A Web site-based reporting system for monitoring home treatment during oral immunotherapy for food allergy

Hazelnut Oral Immunotherapy Desensitizes Hazelnut But Not Other Tree Nut Allergies (Nut CRACKER Study)

BACKGROUND

Data on oral immunotherapy (OIT) for hazelnut allergy is limited and its potential to cross-desensitize for other nuts is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To study the efficacy and safety of hazelnut OIT in desensitizing to hazelnut and additional tree nuts.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational study of 30 hazelnut-allergic patients aged 4 years or older who underwent hazelnut OIT. Full desensitization (4,000 mg protein) rates were compared with those of 14 observational controls, and immunologic changes during OIT were measured. We determined cross-desensitization in cases of walnut and cashew co-allergy (n = 12). Inhibition of IgE binding to walnut by hazelnut was evaluated by ELISA in a separate set of dual walnut-hazelnut allergic patients.

RESULTS

The rate of full hazelnut desensitization following OIT was 96.7% (29 of 30 patients) compared with 14.3% (two of 14) in controls (odds ratio = 25.7; 95% CI, 3.7-178.7; P < .001). Five patients (16.7%) were treated with injectable epinephrine for home reactions. Hazelnut skin prick test and specific IgE to hazelnut and its main components, Cor a 9, 14 and 16, decreased whereas specific IgG4 increased during OIT. A maintenance dose of 1,200 mg hazelnut protein was sufficient to maintain full desensitization. No cross-desensitization was noted in dual hazelnut-cashew allergic patients (n = 6). In dual hazelnut-walnut allergic patients, an increase in the walnut eliciting dose was observed in two of six patients (33.2%) (to 1,200 and 4,200 mg, respectively). Similarly, by cross-inhibition ELISA, hazelnut competed for IgE-binding to walnut in five of 25 (20%) hazelnut-walnut co-allergic patients (20%).

CONCLUSIONS

Hazelnut OIT is highly effective, with a safety profile similar to that of OIT to other nuts. Cross-desensitization to walnut and cashew is unlikely.

Mobile App/Web Platform for Monitoring Food Oral Immunotherapy in Children: Longitudinal Clinical Validation Study

BACKGROUND

Milk and egg allergies significantly impact the quality of life, particularly in children. In this regard, food oral immunotherapy (OIT) has emerged as an effective treatment option; however, the occurrence of frequent adverse reactions poses a challenge, necessitating close monitoring during treatment.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the ability of a new mobile/web app called OITcontrol to monitor milk and egg OIT.

METHODS

Patients undergoing milk or egg OIT were recruited and divided into 2 groups: the active group used the OITcontrol app in conjunction with standard written monitoring methods, whereas the control group relied solely on written diaries. Investigators documented hospital doses, hospital reactions, and administered treatments on the website. Patients recorded their daily allergen home-dose intake, home reactions, and administered treatments using the app. The following variables were compared between both groups: number and severity of hospital and reported home reactions, patient's adhesion to the OITcontrol app or written diary or both in terms of daily home-dose intake and home reactions recording, and treatment and dose adjustment compliance at home in case of reaction.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients were assigned to be monitored using the OITcontrol app along with additional written methods (active group), while 14 patients relied solely on a written paper diary (control group). A similar distribution was observed in terms of sex, age, basal characteristics, allergen treated in OIT, premedication, and sensitization profile. Active patients reported a comparable number of hospital and home reactions compared with the control group. In terms of recording system usage, 13/16 (81%) active patients used the OITcontrol app, while 10/14 (71%) control patients relied on the written diary. Among active patients, 6/16 (38%) used both methods, and 1 active patient used only written methods. However, control patients recorded home reactions more frequently than active patients (P=.009). Among active patients, the app was the preferred method for recording reactions (59/86, 69%), compared with the written diary (15/86, 17%) or both methods (12/86, 14%; P<.001). Treatment compliance in home-recorded reactions was similar between both groups (P=.15). However, treatment indications after an adverse reaction were more frequently followed (P=.04) in reactions recorded solely in the app (36/59, 61%) than in the written diary (29/71, 41%) or both systems (4/12, 33%). Moreover, compliance with dose adjustments after a moderate-severe reaction in home-recorded reactions was higher in the active group than in the control group (P<.001). Home reactions recorded only in the app (16/19, 84%) were more likely to follow dose adjustments (P<.001) than those recorded in the written diary (3/20, 15%) or using both methods (2/3, 67%).

