Determinants of omalizumab dose-related efficacy in oral immunotherapy: Evidence from a cohort of 181 patients

Role of biologics in severe food allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

SUMMARY

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

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.

The Role of Biologics in the Treatment of Food Allergy

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

Practical issues of oral immunotherapy for egg or milk allergy

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has been recommended to reduce parental burden related to strict allergen avoidance and induce desensitization and immune tolerance for patients with long-lasting allergies to hen's eggs (HE) or cow's milk (CM). OIT should be monitored by pediatric allergists specializing in OIT and oral food challenge tests to manage allergic reactions. Although a previous history of anaphylaxis or multiple food allergies is not a contraindication to OIT, it is contraindicated if the patient has uncontrolled asthma, a malignancy, active systemic autoimmune disorders, or diseases requiring treatment with beta-blockers. A variety of OIT protocols have been de veloped to ensure better outcomes and safe up-dosing, including adjunctive therapies with biologics. This review provides insight into the practical issues of various immunotherapy options for children with HE or CM allergies.

Food oral immunotherapy: Any distinguishing factors predicting the need of anti-IgE?

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has gained popularity recently for IgE-mediated food allergy. Omalizumab (OMZ) has been used in patients (10-20%) who have too severe/frequent allergic reactions (AR) to continue OIT, to reduce these reactions. In this study, it was aimed to compare two groups of patients who completed OIT with and without OMZ and to seek determinants predicting the need of this treatment. It was also aimed to share the clinical findings regarding the long-term use of OMZ and the withdrawal process. Forty-one patients were started OIT and 93% could be desensitized. Two groups were similar in means of demographic characteristics, and clinical and laboratory findings. The patients who needed OMZ during OIT had also lower reaction doses during oral challenge (p = 0.037). Higher AR rate in this group declined after starting OMZ (p < 0.001). The injection intervals of OMZ were gradually extended. Most patients were able to discontinue OMZ (81%). There were no severe reactions during drug withdrawal attempts. The low reaction thresholds during oral food challenge may give a clue about OMZ requirement during OIT. It may be an option to start the treatment before OIT if reaction was seen in the first few steps of the oral food challenge. For the sake of safety, extension of injection intervals should be preferred instead of abruptly stopping OMZ.

Update on In Vitro Diagnostic Tools and Treatments for Food Allergies

Food allergy (FA) is an adverse immunological reaction to a specific food that can trigger a wide range of symptoms from mild to life-threatening. This adverse reaction is caused by different immunological mechanisms, such as IgE-mediated, non-IgE-mediated and mixed IgE-mediated reactions. Its epidemiology has had a significant increase in the last decade, more so in developed countries. It is estimated that approximately 2 to 10% of the world's population has FA and this number appears to be increasing and also affecting more children. The diagnosis can be complex and requires the combination of different tests to establish an accurate diagnosis. However, the treatment of FA is based on avoiding the intake of the specific allergenic food, thus being very difficult at times and also controlling the symptoms in case of accidental exposure. Currently, there are other immunomodulatory treatments such as specific allergen immunotherapy or more innovative treatments that can induce a tolerance response. It is important to mention that research in this field is ongoing and clinical trials are underway to assess the safety and efficacy of these different immunotherapy approaches, new treatment pathways are being used to target and promote the tolerance response. In this review, we describe the new in vitro diagnostic tools and therapeutic treatments to show the latest advances in FA management. We conclude that although significant advances have been made to improve therapies and diagnostic tools for FA, there is an urgent need to standardize both so that, in their totality, they help to improve the management of FA.

Peanut allergy: risk factors, immune mechanisms, and best practices for oral immunotherapy success

INTRODUCTION

Peanut oral immunotherapy (pOIT) is the only FDA-approved treatment for food allergy and its adoption amongst allergist immunologists and their patients is growing. pOIT is the subject of numerous clinical trials, however, the focus is often on treatment efficacy, safety, and tolerability, rather than identifying patients most likely to benefit from pOIT. Here, we review existing data on the clinical and immunological outcomes of pOIT that inform best practices for pOIT candidate selection.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we describe the natural history of peanut allergy, summarize immunological and clinical outcomes of pOIT at different ages, discuss the optimization of pOIT in key age groups, and finally suggest an ideal age range at which to initiate pOIT for best outcomes.

