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

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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.

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

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

Real-world experience: a retrospective pediatric chart review to determine why patients and caregivers discontinue oral immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an increasingly utilized management strategy for IgE-mediated food allergy. Despite promising efficacy and effectiveness, there is still a lack of data surrounding the reasons for discontinuation of OIT. The primary reason stated in the literature for discontinuation is adverse gastrointestinal effects. Social factors contributing to OIT discontinuation have not been well reported. We hypothesize that social considerations are significant contributors to treatment discontinuation.

METHODS

We completed a retrospective chart review of 50 patients treated in community pediatric allergy practices who discontinued OIT out of 507 patients who were started on OIT between October 1, 2017-October 27, 2022. Reasons for discontinuation were identified and classified into five main categories: unsafe care decisions, anxiety, adverse effects of OIT, uncontrolled comorbidity and social factors. Categories were not exclusive.

RESULTS

507 patients were started on OIT, with data available for 50 patients who discontinued OIT, aged 10 months to 18 years and 2 months. The overall discontinuation rate was 9.8%, of which 40 patients (80%) discontinued during buildup, 9 patients (18%) discontinued during maintenance and one patient on two food OIT discontinued one food during buildup and one during maintenance (2%). Thirty-four patients (68%) had multiple reasons for discontinuing OIT. Social factors were the most common reason for discontinuation and were identified in 32 patients (64%). Twenty-four patients (48%) discontinued OIT due to adverse effects. Gastrointestinal symptoms were the most prevalent, while anaphylaxis contributed to discontinuation in 15 patients (30%). Anxiety led to discontinuation in 17 patients (34%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data highlights the importance of social factors and anxiety in the success of OIT completion. Our results support the need to consider not only the patient's medical history, but also their social history and support networks when selecting patients who are good candidates for OIT to optimize the successful completion of OIT.

Oral Immunotherapy: An Overview

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an alternative treatment of IgE-mediated food allergy that has been shown to increase tolerance threshold to many of the top food allergens, although this effect may be dependent on age, dose, frequency, and duration. OIT has been shown to be effective and safe in infants, and early initiation can improve rates of desensitization even for those foods whose natural history favors loss of allergy. Studies looking at protocol modification to improve OIT success are ongoing as is the evaluation of clinical tools to help monitor OIT effects.

Psychosocial Impact of Food Allergy on Children and Adults and Practical Interventions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

IgE- and non-IgE-mediated food allergies are increasing in prevalence in children and adults worldwide. A food allergy diagnosis can be associated with a sense of overwhelm and stress and commonly has a negative impact on quality of life.

RECENT FINDINGS

While there is an increased recognition of the psychosocial effects of food allergy, the current research reflects the experience of mostly White, well-educated wealthier populations. Some studies have now explored the psychosocial impact among other populations; however, further study is needed. It is important that physicians and allied health professionals screen for the potentially negative psychosocial effects of food allergy and provide education to promote safety and self-efficacy at each visit; however, time may be a limiting factor. Numerous validated questionnaires are now available to help assess the psychosocial impact of food allergies. Allergy-friendly foods are typically more expensive, and thus, it is imperative that physicians screen for food insecurity as well. Educational resources should be offered regarding living well with food allergies at each visit. For patients and families experiencing anxiety or food allergy burden that is difficult to manage, referral to a mental health provider should be considered. Resources regarding programs to help accessing safe foods should also be available. Further research is needed among diverse populations focusing on interventions to best support patients and families with food allergy.

Eosinophil-Associated Gastrointestinal Manifestations During OIT

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

Immune signatures predicting the clinical outcome of peanut oral immunotherapy: where we stand

Peanut allergy is a growing health concern that can cause mild to severe anaphylaxis as well as reduced quality of life in patients and their families. Oral immunotherapy is an important therapeutic intervention that aims to reshape the immune system toward a higher threshold dose reactivity and sustained unresponsiveness in some patients. From an immunological point of view, young patients, especially those under 3 years old, seem to have the best chance for therapy success. To date, surrogate markers for therapy duration and response are evasive. We provide a comprehensive overview of the current literature state regarding immune signatures evolving over the course of oral immunotherapy as well as baseline immune conditions prior to the initiation of treatment. Although research comparing clinical and immune traits in the first years of life vs. later stages across different age groups is limited, promising insights are available on immunological endotypes among peanut-allergic patients. The available data call for continued research to fill in gaps in knowledge, possibly in an integrated manner, to design novel precision health approaches for advanced therapeutic interventions in peanut allergy.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

To study the rate and risk factors for such reactions.