CONCLUSIONS

The OITcontrol app appears to be a valuable tool for monitoring OIT treatment in children with food allergies. It proves to be a suitable method for recording daily home dose intakes and reactions, and it seems to enhance adherence to treatment indications following an adverse reaction as well as compliance with dose adjustments in home reactions. However, additional studies are necessary to comprehensively grasp the benefits and limitations of using the OITcontrol app in the management of OIT.

Eosinophil-Associated Gastrointestinal Manifestations During OIT

Gastrointestinal adverse events are common during oral immunotherapy (OIT) for food allergy and range from immediate IgE-mediated reactions to non-anaphylactic clinical presentations. This review aims to summarize recent findings on non-anaphylactic eosinophil-associated gastrointestinal adverse events during OIT. Two clinical presentations of non-anaphylactic eosinophil-associated gastrointestinal adverse events during OIT are identified, each with a different paradigm for treatment, and distinguished by their time of onset. In the first clinical entity, characterized by its onset early in the course of treatment, patients present with abdominal pain, nausea, and/or vomiting. The symptoms become evident typically within weeks to months of starting OIT. These symptoms, however, are not temporally related to the time of dose administration, as in the case of immediate IgE-mediated anaphylactic reactions. While esophageal biopsies, when performed, can demonstrate eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), baseline esophageal eosinophilia has also been observed in food allergic patients prior to OIT. A potential non-invasive biomarker, the peripheral absolute eosinophil count (AEC), often rises during these reactions and subsides after dose reduction and subsequent resolution of symptoms. OIT can usually then be resumed, albeit at a slower pace, without a recurrence of symptoms. Risk factors for development of symptoms early during OIT include a high starting dose and a baseline AEC of greater than 600. The second, and much less frequently encountered, non-anaphylactic gastrointestinal adverse event related to OIT, presents months to years after initiating OIT. In this latter group, patients present with the classical clinical symptoms and endoscopic findings of EoE. In contrast to the acute onset group, peripheral eosinophilia is usually not observed in these cases. This OIT-associated EoE has shown good response to standard EoE treatment approaches of proton pump inhibitors or swallowed steroids. Most patients with eosinophil-associated adverse reactions are able to continue OIT and remain desensitized. Treatment approaches depend on the specific subtype of these reactions and relate to the stages of OIT treatment.

Severe Anaphylactic Reactions to Home Doses of Oral Immunotherapy for Food Allergy

BACKGROUND

Severe anaphylactic reactions to home doses may occur during food allergy oral immunotherapy (OIT).

OBJECTIVE

To study the rate and risk factors for such reactions.

METHODS

We studied all patients aged greater than 3.5 years who completed OIT in a single center between April 2010 and January 2020. All home epinephrine-treated reactions (HETRs) were identified. High-grade HETRs (HG-HETRs) were defined as HETRs involving respiratory (SpO2 of 94% or less), cardiovascular (low blood pressure), or central nervous system impairment (loss of consciousness). We investigated the rate and risk factors for HG-HETRs.

RESULTS

A total of 1,637 OIT treatments were studied: milk (880), peanut (346), tree nuts (221), sesame (115), and egg (75). Of 390 identified HETRs, 30 HG-HETRs occurred during 27 treatments (1.65% of all treatments). Nearly all (26 of 30) were during milk OIT in patients with house dust mite (HDM) sensitization and asthma (26 of 30 each). Of the 30 patients with HG-HETRs, 21 recovered with one or two epinephrine treatments, but nine (0.55% of all treatments) did not respond to a second dose of epinephrine and were deemed to have refractory anaphylaxis. Three patients required intensive care unit admission and three received epinephrine drip, but none required ventilatory support. Risk factors for HG-HETRs included milk OIT (P = .031), asthma (P = .02) and HDM sensitization (P = .02). No specific triggers for HG-HETR were identified. Of patients with HG-HETRs, 25.9% were fully desensitized, including the four non-milk treated patients; 22.2% were partially desensitized; and 51.9% failed.

