A real-life ImmunoCAT study: impact of molecular diagnosis through ImmunoCAPTM ISAC 112 on immunotherapy prescription in pollen-polysensitized patients in Catalonia, Spain.

BACKGROUND: Molecular diagnosis in allergology helps to identify multiple allergenic molecules simultaneously. The use of purified and/or recombinant allergens increases the accuracy of individual sensitization profiles in allergic patients. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of molecular diagnosis through the ImmunoCAPTM ISAC 112 microarray on etiological diagnosis and specific immunotherapy (SIT) prescription. This was compared to the use of conventional diagnoses in pediatric, adolescent, and young adult patients with rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis and/or allergic asthma, sensitized to three or more pollen allergens of different botanical species. METHODS: A multicenter, prospective, observational study was conducted in patients aged 3-25 years who received care at the Allergology service of 14 hospitals in Catalonia from 2017 to 2020. Allergology diagnosis was established based on the patient's clinical assessment and the results of the skin prick test and specific immunoglobulin E assays. Subsequently, molecular diagnosis was conducted using ImmunoCAPTM ISAC® 112 to recombinant and/or purified allergen components. RESULTS: A total of 109 patients were included; 35 (32.1%) were pediatric patients and 74 (67.9%) were adolescents or young adults (mean age: 18 years), with 58.0% being females. A change of 51.0% was observed in SIT prescription following molecular etiological diagnosis by means of a multi-parameter microarray. CONCLUSIONS: Molecular diagnosis by means of multi-parameter tests increases the accuracy of etiological diagnosis and helps to define an accurate composition of SIT.

A retrospective comparison of IgE-mediated cow's milk protein allergy management strategies in pediatric cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Complete avoidance of milk is the usual management for IgE-mediated cow's milk protein allergy (CMPA). A baked milk ladder is a method of dietary advancement therapy in IgE-mediated CMPA in Ireland, while in Spain, avoidance of milk awaiting natural tolerance acquisition through an oral food challenge (OFC) is employed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of dietary advancement therapy using a milk ladder compared with complete avoidance of milk for managing IgE-mediated CMPA. METHODS: This is a retrospective chart review of 371 pediatric patients from the population who have been treated for IgE-mediated CMPA between 2011 and 2020, with the milk ladder (Ireland) or complete avoidance followed by an OFC (Spain). The main outcome was the introduction of cow's milk. RESULTS: Milk ladder patients were 3.67 times more likely to succeed in comparison with milk avoidance (p < .001). Anaphylaxis during the treatment period occurred in 34 patients in the milk avoidance groups, while three patients in the milk ladder group experienced anaphylaxis due to accidental exposure to milk (p < .001). Failure to complete treatment was associated with a higher skin prick test in the milk avoidance group and a raised specific IgE in the milk ladder group. CONCLUSION: This is the first study that compares outcomes of dietary advancement therapy to complete avoidance for CMPA management, demonstrating that cow's milk can be successfully and safely reintroduced using dietary advancement therapy using a milk ladder.

Grass pollen allergoids conjugated with mannan for subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy: a dose-finding study.

Background: Polymerized allergoids conjugated with mannan represent a novel approach of allergen immunotherapy targeting dendritic cells. In this study, we aimed to determine the optimal dose of mannan-allergoid conjugates derived from grass pollen (Phleum pratense and Dactylis glomerata) administered via either the subcutaneous or sublingual route. Methods: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with a double-dummy design was conducted, involving 162 participants across 12 centers in Spain. Subjects were randomly allocated to one of nine different treatment groups, each receiving either placebo or active treatment at doses of 500, 1,000, 3,000, or 5,000 mTU/mL over four months. Each participant received five subcutaneous (SC) doses of 0.5 mL each, every 30 days, and a daily sublingual (SL) dose of 0.2 mL. Participants who received active treatment through SC, received placebo through SL. Participants who received active treatment through SL, received placebo SC. One Group, as control, received bot SC and SL placebo. The primary efficacy outcome was the improvement in titrated nasal provocation tests (NPT) at the end of the study compared to baseline. Secondary outcomes included specific antibody (IgG4, IgE) and cellular (IL-10 producing and regulatory T cell) responses. All adverse events and side reactions were recorded and assessed. Results: Post-treatment, the active groups showed improvements in NPT ranging from 33% to 53%, with the highest doses showing the greatest improvements regardless of the administration route. In comparison, the placebo group showed a 12% improvement. Significant differences over placebo were observed at doses of 3,000 mTU/mL (p=0.049 for SL, p=0.015 for SC) and 5,000 mTU/mL (p=0.011 for SL, p=0.015 for SC). A dose-dependent increase in IgG4 was observed following SC administration, and an increase in IL-10 producing cells for both routes of administration. No serious systemic or local adverse reactions were recorded, and no adrenaline was required. Conclusion: Grass pollen immunotherapy with mannan-allergoid conjugates was found to be safe and efficacious in achieving the primary outcome, whether administered via the subcutaneous or sublingual routes, at doses of 3,000 and 5,000 mTU/mL. Clinical trial registration: https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search (EudraCT), identifier 2014-005471-88; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT02654223.

