Long-term treatment with egg oral immunotherapy enhances sustained unresponsiveness that persists after cessation of therapy

CSACI guidelines for the ethical, evidence-based and patient-oriented clinical practice of oral immunotherapy in IgE-mediated food allergy

Background

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an emerging approach to the treatment of patients with IgE-mediated food allergy and is in the process of transitioning to clinical practice.

Objective

To develop patient-oriented clinical practice guidelines on oral immunotherapy based on evidence and ethical imperatives for the provision of safe and efficient food allergy management.

Materials and methods

Recommendations were developed using a reflective patient-centered multicriteria approach including 22 criteria organized in five dimensions (clinical, populational, economic, organizational and sociopolitical). Data was obtained from: (1) a review of scientific and ethic literature; (2) consultations of allergists, other healthcare professionals (pediatricians, family physicians, nurses, registered dieticians, psychologists, peer supporters), patients and caregivers; and patient associations through structured consultative panels, interviews and on-line questionnaire; and (3) organizational and economic data from the milieu of care. All data was synthesized by criteria in a multicriteria deliberative guide that served as a platform for structured discussion and development of recommendations for each dimension, based on evidence, ethical imperatives and other considerations.

Results

The deliberative grid included 162 articles from the literature and media reviews and data from consultations involving 85 individuals. Thirty-eight (38) recommendations were made for the practice of oral immunotherapy for the treatment of IgE mediated food allergy, based on evidence and a diversity of ethical imperatives. All recommendations were aimed at fostering a context conducive to achieving objectives identified by patients and caregivers with food allergy. Notably, specific recommendations were developed to promote a culture of shared responsibility between patients and healthcare system, equity in access, patient empowerment, shared decision making and personalization of OIT protocols to reflect patients' needs. It also provides recommendations to optimize organization of care to generate capacity to meet demand according to patient choice, e.g. OIT or avoidance. These recommendations were made acknowledging the necessity of ensuring sustainability of the clinical offer in light of various economic considerations.

Conclusions

This innovative CPG methodology was guided by patients' perspectives, clinical evidence as well as ethical and other rationales. This allowed for the creation of a broad set of recommendations that chart optimal clinical practice and define the conditions required to bring about changes to food allergy care that will be sustainable, equitable and conducive to the well-being of all patients in need.

Immunoglobulin E (IgE)-Mediated Food Allergy in Children: Epidemiology, Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, Prevention, and Management

A food allergy is an immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated hypersensitive reaction to food, which consists in the appearance of allergic symptoms; it can vary from common urticaria to even fatal anaphylaxis. The prevalence of food allergies has been increasing in the past twenty years and it represents a major public health problem in industrialized countries. The mechanism that leads to food allergies is the lack of immunologic and clinical tolerance to food allergens. The diagnosis of IgE-mediated food allergies is based on the combined use of a detailed medical history, in-vivo, and in-vitro research of specific IgE, the elimination diet, and the double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge. The only currently available treatment for allergies is the strict elimination diet. This type of attitude, which we could define as “passive”, does not overcome the risk of accidental reactions due to involuntary intake of the culprit food. For food allergy management, an “active” approach is urgently needed, such as specific allergen immunotherapy, which is currently under development and only used for research purposes. This article aims to give an updated review of IgE-mediated food allergies in pediatric populations in terms of epidemiology, pathogenesis, prevention, diagnosis, and management.

New Developments in Non-allergen-specific Therapy for the Treatment of Food Allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The prevalence of food allergy is increasing. At the current time, there are no approved treatments for food allergy. Major limitations of immunotherapy are long treatment periods (months or years), frequent clinic visits, high costs, increased risk of adverse events during treatment, and lack of durability of desensitization. Additionally, it is allergen-specific, and in those allergic to multiple allergens, the length and cost of treatment are further increased. In this review, we summarize recent developments in novel non-allergen-specific treatments for food allergy.

RECENT FINDINGS

A number of monoclonal antibodies that block IgE or specific pro-allergenic cytokines or their receptors have shown promise in clinical trials for food allergy. The insight we have gained through the use of one drug for the treatment of an atopic disease is quickly being translated to other atopic diseases, including food allergy. The future for food allergy treatment with biologics looks bright.

Immunotherapy and Oral Immunotherapy with Omalizumab for Food Allergies

Food allergy is potentially life-threatening and has a major impact on quality of life. Avoidance is currently the only approved therapy, and, although effective, avoidance diets can be difficult and may also put children at risk of nutritional deficiencies and impaired growth. At least 80% of milk and egg-allergic children are expected to achieve natural tolerance to these foods by adulthood, and 15–20% of peanut or tree nut-allergic individuals ‘outgrow’ their allergies. Effective therapies for food allergies are therefore highly desirable. There have been several immunotherapies for food allergy such as oral immunotherapy (OIT), sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT), and OIT combined with anti-IgE monoclonal antibodies (omalizumab [OMB]). However, efficacy and safety have only been demonstrated in one large Phase III trial for peanut allergies. Additionally, there have only been three randomised, controlled studies of OMB–OIT combination and these were low-powered, single-centre trials; therefore, evidence levels were low in these trials. Studies that included long-term follow-up observations and clinical tolerance are rare. Additionally, clinical tolerance is not well-defined and remains unknown. Therefore, several problems remain to be resolved, but hopefully OIT in combination with OMB will resolve these problems in the future. Although there are only three randomised, controlled trials of OMB–OIT, the combination therapy enabled high dose desensitisation for a short duration without any adverse events, resulting in the sustained unresponsiveness in IgE-related food allergy. It is speculated that this combination therapy will be the most effective immunotherapy in the future.

Biomarkers in Food Allergy Immunotherapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Investigational allergen immunotherapies (AITs) including oral immunotherapy (OIT), sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), and epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) have proven to increase allergen thresholds required to elicit an allergic reaction in a majority of subjects. However, these studies lack consistent biomarkers to predict therapy outcomes. Here, we will review biomarkers that are currently being investigated for AIT.

RECENT FINDINGS

The mechanisms underlying the therapeutic benefit of AIT involve various cell types, including mast cells, basophils, T cells, and B cells. Skin prick and basophil activation tests assess effector cell sensitivity to allergen and are decreased in subjects on AIT. Allergen-specific IgE increases initially and decreases with continued therapy, while allergen-specific IgG and IgA increase throughout therapy. Allergen-induced regulatory T cells (Tregs) increase throughout therapy and were found to be associated with sustained unresponsiveness after OIT. Subjects on OIT and SLIT have decreased Th2 cytokine production during therapy. Although trends have been reported, a common limitation of these biomarkers is that none are able to reproducibly predict prognosis during AIT. Further studies are needed to expand the currently available biomarker repertoire to provide personalized approaches to AIT.