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Food Oral Immunotherapy: A Survey Among US Practicing Allergists Conducted as a AAAAI Leadership Institute Project and Work Group Report

BACKGROUND

Food oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an active form of treatment for food allergies. Although research in this area has been ongoing for many years, the first US Food and Drug Administration-approved product for peanut allergy treatment became available only in January 2020. Limited data exist on OIT services offered by physicians in the United States.

OBJECTIVE

This workgroup report was developed to evaluate OIT practices among allergists practicing in the United States.

METHODS

The authors developed an anonymous 15-question survey and was subsequently reviewed and approved by the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology Practices, Diagnostics and Therapeutics Committee before distribution to the membership. The American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology electronically distributed the survey to a random sample of 780 members in November 2021. In addition to questions specific to food OIT, the survey included questions on demographics and professional characteristics of the responders.

RESULTS

A total of 78 members completed the survey, yielding a 10% response rate. Fifty percent of responders were offering OIT in their practice. There was a significant difference in experience in OIT originating from research trials in academic versus nonacademic centers. Generally, OIT practices were similar in both settings for the number of foods offered, the performance of oral food challenges before initiating treatment, the number of new patients to whom OIT was offered to per month, and age groups OIT to whom was offered. Almost all of the reported barriers to OIT were similar between settings: staff and time limitations, concerns about safety and anaphylaxis, the need for more education on how to perform, inadequate compensation, and that it was not a significant demand from patients. Clinic space limitations were significantly different and more prominent in academic settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Our survey revealed interesting trends in the practice of OIT across the United States, with some significant differences arising when academic and nonacademic settings were compared.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Efficacy and safety of food allergy oral immunotherapy in adults

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Oral immunotherapy for food allergy: Translation from studies to clinical practice?

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is now recognized as an alternative active treatment to strict food avoidance in certain patients with IgE-mediated food allergy. Studies have confirmed the efficacy of OIT to desensitize children with allergy to cow's milk, eggs, and peanuts. The benefits, risks, and constraints of OIT are becoming increasingly well understood. However, there is no consensual criteria to select patients to whom OIT could be proposed, and many issues remain to address including the definitions of desensitization and long-term efficacy, the assessment of patient's experience in real life, the optimization of buildup and maintenance protocols, and the utility of multiple food OIT. The recent authorization by medical agency concerning the first medicine for peanut OIT is a step forward towards higher standardization in the practice of OIT. This article summarizes in comprehensive narrative format data on efficacy, tolerance, impact on quality of life and adverse effects of OIT and discuss elements to consider in clinical practice before starting OIT.

Oral Immunotherapy

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an alternative treatment of IgE-mediated food allergy that has been shown to increase tolerance threshold to many of the top food allergens, although this effect may be dependent on age, dose, frequency, and duration. OIT has been shown to be effective and safe in infants, and early initiation can improve rates of desensitization even for those foods whose natural history favors loss of allergy. Studies looking at protocol modification to improve OIT success are ongoing as is the evaluation of clinical tools to help monitor OIT effects.

Characteristics of patients diagnosed as non-allergic following food allergy oral immunotherapy referral

BACKGROUND

Ascribing food allergy diagnosis to patients who are not allergic is well described, but its implications on oral immunotherapy (OIT) have not been studied. The aim was to study non-allergic patients referred for OIT.

METHODS

All patients who began OIT at Shamir Medical Center between November 2015 and August 2020 were included. Medical records were reviewed, and skin prick tests (SPT) and/or specific IgE were measured. Patients were challenged to the index food. Allergic and non-allergic patients were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 1073 patients were studied (milk, n = 327; egg, n = 41; peanut, n = 272; sesame, n = 130; and tree nuts, n = 303) and 87 (8.1%) were found non-allergic (milk, n = 21; egg, n = 6; sesame, n = 5; peanut, n = 29; tree nuts, n = 26). Predictors of being not allergic were no previous reaction to the index food (OR = 3.3, p = 0.001), not having asthma (OR = 2.4, p = 0.001), or HDM sensitization (OR = 2.0, p = 0.007), male sex (OR = 2.3, p = 0.004), and a smaller SPT wheal size (OR = 1.5, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial number of patients referred for OIT are mislabeled with food allergy, suffer from unjustly food limitations and impairments in quality of life, and "take up" OIT places of true allergic patients. Awareness of OIT centers to this phenomenon is important.

