An Approach to the Office-Based Practice of Food Oral Immunotherapy

Epicutaneous immunotherapy: A review of safety and efficacy

Epcutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) is a novel, non-oral route of allergen immunotherapy, utilizing the skin and its robust density of epidermal Langerhans cells (LC) for antigen presentation. This space is non-vascularized and impermeable, which limits allergen exposure into the bloodstream but preserves antigen presentation to regional lymph nodes to generate gut-homing regulatory T cells. The EPIT patch utilizes natural water loss from the skin to absorb electrosprayed allergen through condensation. EPIT represents an alternative, non-oral route of immunotherapy for food allergy, with good efficacy and strong safety profiles across multiple phase 2 and 3 studies for milk and peanut. Efficacy appears the best in very young children (1-3 years old), which has been shown to continue to enhance with extended treatment duration up to 36 months. Efficacy in slightly older children ages 4-11 years of age is less clear, but appears to be better in children ages 4-7 years of age. In clinical trials of milk and peanut EPIT, most subjects experienced adverse effects, mainly mild-to-moderate skin reactions localized around the patch placement site, which improve with continued duration of wear. Rates of treatment-related anaphylaxis have been very low across all studies and ages, ranging from 1.6% to 4%, and were lowest in the infant and toddler population. While further studies of safety (1- to 3-year-olds) and efficacy (4- to 7-year-olds) are ongoing, EPIT is a potentially valuable addition to the current landscape of food allergy therapies, in particular for infants and toddlers where families may be seeking a non-oral route of treatment.

Development and acceptability of a decision-aid for food allergy oral immunotherapy in children

BACKGROUND

Limited decision-support tools are available to help shared decision-making (SDM) regarding food oral immunotherapy (OIT) initiation. No current tool covers all foods, forms, and pediatric ages for which OIT is offered.

METHODS

In compliance with International Patient Decision Aid Standards criteria, this pediatric decision-aid comparing OIT versus avoidance was developed in three stages. Nested qualitative data assessing OIT decisional needs were supplemented with evidence-synthesis from the OIT literature to create the prototype decision-aid content. This underwent iterative development with food allergy experts and patient advocacy stakeholders until unanimous consensus was reached regarding content, bias, readability, and utility in making a choice. Lastly, the tool underwent validated assessment of decisional acceptability, decisional conflict, and decisional self-efficacy.

RESULTS

The decision-aid underwent 5 iterations, resulting in a 4-page written aid (Flesch-Kincaid reading level 6.1) explaining therapy choices, risks and benefits, providing self-rating for attribute importance for the options and self-assessment regarding how adequate the information was in decision-making. A total of n = 135 caregivers of food-allergic children assessed the decision-aid, noting good acceptability, high decisional self-efficacy (mean score 85.9/100) and low decisional conflict (mean score 20.9/100). Information content was rated adequate and sufficient, the therapy choices wording balanced, and presented without bias for a "best choice." Lower decisional conflict was associated with caregiver-reported anaphylaxis.

CONCLUSIONS

This first pediatric OIT decision-aid, agnostic to product, allergen, and age has good acceptability, limited bias, and is associated with low decisional conflict and high decisional self-efficacy. It supports SDM in navigating the decision to start OIT or continue allergen avoidance.

Food Allergy Genetics and Epigenetics: A Review of Genome-Wide Association Studies

In this review, we provide an overview of food allergy genetics and epigenetics aimed at clinicians and researchers. This includes a brief review of the current understanding of genetic and epigenetic mechanisms, inheritance of food allergy, as well as a discussion of advantages and limitations of the different types of studies in genetic research. We specifically focus on the results of genome-wide association studies in food allergy, which have identified 16 genetic variants that reach genome-wide significance, many of which overlap with other allergic diseases, including asthma, atopic dermatitis, and allergic rhinitis. Identified genes for food allergy are mainly involved in epithelial barrier function (e.g., FLG, SERPINB7) and immune function (e.g., HLA, IL4). Epigenome-wide significant findings at 32 loci are also summarized as well as 14 additional loci with significance at a false discovery of < 1 × 10-4. Integration of epigenetic and genetic data is discussed in the context of disease mechanisms, many of which are shared with other allergic diseases. The potential utility of genetic and epigenetic discoveries is deliberated. In the future, genetic and epigenetic markers may offer ways to predict the presence or absence of clinical IgE-mediated food allergy among sensitized individuals, likelihood of development of natural tolerance, and response to immunotherapy.

Improving Adherence Through Collaboration and Care Coordination in the Management of Food Allergies and Asthma

Food allergies and asthma significantly impact individual health and global health care systems. Despite established management protocols for asthma and the emerging use of oral immunotherapy for food allergy, adherence to treatments remains a challenge for health care professionals and patients. This review explores the differences in adherence required of asthma and food-allergy treatments and strategies to improve adherence. We highlight the role of collaborative care coordination among health care professionals in enhancing adherence in asthma and food-allergy management and improving patient outcomes.

Getting in Shape: Updates in Exercise Anaphylaxis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Exercise induced anaphylaxis (EIA) can be difficult to diagnose due to the interplay of co-factors on clinical presentation and the lack of standardized, confirmatory testing.

RECENT FINDINGS

EIA has been historically categorized as either food-independent or food-dependent. However, recent literature has suggested that perhaps EIA is more complex given the relationship between not only food on EIA but other various co-factors such as medications and alcohol ingestion that are either required to elicit symptoms in EIA or make symptoms worse. For the practicing clinician, understanding how these co-factors can be implicated in EIA can enable one to take a more personalized approach in treating patients with EIA and thus improve quality of life for patients.

The Relationship Between Asthma and Food Allergies in Children

Asthma and food allergy are two complex allergic diseases with an increasing prevalence in childhood. They share risk factors, including atopic family history, atopic dermatitis, allergen sensitization, and T2 inflammatory pathways. Several studies have shown that in children with a food allergy, the risk of developing asthma, particularly in early childhood, is high. Food allergen intake or the inhalation of aerosolized allergens can induce respiratory symptoms such as bronchospasm. Patients with both conditions have an increased risk of severe asthma exacerbations, hospitalization, and mortality. The current management of clinical food hypersensitivity primarily involves the dietary avoidance of food allergens and the use of self-injectable adrenaline for severe reactions. Poorly controlled asthma limits the prescription of oral immunotherapy to foods, which has emerged as an alternative therapy for managing food allergies. Biological therapies that are effective in severe asthma have been explored for treating food allergies. Omalizumab improves asthma control and, either alone or in combination with oral immunotherapy, increases the threshold of allergen tolerance. Understanding the interplay between asthma and food allergy is crucial for developing successful treatment approaches and ameliorating patient results.

