Oral and sublingual immunotherapy for food allergy

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.

Preclinical evaluation of alternatives to oral immunotherapy for food allergies

The increasing food allergy incidence has led to significant interest in developing therapies for allergic diseases. Oral allergen-specific immunotherapy (OIT) is a recently FDA-approved therapeutic to treat peanut allergies. OIT utilizes daily allergen dosing to reduce allergic reactions to peanuts. However, there is diminished enthusiasm for daily OIT, potentially due to the strict regimen required to induce desensitization and the risks of severe adverse events. Thus, there remains a need for safe and effective food allergy treatments that are well-received by allergic individuals. Preclinical research studies investigate methods to induce allergen desensitization in animals and support clinical studies that address the limitations of current food allergy OIT. Because allergic reactions are triggered by allergen doses above an individual's activation threshold, immunotherapy regimens that induce allergen desensitization with lower allergen doses or without the requirement of daily administrations may expand the use of food allergy immunotherapy. Administering allergen immunotherapy by alternative routes is a strategy to induce desensitization using lower allergen doses than OIT. Several animal models have evaluated oral, sublingual, epicutaneous, and intranasal immunotherapy routes to treat food allergies. Each immunotherapy route may require different allergen doses, formulations, and treatment schedules to induce desensitization. This article will discuss scientific findings from food allergy immunotherapy animal studies that utilize various immunotherapy routes to induce allergen desensitization to support future clinical studies that enhance the safety and efficacy of allergen immunotherapy to treat food allergies.

An update on recent developments and highlights in food allergy

While both the incidence and general awareness of food allergies is increasing, the variety and clinical availability of therapeutics remain limited. Therefore, investigations into the potential factors contributing to the development of food allergy (FA) and the mechanisms of natural tolerance or induced desensitization are required. In addition, a detailed understanding of the pathophysiology of food allergies is needed to generate compelling, enduring, and safe treatment options. New findings regarding the contribution of barrier function, the effect of emollient interventions, mechanisms of allergen recognition, and the contributions of specific immune cell subsets through rodent models and human clinical studies provide novel insights. With the first approved treatment for peanut allergy, the clinical management of FA is evolving toward less intensive, alternative approaches involving fixed doses, lower maintenance dose targets, coadministration of biologicals, adjuvants, and tolerance-inducing formulations. The ultimate goal is to improve immunotherapy and develop precision-based medicine via risk phenotyping allowing optimal treatment for each food-allergic patient.

Berberine-containing natural-medicine with boiled peanut-OIT induces sustained peanut-tolerance associated with distinct microbiota signature

Background

Gut microbiota influence food allergy. We showed that the natural compound berberine reduces IgE and others reported that BBR alters gut microbiota implying a potential role for microbiota changes in BBR function.

Objective

We sought to evaluate an oral Berberine-containing natural medicine with a boiled peanut oral immunotherapy (BNP) regimen as a treatment for food allergy using a murine model and to explore the correlation of treatment-induced changes in gut microbiota with therapeutic outcomes.

Methods

Peanut-allergic (PA) mice, orally sensitized with roasted peanut and cholera toxin, received oral BNP or control treatments. PA mice received periodic post-therapy roasted peanut exposures. Anaphylaxis was assessed by visualization of symptoms and measurement of body temperature. Histamine and serum peanut-specific IgE levels were measured by ELISA. Splenic IgE+B cells were assessed by flow cytometry. Fecal pellets were used for sequencing of bacterial 16S rDNA by Illumina MiSeq. Sequencing data were analyzed using built-in analysis platforms.

Results

BNP treatment regimen induced long-term tolerance to peanut accompanied by profound and sustained reduction of IgE, symptom scores, plasma histamine, body temperature, and number of IgE+ B cells (p <0.001 vs Sham for all). Significant differences were observed for Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes ratio across treatment groups. Bacterial genera positively correlated with post-challenge histamine and PN-IgE included Lachnospiraceae, Ruminococcaceae, and Hydrogenanaerobacterium (all Firmicutes) while Verrucromicrobiacea. Caproiciproducens, Enterobacteriaceae, and Bacteroidales were negatively correlated.