IMPACT

A significant number (8.1%) of patients referred for OIT are found not allergic to the food they intended to treat. This study characterizes non-allergic patients referred for OIT (a lack of previous reaction to the index food, a smaller or negative SPT wheal size, and less atopic co-morbidities) and discusses the implications of such referrals. Increased awareness by OIT centers to potential non-allergic patients referred for OIT is required, including screening of patients before treatment initiation, to minimize unnecessary treatments of non-allergic patients.

Information needs of patients considering oral immunotherapy for food allergy

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

Biomarkers in oral immunotherapy

Food allergy (FA) is a global health problem that affects a large population, and thus effective treatment is highly desirable. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has been showing reasonable efficacy and favorable safety in most FA subjects. Dependable biomarkers are needed for treatment assessment and outcome prediction during OIT. Several immunological indicators have been used as biomarkers in OIT, such as skin prick tests, basophil and mast cell reactivity, T cell and B cell responses, allergen-specific antibody levels, and cytokines. Other novel indicators also could be potential biomarkers. In this review, we discuss and assess the application of various immunological indicators as biomarkers for OIT.

Transitioning peanut oral immunotherapy to clinical practice

Peanut allergy is on the rise in industrialized countries, affecting 1%-4.5% of children and generally persisting into adulthood. It is associated with a risk of severe anaphylaxis and is one of the major causes of food allergy-induced deaths. Health-related quality of life is significantly impaired for patients and affected families due to food restrictions attributable to omnipresent precautionary allergen labeling, constant risk of potentially life-threatening reactions, and limitation of social activities. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has emerged as a valid treatment option for patients with IgE-mediated peanut allergy, with randomized controlled trials and real-life studies showing a high rate of desensitization and a favorable safety profile, especially in young children. Ultimately, the decision to initiate peanut OIT relies on a multidisciplinary shared decision-making process, involving open, personalized and evidence-based discussions with patients and their caregivers.

A practical focus on fish and shellfish oral immunotherapy

Although fish and shellfish allergies represent common worldwide allergies, with anaphylaxis being reportedly frequent, treatment approaches, e.g., oral immunotherapy (OIT), are uncommonly performed. A review of the limited literature is discussed here. Both practical and immunologic challenges are common with seafood OIT, including taste, odor, unclear and potentially inconsistent cross-reactivity, and alteration of protein concentration during the cooking process as well as other concerns. Ongoing attempts at standardization of this OIT process should be considered. The experienced OIT physician may consider this treatment in patients who are motivated to begin OIT.

Variations in protocol development during oral immunotherapy

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) protocols are not standardized, and a wide heterogeneity exists in the literature. OIT protocol variables include the initiation approach (fixed dose versus oral food challenge), buildup speed (slow versus fast), target maintenance dose (low versus high target dose), type of food used, and use of adjuvants among other variables. Most protocols start with an initial escalation day, which is a series of extremely low doses to safely identify the patients who are most allergic, followed by a buildup period over several months to years until the final target maintenance dose is achieved. Doses are generally increased every 1-2 weeks by a factor of 1.25 to 2 and are adapted based on the patient's symptoms. Protocols are increasingly favoring low-maintenance doses over traditional high maintenance doses, although this needs to be discussed and adapted based on the patient's preferences. Accelerated OIT schedules with using a short treatment of omalizumab can be considered in severe food allergy cases.

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

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

Long term oral immunotherapy management and assessment of success

There is limited data addressing the optimal dose, dosing frequency, and duration of OIT maintenance. Using higher maintenance doses, more frequent dosing, and a long dosing duration makes it more likely that sustained unresponsiveness will be achieved but also increases the burden of care on the OIT patient and family. The OIT maintenance regimen should be individualized based on the treatment goals of the patient and family.

Approaches to maintenance dosing during oral immunotherapy

Long term daily dosing for patients and families may be challenging due to food aversions, dosing protocols, and age of the patient. The few long term studies suggest that low quantity daily dosing is associated with passing higher dose challenges over the long term, whereas high dose maintenance may protect for longer avoidance intervals. We review the data for peanut and suggest several strategies for your patients.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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 children with a high-threshold peanut allergy

BACKGROUND

Between 25% and 30% of children with peanut allergy (PA) have a relatively high-threshold peanut allergy (HTPA), with a single maximal tolerated dose (SMTD) higher than 100 mg of peanut protein (PP). However, this threshold may decrease with time, age, exercise, illness, sleep deprivation, and other covariates.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the feasibility of a simplified oral immunotherapy (OIT) protocol in a group of children with HTPA.