Food allergy-From food avoidance to active treatment

The prevalence of food allergy (FA) has increased too rapidly, possibly due to environmental factors. The guidelines recommend strict allergen avoidance, but FA is still the main cause of anaphylaxis in all age groups. Immunotherapy is the only treatment able to change the course of allergic disease, and oral immunotherapy (OIT) is the more effective route in FA. However, it carries the risk of adverse reactions, including anaphylaxis. To improve OIT safety, adjuvant therapy with the immunoglobulin E (IgE) monoclonal antibody omalizumab has been extensively used. Results suggest particular benefit in patients with high risk of fatal anaphylaxis. An alternative approach is to use omalizumab instead of OIT to prevent severe allergic reactions upon accidental exposure. This paper reviews current evidence regarding IgE-mediated FA, focusing on natural tolerance and food sensitization acquisition, and on avoidance measures and their limitations.

Evolution of Immune Responses in Food Immunotherapy

Food allergies are a growing public health concern affecting approximately 8% of children and 10% of adults in the United States. Several immunotherapy approaches are under active investigation, including oral immunotherapy, epicutaneous immunotherapy, and sublingual immunotherapy. Each of these approaches uses a similar strategy of administering small, increasing amounts of allergen to the allergic subject. Immunologic studies have described changes in the T-cell compartment, serum and salivary immunoglobulin profile, and mast cell and basophil degranulation status in response to allergens. This review highlights the immunologic changes induced by food allergen-specific immunotherapy and discusses future directions in this field.

Safety of Food Oral Immunotherapy: What We Know, and What We Need to Learn

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) for food allergy entails a risk of adverse reactions, including anaphylaxis. This safety concern is the major barrier for OIT to become a therapeutic option in clinical practice. The high heterogeneity in safety reporting of OIT studies prevents setting the safety profile accurately. An international consensus is needed to facilitate the analysis of large pooled clinical data with homogeneous safety reporting, that together with integrated omics, and patients/families' opinions, may help stratify the patients' risk and needs, and help developing safe(r) individualized care pathways. This will give OIT the right place in the food allergy therapy.

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.

Oral Immunotherapy (OIT): A Personalized Medicine

Oral Immunotherapy (OIT), a promising allergen-specific approach in the management of Food Allergies (FA), is based on the administration of increasing doses of the culprit food until reaching a maintenance dose. Each step should be adapted to the patient, and OIT should be considered an individualized treatment. Recent studies focused on the standardization and identification of novel biomarkers in order to correlate endotypes with phenotypes in the field of FA.

Long-term sublingual immunotherapy for peanut allergy in children: Clinical and immunologic evidence of desensitization

BACKGROUND

Peanut sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for 1 year has been shown to induce modest clinical desensitization in allergic children. Studies of oral immunotherapy, epicutaneous immunotherapy, and SLIT have suggested additional benefit with extended treatment.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to investigate the safety, clinical effectiveness, and immunologic changes with long-term SLIT in children with peanut allergy.

METHODS

Children with peanut allergy aged 1 to 11 years underwent extended maintenance SLIT with 2 mg/d peanut protein for up to 5 years. Subjects with peanut skin test wheals of less than 5 mm and peanut-specific IgE levels of less than 15 kU/L were allowed to discontinue therapy early. Desensitization was assessed through a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) with up to 5000 mg of peanut protein after completion of SLIT dosing. Sustained unresponsiveness was further assessed by using identical DBPCFCs after 2 to 4 weeks without peanut exposure.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven of 48 subjects completed 3 to 5 years of peanut SLIT, with 67% (32/48) successfully consuming 750 mg or more during DBPCFCs. Furthermore, 25% (12/48) passed the 5000-mg DBPCFC without clinical symptoms, with 10 of these 12 demonstrating sustained unresponsiveness after 2 to 4 weeks. Side effects were reported with 4.8% of doses, with transient oropharyngeal itching reported most commonly. Side effects requiring antihistamine treatment were uncommon (0.21%), and no epinephrine was administered. Peanut skin test wheals, peanut-specific IgE levels, and basophil activation decreased significantly, and peanut-specific IgG₄ levels increased significantly after peanut SLIT.

CONCLUSION

Extended-therapy peanut SLIT provided clinically meaningful desensitization in the majority of children with peanut allergy that was balanced with ease of administration and a favorable safety profile.

Treatment for food allergy

The prevalence of IgE-mediated food allergy is an increasing public health concern effecting millions of persons worldwide. The current standard of treatment is strict avoidance of the offending food or foods, and to date, there are no regulatory approved treatments for food allergy. A significant amount of research has been directed at various forms of food immunotherapy, including oral, sublingual, and epicutaneous delivery routes. Although oral immunotherapy has shown the greatest promise for efficacy in terms of the amount of protein that can be ingested, it has also demonstrated less tolerability and a less favorable safety profile compared with sublingual immunotherapy and epicutaneous immunotherapy, which offers the least protection but has the best safety and tolerability profile. Studies have been conducted with adding adjuvants and anti-IgE to enhance either the efficacy or safety of food immunotherapy. Multiple concepts of food immunotherapy beyond these first-generation treatments are in either animal or early phase 1 studies.

Efficacy and Safety of Sesame Oral Immunotherapy-A Real-World, Single-Center Study

BACKGROUND

The presence of sesame in Western diet is increasing, making its avoidance by sesame-allergic patients more challenging.

OBJECTIVE

To report the efficacy and safety of sesame oral immunotherapy (OIT).

METHODS

Sixty patients aged 4 years or older, diagnosed as sesame-allergic on the basis of a positive oral food challenge, were consecutively enrolled into OIT between November 2014 and November 2017. Fifteen patients with sesame allergy, based on a positive oral food challenge or a recent immediate reaction, and a positive skin prick test result or specific IgE, continued sesame elimination and served as observational controls. Immunologic parameters were measured in a subset (OIT, n = 16; controls, n = 11) at the start and end of the study. Fully desensitized patients continued daily consumption of 1200 mg sesame protein and challenged with 4000 mg after more than 6 months.

RESULTS

Fifty-three OIT-treated patients (88.4%) were fully desensitized to sesame, compared with 0% of controls. Four additional patients (total 57 of 60 = 95%) were desensitized to more than 1000 mg protein. Reactions occurred in 4.7% of hospital doses and 1.9% of home doses. Epinephrine-treated reactions occurred in 16.7% of patients for hospital and 8.3% for home doses. Significant decreases in rSes i 1 IgE (P = .007) and basophil reactivity (P = .001) and increases in sesame and rSes i 1 IgG₄ (P = .001) occurred in OIT-treated patients but not in controls. Forty-seven patients desensitized to 4000 mg were evaluated more than 6 months after reaching maintenance. Only mild reactions were reported during maintenance, and all passed the 4000-mg challenge.

CONCLUSIONS

Sesame-OIT is an effective alternative to sesame avoidance in allergic patients. The potential for adverse events necessitates its performance in specialized centers.

