Quantitative risk reduction through peanut immunotherapy: Safety benefits of an increased threshold in Europe

Evaluation of clinical outcomes of efficacy in food allergen immunotherapy trials, COFAITH EAACI task force

Food allergy is a global public health problem that until recent years lacked any aetiological treatment supported by academy, industry and regulators. Food immunotherapy (AIT) is an evolving treatment option, supported by clinical practice and industry trial data. Recent AIT meta-analyses have highlighted the difficulty in pooling safety and efficacy data from AIT trials, due to secondary heterogeneity in the study. An EAACI task force (CO-FAITH) initiated by the Paediatric Section was created to focus on AIT efficacy outcomes for milk, egg and peanut allergy rather than in trial results. A systematic search and a narrative review of AIT controlled clinical trials and large case series was conducted. A total of 63 manuscripts met inclusion criteria, corresponding to 23, 21 and 22 studies of milk, egg and peanut AIT, respectively. The most common AIT efficacy outcome was desensitization, mostly defined as tolerating a maintenance phase dose, or reaching a particular dose upon successful exit oral food challenge (OFC). However, a large degree of heterogeneity was identified regarding the dose quantity defining this outcome. Sustained unresponsiveness and patient-reported outcomes (e.g. quality of life) were explored less frequently, and to date have been most rigorously described for peanut AIT versus other allergens. Change in allergen threshold assessed by OFC remains the most common efficacy measure, but OFC methods suffer from heterogeneity and methodological disparity. This review has identified multiple heterogeneous outcomes related to measuring the efficacy of AIT. Efforts to better standardize and harmonize which outcomes, and how to measure them must be carried out to help in the clinical development of safe and efficacious food allergy treatments.

Reactivity to allergenic food contaminants: A study on products on the market

BACKGROUND

The frequency and severity of reactions in food-allergic consumers exposed to unintentional food allergen contamination during production is unknown. To warn allergic consumers, it has been suggested for pre-packaged foods to be precautionary labelled when the food allergen contamination may exceed the amount to which 1%-5% of the population could react (ED01-ED05). ED01 for hazelnut and milk have been estimated at 0.1 and 0.2 mg, respectively, by the Voluntary Incidental Trace Allergen Labelling (VITAL) initiative. The respective reference doses recommended by the FAO/WHO Codex consultation are 3 and 2 mg. We evaluated the reactivity to potential traces of milk and hazelnut allergens in allergen-free pre-packaged products by children affected by severe allergies to milk and hazelnuts.

METHODS

Oral Food Challenges with commercially available hazelnut-free wafer biscuits and milk-free chocolate pralines were administered to patients with severe food allergies to hazelnut and cow's milk, respectively. Contamination levels of milk or hazelnut allergens were measured using chromatographic separation interfaced with triple quadrupole mass spectrometry.

RESULTS

No hazelnut allergic patient showed allergic reactions to exposure to biscuits, nor any milk allergic patient displayed allergic reactions to the dark chocolate praline. While no hazelnut trace was detected in biscuits, the praline was found to be contaminated by milk at concentrations ranging between 8 and 35 mg total protein/kg food. In our dose model, these amounts exceeded 1.5-10 times the VITAL ED01 and reached the threshold suggested by the FAO/WHO Codex consultation.

CONCLUSIONS

Upon the consumption of food products available on the market, many patients with severe food allergies tolerate significantly higher doses of allergen than reference doses indicated in the VITAL system used for precautionary allergen labelling. These doses support the safety of the FAO/WHO recommended reference doses.

Clinical outcomes of efficacy in food allergen immunotherapy trials

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

With food allergy affecting millions of children worldwide, the consolidation of food allergen immunotherapy represents an encouraging therapeutic option, that might expand in the next few years to reach greater number of candidates. This review aims at providing a critical overview of the efficacy outcomes employed in food allergen immunotherapy trials (AIT).