METHODS

Children with PA with an SMTD higher than 100 mg were placed on a 40-week OIT protocol of either 300 mg/d of PP or 100 mg/d for 20 weeks followed by 300 mg/d for 20 weeks. A repeat open peanut food challenge was performed after 40 weeks of treatment and at a 6-month follow-up visit. After the 40-week challenge, all children received a maintenance dosage of 2 gPP 3 times a week.

RESULTS

A total of 28 children with HTPA were enrolled, with 56% boys, 89% younger than 6 years old, and a mean SMTD of 304 mg (95% confidence interval 229-378). All were placed on the described OIT protocol. Overall, 2 children were not compliant and 3 had allergic reactions at home on the dose previously tolerated in clinic, 23 completed the 40-week protocol, and all were able to consume 2 g of PP. The mean tolerated dosage at the 6-month follow-up was 8 g. This enabled most children age-appropriate dietary inclusion of peanut-containing products.

CONCLUSION

In children with HTPA, a simple, fixed-dose OIT can be both safe and efficacious.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Food immunotherapy practice: Nation differences across Europe, the FIND project

BACKGROUND

Food allergen immunotherapy (FA-AIT) practice is known to vary globally. This project aims to identify and characterize European centres performing FA-AIT.

METHODS

An EAACI task force conducted an online survey to gather relevant information regarding FA-AIT practice and setting-specific resources after reviewing the published literature and congress abstracts throughout Europe.

RESULTS

We identified 102 FA-AIT centres in 18 countries; only Spain (n = 39) and France (n = 16) had ≥10 such centres. Overall, most facilities were hospital-based (77.5%), publicly funded (80.4%) and delivered FA-AIT as routine clinical care (80.4%). On average, departments had 3 allergists/paediatric allergists and 2 nurses. Surveyed centres had provided FA-AIT for a median of 9 years [1-24] to a median of 105 [5-2415] patients. The estimated total number of treated patients was 24875, of whom 41.3% received AIT for milk, 34.2% egg, 12.8% peanut and 11.7% other foods. Anaphylaxis to AIT doses requiring over 4-6 h of observation was reported by 70.6% of centres, ICU admissions by 10.8% and eosinophilic esophagitis by 45.1%. Quality of life and sustained unresponsiveness were evaluated in 20.6% and 54.9% of centres, respectively. The main contraindications for food AIT were severe asthma (57%-63%), eosinophilic esophagitis (56%-48%) and age below 5 years (47%-41%).

CONCLUSIONS

In Europe, FA-AIT is provided mostly in clinical practice. Significant variation is seen in the number of centres per country, facility characteristics and inclusion/exclusion criteria, and in certain aspects of protocols. Potential inequality in access to AIT has been identified as well as the need for education and guidance for treatment standardization.

Advances, Practical Implementation, and Unmet Needs Regarding Oral Immunotherapy for Food Allergy

Treatment of food allergy is a rapidly changing landscape, with arguably, the most significant advancement in recent years, the transition of oral immunotherapy (OIT) to clinical practice. As an innovation, OIT is a phase of rapidly increasing demand, particularly for some allergens such as peanut, egg, and milk, which have substantial evidence of efficacy. However, significant questions remain about how to best treat multiple food allergies and less common food allergies and how to optimize long-term safety and efficacy. This review summarizes the currently available resources for integrating food allergy OIT into clinical practice and focuses on the multiple remaining unmet needs such as providing an approach for OIT to food allergens for which there is no or limited evidence; practical issues related to food allergy treatment particularly when it is not going well; long-term outcomes and follow-up after OIT; and strategies to help meet the impending increase in demand.

Oral Immunotherapy in Children: Clinical Considerations and Practical Management

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

Successful Milk Oral Immunotherapy Promotes Generation of Casein-Specific CD137+ FOXP3+ Regulatory T Cells Detectable in Peripheral Blood

Background

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an emerging treatment for cow's milk protein (CMP) allergy in children. The mechanisms driving tolerance following OIT are not well understood. Regulatory T cells (T_REG) cells are key inhibitors of allergic responses and promoters of allergen-specific tolerance. In an exploratory study, we sought to detect induction of allergen-specific T_REG in a cohort of subjects undergoing OIT.

