Randomized controlled trial of oral immunotherapy for egg allergy in Japanese patients

Treatment of Food Allergy: Immunotherapy, Omalizumab, or Both

Food allergy is a common disease that has substantial impacts on the quality of life of patients and their families, and all reactions have the potential for causing life-threatening anaphylaxis. Food-allergic individuals currently have 2 Food and Drug Administration- approved therapeutic options available to them aside from life-long allergen avoidance: oral immunotherapy (OIT) and omalizumab. OIT for food allergy has been extensively studied in clinical trials and currently provides the greatest level of protection; however, it also has a high burden of treatment. Studies suggest that more successful OIT outcomes may be attained with earlier intervention; however, early OIT presents its own challenges. Omalizumab, recently Food and Drug Administration-approved, is a biologic targeting IgE, a major driver of allergic reactions. In contrast to OIT, omalizumab monotherapy offers a low treatment burden therapeutic option that provides a safety net against reactions to accidental ingestion of multiple allergens. In addition, omalizumab has been investigated as an adjunct to OIT, improving the speed and safety of single-allergen or multiallergen OIT. Here, we discuss the clinical use of these therapeutic options and provide a guide for shared decision making between patients and physicians about what therapeutic option might be more appropriate.

The Safety and Efficacy of Baked Egg and Milk Dietary Advancement Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Cow's milk and egg allergy affect approximately 1.9% and 0.9% of children, respectively. Dietary advancement therapies (DATs), including milk (ML) and egg (EL) ladders, and baked milk (BM-OIT) and baked egg (BE-OIT) oral immunotherapy, are potential therapeutic options for these patients.

OBJECTIVE

To perform systematic review and meta-analysis of the safety and efficacy of DATs in children with IgE-mediated milk or egg allergy.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted, exploring 22 potential outcomes, with meta-analysis performed where ≥3 studies reported data. The GRADE approach was used to determine the certainty of evidence for each outcome, and the Johanna Briggs Institute tools were used for determining risk of bias.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies met inclusion criteria among 9946 titles screened. Tolerance occurred in 69% of EL, 58% of ML, 49% of BE-OIT, and 29% of BM-OIT patients. All-severity allergic reactions occurred in 21% of EL, 25% of ML, 20% of BE-OIT, and 61% of BM-OIT patients, with epinephrine use in 3% of EL, 2% of ML, and 9% of BM-OIT patients. At-home reactions occurred in 19% of BE-OIT and 10% of BM-OIT patients. Discontinuation occurred in 14% of EL, 17% of ML, 17% of BE-OIT, and 20% of BM-OIT patients. The mean time to BE egg and BE-OIT tolerance was 13.25 months (4 studies) and 19.1 months (3 studies). Certainty of evidence was very low, and risk of bias high. Study heterogeneity was high, attributable to multiple factors.

CONCLUSIONS

There is very low certainty of evidence supporting DAT safety and efficacy. We cannot conclude that DAT accelerates tolerance development.

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

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

POPULATION

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

INTERVENTION

IT and/or biologics.

COMPARATOR

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

OUTCOME

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

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.

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.

A Review of Shared Decision-Making, Published Protocols, and Post-desensitization Strategies in Oral Immunotherapy (OIT)

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this review is to highlight key published oral immunotherapy (OIT) protocols and post-desensitization strategies for the major food allergens and to cover important concepts to consider when evaluating OIT for food-allergic patients. Shared decision-making should help identify patient and family values which will help influence the type of evidence-based protocol and maintenance strategy to use.

RECENT FINDINGS

With food OIT emerging as a treatment option, there is a pressing need for patients, physicians, and other providers to have a nuanced understanding of the management choices available to them. There are now randomized controlled trials (RCT) of OIT for peanut, egg, milk, and wheat, and reports of cohorts of patients who have undergone OIT for tree nuts and sesame clinically. The current published protocols contain significant diversity in terms of starting dose, build-up schedule, maintenance dose, and even the product used for desensitization. Emerging data can help direct the long-term maintenance strategy for patients on OIT. Based on patient and family values elicited through the shared decision-making process, an OIT protocol may be selected that balances the level of desensitization, potential side effects, frequency of clinic visits, and potential to induce sustained unresponsiveness, among other factors. Once maintenance dosing is reached, most patients will need to maintain regular exposure to the food allergen to remain desensitized. The option to transition to commercial food products with equivalent amounts of food protein as the OIT maintenance dose would simplify the dosing process and perhaps improve palatability as well. Less frequent or decreased OIT dosing can provide practical benefits but may affect the level of desensitization and safety for some patients.

