Immunotherapy for peanut allergy

Regional Differences in Food Allergies

The prevalence of food allergies is increasing worldwide. To understand the regional specificities of food allergies and develop effective therapeutic interventions, extensive regional epidemiological studies are necessary. While data regarding incidence, prevalence, regional variation, and treatment in food allergies are available for western countries, such studies may not be available in many Asian countries. China accounts for almost 20% of the world's population and has a vast ethnic diversity, but large-scale meta-analyses of epidemiological studies of food allergy in China are lacking. A literature search revealed 22 publications on the prevalence of food allergy in Chinese populations. A review of these studies showed that the prevalence of food allergies in China is comparable to that in western countries, even though the Chinese diet is vastly different from that of the West and may vary even greatly within China, and finally, specific antigenic triggers of food allergy vary between China and the West and also within China. Current clinical management of food allergy in China includes allergen-specific immunotherapy, Chinese herbal medicine, acupuncture, and Western medicine. This study demonstrates an unmet need in China for a thorough investigation of the prevalence of food allergies in China, the specific foods involved, and characterization of the specific antigenic triggers of food allergy with respect to ethnicity, age, and diet in China.

Efficacy and safety of oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy: a pilot study in Singaporean children

Background

Peanut allergy is an increasing problem in Singapore and strict avoidance is difficult as peanut is ubiquitous in Asian cuisine.

Objective

We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT) in children with obvious peanut allergy in Singapore.

Methods

This was an open-label study of peanut OIT in children living in Singapore, with 2 weekly dose escalation until final maintenance dose of 3,000 mg of peanut protein and a maintenance phase of 12 months. An oral food challenge was performed at 6 months to assess for desensitisation and at 4 weeks after discontinuation of OIT having completed 12 months of maintenance therapy to assess for possible sustained unresponsiveness. The adverse events were monitored using the symptom diaries.

Results

Nine subjects were started on OIT, with 7 managing to complete maintenance phase of therapy. Of these 7, all were able to tolerate at least 3,000 mg of peanut protein by 6 months of maintenance therapy, showing that the OIT was effective. Of these 7, 3 patients complied with the 4-week abstinence period after completion of OIT before another peanut challenge; 2 of the 3 subjects showed a significant decrease from the initial ability to tolerate 3,000 mg of peanut protein. Side effects were mainly gastrointestinal in nature and were more common during the updosing phase than the maintenance phase. No episodes of anaphylaxis were observed in this study.

Conclusion

Peanut OIT seemed to be effective and safe in our cohort of Singaporean children.