Methods

Pediatric patients with a history of allergic reaction to cow's milk and a positive Skin Pick Test (SPT) and/or CMP-specific IgE >0.35 kU, as well as a positive oral challenge to CMP underwent OIT with escalating doses of milk and were followed for up to 6 months. At specific milestones during the dose escalation and maintenance phases, casein-specific CD4⁺ T cells were expanded from patient blood by culturing unfractionated PBMCs with casein in vitro. The CD4⁺ T cell phenotypes were quantified by flow cytometry.

Results

Our culture system induced activated casein-specific FOXP3⁺Helios⁺ T_REG cells and FOXP3^- T_EFF cells, discriminated by expression of CD137 (4-1BB) and CD154 (CD40L) respectively. The frequency of casein-specific T_REG cells increased significantly with escalating doses of milk during OIT while casein-specific T_EFF cell frequencies remained constant. Moreover, expanded casein-specific T_REG cells expressed higher levels of FOXP3 compared to polyclonal T_REG cells, suggesting a more robust T_REG phenotype. The induction of casein-specific T_REG cells increased with successful CMP desensitization and correlated with increased frequencies of casein-specific Th1 cells among OIT subjects. The level of casein-specific T_REG cells negatively correlated with the time required to reach the maintenance phase of desensitization.

Conclusions

Overall, effective CMP-OIT successfully promoted the expansion of casein-specific, functionally-stable FOXP3⁺ T_REG cells while mitigating Th2 responses in children receiving OIT. Our exploratory study proposes that an in vitro T_REG response to casein may correlate with the time to reach maintenance in CMP-OIT.

Oral immunotherapy in children with a food allergy-Where do we stand? - Review

The number of hospitalisations due to an anaphylactic reaction to food is continuously increasing. Therefore, there is an urgent need to seek effective therapy. Currently, the only way to treat food allergies is to avoid allergens and to administer intramuscular adrenaline if an accidental allergen intake occurs. The only causal therapeutic strategy is specific oral immunotherapy. An increasing amount of data confirms this therapy's effectiveness and safety, but the results remain inconclusive due to the lack of long-term follow-up. In this state-of-the-art review, we briefly summarise the latest placebo-controlled randomised controlled trials on oral immunotherapy (OIT) to treat food allergy. During the paper's review, we asked the following questions: does the therapy permanently increase the amount of allergen consumed without symptoms? Does it significantly increase or decrease the occurrence of severe systemic reactions - requiring the administration of adrenaline or hospitalisation? Many authors describe outcomes such as an increase in the amount of allergen that can be safely ingested; however, significant clinical benefits such as decreased hospitalisations or anaphylaxis incidence are rarely included in the results. To date, there is no unified protocol of therapy, which makes comparisons between studies difficult because of significant differences in types, doses, and routes of administration of the allergen, timeline for up-dosing and maintenance, duration of the therapy, and primary outcomes of OIT.

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

Background

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

Objective

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

How to Incorporate Oral Immunotherapy into Your Clinical Practice

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to discuss how to best incorporate oral immunotherapy into your clinical practice based on recent evidence and guidelines, and address controversies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Oral immunotherapy is the food immunotherapy treatment with the most literature supporting its use. Recent data from both randomized clinical trials and real-world studies show OIT is especially safe and effective in preschoolers, while avoidance may be less safe than previously thought. OIT guidelines support its use outside of research. Oral immunotherapy can be safely and effectively incorporated into your clinical practice, with careful planning and consideration of scenarios where benefits outweigh risks. Baseline oral food challenges are necessary in clinical trials, but in clinical practice, these are best done when the history is unclear due to resource limitations. There is a role for both regular food and FDA-approved products. Future research should focus on optimizing safety and adherence in the real-world setting.

Peanut oral immunotherapy in a pediatric allergy clinic: Patient factors associated with clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Additional information is needed to inform optimal patient selection, expected outcomes, and treatment end points for clinical peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT).

OBJECTIVE

To provide insight into the optimal patient selection, expected outcomes, and treatment end points for clinical peanut oral immunotherapy by analyzing a real-world peanut OIT cohort.