Newly identified T cell subsets in mechanistic studies of food immunotherapy

Allergen-specific immunotherapy has shown promise for the treatment of food allergy and is currently being evaluated in clinical trials. Although immunotherapy can induce desensitization, the mechanisms underlying this process are not completely understood. Recent advances in high-throughput technologies along with concomitant advances in data analytics have enabled monitoring of cells at the single-cell level and increased the research focus on upstream cellular factors involved in the efficacy of immunotherapy, particularly the role of T cells. As our appreciation of different T cell subsets and their plasticity increases, the initial simplistic view that restoring Th1/Th2 balance by decreasing Th2 or increasing Th1 responses can ameliorate food allergy is being enhanced by a more complex model involving other T cell subsets, particularly Tregs. In this Review, we focus on the current understanding of T cell functions in food allergy, tolerance, and immunotherapy.

Walnut oral immunotherapy for desensitisation of walnut and additional tree nut allergies (Nut CRACKER): a single-centre, prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of oral immunotherapy for tree nut allergy has not been demonstrated to date, and its effectiveness is complicated by the high prevalence of co-allergies to several nuts. This study aimed to investigate the use of walnut oral immunotherapy in the desensitisation of walnut and additional tree nuts in patients who are co-allergic to several nuts.

METHODS

In a single-centre, prospective cohort study (the Nut Co-Reactivity ACquiring Knowledge for Elimination Recommendations study) at the Institute of Allergy, Immunology, and Paediatric Pulmonology at the Yitzhak Shamir Medical Centre, we recruited patients aged 4 years or older who were allergic to walnut, with or without co-allergy to pecan, hazelnut, and cashew. The diagnosis of each food allergy was based on a positive skin prick test or specific serum IgE (≥0·35 kU_A/L) to the corresponding nut together with a positive oral food challenge, unless an immediate (within 2 h of exposure) reaction in the past year had been documented. Patients with uncontrolled asthma or a medical contraindication to receive adrenaline were excluded. Patients were assigned to walnut oral immunotherapy or the control group (observation and strict dietary exclusion) on the basis of the order of presentation to the clinic. Oral immunotherapy began with a 4-day dose-escalation phase to establish the single highest tolerated dose, which was consumed daily at home for 24 days; subsequent monthly dose escalations were repeated until 4000 mg walnut protein was achieved. Patients who were desensitised to walnut continued to consume 1200 mg walnut protein daily for 6 months as maintenance. The primary outcome was walnut desensitisation (passing an oral food challenge with 4000 mg of walnut protein) at the end of the study, analysed by intention to treat. In patients who were co-allergic to pecan, hazelnut, and cashew, the proportion who achieved cross-desensitisation to these nuts in addition to walnut desensitisation was examined.

FINDINGS

73 patients with a walnut allergy were enrolled between May 15, 2016, and Jan 14, 2018. 49 (89%) of 55 patients in the oral immunotherapy group were desensitised to walnut compared with none of 18 patients in the control group (odds ratio 9·2, 95% CI 4·3-19·5; p<0·0001). Following walnut desensitisation, all patients who were co-allergic to pecan (n=46) were also desensitised to pecan. Additionally, 18 (60%) of 30 patients who were co-allergic to hazelnut or cashew, and 14 (93%) of 15 patients who were co-allergic to hazelnut alone, were either fully desensitised or responded to treatment. 47 (85%) of 55 patients had an adverse reaction (mostly grade 1 or 2) during up-dosing in the clinic; eight patients required intramuscular epinephrine in response to a dose at home. Of 45 patients who had follow-up data for the maintenance phase, all maintained walnut desensitisation and one patient required epinephrine during this period.

INTERPRETATION

Walnut oral immunotherapy can induce desensitisation to walnut as well as cross-desensitisation to pecan and hazelnut in patients who have tree nut co-allergies, with a reasonable safety profile. A low daily dose of the allergen maintains desensitisation.

FUNDING

None.

Long-Term Outcome of Peanut Oral Immunotherapy Facilitated Initially by Omalizumab

BACKGROUND

We successfully used omalizumab to facilitate peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT) in children with reactivity to ≤50mg peanut protein and with high peanut IgE (median, 229 kU/L).

OBJECTIVE

We report on long-term OIT outcomes in these patients, including dosing changes, adverse events, peanut immunoglobulin changes, and quality of life (QoL).

METHODS

Patients were followed for up to 72 months (67 months of maintenance). Outcomes were collected on peanut dose amount, form, and frequency, as well as adverse events, (QoL), and laboratory studies.

RESULTS

Of 13 patients initially enrolled, 7 patients (54%) continued on peanut OIT through month 72; 6 (46%) discontinued therapy because of adverse reactions. Maintenance peanut protein dose varied between 500 and 3500mg. Most patients consumed different peanut-containing products. All patients experienced at least 1 adverse event, and 1 patient developed eosinophilic esophagitis. Peanut-IgE, Arah1-IgE and Arah2-IgE, peanut-SPT, peanut-IgE:IgE ratio, and Arah2-IgE:Arah2-IgG4 ratio decreased on OIT. Peanut-IgG4, Arah1-IgG4, and Arah2-IgG4 initially increased on OIT and then decreased, though not falling to baseline levels. In patients who stopped OIT, there was a trend for reversal of these biomarker changes. Higher peanut-IgE and Arah2-IgE at study month 12 were associated with discontinuation. Patient and parent QoL improved from baseline, even in patients who discontinued OIT.

CONCLUSIONS

Although adjunctive omalizumab allowed for faster and successful desensitization in patients with high peanut-IgE, almost half of patients discontinued OIT within 72 months because of reactions. Patients who stopped therapy had higher month 12 peanut-IgE and Arah2-IgE. It is possible that these patients might benefit from longer omalizumab administration.

Egg oral immunotherapy in children (SEICAP I): Daily or weekly desensitization pattern

BACKGROUND

Studies are required before incorporating egg oral immunotherapy (OIT) into clinical practice. The Spanish Society of Pediatric Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology (SEICAP) conducted a multicenter, randomized controlled study assessing the effectiveness and safety of the OIT using pasteurized egg white (PEW) in egg-allergic children.

METHODS

One hundred and one egg-allergic children (6-9 years) were randomized for 1 year: 25 to an egg-free-diet (CG) and 76 to OIT (target dose 3.3 g PEW proteins), PI (30% weekly plus 5% daily increments) or PII (only 30% weekly increments) buildup patterns. Egg skin prick test, sIgE and sIgG4 serum levels, PEW double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC), and dosing adverse reactions (DARs) were evaluated in all patients from inclusion (T0) until completing 1 year of follow-up (T12). At T12, egg-allergic control patients could start OIT. The effectiveness and safety of OIT and the effect of the buildup pattern were analyzed.