Safety and adherence of early oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy in a primary care setting: a retrospective cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Peanut allergy is a common food allergy with potentially life-threatening implications. Early oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy (P-EOIT) has been shown to be effective and safe in research and specialty clinic settings. Provision of P-EOIT in primary care would make it available to more patients. We sought to assess the safety of P-EOIT in a primary care setting by documenting the rates of peanut-related allergic reactions leading to emergency department (ED) visits and use of epinephrine. We also examined adherence by assessing the percentage of patients reaching maintenance phase and continuing ingestion after one year of P-EOIT.

METHODS

This retrospective study included all patients aged less than 36 months who started P-EOIT at a primary care allergy clinic in New Brunswick, Canada, from 2016 to 2020. The population included patients who (1) had a history of an allergic reaction to peanuts with a positive skin prick test or positive peanut specific IgE level (ps-IgE) or (2) no history of ingestion and a baseline ps-IgE ≥5 kU/L. Patients had biweekly clinic visits with graded increases in peanut protein up to a maintenance dose of 300 mg of peanut protein daily. A blinded retrospective review of paper charts and electronic medical records was conducted along with phone interviews regarding ED visits and epinephrine use.

RESULTS

All 69 consented patients reached maintenance dose over a median of 29 weeks, and 66 patients (95.7%) were still regularly consuming peanut protein after 1 year of maintenance. One patient had a peanut ingestion-related ED visit requiring epinephrine during the escalation phase of peanut protein dosing (1.4%). During the first year of maintenance phase, no patients had peanut ingestion-related ED visits nor required epinephrine.

CONCLUSION

Early oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy in a primary care setting appears to be safe and our findings suggest that it does not lead to an increased burden of emergency department visits. Our population had high adherence rates, with the majority achieving maintenance dose and staying on this dose for one year.

A Media Advocacy Toolkit for the Allergist-Immunologist

For clinicians involved in improving healthcare for patients with allergic and immunologic conditions, advocacy on a broader level through public outreach is key to advancing value-based care. In this article, we provide a toolkit of strategies and resources that can be used to raise public awareness of important issues through various mediums, including podcasts and social media, newspapers, testimonies, presentations, and interviews. A simple approach to effective media interactions is described using the acronym "RATIO," which stands for Research, Audience, Targeted topic, Interview rephrasing, and Optimism. The acronym also reminds the person who is presenting information that only a fraction of what is discussed will be recalled, and an even smaller proportion will be implemented. Key points should be made early. Examples of key talking points are provided for selected topics, including food allergy, anaphylaxis, asthma, rhinitis, and broader healthcare advocacy.

Decisions With Patients, Not for Patients: Shared Decision-Making in Allergy and Immunology

Shared decision-making (SDM) is an increasingly implemented patient-centered approach to navigating patient preferences regarding diagnostic and treatment options and supported decision-making. This therapeutic approach prioritizes the patient's perspectives, considering current medical evidence to provide a balanced approach to clinical scenarios. In light of numerous recent guideline recommendations that are conditional in nature and are clinical scenarios defined by preference-sensitive care options, there is a tremendous opportunity for SDM and validated decision aids. Despite the expansion of the literature on SDM, formal acceptance among clinicians remains inconsistent. Surprisingly, a significant disparity exists between clinicians' self-reported adherence to SDM principles and patients' perceptions of its implementation during clinical encounters. This discrepancy underscores a fundamental issue in the delivery of health care, where clinicians may overestimate their integration of SDM, while patients' experiences suggest otherwise. This review critically examines the factors contributing to this inconsistency, including barriers within the health care system, clinician attitudes and behaviors, and patient expectations and preferences. By elucidating these factors in the fields of food allergy, asthma, eosinophilic esophagitis, and other allergic diseases, this review aims to provide insights into bridging the gap between clinician perception and patient experience in SDM. Addressing this discordance is crucial for advancing patient-centered care and ensuring that SDM is not merely a theoretical concept but a tangible reality in the.

Improving Clinical Practice Through Patient Registries in Allergy and Immunology

Patient registries are a mechanism for collecting data on allergic and immunologic diseases that provide important information on epidemiology and outcomes that can ultimately improve patient care. Key criteria for establishing effective registries include the use of a clearly defined purpose, identifying the target population and ensuring consistent data collection. Registries in allergic diseases include those for diseases such as inborn errors of immunity (IEI), food allergy, asthma and anaphylaxis, pharmacological interventions in vulnerable populations, and adverse effects of pharmacologic interventions including hypersensitivity reactions to drugs and vaccines. Important insights gained from patient registries in our field include contributions in phenotype and outcomes in IEI, the risk for adverse reactions in food-allergic patients in multiple settings, the benefits and risk of biologic medications for asthma during pregnancy, vaccine safety, and the categorization and genetic determination of risk for severe cutaneous adverse reactions to medications. Impediments to the development of clinically meaningful patient registries include the lack of funding resources for registry establishment and the quality, quantity, and consistency of available data. Despite these drawbacks, high-quality and successful registries are invaluable in informing clinical practice and improving outcomes in patients with allergic and immunological diseases.

Food Sublingual Immunotherapy: Safety and Simplicity of a Real Food Updosing Protocol

BACKGROUND

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) using food extracts is safe and effective in desensitizing patients with food allergy, yet not often used in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

To propose a cost-effective, expedited SLIT protocol using real food.

METHODS

Patients with food allergy aged 5 to 50 years (median, 11 years) initiated food SLIT in a single-clinic setting. The daily maintenance dose was 4 to 11 mg protein in 0.1 to 0.5 mL volume, depending on the food. Some foods were available in liquid form at the local grocery (milk, egg white liquid, and cashew/walnut/sunflower/hazelnut milk), whereas others were prepared in the office using flour and 50% glycerin saline (peanut/sesame/wheat). The first cohort of 20 patients began dosing at a 1:1000 dilution, the next 30 patients at 1:100 dilution. An exercise challenge was performed in a subset of patients on maintenance dosing to evaluate the need for a predose or postdose rest period.

