapidly produced antagonistic antibodies against IgE; it is safe and easy to use and might serve as a therapeutic antigen for hay fever and PFAS.

From Skin to Solution: Exploring Epicutaneous Immunotherapy for Peanut Allergy-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Peanut allergy is a leading cause of severe food reactions. This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy and safety of epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) compared to placebo for peanut-allergic individuals. After prospectively registering on PROSPERO, we searched three databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane CENTRAL) and 2 trial registries till September 2023. Analysis was conducted via RevMan where data was computed using risk ratios (RR). The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and GRADE criteria were used to appraise and evaluate the evidence. From 4927 records, six multicenter randomized placebo-controlled trials comprising 1453 participants were included. The 250 µg EPIT group had a significant increase in successful desensitization compared to placebo (RR: 2.13 (95% C.I: 1.72, 2.64), P < 0.01, I2 = 0%), while the 100 µg EPIT group did not (RR: 1.54 (95% C.I: 0.92, 2.58), P = 0.10, I2 = 0%) (moderate certainty evidence). Moreover, there was a significant increase in local (RR: 1.69 (95% C.I: 1.06, 2.68), P = 0.03, I2 = 89%) and systemic adverse events (RR: 1.75 (95% C.I: 1.14, 2.69), P = 0.01, I2 = 0%) with EPIT. Additionally, individuals administered EPIT have an increased probability of requiring rescue medications like epinephrine (RR: 1.91 (95% C.I: 1.12, 3.28), P = 0.02, I2 = 0%) and topical corticosteroids (RR: 1.49 (95% C.I: 1.29, 1.73), P < 0.01, I2 = 0%) to treat adverse events. The association of adverse events post-treatment including anaphylaxis (RR: 2.31 (95% C.I: 1.00, 5.33), P = 0.05, I2 = 36%), skin/subcutaneous disorders like erythema or vesicles (RR: 0.93 (95% C.I: 0.79, 1.08), P = 0.33, I2 = 0%), and respiratory disorders like dyspnea or wheezing (RR: 0.94 (95% C.I: 0.77, 1.15), P = 0.55, I2 = 0%) with EPIT is inconclusive. EPIT, although effective in desensitization, is linked to an increased risk of adverse events. PROSPERO registration: CRD42023466600.

Evaluation of clinical outcomes of efficacy in food allergen immunotherapy trials, COFAITH EAACI task force

Food allergy is a global public health problem that until recent years lacked any aetiological treatment supported by academy, industry and regulators. Food immunotherapy (AIT) is an evolving treatment option, supported by clinical practice and industry trial data. Recent AIT meta-analyses have highlighted the difficulty in pooling safety and efficacy data from AIT trials, due to secondary heterogeneity in the study. An EAACI task force (CO-FAITH) initiated by the Paediatric Section was created to focus on AIT efficacy outcomes for milk, egg and peanut allergy rather than in trial results. A systematic search and a narrative review of AIT controlled clinical trials and large case series was conducted. A total of 63 manuscripts met inclusion criteria, corresponding to 23, 21 and 22 studies of milk, egg and peanut AIT, respectively. The most common AIT efficacy outcome was desensitization, mostly defined as tolerating a maintenance phase dose, or reaching a particular dose upon successful exit oral food challenge (OFC). However, a large degree of heterogeneity was identified regarding the dose quantity defining this outcome. Sustained unresponsiveness and patient-reported outcomes (e.g. quality of life) were explored less frequently, and to date have been most rigorously described for peanut AIT versus other allergens. Change in allergen threshold assessed by OFC remains the most common efficacy measure, but OFC methods suffer from heterogeneity and methodological disparity. This review has identified multiple heterogeneous outcomes related to measuring the efficacy of AIT. Efforts to better standardize and harmonize which outcomes, and how to measure them must be carried out to help in the clinical development of safe and efficacious food allergy treatments.

Core Outcome Set for IgE-mediated food allergy clinical trials and observational studies of interventions: International Delphi consensus study 'COMFA'

BACKGROUND

IgE-mediated food allergy (FA) is a global health concern with substantial individual and societal implications. While diverse intervention strategies have been researched, inconsistencies in reported outcomes limit evaluations of FA treatments. To streamline evaluations and promote consistent reporting, the Core Outcome Measures for Food Allergy (COMFA) initiative aimed to establish a Core Outcome Set (COS) for FA clinical trials and observational studies of interventions.

METHODS

The project involved a review of published clinical trials, trial protocols and qualitative literature. Outcomes found as a result of review were categorized and classified, informing a two-round online-modified Delphi process followed by hybrid consensus meeting to finalize the COS.