RESULTS

At T12, 4/25 (16.0%) CG patients passed the PEW DBPCFC vs 64/76 (84.2%) OIT that reached total desensitization (P = 0.000); 12 egg-allergic control patients started OIT. Finally, 72/88 (81.81%) patients reached total desensitization, 96.15% PI vs 75.80% on PII (P = 0.01). Induction period (121.12 ± 91.43, median 98.00 days) was longer in patients on PII buildup pattern, and those with allergic asthma, minor threshold dose, or higher egg sIgE (P < 0.05). Most patients (89.06%) developed DARs: 74.53% were mild; 21.90% moderate; and 3.5% requiring adrenaline-treatment. Moderate reactions and those requiring adrenaline were more frequent in patients with allergic asthma, PII pattern, or higher egg sIgE serum antibody levels (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

PEW OIT is an effective treatment for children with persistent egg allergy. A 30% weekly plus 5% daily increment pattern could be more effective and safer than one with only 30% weekly increments.

Next-Generation Approaches for the Treatment of Food Allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

IgE-mediated food allergies are an increasing health concern, and current management includes food avoidance and use of emergency medications. Effective treatment of food allergy is highly desirable. Next generation approaches for the treatment of food allergy aim to improve both safety and efficacy, potentially including long-term tolerance.

RECENT FINDINGS

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) and epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) will likely be integrated into clinical practice as part of food allergy management in the near future. Newer approaches, such as sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), modified proteins, lysosomal-associated membrane protein DNA (LAMP DNA) vaccines, and the use of immunomodulatory agents, are early in development and depending on results, could also become important treatment options. This is a review of novel approaches to the treatment of food allergy that are currently under investigation, including the use of SLIT, modified proteins, probiotics, Chinese herbal supplements, biologic therapies, and DNA vaccines, as well as a summary of the current status of OIT and EPIT.

A Phase 2 Randomized Controlled Multisite Study Using Omalizumab-facilitated Rapid Desensitization to Test Continued vs Discontinued Dosing in Multifood Allergic Individuals

BACKGROUND

As there is limited data on the sustainability of desensitization of multifood-oral immunotherapy (multifood-OIT), we conducted a multisite multifood-OIT study to compare the efficacy of successful desensitization with sustained dosing vs discontinued dosing after multifood-OIT.

METHODS

We enrolled 70 participants, aged 5-22 years with multiple food allergies confirmed by double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFCs). In the open-label phase of the study, all participants received omalizumab (weeks 1-16) and multi-OIT (2-5 allergens; weeks 8-30) and eligible participants (on maintenance dose of each allergen by weeks 28-29) were randomized 1:1:1 to 1 g, 300 mg, or 0 mg arms (blinded, weeks 30-36) and then tested by food challenge at week 36. Success was defined as passing 2 g food challenge to at least 2 foods in week 36.

FINDINGS

Most participants were able to reach a dose of 2 g or higher of each of 2, 3, 4, and 5 food allergens (as applicable to the participant's food allergens in OIT) in week 36 food challenges. Using an intent-to-treat analysis, we did not find evidence that a 300 mg dose was effectively different than a 1 g dose in maintaining desensitization, and both together were more effective than OIT discontinuation (0 mg dose) (85% vs 55%, P = 0.03). Fifty-five percent of the intent-to-treat participants and 69% of per protocol participants randomized to the 0 mg arm showed no objective reactivity after 6 weeks of discontinuation. Cross-desensitization was found between cashew/pistachio and walnut/pecan when only one of the foods was part of OIT. No statistically significant safety differences were found between the three arms.

INTERPRETATION

These results suggest that sustained desensitization after omalizumab-facilitated multi-OIT best occurs through continued maintenance OIT dosing of either 300 mg or 1 g of each food allergen as opposed to discontinuation of multi-OIT.

FUNDING

Sean N. Parker Center for Allergy and Asthma Research at Stanford University, Jeff and MacKenzie Bezos, NIAID AADCRC U19AI104209.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02626611.

The Consortium for Food Allergy Research (CoFAR): The first generation

The Consortium for Food Allergy Research (CoFAR) was established by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in 2005 as a collaborative research program bringing together centers focused on the study of food allergy. CoFAR was charged with developing studies to better understand the pathogenesis and natural history of food allergy, as well as potential approaches to the treatment of food allergy. In its first iteration an observational study of infants with milk and egg allergy was established, and studies of oral immunotherapy for egg allergy and sublingual immunotherapy for peanut allergy were initiated, as was a phase 1 study of a recombinant peanut protein vaccine. CoFAR was renewed in 2010 for an additional 5-year period during which the initial observational study was continued, a study of eosinophilic esophagitis was initiated, and new therapeutic trials were established to study epicutaneous immunotherapy for peanut allergy and to compare the safety and efficacy of egg oral immunotherapy to the ingestion of baked egg for the treatment of egg allergy. The results of these efforts will be reviewed in this rostrum, with a brief look to the future of CoFAR.

Oral and Sublingual Immunotherapy for Treatment of IgE-Mediated Food Allergy

Development of active therapies for IgE-mediated food allergy is a critical action step toward alleviating the adverse medical, psychosocial, and economic burdens on affected patients and families. Significant progress has been observed specifically in the application of single-allergen oral and sublingual immunotherapy for treatment of IgE-mediated food allergy, with emphasis on milk, egg, and peanut as the primary allergens. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has demonstrated efficacy in promoting immunomodulatory effects that lead to the clinical outcome of desensitization, defined as reduced reactivity while on active OIT, in the majority of treated individuals; however, achievement of sustained unresponsiveness following cessation of therapy has been observed in a smaller subset of treated subjects. The potential therapeutic benefits of OIT must be carefully considered in light of the significant potential for adverse events ranging from self-limited or easily treated oropharyngeal, respiratory or gastrointestinal symptoms, to persistent abdominal complaints that lead to cessation of therapy in an estimated 10-15% of treated individuals. To date, the majority of studies have focused on single-allergen OIT approaches; however, multi-allergen OIT has shown promise in initial trials and is the subject of ongoing investigation to address the complex needs of multi-food allergic individuals. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has been utilized for the treatment of food allergy and pollen-food allergy syndrome, demonstrating moderate efficacy, a favorable safety profile and variable tolerability, with oropharyngeal symptoms most commonly observed. Although studies directly comparing OIT and SLIT are limited, in general, the favorable safety profile associated with SLIT comes at the expense of reduced efficacy, while the more robust clinical effects observed with OIT come at the risk of potentially intolerable, treatment-limiting side effects. Future investigation to address specific knowledge gaps including optimal dose, duration, age of initiation, maintenance schedule, mechanisms, predictors of risk and therapeutic response will be important to maximize efficacy, minimize risk and develop personalized, effective approaches to targeting food allergy.