RESULTS

The 1:1000 and 1:100 cohorts both completed day 1 without adverse reactions beyond itchy mouth. There were no systemic reactions requiring epinephrine throughout the study period and 88% reached their maintenance dose. Skin testing of 6-month-old peanut flour solution was not diminished from fresh solution and similar to food extract. Exercise challenge test results in 12 patients were negative.

CONCLUSIONS

Allergen extract food SLIT as used in published trials has limitations of cost and multiple office visits. Inexpensive real food, at the same or slightly higher protein dose, was well tolerated in 4 updose visits, a minimum of a week apart. Unlike food oral immunotherapy, a predose or postdose rest period may not be necessary.

Allergic Diseases and Mental Health

Neuropsychiatric symptoms have long been acknowledged as a common comorbidity for individuals with allergic diseases. The proposed mechanisms for this relationship vary by disease and patient population and may include neuroinflammation and/or the consequent social implications of disease symptoms and management. We review connections between mental health and allergic rhinitis, atopic dermatitis, asthma, vocal cord dysfunction, urticaria, and food allergy. Many uncertainties remain and warrant further research, particularly with regard to how medications interact with pathophysiologic mechanisms of allergic disease in the neuroimmune axis. Proactive screening for mental health challenges, using tools such as the Patient Health Questionnaire and Generalized Anxiety Disorder screening instruments among others, can aid clinicians in identifying patients who may need further psychiatric evaluation and support. Although convenient, symptom screening tools are limited by variable sensitivity and specificity and therefore require healthcare professionals to remain vigilant for other mental health "red flags." Ultimately, understanding the connection between allergic disease and mental health empowers clinicians to both anticipate and serve the diverse physical and mental health needs of their patient populations.

Saliva antibody profiles are associated with reaction threshold and severity of peanut allergic reactions

BACKGROUND

Reaction threshold and severity in food allergy are difficult to predict, and noninvasive predictors are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine the relationships between pre-challenge levels of peanut (PN)-specific antibodies in saliva and reaction threshold, severity, and organ-specific symptoms during PN allergic reactions.

METHODS

We measured PN-specific antibody levels in saliva collected from 127 children with suspected PN allergy before double-blind, placebo-controlled PN challenges in which reaction threshold, severity, and symptoms were rigorously characterized. Low threshold (LT) PN allergy was defined as reaction to <300 mg of PN protein cumulatively consumed. A consensus severity grading system was used to grade severity. We analyzed associations between antibody levels and reaction threshold, severity, and organ-specific symptoms.

RESULTS

Among the 127 children, those with high pre-challenge saliva PN IgE had higher odds of LT PN allergy (odds ratio [OR] 3.9, 95% CI 1.6-9.5), while those with high saliva PN IgA:PN IgE ratio or PN IgG4:PN IgE ratio had lower odds of LT PN allergy (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.8; OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.9). Children with high pre-challenge saliva PN IgG4 had lower odds of severe PN reactions (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.9). Children with high saliva PN IgE had higher odds of respiratory symptoms (OR 8.0, 95% CI 2.2-26.8). Saliva PN IgE modestly correlated with serum PN IgE levels (Pearson r = 0.31, P = .0004). High and low saliva PN IgE levels further distinguished reaction threshold and severity in participants stratified by serum PN IgE, suggesting endotypes.

CONCLUSIONS

Saliva PN antibodies could aid in noninvasive risk stratification of PN allergy threshold, severity, and organ-specific symptoms.

Age-Related Food Aversion and Anxiety Represent Primary Patient Barriers to Food Oral Immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Although oral immunotherapy (OIT) for food allergy is a reasonable treatment option, barriers to this procedure's implementation have not been extensively evaluated from a patient perspective.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the barriers patients face during OIT administration, including anxiety and taste aversion, and the role of health care professionals, especially dietitians.

METHODS

A survey in Canada and the United States involved families currently enrolled in food OIT programs.

RESULTS

Of responses from 379 participants, fear of reaction was the most common barrier to OIT initiation, with 45.6% reporting it being a "very significant" barrier with other fears reported. However, taste aversion represented the prominent obstacle to continuation. Taste aversion was associated with a slower buildup (P = .02) and a reduction in dose (P = .002). Taste aversion was a strongly age-dependent barrier for initiation (P < .001) and continuation (P < .002), with older children over 6 years of age reporting it as a very significant barrier (P < .001). Boredom was reported as a concern for specific allergens such as peanut, egg, sesame, and hazelnuts (P < .05), emphasizing the need for diverse food options. Notably, 59.9% of respondents mixed OIT foods with sweet items. Despite these dietary concerns, dietitians were underutilized, with only 9.5% of respondents having seen a dietitian and the majority finding dietitian support helpful with greater certainty about the exact dose (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Taste aversion and anxiety represent primary patient-related barriers to OIT. Taste aversion was highly age dependent, with older patients being more affected. Dietitians and psychology support were underutilized, representing a critical target to improve adherence and OIT success.

Food allergy prevention through the decades: An ounce of humility is worth a pound of cure

Food allergy prevention has undergone a significant transformation over the past 3 decades. This review provides an overview of the evolution of food allergy prevention, highlighting changes in guidance, cost-effectiveness of prevention, the role of shared decision-making, and the emergence of oral immunotherapy for those in whom primary prevention fails. Changes to food allergy prevention over recent decades can be conceptualized into five epochs, which have followed a general trend of loosening restrictions on the allergen introduction timeline. These epochs are characterized by significant maternal and infant dietary restrictions in the "universal avoidance epoch"(-1990), loosened maternal diet restrictions in the "infant avoidance epoch" (1990-2000), a time-bound allergen introduction schedule in the "stratified avoidance epoch" (2000-2010), retraction of recommendations in the "corrective retraction epoch" (2010-2015), and endorsement of early allergen introduction in the "early introduction epoch" (2015-present), the start of which is marked by the 2015 Learning Early About Peanut study. In hindsight, it is clear that certain recommendations from previous decades were not the best course of action. A no-screening early introduction approach to food allergy prevention is both cost-effective and beneficial to patient quality of life.

A practical guide for implementing omalizumab therapy for food allergy

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

Preparing Patients for Oral Immunotherapy (PPOINT): International Delphi consensus for procedural preparation and consent

BACKGROUND

Despite the promise of oral immunotherapy (OIT) to treat food allergies, this procedure is associated with potential risk. There is no current agreement about what elements should be included in the preparatory or consent process.

