Impact of Omalizumab on Food Allergy in Patients Treated for Asthma: A Real-Life Study

Biological treatments in childhood asthma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim is to update the information currently available for the use of biologics in severe asthma in children, in order to facilitate their prescription as far as possible.

RECENT FINDINGS

The appearance of biologics for the treatment of severe asthma has meant a revolutionary change in the therapeutic approach to this disease. Currently, five biologics have been approved for severe asthma in children and/or adolescents by the regulatory agencies: omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab, dupilumab and tezepelumab. But despite their positive results in terms of efficacy, there are still relevant points of debate that should induce caution when selecting the most appropriate biologic in a child with severe asthma. Indeed, safety is essential and, for several of the existing treatments, the availability of medium-term to long-term data in this regard is scarce.

SUMMARY

The use of biologics can facilitate the therapeutic paradigm shift from pleiotropic treatments to personalized medicine. However, the choice of the most appropriate biologics remains a pending issue. On the other hand, to the extent that several of the biologics have been available for a relatively short time, the most robust evidence in terms of efficacy and safety in children is that of omalizumab.

A practical guide for implementing omalizumab therapy for food allergy

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

Role of biologics in severe food allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

SUMMARY

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

The role of pediatricians in the diagnosis and management of IgE-mediated food allergy: a review

Importance

Food allergy can often cause a significant burden on patients, families, and healthcare systems. The complexity of food allergy management requires a multidisciplinary approach involving different types of healthcare providers, including allergists, dieticians, psychologists, nurses, family practitioners and, of particular relevance for this article, pediatric primary caretakers. Pediatricians may be the first-line healthcare providers for food allergy: strategies for management and guideline adherence have been highlighted.

Observations

This review article summarizes the up-to-date recommendations on the role of pediatricians in the diagnosis, management, and prevention of IgE-mediated food allergy. Early introduction of allergenic foods like peanut is known to be of importance to reduce the development of peanut allergy in infants, and pediatricians are essential for educating and supporting parents in this decision. In scenarios of limited allergist availability, as is often the case among rural, Medicaid and minority populations, pediatricians can assist in the evaluation and management of food allergy, and provide action plans, education and counselling for patients and families.

Conclusions and relevance

Pediatric primary caretakers play a key role in the diagnosis, management, and prevention of IgE-mediated food allergy. As more diagnostic tools and therapies in food allergy become available, the need for a multidisciplinary team is paramount to optimize patient care.

Current options in the management of tree nut allergy: A systematic review and narrative synthesis

Tree nut allergy is a lifelong and potentially life-threatening condition. The standard of care is strictly avoiding the culprit nut and treating accidental reactions symptomatically. To evaluate potential therapeutic options for desensitizing patients with IgE-mediated tree nut allergy, we systematically searched three bibliographic databases for studies published until January 2024. We looked for active treatments of IgE-mediated allergy to tree nuts (walnut, hazelnut, pistachio, cashew, almond, pecan, macadamia nut, and brazil nut). We focused on allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) using oral (OIT), sublingual (SLIT), epicutaneous (EPIT), or subcutaneous (SCIT) delivery, or other disease-modifying treatments. We found 19 studies that met our criteria: 3 studies investigated sublingual immunotherapy, 5 studied oral immunotherapy to a single tree nut, and 6 used multi-food oral immunotherapy with or without omalizumab. The remaining studies investigated the effectiveness of monoclonal antibodies or IgE-immunoadsorption in multi-food allergic patients, including patients with tree nut allergy. The heterogeneity of the studies prevented pooling and meta-analysis. Oral immunotherapy, single or multi-nut, with or without omalizumab, was the most studied approach and appears effective in conferring protection from accidental exposures. Omalizumab monotherapy is the only approved alternative management for reducing allergic reactions that may occur with accidental exposure.

The Future of Food Allergy Management: Advancements in Therapies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Combination of omalizumab with allergen immunotherapy versus immunotherapy alone for allergic diseases: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT)-associated adverse events (AEs) limit its usage in the management of allergic diseases. The monoclonal anti-IgE antibody (omalizumab) and AIT have complementary actions. However, no consensus has been reached on whether their combination could exert superior efficacy and safety.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether the combination of AIT with omalizumab is superior to AIT alone in treating allergic diseases.