EXPERT OPINION

pOIT is currently underutilized by patients and allergist-immunologists. Developing guidelines for selecting appropriate patients and optimizing treatment may help to increase access to pOIT. Many aspects of pOIT need additional study to further our understanding of the optimal timing to start pOIT, with careful consideration to clinical, immunological, and quality of life outcomes.

The role of biologics in pediatric food allergy and eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders

Continuing insight into the molecular mechanisms of atopic disorders has enabled the development of biologics to precisely target these diseases. Food allergy (FA) and eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGIDs) are driven by similar inflammatory molecular mechanisms and exist along the same atopic disease spectrum. Therefore, many of the same biologics are being investigated to target key drivers of mechanisms shared across the disease states. The enormous potential of biologics for the treatment of FA and EGIDs is highlighted by the significant increases in the number of ongoing clinical trials (more than 30) evaluating their use in these disease states, as well as by the recent US Food and Drug Administration approval of dupilumab for the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis. Here we discuss past and current research into the use of biologics in FA and EGIDs and their potential role in improving treatment options in the future, with the need to have biologics widely clinically available.

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

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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.

Food allergy, mechanisms, diagnosis and treatment: Innovation through a multi-targeted approach

The incidence of food allergy (FA) has continued to rise over the last several decades, posing significant burdens on health and quality of life. Significant strides into the advancement of FA diagnosis, prevention, and treatment have been made in recent years. In an effort to lower reliance on resource-intensive food challenges, the field has continued work toward the development of highly sensitive and specific assays capable of high-throughput analysis to assist in the diagnosis FA. In looking toward early infancy as a critical period in the development of allergy or acquisition of tolerance, evidence has increasingly suggested that early intervention via the early introduction of food allergens and maintenance of skin barrier function may decrease the risk of FA. As such, large-scale investigations are underway evaluating infant feeding and the impact of emollient and steroid use in infants with dry skin for the prevention of allergy. On the other end of the spectrum, the past few years have been witness to an explosive increase in clinical trials of novel and innovative therapeutic strategies aimed at the treatment of FA in those whom the disease has already manifested. A milestone in the field, 2020 marked the approval of the first drug, oral peanut allergen, for the indication of peanut allergy. With a foundation of promising data supporting the safety and efficacy of single- and multi-allergen oral immunotherapy, current efforts have turned toward the use of probiotics, biologic agents, and modified allergens to optimize and improve upon existing paradigms. Through these advancements, the field hopes to gain footing in the ongoing battle against FA.

Review of biologics in allergy and immunology

Biologics or molecularly targeted drugs are often highly effective for the treatment of allergic diseases and other immunologic disorders, and they are relatively safe for short-term use as compared with conventional approaches such as the systemic use of corticosteroids. A number of studies published in 2021 consistently demonstrated their effectiveness and also revealed unanticipated findings. Among them, clinical trials for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease using biologics targeting thymic stromal lymphopoietin, IL-33, and IL-33 receptor demonstrated that these type 2 alarmin cytokines are also involved in non-type 2, noneosinophilic inflammation. Randomized controlled trials reporting the efficacies of 2 small-molecule oral drugs targeting Janus kinase-1 had a substantial impact on the management of atopic dermatitis. These drugs demonstrated superiority over dupilumab, which has previously demonstrated efficacy and is in wide use in clinical practice. As a concern, biologics are generally costly, and it should be noted that racial/ethnic minority populations may be less likely to receive biologics in the real world. Here, we have reviewed recent clinical trials and related topics dealing with the effects of biologics on allergic and immunologic diseases; in addition, we discuss how our understanding of the pathophysiology of these disorders has progressed.

