Oral Immunotherapy for Food Allergy: A Spanish Guideline. Immunotherapy Egg and Milk Spanish Guide (ITEMS Guide). Part I: Cow Milk and Egg Oral Immunotherapy: Introduction, Methodology, Rationale, Current State, Indications, Contraindications, and Oral Immunotherapy Build-up Phase

Mobile App/Web Platform for Monitoring Food Oral Immunotherapy in Children: Longitudinal Clinical Validation Study

BACKGROUND

Milk and egg allergies significantly impact the quality of life, particularly in children. In this regard, food oral immunotherapy (OIT) has emerged as an effective treatment option; however, the occurrence of frequent adverse reactions poses a challenge, necessitating close monitoring during treatment.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the ability of a new mobile/web app called OITcontrol to monitor milk and egg OIT.

METHODS

Patients undergoing milk or egg OIT were recruited and divided into 2 groups: the active group used the OITcontrol app in conjunction with standard written monitoring methods, whereas the control group relied solely on written diaries. Investigators documented hospital doses, hospital reactions, and administered treatments on the website. Patients recorded their daily allergen home-dose intake, home reactions, and administered treatments using the app. The following variables were compared between both groups: number and severity of hospital and reported home reactions, patient's adhesion to the OITcontrol app or written diary or both in terms of daily home-dose intake and home reactions recording, and treatment and dose adjustment compliance at home in case of reaction.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients were assigned to be monitored using the OITcontrol app along with additional written methods (active group), while 14 patients relied solely on a written paper diary (control group). A similar distribution was observed in terms of sex, age, basal characteristics, allergen treated in OIT, premedication, and sensitization profile. Active patients reported a comparable number of hospital and home reactions compared with the control group. In terms of recording system usage, 13/16 (81%) active patients used the OITcontrol app, while 10/14 (71%) control patients relied on the written diary. Among active patients, 6/16 (38%) used both methods, and 1 active patient used only written methods. However, control patients recorded home reactions more frequently than active patients (P=.009). Among active patients, the app was the preferred method for recording reactions (59/86, 69%), compared with the written diary (15/86, 17%) or both methods (12/86, 14%; P<.001). Treatment compliance in home-recorded reactions was similar between both groups (P=.15). However, treatment indications after an adverse reaction were more frequently followed (P=.04) in reactions recorded solely in the app (36/59, 61%) than in the written diary (29/71, 41%) or both systems (4/12, 33%). Moreover, compliance with dose adjustments after a moderate-severe reaction in home-recorded reactions was higher in the active group than in the control group (P<.001). Home reactions recorded only in the app (16/19, 84%) were more likely to follow dose adjustments (P<.001) than those recorded in the written diary (3/20, 15%) or using both methods (2/3, 67%).

CONCLUSIONS

The OITcontrol app appears to be a valuable tool for monitoring OIT treatment in children with food allergies. It proves to be a suitable method for recording daily home dose intakes and reactions, and it seems to enhance adherence to treatment indications following an adverse reaction as well as compliance with dose adjustments in home reactions. However, additional studies are necessary to comprehensively grasp the benefits and limitations of using the OITcontrol app in the management of OIT.

Addressing common questions on food oral immunotherapy: a practical guide for paediatricians

Food allergy has been increasing in prevalence in most westernised countries and poses a significant burden to patients and families; dietary and social limitations as well as psychosocial and economic burden affect daily activities, resulting in decreased quality of life. Food oral immunotherapy (food-OIT) has emerged as an active form of treatment, with multiple benefits such as increasing the threshold of reactivity to the allergenic food, decreasing reaction severity on accidental exposures, expanding dietary choices, reducing anxiety and generally improving quality of life. Risks associated with food immunotherapy mostly consist of allergic reactions during therapy. While the therapy is generally considered both safe and effective, patients and families must be informed of the aforementioned risks, understand them, and be willing to accept and hedge these risks as being worthwhile and outweighed by the anticipated benefits through a process of shared decision-making. Food-OIT is a good example of a preference-sensitive care paradigm, given candidates for this therapy must consider multiple trade-offs for what is considered an optional therapy for food allergy compared with avoidance. Additionally, clinicians who discuss OIT should remain increasingly aware of the growing impact of social media on medical decision-making and be prepared to counter misconceptions by providing clear evidence-based information during in-person encounters, on their website, and through printed information that families can take home and review.

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.