METHODS

The MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane Library databases were searched to identify randomized control trials (RCTs) reporting the outcomes of omalizumab combined with AIT (omalizumab + AIT) versus AIT alone. A random-effect model was established to estimate outcomes with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

A total of 11 eligible RCTs (involving 901 patients) were screened out for the meta-analysis. According to a pooled analysis, omalizumab + AIT significantly increased the number of patients achieving the target maintenance dose (TMD) and sustained unresponsiveness (SU) to allergens (odds ratio [OR] = 2.43; 95% CI: 1.33-4.44; p = 0.004; I2 = 35%, and OR = 6.77; 95% CI: 2.10-21.80; p = 0.001; I2 = 36%, respectively). Similarly, individuals receiving the combination therapy reported significantly fewer episodes of severe systemic AEs than AIT alone (OR = 0.32; 95% CI: 0.18-0.59; p = 0.0003; I2 = 0%). Meanwhile, the improvements in symptom severity score (mean difference [MD] = -0.26), rescue medication daily means score (MD = -0.14), and number of patients consuming epinephrine in AIT (OR = 0.20) were all more evident than those in AIT alone.

CONCLUSION

Omalizumab + AIT can significantly enhance the efficacy and safety of AIT by increasing TMD and SU to allergens, while decreasing severe systemic AEs.

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.

Reactivity to allergenic food contaminants: A study on products on the market

BACKGROUND

The frequency and severity of reactions in food-allergic consumers exposed to unintentional food allergen contamination during production is unknown. To warn allergic consumers, it has been suggested for pre-packaged foods to be precautionary labelled when the food allergen contamination may exceed the amount to which 1%-5% of the population could react (ED01-ED05). ED01 for hazelnut and milk have been estimated at 0.1 and 0.2 mg, respectively, by the Voluntary Incidental Trace Allergen Labelling (VITAL) initiative. The respective reference doses recommended by the FAO/WHO Codex consultation are 3 and 2 mg. We evaluated the reactivity to potential traces of milk and hazelnut allergens in allergen-free pre-packaged products by children affected by severe allergies to milk and hazelnuts.

METHODS

Oral Food Challenges with commercially available hazelnut-free wafer biscuits and milk-free chocolate pralines were administered to patients with severe food allergies to hazelnut and cow's milk, respectively. Contamination levels of milk or hazelnut allergens were measured using chromatographic separation interfaced with triple quadrupole mass spectrometry.

RESULTS

No hazelnut allergic patient showed allergic reactions to exposure to biscuits, nor any milk allergic patient displayed allergic reactions to the dark chocolate praline. While no hazelnut trace was detected in biscuits, the praline was found to be contaminated by milk at concentrations ranging between 8 and 35 mg total protein/kg food. In our dose model, these amounts exceeded 1.5-10 times the VITAL ED01 and reached the threshold suggested by the FAO/WHO Codex consultation.

CONCLUSIONS

Upon the consumption of food products available on the market, many patients with severe food allergies tolerate significantly higher doses of allergen than reference doses indicated in the VITAL system used for precautionary allergen labelling. These doses support the safety of the FAO/WHO recommended reference doses.

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Food-labeling issues for severe food-allergic consumers

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Food label represent the primary and only source of information before consuming a food product. Deputy government agencies on five continents require allergenic ingredients to be declared when used in prepackaged foods to assist patients in identifying allergenic foods and to help them to choose wisely. Unfortunately, the mandatory allergen list and legislation regarding food labels and reference doses is not uniform and varies by country. This may add difficulties to food-allergic patients, especially those with severe food allergy.

RECENT FINDINGS

A new definition of food allergy severity (the DEFASE grid, developed by the World Allergy Organization), aims to assist clinicians in the identification of the at-risk patients. The FASTER ACT and Natasha's Laws has made important improvements such as the entry of sesame as a major allergen in the United States, and increased evidence of allergens on the food label within prepackaged for direct sale (PPDS) in the UK. The recent introduction of Vital 3.0 brought important new features such as an updated reference doses for many foods.