Recent developments and highlights in allergen immunotherapy

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease-modifying treatment option for patients with IgE-mediated inhalant allergies. Though used in clinical practice for more than 100 years, most innovations in AIT efficacy and safety have been developed in the last two decades. This expert review aimed to highlight the recent progress in AIT for both application routes, the sublingual (SLIT) and subcutaneous (SCIT) forms. As such, it covers recent aspects regarding efficacy and safety in clinical trials and real-life data and outlines new concepts in consensus and position papers as well as in guidelines for AIT. Potential clinical and nonclinical biomarkers are discussed. This review also focuses on potential future perspectives in AIT, such as alternative application routes, immune-modulating adjuvants, and recombinant vaccines. In conclusion, this state of the art review provides a comprehensive overview of AIT and highlights unmet needs for the future.

Blocking antibodies induced by peanut oral and sublingual immunotherapy suppress basophil activation and are associated with sustained unresponsiveness

BACKGROUND

Oral and sublingual immunotherapies for peanut allergy have demonstrated efficacy in small clinical trials; however, mechanisms and biomarkers correlating with clinical outcomes remain elusive. Previous studies have demonstrated a role for IgG in post-OIT plasma in the suppression of IgE-mediated mast cell reactions.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to characterize the role that peanut oral and sublingual immunotherapy-induced plasma factors play in the inhibition of ex vivo basophil activation and whether inhibitory activity is associated with clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Plasma samples from subjects on placebo, peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT) or peanut sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), and IgG-depleted plasma or the IgG fraction were incubated with sensitized basophils, and the inhibition of basophil activation following stimulation with peanut extract was measured. Basophil inhibition results were compared between the two routes of immunotherapy, time on treatment and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Plasma from subjects after 12 months of active peanut OIT, but not placebo, inhibits basophil activation ex vivo. Depletion of IgG abrogated the blocking effect of OIT plasma, while the IgG fraction substantially blocked basophil activation. Basophils are inhibited to a similar extent by undiluted OIT and SLIT plasma; however, diluted OIT plasma from the time of desensitization challenge inhibited basophils more than diluted SLIT plasma from time of desensitization challenge. Plasma from subjects who experienced sustained unresponsiveness following OIT inhibited basophils to a greater extent than plasma from subjects who were desensitized, but this was not true for SLIT.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Peanut immunotherapy induces IgG-dependent functional changes in plasma that are associated with OIT but not SLIT clinical outcomes. Understanding the mechanisms of peanut OIT and SLIT may help derive informative biomarkers.

Severity and threshold of peanut reactivity during hospital-based open oral food challenges: An international multicenter survey

BACKGROUND

Peanut allergy is classically managed by food avoidance. Immunotherapy programs are available at some academic centers for selected patients reacting to small amounts of peanut during food challenge. We aimed to determine and compare reaction thresholds and prevalence of anaphylaxis during peanut oral challenges at multiple specialist allergy centers.

METHODS

A retrospective, international survey of anonymized case records from seven specialist pediatric allergy centers from the UK and Ireland, as well as the Australian HealthNuts study. Demographic information, allergy test results, reaction severity and threshold during open oral peanut challenges were collated and analyzed.

RESULTS

Of the 1634 children aged 1-18 years old included, 525 (32%) failed their peanut challenge. Twenty-eight percent reacted to 25 mg, while 38% only reacted after consuming 1 g or more of whole peanut. Anaphylaxis (55 [11%]) was 3 times more common in teenagers than younger children and the likelihood increased at all ages as children consuming more peanut at the challenge. Children who developed anaphylaxis to 25-200 mg of whole peanut were significantly older. Previous history of reaction did not predict reaction threshold or severity.

CONCLUSIONS

More than a third of the children in this large international cohort tolerated the equivalent of one peanut in an oral challenge. Anaphylaxis, particularly to small amounts of peanut, was more common in older children. Tailored immunotherapy programs might be considered not only for children with low, but also higher reaction thresholds. Whether these programs could prevent heightened sensitivity and anaphylaxis to peanut with age also deserves further study.

Multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of vital wheat gluten oral immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Wheat is a common food allergen that can cause anaphylaxis.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine the efficacy and safety of vital wheat gluten (VWG) oral immunotherapy (OIT).

METHODS

After baseline double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC), 46 patients with wheat allergy (median age, 8.7 years; range, 4.2-22.3 years) were randomized 1:1 to low-dose VWG OIT or placebo, with biweekly escalation to 1445 mg of wheat protein (WP). After a year 1 DBPCFC, active subjects continued low-dose VWG OIT for another year and underwent a year 2 DBPCFC and, if passed, a subsequent off-therapy DBPCFC. Placebo-treated subjects crossed over to high-dose VWG OIT (maximum, 2748 mg of WP).

RESULTS

The median baseline successfully consumed dose (SCD) was 43 mg of WP in both groups. At year 1, 12 (52.2%) of 23 low-dose VWG OIT-treated and 0 (0%) of 23 placebo-treated subjects achieved the primary end point of an SCD of 4443 mg of WP or greater (P < .0001); median SCDs were 4443 and 143 mg, respectively. At year 2, 7 (30.4%) of 23 low-dose VWG OIT-treated subjects were desensitized to an SCD of 7443 mg of WP; 3 (13%) achieved sustained unresponsiveness 8 to 10 weeks off therapy. Among placebo-treated subjects who crossed over to high-dose VWG OIT, 12 (57.1%) of 21 were desensitized after 1 year (median SCD, 7443 mg of WP; nonsignificant vs low-dose VWG OIT). At year 1, skin prick test responses and wheat- and omega-5 gliadin-specific IgE levels did not differ between groups; the low-dose VWG OIT median specific IgG₄ level was greater than placebo (wheat, P = .0005; omega-5 gliadin, P = .0001). Year 1 SCDs correlated with wheat-specific (rho = 0.55, P = .0003) and omega-5 gliadin-specific (rho = 0.51, P = .001) IgG₄ levels in all subjects. Among 7822 low-dose VWG OIT doses in year 1, 15.4% were associated with adverse reactions: 0.04% were severe, and 0.08% subjects received epinephrine. Among 7921 placebo doses, 5.8% were associated with adverse reactions; none were severe.

CONCLUSIONS

Low- and high-dose VWG OIT induced desensitization in about one half of the subjects after 1 year of treatment. Two years of low-dose VWG OIT resulted in 30% desensitization, and 13% had sustained unresponsiveness.

New modalities of allergen immunotherapy

Allergen immunotherapy is a rapidly evolving field. Although subcutaneous immunotherapy has been practiced for over a hundred years, improved understanding of the underlying immunological mechanisms has led to the development of new, efficacious and better tolerated allergen-derivatives, adjuvants and encapsulated allergens. Diverse routes of allergen immunotherapy - oral, sublingual, epicutanoeus and intralymphatic - are enabling immunotherapy for anaphylactic food allergies and pollen-food allergy syndrome, while improving the tolerability and effectiveness of aeroallergen immunotherapy. The addition of Anti-IgE therapy decreases adverse effects of subcutaneous and oral immunotherapy.