Conclusions

BNP is a promising regimen for food allergy treatment and its benefits in a murine model are associated with a distinct microbiota signature.

Update on clinical research for food allergy treatment

The incidence of IgE-mediated food allergy (FA) has continued to increase over the years which places substantial burden on patient health and quality of life. With no cure for this disease, the mainstay of management has been allergen avoidance. However, there have been advancements in FA treatment in recent years with multiple clinical trials utilizing novel and innovative therapeutic strategies. A landmark event came in 2020 with the first drug approval for food allergy with the approval of a product for peanut oral immunotherapy. In addition to oral immunotherapy, different delivery systems of immunotherapy (SLIT, EPIT) are being studied in addition to probiotics, biologic agents - used as monotherapy and as an adjunct, and modified allergens has taken place with the hope to further enhance existing therapeutic options. The hope through these continued developments is for therapies to emerge that will provide a more comprehensive benefit to this patient population.

Efficacy and safety of food allergy oral immunotherapy in adults

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Seafood allergy: Allergen, epitope mapping and immunotherapy strategy

Seafoods are fashionable delicacies with high nutritional values and culinary properties, while seafood belongs to worldwide common food allergens. In recent years, many seafood allergens have been identified, while the diversity of various seafood species give a great challenge in identifying and characterizing seafood allergens, mapping IgE-binding epitopes and allergen immunotherapy development, which are critical for allergy diagnostics and immunotherapy treatments. This paper reviewed the recent progress on seafood (fish, crustacean, and mollusk) allergens, IgE-binding epitopes and allergen immunotherapy for seafood allergy. In recent years, many newly identified seafood allergens were reported, this work concluded the current situation of seafood allergen identification and designation by the World Health Organization (WHO)/International Union of Immunological Societies (IUIS) Allergen Nomenclature Sub-Committee. Moreover, this review represented the recent advances in identifying the IgE-binding epitopes of seafood allergens, which were helpful to the diagnosis, prevention and treatment for seafood allergy. Furthermore, the allergen immunotherapy could alleviate seafood allergy and provide promising approaches for seafood allergy treatment. This review represents the recent advances and future outlook on seafood allergen identification, IgE-binding epitope mapping and allergen immunotherapy strategies for seafood allergy prevention and treatment.

Dose and route of administration determine the efficacy of prophylactic immunotherapy for peanut allergy in a Brown Norway rat model

Introduction

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (IT) is emerging as a viable option for treatment of peanut allergy. Yet, prophylactic IT remains unexplored despite early introduction of peanut in infancy was shown to prevent allergy. There is a need to understand how allergens interact with the immune system depending on the route of administration, and how different dosages of allergen may protect from sensitisation and a clinical active allergy. Here we compared peanut allergen delivery via the oral, sublingual (SL), intragastric (IG) and subcutaneous (SC) routes for the prevention of peanut allergy in Brown Norway (BN) rats.

Methods

BN rats were administered PBS or three different doses of peanut protein extract (PPE) via either oral IT (OIT), SLIT, IGIT or SCIT followed by intraperitoneal (IP) injections of PPE to assess the protection from peanut sensitisation. The development of IgE and IgG1 responses to PPE and the major peanut allergens were evaluated by ELISAs. The clinical response to PPE was assessed by an ear swelling test (EST) and proliferation was assessed by stimulating splenocytes with PPE.

Results

Low and medium dose OIT (1 and 10 mg) and all doses of SCIT (1, 10, 100 µg) induced sensitisation to PPE, whereas high dose OIT (100 mg), SLIT (10, 100 or 1000 µg) or IGIT (1, 10 and 100 mg) did not. High dose OIT and SLIT as well as high and medium dose IGIT prevented sensitisation from the following IP injections of PPE and suppressed PPE-specific IgE levels in a dose-dependent manner. Hence, administration of peanut protein via different routes confers different risks for sensitisation and protection from peanut allergy development. Overall, the IgE levels toward the individual major peanut allergens followed the PPE-specific IgE levels.

Discussion

Collectively, this study showed that the preventive effect of allergen-specific IT is determined by the interplay between the specific site of PPE delivery for presentation to the immune system, and the allergen quantity, and that targeting and modulating tolerance mechanisms at specific mucosal sites may be a prophylactic strategy for prevention of peanut allergy.