Food Immunotherapy: Dissecting Current Guidelines and Navigating the Gray Zone

Food allergy is a common, chronic disease that is burdensome for patients and families, with multiple dietary and social limitations and a significant psychological impact stemming from the fear of accidental exposures and potentially severe, life-threatening reactions. Until recently, the only management option consisted of strict food avoidance. Food allergen immunotherapy (food AIT) has emerged as an alternative, active intervention to strict food avoidance, with a multitude of research studies supporting its efficacy and good safety profile. Food AIT results in a raise of allergenic threshold, which provides several benefits to food-allergic patients, including protection from accidental exposures, potentially decreased severity of allergic reactions on unintentional exposures, and improvement in quality of life. In the last few years, multiple independent reports have been published proposing strategies to implement food oral immunotherapy in U.S. clinics, although formal guidelines are currently lacking. Because food immunotherapy is gaining traction, popularity, and interest among both patients and health care providers, many physicians look for guidance on how to implement this intervention in their daily practice. In other parts of the world, use of this treatment has prompted the development of various guidelines from allergy societies. This rostrum discusses currently available guidelines on food AIT from different areas of the world, describes and comments on their similarities and differences, and highlights unmet needs in this area of therapy.

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.

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.

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.

Oral Immunotherapy and Risk of Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Children: 15 Years' Experience

OBJECTIVES

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an effective treatment for children with persistent food allergy, and has concerns about its safety, including eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of EoE in a large cohort of children who underwent OIT in our center, and to determine if there were any clinical, endoscopic, or histologic differences depending on the food employed for the OIT.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed over a 15-year period (2005-2020). Children who underwent cow's milk (CM), egg, and/or peanut OIT and developed EoE were included.

RESULTS

Six hundred and seven OIT were carried out (277 CM-OIT, 322 egg-OIT, and 8 peanut-OIT). Seventeen patients (2.8%) had a confirmed histologic diagnosis of EoE with a higher prevalence for patients who underwent CM-OIT (3.9%) than egg-OIT (2.2%). Symptoms suggestive of EoE and a confirmed diagnosis occurred at median times of 25 and 36 months, respectively, after the build-up phase of the OIT was completed. Choking, abdominal pain, and dysphagia were the most frequent symptoms and lamina propria fibrosis was observed in 41.2% of patients. No significant differences in clinical symptoms, endoscopic, or histologic findings between patients under CM or egg-OIT were found. One-third of patients reported mild symptoms suggestive of EoE before the OIT.

CONCLUSIONS

EoE appears to be a rare but important adverse event that can occur even years after OIT. Validated questionnaires to screen EoE before the OIT and in the follow-up of these patients may be the main tool for an early diagnosis.

Standards for practical intravenous rapid drug desensitization & delabeling: A WAO committee statement

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) to intravenous drugs can be severe and might leave patients and doctors in a difficult position where an essential treatment or intervention has to be suspended. Even if virtually any intravenous medication can potentially trigger a life-threatening DHR, chemotherapeutics, biologics, and antibiotics are amongst the intravenous drugs most frequently involved in these reactions. Admittedly, suspending such treatments may negatively impact the survival outcomes or the quality of life of affected patients.

Delabeling pathways and rapid drug desensitization (RDD) can help reactive patients stay on first-choice therapies instead of turning to less efficacious, less cost-effective, or more toxic alternatives. However, these are high-complexity and high-risk techniques, which usually need expert teams and allergy-specific techniques (skin testing, in vitro testing, drug provocation testing) to ensure safety, an accurate diagnosis, and personalized management. Unfortunately, there are significant inequalities within and among countries in access to allergy departments with the necessary expertise and resources to offer these techniques and tackle these DHRs optimally.

The main objective of this consensus document is to create a great benefit for patients worldwide by aiding allergists to expand the scope of their practice and support them with evidence, data, and experience from leading groups from around the globe.

This statement of the Drug Hypersensitivity Committee of the World Allergy Organization (WAO) aims to be a comprehensive practical guide on the technical aspects of implementing acute-onset intravenous hypersensitivity delabeling and RDD for a wide range of drugs. Thus, the manuscript does not only focus on clinical pathways. Instead, it also provides guidance on topics usually left unaddressed, namely, internal validation, continuous quality improvement, creating a healthy multidisciplinary environment, and redesigning care (including a specific supplemental section on a real-life example of how to design a dedicated space that can combine basic and complex diagnostic and therapeutic techniques in allergy).

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

INTRODUCTION

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

AREAS COVERED

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

EXPERT OPINION

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

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.

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.

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.

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 for Children with Cow's Milk Allergy

Cow's milk allergy (CMA) is one of the most common IgE-dependent food allergies in children. Some children develop severe and persistent CMA, with near-fatal reactions after exposure to trace amounts of cow's milk (CM). Because milk and dairy products are included in various processed food products, it is difficult to completely remove milk, which negatively affects the quality of life of children with CMA. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) can alleviate food allergen-induced anaphylaxis under continuous ingestion of a little of the causative food. Children with severe CMA may benefit from OIT, but the treatment requires a long time and poses a risk of anaphylaxis. Moreover, in recent years, new therapies, including omalizumab, sublingual immunotherapy, and epicutaneous immunotherapy, have played the role of optional OIT. In this review, we present the current methods of and other attempts at OIT, and discuss OIT for safely treating CMA.