RECENT FINDINGS

Understanding efficacy endpoints rely on identifying what and how these are being measured. Desensitization, as the efficacy of the therapy to increase the patient's reactivity threshold to the food during therapy, and Sustained Unresponsiveness, withholding such efficacy even if the therapy is withdrawn, are nowadays considered the main parameters of efficacy evaluation. Quality of life is a promising variable to capture food AIT impact from the patient's perspective.There is a relevant degree of heterogeneity across studies in outcomes definitions and also in oral food challenges design, the tool that is more spread to assess results, hampering study comparison.

SUMMARY

Interpreting the results of a clinical trial, and comparing data from different studies is an important task, both for the researcher and the clinician, that should be done after a careful analysis of the outcomes and the evaluation tools used.

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.

Precautionary Allergen Labeling: What Advice Is Available for Health Care Professionals, Allergists, and Allergic Consumers?

In most countries, the use of precautionary allergen labeling (PAL) is not governed by regulation. PAL was initially identified as a judicious risk management measure to address instances of "unavoidable" cross-contact with priority food allergens during food processing. However, PAL has gradually been devalued in part due to overuse and inconsistent application by the food industry. Currently, most food products do not contain detectable allergen residue or contain only low concentrations of residue of the allergens declared using PAL; however, occasionally, high concentrations of allergen residue are reported, rendering it an ineffective risk communication tool for allergic consumers. In this context, several reasons exist that make the consumption of products bearing a PAL statement not advisable for people with food allergies. The main reason is that the risk is generally not correlated with the statement used by manufacturers. Because of the increased use of PAL on prepackaged food products, and to maximize food choices for allergic individuals, health care professionals increasingly advise some patients considered to be "not highly allergic" to consume products bearing a PAL statement. This article explains why the consumption of products with PAL is not advisable without having a full clinical evaluation and knowledge that an allergen risk assessment has been conducted. It also discusses the perspectives for a better use of PAL on the basis of the recent Food and Agricultural Organization/World Health Organization recommendations on food allergens.

Allergen immunotherapy and/or biologicals for IgE-mediated food allergy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

There is substantial interest in immunotherapy and biologicals in IgE‐mediated food allergy.

Methods

We searched six databases for randomized controlled trials about immunotherapy alone or with biologicals (to April 2021) or biological monotherapy (to September 2021) in food allergy confirmed by oral food challenge. We pooled the data using random‐effects meta‐analysis.

Results

We included 36 trials about immunotherapy with 2126 mainly child participants. Oral immunotherapy increased tolerance whilst on therapy for peanut (RR 9.9, 95% CI 4.5.–21.4, high certainty); cow's milk (RR 5.7, 1.9–16.7, moderate certainty) and hen's egg allergy (RR 8.9, 4.4–18, moderate certainty). The number needed to treat to increase tolerance to a single dose of 300 mg or 1000 mg peanut protein was 2.

Oral immunotherapy did not increase adverse reactions (RR 1.1, 1.0–1.2, low certainty) or severe reactions in peanut allergy (RR 1,6, 0.7–3.5, low certainty), but may increase (mild) adverse reactions in cow's milk (RR 3.9, 2.1–7.5, low certainty) and hen's egg allergy (RR 7.0, 2.4–19.8, moderate certainty). Epicutaneous immunotherapy increased tolerance whilst on therapy for peanut (RR 2.6, 1.8–3.8, moderate certainty). Results were unclear for other allergies and administration routes.

There were too few trials of biologicals alone (3) or with immunotherapy (1) to draw conclusions.

Conclusions

Oral immunotherapy improves tolerance whilst on therapy and is probably safe in peanut, cow's milk and hen's egg allergy. More research is needed about quality of life, cost and biologicals.