RESULTS

The literature review, taxonomy mapping and iterative discussions with diverse COMFA group yielded an initial list of 39 outcomes. The iterative online and in-person meetings reduced the list to 13 outcomes for voting in the formal Delphi process. One more outcome was added based on participant suggestions after the first Delphi round. A total of 778 participants from 52 countries participated, with 442 participating in both Delphi rounds. No outcome met a priori criteria for inclusion, and one was excluded as a result of the Delphi. Thirteen outcomes were brought to the hybrid consensus meeting as a result of Delphi and two outcomes, 'allergic symptoms' and 'quality of life' achieved consensus for inclusion as 'core' outcomes.

CONCLUSION

In addition to the mandatory reporting of adverse events for FA clinical trials or observational studies of interventions, allergic symptoms and quality of life should be measured as core outcomes. Future work by COMFA will define how best to measure these core outcomes.

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.

Phase 1 trial supports safety and mechanism of action of peptide immunotherapy for peanut allergy

BACKGROUND

Food allergy is a leading cause of anaphylaxis worldwide. Allergen-specific immunotherapy is the only treatment shown to modify the natural history of allergic disease, but application to food allergy has been hindered by risk of severe allergic reactions and short-lived efficacy. Allergen-derived peptides could provide a solution. PVX108 comprises seven short peptides representing immunodominant T-cell epitopes of major peanut allergens for treatment of peanut allergy.

METHODS

Pre-clinical safety of PVX108 was assessed using ex vivo basophil activation tests (n = 185). Clinical safety and tolerability of single and repeat PVX108 doses were evaluated in a first-in-human, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in peanut-allergic adults (46 active, 21 placebo). The repeat-dose cohort received six doses over 16 weeks with safety monitored to 21 weeks. Exploratory immunological analyses were performed at pre-dose, Week 21 and Month 18 after treatment.

RESULTS

PVX108 induced negligible activation of peanut-sensitised basophils. PVX108 was safe and well tolerated in peanut-allergic adults. There were no treatment-related hypersensitivity events or AEs of clinical concern. The only events occurring more frequently in active than placebo were mild injection site reactions. Exploratory immunological analyses revealed a decrease in the ratio of ST2+ Th2A:CCR6+ Th17-like cells within the peanut-reactive Th pool which strengthened following treatment.

CONCLUSION

This study supports the concept that PVX108 could provide a safe alternative to whole peanut immunotherapies and provides evidence of durable peanut-specific T-cell modulation. Translation of these findings to clinical efficacy in ongoing Phase 2 trials would provide important proof-of-concept for using peptides to treat food allergy.

Safety and immunopharmacology of ASP0892 in adults or adolescents with peanut allergy: two randomized trials

BACKGROUND

New treatment options with improved safety and novel mechanisms of actions are needed for patients with peanut allergy.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of ASP0892, a peanut DNA vaccine, after intradermal (id) or intramuscular (im) administration in adult or adolescent patients with peanut allergy in two phase 1 studies.

METHODS

ASP0892 or placebo was administered every 2 weeks for a total of 4 doses. The doses were 1 mg or 4 mg id or 4 mg im for adults, and 1 mg or 4 mg id for adolescents. Immunologic parameters were assessed longitudinally.

RESULTS

Thirty-one adults (mean age 24.3 years, 17 males) received ASP0892 (9, 8, 8 patients for 1 mg id, 4 mg id or 4 mg im, respectively) or placebo (2 patients/group). Twenty adolescents (mean age 14.2 years, 11 males) received ASP0892 (8 patients/group) or placebo (2 patients/group). In both studies, the most common treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) was injection site pruritus. No deaths or treatment withdrawal were related to TEAEs. No serious TEAEs related to treatment were observed in adult or adolescent patients. ASP0892 treatment led to modest increases in allergen-specific IgG and/or IgG4 in adults (1 mg id, 4 mg im) and adolescents (1 mg id, 4 mg id). No improvements in clinical outcomes, including double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge, were found after ASP0892 treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

In two phase 1 studies, ASP0892 was well tolerated with modest but not clinically relevant changes in immune responses.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV IDENTIFIERS

NCT02851277, NCT03755713.

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.

Natural course of IgE-mediated food allergy in children

The prevalence of food allergy and food-induced anaphylaxis in children is increasing worldwide. Cow's milk, hen's eggs, and wheat allergies in young children have a more favorable prognosis with a relatively early outgrow, while allergies to peanuts, tree nuts, and seafood are more likely to be persistent. Although our understanding of the mechanism underlying the resolution of food allergy is incomplete, the roles of dendritic cells, regulatory T cells, and regulatory B cells are important. Many past studies on the natural course of food allergy were retrospective analyses of specific study groups, but large-scale population-based prospective studies are now being published. This review summarizes recent studies of the natural course of cow's milk, hen's eggs, wheat, peanuts, tree nuts, soy, sesame, and seafood allergies. The potential factors affecting the natural course of food allergy include symptom severity on ingestion, age at diagnosis, allergic comorbidities, skin prick test reaction size or serum food-specific immunoglobulin (Ig) E levels, changes in sensitization degree, IgE epitope specificity, ratio of food-specific IgE to IgG4, food-specific IgA levels, component-resolved diagnostic profile, diet, gut microbiome, and interventions such as immunotherapy. Since food allergy places a significant burden on patients and their caregivers in daily life, clinicians should be able to provide relevant knowledge on the natural course of food allergy, appropriately evaluate its resolution, and offer therapeutic options whenever possible.