Long-term outcome of peanut oral immunotherapy-Real-life experience

BACKGROUND

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is currently recommended as a treatment option for peanut-allergic patients. Data regarding its long-term compliance and efficacy in real life are required.

METHODS

Peanut-allergic patients aged ≥4 years were enrolled in a single-center clinical OIT program. Buildup to 3000 mg peanut protein was performed. Patients reaching this dose before or after 12/2014 were instructed to consume 3000 or 1200 mg daily, respectively. Patients were followed ≥6 months after reaching maintenance and rechallenged to 3000 mg.

RESULTS

Of the 145 patients studied, 113 (77.9%) were fully desensitized to 3000 mg and 133 (91.7%) were desensitized to ≥300 mg. 21/145 patients (14.5%) required adrenaline for home-dose reactions during buildup. Non-anaphylactic gastrointestinal symptoms, experienced by 9 patients (6.2%), reversed with dose reduction. Of the 111 patients available for analysis 6 months after reaching 3000 mg, 97 (87.4%) continued regular peanut consumption. Only 2/111 patients (1.8%) required adrenaline over the long-term (median, range; 18, 6-75 months) follow-up. Adherence to treatment was significantly higher in patients consuming 1200 mg (73/76, 96.1%) vs those consuming 3000 mg (24/35, 72.2%), (P = .001). A higher maintenance dosage and home adrenaline requirement during buildup predicted adherence cessation (OR 12.5, P = .001; and OR 7.8, P = .02, respectively). 63/64 patients (98.4%) consuming 1200 mg maintenance dose were successfully rechallenged to 3000 mg.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-life experience demonstrates the efficacy of peanut OIT long-term. A lower maintenance dose minimized treatment cessation while maintaining desensitization. OIT should be performed in qualified centers given the prevalence of adverse reactions, particularly during buildup.

A general strategy for de novo immunotherapy design: the active treatment of food allergy

INTRODUCTION

IgE-mediated food allergy (FA) has been emerging as a public health priority. It is a potentially life-threatening condition with negative impact on the quality of life of patients and their family and its prevalence is increasing in westernized countries in the recent two decades. The current standard approach to FA consists of the strict avoidance of the triggering food. However, an elimination diet may be difficult and frustrating, above all for those foods (e.g. milk and egg) that are pivotal in the common diet. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) may increase the amount of food that the patient can intake without reaction and reduce the risk of potential life-threatening allergic reactions. It is currently considered the most promising treatment for FA. However, many gaps are still unsolved. Areas covered: The aim of this review is to shed light on the current evidence and the main needs in OIT in order to stimulate the development of longitudinal, prospective, and well-designed studies with the final goal of a 'precision medicine.' Expert commentary: Clinical trials for OIT conducted so far are extremely heterogeneous. The aim in the near future is to identify the most suitable candidates to OIT and algorithms for treatments tailored on well-characterized subpopulations of patients.

Is Allergen Immunotherapy in Children Disease Modifying? A Review of the Evidence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although evidence supports a beneficial effect of allergen immunotherapy on the symptoms of allergic respiratory disease and food allergy, it is not clear whether immunotherapy modifies the natural history of these conditions.

RECENT FINDINGS

In aeroallergen immunotherapy, studies suggest that prevention of asthma can be attained. Less evident is the ability of immunotherapy to prevent new allergen sensitizations and more studies are needed to test whether immunotherapy can continue suppressing airway symptoms after treatment discontinuation. In food allergen immunotherapy, there is evidence that unresponsiveness to a food challenge can be sustained in some treatment recipients, but little knowledge exists as to the dose and duration of treatment that can optimize this effect. Suggestive evidence exists that allergen immunotherapy can modify allergic disease in children, but definitive studies are lacking. More research in the field is required.

The future outlook on allergen immunotherapy in children: 2018 and beyond

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only currently available immune-modifying and aetiological treatment for patients suffering from IgE-mediated diseases. In childhood, it represents a suitable therapeutic option to intervene during the early phases of respiratory allergic diseases such as rhino-conjunctivitis and asthma, which is when their progression may be more easily influenced. A growing body of evidence shows that oral immunotherapy represents a promising treatment option in children with persistent IgE- mediated food allergy. The efficacy of AIT is under investigation also in patients with extrinsic atopic dermatitis, currently with controversial results. Furthermore, AIT might be a strategy to prevent the development of a new sensitization or of a (new) allergic disease. However, there are still some methodological criticisms, such as: a) the regimen of administration and the amount of the maintenance dose are both largely variable; b) the protocols of administration are not standardized; c) the description and classification of side effects is variable among studies and needs to be standardized; d) quality of life and evaluation of health economics are overall missing. All these aspects make difficult to compare each study with another. In addition, the content of major allergen(s) remains largely variable among manufacturers and the availability of AIT products differences among countries. The interest and the attention to AIT treatment are currently fervent and increasing. Well-designed studies are awaited in the near future in order to overcome the current gaps in the evidence and furtherly promote implementation strategies.

Quality of Life of Food-Allergic Patients Before, During, and After Oral Immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) for food allergy is demanding but data on patients' quality of life (QOL) throughout the process are limited.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize changes in QOL of food-allergic patients during and after OIT.

METHODS

In a prospective cohort study, the Food Allergy Quality of Life Questionnaire-Parental Form (FAQLQ-PF) was administered to parents of 191 consecutive children aged 4 to 12 years undergoing OIT for food allergy. Questionnaires were administered at OIT initiation, mid up-dosing, upon reaching maintenance, and after 6 months of follow-up. Age- and sex-matched food-allergic children (n = 48) not undergoing OIT served as controls.

RESULTS

FAQLQ-PF scores had significantly improved (decreased) from OIT initiation to reaching full maintenance (emotional impact [EI], 3.66-3.32, P = .001; food anxiety [FA], 3.90-3.32, P < .001; social and dietary limitation [SDL], 3.50-2.94, P < .001; and total score, 3.69-3.19, P < .001) and partial maintenance, whereas no change was noted in control patients. Worse baseline QOL, single food allergy, and a younger age predicted greater QOL improvement. Of the 85 (88.5%) patients who completed the FAQLQ-PF at mid up-dosing and for whom QOL deteriorated, a significant improvement was noted upon reaching maintenance. Additional significant improvement in QOL was observed in the 95 (88.8%) patients who completed the FAQLQ-PF 6 months after reaching maintenance (EI, 3.414-2.993, P = 0.049; FA, 3.37-2.593, P = .001; SDL, 2.989-2.264, P = .001; and total score, 3.266-2.614, P = .001).

CONCLUSION

The QOL of food-allergic children improves significantly upon reaching OIT maintenance, with additional improvement 6 months later. The detrimental effect of OIT on some patients' QOL during up-dosing is reversed upon reaching maintenance.