Determination of Allergen Levels, Isoforms, and Their Hydroxyproline Modifications Among Peanut Genotypes by Mass Spectrometry

The recently published reference genome of peanuts enables a detailed molecular description of the allergenic proteins of the seed. We used LC-MS/MS to investigate peanuts of different genotypes to assess variability and to better describe naturally occurring allergens and isoforms. Using relative quantification by mass spectrometry, minor variation of some allergenic proteins was observed, but total levels of Ara h 1, 2, 3, and 6 were relatively consistent among 20 genotypes. Previously published RP-HPLC methodology was used for comparison. The abundance of three Ara h 3 isoforms were variable among the genotypes and contributed to a large proportion of total Ara h 3 where present. Previously unpublished hydroxyproline sites were identified in Ara h 1 and 3. Hydroxylation did not vary significantly where sites were present. Peanut allergen composition was largely stable, with only some isoforms displaying differences between genotypes. The resulting differences in allergenicity are of unknown clinical significance but are likely to be minor. The data presented herein allow for the design of targeted MS methodology to allow the quantitation and therefore control of peanut allergens of clinical relevance and observed variability.

The Risk Reduction of Accidental Exposure-Related Systemic Allergic Reactions Extrapolated Based on Food Challenge Data After 1 Year of Peanut Oral Immunotherapy

Introduction

The phase 3 trial PALISADE, comparing peanut (Arachis hypogaea) allergen powder-dnfp (PTAH) oral immunotherapy versus placebo in peanut-allergic children, reported that a significantly higher percentage of PTAH-treated participants tolerated higher doses of peanut protein after 1 year of treatment. This study used PALISADE data to estimate the reduction in the risk of systemic allergic reaction (SAR) after accidental exposure following 1 year of PTAH treatment.

Methods

Participants (aged 4–17 years) enrolled in PALISADE were included. Parametric interval-censoring survival analysis with the maximum likelihood estimation was used to construct a real-world distribution of peanut protein exposure using lifetime SAR history and highest tolerated dose (HTD) from a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge conducted at baseline. The SAR risk reduction was extrapolated using the exposure distribution and the HTD were collected at baseline and trial exit for PTAH- and placebo-treated participants.

Results

Assuming a maximum peanut protein intake of 1500 mg, participants were estimated to have < 1% probability of ingesting > 0.01 mg during daily life. The mean annual SAR risk at trial entry was 9.25–9.98%. At trial exit, the relative SAR risk reduction following accidental exposure was 94.9% for PTAH versus 6.4% for placebo. For PTAH-treated participants with exit HTD of 600 or 1000 mg without dose-limiting symptoms, the SAR risk reduction increased to 97.2%. The result was consistent in the sensitivity analysis across different parametric distributions.

Conclusion

Oral immunotherapy with PTAH is expected to result in a substantially greater reduction in risk of SAR following accidental exposure compared to placebo among children with peanut allergy.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01843-2.

Treatment Approaches to Food Allergy

IgE-mediated food allergies affect both children and adults and are associated with dramatic decreases in the quality of life. In the majority of cases, food allergens have to be avoided which may be difficult, particularly in patients who suffer from life-threatening symptoms following the ingestion of minimal doses of food allergens. Several novel therapeutic approaches have been studied during the recent past and are summarized in this review. Therapies with novel therapeutic monoclonal antibodies, innovative allergen-specific immunotherapies using subcutaneous, sublingual, or epicutaneous routes, and oral immunotherapies leading to increases of individual thresholds of tolerable foods upon their continuous ingestion showed promising results which may change future management strategies in moderate to severe food allergy.

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.

Risk of shared equipment in restaurants for consumers with peanut allergy: a simulation for preparing Asian foods: A simulation for preparing Asian foods

BACKGROUND

Allergic reactions to meals consumed outside the home are common and can be severe and sometimes fatal.

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the risk reduction potentially achieved by increasing an individual's threshold sensitivity to peanut (such as by means of immunotherapy) in scenarios of peanut exposure through shared kitchen materials in a restaurant setting.