Study protocol of a phase 2, dual-centre, randomised, controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of probiotic and egg oral immunotherapy at inducing desensitisation or sustained unresponsiveness (remission) in participants with egg allergy compared with placebo (Probiotic Egg Allergen Oral Immunotherapy for Treatment of Egg Allergy: PEAT study)

INTRODUCTION

Egg allergy is the most common food allergy in children but recent studies have shown persistence or delayed resolution into adolescence. As there is currently no effective long-term treatment, definitive treatments that improve quality of life and prevent fatalities for food allergies are required. We have previously shown that a novel treatment comprising a combination of the probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus CGMCC 1.3724 with peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT) is highly effective at inducing sustained unresponsiveness, with benefit persisting to 4 years after treatment cessation in the majority of initial treatment responders. In this study, we plan to extend the probiotic food OIT platform to another allergen, namely egg. We describe the protocol for a phase 2, dual-centre, randomised, controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of probiotic and egg OIT at inducing desensitisation or sustained unresponsiveness (remission) in participants with egg allergy compared with placebo.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

80 participants aged 5-30 years of age with current egg allergy confirmed by double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge at study screening will be recruited from Australia and Singapore. There are two intervention arms-probiotic and egg OIT (active) or placebo. Interventions are administered once daily for 18 months. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants who attain 8-week sustained unresponsiveness in the active group versus placebo group.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been approved by the Human Research Ethics Committees at the Royal Children's Hospital (HREC 2019.082) and the National Healthcare Group Domain Specific Review Board (2019/00029). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated via presentations at international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12619000480189.

Economic considerations on the usage of biologics in the allergy clinic

The advent of biologic therapies has transformed care for severe atopic disorders but their high cost poses new challenges with regard to long-term sustainability and fair allocation of resources. This article covers the basic concepts of cost-utility analyses and reviews the available literature on cost utility of biologic drugs in atopic disorders. When used within their limits as part of a multi-dimensional assessment, economic analyses can be extremely useful to guide decision-making and prioritization of care. Despite the good quality of most cost-utility analyses conducted for the use of biologics in asthma and other atopic diseases, their conclusions regarding cost-effectiveness are extremely variable. This is mainly due to the use of inconsistent estimates of health utility benefit with therapy. Development of reliable and validated instruments to measure disutility in atopic disorders and measure of indirect costs in atopic disease are identified as a priority for future research.

Oral and sublingual immunotherapy for food allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To critically appraise the recent most relevant studies in the rapidly advancing field of food oral and sublingual immunotherapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Food allergen-specific immunotherapy via oral (OIT) and sublingual route (SLIT) increases the threshold of reactivity to peanut, cow's milk, egg, wheat, and many other foods in the majority of the treated individuals. This desensitized state is contingent upon the continued ingestion of the maintenance doses of the food. Permanent oral tolerance is achievable in a smaller subset of the treated individuals. The optimal duration of therapy has not been firmly established but is likely dependent on the phenotype (severity and persistence). Efficacy of food-OIT is superior compared with SLIT, whereas the safety of OIT is less favorable. Standardization of treatment protocols, maintenance dosing, duration of therapy, target populations and harmonization of the outcomes are top priorities at this stage.

SUMMARY

OIT and SLIT represent two different routes of food allergen-specific immunotherapy. Although significant progress has been made in the last decade, both treatment modalities are still in the very early stages of development and further investigations are necessary to optimize the protocols and improve safety while maximizing efficacy.

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.

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.

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.

Oral immunotherapy with peach juice in patients allergic to LTPs

Introduction

To assess the safety and efficacy of an oral immunotherapy regimen in patients with allergy to lipid transfer proteins (LTPs).

Materials and methods

Prospective study of 24 patients allergic to LTP with positive skin test and a history of anaphylaxis. All patients underwent a desensitization protocol with commercial peach juice. Rising doses of peach juice were administered, starting with an initial dose of seven drops of a 1/1000 dilution and finishing with a dose of 5 ml at visit 17. At visit 18, all patients performed an open challenge with whole juice at a cumulative dose of 200 ml. All adverse reactions occurring during the administration of the different doses were recorded. Levels of rPru p 3 in the juice were quantified.

Results

There were no severe reactions during the desensitization process in the 24 patients. Seven patients (29%) reported mild oral symptoms, and two patients (8%) had urticaria associated with co-factors (one due to exercise and another due to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs). Nineteen patients were able to swallow 5 ml of juice and five withdrew from the study. In two pregnant patients the final challenge was not performed. In all, 17/24 patients were able to consume 200 ml peach juice without developing symptoms.