Anaphylaxis in the 21st century: phenotypes, endotypes, and biomarkers

Anaphylaxis is the most serious of all allergic reactions and can be fatal. The diagnosis is frequently delayed, and misdiagnosis often occurs with asthma or urticaria. Biomarkers such as tryptase are not routinely checked, and appropriate treatment with epinephrine is not administered in a majority of cases, increasing the risk of poor outcomes. The objective of this review is to provide a better understanding of the pathophysiology of anaphylaxis with a description of phenotypes, endotypes, and biomarkers available in both the clinical and research settings. Expanding knowledge with regard to the presentation, causes, and triggers for anaphylaxis among health care providers will improve its diagnosis and management, increase patient safety, and decrease morbidity and mortality.

Debates in Allergy Medicine: Oral immunotherapy shortens the duration of milk and egg allergy - the con argument

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has been shown to be effective for inducing desensitization in children with cow’s milk and egg allergy. In contrast, there is limited evidence that OIT can induce tolerance or sustained unresponsiveness in food allergic patients. Sustained unresponsiveness, determined by a food challenge following a period of secondary avoidance, has been suggested to reflect a more enduring state of tolerance and is pertinent when considering the ability of OIT to shorten the duration of food allergy. While it has been shown that children who tolerate baked forms of egg and milk are more likely to develop tolerance compared to those who are allergic to baked forms of these foods, there is no convincing evidence that OIT using modified allergen in baked foods can hasten resolution of cow’s milk and egg allergy. Instead, it is likely that baked milk and baked egg tolerant children represent a sub-phenotype of milk and egg allergy that is more likely to resolve spontaneously over time.

Debates in Allergy Medicine: Does oral immunotherapy shorten the duration of milk and egg allergy? The pro argument

The development of oral tolerance or food allergy is an active process, related to dynamic interactions between host immune cells, microbiome, dietary factors, and food allergens. Oral tolerance is the default immune response in the gut. A food allergy occurs when this process fails and a pathologic Th2 response is activated. Oral food immunotherapy (OIT) aims to restore immune tolerance in food-allergic individuals. The stimulation of Tregs production seems to represent a crucial step in inducing long-term tolerance, but other mechanisms (e.g., the suppression of mast cell and basophil reactivity, changes in allergen-specific cells with regulatory markers) are involved. Several studies reported the efficacy of OIT in terms of "sustained unresponsiveness" (SU), an operational definition of immune tolerance. In successfully treated subjects, the ability to pass an oral food challenge 2 to 8 weeks after stopping the food allergen exposure seems to be conditioned by the treatment starting age, frequency, amount or type of food consumed, and by the duration of the maintenance phase. Based on the available data, the percentage of milk- and egg-allergic subjects achieving sustained unresponsiveness after an OIT ranges from 21% to 58,3%. A comprehensive understanding of mechanisms underlying the induction of oral tolerance with OIT, or natural tolerance to food allergens in healthy individuals, could potentially lead to advances in development of better treatment options for food allergic patients.

Immunotherapy for IgE-mediated wheat allergy

Among various routes of immunotherapy for food allergy, oral immunotherapy (OIT) appears to have a promising result due to its ability to modify abnormal immunologic mechanism of IgE-mediated food allergy. Other methods for immunomodulation such as sublingual (SLIT) or epicutaneous (EPIT) immunotherapy which carry lower rates of systemic reactions, may have less efficacy. Wheat has recently been recognized as a more common cause of food-induced anaphylaxis than previously recognized, especially among young children, around the world. In wheat allergic patients, avoidance recommended as standard recommendation is not easy to follow, because wheat has been used as a common constituents in various kinds of consumed foods in every day's life. Therefore, wheat OIT may be considered as an alternative treatments of those in which wheat avoidance is not sufficient to avert frequent events of anaphylaxis resulting from inadvertent exposure to small amount of wheat among this population. Currently, only few clinical trials about wheat OIT are available. In this review, we discuss available protocols of wheat OIT, initial starting dose, maintenance dose, and the strategies to minimize the side effects during the treatment.

Update on oral immunotherapy for egg allergy

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an emerging treatment of IgE-mediated egg allergy. In the past decade, a multitude of studies have assessed the potential for egg OIT to induce clinical desensitization. The following review will evaluate the efficacy and safety of this therapy as determined by randomized controlled, non-randomized controlled and uncontrolled trials. Recent studies using reduced allergenic egg products and anti-IgE assisted therapy to improve egg OIT safety will also be discussed. Recent advances in the mechanisms underlying food OIT suggest that certain immune parameters may be helpful in monitoring response to therapy, including egg OIT. Although, egg OIT is consistently shown to be effective with regards to clinical desensitization, fewer studies have looked at persistent tolerance or sustained unresponsiveness. Limited results of long-term follow-up trials suggest that this therapy may have disease-modifying effects. In general, the comparison of studies is complicated by major differences in study designs, OIT protocols and endpoints.

The effect of oral immunotherapy treatment in severe IgE mediated milk, peanut, and egg allergy in adults

INTRODUCTION

The standard care of severe food allergy in both adults and children means avoidance of allergens. In recent years promising results of oral immunotherapy (OIT) have been reported in children. In adults, information on OIT in severe food allergy is very limited.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to study if OIT is possible in adults.

METHODS

We report OIT results in 10 adult patients with milk OIT, nine adult patients with peanut OIT, and four adult patients with egg OIT. The allergy was confirmed with allergen specific IgE tests and oral food challenges (open in milk allergy and double-blind in peanut and egg allergy). The OIT was performed as open.

RESULTS

The median dose of protein that led to discontinuation of allergen challenge because of symptoms was 7.5 mg in milk allergy, 25 mg in peanut allergy, and 15 mg in egg allergy. The median period of OIT was 515 days. Currently on OIT are 6/10 milk allergic patients, 4/9 peanut allergic patients and 3/4 egg allergic patients. The median dose of milk protein increased by 60-fold during OIT compared to the allergen challenge dose. In peanut OIT the median dose increased by eightfold and in egg allergy the dose increased with OIT by 35-fold. Local itching was the most common side effect of OIT (73.9% of the patients), four patients reported having used epinephrine autoinjector and three patients having needed emergency room treatment.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

OIT can be given in adult patients with severe milk, peanut, or egg allergy only in selected cases. OIT leads into desensitization but it is not clear whether persistent tolerance can be achieved. Mild adverse events during OIT are common.

Wheat oral immunotherapy was moderately successful but was associated with very frequent adverse events in children aged 6-18 years

AIM

This study investigated oral immunotherapy (OIT) for children aged 6-18 years with wheat allergies.

METHODS

Well-cooked wheat spaghetti was given to 100 children with wheat allergies every day for 17 weeks, increasing from 0.3 to 2000 mg of wheat protein, followed by three- and nine-month maintenance phases. Blood samples were taken before therapy and at follow-up visits. The study was carried out in 2009-2015 in four Finnish paediatric allergology units.