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

Background

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

Objective

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

The year in food allergy

Research into food allergy continues to rapidly evolve, accompanying and driving real changes in the clinical approach to these diseases. The past year has seen the rollout of the first treatment approved for active management of food allergy, more data on alternative methods of treatment, the continued evolution of strategies for prevention of food allergy, a renewed interest in phenotyping food allergy subtypes, and, importantly, key new insights into the pathophysiology of food allergy. We expect that in the coming years, the therapies that are in preclinical or early clinical evaluation now will make their way to the clinic, finally allowing the possibility of safe and effective treatments for food allergy.

Update on omalizumab in allergen immunotherapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

SUMMARY

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

Omalizumab effectiveness in patients with a previously failed oral immunotherapy for severe milk allergy

Background

Some studies addressed the issue of omalizumab (OML) effectiveness in children starting their first oral immunotherapy (OIT) attempt but no study investigated the possible role of OML in the setting of patients with persisting milk allergy after a failed OIT attempt.

Methods

Single‐center, prospective, observational study in a selected group of patients with a persisting and severe cow milk (CM) allergy associated with moderate allergic asthma, in which a previous OIT attempt had already failed. We performed an open oral food challenge (OFC) to identify patients who tolerated less than 173 mg of cow's milk protein. At the end of the recruitment, we have found four patients with a mean age of 16.25 years (8–24) who had suspended a previous OIT attempt and still reacted to an amount of CM equal or below 173 mg. Enrolled patients, after an 8‐week course of OML along with a CM avoiding diet, underwent again an open OFC with CM to re‐evaluate their threshold. Eventually, a new OIT course was started using the same OIT protocol of the previous attempt, maintaining cotreatment with OML for the first 12 months. For each patient, we documented: the threshold of CM at OFC, level of specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) and IgG4 for milk, and quality of life (QoL).

Results

During OIT the four patients experienced no reactions or extremely mild ones (oral itching, transient mild abdominal pain). All increased their threshold of CM in OML if compared with the baseline and maintained it long after that biologic therapy had discontinued. Specific milk proteins IgG4 levels significantly increased in all.

Conclusion

In this series, OML was effective in patients with severe CM allergy who had previously failed OIT, allowing milk intake without adverse reactions and improving the QoL.

The use of biologics in food allergy

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Omalizumab as monotherapy for food allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

SUMMARY

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

Biologics in food allergy: up-to-date

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

An Approach to the Office-Based Practice of Food Oral Immunotherapy

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) provides an active treatment option for patients with food allergies. OIT may improve quality of life and raise the threshold at which a patient with food allergy may react to an allergen, but it is a rigorous therapy that requires a high degree of commitment by the clinician, patients, and families. Recent guidelines from the Canadian Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology have provided a framework for the ethical, evidence-based, and patient-oriented clinical practice of OIT, and the European Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology guidelines have also recommended that OIT can be used as a potential treatment. The recent Food and Drug Administration approval of an OIT pharmaceutical has accelerated the adoption of OIT. This review provides a summary of the recent Canadian Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology guidelines and a consensus of practical experience of clinicians across the United States and Canada related to patient selection, office and staff preparation, the general OIT process, OIT-related reaction management, and treatment outcomes.

Omalizumab as an adjuvant in food allergen immunotherapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the most relevant studies in the rapidly advancing field of omalizumab as an adjunct to food allergen oral immunotherapy (OIT).

RECENT FINDINGS

Clinical trials have primarily focused on milk, peanut, and multiallergen OIT combined with omalizumab. These studies suggest that omalizumab in addition to OIT can decrease the time required to reach maintenance OIT dosing and adverse events; however, serious adverse events did still occur. There is limited long-term data but available information suggests that individuals are at risk for increased reactivity after stopping omalizumab, and many discontinued treatment. There has been diversity in study designs, dosing, and populations.

SUMMARY

The use of anti-IgE antibody as an adjunct to food allergen OIT has been an expanding area of research with several additional trials underway. Significant progress has been made in the past decades but further studies are needed to optimize protocols, improve safety and efficacy, and identify patients who will have the greatest benefit.