SUMMARY

Currently, there are still considerable differences regarding food labels in different countries. Growing public and scientific attention to the problem promises to increase the food safety for allergens. Among the next improvements, we expect a reconsideration of the food reference doses, a harmonization of the food oral challenge process, and the promulgation of regulatory rules for the precautionary labeling.

Biologicals in IgE-mediated food allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

SUMMARY

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

Omalizumab for the treatment of patients with severe allergic asthma with immunoglobulin E levels above >1500 IU/mL

Immunoglobulin E (IgE) plays a critical role in the allergen-initiated inflammatory pathway and thus serves as a viable therapeutic target in allergic or IgE-mediated diseases such as asthma. Omalizumab, an anti-IgE biologic, has been approved in the United States (US, 2003) and in the European Union (EU, 2005) as an add-on therapy in patients with moderate-to-severe persistent asthma and severe allergic asthma (SAA) aged 6 years and older. The dose and frequency of omalizumab are adjusted based on the patient's body weight and baseline IgE levels, as recommended by its dosing tables. Currently, these dosing recommendations are limited to patients with baseline IgE levels of up to 1500 IU/mL in the European Union and 700 IU/mL in the United States. However, many patients with SAA have IgE levels >1500 IU/mL, highlighting an unmet need. This review presents the current evidence on the treatment benefits of omalizumab in patients with IgE levels >1500 IU/mL. The findings from the reviewed studies which included >3000 patients support the efficacy and effectiveness of omalizumab in reducing exacerbations, and improving asthma control, lung function, and quality of life in patients with severe asthma having IgE levels beyond the current dosing range. Omalizumab was well-tolerated in these patients, with no new safety signals. In addition, high IgE levels (>1500 IU/mL) are also reported in several comorbidities of asthma (allergic rhinitis, atopic dermatitis, allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis [ABPA], food allergy, and nasal polyposis) and omalizumab has demonstrated efficacy and safety in these indications. These data suggest that omalizumab may be considered for administration in SAA patients, with high IgE levels outside the current dosing tables. A detailed assessment of patients with high IgE levels is needed before deciding on the optimal treatment approach. A management algorithm for SAA patients with IgE >1500 IU/mL is proposed in this review and a suggestion to follow the Delphi consensus is advised.

A Multidisciplinary Approach for Type 2 Allergic Diseases: What Do Biologics Teach Us?

Patients with atopic/allergic disorders, including atopic dermatitis (AD), allergic rhino-conjunctivitis (AR), chronic rhinosinusitis with/without nasal polyps (CRSwNP/CRSsNP), bronchial asthma, food allergy, and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), often share a common genetic background, a type Th2 polarized immune response, and several environmental factors [...].

Targeting type 2 immunity and the future of food allergy treatment

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

Natural History of Hazelnut Allergy and Current Approach to Its Diagnosis and Treatment

Hazelnut allergy is the most prevalent type of nut allergy in Europe, with symptoms that can range from mild, such as hives and itching, to severe, such as anaphylaxis, particularly in patients who are sensitized to highly stable allergens, such as storage proteins. Compared to other types of food allergies, allergies to tree nuts, including hazelnuts, tend to persist throughout life. Although symptoms can appear in early childhood, they often continue into adulthood, with a minority of cases improving during adolescence. Currently, there is no curative treatment available for hazelnut allergy, and patients must adhere to a restrictive diet and carry autoinjective epinephrine. However, oral allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a promising treatment option. Patients can be categorized based on their risk for severe reactions using various clinical, in vivo, and in vitro tests, including component-resolved diagnosis and oral food challenge. This review aims to provide an overview of the current knowledge of the natural history of hazelnut allergy and new approaches for its diagnosis and management.

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.

Oral Immunotherapy in Food Allergy: Where Are We Now?

