Oral peanut immunotherapy How much is too much? How much is enough?

Oral Immunotherapy: An Overview

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an alternative treatment of IgE-mediated food allergy that has been shown to increase tolerance threshold to many of the top food allergens, although this effect may be dependent on age, dose, frequency, and duration. OIT has been shown to be effective and safe in infants, and early initiation can improve rates of desensitization even for those foods whose natural history favors loss of allergy. Studies looking at protocol modification to improve OIT success are ongoing as is the evaluation of clinical tools to help monitor OIT effects.

Oral Immunotherapy

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an alternative treatment of IgE-mediated food allergy that has been shown to increase tolerance threshold to many of the top food allergens, although this effect may be dependent on age, dose, frequency, and duration. OIT has been shown to be effective and safe in infants, and early initiation can improve rates of desensitization even for those foods whose natural history favors loss of allergy. Studies looking at protocol modification to improve OIT success are ongoing as is the evaluation of clinical tools to help monitor OIT effects.

Reduction in Allergenicity and Induction of Oral Tolerance of Glycated Tropomyosin from Crab

Tropomyosin (TM) is an important crustacean (Scylla paramamosain) allergen. This study aimed to assess Maillard-reacted TM (TM-G) induction of allergenic responses with cell and mouse models. We analyzed the difference of sensitization and the ability to induce immune tolerance between TM and TM-G by in vitro and in vivo models, then we compared the relationship between glycation sites of TM-G and epitopes of TM. In the in vitro assay, we discovered that the sensitization of TM-G was lower than TM, and the ability to stimulate mast cell degranulation decreased from 55.07 ± 4.23% to 27.86 ± 3.21%. In the serum of sensitized Balb/c mice, the level of specific IgE produced by TM-G sensitized mice was significantly lower than TM, and the levels of interleukins 4 and interleukins 13 produced by Th2 cells in spleen lymphocytes decreased by 82.35 ± 5.88% and 83.64 ± 9.09%, respectively. In the oral tolerance model, the ratio of Th2/Th1 decreased from 4.05 ± 0.38 to 1.69 ± 0.19. Maillard reaction masked the B cell epitopes of TM and retained some T cell epitopes. Potentially, Maillard reaction products (MRPs) can be used as tolerance inducers for allergen-specific immunotherapy.

Scientific Opinion on development needs for the allergenicity and protein safety assessment of food and feed products derived from biotechnology

This Scientific Opinion addresses the formulation of specific development needs, including research requirements for allergenicity assessment and protein safety, in general, which is urgently needed in a world that demands more sustainable food systems. Current allergenicity risk assessment strategies are based on the principles and guidelines of the Codex Alimentarius for the safety assessment of foods derived from 'modern' biotechnology initially published in 2003. The core approach for the safety assessment is based on a 'weight-of-evidence' approach because no single piece of information or experimental method provides sufficient evidence to predict allergenicity. Although the Codex Alimentarius and EFSA guidance documents successfully addressed allergenicity assessments of single/stacked event GM applications, experience gained and new developments in the field call for a modernisation of some key elements of the risk assessment. These should include the consideration of clinical relevance, route of exposure and potential threshold values of food allergens, the update of in silico tools used with more targeted databases and better integration and standardisation of test materials and in vitro/in vivo protocols. Furthermore, more complex future products will likely challenge the overall practical implementation of current guidelines, which were mainly targeted to assess a few newly expressed proteins. Therefore, it is timely to review and clarify the main purpose of the allergenicity risk assessment and the vital role it plays in protecting consumers' health. A roadmap to (re)define the allergenicity safety objectives and risk assessment needs will be required to inform a series of key questions for risk assessors and risk managers such as 'what is the purpose of the allergenicity risk assessment?' or 'what level of confidence is necessary for the predictions?'.

Mechanisms of allergen-specific immunotherapy and allergen tolerance

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is the mainstay treatment for the cure of allergic disorders, with depicted efficacy and safety by several trials and meta-analysis. AIT impressively contributes to the management of allergic rhinitis, asthma and venom allergies. Food allergy is a new arena for AIT with promising results, especially via novel administration routes. Cell subsets with regulatory capacities are induced during AIT. IL-10 and transforming growth factor (TGF)-β are the main suppressor cytokines, in addition to surface molecules such as cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4) and programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) within the micro milieu. Modified T- and B-cell responses and antibody isotypes, increased activity thresholds for eosinophils, basophils and mast cells and consequent limitation of inflammatory cascades altogether induce and maintain a state of sustained allergen-specific unresponsiveness. Established tolerance is reflected into the clinical perspectives as improvement of allergy symptoms together with reduced medication requirements and evolved disease severity. Long treatment durations, costs, reduced patient compliance and risk of severe, even life-threatening adverse reactions during treatment stand as major limiting factors for AIT. By development of purified non-allergenic, highly-immunogenic modified allergen extracts, and combinational usage of them with novel adjuvant molecules via new routes may shorten treatment durations and possibly reduce these drawbacks. AIT is the best model for custom-tailored therapy of allergic disorders. Better characterization of disease endotypes, definition of specific biomarkers for diagnosis and therapy follow-up, as well as precision medicine approaches may further contribute to success of AIT in management of allergic disorders.