METHODS

Three versions of popular peanut-containing sauces were selected to represent common ingredients used in Asian cooking. Different combinations of utensils, equipment, sauces, and test conditions were prepared by a professional chef, with or without common cleaning procedures, to represent normal daily practice. Residue amounts of peanut-containing material on kitchen equipment and utensils were measured and used for quantitative risk assessment to model the risk reduction associated with increasing an individual's threshold.

RESULTS

Shared utensils had mean residue amounts of 23 to 1519 mg peanut protein (no cleaning) and 3 to 82 mg peanut protein (after water rinse). Shared woks and pans had up to 20 mg peanut protein after rinsing. Individuals who reach a threshold of 300 mg peanut protein have a predicted relative risk reduction of 94.9% to greater than 99.99% with brief cleaning. With no cleaning, relative risk reductions were 63.5% to 91.1% for individuals with a baseline threshold of less than or equal to 100 mg peanut protein who reach a threshold of 300 mg peanut protein, increasing to 91% to 99.7% when reaching a threshold value of 1000 mg peanut protein.

CONCLUSION

In all shared kitchen material scenarios that we studied, achieving an eliciting dose of 300 or 1000 mg peanut protein seems clinically relevant for the peanut-allergic population.

CSACI guidelines for the ethical, evidence-based and patient-oriented clinical practice of oral immunotherapy in IgE-mediated food allergy

Background

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an emerging approach to the treatment of patients with IgE-mediated food allergy and is in the process of transitioning to clinical practice.

Objective

To develop patient-oriented clinical practice guidelines on oral immunotherapy based on evidence and ethical imperatives for the provision of safe and efficient food allergy management.

Materials and methods

Recommendations were developed using a reflective patient-centered multicriteria approach including 22 criteria organized in five dimensions (clinical, populational, economic, organizational and sociopolitical). Data was obtained from: (1) a review of scientific and ethic literature; (2) consultations of allergists, other healthcare professionals (pediatricians, family physicians, nurses, registered dieticians, psychologists, peer supporters), patients and caregivers; and patient associations through structured consultative panels, interviews and on-line questionnaire; and (3) organizational and economic data from the milieu of care. All data was synthesized by criteria in a multicriteria deliberative guide that served as a platform for structured discussion and development of recommendations for each dimension, based on evidence, ethical imperatives and other considerations.

Results

The deliberative grid included 162 articles from the literature and media reviews and data from consultations involving 85 individuals. Thirty-eight (38) recommendations were made for the practice of oral immunotherapy for the treatment of IgE mediated food allergy, based on evidence and a diversity of ethical imperatives. All recommendations were aimed at fostering a context conducive to achieving objectives identified by patients and caregivers with food allergy. Notably, specific recommendations were developed to promote a culture of shared responsibility between patients and healthcare system, equity in access, patient empowerment, shared decision making and personalization of OIT protocols to reflect patients' needs. It also provides recommendations to optimize organization of care to generate capacity to meet demand according to patient choice, e.g. OIT or avoidance. These recommendations were made acknowledging the necessity of ensuring sustainability of the clinical offer in light of various economic considerations.

Conclusions

This innovative CPG methodology was guided by patients' perspectives, clinical evidence as well as ethical and other rationales. This allowed for the creation of a broad set of recommendations that chart optimal clinical practice and define the conditions required to bring about changes to food allergy care that will be sustainable, equitable and conducive to the well-being of all patients in need.

Unmet needs of children with peanut allergy: Aligning the risks and the evidence

BACKGROUND

Peanut allergy is a potentially severe and lifelong allergy, with few effective treatments or preventive measures.

OBJECTIVE

To convene an expert panel of allergists, pediatricians, and advocates to discuss and highlight unmet needs in the prevention and management of peanut allergies.

METHODS

Literature searches of PubMed were performed. The panel evaluated published data on the prevention of peanut allergy, treatment of existing peanut allergy, and management of reactions after unintentional peanut exposures.