OBJECTIVE

We developed consensus recommendations about the OIT process considerations and patient-specific factors that should be addressed before initiating OIT and developed a consensus OIT consent process and information form.

METHODS

We convened a 36-member Preparing Patients for Oral Immunotherapy (PPOINT) panel of allergy experts to develop a consensus OIT patient preparation, informed consent process, and framework form. Consensus for themes and statements was reached using Delphi methodology, and the consent information form was developed.

RESULTS

The expert panel reached consensus for 4 themes and 103 statements specific to OIT preparatory procedures, of which 76 statements reached consensus for inclusion specific to the following themes: general considerations for counseling patients about OIT; patient- and family-specific factors that should be addressed before initiating OIT and during OIT; indications for initiating OIT; and potential contraindications and precautions for OIT. The panel reached consensus on 9 OIT consent form themes: benefits, risks, outcomes, alternatives, risk mitigation, difficulties/challenges, discontinuation, office policies, and long-term management. From these themes, 219 statements were proposed, of which 189 reached consensus, and 71 were included on the consent information form.

CONCLUSION

We developed consensus recommendations to prepare and counsel patients for safe and effective OIT in clinical practice with evidence-based risk mitigation. Adoption of these recommendations may help standardize clinical care and improve patient outcomes and quality of life.

Implementing Food Oral Immunotherapy Into Clinical Practice: Quality and Safety Perspectives From a US Academic Center

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an accessible procedure for practicing allergy/immunology providers, yet rigorous safety standards are limited in the clinical setting. By exploring the transition from research to clinical practice OIT, we review relevant safety considerations necessary for the clinical provider. We offer a perspective on clinical benefits and considerations at the individual, collaboration, and policy levels from the vantage of a large academic OIT program, and we propose several practical start-up checklists and clerical considerations for practicing providers. Awareness of the local population and front-end planning is necessary to improve the accessibility of this procedure in clinical practice among racial and socioeconomic minority populations. Sharing and merging OIT protocols, procedural methods, and electronic medical record order sets may increase harmonization among OIT-providing institutions and further our abilities to pool safety and outcomes data, ultimately enhancing the safety and efficacy of clinical OIT.

Food allergies on a college campus

There are limited data on food allergies among college students. In this article, we review the most current available studies. These self-reported surveys and qualitative interviews reported overall poor avoidance of known allergens and low rates of carrying self-injectable epinephrine among students with food allergy. College students may exhibit risk-taking food behaviors due to a number of factors, including age-appropriate risk-taking predilection, strong social influences, and lack of experience in self-advocacy. Having to disclose an otherwise invisible condition repeatedly in a new environment may also lead to "disclosure fatigue," creating an additional barrier to self-advocacy. Common themes in the narrative include hypervigilance, stigma management, and concern about others' misunderstanding of food allergy. Although there is a paucity of data in this area, it is likely that having greater support at the institution level, along with support from peers and faculty, may help improve awareness, self-injectable epinephrine carriage, and allergen avoidance. This review also discusses strategies for preparedness at school, including specific steps to maximize safety.

Flex-IT! Applying "Platform Trials" Methodology to Immunotherapy for Food Allergy in Research and Clinical Practice

There is an increasing trend in the management of food allergy toward active treatment using allergen immunotherapy (AIT). Although AIT is efficacious, treatment-related adverse events are common, particularly with oral immunotherapy in those with high levels of allergen-specific IgE sensitization. In clinical practice, these adverse events inevitably create challenges: clinicians and patients routinely face decisions whether to alter the dose itself, the frequency of dosing, and the pace of escalation, or indeed discontinue AIT altogether. Flexibility is therefore needed to adapt treatment, particularly in clinical practice, so that participants are "treated-to-target." For example, this may entail a significant change in the dosing protocol or even switching from one route of administration to another in response to frequent adverse events. We refer to this approach as flexible immunotherapy. However, there is little evidence to inform clinicians as to what changes to treatment are most likely to result in treatment success. Classical clinical trials rely, by necessity, on relatively rigid updosing protocols. To provide an evidence base to optimize AIT, the food allergy community should adopt adaptive platform trials, where a "master protocol" facilitates more efficient evaluation, including longer-term outcomes of multiple interventions. Within a single clinical trial, participants are able to switch between different treatment arms; interventions can be added or dropped without compromising the integrity of the trial. Developing platform trials for food AIT may initially be costly, but they represent a significant opportunity to grow the evidence base (with respect to both treatment outcomes and biomarker discovery) at scale. In addition, they could help understand longitudinal disease trajectories that are difficult to study in clinical trials for food allergy due to the time needed to demonstrate changes in efficacy. Finally, their adoption would achieve greater collaboration and consistency in approaches to proactive management of food allergy in routine clinical practice. As a community, we need to actively pursue this with funders and established research collaborations to deliver the very best outcomes for our patients and their families.

Initial updosing phase of oral immunotherapy improves quality of life and psychological burden in parents of children with food allergy

Background: Oral immunotherapy (OIT) can impose psychological burdens on patients and their parents due to the necessary preparations and repeated adverse reactions. Objective: To investigate changes in quality of life (QoL) and psychological burden in parents of children receiving OIT for food allergy (FA). Methods: Children aged 3-13 years with FA were enrolled. Parents were asked to fill out the Korean versions of the Food Allergy Quality of Life-Parental Burden (FAQL-PB), the Korean versions of the Food Allergy Quality of Life-Parental Form (K-FAQLQ-PF), the Korean versions of the Beck Anxiety Inventory (K-BAI), and the Korean version of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) for depression before OIT (T1), after 2 months of updosing (T2), and after the end of the updosing phase (T3). Results: A total of 111 parents were enrolled. The total FAQL-PB scores were decreased at T2 and T3 compared with those at T1 (all p < 0.001). Greater improvement in the total FAQL-PB score at T2 was noted in parents with a higher parental burden (FAQL-PB score ≥ 74 points) at baseline than in those with a lower parental burden (p = 0.001). Among the K-FAQLQ-PF domains, "food anxiety" scores were decreased at T2 and T3 compared with those at T1 (p = 0.049 and p = 0.030, respectively), whereas there was no change in "social and dietary limitation" and "emotional impact" scores between T1 and T2 and between T1 and T3. However, no differences were observed in K-BAI and PHQ-9 scores between T1 and T2 and between T1 and T3. Conclusion: Our results suggest that OIT improves parental burden and QoL in parents of children with FA.

