Effectiveness and safety of orally administered immunotherapy for food allergies: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Oral Immunotherapy Should Play a Key Role in Preschool Food Allergy Management

Food allergies pose significant challenges including the risk for severe allergic reactions. This review article highlights the advantages and disadvantages of the historic standard management approach-avoidance and carrying epinephrine in case of accidental ingestion-and argues, based on accumulating evidence, that oral immunotherapy (OIT) should play a key role in preschool food allergy management. Firstly, our review will highlight pitfalls with the 'wait-and-see' approach to natural resolution of food allergies, with recent data pointing to lower resolution than previously thought. For those who do not outgrow their allergies, waiting until school age to offer OIT means missing the window of opportunity where OIT is safest, and prolongs unnecessary dietary restrictions. For those who do outgrow their allergies, research indicates they may not reintroduce the food due to fear and aversion and can become re-sensitised, putting them at risk of severe reactions. Secondly, the risks associated with allergen avoidance are higher than previously believed. Allergen avoidance is imperfect and carries an increased risk of severe reactions when compared with the risk of severe reactions while on OIT, particularly in preschoolers. Although an allergic reaction can be stressful, it is preferable to have this occur during OIT where caregivers are vigilant following a scheduled dose, rather than having this occur at a potentially unexpected time following an accidental exposure. Lastly, there is a growing body of evidence supporting favourable safety and effectiveness of OIT in preschoolers, and preliminary data suggesting higher likelihood of remission in infants. OIT has the potential to significantly improve quality of life, and future research is needed to answer this important question in preschoolers. In summary, while ongoing research will further clarify cost-effectiveness, long-term adherence and psychosocial impacts of OIT, this review suggests that OIT should play a key role in preschool food allergy management.

ADP101 multifood oral immunotherapy for food-allergic patients: Harmony phase 1/2 randomized clinical trial

Background

Oral immunotherapy is an established approach to desensitize the immune system in the context of allergic disease; however, the only currently approved product is for peanut allergy. ADP101 is a novel, pharmaceutical-grade, multifood oral immunotherapy in development to simultaneously treat single or multiple food allergies, containing allergenic proteins from 15 foods in equal parts by protein weight.

Objective

The phase 1/2 Harmony trial (NCT04856865) evaluated efficacy and safety of ADP101 in participants with qualifying allergy to 1 to 5 foods in ADP101, defined as dose-limiting symptoms with a ≤100 mg challenge dose during double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC).

Methods

Participants were randomized to low-dose (1500 mg/d; 100 mg protein per food) or high-dose (4500 mg/d; 300 mg protein per food) ADP101, or matched placebo, with dose escalation followed by daily maintenance dosing over 40 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants tolerating a ≥600 mg challenge dose of a single qualifying food without dose-limiting symptoms at the Week 40 Exit DBPCFC (ie, responders).

Results

In the primary analysis population (61 pediatric participants aged 4-17 years), a greater response rate was observed in both the high-dose ADP101 (55.0%) and low-dose ADP101 (38.1%) groups compared with pooled placebo (20.0%) (nominal P = .048, P = .306, respectively; adjusted for multiple comparisons, P = .097, P = .306, respectively). Desensitization to ≥2 foods was observed in individuals with multiple food allergies, as was desensitization at levels over 600 mg. ADP101-treated participants showed an overall reduction in skin-prick test reactivity, with an increase in maximum tolerated dose across the majority of foods tested. Adverse events were mostly mild or moderate, with no life-threatening events or deaths.

Conclusions

The study did not meet its primary endpoint, but ADP101 demonstrated a favorable safety profile and increased the reactive threshold in DBPCFC in pediatric participants with single or multiple food allergies across multiple endpoints, warranting further clinical investigation.

Immunotherapy and biologics in the management of IgE-mediated food allergy: Systematic review and meta-analyses of efficacy and safety

Food allergy (FA) is a potentially life-threatening chronic condition that is becoming an increasing public health problem worldwide. This systematic review (SR) was carried out to inform the development of clinical recommendations on the treatment of IgE-mediated FA with biologics and/or IT for the update of the EAACI guidelines. A SR of randomized-controlled trials or quasi-controlled trials was carried out. Studies were identified via comprehensive search strategies in Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library, up to April 2022.

POPULATION

Human adults, children, and adolescents with IgE-mediated FA.

INTERVENTION

IT and/or biologics.

COMPARATOR

Placebo or standard-of-care (allergen avoidance).

OUTCOME

Efficacy (desensitization, sustained unresponsiveness (SU), remission), quality of life, and safety (systemic and local adverse reactions (AR)). The Cochrane RoB tool was used to assess the risk of bias. It was reported according to PRISMA and registered in PROSPERO CRD4202229828. After screening, 121 studies were included (111 for IT and 10 for biologics). Most studies had a high risk of bias and showed high heterogeneity in design and results. Metanalysis showed a positive effect of biologics and IT in terms of relative risk (RR) for achieving tolerance to the culprit food compared to avoidance or placebo. Omalizumab for any FA showed a RR of 2.17 [95% confidence interval: 1.22, 3.85]. For peanut allergy, oral IT (OIT) had a RR of 11.94 [1.76, 80.84] versus avoidance or placebo, sublingual IT (SLIT) had a RR of 3.00 [1.04, 8.66], and epicutaneous IT (EPIT) of 2.16 [1.56, 3.00]. OIT had a RR of 5.88 [2.27, 15.18] for cow's milk allergy, and of 3.43 [2.24, 5.27] for egg allergy. There was insufficient data on SLIT or EPIT for the treatment of egg and milk allergies. Most ARs reported were mild. For OIT the most common AR involved the gastrointestinal system and for EPIT, AR's most commonly affected the skin. There was limited data on severe or life-threatening ARs. There was limited evidence for long term efficacy and quality of life. In conclusion, biologics and IT, alone or in combination, are effective in achieving desensitization while on active treatment but more evidence is needed on long-term tolerance as current evidence is not of high quality. Adverse events while on therapy are generally mild to moderate but a long-term comprehensive safety profile is missing. There is a critical need to optimize and standardize desensitization protocols and outcome measures to facilitate our understanding of the efficacy and safety as well as to allow for comparison between interventions.