Food allergy (FA) has become more prevalent and problematic in the last 2 decades, and it poses important individual, social, and economic burdens. Besides treating reactions induced by accidental exposure and periodic evaluation for acquiring natural tolerance, the primary management approach is still allergen avoidance as a global standard. However, an active therapeutic approach that can raise the reaction threshold or accelerate tolerance is needed. This review aimed to provide an overview and the latest evidence of oral immunotherapy (OIT), which has recently been used in the active treatment of FA. FA immunotherapy, particularly OIT, is gaining considerable interest, and substantial effort has been made to integrate this active treatment into clinical practice. Consequently, growing evidence has been obtained regarding the efficacy and safety of OIT, particularly for allergens such as peanuts, eggs, and milk. However, several issues need to be addressed regarding the availability, safety, and long-term effects of this intervention. In this review, we summarize currently available information regarding tolerance-inducing immune mechanisms of OIT, data on efficacy and safety, gaps in current evidence, and ongoing research to develop new therapeutic molecules in order to enhance safety.

Varying Approaches to Management of IgE-Mediated Food Allergy in Children Around the World

Food allergy is a chronic disease that affects individuals of all ages and is a significant public health problem globally. This narrative overview examines clinical management strategies for IgE-mediated food allergy in children around the world to understand variations in practice. Information was drawn from clinical practice guidelines, recent research, the websites of professional and governmental bodies with expertise in food allergy, and clinical experts from a broad cross-section of geographical regions. The structure and delivery of clinical services, allergen avoidance and food labeling, and resources to support the management of allergic reactions in the community are discussed in detail. The adoption of emerging food immunotherapies is also explored. Wide variations in clinical management of food allergy were apparent across the different countries. Common themes were continuing issues with access to specialist care and recognition of the need to balance risk reduction with dietary and social restrictions to avoid unnecessary detrimental impacts on the quality of life of food allergy sufferers. Findings highlight the need for standardized presentation of practice and priorities, and may assist clinicians and researchers when engaging with government and funding agencies to address gaps.

Soluble IgE-binding factors in the serum of food-allergic patients: Possible pathophysiological role of soluble FcεRI as protective factor

BACKGROUND

IgE-mediated food allergy is the result of an aberrant immune response involving the interaction of a food allergen with its specific IgE bound to FcɛRI, the high affinity IgE receptor, on mast cells. Allergen-specific IgE also binds to soluble binding factors, but, their expression and role in food allergy is not well characterized. Here, we assess the prevalence and relevance of soluble IgE binding factors in food allergy and tolerance.

METHODS

We measured serum levels of four IgE binding factors, that is, galectin-3, galectin-9, soluble FcɛRI (sFcεRI) and soluble CD23 (sCD23) in 67 adults sensitized to peanut or hazelnut and sFcɛRI in 29 children sensitized to hen's egg. Adults without food allergen sensitization (n = 17) served as healthy controls. We compared serum levels of patients and controls and assessed them, in the former, for links to clinical features including allergy and tolerance.

RESULTS

Serum levels of sFcɛRI and sCD23, but not galectin-3 and galectin-9, significantly differ in food-sensitized patients as compared to healthy controls. A subgroup (28%) of peanut and hazelnut allergic patients had elevated sFcεRI levels, that were associated with higher total and specific IgE levels. Furthermore, sFcεRI levels were significantly higher in tolerant subjects compared to allergics. Among hazelnut allergic patients, those with high sFcεRI levels tolerated the highest protein amounts in the oral food challenge.

CONCLUSION

sFcɛRI but not sCD23, galectin-3 and galectin-9 might play a role in the pathophysiology of food allergy. Its functional role or use as biomarker should be assessed in further studies.

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.

Food Allergy and Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases-The Next 10 Years

The first report of food allergy desensitization was in 1908, at least a few years before the first published description of a diagnostic test for food allergy. It has taken almost 100 years for food allergy to move from passive management of avoidance to a more proactive approach including prevention and treatment. In parallel, this has been matched by recognition of eosinophil gastrointestinal diseases, which were first described in the 1980s (although eosinophilic esophagitis was itself described in 1978). As we celebrate 10 years of The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice, we take the opportunity to look into the future and speculate how our practice may develop over the next decade.