Tolerance to heated egg in egg allergy: Explanations and implications for prevention and treatment

Hen's egg allergy is the second most frequent food allergy found in children. Allergic symptoms can be caused by raw or heated egg, but a majority of egg-allergic children can tolerate hard-boiled or baked egg. Understanding the reasons for the tolerance towards heated egg provides clues about the molecular mechanisms involved in egg allergy, and the differential allergenicity of heated and baked egg might be exploited to prevent or treat egg allergy. In this review, we therefore discuss (i) why some patients are able to tolerate heated egg; by highlighting the structural changes of egg white (EW) proteins upon heating and their impact on immunoreactivity, as well as patient characteristics, and (ii) to what extent heated or baked EW might be useful for primary prevention strategies or oral immunotherapy. We describe that the level of immunoreactivity towards EW helps to discriminate patients tolerant or reactive to heated or baked egg. Furthermore, the use of heated or baked egg seems effective in primary prevention strategies and might limit adverse reactions. Oral immunotherapy is a promising treatment strategy, but it can sometimes cause significant adverse events. The use of heated or baked egg might limit these, but current literature is insufficient to conclude about its efficacy.

Efficacy and safety of oral immunotherapy for peanut, cow's milk, and hen's egg allergy: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is a promising treatment for food allergies; however, safety is a concern. We synthesized evidence from the best randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on efficacy/safety of OIT for desensitization (DS) and remission (sustained unresponsiveness (SU)) in IgE mediated allergy to peanut, hen's eggs, and cow's milk. BODY: We searched Pubmed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases (Until Oct 22) identifying 16 eligible RCTs published in English measuring food allergy by food challenge at the beginning and at the end of the study. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used to assess study quality. We found 18 eligible studies. There was evidence of efficacy for DS for all allergens: peanut (RR 11.32; 95% CI 5.93, 21.60, I2 49%, 8 studies); hen's egg (RR 4.67; 2.66, 8.21, I2 0%, 5 studies); cow's milk (RR 13.98; 3.51, 55.65, I2 0%, 4 studies) and evidence for SU for peanut (RR 7.74; 2.90, 20.69, I2 0%, 3 studies) and hen's egg (RR 6.91; 1.67, 28.57, I2 0%, 2 studies). Allergic events were increased with intervention, and risk of adrenaline use increased for peanut RR 2.96; 1.63, 5.35, I2 0%, 8 studies; egg RR 1.71; 0.42, 6.92, I2 0%, 6 studies; and milk RR 8.45; 2.02, 35.27, I2 0%, 4 studies.

CONCLUSION

We found strong evidence that peanut, hen's egg, and cow's milk OIT can induce DS and some evidence for remission. There was a high risk of allergic reactions. Generalizability to the entire food allergic population is not known.

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.

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.

Oral Immunotherapy in Food Allergy: A Critical Pediatric Perspective

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

Home-Based Up-Dosing in Build-Up Phase of Oral Immunotherapy of Egg Allergy Is Safe and Feasible in Real-World Practice

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has emerged to build sustained unresponsiveness or tolerance in patients with egg allergy. However, it is important to increase compliance and ensure safety because OIT requires an extended period of time and has a risk of side effects like anaphylaxis. We aimed to show the feasibility and safety of OIT during the build-up phase using a home-based, up-dosing method in children with egg allergy. Sixteen patients aged 4 to 12 years with egg allergy were enrolled. Patients increased the dose of boiled egg white (EW) by 5% per day at home and 25% per month at the hospital, with a target dose of 40 g of boiled EW (4.0 g of EW proteins). A historical control group (n = 16) was matched for age, sex, and clinical characteristics for comparisons with the OIT group. Oral food challenge (OFC) tests were performed after completing the build-up phase. In the OIT group, 93.8% (15/16) of patients achieved desensitization, with only 1 patient discontinuing OIT before the maintenance phase due to repeated allergic reactions. Mild allergic reactions and anaphylaxis occurred in 12 (75.0%) and 2 patients (12.5%), respectively. However, there were no significant adverse reactions such as serious anxiety or life-threatening events that required discontinuation of treatment. On the contrary, only 1 patient (6.3%) in the control group passed an OFC of 40 g of boiled EW during the same period (P < 0.001). Our results suggest that home-based up-dosing protocols using boiled eggs may be safe and feasible for the build-up phase of OIT in children with egg allergy.