Exploratory immunogenicity outcomes of peanut oral immunotherapy: Findings from the PALISADE trial

BACKGROUND

Immunoglobulin E (IgE) and immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4) to peanut and its components may influence the clinical reactivity to peanut. Allergen-specific immunotherapy is known for modifying both IgE and IgG4. Peanut oral immunotherapy may influence these serological parameters.

METHODS

Exploratory analyses of serological data from participants receiving peanut (Arachis hypogaea) allergen powder-dnfp (PTAH) and placebo in the double-blind, randomized, phase 3 PALISADE trial were conducted to evaluate potential relationships between peanut-specific and peanut component-specific (Ara h 1, Ara h 2, Ara h 3, Ara h 6, Ara h 8, and Ara h 9) IgE and IgG4 levels and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 269 participants (PTAH, n = 202; placebo, n = 67) were analyzed. No relationship was observed between specific IgE and IgG4 levels at screening and maximum tolerated peanut protein dose during screening or response status during exit double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC). In PTAH-treated participants, no relationship was observed between IgE and IgG4 levels at screening and maximum symptom severity during exit DBPCFC. Postscreening ratios (ie, postscreening/screening) in the PTAH group were significant at the end of updosing and exit visit for most components. Postscreening changes in specific IgE levels were more pronounced with PTAH versus placebo for most components.

CONCLUSIONS

Specific IgE and IgG4 levels at screening are not correlated with screening or exit DBPCFC results, and are not predictive of clinical response to PTAH. Peanut (Arachis hypogaea) allergen powder-dnfp contains the relevant and immunodominant allergens, inducing immunological changes with the treatment.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02635776.

World Allergy Organization (WAO) Diagnosis and Rationale for Action against Cow's Milk Allergy (DRACMA) guideline update - XIII - Oral immunotherapy for CMA - Systematic review

Background

Allergy to cow's milk is the most common food allergy in infants and it is usually outgrown by 5 years of age. In some individuals it persists beyond early childhood. Oral immunotherapy (OIT, oral desensitization, specific oral tolerance induction) has been proposed as a promising therapeutic strategy for persistent IgE-mediated cow's milk allergy. We previously published the systematic review of OIT for cow's milk allergy (CMA) in 2010 as part of the World Allergy Organization (WAO) Diagnosis and Rationale for Action against Cow's Milk Allergy (DRACMA) Guidelines.

Objective

To systematically synthesize the currently available evidence about OIT for IgE-mediated CMA and to inform the updated 2022 WAO guidelines.

Methods

We searched the electronic databases including PubMed, Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the websites of selected allergy organizations. We included all studies irrespective of the language of the original publication. The last search was conducted in February 2021. We registered the protocol on Open Science Framework (10.17605/OSF.IO/AH2DT).

Results

We identified 2147 unique records published between 2010 and 2021, including 13 randomized trials and 109 observational studies addressing cow's milk OIT. We found low-certainty evidence that OIT with unheated cow's milk, compared to elimination diet alone, increased the likelihood of being able to consume ≥150 ml of cow's milk in controlled settings (risk ratio (RR): 12.3, 95% CI: 5.9 to 26.0; risk difference (RD): 25 more per 100, 95% CI 11 to 56) as well as accidently ingest a small amount (≥5 ml) of cow's milk (RR: 8.7, 95% CI: 4.7 to 16.1; RD: 25 more per 100, 95% CI 12 to 50). However, 2-8 weeks after discontinuation of a successful OIT, tolerance of cow's milk persisted in only 36% (range: 20%-91%) of patients. OIT increased the frequency of anaphylaxis (rate ratio: 60.0, 95% CI 15 to 244; rate difference 5 more anaphylactic reactions per 1 person per year, 95% CI: 4 to 6; moderate evidence) and the frequency of epinephrine use (rate ratio: 35.2, 95% CI: 9 to 136.5; rate difference 268 more events per 100 person-years, 95% CI: 203 to 333; high certainty). OIT also increased the risk of gastrointestinal symptoms (RR 6.9, 95% CI 1.6-30.9; RD 28 more per 100, CI 3 to 100) and respiratory symptoms (RR 49.0, 95% CI 3.12-770.6; RD 77 more per 100, CI 62 to 92), compared with avoidance diet alone. Single-arm observational studies showed that on average 6.9% of OIT patients (95% CI: 3.8%-10%) developed eosinophilic esophagitis (very low certainty evidence). We found 1 trial and 2 small case series of OIT with baked milk.

Conclusions

Moderate certainty evidence shows that OIT with unheated cow's milk in patients with IgE-mediated CMA is associated with an increased probability of being able to drink milk and, at the same time, an increased risk of serious adverse effects.

Phase 2, randomized multi oral immunotherapy with omalizumab 'real life' study

BACKGROUND

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is frequently discontinued due to adverse events (AEs) and current data suggests that lowering OIT doses can minimize severity and frequency of AEs. However, the minimum daily dose that can enable desensitization and induce immune responses in multi-food OIT (mOIT) is unknown.

METHODS

Participants aged 2-25 years with multi-food allergies were pretreated with fixed-dose omalizumab (150 mg, 3 doses, every 4 weeks), and randomized 1:1 to receive mOIT to a total maintenance dose of either 300 or 1200 mg total protein, (total dose includes at least two and up to a max of five allergens) and then transitioned to real-food protein equivalents after 18 weeks of treatment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of subjects with increases in IgG4/IgE ratio of at least 2 allergens by ≥25% from baseline after 18 weeks of therapy. The primary efficacy and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population.

RESULTS

Sixty participants were enrolled across two sites. Seventy percent of participants in both arms showed changes in sIgG4/sIgE ratio in at least 2 allergens with no difference between the treatment groups (OR [95% CI] = 1.00 [0.29, 3.49]). Overall, there were no differences in AEs between the 300 and 1200 mg groups (19% vs. 17%, p = .69), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that plasma marker changes are induced early, even at a total protein dose of 300 mg inclusive of multiple allergens when mOIT is combined with fixed-dose omalizumab. Identification of optimal mOIT dosing with adjunct omalizumab is needed for the long-term success of OIT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03181009).

Oral immunotherapy for food allergy in children: is it worth it?

INTRODUCTION

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is effective at inducing desensitization in food-allergic individuals, and is a valid therapeutic option for those allergic to peanut, cow's milk and egg. However, there is a high rate of dose-related adverse events, and at least one fatality to OIT has been reported.

AREAS COVERED

We provide an update on the broader framework of issues which will impact on the availability and uptake of OIT.