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.

Cow's milk and egg protein threshold dose distributions in children tolerant to beef, baked milk, and baked egg

BACKGROUND

The use of eliciting doses (EDs) for food allergens is necessary to inform individual dietary advice and food allergen risk-management. The Eliciting Dose 01 (ED01) for milk and egg, calculated from populations of allergic subjects undergoing oral food challenges (OFCs), are 0.2 mg total protein. The respective Eliciting Dose 05 (ED05) is 2.4 mg for milk and 2.3 mg for egg. As about 70% children allergic to such foods may tolerate them when baked, we sought to verify the EDs of that subpopulation of milk and egg-allergic children.

METHODS

We retrospectively assessed consecutive OFC for fresh milk and egg between January 2018 and December 2020 in a population of baked food-tolerant children.

RESULTS

Among 288 children (median age 56 - IQR 36-92.5 months, 67.1% male) included, 87 (30.2%) returned positive OFC results, 38 with milk and 49 with egg. The most conservative ED01 was 0.3 mg total protein (IQR 0.03-2.9) for milk and 14.4 mg total protein (IQR 3.6-56.9) for egg. The respective ED05 was 4.2 (IQR 0.9-19.6) mg for milk and 87.7 (IQR 43-179) mg for egg. Such thresholds are, respectively, 1.5 (milk ED01), 1.75 (milk ED05), 72 (egg ED01), and 38.35 (egg ED05) times higher than the currently used thresholds.

CONCLUSIONS

The subpopulation of children allergic to milk and egg, but tolerant to baked proteins, displays higher reactivity thresholds than the general population of children allergic to milk and egg. Their risk stratification, in both individual and population terms, should consider this difference. In baked milk-tolerant children, milk causes reactions at lower doses than egg in our group of egg-tolerant children. This could be associated with the relative harmlessness of egg compared with milk in the determinism of fatal anaphylactic reactions in children.

The rationale for development of ligelizumab in food allergy

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

Managing food allergy: GA2LEN guideline 2022

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

Risk factors for discontinuing oral immunotherapy in children with persistent cow milk allergy

Background

There are no universally accepted criteria for discontinuing milk oral immunotherapy (MOIT) in patients with persistent cow milk allergy (CMA) and little data are available on predictive risk factors for dropping out from oral immunotherapy (OIT), due to allergic reactions or other reasons.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed clinical records of patients with persistent severe CMA undergoing MOIT in a tertiary care center hospital to investigate risk factors associated with discontinuation of OIT. Persistent and severe allergy was defined as the history of systemic reactions and any milk protein‐specific IgE level >85 kU/ml. All patients were first admitted for an in‐hospital rush phase eventually followed by an at‐home dose increase. We evaluated the effect of various factors on two primary outcomes: the highest dose of milk ingested during the in‐hospital rush phase and during the home OIT phase.

Results

We identified 391 patients, of whom 131 met the inclusion criteria for the retrospective study, 54 females and 77 males. Data of the home OIT phase were available for 104 patients (27%).

Regarding the home OIT outcome, an association for having a cow milk avoiding diet was found with reaching a dose below 10 ml during the in‐hospital rush phase (relative risks [RR]: 2.33, confidence interval [CI]: 0.85; 6.42), an age above than 10 years from the time of admission (RR: 3.29, CI: 0.85; 12.73), and a higher total number of reactions occurred during the hospitalization (RR: 1.54, CI: 1.02; 2.32), whereas the presence of respiratory reactions with wheezing (RR: 1.93, CI: 0.49; 7.61) and an IM adrenaline use was related to a higher risk of having an OIT still in progress (RR: 5.47, CI: 0.33; 7.73).

Conclusions

In this cohort of children with persistent CMA undergoing OIT who presented with respiratory reactions with wheezing, the development of anaphylaxis with the need for IM adrenaline, and age above 10 years were predictors of poor long‐term outcome.