RESULTS

The children (67% male) had a mean age of 11.6 years (range 6.1-18.6), and 57 were using wheat daily 16 months after the initiation of therapy. Allergic symptoms occurred in 94/100 children: mild in 34, moderate in 36 and severe in 24. Specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) for ω-5-gliadin was significantly higher in patients who did not reach the target dose and were related to the intensity of reactions.

CONCLUSION

The majority (57%) of children with wheat allergies could use wheat in their daily diet 16 months after the initiation of OIT, but 94/100 had adverse reactions and 60 were moderate or severe. Specific IgE to ω-5-gliadin may provide a biomarker for how much wheat can be tolerated and the intensity of the reactions to immunotherapy.

Oral and sublingual immunotherapy for egg allergy

BACKGROUND

Clinical egg allergy is a common food allergy. Current management relies upon strict allergen avoidance. Oral immunotherapy might be an optional treatment, through desensitization to egg allergen.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of oral and sublingual immunotherapy in children and adults with immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated egg allergy as compared to a placebo treatment or an avoidance strategy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 13 databases for journal articles, conference proceedings, theses and trials registers using a combination of subject headings and text words (last search 31 March 2017).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing oral immunotherapy or sublingual immunotherapy administered by any protocol with placebo or an elimination diet. Participants were children or adults with clinical egg allergy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We retrieved 97 studies from the electronic searches. We selected studies, extracted data and assessed the methodological quality. We attempted to contact the study investigators to obtain the unpublished data, wherever possible. We used the I² statistic to assess statistical heterogeneity. We estimated a pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for each outcome using a Mantel-Haenzel fixed-effect model if statistical heterogeneity was low (I² value less than 50%). We rated the quality of evidence for all outcomes using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 RCTs that met our inclusion criteria, that involved a total of 439 children (oral immunotherapy 249; control intervention 190), aged 1 year to 18 years. Each study used a different oral immunotherapy protocol; none used sublingual immunotherapy. Three studies used placebo and seven used an egg avoidance diet as the control. Primary outcomes were: an increased amount of egg that can be ingested and tolerated without adverse events while receiving allergen-specific oral immunotherapy or sublingual immunotherapy, compared to control; and a complete recovery from egg allergy after completion of oral immunotherapy or sublingual immunotherapy, compared to control. Most children (82%) in the oral immunotherapy group could ingest a partial serving of egg (1 g to 7.5 g) compared to 10% of control group children (RR 7.48, 95% CI 4.91 to 11.38; RD 0.73, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.80). Fewer than half (45%) of children receiving oral immunotherapy were able to tolerate a full serving of egg compared to 10% of the control group (RR 4.25, 95% CI 2.77 to 6.53; RD 0.35, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.43). All 10 trials reported numbers of children with serious adverse events (SAEs) and numbers of children with mild-to-severe adverse events. SAEs requiring epinephrine/adrenaline presented in 21/249 (8.4%) of children in the oral immunotherapy group, and none in the control group. Mild-to-severe adverse events were frequent; 75% of children presented mild-to-severe adverse events during oral immunotherapy treatment versus 6.8% of the control group (RR 8.35, 95% CI 5.31 to 13.12). Of note, seven studies used an egg avoidance diet as the control. Adverse events occurred in 4.2% of children, which may relate to accidental ingestion of egg-containing food. Three studies used a placebo control with adverse events present in 2.6% of children. Overall, there was inconsistent methodological rigour in the trials. All studies enrolled small numbers of children and used different methods to provide oral immunotherapy. Eight included studies were judged to be at high risk of bias in at least one domain. Furthermore, the quality of evidence was judged to be low due to small numbers of participants and events, and possible biases.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Frequent and increasing exposure to egg over one to two years in people who are allergic to egg builds tolerance, with almost everyone becoming more tolerant compared with a minority in the control group and almost half of people being totally tolerant of egg by the end of treatment compared with 1 in 10 people who avoid egg. However, nearly all who received treatment experienced adverse events, mainly allergy-related. We found that 1 in 12 children had serious allergic reactions requiring adrenaline, and some people gave up oral immunotherapy. It appears that oral immunotherapy for egg allergy is effective, but confidence in the trade-off between benefits and harms is low; because there was a small number of trials with few participants, and methodological problems with some trials.

EAACI Guidelines on allergen immunotherapy: IgE-mediated food allergy

Food allergy can result in considerable morbidity, impairment of quality of life, and healthcare expenditure. There is therefore interest in novel strategies for its treatment, particularly food allergen immunotherapy (FA-AIT) through the oral (OIT), sublingual (SLIT), or epicutaneous (EPIT) routes. This Guideline, prepared by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) Task Force on Allergen Immunotherapy for IgE-mediated Food Allergy, aims to provide evidence-based recommendations for active treatment of IgE-mediated food allergy with FA-AIT. Immunotherapy relies on the delivery of gradually increasing doses of specific allergen to increase the threshold of reaction while on therapy (also known as desensitization) and ultimately to achieve post-discontinuation effectiveness (also known as tolerance or sustained unresponsiveness). Oral FA-AIT has most frequently been assessed: here, the allergen is either immediately swallowed (OIT) or held under the tongue for a period of time (SLIT). Overall, trials have found substantial benefit for patients undergoing either OIT or SLIT with respect to efficacy during treatment, particularly for cow's milk, hen's egg, and peanut allergies. A benefit post-discontinuation is also suggested, but not confirmed. Adverse events during FA-AIT have been frequently reported, but few subjects discontinue FA-AIT as a result of these. Taking into account the current evidence, FA-AIT should only be performed in research centers or in clinical centers with an extensive experience in FA-AIT. Patients and their families should be provided with information about the use of FA-AIT for IgE-mediated food allergy to allow them to make an informed decision about the therapy.

Advances in the approach to the patient with food allergy

Advances in food allergy diagnosis, management, prevention, and therapeutic interventions have been significant over the past 2 decades. Evidence-based national and international guidelines have streamlined food allergy diagnosis and management, whereas paradigm-shifting work in primary prevention of peanut allergy has resulted in significant modifications in the approach to early food introduction in infants and toddlers. Innovative investigation of food allergy epidemiology, systems biology, effect, and management has provided important insights. Although active therapeutic approaches to food allergy remain experimental, progress toward licensed therapies has been substantial. Mechanistic understanding of the immunologic processes underlying food allergy and immunotherapy will inform the future design of therapeutic approaches targeting the food-induced allergic response. Global strategies to mitigate the substantial medical, economic, and psychosocial burden of food allergy in affected subjects and families will require engagement of stakeholders across multiple sectors in research, health care, public health, government, educational institutions, and industry. However, the relationship between the well-informed allergy care provider and the patient and family remains fundamental for optimizing the care of the patient with food allergy.