Practical issues of oral immunotherapy for egg or milk allergy

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has been recommended to reduce parental burden related to strict allergen avoidance and induce desensitization and immune tolerance for patients with long-lasting allergies to hen's eggs (HE) or cow's milk (CM). OIT should be monitored by pediatric allergists specializing in OIT and oral food challenge tests to manage allergic reactions. Although a previous history of anaphylaxis or multiple food allergies is not a contraindication to OIT, it is contraindicated if the patient has uncontrolled asthma, a malignancy, active systemic autoimmune disorders, or diseases requiring treatment with beta-blockers. A variety of OIT protocols have been de veloped to ensure better outcomes and safe up-dosing, including adjunctive therapies with biologics. This review provides insight into the practical issues of various immunotherapy options for children with HE or CM allergies.

Asthma and food allergy: A nuanced relationship

Asthma is one of the most common chronic health conditions that affect children and adults. It is associated with many comorbid conditions, particularly those along the allergic spectrum, such as atopic dermatitis, allergic rhinitis, and food allergy. The relationship between asthma and food allergies involves prognosis, management, and understanding of risk for severe reactions. Both conditions are heterogeneous and can change over time, which necessitates an individualized approach toward counseling and management. Long-standing associations of an increased risk for food allergy fatality in individuals who have asthma is not as straightforward or concrete as previously believed. It is important for clinicians to have a current understanding of the evidence about the relationship between asthma and food allergy to participate in shared decision-making and counseling with patients. This review will offer background and new perspective surrounding the nuanced relationship of asthma and food allergy.

Exploring novel approaches to food allergy management

ABSTRACT

Nurse practitioners are likely to encounter pediatric and adult patients with symptoms of food allergy who need an accurate diagnosis, emergency treatment plans, and options for management. The pathophysiology of immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated food allergy, current and emerging diagnostics, treatment, and emergency management is briefly reviewed, and promising new and potential future treatment options are discussed. Currently, Food and Drug Administration-approved oral immunotherapy (OIT) treatment for peanut allergy, but clinical trials are underway to explore multiple-allergen OIT and alternate routes for IT such as sublingual and epicutaneous. Treatments that modulate the immune system are also potential treatments for food allergies (FAs), including biologic agents. Omalizumab, an anti-IgE therapy, dupilumab, an interleukin-4Ra receptor monoclonal antibody, and etokimab, an anti-IL-33, are all being studied for the treatment of food allergy. There is hope that these novel therapies for FAs will be a viable option translated to the practice setting in the near future, so that strict avoidance is not the only treatment plan for FAs. Nurse practitioners can support their patients with FAs and their families by keeping abreast of progress in food allergy research and assisting patients to consider novel treatment options, when appropriate, using shared decision making.

Food Immunotherapy: Dissecting Current Guidelines and Navigating the Gray Zone

Food allergy is a common, chronic disease that is burdensome for patients and families, with multiple dietary and social limitations and a significant psychological impact stemming from the fear of accidental exposures and potentially severe, life-threatening reactions. Until recently, the only management option consisted of strict food avoidance. Food allergen immunotherapy (food AIT) has emerged as an alternative, active intervention to strict food avoidance, with a multitude of research studies supporting its efficacy and good safety profile. Food AIT results in a raise of allergenic threshold, which provides several benefits to food-allergic patients, including protection from accidental exposures, potentially decreased severity of allergic reactions on unintentional exposures, and improvement in quality of life. In the last few years, multiple independent reports have been published proposing strategies to implement food oral immunotherapy in U.S. clinics, although formal guidelines are currently lacking. Because food immunotherapy is gaining traction, popularity, and interest among both patients and health care providers, many physicians look for guidance on how to implement this intervention in their daily practice. In other parts of the world, use of this treatment has prompted the development of various guidelines from allergy societies. This rostrum discusses currently available guidelines on food AIT from different areas of the world, describes and comments on their similarities and differences, and highlights unmet needs in this area of therapy.

The future of food allergy: Challenging existing paradigms of clinical practice

The field of food allergy has seen tremendous change over the past 5-10 years with seminal studies redefining our approach to prevention and management and novel testing modalities in the horizon. Early introduction of allergenic foods is now recommended, challenging the previous paradigm of restrictive avoidance. The management of food allergy has shifted from a passive avoidance approach to active interventions that aim to provide protection from accidental exposures, decrease allergic reaction severity and improve the quality of life of food-allergic patients and their families. Additionally, novel diagnostic tools are making their way into clinical practice with the goal to reduce the need for food challenges and assist physicians in the-often complex-diagnostic process. With all the new developments and available choices for diagnosis, prevention and therapy, shared decision-making has become a key part of medical consultation, enabling patients to make the right choice for them, based on their values and preferences. Communication with patients has also become more complex over time, as patients are seeking advice online and through social media, but the information found online may be outdated, incorrect, or lacking in context. The role of the allergist has evolved to embrace all the above exciting developments and provide patients with the optimal care that fits their needs. In this review, we discuss recent developments as well as the evolution of the field of food allergy in the next decade.

Provision of Food Allergy Care in the United Kingdom and United States: Current Issues and Future Directions

Food allergy (FA) is a growing issue worldwide. The United Kingdom and United States are high-income, industrialized countries with reported increases in FA prevalence over the past few decades. This review compares delivery of FA care in the United Kingdom and United States and each country's response to the heightened demand and disparities for FA services. In the United Kingdom, allergy specialists are scarce and general practitioners (GPs) provide most allergy care. Whereas the United States has more allergists per capita than the United Kingdom, there is still a shortage of allergy services owing to the greater reliance on specialist care for FA in America and wide geographic variation in access to allergist services. Currently, generalists in these countries lack the specialty training and equipment to diagnose and manage FA optimally. Moving forward, the United Kingdom aims to enhance training for GPs so they may provide better quality frontline allergy care. In addition, the United Kingdom is implementing a new tier of semi-specialized GPs and increasing cross-center collaboration through clinical networks. The United Kingdom and United States aim to increase the number of FA specialists, which is critical at a time of rapidly expanding management options for allergic and immunologic diseases requiring clinical expertise and shared decision-making to select appropriate therapies. While these countries aim to grow their supply of quality FA services actively, further efforts to build clinical networks and perhaps recruit international medical graduates and expand telehealth services are necessary to reduce disparities in access to care. For the United Kingdom in particular, increasing quality services will require additional support from the leadership of the centralized National Health Service, which remains challenging.