Biologics and Novel Therapies for Food Allergy

Food allergy is a significant public health burden affecting around 10% of adults and 8% of children. Although the first peanut oral immunotherapy product received Food and Drug Administration approval in 2020, there is still an unmet need for more effective therapeutic options that minimize the risk of anaphylaxis, nutritional deficiencies, and patient's quality of life. Biologics are promising modalities, as they may improve compliance, target multiple food allergies, and treat other concomitant atopic diseases. Although omalizumab has been evaluated extensively, most biologics are more novel and have broader immunologic impact. Careful evaluation of their safety profile should therefore be conducted.

Array-based measurements of aero-allergen-specific IgE correlate with skin-prick test reactivity in asthma regardless of specific IgG4 or total IgE measurements

Skin prick testing (SPT) and measurement of serum allergen-specific IgE (sIgE) are used to investigate asthma and other allergic conditions. Measurement of serum total IgE (tIgE) and allergen-specific IgG4 (sIgG4) may also be useful. The aim was to ascertain the correlation between these serological parameters and SPT. Sera from 60 suspected asthmatic patients and 18 healthy controls were assayed for sIgE and sIgG4 reactivity against a panel of 70 SPT allergen preparations, and for tIgE. The patients were also assessed by skin prick tests for reactivity to cat, dog, house dust mite and grass allergens. Over 50% of the patients had tIgE levels above the 75th percentile of the controls. 58% of patients and 39% of controls showed sIgE reactivity to ≥1 allergen. The mean number of allergens detected by sIgE was 3.1 in suspected asthma patients and 0.9 in controls. 58% of patients and 50% of controls showed sIgG4 reactivity to ≥1 allergen. The mean number of allergens detected by sIgG4 was 2.5 in patients and 1.7 in controls. For the patients, a strong correlation was observed between clinical SPT reactivity and serum sIgE levels to cat, dog, house dust mite (HDM) and grass allergens. SPT correlations using sIgE/sIgG4 or sIgE/tIgE ratios were not markedly higher. The measurement of serum sIgE by microarray using SPT allergen preparations showed good correlation with clinical SPT reactivity to cat, dog, HDM and grass allergens. This concordance was not improved by measuring tIgE or sIgG4.

Immunological Outcomes of Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy in Food Allergy

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

Can food allergy be cured? What are the future prospects?

Food allergies have become a significant heath burden as prevalence continues to rise, affecting 6%-13% of the global population. In the absence of drugs approved by regulatory agencies, the current standard of care remains avoidance of allergenic foods and management of acute allergic reactions with antihistamines and epinephrine autoinjectors. Allergen immunotherapy has been shown to increase the threshold of reactivity in the majority of food-allergic individuals. However, challenges include long treatment periods, high rates of adverse reactions, and lack of permanence of desensitization and established protocols. To address these limitations, adjunctive allergen-specific immunotherapy, vaccines, and non-allergen-specific therapies (eg, monoclonal antibodies) are being explored. The future of food allergy treatment is promising with a number of clinical trials in progress. Currently, although desensitization can be achieved for the majority of individuals with food allergy through immunotherapy, continued ingestion of allergen is needed for most individuals to maintain desensitization. Further understanding of the mechanisms of food allergy and identification of biomarkers to distinguish between temporary and permanent resolution of allergies is needed before a cure, where reactivity to the allergen is permanently lost enabling the individual to consume the allergen in any amount at any time, can be envisioned.

The clinical and immune outcomes after food allergen immunotherapy emphasizing the development of tolerance

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The present review serves to outline the direction of food allergy immunotherapy research with an emphasis on clinical and immunologic outcomes. It helps to delineate sustained unresponsiveness achieved from food immunotherapy as the clinical outcome most similar to immune tolerance.