Conclusions

Oral immunotherapy with the regimen used in this study is an effective and safe short-term therapeutic option for patients with allergy to LTPs. Commercial peach juice appears to be suitable for this treatment.

Successful oral desensitization in children with cow's milk anaphylaxis: Clinical and laboratory evaluation up to nine-years follow-up

INTRODUCTION

Cow's milk protein allergy (CMPA) is the most common food allergy in children worldwide. Some children have severe and persistent CMPA, with near-fatal reactions after exposure to trace amounts of cow's milk-proteins (CMP). Strict avoidance diet is difficult, negatively affects quality of life and represents a conservative approach. Therefore, different therapeutic strategies are necessary.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess long-term efficacy and safety of oral immunotherapy (OIT) in children with severe and long-lasting IgE-mediated CMPA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The authors present four case reports of patients with CMPA who underwent CMP-OIT, that have been under long-term follow-up up to nine years. We provide information about the clinical and laboratory evaluation. Skin prick tests (SPT), specific IgE and IgG4 were performed before, during, and after OIT. Immune profile after OIT was assessed by flow cytometry (lymphocyte subsets, regulatory T and B cells).

RESULTS

The success rate was 100%, and all patients currently have a free diet with minimal diary ingestion of 200mL CMP or equivalent. Specific IgE levels and SPT to CMP have progressively decreased, and specific IgG4 levels have increased. CD4⁺CD25⁺CD127^-/dim regulatory T cells were increased after OIT.

CONCLUSIONS

OIT ensured a clinical tolerance state after up to nine years, confirmed by both clinical and immune profile, allowing a diet without restrictions, with high satisfaction from patients and caregivers. We emphasize that OIT should be performed only by allergy experts in the hospital setting, and that only motivated families should be enrolled, since it is essential to ensure CMP daily intake at home.

IgE-mediated food allergy

Food allergy is defined as an adverse immunologic response to a food protein. Food-related reactions are associated with a broad range of signs and symptoms that may involve any body system, including the skin, gastrointestinal and respiratory tracts, and cardiovascular system. Immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated food allergy is a leading cause of anaphylaxis and, therefore, referral to an allergist for timely and appropriate diagnosis and treatment is imperative. Diagnosis entails a careful history and diagnostic tests, such as skin prick tests, serum-specific IgE and, if indicated, an oral food challenge. Once the diagnosis of food allergy is confirmed, strict elimination of the offending food allergen from the diet is generally necessary; however, in the case of cow’s milk and egg allergy, many allergic children are able to eat these foods in their baked form. This article provides an overview of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of IgE-mediated food allergy.

Shellfish/crustacean oral allergy syndrome among national service pre-enlistees in Singapore

Background

All Singaporean males undergo medical screening prior to compulsory military service. A history of possible food allergy may require referral to a specialist Allergy clinic to ensure that special dietary needs can be taken into account during field training and deployment.

Objective

To study the pattern of food allergy among pre-enlistees who were referred to a specialist allergy clinic to work up suspected food allergy.

Methods

Retrospective study of all pre-enlistees registered in the Clinical Immunology/Allergy New Case Registry referred to the Allergy Clinic from 1 August 2015 to 31 May 2016 for suspected food allergy.

Results

One hundred twenty pre-enlistees reporting food allergy symptoms other than rash alone were referred to the Allergy Clinic during the study period. Of these, 77 (64.2%) had food allergy. Among those with food allergy, mean age was 19.1 ± 1.5 years. They comprised predominantly Chinese (66.2%) and Malays (20.8%). The most commonly reported foods were shellfish/crustaceans (78%), peanut (15.6%), and egg (6.5%). Self-limiting oral allergy syndrome, OAS (itchy lips and throat with/without lip angioedema) was the most common manifestation (n = 33, 42.9%) followed by anaphylaxis (n = 23, 29.9%). Majority of OAS was from shellfish/crustacean (90.6%); of which shrimp (30.3%), crab (15.2%), and lobster (3.0%) were the most common. Mild childhood asthma (69.7%), allergic rhinitis (6.3%), and eczema (6.1%) were the most common atopic conditions among individuals with shellfish/crustacean OAS. This pattern was similar for shellfish/crustacean anaphylaxis. Skin prick tests were most commonly positive for shrimp (OAS 87.1% vs. anaphylaxis 100%), crab (OAS 95.8% vs. 90.9%), and lobster (OAS 91.7% vs. 63.6%).

Conclusion

OAS to shellfish/crustaceans was more common than anaphylaxis among this study population of young males referred for food allergy symptoms other than rash alone.