Shared decision-making, communicating risk, and food allergy in 2023

Background

Across the practice of allergy and clinical immunology, disruptive innovations have accelerated the adoption of shared decision-making (SDM) to improve the health of patients and populations, particularly with regard to food allergy prevention and management of food allergy and anaphylaxis.

Methods

A narrative review was performed to describe recent innovations in shared decision-making, risk communication, and food allergy.

Results

Several challenges, primarily related to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and misinformation campaigns, have catalyzed adaptations to evolve clinical care. Recent pressures have facilitated the rapid adoption of telemedicine. In 2023, many allergist/immunologists routinely incorporate both in-person and virtual visits to contextually deliver value-based care to each patient. SDM may occur in a hybrid model that incorporates both in-person and virtual encounters, with many patients experiencing benefit from a combination approach. This may be facilitated by leveraging previsit web-based SDM tools. Whether in person or by telemedicine, effective risk communication to avoid cognitive overload while appreciating population variation in numeracy is key to competent implementation of SDM. Misinformation continues to disproportionately harm patients who belong to groups that encourage denial of evidence-based medical recommendations and COVID-19 vaccination intent correlating with sociopolitical factors. Still, strategies to address misinformation that leverage empathy, respect, and expertise can help to mitigate these effects. Physician wellness is a key component to realization of the Quadruple Aim of health care, and the use of positive framing and appreciative inquiry can help to optimize outcomes and improve value in health care.

Conclusion

SDM is an important component to consider when incorporating recent innovations in allergy and clinical immunology care, particularly in the setting of contextual and conditional medical recommendations. Effective risk communication is critical to SDM that is truly reflective of patient goals and preferences, and can be facilitated through in-person encounters, telemedicine, and hybrid models. It is important to foster physician wellness as a component of the Quadruple Aim, particularly in the recent pandemic climate of misinformation and denial of evidence-based medicine within large groups of society.

Viewing Pediatric Food Oral Immunotherapy Through an Ethical Lens-A Narrative Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Food allergy remains a common problem and a lifelong condition for many children. In recent years, food allergy management has increasingly involved conversations about food oral immunotherapy (OIT). Although ethical considerations of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice implicitly inform these conversations, applying these principles can be complex, particularly in young children. Families of young children assume a role of surrogate decision-maker and must balance immediate risks with the hope of longer-term benefits.

OBJECTIVE

To explore implementation of OIT in children through an ethical lens.

METHODS

To evaluate OIT through an ethical lens, we conducted a literature search to explore currently published frameworks in this area.

RESULTS

Evaluation of the harm principle, the basic interest principle, and the best interest principle of parental decision-making can be informative. Shared decision-making continues to be central to the process of engaging with patient-family units to individualize the best care, at the right time, and minimize decisional discord. Although OIT is well-positioned to promote health and well-being, challenges to equity, sustainability, and organizational support must be considered to improve access for appropriate patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Whereas approaches to food OIT may be tailored to the individual context of each patient-family unit, ethical principles must guide decisions to initiate and continue therapy. Traditional ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice remain cornerstones when considering the ethical context of OIT.

Are There Hidden Dangers Associated With Milk and Egg Dietary Advancement Therapy?

Dietary advancement therapies (DATs) constitute a continuum spanning extensively heated item ingestion, progressive milk or egg ladders, and oral immunotherapy (OIT). These represent an evolution in food allergy management from strict avoidance to an active therapy that may modulate the immune system to develop tolerance to particular forms of the allergen. Many egg or milk individuals are tolerant to baked egg or milk at baseline, and regular consumption (at home ingestion) of baked milk or egg is a safe process with potential quality of life and immunologic benefit. Milk and egg ladders, developed for non-IgE mediated allergy, are increasingly being adapted to IgE-mediated allergy as a potentially safe at-home option for gradual dietary advancement. However, data are limited regarding how safe and effective these approaches are or what patient is best suited for which DAT. It is also unclear whether extensively heated allergen consumption and ladders are susceptible to the same patient-specific factors that affect day-to-day tolerance and safety in OIT. Several recent events involving near-fatal or fatal reactions to milk or egg products (all among patients with asthma) have highlighted that DATs are not risk-free, and that physician guidance in these therapies is essential. Such guidance may include obtaining informed consent before starting any DAT and instituting the same safe dosing rules for OIT across any form of DAT. This rostrum discusses practical concerns about the safety of DAT, and considerations regarding how clinicians can maximize patient protection while defining the safety and efficacy of real-world implementation of these concepts.

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.

Retail Food Equivalents for Post-Oral Immunotherapy Dosing in the Omalizumab as Monotherapy and as Adjunct Therapy to Multi-Allergen Oral Immunotherapy in Food-Allergic Children and Adults (OUtMATCH) Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with food allergy may be advised to introduce specific foods into their diets, both to increase tolerance gradually and as next steps after completing oral immunotherapy or other therapeutic interventions. However, the safe use of retail foods depends on the ability to establish the specific allergen protein content of these foods.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a systematic approach to estimate the protein content of peanut, milk, egg, wheat, cashew, hazelnut, and walnut in a variety of retail food equivalents for each allergen and associated patient education materials.

METHOD

We created an algorithm that used a multistep process with information from product food labels, nutrient databases, independent weighing and measuring of foods, and information provided by manufacturers, including certificates of analysis, and e-mail communication to estimate the allergen protein content of multiple retail foods for each of seven allergens. Once a variety of retail food equivalents for each allergen and allergen serving size was determined, we developed participant education handouts, which were reviewed by study teams at 10 food allergy centers, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and the Consortium for Food Allergy Research coordinating center. After 1 year of use, multiple queries were addressed and the retail food equivalents and educational materials were reviewed and edited.

RESULTS

We identified a variety of retail food equivalents for seven allergens at six serving sizes, and created 48 unique patient education materials.

CONCLUSION

Our results provide extensive guidance on a variety of retail equivalents for seven foods, and a method to estimate retail food protein equivalents systematically with ongoing reassessment.