EXPERT OPINION

The need for standardized products remains controversial. A licensed product exists for peanut-OIT, but OIT can also be safely achieved using peanut-containing foods at much lower cost. For other allergens, OIT can only be done with non-pharma products - something which has been done safely for over 2 decades. There is a need to develop personalized protocols for OIT, particularly for the 20% of patients unable to tolerate standard OIT. Cost-effectiveness is dependent on improved quality of life, but evidence for this is currently lacking, and is a key evidence gap. OIT is likely to be cost-effective, particularly if noncommercial products are used. There may be a trade-off: in patients with lower reaction thresholds, a commercial product may be needed for initial updosing, until a level of desensitization is achieved when they can be switched to natural food products.

Epitope mapping and the effects of various factors on the immunoreactivity of main allergens in egg white

Egg white has high protein content and numerous biological/functional properties. However, reported allergenicity for some of the proteins in egg white is an issue that needs to be paid exclusive attention. A consideration of the structure of IgE epitopes and their sequences, as well as a comprehensive understanding of the effects of various processes on epitopes and the impact of the gastrointestinal tract on them, can help target such issues. The current study focuses on the identified IgE epitopes in egg white proteins and evaluation of the effects of the gastrointestinal digestion, carbohydrate moiety, food matrix, microbial fermentation, recombinant allergen, heat treatment, Maillard reaction and combination of various processes and gastrointestinal digestion on egg white allergenicity. Although the gastrointestinal tract reduces the immunoreactivity of native egg white proteins, some of the IgE epitope-containing fragments remain intact during the digestion process. It has been found that the gastrointestinal tract can have both positive and negative impacts on the IgE binding activities of egg white proteins. Elimination of the carbohydrate moiety leads to a reduction in the immunoreactivity of ovalbumin. But, such effects from the carbohydrate parts in the IgE binding activity need to be explored further. In addition, the interaction between the egg white proteins and the food matrix leads to various effects from the gastrointestinal tract on the digestion of egg white proteins and their subsequent immunoreactivity. Further on this matter, studies have shown that both microbial fermentation and Maillard reaction can reduce the IgE binding activities of egg white proteins. Also, as an alternate approach, the thermal process can be used to treat the egg white proteins, which may result in the reduction or increase in their IgE binding activities depending on the conditions used in the process. Overall, based on the reported data, the allergenicity levels of egg white proteins can be mitigated or escalated depending on the conditions applied in the processing of the food products containing egg white. So far, no practical solutions have been reported to eliminate such allergenicity.

Oral Immunotherapy in Food Allergy: A Critical Pediatric Perspective

There is evidence that in children with persistent IgE-mediated food allergy (FA) to cow's milk, hen's egg, and peanut, oral allergen-specific immunotherapy (OIT) may increase the reaction threshold to the culprit food allergen(s). OIT may protect patients from the occurrence of severe reactions in case of accidental ingestion of the culprit food during treatment. Notwithstanding, many gaps are still unsolved, including safety issues, identification of predictive biomarkers, and post-desensitization efficacy. In this perspective, the use of omalizumab (Anti-IgE monoclonal antibody) has been proposed as an adjunctive treatment to OIT in order to reduce the risk of allergic reactions related to OIT. This review aims to summarize the current evidence and unmet needs on OIT in children with FA to enhance the development of longitudinal, prospective, and well-designed studies able to fill the current gaps soon.

Update of the S2k guideline on the management of IgE-mediated food allergies

Not available.

Immunological Outcomes of Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy in Food Allergy

IgE-mediated food allergies are caused by adverse immunologic responses to food proteins. Allergic reactions may present locally in different tissues such as skin, gastrointestinal and respiratory tract and may result is systemic life-threatening reactions. During the last decades, the prevalence of food allergies has significantly increased throughout the world, and considerable efforts have been made to develop curative therapies. Food allergen immunotherapy is a promising therapeutic approach for food allergies that is based on the administration of increasing doses of culprit food extracts, or purified, and sometime modified food allergens. Different routes of administration for food allergen immunotherapy including oral, sublingual, epicutaneous and subcutaneous regimens are being evaluated. Although a wealth of data from clinical food allergen immunotherapy trials has been obtained, a lack of consistency in assessed clinical and immunological outcome measures presents a major hurdle for evaluating these new treatments. Coordinated efforts are needed to establish standardized outcome measures to be applied in food allergy immunotherapy studies, allowing for better harmonization of data and setting the standards for the future research. Several immunological parameters have been measured in food allergen immunotherapy, including allergen-specific immunoglobulin levels, basophil activation, cytokines, and other soluble biomarkers, T cell and B cell responses and skin prick tests. In this review we discuss different immunological parameters and assess their applicability as potential outcome measures for food allergen immunotherapy that may be included in such a standardized set of outcome measures.

Current Controversies and Future Prospects for Peanut Allergy Prevention, Diagnosis and Therapies

Peanut allergy has increased substantially in the past few decades, both in developed and developing countries. Peanut allergy has become a major public health concern, affecting up to 1 in 50 children, with repercussions for school and airline policies. Recent research findings have shown that, contrary to the long-standing teaching of "delayed" introduction of allergens, early introduction of peanut protein is of benefit as an allergy prevention strategy, especially in high-risk cases. Ideal dose, frequency and duration of "proactive" peanut therapy for maximum protection remain to be determined in order for it to become acceptable and practical on a large scale. Logistics around widespread screening of high-risk patients remain complex. The correct diagnosis of peanut allergy is crucial and diagnostic tests have been fine-tuned in the past 2 decades in order to help differentiate true allergy from false-positive sensitization through cross-reactivity. Component-resolved diagnostics have become routinely available, and the use of basophil activation tests has increased, although standardization and availability remain issues. Future tests, including epitope testing and histamine-release assays, promise to be even more specific in ruling out false positives and reducing the need for incremental food challenges. Stringent peanut avoidance and prompt treatment of reactions remain the cornerstone of treatment. The concept of exposing the allergic body to small amounts of peanut protein in a cautious, orderly, escalating fashion in the form of desensitization has been widely applied in the past 10-15 years, mainly in the research domain, but of late spilling over into every-day practice. However, desensitization does not equate to a cure, and has significant safety concerns and practical ramifications; probably requiring lifelong-controlled peanut ingestion for ongoing protection. Further strategies to enhance the safety and efficacy of immunotherapy are under exploration, many with a non-specific immune-modifying effect. Despite recent advances in peanut allergy, we still need to go back to basics with accurate diagnosis, nutritional counselling, well-organized allergy action plans and accessible emergency kits.