A comparison of double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge and open food challenge

BACKGROUND

Double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) remains the gold standard for diagnosing food allergy, despite sparse comparisons to open food challenges (OpenFCs). The objective of this retrospective study was to compare severity of symptoms and threshold values (cumulative dose of food allergen eliciting a clinical reaction) in children and adults with peanut allergy, challenged in an open and/or double-blind, placebo-controlled protocol.

METHODS

This study included patients from the Allergy Centre, Odense University Hospital with a positive oral food challenge, defined as strict objective signs, with peanut during the period 2001-2022. Severity of symptoms was graded using the Sampson's severity score. Distribution models of threshold values were calculated using log-normal interval-censored survival analysis, and the number of placebo reactions was evaluated.

RESULTS

In total, 318 positive OpenFCs and 86 DBPCFCs were included. There was no difference in severity of symptoms nor threshold values comparing the two challenge types, neither when stratified for age groups. However, a higher proportion of children experienced Grade 3 symptoms in the double-blind group. Only one patient had a positive reaction to a placebo challenge.

CONCLUSION

Our findings do not advocate for DBPCFC being superior to OpenFC, if the latter is performed with strict objective stop criteria by trained staff.

Palforzia for Peanut Allergy: A Narrative Review and Update on a Novel Immunotherapy

With Palforzia appearing as the first oral immunotherapy for patients with peanut allergy, the present investigation aims to summarize recent clinical trials, the mechanism of dosing, and the real-world usage of this novel therapy. Palforzia offers a new avenue for treating the human allergic response in previous immune modulation refractory patients or patients who have undergone immune environment sensitivity testing, which allows for more specialized treatment. Current studies are focusing on certain age groups that have been shown to be more receptive to treatment. Further, studies are tailoring oral immunotherapy treatment alongside other immune modulators to elicit greater targeted immune tolerance. With an increasing prevalence of patient allergies, many questions remain surrounding the optimization of therapies in reaching therapeutic goals. Overall, Palforzia offers a hopeful treatment for peanut-allergic patients to attenuate their immune response while furthering research in related therapies.

Recent advances in epicutaneous immunotherapy and potential applications in food allergy

Given the potent immunological properties of the skin, epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) emerges as a promising treatment approach for inducing immune tolerance, particularly for food allergies. Targeting the highly immunocompetent, non-vascularized epidermis allows for the application of microgram amounts of allergen while significantly reducing the risk of allergen passage into the bloodstream, thus limiting systemic allergen exposure and distribution. This makes EPIT highly suitable for the treatment of potentially life-threatening allergies such as food allergies. Multiple approaches to EPIT are currently under investigation for the treatment of food allergy, and these include the use of allergen-coated microneedles, application of allergen on the skin pretreated by tape stripping, abrasion or laser-mediated microperforation, or the application of allergen on the intact skin using an occlusive epicutaneous system. To date, the most clinically advanced approach to EPIT is the Viaskin technology platform. Viaskin is an occlusive epicutaneous system (patch) containing dried native allergen extracts, without adjuvants, which relies on frequent application for the progressive passage of small amounts of allergen to the epidermis through occlusion of the intact skin. Numerous preclinical studies of Viaskin have demonstrated that this particular approach to EPIT can induce potent and long-lasting T-regulatory cells with broad homing capabilities, which can exert their suppressive effects in multiple organs and ameliorate immune responses from different routes of allergen exposure. Clinical trials of the Viaskin patch have studied the efficacy and safety for the treatment of life-threatening allergies in younger patients, at an age when allergic diseases start to occur. Moreover, this treatment approach is designed to provide a non-invasive therapy with no restrictions on daily activities. Taken together, the preclinical and clinical data on the use of EPIT support the continued investigation of this therapeutic approach to provide improved treatment options for patients with allergic disorders in the near future.

Immune signatures predicting the clinical outcome of peanut oral immunotherapy: where we stand

Peanut allergy is a growing health concern that can cause mild to severe anaphylaxis as well as reduced quality of life in patients and their families. Oral immunotherapy is an important therapeutic intervention that aims to reshape the immune system toward a higher threshold dose reactivity and sustained unresponsiveness in some patients. From an immunological point of view, young patients, especially those under 3 years old, seem to have the best chance for therapy success. To date, surrogate markers for therapy duration and response are evasive. We provide a comprehensive overview of the current literature state regarding immune signatures evolving over the course of oral immunotherapy as well as baseline immune conditions prior to the initiation of treatment. Although research comparing clinical and immune traits in the first years of life vs. later stages across different age groups is limited, promising insights are available on immunological endotypes among peanut-allergic patients. The available data call for continued research to fill in gaps in knowledge, possibly in an integrated manner, to design novel precision health approaches for advanced therapeutic interventions in peanut allergy.