This study shows that wheezing reactions during the in‐hospital phase admission, discharge with a dose below 10 ml, use of IM epinephrine, and older age (over 10 years) were all risk factors for OIT discontinuation.

The provided phenotype of patients with a severe milk allergy who are more likely to fail OIT can help pediatricians to provide to their parents the elements to properly decide the most appropriate approach.

Cow's milk allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To highlight the most recent insights on cow's milk allergy (CMA), its treatment, and management.

RECENT FINDINGS

CMA is one of the most common food allergies among children. Burdened by the risk for fatal reaction, CMA may imply also a severe impairment of health-related quality of life at individual and family level as well as well as individual and societal costs. The updated Diagnosis and Rationale for Action against Cow's Milk Allergy series is going to provide a series of manuscripts that will offer a comprehensive state-of-the-art specifically on CMA, including international evidence-based recommendations. The current results from randomized clinical trials highlight that oral immunotherapy may be effective by itself in providing desensitization. Preliminary data suggest that biologicals such as omalizumab may be able to increase the threshold of reactivity to milk or several foods (if multiple food allergies) without requiring allergen exposure. Breastfeeding is the first choice for infants with CMA. Extensively hydrolyzed formula and amino-acid formula are valid alternatives and may be particularly helpful when eliminating multiple foods, with severe complex gastrointestinal food allergies, eosinophilic esophagitis, severe eczema, or symptoms while exclusively breastfeeding. Heed is needed to ensure the formula is nutritionally sufficient. Due to a high degree of cross-reactivity with cow's milk proteins and risk for allergic reactions, goats' milk or other mammals' milk should not be used.

SUMMARY

The adoption and implementation of evidence-based recommendations may guide a proper diagnostics and management and awaited advances in knowledge will allow the development of a personalized treatment tailored on the specific CMA patient's profile.

Phase 2, randomized multi oral immunotherapy with omalizumab 'real life' study

BACKGROUND

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is frequently discontinued due to adverse events (AEs) and current data suggests that lowering OIT doses can minimize severity and frequency of AEs. However, the minimum daily dose that can enable desensitization and induce immune responses in multi-food OIT (mOIT) is unknown.

METHODS

Participants aged 2-25 years with multi-food allergies were pretreated with fixed-dose omalizumab (150 mg, 3 doses, every 4 weeks), and randomized 1:1 to receive mOIT to a total maintenance dose of either 300 or 1200 mg total protein, (total dose includes at least two and up to a max of five allergens) and then transitioned to real-food protein equivalents after 18 weeks of treatment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of subjects with increases in IgG4/IgE ratio of at least 2 allergens by ≥25% from baseline after 18 weeks of therapy. The primary efficacy and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population.

RESULTS

Sixty participants were enrolled across two sites. Seventy percent of participants in both arms showed changes in sIgG4/sIgE ratio in at least 2 allergens with no difference between the treatment groups (OR [95% CI] = 1.00 [0.29, 3.49]). Overall, there were no differences in AEs between the 300 and 1200 mg groups (19% vs. 17%, p = .69), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that plasma marker changes are induced early, even at a total protein dose of 300 mg inclusive of multiple allergens when mOIT is combined with fixed-dose omalizumab. Identification of optimal mOIT dosing with adjunct omalizumab is needed for the long-term success of OIT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03181009).

Current and Emerging Strategies to Inhibit Type 2 Inflammation in Atopic Dermatitis