Underlying Immune Mechanisms Involved in Cow’s Milk-Induced Hypersensitivity Reactions Manifesting as Atopic Dermatitis

Of the many symptoms associated with cow’s milk allergy (CMA), many populations face the burden of the appearance or worsening of atopic dermatitis (AD) when consuming milk products. Due to the prevalence and possible severity of symptoms, it is important to understand the underlying immune mechanisms involved in such reactions. Hypersensitivity reactions are exaggerated immune responses to often benign antigens, many times resulting in a cascade of pro-inflammatory processes. Of the four major types, type I and IV are of most relevance when considering atopic dermatitis worsened by cow’s milk. Considered a “true allergy,” type I (immediate) hypersensitivity reactions occur within hours after secondary exposure to an allergen and are primarily driven by antibodies and humoral immune responses. On the contrary, type IV (delayed) hypersensitivity reactions are driven by cell-mediated responses involving T-cell activation. Due to the array of symptoms induced by these complex reactions, it is imperative to diagnose early and treat appropriately. In this literature review, we aim to highlight the primary underlying immune contributors to hypersensitivity reactions, discuss AD as a manifestation of hypersensitivity reactions to cow’s milk, and consider current and future treatment options for combatting hypersensitivities manifesting as AD.

Pediatric sublingual allergen immunotherapy

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) offers an important therapeutic modality in the management of children with respiratory allergies. Along with subcutaneous immunotherapy, these modalities are the only selections that have shown not merely relief of symptoms but also disease-modifying activity. SLIT can be given as either a dissolvable tablet (SLIT-T) or liquid drops (SLIT-D). In studies that examined the efficacy and safety in allergic rhinitis and asthma, SLIT-T and SLIT-D both show efficacy in reducing symptoms and the need for medication, although it seems that SLIT-T may show a better response. Almost all SLIT-D efficacy studies are with single allergens. There are virtually no data on the efficacy of mixing unrelated allergens in the same prescription. Both SLIT-T and SLIT-D treatments are safe, with the most common adverse effects being local ones, such as oral pruritus and mouth irritation, which tend to be mild and short lived. Studies that assess the role of SLIT in the prevention of new sensitizations and asthma in the pediatric population are insufficient and of mixed results; therefore, no conclusions can be made. In the treatment of other pediatric conditions, such as food allergy and atopic dermatitis, there are few studies that assessed if, and the degree of, the benefit with SLIT. In determining if SLIT should be prescribed for the pediatric patient, there is a need for shared decision-making to allow the older child and parents or caregivers to understand the pros and cons, and the costs of all the options and relate their values and preferences to the physician.

[What is the role of allergen immunotherapy in IgE-mediated food allergy?]

In food allergy, allergen avoidance and emergency treatment are still therapeutic hallmarks but, recently, allergen immunotherapy (AIT), with different application routes, has gained more attention. In primary food allergy, oral immunotherapy has been frequently used in clinical trials. This year, an oral immunotherapy preparation for treatment of peanut allergy was licensed in Europe. In secondary food allergy, sublingual and subcutaneous extracts have been used in clinical trials, mostly with cross-reactive pollen allergens. As there is no AIT preparation licensed for this indication, therapy should only be started when there also is a need for treating associated respiratory symptoms.

The use of biologics in food allergy

BACKGROUND

Food allergy continues to pose problems due to its increased frequency and its increasingly high severity. In this context, alongside the traditional avoidance strategies of allergenic foods and desensitization through the cautious progression of exposure to foods in the context of oral immunotherapy (OIT), alternative strategies have made their way in the last decades. We review the possibilities of intervention in food allergy with the use of biological drugs capable of interfering with the synthesis of IgE, with their mechanisms of action, or with complex biological mechanisms that lead to the establishment of a food allergy.

METHODS

Repeated Entrez PubMed searches using the template algorithm "Food allergy" and "biologics" or "Omalizumab" or "Dupilumab" or "milk desensitization" or "oral tolerance induction" or "oral immunotherapy" or "Etokimab" or "Tezepelumab" or "Quilizumab" or "Ligelizumab" or "Tralokinumab" or "Nemolizumab" or "Mepolizumab" or "Reslizumab" or "Benralizumab". The authors' clinical experience in paediatric allergy units of University hospitals was also drawn upon.