Oral Immunotherapy (OIT): A Personalized Medicine

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

Treatment for food allergy

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

Current Trends in Tolerance Induction in Cow's Milk Allergy: From Passive to Proactive Strategies

This review addresses the current strategies of inducing tolerance development in infant and childhood cow's milk protein allergy (CMPA). The change in prevention strategies for CMPA has been emphasized based on the lack of evidence to support the efficacy of food allergen avoidance in infancy and the concept of the dual-allergen-exposure hypothesis, which suggests that allergen exposure through the skin leads to sensitization, whereas early oral consumption of allergenic food protein induces oral tolerance. The new approach is based on the likelihood of early introduction of allergenic foods to the infant's diet to reduce the development of food allergies through oral tolerance induction. The latest treatment guidelines recommend the continuation of breast feeding and the elimination of cow's milk and products from the maternal diet in exclusively breast-fed infants with CMPA, the use of an extensively hydrolyzed infant formula (eHF) with proven efficacy in CMPA as the first elimination diet in formula-fed infants with CMPA and the use of amino acid-based formula (AAF) in severe cases, such as anaphylaxis, enteropathy, eosinophilic esophagitis, and food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES), as well as cases of multiple system involvement, multiple food allergies, and intolerance to extensively hydrolyzed formula (eHF). In conclusion, this paper presents the current knowledge on tolerance development in infants and children with CMPA to increase the awareness of the clinicians concerning the new approaches in CMPA treatment Tolerance development is considered a relatively new concept in CMPA, inducing a shift in interventions in CMPA from a passive (avoidance of responsible allergen) toward a proactive (tolerance induction) strategy.

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

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

Specific oral immunotherapy in food allergic patients: transient or persistent tolerance?

INTRODUCTION

The first therapeutic choice for food allergy is avoidance of the responsible food, but when this approach is not possible, specific oral desensitization could be considered as a good alternative. It is not clear yet whether the acquired tolerance is transient or persistent.

AIM

We report on a subset of 13 patients of a larger study, treated successfully with specific oral tolerance induction who experienced secondary loss of tolerance after a period of allergen avoidance.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Thirteen patients affected by IgE-mediated food allergy: to cow milk (3 patients), to hen egg (3 patients), to cod fish (2 patients), to peanuts (1 patient) and to corn (1 patient) confirmed by a complete allergological workup and a double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC), were treated with sublingual-oral desensitization. After the interruption of the maintenance phase, the laboratory tests were performed and 12 of 13 patients underwent DBPCFC.

RESULTS

Oral specific desensitization was completed successfully in all the 13 reported patients. At different times after the end of treatment, they decided, on their own initiative, to stop the ingestion of incriminated food. A new food allergen re-exposure caused adverse reactions in 12 of 13 patients. The detection of specific IgE and IgG4 during the period of allergen avoidance showed an increase in or a stable level of specific IgE and a decrease in specific IgG4 in 8 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

According to our experience, the tolerance obtained through the desensitizing treatment is transient and so the regular allergen intake is necessary for its maintenance.

Cow's milk oral immunotherapy in real life: 8-year long-term follow-up study

Background

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has been recognized as a promising treatment for severe and long-lasting cow's milk (CM) allergy. Once maintenance has been achieved, patients should maintain daily intake of CM to ensure desensitization. Clinical experience concerning long-term follow-up is scarce.

Objective

The authors aimed to assess long-term efficacy and safety of a maintenance phase of OIT in real life.

Methods

Prospective study of all children and adolescents, who underwent CM-OIT and were subsequently followed at our allergy center on maintenance dose (200 mL daily) for at least 36 months after reaching the maintenance phase (from 2009 to 2016).

Results

Forty-two patients were enrolled: 60% male, 36% with history of anaphylaxis and 57% with asthma. The median time of follow-up was 69 months (range, 39–105 months) and the median age at the last clinical evaluation was 13 years (range, 6–23 years). Regarding adherence to the protocol: 92% are on free diet (at least 200 mL of CM daily; 7-g protein); 14% had transient interruptions and 7% definitely withdrawn with loss of tolerance. During maintenance, 45% developed mild to severe allergic reactions, and 7% had more than 3 episodes. A positive correlation between the occurrence of allergic reactions and history of anaphylaxis (p < 0.001) was found. The coexistence of asthma was risk factor for the occurrence of allergic reactions during maintenance.

Conclusion

This real-life study supports long-term efficacy and safety of CM-OIT. Despite daily intake, 41% had symptoms at some moment during the complete follow-up period; a total of 33 symptomatic days in patients with mean follow-up time of 67.5 months. Clinical tolerance depends on daily intake. The protective effect reached can be lost after CM withdrawal. History of anaphylaxis was a risk factor for the occurrence of allergic reactions during the maintenance phase.

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

The Nuts and Bolts of Food Immunotherapy: The Future of Food Allergy

Food allergies are on the rise and have a major impact on the quality of life of the food allergic child and their family. Currently, the mainstream treatment for food allergies is strict avoidance and elimination of the allergenic food(s) from the patient's diet in order to prevent an allergic reaction. However, recent advances in research have presented new therapeutic options for food allergic patients that are potentially becoming promising alternatives to traditional treatment. Food immunotherapy is the most popular of these new emerging interventions and has been studied intensively over the last decade for various foods. In this review, we discuss this exciting new development that is aspiring to become part of the mainstream therapy for food allergy.

EAACI Guidelines on allergen immunotherapy: IgE-mediated food allergy

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

Combining anti-IgE with oral immunotherapy

Food allergy is a significant medical problem that affects up to 8% of children in developed countries. At present, there are no curative therapies available in routine practice and management of food allergy involves strict allergen avoidance, education, and prompt treatment upon accidental exposure. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an efficacious experimental approach to food allergy and has been shown to provide a substantial benefit in terms of allergen desensitization. However, OIT is associated with high rates of allergic reactions, and the period of protection offered by OIT appears to be limited and highly variable. Recurrence of allergen sensitivity after a period of treatment discontinuation is commonly observed. With the aim of overcoming these limitations of OIT, several trials have studied omalizumab (anti-IgE monoclonal antibody) as an adjuvant treatment for patients undergoing OIT. Results from these trials have shown that the addition of omalizumab to OIT leads to a significant decrease in the frequency and severity of reactions, which allows for an increase in the threshold of tolerance to food allergens. This review provides a summary of the current literature and addresses some of the key questions that remain regarding the use of omalizumab in conjunction with OIT.