Efficacy and safety of hymenoptera venom immunotherapy.

Background: Being stung by Hymenoptera species can cause life-threatening anaphylaxis. Although venom immunotherapy (VIT) seems to be the most effective treatment, its long-term efficacy, and risk factors for adverse events remain unclear. Objective: The objective was to investigate the long-term efficacy of VIT and evaluate adverse events and risk factors related to this. Method: Patients who received VIT in a tertiary-care adult allergy clinic between January 2005 and July 2022 were included. Patients' data were compared with those of individuals who had been diagnosed with bee and/or wasp venom allergy during the same period but had not received VIT and experienced field re-stings. Results: The study included 105 patients with venom allergy, of whom 68 received VIT and 37 did not receive VIT. Twenty-three patients (34%) completed 5 years of VIT, and the overall mean ± standard deviation VIT duration was 46.9 ± 20.9 months. Re-stings occurred in 5 of 23 patients who completed 5 years of VIT, and none of them developed a systemic reaction. Eighteen patients (40%) experienced re-stings after prematurely discontinuing VIT, of whom eight (44%) developed a systemic reaction. In the control group of patients who did not receive VIT, 26 patients (70.3%) experienced re-stings, and all had systemic reactions (100%), with no change in their median Mueller scores. There was a significant difference in the median Mueller score change between the patients who received VIT and the controls who did not (p = 0.016). A total of 13 patients (19%) experienced adverse events while receiving VIT, which were systemic reactions in nine honeybee VIT. The use of ß-blockers was determined as the most important risk factor (odds ratio 15.9 [95% confidence interval, 1.2-208.8]; p = 0.035). Conclusion: It was confirmed that VIT was effective in both reducing the incidence and the severity of re-sting reactions. These effects were more pronounced in the patients who completed 5 years of VIT.

Fluctuation of Disease Severity and Quality of Life Applying Intralymphatic Immunotherapy for Patients with Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis.

Allergen-specific immunotherapy is the only disease-modifying treatment for IgE-mediated allergic disorders. Intra lymphatic immunotherapy (ILIT) is an efficacious and time-saving alternative to subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT). This study aimed to evaluate the effects and safety of ILIT in patients with moderate to severe allergic rhinitis.  In this clinical trial, patients between 18 and 65 years old with moderate to severe allergic rhinitis were enrolled. They received monthly intra-lymphatic inguinal injections of an active allergen (1000 SQ-U Salsola kali pollen). Their clinical symptoms were assessed before and four weeks after treatments. The clinical signs were also evaluated during two consecutive pollination seasons and the following non-pollination season in April. No moderate or severe reactions were recorded following ILIT treatment. Lymph node enlargement, angioedema/urticaria, and local itching were seen instantly after injection. Patients who received ILIT experienced a significant clinical improvement in self-recorded seasonal allergic symptoms after the treatments, compared to themselves before ILIT. Furthermore, their quality of life significantly improved. This study suggests ILIT with Salsola-pollen extract may decrease symptoms of allergic rhinitis. It was safe and did not cause any crucial complications.