RESULTS

The following key unmet needs in the prevention and management of peanut allergy were identified: (1) enhancing and optimizing implementation of early peanut introduction as a means of preventing the development of peanut allergy, (2) developing knowledge translation strategies regarding the safety and efficacy data for current and emerging immunotherapies for peanut-allergic children to support their use in clinical practice, and (3) promoting understanding of true exposure risk in allergic individuals and ensuring access to epinephrine for unintentional exposures that provoke severe reactions. Practitioners should help educate caregivers about the actual risks associated with peanut allergy and its prevention and management so that treatment decisions can be evidence based rather than fear based. Support tools are needed to help address caregiver goals, expectations, and psychological barriers, as well as identify facilitators for prevention and treatment strategies.

CONCLUSION

There are significant unmet needs in our understanding of peanut allergy; addressing these needs will help to enhance understanding of how to most effectively prevent and treat peanut allergy, as well as educate the food-allergic and nonallergic community regarding current evidence-based practices.

Food and drug allergy, and anaphylaxis in EAACI journals (2018)

The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) supports three journals: "Allergy," "Pediatric Allergy and Immunology (PAI)," and "Clinical and Translational Allergy (CTA)." One of the major goals of EAACI is to support health promotion in which prevention of allergy and asthma plays a critical role and to disseminate the knowledge of allergy to all stakeholders including the EAACI junior members. This paper summarizes the achievements of 2018 in anaphylaxis, and food and drug allergy. Main topics that have been focused are anaphylaxis, mechanisms of food allergy (FA), epidemiology of FA, food allergens, diagnosis of FA, prevention and control of FA, FA immunotherapy, drug allergy, and political agenda.

Recent developments and highlights in food allergy

The achievement of long-lasting, safe treatments for food allergy is dependent on the understanding of the immunological basis of food allergy. Accurate diagnosis is essential for management. In recent years, data from oral food challenges have revealed that routine allergy testing is poor at predicting clinical allergy for tree nuts, almonds in particular. More advanced antigen-based tests including component-resolved diagnostics and epitope reactivity may lead to more accurate diagnosis and selection of therapeutic intervention. Additional diagnostic accuracy may come from cellular tests such as the basophil activation test or mast cell approaches. In the context of clinical trials, cellular tests have revealed specific T-cell and B-cell populations that are more abundant in food-allergic individuals with distinct mechanistic features. Awareness of clinical markers, such as the ability to eat baked forms of milk and egg, continues to inform the understanding of natural tolerance development. Mouse models have allowed for investigation into multiple mechanisms of food allergy including modification of epithelial metabolism, and the induction of regulatory cell subsets and the microbiome. Increasing numbers of children who underwent food immunotherapy enlarged the body of evidence on mechanisms and predictors of treatment success. Experimental immunological markers in conjunction with clinical determinants such as lower age and lower initial specific IgE appear to be of benefit. More research on the optimal dose, preparation, and route of application integrating a high-level safety and efficacy is demanded. Alternatively, biologics blocking TSLP, IL-33, IL-4 and IL-13, or IgE may help to achieve that.

IgE binding to linear epitopes of Ara h 2 in peanut allergic preschool children undergoing oral Immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

For patients with peanut allergy, there are currently no methods to predict who will develop sustained unresponsiveness (SU) after oral immunotherapy (OIT).

OBJECTIVE

Assess IgE binding to peanut (PN), Ara h 2, and specific linear epitopes of Ara h 2 as predictors of the important clinical parameters: eliciting dose threshold and attainment of SU following OIT.

METHODS

Samples and clinical data were collected from children undergoing OIT. PN- and Ara h 2-sIgE were quantified by ImmunoCAP^® . IgE binding to linear peptides of Ara h 2 and Ara h 6 was measured with peptide microarrays.