METHODS

Records were reviewed for 174 children undergoing peanut OIT at a pediatric allergy clinic. Patient age, peanut skin prick test results, and peanut-specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) results, with inclusion of additional foods in OIT, were analyzed for correlations with OIT outcomes.

RESULTS

To date, 144 patients have achieved maintenance dosing, 50 of whom transitioned to ad lib twice-weekly peanut ingestion. A total of 30 discontinued OIT. In addition, 47 patients who underwent multifood OIT had no significant difference in reactions (FDR-adjusted P = .48) or time-to-reach maintenance (FDR-adjusted P = .48) compared with those on peanut OIT alone. Age at initiation inversely correlated with achievement of maintenance: 92% of patients 0.5 to less than 5 years, 81% of those 5 to less than 11 years, and 70% of those 11 to less than 18 years reached and continued maintenance (P = .01). Baseline peanut-sIgE level positively correlated with number of reactions during updosing (P < .001) and maintenance (P = .005), though it was not significantly different in patients achieving successful maintenance vs those who discontinued OIT (P = .09). Furthermore, 66% of patients experienced greater than or equal to 1 adverse reaction during OIT. Of those on ad lib peanut ingestion, 2 reported mild reactions after lapses in peanut consumption.

CONCLUSION

Clinical peanut OIT has similar outcomes to research protocols. OIT can be successful in older children and those with high peanut-sIgE levels, though these factors affect outcomes. Clinical and laboratory criteria can guide successful transition to intermittent ad lib peanut consumption.

A Practical, Stepwise Approach to Peanut Oral Immunotherapy in Clinical Practice: Benefits and Risks

Food allergies are common, affecting 6-8% of the children in the United States. There is a significant burden on the quality of life of allergic children and their caregivers, due to multiple dietary, social and psychological restrictions. Peanut allergy affects approximately 2-5% of the school-age children. Despite the recommended dietary avoidance, reactions tend to occur due to unintentional exposures and the fear of accidental ingestions potentially resulting in anaphylaxis and death, which creates a lot of anxiety in peanut-allergic individuals. Peanut oral immunotherapy (POIT) has emerged as a form of active treatment and has shown high efficacy in research trials with the majority of participants achieving desensitization and protection from trace exposures. An improved quality of life has also been noted following successful POIT. The risks of POIT should be balanced against the benefits resulting from successful treatment for each individual. Rates of allergic reactions and anaphylaxis are reported to be higher in individuals pursuing therapy, but most subjects will experience mild or moderate reactions during treatment. The landscape of peanut allergy management is changing and the future offers more options for patients than were previously available. Shared decision-making, which is the process of how to choose between different available options, becomes an ongoing discussion between the clinician and the patient, which will ensure achievement of the best possible outcome for the peanut-allergic child. This is a multistep process that evaluates the benefits and risks of therapy or no therapy, as well as patient and family preferences and we review it in detail in this manuscript with the aim to provide clinicians with a practical approach.

Practical challenges in oral immunotherapy resolved through patient-centered care

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is now widely recognized as a valid option for the management of IgE-mediated food allergies. However, in real-life practice, OIT can lead to a variety of unique situations where the best course of action is undetermined. In patient-centered care, individual patient preferences, needs and values, should guide all clinical decisions. This can be achieved by using shared-decision making and treatment customization to navigate areas of uncertainty in a way that is responsive to patient’s needs and preferences. However, in the context of OIT, lack of awareness of potential protocol adaptability or alternatives can become a barrier to treatment personalization. The purpose of this article is to review the theoretical bases of patient-centered care and shared decision-making and their practical implication for the patient-centered delivery of OIT. Clinical cases highlighting common challenges in real-life OIT practice are presented along with a discussion of potential personalized management options to be considered. While the practice of OIT is bound to evolve as additional scientific and experiential knowledge is gained, it should always remain rooted in the general principles of patient-centered care.

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

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) provides an active treatment option for patients with food allergies. OIT may improve quality of life and raise the threshold at which a patient with food allergy may react to an allergen, but it is a rigorous therapy that requires a high degree of commitment by the clinician, patients, and families. Recent guidelines from the Canadian Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology have provided a framework for the ethical, evidence-based, and patient-oriented clinical practice of OIT, and the European Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology guidelines have also recommended that OIT can be used as a potential treatment. The recent Food and Drug Administration approval of an OIT pharmaceutical has accelerated the adoption of OIT. This review provides a summary of the recent Canadian Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology guidelines and a consensus of practical experience of clinicians across the United States and Canada related to patient selection, office and staff preparation, the general OIT process, OIT-related reaction management, and treatment outcomes.