New evidence in food allergies treatment.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To acknowledge, the newly available treatments for food allergy described in the latest scientific literature, such as oral immunotherapy (OIT), biologics and the combination of them in managing patients with IgE-mediated food allergies. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies suggest that OIT and biologics, alone or together, can have a role as disease-modifying treatments for food allergies. The FDA has recently approved omalizumab as a treatment for food allergy. Other biologics are currently under evaluation and further studies are needed to assess the efficacy and safety of these therapies. SUMMARY: The allergology scenario is rapidly evolving, the recent introduction and approval of new therapeutic strategies such as biotechnological drugs and allergen immunotherapy is changing the therapeutic paradigm: we are witnessing a shift from a strategy based on avoiding the trigger and reversing an allergic reaction already in progress, to one that aims to modify the natural history of the disease by acting on the immunological mechanisms that determine it. This approach is consistent with the modern perspective of a personalized patient-tailored medicine. In this opinion review, we will provide a brief analysis of current and future therapeutic options for IgE-mediated food allergy, focusing on OIT, biologics and their combination.

Consistent efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy tablets across allergens and geographic regions.

Background: The clinical development program of the SQ grass, ragweed, tree, and house dust mite (HDM) sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablets for allergic rhinitis/conjunctivitis (AR/C) included clinical trials conducted in North America, Europe, and Japan. Objective: Data from these trials were analyzed to assess efficacy, immunologic mechanisms, and safety outcomes across allergens and geographic regions. Methods: Thirteen phase III, double-blind, placebo controlled trials in the subjects with AR/C were conducted in North America, Europe (including Russia), and Japan (N = 7763 analyzed). Trials were generally similar with respect to medical practice, target population, eligibility criteria, and efficacy and safety monitoring. Data were analyzed for the approved doses in North America and Europe. Four statistical models were used to enhance comparison of the efficacy end points among the trials. Results: The SLIT-tablets demonstrated consistent efficacy across allergens and regions, regardless of the statistical analysis used. Relative improvement in the primary efficacy end point compared with placebo by using the predefined protocol analysis ranged from 17.9% to 32.8%, 17.5% to 19.3%, 20.6% to 38.3%, and 39.6% with the grass, HDM, ragweed, and tree SLIT-tablets, respectively. The kinetics of specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) and IgG4 responses were similar among the allergens and regions. Local application-site reactions were the most common adverse events for all allergens and in all regions. Most treatment-related adverse events for all allergens and in all regions were mild in severity. The rate of systemic allergic reactions was similar across regions (0%-0.54%). Conclusion: Confirmatory phase III trials for SLIT-tablets in the treatment of AR/C showed consistent efficacy, immunologic, and safety outcomes across allergens and geographic regions.

Tablet allergen immunotherapy: the anaphylaxis issue.

For the first time 15 years ago, tablet allergen immunotherapy (T-AIT) formulations were approved by regulatory agencies for treating allergic rhinitis caused by grass pollen in adults and children aged >5 years. Extensive evidences existed about effectiveness and safety of AIT. However, the safety profile is particularly compelling in children. Generally, T-AIT causes local reactions, mostly in the oral cavity, that are usually mild-to-moderate and often self-resolving. However, systemic allergic reactions are also observed with T-AIT, anaphylaxis representing the most fearsome adverse event, considering that it occurs in subjects treated for allergic rhinitis. Therefore, we conducted a literature search of patients reporting anaphylaxis because of T-AIT. Nine cases of anaphylactic reactions were reported in literature. Notably, no death was reported using T-AIT. This outcome was very important as it underscored the substantial safety of T-AIT. However, T-AIT deserves careful attention, mainly in the pediatric population. In this regard, after the first report of anaphylactic reaction at the first administration of T-AIT, manufacturers recommended that the first dose should be administered in a medical facility in the presence of staff with experience in managing anaphylaxis and the patient should be observed for at least 30 min. Interestingly, reported anaphylactic reactions were due to grass pollen extracts, with no report concerning other allergen extracts. However, it is relevant to note that anaphylactic reactions because of T-AIT are not reported in recent years.

Peanut oral immunotherapy using an extensively heated and baked novel composition of peanuts.