The Value of Current Laboratory Tests in Diagnosing Food, Venom, and Drug Allergies

An accurate diagnosis of IgE-mediated allergies is necessary to inform risk management for severe allergic reactions including anaphylaxis for food, venom, and drug allergies. The most widely available laboratory test for allergy is serum-specific IgE testing, which is routinely used for food allergy and insect sting allergy. Testing for specific IgE is limited by high sensitivity and low specificity, resulting in concern regarding overdiagnosis. Testing of allergen components has led to improved diagnosis for some food and venom allergens. Additional options for laboratory tests, such as epitope analysis, basophil activation, and mast cell activation, are being investigated for their potential to optimize diagnosis and provide predictors for reaction severity and treatment response. In contrast, laboratory testing for drug allergy is more limited because to date, there are no well-validated commercial assays in the United States. Furthermore, it is important to diagnose delayed reactions to medications, because these also significantly affect decision-making regarding therapeutic options for infectious disorders. Reliable tests for both immediate and delayed drug hypersensitivity are much needed, because drug allergy labels can significantly limit treatment options for patients. Research in this area is emerging.

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.

An update on recent developments and highlights in food allergy

While both the incidence and general awareness of food allergies is increasing, the variety and clinical availability of therapeutics remain limited. Therefore, investigations into the potential factors contributing to the development of food allergy (FA) and the mechanisms of natural tolerance or induced desensitization are required. In addition, a detailed understanding of the pathophysiology of food allergies is needed to generate compelling, enduring, and safe treatment options. New findings regarding the contribution of barrier function, the effect of emollient interventions, mechanisms of allergen recognition, and the contributions of specific immune cell subsets through rodent models and human clinical studies provide novel insights. With the first approved treatment for peanut allergy, the clinical management of FA is evolving toward less intensive, alternative approaches involving fixed doses, lower maintenance dose targets, coadministration of biologicals, adjuvants, and tolerance-inducing formulations. The ultimate goal is to improve immunotherapy and develop precision-based medicine via risk phenotyping allowing optimal treatment for each food-allergic patient.

Innovative delivery systems for epicutaneous immunotherapy

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) describes the establishment of peripheral tolerance through repeated allergen exposure, which qualifies as the only curative treatment for allergic diseases. Although conventional subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) have been approved to treat respiratory allergies clinically, the progress made is far from satisfactory. Epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) exploits the skin's immune properties to modulate immunological response, which is emerging as a promising alternative and has shown effectiveness in many preclinical and clinical studies for both respiratory and food allergies. It is worth noting that the stratum corneum (SC) barrier impedes the effective delivery of allergens, while disrupting the SC layer excessively often triggers unexpected Th2 immune responses. This work aims to comprehend the immunological mechanisms of EPIT, and summarize the innovative system for sufficient delivery of allergens as well as tolerogenic adjuvants. Finally, the safety, acceptability, and cost-effectiveness of these innovative delivery systems are discussed, which directs the development of future immunotherapies with all desirable characteristics.

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.

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.

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.

Mechanisms of Allergen Immunotherapy and Potential Biomarkers for Clinical Evaluation

Allergen-immunotherapy (AIT) is an efficacious and disease-modifying treatment option for IgE-mediated diseases. Among these allergic rhinitis, insect venom allergy, food allergy, and allergic asthma are the most common candidates for AIT. AIT gives rise to clinical immunotolerance which may last for years after the treatment cessation. Mechanisms of AIT include suppression of allergic inflammation in target tissues and stimulation of the production of blocking antibodies, especially IgG4 and IgA. These mechanisms are followed by a reduction of underlying allergen-specific Th2 cell-driven responses to the allergens. Tolerance induction takes place through the desensitization of effector cells and stimulation of regulatory T cells that show their effects by mechanisms involving cell-cell cross-talk, but also other mechanisms, e.g., by the production of immunomodulatory cytokines such as, e.g., IL-10 and TGF-beta. From a personalized medical perspective, there is a need for clinical biomarkers of value in selecting responders and optimizing patient care during AIT. Also, a deeper understanding of underlying mechanistic processes will improve AIT's future outcomes. In this paper, the current knowledge of mechanisms in AIT is reviewed with a special focus on biomarkers of this therapy.

Microneedle array patches for allergen-specific immunotherapy

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

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.

Efficacy and safety of peanut epicutaneous immunotherapy in patients with atopic comorbidities

Background

Co-occurring atopic conditions are common in children with peanut allergy. As such, it is important to examine the safety and efficacy of epicutaneous immunotherapy with Viaskin Peanut 250 μg patch (VP250) in peanut-allergic children with these conditions.