RESULTS

The landscape in this context has changed dramatically over the past 10 years. We have acquired knowledge mainly on the effect of different types of anti-IgE treatments in poliallergic patients with food allergy, and in patients treated with OIT. However, other mediators are being targeted by specific biologic treatments. Among them, the alarmins Il-33 and TSLP, IL-4 and IL-13, eosinophil-related molecules as IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-12, and mostly IL-5, and integrins involved in the pathogenesis of eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs), as SIGLEC-8.

CONCLUSIONS

The ever-better knowledge of the mechanisms of food allergy allowing these developments will improve not only the perspective of patients with the most serious immediate food allergies such as anaphylaxis, but also those of patients with related diseases such as atopic dermatitis, eosinophilic esophagitis, and EGIDs. Biologics are also intended to complement OIT strategies that have developed over the years.

Emerging developments in the forefront of peanut oral immunotherapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, progress continued in the field of peanut oral immunotherapy over the past 12 to 18 months. Of importance, the first oral immunotherapy product for the treatment of peanut allergy was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in January 2020.

RECENT FINDINGS

Suggested modifications to the practice of oral immunotherapy, some of which may have lasting impacts, were circulated as a result of the pandemic. New advances in pathophysiology, sustained unresponsiveness, quality of life, safety, and cost effectiveness were also published.

SUMMARY

During 2020, COVID-19 influenced the daily practice of allergy and immunology, with peanut oral immunotherapy being no exception. However, clinicians now have a FDA-approved treatment option for peanut allergy in children, a welcome development for a difficult disease. Future research is needed to clarify several knowledge deficits surrounding the best use of peanut OIT.

Cow's Milk Protein Allergy as a Model of Food Allergies

Cow's milk allergy (CMA) is one of the most common food allergies in infants, and its prevalence has increased over recent years. In the present paper, we focus on CMA as a model of food allergies in children. Understanding the diagnostic features of CMA is essential in order to manage patients with this disorder, guide the use of an elimination diet, and find the best moment to start an oral food challenge (OFC) and liberalize the diet. To date, no shared tolerance markers for the diagnosis of food allergy have been identified, and OFC remains the gold standard. Recently, oral immunotherapy (OIT) has emerged as a new therapeutic strategy and has changed the natural history of CMA. Before this, patients had to strictly avoid the food allergen, resulting in a decline in quality of life and subsequent nutritional, social, and psychological impairments. Thanks to the introduction of OIT, the passive approach involving rigid exclusion has changed to a proactive one. Both the heterogeneity in the diagnostic process among the studies and the variability of OIT data limit the comprehension of the real epidemiology of CMA, and, consequentially, its natural history. Therefore, well-planned randomized controlled trials are needed to standardize CMA diagnosis, prevention, and treatment strategies.

Gastric Enzyme Supplementation Inhibits Food Allergy in a BALB/c Mouse Model

Impaired gastric digestion due to suppressed gastric acidity enhances the risk for food allergy development. In the current study, we aimed to evaluate the impact of a supported gastric digestion via application of a pharmaceutical gastric enzyme solution (GES) on food allergy development and allergic reactions in a BALB/c mouse model. The ability of the GES to restore hypoacidic conditions was tested in mice treated with gastric acid suppression medication. To evaluate the impact on allergic symptoms, mice were orally sensitized with ovalbumin (OVA) under gastric acid suppression and subjected to oral challenges with or without GES. The immune response was evaluated by measurement of antibody titers, cytokine levels, mucosal allergy effector cell influx and regulatory T-cell counts. Clinical response was objectified by core body temperature measurements after oral OVA challenge. Supplementation of GES transiently restored physiological pH levels in the stomach after pharmaceutical gastric acid suppression. During oral sensitization, supplementation of gastric enzymes significantly reduced systemic IgE, IgG1 and IgG2a levels and allergic symptoms. In food allergic mice, clinical symptoms were reduced by co-administration of the gastric enzyme solution. Support of gastric digestion efficiently prevents food allergy induction and alleviates clinical symptoms in our food allergy model.