CONCLUSIONS

High-grade HETRs are uncommon, particularly refractory anaphylactic reactions to home OIT doses. Although milk OIT, asthma, and HDM sensitization are the main risk factors for such reactions, identification of patients who are at risk is challenging.

Factors associated with home epinephrine-treated reactions during peanut and tree-nut oral immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Home reactions requiring epinephrine administration, a marker of their severity, restrict the widespread use of oral immunotherapy (OIT), but their risk factors are largely not known.

OBJECTIVE

To identify risk factors for such reactions during OIT to most allergenic foods.

METHODS

All patients who began OIT for peanut, tree nuts, sesame, or egg allergy at the Shamir Medical Center between April 2010 and January 2020 were enrolled. The patients were instructed to use their epinephrine autoinjectors during reactions consisting of severe abdominal pain, significant shortness of breath, or lethargy, or whenever in uncertainty of reaction severity. Patients with and without home epinephrine-treated reactions (HETRs) were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 757 OIT treatments for peanut (n = 346), tree nuts (n = 221; walnut n = 147, cashew n = 57, hazelnut n = 16, almond n = 1), sesame (n = 115), and egg (n = 75) allergies were administered to 644 patients. Eighty-three (10.9%) patients experienced HETRs. The highest rate of HETRs was experienced during walnut (20.4%) or hazelnut (25%) OIT, followed by peanut (9.8%), sesame (6.1%), egg (6.7%), and cashew (5.3%) OIT. Risk factors for HETRs included a reaction treated in an emergency department (ER) (P = .005) before starting OIT and a reaction treated with epinephrine during in-clinic induction (P < .001). Significantly fewer patients with (73.6%) than without (88.3%) HETRs achieved full desensitization (P = .001), but only a few patients with HETRs (8.4%) failed treatment.

CONCLUSION

Previous reaction severity is the main predictor for HETRs during OIT. These reactions are more frequent during walnut and hazelnut OIT than during OIT for other foods studied. Most patients experiencing HETRs achieved desensitization.

Efficacy and safety of food allergy oral immunotherapy in adults

BACKGROUND

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an emerging method for treating food allergy in children. However, data regarding adults undergoing this process are lacking.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of patients with food allergy aged ≥17 years who completed OIT treatment between April 2010 and December 2020 at Shamir Medical Center. Data were compared with that of children aged 4 to <11 years and adolescents aged ≥11 to 17 treated during the same time period.

RESULTS

A total of 96 adults at a median age of 22.3 years who underwent OIT for milk (n = 53), peanut (n = 18), sesame (n = 7), egg (n = 5), and tree nuts (n = 13) were analyzed and compared with 1299 children and 309 adolescents. Adults experienced more adverse reactions requiring injectable epinephrine, both during in-clinic up-dosing (49% vs. 15.9% and 26.5% for children and adolescents, respectively, p < 0.0001) and during home treatment (22.9% vs. 12.4%, p = 0.007 for children, and 17.5%, p = 0.23 for adolescents). Most adults (61.5%) were fully desensitized, but the rates of full desensitization were significantly lower than children (73.4%, p = 0.013). Significantly more adults (28.3%) undergoing milk OIT failed treatment than children (14.3%, p = 0.015) and adolescents (14.1%, p = 0.022), while failure rates in adults undergoing OIT for other foods were low (9.3%) and comparable with children and adolescents.

CONCLUSIONS

OIT is successful in desensitizing most adults with IgE-mediated food allergy. Adults undergoing milk OIT are at increased risk for severe reactions and for OIT failure while failure rates in adults undergoing OIT for other foods are low.

Cashew oral immunotherapy for desensitizing cashew-pistachio allergy (NUT CRACKER study)

BACKGROUND

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is a treatment option for patients with milk, egg, and peanut allergy, but data on the efficacy and safety of cashew OIT are limited.