RECENT FINDINGS

We will discuss the difference between immune tolerance, desensitization, and sustained unresponsiveness in relation to food immunotherapy by discussing the clinical and immunologic changes which have been recently discovered.

SUMMARY

Research has recently shown that oral immunotherapy is most efficacious clinically at achieving desensitization to a food and sustained unresponsiveness.

Oral Immunotherapy (OIT): A Personalized Medicine

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

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.

Risk prediction of severe reaction to oral challenge test of cow's milk

Cow's milk is one of the most common food allergens among children. Oral food challenge tests determine the threshold dose of allergens, but have not been standardized. To reduce the severe reactions, we developed a practical model of the test. We studied 111 high-risk patients who underwent a first milk oral food challenge on the risk-stratified dose between 2011 and 2017 for predicting the severe reaction risk. Severe reactions were defined as showing > 3 of Sampson's classification grade. Twenty-eight patients (25%) showed severe reactions without death. Prior to oral food challenge, severe reaction patients experienced milk avoidance (71% vs. 45%, p = 0.02) or bronchial asthma (61% vs. 28%, p = 0.003) more frequently and showed higher milk-specific IgE levels (median 28.3 vs. 7.7 U_A/mL, p < 0.0001) than non-severe reaction patients. Multivariate logistic regression analyses established a formula including severe reaction-associated factors; increased levels of milk-specific IgE (odds ratio 11.61, p = 0.001), milk avoidance (odds ratio 3.88, p = 0.02), and bronchial asthma (odds ratio 3.75, p = 0.02). This model had 86% sensitivity and 56% specificity (cut-off 0.25) for risk. Five patients with < 25% probability developed severe reactions, which started in > 3 grade dyspnea up to 20 mL of challenge.Conclusion: This model could effectively reduce the severe reaction development on the first milk oral food challenge test according to the individual needs. What is Known: •Higher levels of milk-specific IgE values, bronchial asthma, and complete milk avoidance are independent risk factors of severe reactions during the cow's milk oral food challenge. What is New: •Statistical analyses of our milk oral food challenge records for 111 patients helped us develop a model formula predicting severe reactions at the first test with high specificity and sensitivity. •This simple risk-stratified protocol is useful for minimizing the adverse events in the first milk challenge.

Update on oral immunotherapy for egg allergy

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an emerging treatment of IgE-mediated egg allergy. In the past decade, a multitude of studies have assessed the potential for egg OIT to induce clinical desensitization. The following review will evaluate the efficacy and safety of this therapy as determined by randomized controlled, non-randomized controlled and uncontrolled trials. Recent studies using reduced allergenic egg products and anti-IgE assisted therapy to improve egg OIT safety will also be discussed. Recent advances in the mechanisms underlying food OIT suggest that certain immune parameters may be helpful in monitoring response to therapy, including egg OIT. Although, egg OIT is consistently shown to be effective with regards to clinical desensitization, fewer studies have looked at persistent tolerance or sustained unresponsiveness. Limited results of long-term follow-up trials suggest that this therapy may have disease-modifying effects. In general, the comparison of studies is complicated by major differences in study designs, OIT protocols and endpoints.