BACKGROUND: Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an increasingly acceptable therapeutic option for peanut-allergic (PA) children, despite significant side effects. Major peanut allergenic proteins are heat-resistant and are not rendered hypoallergenic after baking or cooking. Lyophilized peanut protein-MH (LPP-MH) is a novel composition from developing peanuts, enabling cooking-induced reduction in allergenicity. We aimed to explore the safety and efficacy of OIT, with extensively heated and baked (EHEB) LPP-MH in PA children. METHODS: In a single-arm, single-center, pilot study, PA children with a single highest tolerated dose of <100 mg peanut protein were placed on a 40-week OIT protocol with 300 mg daily of heat-treated LPP-MH. A repeat open peanut food challenge was performed after 40 weeks of treatment and at a 6-12 months of follow-up visit. RESULTS: Thirty-three children with PA were enrolled, with a mean cumulative tolerated dose (MCTD) of 71.2 mg PP (95% CI 45-100 mg). After 40 weeks, 32/33 patients were able to consume more than 300 mg of natural PP, with MCTD of 1709 mg (CI 365-3675 mg). There were no severe allergic reactions requiring epinephrine, during any of the observed LPP-MH challenges or any treatment related doses at home. After 6-12 months on daily maintenance, the MCTD was 8821 mg (95% CI 1930-13,500 mg). This enabled most children age-appropriate dietary inclusion of peanuts. CONCLUSION: An OIT protocol with heat-treated LPP-MH, a novel composition from developing peanuts, seems a potentially safe and efficacious OIT modality for PA children, enabling the introduction of dietary levels of peanut proteins in highly allergic PA children. Validation in randomized controlled studies is mandated.

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.

A modified schedule of multiple aeroallergen ultra-rush immunotherapy in perennial allergic rhinitis: safety, efficacy, and T lymphocyte cell population studies.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed whether a modified immunotherapy schedule for allergic rhinitis could be safe and efficient. Ultra-rush immunotherapy (URIT) rapidly desensitizes patients to aeroallergens. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop a modified URIT protocol in 3 days to achieve the target dose while observing whether it could improve this situation and decrease the time to achieve the maintenance dose. METHODS: The URIT was exercised in 21 patients with perennial allergic rhinitis. Premeditations were given to the patients 3 days prior to the immunotherapy and during the 3 days injections immunotherapy: pred nisolone, ranitidine, and Airokast/montelukast. Finally, the T cell population frequencies of patients prior to and after immunotherapy, including T helper 1, T helper 2, cytotoxic T lymphocytes, and regulatory T cells, were studied using flow cytometry. During the URIT protocol, 21 patients received 291 injections. RESULT: Six patients (28.6%) showed systemic reactions in our study. All systemic reactions occurred on the third day by the 1:1 dilution of the maintenance dose. These systemic reactions occurred in three patients after 13 injections, and the three remaining patients showed systemic reactions following the last injection. No systemic reaction was observed on the first and second day of the therapy, and the risk of systemic reaction with every injection was about 2%. Among the T cell populations, CD3+ and CD8+ cells decreased significantly. CONCLUSION: The findings emphasized that URIT, alongside premedication with a high dose of antihistamine, helped to achieve the maintenance dose and control clinical manifestations.

Hymenoptera venom immunotherapy: Safety and efficacy of an accelerated induction regimen with depot aluminum adsorbed extracts.

Introduction: Hymenoptera venom immunotherapy (VIT) is the only therapy that protects patients with Hymenoptera venom allergy by preventing systemic reactions after a new sting. Various extracts for VIT are available and used. VIT administration consists of an induction phase and a maintenance phase. Depot preparations of Hymenoptera VIT extracts are typically used for cluster and conventional protocols, and the maintenance phase. Many patients with Hymenoptera allergy need to achieve tolerance quickly because of the high risk of re-sting and possible anaphylaxis. Objective: Our study aimed to show the safety and efficacy of an accelerated regimen with depot preparations on aluminum hydroxide by using relatively high starting doses in a heterogeneous group of patients. Methods: The research focused on a group of patients with a history of severe systemic reactions to Hymenoptera stings, with the necessity of swift immunization due to high occupational risks. Aluminum hydroxide depot extracts either of Vepula species or Apis mellifera extracts were used. Results: The induction protocol was started with the highest concentration of depot venom extract of 100,000 standard quality unit and was well tolerated by 19 of 20 patients. Onne patient presented with a mild systemic reaction during the accelerated induction schedule, which was promptly treated with intravenous steroids and intramuscular H1 antihistamine; when switched to a conventional induction protocol, he had a similar reaction but finally reached maintenance with an H1-antagonist premedication. Conclusion: If validated, the accelerated induction protocol by using depot aluminum adsorbed extracts with the highest concentration of venom from the beginning could offer a streamlined and accessible treatment modality for patients diagnosed with anaphylaxis from bee and wasp venoms in need of rapid desensitization.

