Phase 3 Trial of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy in Toddlers with Peanut Allergy.

BACKGROUND: No approved treatment for peanut allergy exists for children younger than 4 years of age, and the efficacy and safety of epicutaneous immunotherapy with a peanut patch in toddlers with peanut allergy are unknown. METHODS: We conducted this phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial involving children 1 to 3 years of age with peanut allergy confirmed by a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge. Patients who had an eliciting dose (the dose necessary to elicit an allergic reaction) of 300 mg or less of peanut protein were assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive epicutaneous immunotherapy delivered by means of a peanut patch (intervention group) or to receive placebo administered daily for 12 months. The primary end point was a treatment response as measured by the eliciting dose of peanut protein at 12 months. Safety was assessed according to the occurrence of adverse events during the use of the peanut patch or placebo. RESULTS: Of the 362 patients who underwent randomization, 84.8% completed the trial. The primary efficacy end point result was observed in 67.0% of children in the intervention group as compared with 33.5% of those in the placebo group (risk difference, 33.4 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 22.4 to 44.5; P<0.001). Adverse events that occurred during the use of the intervention or placebo, irrespective of relatedness, were observed in 100% of the patients in the intervention group and 99.2% in the placebo group. Serious adverse events occurred in 8.6% of the patients in the intervention group and 2.5% of those in the placebo group; anaphylaxis occurred in 7.8% and 3.4%, respectively. Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 0.4% of patients in the intervention group and none in the placebo group. Treatment-related anaphylaxis occurred in 1.6% in the intervention group and none in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving children 1 to 3 years of age with peanut allergy, epicutaneous immunotherapy for 12 months was superior to placebo in desensitizing children to peanuts and increasing the peanut dose that triggered allergic symptoms. (Funded by DBV Technologies; EPITOPE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03211247.).

Desensitization and remission after peanut sublingual immunotherapy in 1- to 4-year-old peanut-allergic children: A randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies of peanut sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) have suggested a potential advantage with younger age at treatment initiation. OBJECTIVE: We studied the safety and efficacy of SLIT for peanut allergy in 1- to 4-year-old children. METHODS: Peanut-allergic 1- to 4-year-old children were randomized to receive 4 mg peanut SLIT versus placebo. Desensitization was assessed by double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) after 36 months of treatment. Participants desensitized to at least 443 mg peanut protein discontinued therapy for 3 months and then underwent DBPCFC to assess for remission. Biomarkers were measured at baseline and longitudinally during treatment. RESULTS: Fifty participants (25 peanut SLIT, 25 placebo) with a median age of 2.4 years were enrolled across 2 sites. The primary end point of desensitization was met with actively treated versus placebo participants having a significantly greater median cumulative tolerated dose (4443 mg vs 143 mg), higher likelihood of passing the month 36 DBPCFC (60% vs 0), and higher likelihood of demonstrating remission (48% vs 0). The highest rate of desensitization and remission was seen in 1- to 2-year-olds, followed by 2- to 3-year-olds and 3- to 4-year-olds. Longitudinal changes in peanut skin prick testing, peanut-specific IgG4, and peanut-specific IgG4/IgE ratio were seen in peanut SLIT but not placebo participants. Oropharyngeal itching was more commonly reported by peanut SLIT than placebo participants. Skin, gastrointestinal, upper respiratory, lower respiratory, and multisystem adverse events were similar between treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Peanut SLIT safely induces desensitization and remission in 1- to 4-year-old children, with improved outcomes seen with younger age at initiation.

Phase 1 trial supports safety and mechanism of action of peptide immunotherapy for peanut allergy.