Type 2 immunity evolved to combat helminth infections by orchestrating a combined protective response of innate and adaptive immune cells and promotion of parasitic worm destruction or expulsion, wound repair, and barrier function. Aberrant type 2 immune responses are associated with allergic conditions characterized by chronic tissue inflammation, including atopic dermatitis (AD) and asthma. Signature cytokines of type 2 immunity include interleukin (IL)-4, IL-5, IL-9, IL-13, and IL-31, mainly secreted from immune cells, as well as IL-25, IL-33, and thymic stromal lymphopoietin, mainly secreted from tissue cells, particularly epithelial cells. IL-4 and IL-13 are key players mediating the prototypical type 2 response; IL-4 initiates and promotes differentiation and proliferation of naïve T-helper (Th) cells toward a Th2 cell phenotype, whereas IL-13 has a pleiotropic effect on type 2 inflammation, including, together with IL-4, decreased barrier function. Both cytokines are implicated in B-cell isotype class switching to generate immunoglobulin E, tissue fibrosis, and pruritus. IL-5, a key regulator of eosinophils, is responsible for eosinophil growth, differentiation, survival, and mobilization. In AD, IL-4, IL-13, and IL-31 are associated with sensory nerve sensitization and itch, leading to scratching that further exacerbates inflammation and barrier dysfunction. Various strategies have emerged to suppress type 2 inflammation, including biologics targeting cytokines or their receptors, and Janus kinase inhibitors that block intracellular cytokine signaling pathways. Here we review type 2 inflammation, its role in inflammatory diseases, and current and future therapies targeting type 2 pathways, with a focus on AD.

An Overview of Off-Label Use of Humanized Monoclonal Antibodies in Paediatrics

In recent years, off-label and unlicensed drug use has extensively developed in the paediatric population. For a long time, clinical trials in the paediatric population were considered complicated to perform because of ethical problems, causing frequent off-label use. Off-label drug use remains an important public health issue, especially for children with rare conditions or with diseases not responsive to conventional treatments. The present paper is a narrative review of the literature of off-label drug use in children. The aim of our study is to summarize the main works dealing with the off-label use of biological drugs in paediatrics. Further studies analyzing their efficacy, safety, and cost-benefit ratios are needed to extend the use of biological therapies to the paediatric population.

Use of biologics for the treatment of moderate-to-severe asthma: the age of personalized medicine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There are multiple FDA-approved biologics to treat poorly controlled moderate-to-severe asthma. Given the heterogeneity of asthma and the lack of head-to-head data between biologics, selecting the best biologic for a patient can be difficult. This review summarizes the key literature to date, in hopes of facilitating an evidence-based approach to selecting the most appropriate biologic for patients with asthma.

RECENT FINDINGS

In addition to unique mechanisms of action, there is increasing literature on predictors of response to each biologic, such as sensitizations to aeroallergens, peripheral eosinophil count, total serum IgE, and exhaled nitric oxide. Biologics available for asthma are also being increasingly studied in comorbid conditions with asthma, and this may facilitate selecting the most appropriate biologic for a patient. In the absence of head-to-head studies, there is literature of switching between biologics whenever necessary.

SUMMARY

The authors outline an approach to selecting a biologic based on various considerations, and hope this suggested approach facilitates selecting the biologic most suitable for each individual with poorly controlled moderate-to-severe asthma.

Pediatric usage of Omalizumab: A promising one

Allergic and related diseases have a substantial epidemiological impact on the pediatric population. Small molecule-based medicines have been traditionally used to manage the diseases. Omalizumab is the first monoclonal antibody-based medicine used in children's allergy and shows great promises. It binds to free IgE and prevents it from binding to IgE receptors, thus interrupting the IgE-dependent allergic inflammatory cascade. Vast amounts of data demonstrate its effectiveness and well tolerance by patients, including the children. However, the drug was only approved to use in allergic asthma and chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU), though other applications were explored in clinical trials. In this review, we summarized current pediatric applications of omalizumab in allergic diseases, focusing on its usages beyond asthma and CSU, including allergic rhinitis, allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis, vernal keratoconjunctivitis, food allergy and atopic dermatitis. In addition, we highlighted the unmet needs and controversial issues of anti-IgE therapy.

•

Omalizumab, the first monoclonal antibody-based medicine used in children's allergy, shows great promise.

•

Omalizumab is effective in relieving symptoms associated with almost every children's allergic and related diseases beyond asthma and CSU.

•

There are unmet needs and controversial issues of anti-IgE therapy in allergic and related diseases.