METHODS

A cohort of 50 cashew-allergic patients aged ≥4 years, who were consecutively enrolled into cashew OIT (target dose 4000 mg protein) between 4/2016 and 12/2019. Fifteen cashew-allergic patients who continued cashew elimination served as observational controls. Co-allergy to pistachio and walnut was determined. Full desensitization rate and associated immunological changes in both groups were compared. Patients fully desensitized to cashew were instructed to consume a dose of 1200 mg cashew protein for 6 months and were then challenged to a full dose. Patients with co-allergy to pistachio or walnut were challenged to the respective nut.

RESULTS

Forty-four of 50 OIT-treated patients (88%) compared to 0% in controls tolerated a dose of 4000 mg cashew protein at the end of the study (odds ratio 8.3, 95% CI 3.9-17.7, p < 0.001). An additional three patients were desensitized to 1200 mg cashew protein, and three patients stopped treatment. Three patients (6%) were treated with injectable epinephrine for home reactions. Desensitized patients had decreased SPT, sIgE, basophil reactivity, and increased sIgG4, following treatment. Following cashew desensitization, all pistachio (n = 35) and four of eight walnut co-allergic patients were cross-desensitized to the respective nut. All (n = 44) patients consuming a low cashew dose for ≥6 months following desensitization passed a full-dose cashew OFC.

CONCLUSIONS

Cashew OIT desensitizes most cashew-allergic patients and cross-desensitizes to pistachio. Safety is similar to OIT for other foods.

Triggers for Home Epinephrine-Treated Reactions During Oral Immunotherapy for Food Allergy

BACKGROUND

Home reactions requiring epinephrine treatment represent a significant obstacle to oral immunotherapy (OIT) and impair treatment outcome.

OBJECTIVE

To identify potential triggers for such reactions for improvement of patient safety.

METHODS

All patients aged older than 3.7 years who began an open-label OIT treatment program to milk, peanut, egg, sesame, or tree nuts in the Institute of Allergy, Immunology, and Pediatric Pulmonology at Shamir Medical Center between April 2010 and March 2018 were enrolled. Information on home epinephrine-treated reactions (HETRs) during the up-dosing phase of OIT was collected from the documentation in patients' files and the reports were transmitted by email and via a web reporting system.

RESULTS

A total 1,270 OIT treatments were included (milk 780; peanut 256; egg 63; sesame 72; and tree nuts 99). Home epinephrine was administered in 200 treatments (15.7%) and in 70 of them a second epinephrine-treated reaction occurred. The leading identified triggers for HETRs were physical exercise temporally associated with administration of home dose (20%), and dose consumption during infectious disease (16.7%), or when fatigued (13.8%). The rate of first HETRs was highest (10.1%) to doses of 500 mg protein or less and particularly to 300 mg or less. The occurrence of first HETRs was highest (35.5%) during the first and decreased to 13.8% by the last of the 4-week home-treatment phase. Second HETRs occurred in a similar rate throughout these 4 weeks. The incidence of HETRs was highest during pollen season and vacation months.

CONCLUSIONS

The identification of factors, some protocol-dependent, that trigger HETRs should assist in improving OIT safety.

Oral Immunotherapy in Children: Clinical Considerations and Practical Management

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) in pediatric patients provides an alternative option to the current standard of care in food allergy, which is allergen avoidance and reactive treatment. Because patients are exposed to one or more food allergens during treatment, OIT is associated with adverse events and can be a cumbersome process for children, their caregivers, and clinicians. However, there have been an overwhelming number of studies that show high efficacy in both single- and multi-allergen OIT, and that quality of life is greatly improved for both patients and their families after undergoing immunotherapy. This review discusses clinical considerations for OIT in pediatrics, including efficacy and safety, practical management, and future directions of treatment.

Home epinephrine-treated reactions in food allergy oral immunotherapy: Lessons from the coronavirus disease 2019 lockdown

Background

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is effective in desensitizing patients with food allergy but adverse reactions limit its use.