Oral Immunotherapy With Partially Hydrolyzed Wheat-Based Cereals: A Pilot Study

To date, only few studies have assessed oral immunotherapy (OIT) for wheat allergy and often describe severe adverse reactions during therapy. We developed partially hydrolyzed wheat-based cereals (pHC), which were used in a multicenter, open-label, OIT pilot study, in immunoglobulin E–mediated wheat allergy children (NCT01332084). The primary objective of the study was to test whether wheat allergic patients tolerate pHC and primary end point was the presence or not of immediate adverse reactions to pHC during the 1-day initial escalation phase (stepwise increased doses of pHC), with evaluation of the maximum dose tolerated. Of the 9 patients enrolled in the trial, 4 discontinued OIT because of mild to severe reactions at the initial escalation phase. The 5 patients who passed the escalation phase consumed pHC daily for 1 to 6 months. One of these patients withdrew due to noncompliance, whereas the 4 others completed the study and successfully passed the wheat challenge test at the end of the study. About 60% of the adverse events were unrelated to the study product. Our study provides preliminary evidence that pHC is tolerated by a subset of wheat allergic patients. Further studies are warranted to test its efficacy as a potential therapeutic option for wheat allergic patients.

Allergen immunotherapy for IgE-mediated food allergy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is developing Guidelines for Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) for IgE-mediated Food Allergy. To inform the development of clinical recommendations, we sought to critically assess evidence on the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of AIT in the management of food allergy.

METHODS

We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis that involved searching nine international electronic databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized studies (NRS). Eligible studies were independently assessed by two reviewers against predefined eligibility criteria. The quality of studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for RCTs and the Cochrane ACROBAT-NRS tool for quasi-RCTs. Random-effects meta-analyses were undertaken, with planned subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

We identified 1814 potentially relevant papers from which we selected 31 eligible studies, comprising of 25 RCTs and six NRS, studying a total of 1259 patients. Twenty-five trials evaluated oral immunotherapy (OIT), five studies investigated sublingual immunotherapy, and one study evaluated epicutaneous immunotherapy. The majority of these studies were in children. Twenty-seven studies assessed desensitization, and eight studies investigated sustained unresponsiveness postdiscontinuation of AIT. Meta-analyses demonstrated a substantial benefit in terms of desensitization (risk ratio (RR) = 0.16, 95% CI 0.10, 0.26) and suggested, but did not confirm sustained unresponsiveness (RR = 0.29, 95% CI 0.08, 1.13). Only one study reported on disease-specific quality of life (QoL), which reported no comparative results between OIT and control group. Meta-analyses revealed that the risk of experiencing a systemic adverse reaction was higher in those receiving AIT, with a more marked increase in the risk of local adverse reactions. Sensitivity analysis excluding those studies judged to be at high risk of bias demonstrated the robustness of summary estimates of effectiveness and safety of AIT for food allergy. None of the studies reported data on health economic analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

AIT may be effective in raising the threshold of reactivity to a range of foods in children with IgE-mediated food allergy whilst receiving (i.e. desensitization) and post-discontinuation of AIT. It is, however, associated with a modest increased risk in serious systemic adverse reactions and a substantial increase in minor local adverse reactions. More data are needed in relation to adults, long term effects, the impact on QoL and the cost-effectiveness of AIT.

Oral immunotherapy for food allergy: A Spanish guideline. Immunotherapy egg and milk Spanish guide (items guide). Part I: Cow milk and egg oral immunotherapy: Introduction, methodology, rationale, current state, indications contraindications and oral immunotherapy build-up phase

INTRODUCTION

Cow's milk and egg are the most frequent causes of food allergy in the first years of life. Treatments such as oral immunotherapy (OIT) have been investigated as an alternative to avoidance diets. No clinical practice guides on the management of OIT with milk and egg are currently available.

OBJECTIVES

To develop a clinical guide on OIT based on the available scientific evidence and the opinions of experts.

METHODS

A review was made of studies published in the period between 1984 and June 2016, Doctoral Theses published in Spain, and summaries of communications at congresses (SEAIC, SEICAP, EAACI, AAAAI), with evaluation of the opinion consensus established by a group of experts pertaining to the scientific societies SEICAP and SEAIC.

RESULTS

Recommendations have been established regarding the indications, requirements and practical aspects of the different phases of OIT, as well as special protocols for patients at high risk of suffering adverse reactions.

CONCLUSIONS

A clinical practice guide is presented for the management of OIT with milk and egg, based on the opinion consensus of Spanish experts.

Side effects and their impact on the success of milk oral immunotherapy (OIT) in children

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has been introduced as a new immune-modulating treatment under investigation for food allergies. The aim of our study was to evaluate the success of OIT in a cohort of children with milk allergy. These children underwent OIT in a clinical practice and were followed for up to ten years. The secondary endpoint was to describe the main adverse events during OIT and compare them to those reported in the literature.

Eighty-two milk-allergic children started OIT. According to the OIT endpoint reached after one year, all of the children enrolled in the study were divided into four groups: complete desensitization; partial desensitization; step down; and stop groups. Any adverse events that occurred during OIT were also recorded.

Of the 82 patients, eight were recruited in the last months of 2010 so they were still ongoing at the end of the study. For that reason, they were excluded from the analysis. The majority (73%) of the 74 children evaluated (51 boys, 23 girls; median age, 7 years; age range, 2–18 years; specific serum IgE for cow’s milk, 36 KUA/L [range, 3–100 KUA/L]; milk SPT wheal diameter, 7 mm [range, 2–15 mm]) reached complete (58.1%) or partial (14.9%) desensitization, 9.4% were subjected to step down. The remaining 17.6% of the children discontinued OIT because of the occurrence of chronic gastroenteric (GE) symptoms (46.1%) or acute asthma (15.3%) following milk intake.

In agreement with the literature, we found that chronic GE symptoms was the main reason for OIT discontinuation. OIT represents a valid tool for the treatment of food allergies in children; however, the risk of potential adverse reactions, both IgE- and non-IgE-mediated, should be discussed with parents prior to the initiation of OIT.