Towards an FDA-cleared basophil activation test

Food allergy is a global health problem affecting up to 10% of the world population. Accurate diagnosis of food allergies, however, is still a major challenge in medical offices and for patients seeking alternative avenues of diagnosis. A flawless test to confirm or rule out a food allergy does not exist. The lack of optimum testing methods to establish precise clinical correlations remains a major obstacle to effective treatment. Certain IgE measurement methods, including component testing, have received FDA clearance, but they have been used primarily as an analytical tool and not to establish clinical correlations. Most allergy tests are still carried out within the laboratory, and skin tests outside a laboratory setting that are used for food allergy diagnosis rely on non-standardized allergens, according to the FDA definition. Epitope mapping and basophil activation test (BAT) have recently been proposed as a means of establishing better clinical correlations. Yet neither have received FDA clearance for widespread distribution. Of the two methods, the BAT has the advantage of being a functional assay. Over the past few years, several large private practice groups in the United States, have developed BAT as a clinical assay and have started using it in patient care. Given this clinical experience, the vast number of papers published on BAT (more than 1,400 as of 2022) and the trend toward increasing FDA regulation, it is essential to understand the roadmap for regulatory clearance of this assay.

Information needs of patients considering oral immunotherapy for food allergy

While the historic management of food allergy includes avoidance strategies and allergic reaction treatment, oral immunotherapy (OIT) approaches have become more commonly integrated into therapeutic approaches. International guidelines, phase 3 trials and real-world experience have supported the implementation of this procedure. However, OIT is an elective, rarely curative procedure with inherent risks that necessitates an increased degree of health literacy for the patients and families. Families assume the responsibility of amateur healthcare providers to ensure the daily safe administration of the allergenic food. As such, it is incumbent upon physicians to ensure that families are prepared for this role. A thorough educational and shared decision-making approach is necessary during the counselling and consent process to adequately inform the families. Educated discussion about the efficacy and patient-centred effectiveness, therapeutic alternatives and family goals is required to align physician and patient expectations. A frank discussion about the struggles, practical challenges, risks and contraindications can help to develop an understanding of the risk mitigation strategies employed to maintain safety. Physicians should develop a proactive approach to educate families about this, at times, burdensome procedure. This educational approach should encourage ongoing support starting prior to consent through the maintenance visits. By preparing families for their unique management role, physicians can help ensure the safe and successful integration of OIT into the therapeutic offering for the management of food allergies.

The Case for Prompt Salvage Infant Peanut Oral Immunotherapy Following Failed Primary Prevention

Recent guideline recommendations have shifted from recommending prolonged avoidance of allergenic foods in the first 3 years of life to a primary prevention approach involving the deliberate early introduction to infants at risk of developing food allergy. Despite this, some infants, especially those with severe eczema who are at highest risk for developing peanut allergy, fail to receive the preventative benefits of early peanut introduction due to hesitancy and other factors. Difficulty adhering to regular ingestion after introduction further reduces the effectiveness of primary prevention. As emerging real-world evidence has demonstrated that performing peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT) among infants is effective and safe, peanut OIT could be a treatment option for infants with peanut allergy. This review discusses the benefits, risks, and barriers to offering peanut OIT to infants who fail primary prevention strategies. We propose the novel concept that infants with peanut allergy be offered peanut OIT as soon as possible after failed peanut introduction through a shared decision-making process with the family, where there is a preference for active management rather than avoidance.

Practical aspects of oral immunotherapy: The importance of optimal office design and workflow

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an emerging treatment, but it is more than products and protocols. Office setup, including spacing, staffing, and logistics, is critical to assess to fully implement OIT into clinical practice. To provide insights into what needs to be considered in setting up an office to practically implement OIT into clinical practice. Most of the clinical research about OIT focuses on the products and protocols used for OIT. However, to safely and effectively integrate this into clinical practice, there are many practical aspects that need to be considered. Proper staffing, office space, scheduling, and on-call responsibilities all need to be considered because OIT will impact all of these aspects of practice. We provide suggestions and considerations as you think through these vital logistics in your office. These are practical considerations that must be determined to effectively handle OIT in an office setting. OIT products and protocols are one aspect of OIT. Actually delivering the treatment with staff, office space, and handling the patient needs after hours is really when OIT becomes more of a reality for the physician and the patient.

An overview of current clinical practice and international oral immunotherapy guidelines: A focus on Spanish, European, and Canadian guidelines

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is a recent and evolving therapeutic option for the treatment of immunoglobulin E (IgE) mediated food allergies. Clinical practice guidelines are starting to emerge to establish the parameters of this new clinical offer. A comparative analysis reveals several areas of consensus, such as the need for an accurate diagnosis with immunoglobulin E testing and, if necessary, open food challenge before initiating therapy; a list of specific contraindications; the importance of performing OIT in an adequate setting with appropriate level of expertise; the possibility to use grocery products to perform OIT; and the need to adapt protocols to patient needs. Certain discrepancies among the guidelines also underscore various areas of uncertainty, which makes it important that decisions to pursue the treatment be reached by using a shared decision-making approach that involves patients and caregivers. Gaps of knowledge remain with regard to treatment of adolescents and adults, and optimal performance measures in practice. These guidelines are expected to evolve in the coming years as new scientific and experiential knowledge is gained.

Food allergy: Symptoms and diagnosis

Food allergy is common and has increased in prevalence over time. Although there are many types of reactions to foods, immunoglobulin E (IgE) mediated food allergy is acute in onset and resolves quickly, and is reproducible in nature. Anaphylaxis is the most severe form of IgE-mediated food allergy and has a range of clinical manifestations. First-line food allergy diagnostic testing is sensitive but not specific and should only be done in the context of a convincing history of a reaction. Oral food challenge is the criterion standard in diagnosis but carries the risk of a reaction. The only therapy for anaphylaxis is immediate intramuscular epinephrine. Traditional management of food allergy consists of avoidance management, with strict avoidance, reading labels, and carrying an epinephrine autoinjector at all times. Although effective, accidental reactions do occur, and this management strategy has a profound impact on quality of life.

A practical focus on legume oral immunotherapy

Legumes other than peanut are an important source of protein and consist of a wide variety of species, such as soy, peas, chickpeas, lentils, and lupin. Due to their health benefits and the rising popularity of veganism, legume consumption has increased. Legume allergy, cross-sensitization, and cross-reactivity between different species have been reported in the literature and are increasingly recognized. Unlike peanut, oral immunotherapy (OIT) for nonpeanut legumes has not been well studied and published protocols are lacking. Future studies are needed to provide real-world data on the safety and effectiveness of nonpeanut legume OIT, and whether desensitization to one legume leads to desensitization to other legumes in patients with multiple legume allergy. Nevertheless, due to the abundance of clinical trial and real-world data for peanut OIT, it is reasonable to use protocols that substitute peanut protein with other legume protein when desensitizing individuals with nonpeanut legume allergy. Clinicians who are starting to offer legume OIT in their practices may consider starting with preschoolers, an age group for whom real-world data has shown the greatest safety and effectiveness.

