High Degree of Desensitization After 1 Year of Early-Life Peanut Oral Immunotherapy: Small Children Oral Immunotherapy (SmaChO) Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of peanut allergy is about 2% and mostly lifelong. Studies of oral immunotherapy (OIT) with peanut (the daily oral intake of an initially low and then increasing dose of peanut) often show problematic side effects, but there are indications of better safety and effect in younger children compared with older children and adults. OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety and effectiveness of peanut OIT with a slow up-dosing strategy and low maintenance dose in children aged 1 to 3 years who were allergic to peanut, through a 1-year interim analysis. METHOD: In a randomized controlled trial (2:1 ratio), 75 children, median age 31 months (interquartile range [IQR], 23-40 months) were assigned to receive peanut OIT (n = 50) or peanut avoidance (n = 25). RESULTS: In the OIT and avoidance groups, 43 of 50 and 20 of 25 children, respectively, performed the 1-year open oral peanut challenge. A cumulative dose of 750 mg peanut protein after 1 year was tolerated by 72% (36 of 50 children) in the OIT group compared with 4% (1 of 25) in the avoidance group (P < .001). Median tolerated cumulative dose was 2,750 mg (IQR, 275-5,000 mg) peanut protein in the OIT group compared with 2.8 mg (IQR, 0.3-27.8 mg) in the avoidance group (P < .001). Of the doses administered at home during the first year of OIT, 1.4% resulted in adverse events and 79% were mild, and three doses of epinephrine were given at home to two individuals. CONCLUSION: In children aged 1 to 3 years, peanut OIT with the combination of slow up-dosing and low maintenance dose seems safe and effective after 1 year.

A pilot study towards the immunological effects of omalizumab treatment used to facilitate oral immunotherapy in peanut-allergic adolescents.

Anti-IgE treatments, such as omalizumab, have shown promising effects in allergy treatment. Our previous work has shown that individualized omalizumab treatment (OT) allows a safe initiation and rapid up-dosing of peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT) in peanut-allergic adolescents. However, the broader immunological effects of this OT are incompletely understood. In this pilot study, we longitudinally followed the total B- and T-cell immunity during OT, using flow cytometry, ELISpot and ELISA. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) and plasma were collected from participants (n = 17) at several timepoints during treatment, before starting OT (baseline), prior to starting OIT during OT (start OIT) and at maintenance dose OIT prior to OT reduction (maintenance). OT did not affect the total B-cell compartment over treatment time, but our results suggest an association between the OT dosage scheme and the B-cell compartment. Further, in vitro polyclonal T-cell activation at the different timepoints suggests a cytokine skewing towards the Th1 phenotype at the expense of Th2- and Th9-related cytokines during treatment. No differences in the frequencies or phenotype of regulatory T cells (Tregs) over treatment time were observed. Finally, plasma chemokine levels were stable over treatment time, but suggest elevated gut homing immune responses in treatment successes during the treatment as compared to treatment failures. The novel and explorative results of this pilot study help to improve our understanding on the immunological effects of OT used to facilitate OIT and provide guidance for future immunological investigation in large clinical trials.

Individually dosed omalizumab facilitates peanut oral immunotherapy in peanut allergic adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Peanut oral immunotherapy (pOIT) has showed good short-term outcomes, but allergic reactions may prevent effective up-dosing and is a major cause of stopping OIT. In placebo-controlled trials, omalizumab has been shown to facilitate allergen immunotherapy and increase tolerance to peanut. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that by combining omalizumab with pOIT, and monitor treatment effects with basophil allergen threshold sensitivity tests (CD-sens), peanut allergic patients could safely initiate pOIT and thereafter slowly withdraw omalizumab. METHODS: This is the 2nd part of a one-armed open phase-2 study where peanut allergic adolescents (n = 23) started pOIT after an individualized omalizumab treatment. The pOIT dose was increased from 280 to 2800 mg peanut protein in 8 weeks followed by an individualized step-wise withdrawal of omalizumab, based on clinical symptoms and CD-sens levels. pOIT continued for 12 weeks followed by an open peanut challenge. Peanut CD-sens and allergen-binding activity (ABA) and IgE-ab, IgG-ab and IgG4-ab to peanut and its components were measured during the study. RESULTS: All 23 patients successfully reached the 2800 mg maintenance dose. Moderate/systemic allergic reactions were rare while receiving full-dose omalizumab. Eleven of 23 (48%) successfully continued with pOIT after omalizumab was stopped. Compared to treatment failures, median baseline IgE-ab to peanut components Ara h 1-3 and CD-sens to peanut were significantly lower among successfully treated patients and IgG4-ab to peanut, Ara h 2 and 6 increased significantly more during treatment. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study indicates that omalizumab is an effective adjunctive therapy for initiation and rapid up-dosing of pOIT; however, adverse events from pOIT become more frequent as omalizumab doses are decreased. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT02402231. EudraCT; 2012-005625-78.

[New perspectives on the diagnosis and treatment of food allergies in children]. / Nya perspektiv på diagnos och behandling av matallergier hos barn.

Acute allergic reactions to food are often IgE mediated. Symptoms vary in severity; from mild oral itching to anaphylactic reactions. Where birch pollen allergy is endemic, mild allergic reactions from e.g. fresh fruits and nuts are most likely caused by cross reactivity between pollen and plants (cross reactions). These mild symptoms, if caused by cross reactivity, do not progress to more severe symptoms, in contrast to ¼true« food allergy. However, making this distinction is a delicate task, since more severe reactions also often start with mild oral symptoms. Also conventional allergy tests, such as skin-prick test and blood test to detect IgE-antibodies (IgE-ab) to foods, discriminate poorly between cross reactions and true allergy. Component resolved diagnostics, i.e. analysis of IgE-ab to specific proteins in an allergen and CD-sens (Basophil allergen threshold sensitivity), can differentiate pollen-related cross reactions from true allergic reactions that may cause anaphylaxis. There is no widely accepted or evidence based treatment for food allergy, but reports from several studies have been published and many are in progress, where oral immunotherapy probably is the most promising form of treatment.