Hypoallergenic Variant of the Major Egg White Allergen Gal d 1 Produced by Disruption of Cysteine Bridges

BACKGROUND

Gal d 1 (ovomucoid) is the dominant allergen in the chicken egg white. Hypoallergenic variants of this allergen can be used in immunotherapy as an egg allergy treatment approach. We hypothesised that disruption of two of the nine cysteine-cysteine bridges by site-directed mutagenesis will allow the production of a hypoallergenic variant of the protein; Methods: Two cysteine residues at C192 and C210 in domain III of the protein were mutated to alanine using site-directed mutagenesis, to disrupt two separate cysteine-cysteine bridges. The mutated and non-mutated proteins were expressed in Escherichia coli (E. coli) by induction with isopropyl β-d-1-thiogalactopyranoside (IPTG). The expressed proteins were analysed using sodium dodecyl sulfate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) and immunoblotting to confirm expression. Immunoglobulin E (IgE) reactivity of the two proteins was analysed, by immunoblotting, against a pool of egg-allergic patients' sera. A pool of non-allergic patients' sera was also used in a separate blot as a negative control; Results: Mutant Gal d 1 showed diminished IgE reactivity in the immunoblot by showing lighter bands when compared to the non-mutated version, although there was more of the mutant protein immobilised on the membrane when compared to the wild-type protein. The non-allergic negative control showed no bands, indicating an absence of non-specific binding of secondary antibody to the proteins; Conclusion: Disruption of two cysteine bridges in domain III of Gal d 1 reduces IgE reactivity. Following downstream laboratory and clinical testing, this mutant protein can be used in immunotherapy to induce tolerance to Gal d 1 and in egg allergy diagnosis.

Specific oral tolerance induction in childhood

Food allergy continues to be a significant public health concern for which there are no approved treatments and management strategies primarily include allergen avoidance and pharmacological measures for accidental exposures. Food allergy is thought to result from either a failure to establish oral tolerance or the breakdown of existing oral tolerance, and therefore, experimental preventative and treatment strategies are now aimed at inducing specific oral tolerance. This may occur in infancy prior to the development of food allergy through the optimal timing of dietary exposure (primary oral tolerance induction) or as a treatment for established food allergy through oral immunotherapy (secondary oral tolerance induction). Trials examining the effectiveness of early dietary allergen exposure to prevent food allergy have yielded promising results for peanut allergy but not so for other allergens, although the results of several trials are yet to be published. Although infant feeding guidelines no longer advise to avoid allergenic foods and exposure to food allergens orally is an important step in inducing food tolerance by the immune system, evidence regarding the optimal timing, dose and form of these foods into the infant's diet is lacking. Likewise, oral immunotherapy trials appear promising for inducing desensitization; however, the long-term efficacy in achieving sustained desensitization and optimal protocols to achieve this is unknown. More research is needed in this emerging field.

Food Allergy: What We Know Now

Food allergy is an adverse immune reaction that occurs reproducibly on exposure to a given food. Prevalence rates of food allergy continue to increase worldwide, sparking continual research efforts in finding a suitable and safe cure. Food avoidance, the current standard of care, can be difficult to achieve. This review aims to provide a broad overview of immunoglobulin E-mediated food allergy, highlighting its epidemiology, masqueraders, immunopathophysiology, clinical presentation, diagnostic work-up and available preventative and treatment strategies. This review also discusses novel, investigative therapies that offer promising therapeutic options, yet require continued research efforts to determine safety effects. Inducing tolerance, whether by immunotherapy or by the administration of monoclonal antibodies, allows us to move toward a cure for food allergy, which could vastly change this field of allergic diseases in the coming decades.

Risk and safety requirements for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in allergology: World Allergy Organization Statement

One of the major concerns in the practice of allergy is related to the safety of procedures for the diagnosis and treatment of allergic disease. Management (diagnosis and treatment) of hypersensitivity disorders involves often intentional exposure to potentially allergenic substances (during skin testing), deliberate induction in the office of allergic symptoms to offending compounds (provocation tests) or intentional application of potentially dangerous substances (allergy vaccine) to sensitized patients. These situations may be associated with a significant risk of unwanted, excessive or even dangerous reactions, which in many instances cannot be completely avoided. However, adverse reactions can be minimized or even avoided if a physician is fully aware of potential risk and is prepared to appropriately handle the situation. Information on the risk of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in allergic diseases has been accumulated in the medical literature for decades; however, except for allergen specific immunotherapy, it has never been presented in a systematic fashion. Up to now no single document addressed the risk of the most commonly used medical procedures in the allergy office nor attempted to present general requirements necessary to assure the safety of these procedures. Following review of available literature a group of allergy experts within the World Allergy Organization (WAO), representing various continents and areas of allergy expertise, presents this report on risk associated with diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in allergology and proposes a consensus on safety requirements for performing procedures in allergy offices. Optimal safety measures including appropriate location, type and required time of supervision, availability of safety equipment, access to specialized emergency services, etc. for various procedures have been recommended. This document should be useful for allergists with already established practices and experience as well as to other specialists taking care of patients with allergies.

Rush Oral Immunotherapy Does Not Reduce Allergic Response in Mice with Mild Allergy to Egg White Ovomucoid

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is a promising therapeutic approach for treating food allergy. Past studies have shown that OIT reduces allergic response only in severe allergy model mice. We worked to establish mild allergy model mice, and investigated whether 'rush' OIT for 10 d improved the allergic response and biomarkers in these mice. Balb/c mice were sensitized to ovomucoid (OM) in alum. The rush OIT was done for 10 d. Oral OM challenge was used to determine the impact of OIT on the allergic response. We measured allergic biomarkers, such as vascular permeability in the skin, plasma levels of total IgE, OM-specific IgE, IgG1 and IgG2a and cytokines in splenocyte culture supernatant. OIT for 10 d did not improve allergy symptoms and increased vascular permeability. Total IgE in the plasma of OIT-treated mice was significantly higher than in that of non-treated mice. OM-specific IgG1 and IgG2a plasma levels were not significantly different between OIT-treated and non-treated mice. Among the cytokine secretion of splenocyte from OIT-treated mice, IFN-γ and IL-10 were significantly lower than in non-treated mice, and IL-4 and IL-5 were significantly higher. Total TGF-β in the OIT-treated group was not detected. The IFN-γ/IL-4 ratio of the OIT-treated group was about 1/8 that of the non-treated group. OIT for 10 d was not effective and some biomarkers showed negative responses in the mild allergy model mice. We suggest OIT should be used very carefully as this treatment carries a risk of worsening allergy symptoms for mice with mild allergy.