Objective

We sought to compare efficacy and safety of VP250 versus placebo in peanut-allergic children with/without ongoing atopic conditions at baseline, including asthma, atopic dermatitis/eczema, or concomitant food allergy.

Methods

A subgroup analysis of peanut-allergic children aged 4 to 11 years enrolled in PEPITES (12 months) and REALISE (6 months) randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials was conducted. The efficacy outcome measure was the difference in prespecified responder rate between placebo and VP250 groups at month 12 based on eliciting dose of peanut protein using double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge in PEPITES. Safety profiles were evaluated by baseline concomitant disease subgroup in all randomized subjects who received 1 or more dose of the study drug in PEPITES and REALISE pooled data.

Results

Responder rates were significantly (P < .05, all comparisons) greater with VP250 compared with placebo treatment regardless of whether subjects had other atopic conditions. Safety and tolerability profiles were generally similar across subgroups, with no new safety concerns detected. A trend for both higher responder rates and rates of local reactions was observed in subjects with baseline atopic dermatitis versus those without. In subjects with concomitant food allergy at baseline, higher rates of treatment-emergent adverse events, but not study discontinuations or overall rates of anaphylaxis, were observed.

Conclusions

The results support the safety and efficacy of VP250 for treating peanut-allergic children with or without concomitant atopic conditions.

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.

Phenotypic Distinctions Between Omega-5-Gliadin Allergy and Peanut Allergy: Clinical Profile, Reaction Rates and Triggers, and Quality of Life

Background

Different phenotypes of food allergy may exist, exhibiting distinct clinical features, and driven by different pathogenic mechanisms. We compared omega-5-gliadin (O5G) allergy to peanut allergy, focusing on clinical features, reaction rates and triggers, and quality of life (QOL).

Methods

We surveyed adults with O5G allergy and peanut allergy regarding their diagnosis, co-morbidities, allergic reactions, and QOL measured by the FAQLQ-AF.

Results

We received responses from 43/80 (54%) individuals with O5G allergy and 43/130 (33%) with peanut allergy. Compared to peanut allergic individuals, those with O5G allergy were older at age of onset (37.2 vs 2.5 years, p < 0.001), had fewer additional atopic conditions (0.88 vs 2.93, p < 0.001) or food allergies (0.15 vs 1.86, p < 0.001), and more frequent reactions before diagnosis (1.085 vs 0.29 per month, p < 0.05) Reaction rates improved in both groups following diagnosis. Reactions to peanut were more often triggered by accidental exposure (84% vs 26%, p < 0.001) and being away from home (65% vs 28%, p < 0.001), while reactions to O5G were more often due to deliberate ingestion (30% vs 9%, p < 0.05) or unexpected exercise (35% vs 2%, p < 0.001). Overall QOL score was similar between groups (4.2 in O5G allergy, 4.7 in peanut allergy, p = 0.12), but worse among women and those with additional food allergies.

Conclusion

Phenotypic differences between O5G and peanut allergy support the development of different clinical approaches and the possibility of targeting distinct pathogenic mechanisms for prevention and treatment. Quality of life was impaired to a similar degree between groups.

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: State-of-the-art review of therapies and theratypes

Through its disease-modifying potential, immunotherapy is the keystone to curing allergic diseases. Allergen immunotherapy, applied for more than a century, is currently supported by novel modalities such as mAb-based therapies or small molecules targeting the key nodes of the allergic inflammation network. In this review, a summary of the most significant advances in immunotherapy is presented, addressing not only novel approaches to stratifying patients but also major controlled clinical trials and real-world evidence that strengthen the role of immunotherapy in the treatment of allergies.

Immunology of allergen immunotherapy

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease-modifying therapy for allergic disease. Through repeated inoculations of low doses of allergen-either as whole proteins or peptides-patients can achieve a homeostatic balance between inflammatory effectors induced and/or associated with allergen contact, and mediators of immunologic non-responsiveness, potentially leading to sustained clinical improvements. AIT for airborne/respiratory tract allergens and insect venoms have traditionally been supplied subcutaneously, but other routes and modalities of administration can also be effective. Despite differences of allergen administration, there are some similarities of immunologic responses across platforms, with a general theme involving the restructuring and polarization of adaptive and innate immune effector cells. Here we review the immunology of AIT across various delivery platforms, including subcutaneous, sublingual, epicutaneous, intradermal, and intralymphatic approaches, emphasizing shared mechanisms associated with achieving immunologic non-responsiveness to allergen.

Allergen immunotherapy for food allergy: Evidence and outlook

Food allergy represents a significant health issue characterized by a sizeable epidemiological burden, involving up to 5% of adults and up to 8% of children in the Western world. The elimination diet of the trigger food is the cornerstone of food allergy management. However, novel treatment options are most wanted to provide alternative strategies for this potentially fatal medical condition. Allergen immunotherapy for food allergy (FA-AIT) is considered an immunomodulatory intervention where regular exposure to increasing doses of food is performed in the context of an allergist's supervised protocol. The main objective is to decrease reactivity, attenuate life-threatening allergic episodes and reduce frequent access to the emergency department. Achieving food tolerance off-treatment is, however, the ultimate aim. In this review, we aim to summarize FA-AIT evidence and outlook.