Optimal patient selection for oral immunotherapy

Standard criteria for ideal patient selection with food oral immunotherapy (OIT) have yet to be determined. Although there are a handful of contraindications to consider before recommending OIT, most patients with confirmed immunoglobulin E-mediated food allergies are appropriate candidates. Success rates of OIT can vary widely and be influenced by several factors. Choosing the most appropriate candidate for an OIT program can mitigate risks and provide the best chance for patients to be successful.

Considerations for a shared decision-making conversation when initiating food oral immunotherapy

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an office-based procedure that offers potential treatment of immunoglobulin E mediated food allergy. OIT has multiple benefits, e.g., the ability to desensitize the individual with food allergy, which shifts the eliciting dose threshold required in that individual to trigger an allergic reaction, and also potentially to decrease the severity of any resulting reactions. However, OIT is not a cure and has distinct risks, including the risk of allergic reactions (including anaphylaxis) from the therapy itself, the potential risk of developing eosinophilic esophagitis (or similar clinical symptoms without a formal biopsy), and logistical issues in coordinating when to give the daily dose, and there are still uncertain intermediate-to-long-term outcomes with regard to OIT. The decision to start OIT is complex and potentially nuanced. Shared decision-making is a process that allows the patient and family and the clinician to undergo a mutual discussion of the risks, benefits, alternatives, and other considerations with regard to a medical decision (such as starting OIT) whereby there is an exchange of information that allows the patient and family to formally clarify and express their values and preferences with regard to facets of the decision in this particular context. The goal is for the patient to be able to make a fully informed decision that is reflective of his or her goals, values, preferences, and desires. This article outlined some of the key considerations to discuss with parents and patients before enrolling in an OIT program with regard to the risks and benefits, to assist in engaging in shared decision-making and obtaining informed consent.

Food allergy: History, definitions and treatment approaches

Allergen-specific immunotherapy for the treatment of immunoglobulin E mediated food allergies, specifically oral, epicutaneous, and sublingual immunotherapies, are promising options that may provide an alternative to strict avoidance of the dietary allergen. Of these potential therapies, oral immunotherapy is the furthest along in development, with strong evidence of efficacy in clinical trials, and has achieved regulatory approval. Nevertheless, oral immunotherapy may not be a suitable therapy for some patients due to the risk of adverse effects. In contrast to oral immunotherapy, epicutaneous and sublingual immunotherapies have demonstrated modest efficacy in clinical trials, with a favorable adverse effect profile, which suggests that these therapies may be possible contenders to oral immunotherapy in certain clinical situations. Familiarity with the various treatment approaches is vital for guiding patients and families as more therapeutic modalities become available for use outside of the research setting.

Multifaceted role of the registered nurse on an oral immunotherapy clinical team

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) emerged into clinical practice, and its delivery highlights the multifaceted expertise of registered nurses (RN) as central to allergy/immunology interprofessional collaborative teams. The allergist-RN model of clinical evidenced-based OIT provision is presented. RN competencies, role components, and intervention examples are included to assist RNs and allergists in maximizing RN capabilities. RNs' patient-centered focus, and the ability to evaluate and incorporate physical, psychological, and sociological patient aspects are assets to OIT teams. RNs can establish best practices, initiate scholarly inquiry, and disseminate new knowledge to interdisciplinary colleagues. RNs also implement allergist-prescribed standing protocols within their legal practice scope by using their clinical judgment during evaluation of a patient receiving OIT. The same RN may serve as a nurse clinician, patient and family educator, case manager, research collaborator, and OIT program manager. Allergy/immunology practices use diverse staffing models, which thus require adaptation of presented descriptions per clinical team needs and resources.

A practical focus on wheat oral immunotherapy

Wheat is a dietary staple in many cultures as well as a common food allergen. Although not as extensively studied as other forms of oral immunotherapy, the current literature suggests that wheat oral immunotherapy (WOIT) can result in successful desensitization. There has only been one multicenter, double-blind, randomized controlled trial of WOIT, along with several open-label nonrandomized trials. The trials were limited by several factors, including small sample sizes; demographic skew; and heterogeneity in dosing, duration, and outcomes. The majority of WOIT regimens results in desensitization, with literature that indicates that a longer duration and higher dosing may lead to more clinical success. WOIT has been associated with adverse events, including allergic reactions, but these events seem to decrease over time. Study on WOIT is underway, but evidence from trials suggests it can be successful and safe. Further studies will need to optimize dosing protocols to improve efficacy and safety.

A practical focus on peanut oral immunotherapy

A new era of active treatment for food allergy has arrived because patients with peanut allergy are increasingly able to access options for oral immunotherapy (OIT). This milestone is a culmination of years of clinical research and represents a major inflection point for the field because it will have dramatic impacts on allergy practice. In this review, we provide a brief review of the literature as well as practical guidance with concern for the use of U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved peanut OIT as well as shelf-bought products.

A practical focus on multi-food oral immunotherapy

Approximately one-third of patients who present for oral immunotherapy (OIT) will be allergic to more than one food. Those patients with more than one food allergy have the option of sequential courses of single-food OIT or, in the right situation, combining several foods as part of multifood OIT. The time and cost savings can be substantial. Treatment protocols used with multiple foods are basically the same as with single-food courses, so clinics proficient with single-food OIT can easily transition to multifood OIT. Outcomes have been shown to be similar between the two approaches, so patients should be offered the opportunity to address their food allergies in one, more convenient OIT course.

Risk factors for reactions and adverse effects during oral immunotherapy

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) involves the potential for a variety of adverse events, which range from serious systemic reactions that require epinephrine to minimal oral reactions that require no treatment. This chapter describes common types of reactions seen in the course of OIT, reviews the frequency of and risk factors for different types of events as reported in recent literature (with a focus on real-world reports from private practice), and discusses treatment strategies for these adverse events. As the availability of OIT expands, it is paramount to ensure that allergists who offer OIT have a robust understanding of these reactions and mechanisms, with the overarching goal being the safety and tolerability of the therapy for the individual patient.