Skin-centered strategies in food allergy prevention.

While the early introduction of food allergens in the infant diet has been shown to be effective at preventing the development of food allergy (FA), its implementation in real life has been associated with various challenges. Interventions aimed at correcting skin barrier dysfunction have been explored in recent decades as a distinct or complementary mean to prevent allergic sensitization through the skin and subsequent development of FA. Studies assessing the application of emollient from birth have yielded conflicting results, and meta-analyses have demonstrated either no effect or only a slight positive effect on FA prevention. However, a careful review of the clinical trials reveals that different emollients were used, which may have explained some of the discrepancies between study results. Emollient application protocols also varied widely between studies. While firm conclusions cannot be drawn with regard to their overall efficacy at preventing FA, the available data provide valuable insight into the characteristics that could be associated with a more effective intervention. Namely, successful trials tended to use emollients with an acidic pH of 5.5, applied over the entire body, and combined with topical corticosteroids in affected areas. Consensus on the optimal strategy to restore skin barrier function could help improve the homogeneity and clinical relevance of future trials on this topic. In the meantime, clinicians should avoid products associated with worse outcomes.

AM-301, a barrier-forming nasal spray, versus saline spray in seasonal allergic rhinitis: A randomized clinical trial.

RATIONALE: Saline nasal sprays are frequently used in the management of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) for the cleansing and clearing of aeroallergens from the nasal cavity. Also using a drug-free approach, AM-301 nasal spray is forming a thin film barrier on the nasal mucosa to prevent contact with allergens, trap them, and facilitate their discharge. A clinical trial compared the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of AM-301 and saline spray in SAR. METHODS: A total of 100 patients were randomized 1:1 to self-administer AM-301 or saline 3 × daily for 2 weeks. Primary efficacy endpoint: reduction in mean daily reflective Total Nasal Symptom Score (rTNSS). Secondary efficacy endpoints: reduction in mean instantaneous TNSS and Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ), global impression of efficacy. Safety and tolerability: adverse events, relief medication use, symptom-free days, global impression of tolerability. RESULTS: AM-301-treated patients achieved a significantly lower rTNSS than the saline group (LS square means difference -1.1, 95% CI -1.959 to -0.241, p = .013) with improvement observed across all individual nasal symptoms. Likewise, all secondary endpoints showed statistical significance in favor of AM-301; for example, quality of life was significantly improved overall (p < .001) as well as for each individual RQLQ domain. Both treatments showed similarly good safety and tolerability. With AM-301, fewer patients used relief medication and more enjoyed symptom-free days compared to saline treatment. CONCLUSIONS: AM-301 was more effective than saline in improving SAR nasal symptoms and related quality of life while offering similar tolerability, demonstrating the benefits of a barrier approach.

Current state and advances in desensitization for peanut allergy in pediatric age.

Peanut allergy affects about 1%-3% of the pediatric population in the world, with an important increase in the last decades. Nowadays, international guidelines recommend the early introduction of peanuts in the infant diet, with poor information about the quantity and the frequency of the intake. Allergen immunotherapy may represent the only therapeutic strategy able to modify the natural history of peanut allergy. In particular, oral immunotherapy showed the most promising results in terms of efficacy, but with significant rates of adverse reactions, mostly gastrointestinal. In 2020, the Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency approved Palforzia®, an oral drug for patients aged 4-17 years. Several studies are ongoing to improve the tolerability of oral immunotherapy and standardize the desensitization protocols. Sublingual immunotherapy permits to offer much lower doses than oral immunotherapy, but fewer adverse events are shown. Subcutaneous immunotherapy is associated with the greatest systemic adverse effects. Epicutaneous immunotherapy, for which Viaskin® patch was approved, has the highest safety profile. Innovative studies are evaluating the use of biological drugs, such as omalizumab or dupilumab, and probiotics, such as Lactobacillus rhamnosus, in monotherapy or associated with oral immunotherapy. Therapy for peanut allergy is constantly evolving, and new perspectives are ongoing to develop.