Treating allergies via skin - Recent advances in cutaneous allergen immunotherapy

Subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy has been practiced clinically for decades to treat airborne allergies. Recently, the cutaneous route, which exploits the immunocompetence of the skin has received attention, which is evident from attempts to use it to treat peanut allergy. Delivery of allergens into the skin is inherently impeded by the barrier imposed by stratum corneum, the top layer of the skin. While the stratum corneum barrier must be overcome for efficient allergen delivery, excessive disruption of this layer can predispose to development of allergic inflammation. Thus, the most desirable allergen delivery approach must provide a balance between the level of skin disruption and the amount of allergen delivered. Such an approach should aim to achieve high allergen delivery efficiency across various skin types independent of age and ethnicity, and optimize variables such as safety profile, allergen dosage, treatment frequency, application time and patient compliance. The ability to precisely quantify the amount of allergen being delivered into the skin is crucial since it can allow for allergen dose optimization and can promote consistency and reproducibility in treatment response. In this work we review prominent cutaneous delivery approaches, and offer a perspective on further improvisation in cutaneous allergen-specific immunotherapy.

Protocol design and synopsis: Omalizumab as Monotherapy and as Adjunct Therapy to Multiallergen OIT in Children and Adults with Food Allergy (OUtMATCH)

Background

Food allergy is common and causes substantial morbidity and even mortality. Safe and effective treatments for food allergy would therefore be highly desirable, especially for individuals with multiple food allergies.

Objectives

Our aim was to describe a phase 3 study on treatment of patients with multiple food allergies with omalizumab.

Methods

The study was developed as a collaboration between the Consortium for Food Allergy Research, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and 2 industry sponsors (Genentech and Novartis).

Results

The study is currently under way, enrolling participants from age 1 year to age 55 years who are allergic to peanut and at least 2 other foods (including milk, egg, wheat, cashew, hazelnut, and walnut). The study is designed to address 3 major questions. First, stage 1 will study the potential value of omalizumab for the treatment of patients with peanut allergy and at least 2 other common food allergens. Second, stage 2 will directly compare treatment of patients with multifood allergies using omalizumab as monotherapy versus treatment with omalizumab-facilitated multiallergen oral immunotherapy in which omalizumab is used as an adjunctive treatment. Third, stage 3 will address the longer-term outcomes following these treatment approaches, including the introduction of dietary forms of the study foods to induce or maintain desensitization.

Conclusions

This phase 3 study will provide important information on the potential of omalizumab to treat patients with multiple food allergies.

Biomarkers and mechanisms of tolerance induction in food allergic patients drive new therapeutic approaches

Immunotherapy for food-allergic patients has been effective in inducing desensitization in some populations, but long-term tolerance has remained an elusive target. A challenge facing our field is how to differentiate immune markers that are impacted by immunotherapy from those that are critical biomarkers of tolerance. Data from recent clinical trials have identified several biomarkers and mechanisms for achieving tolerance. These biomarkers include younger age, lower food-specific IgE, lower food component-specific IgE, specific linear epitope profiles, and subsets of food-specific CD4+ T cells. Additional biomarkers under investigation for their relevance in tolerance induction include TCR repertoires, gastrointestinal and skin microbiome, and local tissue immunity. This mini-review highlights recent advances in understanding biomarkers and mechanisms of tolerance induction in food immunotherapy and how these are influencing clinical trial development.

Predicting probability of tolerating discrete amounts of peanut protein in allergic children using epitope-specific IgE antibody profiling

BACKGROUND

IgE-epitope profiling can accurately diagnose clinical peanut allergy.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine whether sequential (linear) epitope-specific IgE (ses-IgE) profiling can provide probabilities of tolerating discrete doses of peanut protein in allergic subjects undergoing double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges utilizing PRACTALL dosing.

METHODS

Sixty four ses-IgE antibodies were quantified in blood samples using a bead-based epitope assay. A pair of ses-IgEs that predicts Cumulative Tolerated Dose (CTD) was determined using regression in 75 subjects from the discovery cohort. This epitope-based predictor was validated on 331 subjects from five independent cohorts (ages 4-25 years). Subjects were grouped based on their predicted values and probabilities of reactions at each CTD threshold were calculated.