EAACI Allergen Immunotherapy User's Guide

Allergen immunotherapy is a cornerstone in the treatment of allergic children. The clinical efficiency relies on a well-defined immunologic mechanism promoting regulatory T cells and downplaying the immune response induced by allergens. Clinical indications have been well documented for respiratory allergy in the presence of rhinitis and/or allergic asthma, to pollens and dust mites. Patients who have had an anaphylactic reaction to hymenoptera venom are also good candidates for allergen immunotherapy. Administration of allergen is currently mostly either by subcutaneous injections or by sublingual administration. Both methods have been extensively studied and have pros and cons. Specifically in children, the choice of the method of administration according to the patient's profile is important. Although allergen immunotherapy is widely used, there is a need for improvement. More particularly, biomarkers for prediction of the success of the treatments are needed. The strength and efficiency of the immune response may also be boosted by the use of better adjuvants. Finally, novel formulations might be more efficient and might improve the patient's adherence to the treatment. This user's guide reviews current knowledge and aims to provide clinical guidance to healthcare professionals taking care of children undergoing allergen immunotherapy.

Recent developments and highlights in food allergy

The achievement of long-lasting, safe treatments for food allergy is dependent on the understanding of the immunological basis of food allergy. Accurate diagnosis is essential for management. In recent years, data from oral food challenges have revealed that routine allergy testing is poor at predicting clinical allergy for tree nuts, almonds in particular. More advanced antigen-based tests including component-resolved diagnostics and epitope reactivity may lead to more accurate diagnosis and selection of therapeutic intervention. Additional diagnostic accuracy may come from cellular tests such as the basophil activation test or mast cell approaches. In the context of clinical trials, cellular tests have revealed specific T-cell and B-cell populations that are more abundant in food-allergic individuals with distinct mechanistic features. Awareness of clinical markers, such as the ability to eat baked forms of milk and egg, continues to inform the understanding of natural tolerance development. Mouse models have allowed for investigation into multiple mechanisms of food allergy including modification of epithelial metabolism, and the induction of regulatory cell subsets and the microbiome. Increasing numbers of children who underwent food immunotherapy enlarged the body of evidence on mechanisms and predictors of treatment success. Experimental immunological markers in conjunction with clinical determinants such as lower age and lower initial specific IgE appear to be of benefit. More research on the optimal dose, preparation, and route of application integrating a high-level safety and efficacy is demanded. Alternatively, biologics blocking TSLP, IL-33, IL-4 and IL-13, or IgE may help to achieve that.

Future research trends in understanding the mechanisms underlying allergic diseases for improved patient care

The specialties of allergy and clinical immunology have entered the era of precision medicine with the stratification of diseases into distinct disease subsets, specific diagnoses, and targeted treatment options, including biologicals and small molecules. This article reviews recent developments in research and patient care and future trends in the discipline. The section on basic mechanisms of allergic diseases summarizes the current status and defines research needs in structural biology, type 2 inflammation, immune tolerance, neuroimmune mechanisms, role of the microbiome and diet, environmental factors, and respiratory viral infections. In the section on diagnostic challenges, clinical trials, precision medicine and immune monitoring of allergic diseases, asthma, allergic and nonallergic rhinitis, and new approaches to the diagnosis and treatment of drug hypersensitivity reactions are discussed in further detail. In the third section, unmet needs and future research areas for the treatment of allergic diseases are highlighted with topics on food allergy, biologics, small molecules, and novel therapeutic concepts in allergen‐specific immunotherapy for airway disease. Unknowns and future research needs are discussed at the end of each subsection.

Sustained outcomes in oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy (POISED study): a large, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study

BACKGROUND

Dietary avoidance is recommended for peanut allergies. We evaluated the sustained effects of peanut allergy oral immunotherapy (OIT) in a randomised long-term study in adults and children.