Objective

To study the effect of the coronavirus disease 2019 lockdown in Israel between March 15, 2020, and April 30, 2020, on the incidence of home epinephrine-treated reactions.

Methods

All patients who were in the up-dosing phase of OIT for greater than or equal to 1 month during the lockdown, or a respective period in years 2015 to 2019, were studied. The incidence of home-epinephrine treated reactions during the 2020 lockdown was compared with that in the respective period in 2015 to 2019 and to periods before and after the lockdown.

Results

A total of 1163 OIT treatments were analyzed. Two epinephrine injections occurred during 2020 (0.7%) compared with 29 injections (3.28%) during 2015 to 2019 (P = .03). Patients treated in 2020 were older (8.1 vs 7 years, P < .01) and had a significantly lower single highest tolerated dose (12 vs 20 mg protein, P < .01). The rate of milk-OIT was lower (P = .01), but the total number of milk treatments was higher (99 vs 71 to 82) in 2020 compared with 2015 to 2019. On multivariate analysis, treatments during the 2020 lockdown were performed in older patients (P = .001), primarily for nonmilk (P = .03), began with a lower single highest tolerated dose (P = .006), and were associated with significantly less home epinephrine-treated reactions (P = .05) compared with those in 2015 to 2019. Patients treated in 2020 experienced more epinephrine-treated reactions in adjacent periods before (n = 8) and after (n = 6) the lockdown.

Conclusion

The lower rate of home epinephrine-treated reactions during the coronavirus disease 2019 lockdown in Israel suggests that potentially avoidable triggers contribute significantly to the rate of adverse reactions during OIT.

Quality of life of children aged 8-12 years undergoing food allergy oral immunotherapy: Child and parent perspective

BACKGROUND

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) for food allergy improves the quality of life (QOL) of children from parental perspective but little is known about the child perception.

METHODS

The Food Allergy Quality of Life Questionnaire-Child Form (FAQLQ-CF) was administered to children aged 8-12 years, and the FAQLQ-Parent Form (FAQLQ-PF) was administered to their parents at the start of OIT for milk, egg, peanut, sesame, or tree nuts, at the end of up-dosing, and after 6 months of follow-up. Food-allergic children not undergoing OIT served as controls. Children QOL scores were compared to their parents.

RESULTS

The total FAQLQ-CF score of 103 children undergoing OIT improved significantly from start of OIT (median (IQR); 4.8, 3.8-5.7) to end of up-dosing (3.9, 3-5.2) (P < .001). A greater improvement was noted in the 56 children who reached a follow-up visit, from 5.0 (3.7-5.8) at OIT start to 3.1 (1.8-5.0) on follow-up, (P < .001). In contrast, FAQLQ-CF scores of control patients improved mildly and nonsignificantly between the two time points from 5.3 (4.3-5.7) to 4.8 (3.6-6.0), (P = .13). The improvement in the total FAQLQ-CF scores from OIT start to follow-up was significantly greater compared to the change in control patients during observation (P = .015). Parents reported better QOL scores compared to their children at all stages of OIT (start 4.0, 3.2-5, P = .004; end of up-dosing 2.9, 1.9-4.7, P = .04; follow-up 2.2, 1.6-3.6, P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS

QOL of food-allergic children undergoing OIT improves significantly compared to controls. Parents perceive QOL to be better than the perception of the children.

Novel Approaches to Food Allergy Management During COVID-19 Inspire Long-Term Change

The SARS-CoV2 pandemic has prompted a re-evaluation of our current practice of medicine. The seemingly abrupt worldwide spread of this disease resulted in immediate changes and a reduction in many allergy-focussed services and procedures. The reality of the long-term circulation of this virus in our communities requires us to evolve as a specialty. In this article, we outline current and future challenges in the management of food allergy in light of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We focus on infant food allergy prevention, management of anaphylaxis, accurate diagnosis with oral food challenges, and active management of food allergy with oral immunotherapy. This article identifies the challenges of conflicting guidelines, shortcomings of acute management approaches, and inherent system deficiencies. We offer perspectives and strategies that can be implemented now, including an evaluation of virtual care and telemedicine for the management of food allergy. The use of a shared decision-making model results in novel approaches that can benefit our patients and our specialty for years to come. COVID-19 has forced us to re-evaluate our current way of thinking about food allergy management to better treat our patients.