Current and Emerging Therapies for IgE-Mediated Food Allergy

Food allergies are a growing clinical problem leading to increased health care utilization and decreases in patient quality of life. Current treatment recommendations include strict dietary avoidance of the offending food as well as use of self-injectable epinephrine in case of accidental exposure with allergic reaction. Although many individuals will eventually outgrow their food allergies, a substantial number will not. Significant effort has been made to find novel treatments that protect patients from food-triggered reactions as well as to develop immune-modulating therapies that could lead to tolerance. In this review, three therapies that have shown the most promise for the treatment of food allergies are highlighted: oral immunotherapy, sublingual immunotherapy, and epicutaneous immunotherapy.

Allergen immunotherapy for IgE-mediated food allergy: protocol for a systematic review

Background

The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is in the process of developing the EAACI Guidelines for Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) for IgE-mediated food allergy. We seek to critically assess the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of AIT in IgE-mediated food allergy.

Methods

We will undertake a systematic review, which will involve searching international biomedical databases for published, in progress and unpublished evidence. Studies will be independently screened against pre-defined eligibility criteria and critically appraised using established instruments. Data will be descriptively and, if possible and appropriate, quantitatively synthesised.

Discussion

The findings from this review will be used to inform the development of recommendations for EAACI’s Guidelines on AIT.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13601-016-0113-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

[Allergen-specific immunotherapy for food allergies in childhood. Current options and future perspectives]

During recent years increasing research has been conducted on casual treatment options for food allergy, with focus on oral immunotherapy (OIT) for hen's egg, cow's milk and peanut allergy. Several studies could show that OIT leads to desensitization or an increase of threshold. However, severe adverse events during this treatment are not uncommon. Whether OIT leads to a sustained, 'robust' development of tolerance in patients has not yet been thoroughly investigated. Besides OIT, some studies on sublingual (SLIT) and epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) were performed, aiming to improve the safety profile. Furthermore, there are some pilot studies investigating a combined treatment of SLIT and OIT or a combined use of anti-IgE treatment or probiotic supplementation with OIT. Further placebo-controlled trials with larger sample size are needed in order to develop standardized protocols before immunotherapy may be used as a therapeutic option for food allergy outside of clinical trials.

Update on Early Nutrition and Food Allergy in Children

With growing evidence of an increase in the prevalence, food allergy has been emerged as a new public health problem. As treatment and management of food allergy remain challenging, more attention has been paid to the importance of prevention of food allergy. Although the exact mechanism of recent epidemic is not fully understood, it is suggested that nutritional exposure in early life may play an important role in food allergy development. The underlying hypothesis is that nutritional status or food exposure in the critical period of fetal development can affect the programming of immune system and modify the risk of immunologic reactions to foods in postnatal life. We review accumulating epidemiological studies to examine an association between nutritional exposure during pregnancy or early infancy and food allergy development in children. We also discuss recent advances in the studies of the genetic and epigenetic regulation of food allergy and evaluate the role of early nutrition in food allergy development to provide a new perspective on the prevention of food allergy.

Anaphylaxis in adolescents: a potential tripartite management framework

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The incidence of anaphylaxis is increasing across all ages, but the risk of morbidity and fatality is disproportionately high in adolescents. This may, at least in part, be a consequence of a constellation of potentially modifiable psychosocial factors that tend to manifest during adolescence. This study highlights the shortcomings in and the barriers to effective management of anaphylaxis in adolescents, and proposes an integrated tripartite framework that may help promote successful management.

RECENT FINDINGS

Existing mainstay anaphylaxis self-management approaches - comprising careful avoidance of triggers, recognition of early features indicative of anaphylaxis and prompt self-administration of intra-muscular adrenaline (epinephrine) - often fail in adolescents. Key barriers to successful management centre on the impact of the psychosocial environment during adolescents' developmental transition. As a result, risk-taking, poor judgement of actions during reactions and non-compliance to management instructions are common.

SUMMARY

To be successful, anaphylaxis management strategies require more multidimensional approaches among adolescents. We propose a tripartite management framework that emphasizes integration of the following components: better understanding of adolescence; incorporation of the constituents of adolescents' social networks; and adolescent-tailored healthcare perspectives. This theoretical framework now requires translation into an intervention, feasibility and pilot testing, and formal evaluation through randomized controlled trials.

Improving the safety of oral immunotherapy for food allergy

Food allergy is a major public health problem in children, impacting upon the affected individual, their families and others charged with their care, for example educational establishments, and the food industry. In contrast to most other paediatric diseases, there is no established cure: current management is based upon dietary avoidance and the provision of rescue medication in the event of accidental reactions, which are common. This strategy has significant limitations and impacts adversely on health-related quality of life. In the last decade, research into disease-modifying treatments for food allergy has emerged, predominantly for peanut, egg and cow's milk. Most studies have used the oral route (oral immunotherapy, OIT), in which increasing amounts of allergen are given over weeks-months. OIT has proven effective to induce immune modulation and 'desensitization' - that is, an increase in the amount of food allergen that can be consumed, so long as regular (typically daily) doses are continued. However, its ability to induce permanent tolerance once ongoing exposure has stopped seems limited. Additionally, the short- and long-term safety of OIT is often poorly reported, raising concerns about its implementation in routine practice. Most patients experience allergic reactions and, although generally mild, severe reactions have occurred. Long-term adherence is unclear, which rises concerns given the low rates of long-term tolerance induction. Current research focuses on improving current limitations, especially safety. Strategies include alternative routes (sublingual, epicutaneous), modified hypoallergenic products and adjuvants (anti-IgE, pre-/probiotics). Biomarkers of safe/successful OIT are also under investigation.

Immunotherapy (oral and sublingual) for food allergy to fruits

BACKGROUND

Food allergy is an abnormal immunological response following exposure (usually ingestion) to a food. Elimination of the allergen is the principle treatment for food allergy, including allergy to fruit. Accidental ingestion of allergenic foods can result in severe anaphylactic reactions. Allergen-specific immunotherapy (SIT) is a specific treatment, when the avoidance of allergenic foods is problematic. Recently, studies have been conducted on different types of immunotherapy for the treatment of food allergy, including oral (OIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT).