METHODS

In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study, we enrolled participants at the Sean N Parker Center for Allergy and Asthma Research at Stanford University (Stanford, CA, USA) with peanut allergy aged 7-55 years with a positive result from a double-blind, placebo-controlled, food challenge (DBPCFC; ≤500 mg of peanut protein), a positive skin-prick test (SPT) result (≥5 mm wheal diameter above the negative control), and peanut-specific immunoglobulin (Ig)E concentration of more than 4 kU/L. Participants were randomly assigned (2·4:1·4:1) in a two-by-two block design via a computerised system to be built up and maintained on 4000 mg peanut protein through to week 104 then discontinued on peanut (peanut-0 group), to be built up and maintained on 4000 mg peanut protein through to week 104 then to ingest 300 mg peanut protein daily (peanut-300 group) for 52 weeks, or to receive oat flour (placebo group). DBPCFCs to 4000 mg peanut protein were done at baseline and weeks 104, 117, 130, 143, and 156. The pharmacist assigned treatment on the basis of a randomised computer list. Peanut or placebo (oat) flour was administered orally and participants and the study team were masked throughout by use of oat flour that was similar in look and feel to the peanut flour and nose clips, as tolerated, to mask taste. The statistician was also masked. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants who passed DBPCFCs to a cumulative dose of 4000 mg at both 104 and 117 weeks. The primary efficacy analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02103270.

FINDINGS

Between April 15, 2014, and March 2, 2016, of 152 individuals assessed, we enrolled 120 participants, who were randomly assigned to the peanut-0 (n=60), peanut-300 (n=35), and placebo groups (n=25). 21 (35%) of peanut-0 group participants and one (4%) placebo group participant passed the 4000 mg challenge at both 104 and 117 weeks (odds ratio [OR] 12·7, 95% CI 1·8-554·8; p=0·0024). Over the entire study, the most common adverse events were mild gastrointestinal symptoms, which were seen in 90 of 120 patients (50/60 in the peanut-0 group, 29/35 in the peanut-300 group, and 11/25 in the placebo group) and skin disorders, which were seen in 50/120 patients (26/60 in the peanut-0 group, 15/35 in the peanut-300 group, and 9/25 in the placebo group). Adverse events decreased over time in all groups. Two participants in the peanut groups had serious adverse events during the 3-year study. In the peanut-0 group, in which eight (13%) of 60 participants passed DBPCFCs at week 156, higher baseline peanut-specific IgG4 to IgE ratio and lower Ara h 2 IgE and basophil activation responses were associated with sustained unresponsiveness. No treatment-related deaths occurred.

INTERPRETATION

Our study suggests that peanut OIT could desensitise individuals with peanut allergy to 4000 mg peanut protein but discontinuation, or even reduction to 300 mg daily, could increase the likelihood of regaining clinical reactivity to peanut. Since baseline blood tests correlated with week 117 treatment outcomes, this study might aid in optimal patient selection for this therapy.

FUNDING

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Parent and child perception of quality of life in a randomized controlled peanut oral immunotherapy trial

BACKGROUND

Improved quality of life (QoL) after oral immunotherapy (OIT) in peanut allergic children is often reported by their parents, while the child's perspective is less clear.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to explore whether 2 years of OIT improved QoL in children with peanut allergy and to identify factors influencing change in QoL.

METHODS

In the open-labeled TAKE-AWAY peanut OIT trial including children with anaphylaxis to peanuts, 57 were randomized to OIT and 20 to observation. The Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory Version 4.0 was completed by parents and children at enrollment (Y₀ ), after 1 year (end of updosing; Y₁ ) and after 2 years (Y₂ ) of OIT. Minimally clinically important difference (MCID) is ≥5.3. Perceived treatment burden was recorded by visual analogue scales, including adverse events (AEs). An open food challenge (OFC) was performed at Y₂ .

RESULTS

At Y₂ , 18 children had discontinued OIT and 2 of 39 OIT children refused OFC, while 35 of 37 were desensitized to 7500 mg peanut protein. From Y₀ to Y_2, the mean change (95% confidence intervals) in QoL was 4.4 (0.5, 8.3) among child self-reports and twice as large among parental proxy reports (9.3 [4.3, 14.3]; both P < 0.0001), without significant improvement among the controls. The change in QoL was significantly different from the controls for the parental proxy reports only (P = 0.002). Neither treatment burden nor AEs significantly predicted changes in QoL.

CONCLUSION

Two years of OIT improved child-QoL as reported by parents, but not by the children, suggesting that parents may overestimate improvement in child-QoL by OIT.