Patient Characteristics and Risk Factors for Home Epinephrine-Treated Reactions During Oral Immunotherapy for Food Allergy

BACKGROUND

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is effective in desensitizing food-allergic patients but adverse events limit its applicability.

OBJECTIVE

To identify risk factors for home epinephrine-treated reactions during the build-up phase of OIT.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of patients older than 3.7 years undergoing OIT for food allergy at Shamir Medical Center between April 2010 and March 2019. All patients with a final disposition of full desensitization, partial desensitization, or failure were analyzed. Risk factors and outcome of home epinephrine-treated reactions were examined.

RESULTS

A total of 1037 patients (mean age, 8.4 years) who underwent 1100 OIT treatments (milk, n = 710; peanut, n = 213; egg, n = 50; sesame, n = 57; and tree nuts, n = 70) reached a final disposition and were analyzed. Full desensitization was achieved in 763 (69.4%) treatments, partial desensitization in 219 (19.9%), and 118 (10.7%) failed. Epinephrine was administered to 121 patients (11.7%) during 10.8% of treatments. Milk OIT was a significant risk factor both for epinephrine-treated reactions (odds ratio, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.25-3.68) and for low rate of full desensitization following such reactions compared with nonmilk OIT (18.2% vs 73.9%, respectively; P < .0001). Risk factors during milk OIT included asthma, pre-OIT reaction severity, lower tolerated dose, and epinephrine-treated reactions during clinic updosing, whereas risk factors during nonmilk OIT were male sex and lower tolerated dose.

CONCLUSIONS

Milk OIT poses a significant risk for home epinephrine-treated reactions during OIT and for poor outcome following such reactions. Together with the additional risk factors described for both milk and nonmilk OIT, this information may assist in patient selection for treatment.

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.

Risk Factors and Treatment Outcomes for Oral Immunotherapy-Induced Gastrointestinal Symptoms and Eosinophilic Responses (OITIGER)

BACKGROUND

We recently described that oral immunotherapy (OIT)-induced gastrointestinal symptoms were associated with peripheral eosinophilic responses (termed OITIGER).

OBJECTIVE

To identify treatment outcomes after dose modification and risk factors for developing OITIGER.

METHODS

Treatment modifications in patients with OITIGER (n = 65) including cumulative dose reductions or treatment suspension were individualized and based on the severity of symptoms and an associated absolute eosinophil count (AEC, eosinophils/μL) of more than 900. Multivariate analysis for risk factors associated with OITIGER was performed in milk-OIT subjects.

RESULTS

Treatment modifications reduced the cumulative daily dosage load by a median of 50% (interquartile range, 50%-67%) in 43 of 65 (66.1%) patients, deferred dose increases in 2 of 65 (3.1%) patients, or temporarily suspended treatment in 18 of 65 (27.7%) patients. Two patients (3.1%) had no treatment intervention. Symptoms and eosinophilia abated on dosage modification, allowing for resumption of dose increases (n = 34) or reinitiation of treatment (n = 9) after a median of 29 (interquartile range, 20-56) and 19 (interquartile range, 17-44) days, respectively. OITIGER reoccurred during treatment in 10 of 54 (18.5%) patients, which resolved after further dose modification. In long-term follow-up (>3-26 months), 31 of 32 patients were asymptomatic with stable AECs. Patients with OITIGER had a higher OIT failure rate (P = .004) and were less likely to reach full desensitization (P < .001), as compared with asymptomatic patients (n = 684). Multivariate analysis identified several risk factors for OITIGER: starting dose more than 120 mg (P < .001; odds ratio, 7.14), second-month dose more than 4-fold over the starting dose (P = .037; odds ratio, 2.18), and baseline AEC more than 600/μL (P = .002; odds ratio, 3.2).

CONCLUSIONS

OITIGER is transient or reversible in most subjects, and its occurrence is related to OIT starting dose, its rate of increase, and baseline AECs.