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of oral and sublingual immunotherapy in children and adults with food allergy to fruits, when compared with placebo or an elimination strategy.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and AMED were searched for published results along with trial registries and the Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine for grey literature. The date of the most recent search was July 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing OIT or SLIT with placebo or an elimination diet were included. Participants were children or adults diagnosed with food allergy who presented immediate fruit reactions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration. We assessed treatment effect through risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified two RCTs (N=89) eligible for inclusion. These RCTs addressed oral or sublingual immunotherapy, both in adults, with an allergy to apple or peach respectively. Both studies enrolled a small number of participants and used different methods to provide these differing types of immunotherapy. Both studies were judged to be at high risk of bias in at least one domain. Overall, the quality of evidence was judged to be very low due to the small number of studies and participants and possible bias. The studies were clinically heterogeneous and hence we did not pool the results. A study comparing SLIT with placebo for allergy to peach did not detect a significant difference between the number of patients desensitised at six months following a double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (RR 1.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49 to 2.74). The second study, comparing OIT versus no treatment for apple allergy, found an effect on desensitisation in favour of the intervention using an oral provocation test at eight months, but results were imprecise (RR 17.50, 95% CI 1.13 to 270.19). Neither study reported data on evidence of immunologic tolerance. In both studies, the incidence of mild and moderate adverse events was higher in the intervention groups than in the controls. In the study comparing SLIT with placebo, patients in the intervention group experienced significantly more local adverse reactions than participants in the control group (RR 3.21, 95% CI 1.51 to 6.82), though there was not a significant difference in the number of participants experiencing systemic adverse reactions (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.22 to 3.02). In the study of OIT, two of the 25 participants in the intervention group reported relevant side effects, whereas no participants in the control group reported relevant side effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence for using OIT or SLIT to treat allergy to fruit, specifically related to peach and apple. Mild or moderate adverse reactions were reported more frequently in people receiving OIT or SLIT. However, these reactions could be treated successfully with medications.

Oral immunotherapy for food allergy: mechanisms and role in management

With the emergence of food allergy as an important public health problem, it has become clear that there is an unmet need in regard to treatment. In particular, IgE-mediated food allergy that is associated with risk of fatal anaphylaxis has been the subject of multiple studies in the past decade. The growing body of evidence derived from multiple centres and various study designs indicates that for IgE-mediated food allergy, immunomodulation through food immunotherapy is possible; however, the extent of protection afforded by such treatment is highly variable. At this time, the capacity for food immunotherapy to restore permanent tolerance to food has not been demonstrated conclusively. This review will discuss these topics as they apply to the most important studies of food oral immunotherapy.

Position document: IgE-mediated cow's milk allergy

The present document offers an update on the recommendations for managing patients with cow's milk allergy - a disorder that manifests in the first year of life, with an estimated prevalence of 1.6-3% in this paediatric age group. The main causal allergens are the caseins and proteins in lactoserum (beta-lactoglobulin, alpha-lactoalbumin), and the clinical manifestations are highly variable in terms of their presentation and severity. Most allergic reactions affect the skin, followed by the gastrointestinal and respiratory systems, and severe anaphylaxis may occur. The diagnosis of cow's milk allergy is based on the existence of a suggestive clinical history, a positive allergy study and the subsequent application of controlled exposure testing, which constitutes the gold standard for confirming the diagnosis. The most efficient treatment for cow's milk allergy is an elimination diet and the use of adequate substitution formulas. The elimination diet must include milk from other mammals (e.g., sheep, goat, etc.) due to the risk of cross-reactivity with the proteins of cow's milk. Most infants with IgE-mediated cow's milk allergy become tolerant in the first few years of life. In those cases where cow's milk allergy persists, novel treatment options may include oral immunotherapy, although most authors do not currently recommend this technique in routine clinical practice. Enough evidence is not there to confirm the efficacy of elimination diets in the mother and infant for preventing the appearance of cow's milk allergy. Likewise, no benefits have been observed with prebiotic and probiotic dietetic supplements in infants for preventing food allergy.

Novel immunotherapy approaches to food allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite reaching high percentages of desensitization using allergen-specific immunotherapy (SIT) in patients with food allergy, recent studies suggest only a low number of patients to reach persistent clinical tolerance. This review describes current developments in strategies to improve safety and long-term efficacy of SIT.

RECENT FINDINGS

Modified allergens or tolerogenic peptides, ultimately optimized for human leukocyte antigen background of the patient, are explored for tolerance induction, whereas anti-IgE antibody (Omalizumab) may be used to facilitate SIT safety. Adjunct therapies to enhance efficacy may make use of TH1 polarizing agents, for example, CpG-oligodeoxynucleotides combined with modified allergen packaged in nanoparticles. Preclinical studies showed insulin-like growth factor-2, intravenous immunoglobulin, Tregitopes or allergen encased oligomannose-coated liposomes capable of inducing regulatory T-cells, recognized for their importance in clinical tolerance induction. Dietary intervention strategies utilizing herbal formula 2, VSL#3, nondigestible short-chain galacto-oligosaccharides and long-chain fructo-oligosaccharides (scGOS/lcFOS) plus Bifidobacterium breve M-16V or n-3 long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids may facilitate safety and/or a favourable milieu for tolerance induction.

SUMMARY

Combining SIT using (adapted) allergens or tolerogenic peptides with adjunct therapy may be essential to improve safety and/or efficacy. Beyond using targeted approaches, specific dietary components may be explored to reduce side-effects and support clinical tolerance induction by SIT.

Current developments for improving efficacy of allergy vaccines

Allergic diseases are prevalent worldwide. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a current treatment for allergy, leading to modification of the natural course of disease. Mechanisms of efficacy include Treg through release of IL-10 and TGF-β and specific IgG4 blocking antibodies. Subcutaneous and sublingual routes are popular, but uptake is limited by inconvenience and safety concerns. Inclusion criteria limit application to a small proportion of allergic patients. New forms of immunotherapy are being investigated for more efficacious, convenient and safer options with promising advances in recent years. The rationale of reducing vaccine allergenicity to increase safety while improving immunogenicity led to investigation of T-cell epitope-based peptides and recombinant allergen derivatives. Additionally, different routes of administration and adjuvants and adjunct therapies are being explored. This review discusses the current status of AIT and recent advances to improve clinical efficacy, safety and long-term immune tolerance.