RESULTS

In discovery, an algorithm using two ses-IgE antibodies was correlated with CTDs (rho = 0.61, p < .05); this correlation was 0.51 (p < .05) in validation. Using the ses-IgE-based predictor, subjects were assigned into "high," "moderate," or "low" dose-reactivity groups. On average, subjects in the "high" group were four times more likely to tolerate a specific dose, compared with the "low" group. For example, predicted probabilities of tolerating 4, 14, 44, and 144 or 444 mg in the "low" group were 92%, 77%, 53%, 29%, and 10% compared with 98%, 95%, 94%, 88%, and 73% in the "high" group.

CONCLUSIONS

Accurate predictions of food challenge thresholds are complex due to factors including limited responder sample sizes at each dose and variations in study-specific challenge protocols. Despite these limitations, an epitope-based predictor was able to accurately identify CTDs and may provide a useful surrogate for peanut challenges.

Safety of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy in Peanut-Allergic Children: REALISE Randomized Clinical Trial Results

BACKGROUND

Treatment options for peanut allergy are limited. In previous clinical trials, epicutaneous immunotherapy with a patch containing 250-μg peanut protein (Viaskin Peanut 250 μg [VP250]) was well tolerated and statistically superior to placebo in desensitizing peanut-allergic children.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the safety of VP250 in children, using a study design approximating potential real-world use.

METHODS

REAL LIfe Use and Safety of EPIT (REALISE) is a phase 3 multicenter study consisting of a 6-month, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled period followed by open-label active treatment. Children aged 4 to 11 years with physician diagnosis of peanut allergy received daily treatment with placebo (6 months) or VP250 (up to 36 months). Data from the 6-month, randomized, controlled phase of REALISE are reported.

RESULTS

Three hundred ninety-three children were randomized 3:1 to receive VP250 (n = 294) or placebo (n = 99) for 6 months; 284 (72.3%) children had a history of peanut anaphylaxis. According to parent diary, all participants receiving VP250 and 83.8% receiving placebo reported at least 1 episode of local skin reaction, with frequency decreasing over time. Only 4 participants (1.4%) receiving VP250 discontinued because of adverse events (AEs). Epinephrine was administered for allergic reactions attributed to VP250 in 7 children (2.4%), of whom 5 remained in the study; none involved severe anaphylaxis. Overall, AE rates were similar among participants with and without a history of peanut anaphylaxis.

CONCLUSIONS

In a study designed to mirror real-world use, VP250 was observed to be well tolerated in peanut-allergic children, consistent with previous phase 2b and 3 studies.

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.

Updating the CoFAR Grading Scale for Systemic Allergic Reactions in Food Allergy

BACKGROUND

Immunotherapy is promising as an efficacious treatment for food allergy. Other food allergy treatments are also under development. However, adverse allergic events during treatment, as well as during oral food challenges, are common and reporting is not standardized.

OBJECTIVE

A more nuanced grading scale is needed to create a comprehensive and universal system to categorize adverse events and their severity for food allergy clinical trials.

METHODS

Starting with the 2012 Consortium for Food Allergy Research (CoFAR) Grading Scale and the World Allergy Organization Grading System, we developed the CoFAR Grading Scale for Systemic Allergic Reactions, Version 3.0, in collaboration with industry partners with expert opinion.

RESULTS

The revised CoFAR Grading Scale for Systemic Allergic Reactions has 5 levels of increasing severity, ranging from generalized urticaria, localized angioedema, rhinitis, and abdominal pain (grade 1) to death (grade 5). Systemic reactions are further categorized within each grade by relevant organ system. Mild, single-system reactions are differentiated from mild, multisystem reactions. Lower respiratory tract symptoms are graded on the basis of response to therapy; those that are refractory to standard treatment (eg, requiring >3 doses of intramuscular epinephrine, continuous intravenous epinephrine infusion, and continuous albuterol nebulization) and respiratory compromise requiring mechanical ventilation are classified as grade 4, life-threatening reactions.

CONCLUSIONS

Universal and consistent use of the revised CoFAR Grading Scale beyond the CoFAR centers would allow for better data aggregation and safety comparisons in clinical trials for food allergy.

Preventing allergies through the skin

OBJECTIVE

To inform readers of the current and forthcoming skin barrier interventions that have clinically relevant implications in the prevention of allergic sensitization and atopic diseases.

DATA SOURCES

Peer-reviewed journal articles indexed on PubMed and clinical trials referenced on clinicaltrials.gov were analyzed.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Literature searches from PubMed and clinicaltrials.gov were performed using combinations of the following search terms: prevention, allergy, atopy, skin, cutaneous, microbiome, microbiota, Staphylococcus aureus, atopic dermatitis, eczema, food allergy, and asthma.

RESULTS

The skin barrier represents an entry point for allergic sensitization and T_H2-mediated allergic disorders. Results from clinical trials designed to improve microbiome complexity and reduce S aureus colonization, provide skin barrier enhancement, and deliver epicutaneous immunotherapy are summarized and discussed in the context of primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention of allergic disease.

CONCLUSION

The skin barrier is a promising target for prevention of allergic disease, though clinical trial results thus far have been mixed, at best.