RESULTS

Values of PN-sIgE correlated with eliciting dose (P = .001) and with a higher likelihood of achieving SU (P < .0001), but these relationships were lost at higher values for PN-sIgE (≥14 kIU for eliciting dose and ≥35 kIU/L for SU). In subjects with PN-sIgE ≥ 14 kIU/L, binding of IgE to epitopes 5 and 6 of Ara h 2 was associated with a lower eliciting dose at baseline challenge (P < .001; P_c  < .02). In subjects with PN-sIgE ≥ 35 kIU/L, a combined model of IgE binding to epitopes 1, 5 and 6 with PN-sIgE was highly predictive of attainment of SU (AUC of 0.86; P = .0067).

CONCLUSION

In young patients with peanut allergy, measurement of PN-sIgE and IgE binding to specific linear epitopes of Ara h 2 in baseline samples may allow stratification of patients regarding sensitivity to challenge and outcome of OIT.

Could This Be IT? Epicutaneous, Sublingual, and Subcutaneous Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Food Allergies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Over the last decade, there has been a spark in innovation in the development of therapies for food allergy. Herein, we describe the background and recent advances for food-specific immunotherapies including epicutaneous (EPIT), sublingual (SLIT), and subcutaneous (SCIT).

RECENT FINDINGS

Studies have progressed most quickly for the treatment of peanut allergy. Data from the phase 3 EPIT trial add to the accumulating evidence that this will be a viable therapy for peanut allergy. Studies for SLIT and SCIT remain in earlier phases with promising results. This is an exciting era for the treatment of food allergy. Multiple therapies are under investigation, each with their own potential advantages. Specific strengths and limitations of each of these therapies may provide an opportunity to personalize the choice of therapy for individual patients.

Estimated risk reduction to packaged food reactions by epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) for peanut allergy

BACKGROUND

Peanut allergy is a generally persistent, sometimes life-threatening food allergy. With no treatments demonstrating the ability to cure a food allergy, the focus of drugs in development has been on providing a level of protection against accidental exposure reactions. However, no study has estimated the relative risk reduction of a food-allergic population receiving a specific immunotherapeutic treatment for their allergies.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the relative risk reduction when consuming peanut-contaminated packaged food products in a double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 3 study population of children treated with epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) for 12 months with either a patch containing 250 μg peanut protein (250-μg patch) or a placebo patch.

METHODS

The probability of an allergic reaction due to the unintended presence of peanut protein in packaged food products was modeled per study group and food category combination using Monte Carlo simulations. Risks per eating occasion of a contaminated packaged food product and the number of individuals per study population predicted to react on a yearly basis were investigated.

RESULTS

The population treated with the 250-μg patch demonstrated a significantly increased dose-response distribution after 12 months of treatment, which resulted in a relative risk reduction of 73.2% to 78.4% when consuming peanut-contaminated packaged food products. In contrast, no statistically significant change was observed for the placebo group at the 12-month point.

CONCLUSION

Our study estimates a substantial relative risk reduction for allergic reactions among peanut-allergic children after 12 months of EPIT with the 250-μg patch, supporting the potential real-world clinical relevance of this investigational immunotherapy and its possible role as a future therapy for peanut-allergic children. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02636699.

GRADE-ing the Benefit/Risk Equation in Food Immunotherapy

Purpose of Review

We reviewed the existing evidence base to desensitisation for food allergy, applying the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to discuss whether desensitisation is likely to become part of routine treatment for patients with food allergy.

Recent Findings

Desensitisation for food allergy to peanut, egg and cow’s milk is efficacious, but whether such interventions are cost-effective is less clear, due to the issues over a sustained desensitisation effect and the increase in allergic reactions occurring in patients on treatment. Few studies have assessed the change in health-related quality of life associated with treatment, and most have not considered discordance between parent-reported changes in health-related quality of life (HRQL) outcomes compared to those of the patients themselves; none to date have controlled for the improvement in HRQL occurring after initial challenge which will confound outcomes.

Summary

The lack of longer-term safety and cost-effectiveness data, as well as an absence of current consensus in the reporting of patient-relevant outcomes, must be addressed in order to be able to recommend the introduction of desensitisation as a routine treatment in healthcare systems.