Omalizumab as an adjuvant in food allergen immunotherapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the most relevant studies in the rapidly advancing field of omalizumab as an adjunct to food allergen oral immunotherapy (OIT).

RECENT FINDINGS

Clinical trials have primarily focused on milk, peanut, and multiallergen OIT combined with omalizumab. These studies suggest that omalizumab in addition to OIT can decrease the time required to reach maintenance OIT dosing and adverse events; however, serious adverse events did still occur. There is limited long-term data but available information suggests that individuals are at risk for increased reactivity after stopping omalizumab, and many discontinued treatment. There has been diversity in study designs, dosing, and populations.

SUMMARY

The use of anti-IgE antibody as an adjunct to food allergen OIT has been an expanding area of research with several additional trials underway. Significant progress has been made in the past decades but further studies are needed to optimize protocols, improve safety and efficacy, and identify patients who will have the greatest benefit.

Oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy: The con argument

Background

In some countries of the world, peanut allergy represents an important source of anaphylactic reactions. Traditionally treated with the avoidance of responsible allergens, this condition can also be targeted by oral peanut immunotherapy.

Methods

In this study, we review the beneficial and side effects of currently available forms of peanut oral immunotherapy (POIT). We report the discussions resulting from the publication of a meta-analysis that brought to light the downsides of oral immunotherapy for peanuts.

Results

In some clinical situations, the risk-benefit ratio can favor peanut oral immunotherapy over avoidance. In many other situations, this is not the case. The decision must be based on the values and preferences of clinicians and patients. Those not ready to accept serious adverse effects from POIT are likely to continue the elimination diet; those motivated to achieving desensitization, and prepared to accept serious adverse effects, may choose to undergo POIT.

Conclusions

Without being prejudiced against peanut oral immunotherapy, we indicate the possible evolution of treatment for this condition is in a rapidly evolving broader scenario. Among the future options, sublingual immunotherapy, parenteral immunotherapy with modified allergens, transcutaneous immunotherapy, and the use of biologics will become important options.

Linking autoantigen properties to mechanisms of immunity

Antigen-specific immunotherapies (ASIT) present compelling potential for introducing precision to the treatment of autoimmune diseases where nonspecific, global immunosuppression is currently the only treatment option. Central to ASIT design is the delivery of autoantigen, which parallels allergy desensitization approaches. Clinical success in tolerizing allergen-specific responses spans longer than a century, but autoimmune ASITs have yet to see an FDA-approved breakthrough. Allergens and autoantigens differ substantially in physicochemical properties, and these discrepancies influence the nature of their interactions with the immune system. Approved allergen-specific immunotherapies are typically administered as water soluble, neutrally charged protein fractions from 10 to 70 kDa. Conversely, autoantigens are native proteins that exhibit wide-ranging sizes, solubilities, and charges that render them susceptible to immunogenicity. To translate the success of allergen hyposensitization to ASIT, delivery strategies may be necessary to effectively format autoantigens, guide biodistribution, and engage appropriate immune mechanisms.

Recent developments and highlights in immune monitoring of allergen immunotherapy

Allergic diseases are the most common chronic immune-mediated disorders and can manifest with an enormous diversity in clinical severity and symptoms. Underlying mechanisms for the adverse immune response to allergens and its downregulation by treatment are still being revealed. As a result, there have been, and still are, major challenges in diagnosis, prediction of disease progression/evolution and treatment. Currently, the only corrective treatment available is allergen immunotherapy (AIT). AIT modifies the immune response through long-term repeated exposure to defined doses of allergen. However, as the treatment usually needs to be continued for several years to be effective, and can be accompanied by adverse reactions, many patients face difficulties completing their schedule. Long-term therapy also potentially incurs high costs. Therefore, there is a great need for objective markers to predict or to monitor individual patient's beneficial changes in immune response during therapy so that efficacy can be identified as early as possible. In this review, we specifically address recent technical developments that have generated new insights into allergic disease pathogenesis, and how these could potentially be translated into routine laboratory assays for disease monitoring during AIT that are relatively inexpensive, robust and scalable.