Oral and sublingual immunotherapy for egg allergy

BACKGROUND

Clinical egg allergy is a common food allergy. Current management relies upon strict allergen avoidance. Oral immunotherapy might be an optional treatment, through desensitization to egg allergen.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of oral and sublingual immunotherapy in children and adults with immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated egg allergy as compared to a placebo treatment or an avoidance strategy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 13 databases for journal articles, conference proceedings, theses and trials registers using a combination of subject headings and text words (last search 31 March 2017).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing oral immunotherapy or sublingual immunotherapy administered by any protocol with placebo or an elimination diet. Participants were children or adults with clinical egg allergy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We retrieved 97 studies from the electronic searches. We selected studies, extracted data and assessed the methodological quality. We attempted to contact the study investigators to obtain the unpublished data, wherever possible. We used the I² statistic to assess statistical heterogeneity. We estimated a pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for each outcome using a Mantel-Haenzel fixed-effect model if statistical heterogeneity was low (I² value less than 50%). We rated the quality of evidence for all outcomes using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 RCTs that met our inclusion criteria, that involved a total of 439 children (oral immunotherapy 249; control intervention 190), aged 1 year to 18 years. Each study used a different oral immunotherapy protocol; none used sublingual immunotherapy. Three studies used placebo and seven used an egg avoidance diet as the control. Primary outcomes were: an increased amount of egg that can be ingested and tolerated without adverse events while receiving allergen-specific oral immunotherapy or sublingual immunotherapy, compared to control; and a complete recovery from egg allergy after completion of oral immunotherapy or sublingual immunotherapy, compared to control. Most children (82%) in the oral immunotherapy group could ingest a partial serving of egg (1 g to 7.5 g) compared to 10% of control group children (RR 7.48, 95% CI 4.91 to 11.38; RD 0.73, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.80). Fewer than half (45%) of children receiving oral immunotherapy were able to tolerate a full serving of egg compared to 10% of the control group (RR 4.25, 95% CI 2.77 to 6.53; RD 0.35, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.43). All 10 trials reported numbers of children with serious adverse events (SAEs) and numbers of children with mild-to-severe adverse events. SAEs requiring epinephrine/adrenaline presented in 21/249 (8.4%) of children in the oral immunotherapy group, and none in the control group. Mild-to-severe adverse events were frequent; 75% of children presented mild-to-severe adverse events during oral immunotherapy treatment versus 6.8% of the control group (RR 8.35, 95% CI 5.31 to 13.12). Of note, seven studies used an egg avoidance diet as the control. Adverse events occurred in 4.2% of children, which may relate to accidental ingestion of egg-containing food. Three studies used a placebo control with adverse events present in 2.6% of children. Overall, there was inconsistent methodological rigour in the trials. All studies enrolled small numbers of children and used different methods to provide oral immunotherapy. Eight included studies were judged to be at high risk of bias in at least one domain. Furthermore, the quality of evidence was judged to be low due to small numbers of participants and events, and possible biases.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Frequent and increasing exposure to egg over one to two years in people who are allergic to egg builds tolerance, with almost everyone becoming more tolerant compared with a minority in the control group and almost half of people being totally tolerant of egg by the end of treatment compared with 1 in 10 people who avoid egg. However, nearly all who received treatment experienced adverse events, mainly allergy-related. We found that 1 in 12 children had serious allergic reactions requiring adrenaline, and some people gave up oral immunotherapy. It appears that oral immunotherapy for egg allergy is effective, but confidence in the trade-off between benefits and harms is low; because there was a small number of trials with few participants, and methodological problems with some trials.

Desensitization to a whole egg by rush oral immunotherapy improves the quality of life of guardians: A multicenter, randomized, parallel-group, delayed-start design study

BACKGROUND

Patients with food allergies and their families have a significantly reduced health-related quality of life (QOL).

METHODS

We performed a multicenter, randomized, parallel-group, delayed-start design study to clarify the efficacy and safety of rush oral immunotherapy (rOIT) and its impact on the participants' daily life and their guardians (UMIN000003943). Forty-five participants were randomly divided into an early-start group and a late-start group. The early-start group received rOIT for 3 months, while the late-start group continued the egg elimination diet (control). In the next stage, both groups received OIT until all participants had finished 12 months of maintenance OIT.

RESULTS

The ratio of the participants in whom an increase of the TD was achieved in the first stage was significantly higher in the early-start group (87.0%), than in the late-start group (22.7%). The QOL of the guardians in the early-start group significantly improved after the first stage (65.2%), in comparison to the late-start group (31.8%). During 12 months of rOIT, the serum ovomucoid-specific IgE levels, the percentage of CD203c+ basophils upon stimulation with egg white, and the wheal size to egg white were decreased, while the serum ovomucoid-specific IgG4 levels were increased. However, approximately 80% of the participants in the early-start group showed an allergic reaction during the first stage of the study, whereas none of the patients in the late-start group experienced an allergic reaction.

CONCLUSIONS

rOIT induced desensitization to egg and thus improved the QOL of guardians; however, the participants experienced frequent allergic reactions due to the treatment.