Threshold of Reactivity and Tolerance to Precautionary Allergen-Labelled Biscuits of Baked Milk- and Egg-Allergic Children

Extremely sensitive food-allergic patients may react to very small amounts of allergenic foods. Precautionary allergen labelling (PAL) warns from possible allergenic contaminations. We evaluated by oral food challenge the reactivity to a brand of PAL-labelled milk- and egg-free biscuits of children with severe milk and egg allergy. We explored the ability of proteomic methods to identify minute amounts of milk/egg allergens in such biscuits. Traces of milk and/or egg allergens in biscuits were measured by two different liquid-chromatography-mass spectrometry methods. The binding of patient’s serum with egg/milk proteins was assessed using immunoblotting. None of the patients reacted to biscuits. Egg and milk proteins were undetectable with a limit of detection of 0.6 µg/g for milk and egg (method A), and of 0.1 and 0.3 µg /g for milk and egg, respectively (method B). The immunoblots did not show milk/egg proteins in the studied biscuits. Milk/egg content of the biscuits is far lower than 4 µg of milk or egg protein per gram of product, the minimal doses considered theoretically capable of causing reactions. With high sensitivity, proteomic assessments predict the harmlessness of very small amount of allergens in foods, and can be used to help avoiding unnecessary PAL.

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

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

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

OBJECTIVE

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

DATA SOURCES

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

STUDY SELECTIONS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Food labeling issues for severe food allergic patients

Food allergy carries high importance and responsibility, affecting an estimated 220 million people worldwide. It is a frequent cause of food-induced anaphylaxis, a life-threatening condition requiring a toll of about one death per 50 million people a year worldwide. In order to help patients to identify allergenic foods and thus avoid anaphylactic reactions, 66 countries over the 5 continents require by law that allergenic ingredients must be declared when used in prepackaged foods. Unfortunately, the mandatory allergen list is not uniform, but varies among different countries. The widespread adoption of Precautionary Allergen Labeling (PAL) results in a proliferation of unregulated PALs with different informative statements. In this situation, the need of a scientific consensus on the definition of food allergy and the identification of a tolerable risk with routinely used detection assays, considering not only the eliciting dose but also the food source, is urgent. The aim of this manuscript is: 1) to draw a picture of the global situation in terms of PALs, and 2) to highlight new approaches that could aid in tackling the problem of regulating the labeling of allergens. These include the Voluntary Incidental Trace Allergen Labelling (VITAL) system, which intersects reference doses and labelling decisions, and a direct quantification of trace amounts of allergens at lower limit of detection (LOD) levels in the food itself through proteomics. We here highlight how, although with some limitations, the steady advances in proteomic approaches possess higher sensitivity than the recommended VITAL reference doses, allowing the identification of allergens at much lower LOD levels than VITAL. Considering that each assay used to detect allergen in food products carries method-specific issues, a more comprehensive and harmonized approach implementing both quantitative and qualitative methods could help overcoming the risk stratification approach and the overuse of PALs, offering promise as the field moves forward towards improving consumers' quality of life.

Biologics as treatment options for anaphylaxis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

SUMMARY

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

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

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

Clinical Manifestations of Pediatric Food Allergy: a Contemporary Review

Food allergies (FAs) are an emerging health care issue, and a "second wave of the allergy epidemic" was named. There are extensive data that documented the prevalence rate as high as approximately 10%. FAs are immunological adverse reactions, including IgE-mediated mechanisms, cell-mediated mechanisms, or mixed IgE- and cell-mediated mechanisms. A diagnosis of FA is made by specific symptoms encounter with food, detailed past history, sensitization tests, and oral food challenges (OFCs) if necessary. The component-resolved diagnostics (CRD) test can distinguish true or cross-reaction. "Minimal elimination" from the results of CRD and OFC could avoid unnecessary food restriction. Strict food limitation is harsh and stressful on patients and their families. Children with FAs experience a higher rate of post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) and bullying than others. In the last 20 years, oral immunotherapy (OIT), sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), and epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) are treatment strategies. OIT and EPIT are the most two encouraging treatments for FA. This review aims to introduce FAs in diverse clinical disorders, new perspectives, and their practical implications in diagnosing and treating FA.

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

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

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

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.