Allergen-specific T cells and clinical features of food allergy: Lessons from CoFAR immunotherapy cohorts

BACKGROUND

Allergen-specific IL-4+ and IL-13+ CD4+ cells (type 2 cells) are essential for helping B cells to class-switch to IgE and establishing an allergic milieu in the gastrointestinal tract. The role of T cells in established food allergy is less clear.

OBJECTIVE

We examined the food allergen-specific T-cell response in participants of 2 food allergen immunotherapy trials to assess the relationship of the T-cell response to clinical phenotypes, including response to immunotherapy.

METHODS

Blood was obtained from 84 participants with peanut allergy and 142 participants with egg allergy who underwent double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges. Peanut- and egg-responsive T cells were identified by CD154 upregulation after stimulation with the respective extract. Intracellular cytokines and chemokine receptors were also detected. The response to peanut epicutaneous immunotherapy (Peanut Epicutaneous Phase II Immunotherapy Clinical Trial [CoFAR6]; 49 participants receiving epicutaneous immunotherapy) and egg oral immunotherapy or a baked egg diet (Baked Egg or Egg Oral Immunotherapy for Children With Egg Allergy [CoFAR7]; 92 participants) was monitored over time.

RESULTS

Peanut-specific type 2 and CCR6+ T cells were negatively correlated with each other and differently associated with immune parameters, including specific IgE level and basophil activation test result. At baseline, type 2 cells, but not CCR6+ cells, were predictive of clinical parameters, including a successfully consumed dose of peanut and baked egg tolerance. Exposure to peanut or egg immunotherapy was associated with a decrease in type 2 cell frequency. At baseline, high egg-specific type 2 cell frequency was the immune feature most predictive of oral immunotherapy failure.

CONCLUSION

Food-specific type 2 T cells at baseline are informative of threshold of reactivity and response to immunotherapy.

The Road Toward Transformative Treatments for Food Allergy

A series of landmark studies have provided conclusive evidence that the early administration of food allergens dramatically prevents the emergence of food allergy. One of the greatest remaining challenges is whether patients with established food allergy can return to health. This challenge is particularly pressing in the case of allergies against peanut, tree nuts, fish, and shellfish which are lifelong in most patients and may elicit severe reactions. The standard of care for food allergy is allergen avoidance and the timely administration of epinephrine upon accidental exposure. Epinephrine, and other therapeutic options like antihistamines provide acute symptom relief but do not target the underlying pathology of the disease. In principle, any transformative treatment for established food allergy would require the restoration of a homeostatic immunological state. This may be attained through either an active, non-harmful immune response (immunological tolerance) or a lack of a harmful immune response (e.g., anergy), such that subsequent exposures to the allergen do not elicit a clinical reaction. Importantly, such a state must persist beyond the course of the treatment and exert its protective effects permanently. In this review, we will discuss the immunological mechanisms that maintain lifelong food allergies and are, consequently, those which must be dismantled or reprogrammed to instate a clinically non-reactive state. Arguably, the restoration of such a state in the context of an established food allergy would require a reprogramming of the immune response against a given food allergen. We will discuss existing and experimental therapeutic strategies to eliminate IgE reactivity and, lastly, will propose outstanding questions to pave the road to the development of novel, transformative therapeutics in food allergy.

New and Emerging Concepts and Therapies for the Treatment of Food Allergy

Food allergy is an increasingly common disease that often starts in early childhood and lasts throughout life. Self-reported food allergy has risen at a rate of 1.2% per decade since 1988, and by 2018, the prevalence of food allergy in the United States was estimated to be 8% in children and 11% in adults.^- This prevalence has led to an economic burden of almost $25 billion annually. Despite these staggering statistics, as of the time of this writing, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has only approved one treatment for food allergy, which is limited to use in children with peanut allergy. Fortunately, a new horizon of therapeutic interventions, in all stages of development, lay ahead and hold promise for the near future.

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.

Peanut oral immunotherapy – current trends in clinical trials

Immunotherapy for allergy has been practised for over 100 years. Low-dose repeated exposure to specific allergen extracts over several months to years can successfully induce clinical tolerance in patients with allergy to insect venoms, pollen, house dust mite and domestic animals. Different regimens and routes for immunotherapy include subcutaneous, sublingual, oral and intralymphatic. Food allergies have been difficult to treat in this way due to high anaphylactic potential and only recently the first immunotherapy for peanut allergy has received regulatory approval. Several clinical trials have indicated high efficacy in desensitisation of peanut-allergic individuals using oral immunotherapy, which allows for safer administration of relatively high allergen concentrations. Still, the risk of adverse events including serious allergic reactions and high anxiety levels for patients remains, demonstrating the need for further optimisation of treatment protocols. Here we discuss the design and outcomes of recent clinical trials with traditional oral immunotherapy, and consider alternative protocols and formulations for safer and more effective oral treatment strategies for peanut allergy.

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

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