Integrating oral immunotherapy into clinical practice

In 2020, the first food allergy treatment, an oral immunotherapy (OIT) product for peanut allergy, was approved by the Food and Drug Administration, and a peanut epicutaneous immunotherapy patch was under review. As food allergy therapies become available and widespread, allergy offices will need to adjust practices to be able to offer their patients these new treatments. OIT is an intensive therapy that requires commitment from patients and their families, and open communication with the practice is paramount. OIT may not be the right therapy for every patient, and although identifying good candidates is still an area rich for research opportunity, experience from cohorts and clinical trials provides some insight. It is important to understand the scope of practice for each member of the OIT team based on state regulations for a particular location. Staffing and space will likely dictate how many patients at an individual office could be on active OIT at one time. Emergency medications, supplies, and protocols must be in place. Screening, scheduling, visit procedures, monitoring, home dosing, dose modifications, safety precautions, adverse reactions, and maintenance will be addressed in this article. Finally, adjunct therapies under investigation will be reviewed.

First Real-World Effectiveness Analysis of Preschool Peanut Oral Immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

We previously described safety of preschool peanut oral immunotherapy (P-OIT) in a real-world setting; 0.4% of patients experienced a severe reaction, and 4.1% received epinephrine, during build-up.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of preschool P-OIT after 1 year of maintenance.

METHODS

Preschoolers (9-70 months) with at least 1 objective reaction to peanut (during baseline oral food challenge (OFC) or P-OIT build-up) received a follow-up OFC to cumulative 4000 mg protein after 1 year on 300 mg peanut daily maintenance. Effectiveness of desensitization was defined as proportion of patients with a negative follow-up OFC. Symptoms and treatment at follow-up OFC were recorded.

RESULTS

Of the 117 patients who successfully completed 1 year of P-OIT and subsequently underwent a cumulative 4000-mg follow-up OFC, 92 (78.6%) had a negative OFC and 115 (98.3%) tolerated a cumulative dose of greater than or equal to 1000 mg. For the 25 (21.4%) who reacted, their threshold increased by 3376 mg (95% CI, 2884-3868) from baseline to follow-up; 17 (14.5%) patients experienced grade 1 reactions, 7 (6.00%) grade 2, and 1 (0.85%) grade 3. Two patients (1.71%) received epinephrine associated with P-OIT, and 1 (0.85%) went to the emergency department.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data demonstrate that real-world preschool P-OIT is effective after 1 year of maintenance for those who received a follow-up OFC. For those who reacted, their threshold increased sufficiently to protect against accidental exposures. P-OIT should be considered for preschoolers as an alternative to current recommendations to avoid peanut.

Microbial signature in IgE-mediated food allergies

BACKGROUND

Multiple studies suggest a key role for gut microbiota in IgE-mediated food allergy (FA) development, but to date, none has studied it in the persistent state.

METHODS

To characterize the gut microbiota composition and short-chain fatty acid (SCFAs) profiles associated with major food allergy groups, we recruited 233 patients with FA including milk (N = 66), sesame (N = 38), peanut (N = 71), and tree nuts (N = 58), and non-allergic controls (N = 58). DNA was isolated from fecal samples, and 16S rRNA gene sequences were analyzed. SCFAs in stool were analyzed from patients with a single allergy (N = 84) and controls (N = 31).

RESULTS

The gut microbiota composition of allergic patients was significantly different compared to age-matched controls both in α-diversity and β-diversity. Distinct microbial signatures were noted for FA to different foods. Prevotella copri (P. copri) was the most overrepresented species in non-allergic controls. SCFAs levels were significantly higher in the non-allergic compared to the FA groups, whereas P. copri significantly correlated with all three SCFAs. We used these microbial differences to distinguish between FA patients and non-allergic healthy controls with an area under the curve of 0.90, and for the classification of FA patients according to their FA types using a supervised learning algorithm. Bacteroides and P. copri were identified as taxa potentially contributing to KEGG acetate-related pathways enriched in non-allergic compared to FA. In addition, overall pathway dissimilarities were found among different FAs.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate a link between IgE-mediated FA and the composition and metabolic activity of the gut microbiota.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

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