Exclusive Bee Venom Allergy: Risk Factors and Outcome of Immunotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Venom immunotherapy (VIT) is considered to be the gold-standard treatment for patients with Hymenoptera venom allergy. Data regarding VIT in bee venom (BV) allergic patients are scarce.

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of VIT in patients with exclusive BV allergy and to try to define risk factors for VIT-induced systemic reactions (VIT-ISR) and VIT failure.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study including data from all BV allergic patients that were treated by VIT in the Allergy Unit at the Meir Medical Center in the years 1995-2018.

RESULTS

Two hundred and forty-seven patients with exclusive BV allergy were included; 206 (83.4%) preferred to undergo rush buildup. Sixty-nine patients (27.9%) had at least 1 reaction during buildup, with the c-kit mutation being the only significant risk factor (100 vs. 28.9%, p = 0.02). Female gender (25.4 vs. 13.3%, p = 0.04), conventional buildup schedule (26.8 vs. 14.1%, p = 0.04), and c-kit mutation (100 vs. 16.8%, p < 0.01) but not tryptase level were found to be significantly more frequent in recurrent reactors. Females (20.3 vs. 9%, p = 0.03), patients with severe systemic reaction to the index sting (24.3 vs. 9.5%, p = 0.004), and c-kit mutation (66 vs. 12%, p = 0.05) but not tryptase level were found to be risk factors for severe systemic reactions.

CONCLUSION

Despite the considerably high rate of VIT-ISR in patients with exclusive BV allergy, VIT can be performed safely and efficiently. C-kit mutation, and not basal serum tryptase level, seems to be a preferable biomarker for VIT-ISR in these patients.

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.

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-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.

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.

Changes in patient quality of life during oral immunotherapy for food allergy

BACKGROUND

Quality of life (QOL) is impaired in patients with food allergy and improves following oral immunotherapy (OIT). However, the treatment itself is prolonged and demanding. We examined changes in patient QOL during OIT for food allergy.

METHODS

The FAQLQ-PF was administered to children aged 4-12 years undergoing OIT for milk, peanut, or egg allergy, at the beginning and after 4 months of treatment. Patients were categorized as improved, unchanged, or diminished FAQLQ-PF (>0.5 point decrease, a change of ≤0.5 points, or >0.5 increase, respectively) and compared. Food-allergic patients not undergoing OIT served as controls.

RESULTS

The Food Anxiety, Social and Dietary Limitation, and total FAQLQ-PF scores improved significantly during the study period (P=.001, P=.018, and P=.01, respectively) in treated but not in control patients, while the Emotional Impact did not. The change in the FAQLQ-PF was independent of the maximal tolerated dose at baseline or following four months of treatment, the pace of dose increase, or the number or severity of reactions experienced. The total FAQLQ-PF score was inversely associated with the score at baseline on multivariate analysis (regression coefficient=-0.56, P<.001). That was driven primarily by improvement in QOL scores in patients with high score (worse QOL) at baseline. Some patients with low FAQLQ-PF score (better QOL) at baseline deteriorated.

CONCLUSIONS

QOL of patients with food allergy improves in some but deteriorates in others during OIT. Patients with impaired QOL at baseline improve significantly despite the treatment burden. Some patients with better QOL at baseline might deteriorate during OIT.

A practical view of immunotherapy for food allergy

Food allergy is common and sometimes life threatening for Korean children. The current standard treatment of allergen avoidance and self-injectable epinephrine does not change the natural course of food allergy. Recently, oral, sublingual, and epicutaneous immunotherapies have been studied for their effectiveness against food allergy. While various rates of desensitization (36% to 100%) and tolerance (28% to 75%) have been induced by immunotherapies for food allergy, no single established protocol has been shown to be both effective and safe. In some studies, immunologic changes after immunotherapy for food allergy have been revealed. Adverse reactions to these immunotherapies have usually been localized, but severe systemic reactions have been observed in some cases. Although immunotherapy cannot be recommended for routine practice yet, results from recent studies demonstrate that immunotherapies are promising for the treatment of food allergy.