BACKGROUND: Food allergy is a leading cause of anaphylaxis worldwide. Allergen-specific immunotherapy is the only treatment shown to modify the natural history of allergic disease, but application to food allergy has been hindered by risk of severe allergic reactions and short-lived efficacy. Allergen-derived peptides could provide a solution. PVX108 comprises seven short peptides representing immunodominant T-cell epitopes of major peanut allergens for treatment of peanut allergy. METHODS: Pre-clinical safety of PVX108 was assessed using ex vivo basophil activation tests (n = 185). Clinical safety and tolerability of single and repeat PVX108 doses were evaluated in a first-in-human, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in peanut-allergic adults (46 active, 21 placebo). The repeat-dose cohort received six doses over 16 weeks with safety monitored to 21 weeks. Exploratory immunological analyses were performed at pre-dose, Week 21 and Month 18 after treatment. RESULTS: PVX108 induced negligible activation of peanut-sensitised basophils. PVX108 was safe and well tolerated in peanut-allergic adults. There were no treatment-related hypersensitivity events or AEs of clinical concern. The only events occurring more frequently in active than placebo were mild injection site reactions. Exploratory immunological analyses revealed a decrease in the ratio of ST2+ Th2A:CCR6+ Th17-like cells within the peanut-reactive Th pool which strengthened following treatment. CONCLUSION: This study supports the concept that PVX108 could provide a safe alternative to whole peanut immunotherapies and provides evidence of durable peanut-specific T-cell modulation. Translation of these findings to clinical efficacy in ongoing Phase 2 trials would provide important proof-of-concept for using peptides to treat food allergy.

Safety and immunopharmacology of ASP0892 in adults or adolescents with peanut allergy: two randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: New treatment options with improved safety and novel mechanisms of actions are needed for patients with peanut allergy. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of ASP0892, a peanut DNA vaccine, after intradermal (id) or intramuscular (im) administration in adult or adolescent patients with peanut allergy in two phase 1 studies. METHODS: ASP0892 or placebo was administered every 2 weeks for a total of 4 doses. The doses were 1 mg or 4 mg id or 4 mg im for adults, and 1 mg or 4 mg id for adolescents. Immunologic parameters were assessed longitudinally. RESULTS: Thirty-one adults (mean age 24.3 years, 17 males) received ASP0892 (9, 8, 8 patients for 1 mg id, 4 mg id or 4 mg im, respectively) or placebo (2 patients/group). Twenty adolescents (mean age 14.2 years, 11 males) received ASP0892 (8 patients/group) or placebo (2 patients/group). In both studies, the most common treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) was injection site pruritus. No deaths or treatment withdrawal were related to TEAEs. No serious TEAEs related to treatment were observed in adult or adolescent patients. ASP0892 treatment led to modest increases in allergen-specific IgG and/or IgG4 in adults (1 mg id, 4 mg im) and adolescents (1 mg id, 4 mg id). No improvements in clinical outcomes, including double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge, were found after ASP0892 treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In two phase 1 studies, ASP0892 was well tolerated with modest but not clinically relevant changes in immune responses. GOV IDENTIFIERS: NCT02851277, NCT03755713.

Preventive allergen immunotherapy with inhalant allergens in children.

The efficacy and safety of preventive allergen immunotherapy (pAIT) in children are currently under investigation. Here, we provide an overview of pAIT with respiratory allergens concerning the prevention of new sensitizations, allergic disease onset and progression as well as further immunomodulatory effects. Three databases were searched for clinical pAIT studies in children. Selected publications were reviewed for preventive outcomes according to prevention level (primary, secondary, and tertiary), allergen type, administration route, dose, and treatment duration. The primary prevention approach appears safe but showed no allergen-specific effect on new sensitizations. Secondary prevention seems feasible and may induce regulatory T cell-mediated immunotolerance. The number of studies at these prevention levels is limited. Tertiary prevention with grass and/or tree pollen-based pAIT has shown efficacy in preventing disease progression from allergic rhinitis/conjunctivitis to asthma. Data on tertiary pAIT with house dust mites and other allergen types are inconclusive. Subcutaneous and sublingual routes appear similarly effective, but head-to-head comparative paediatric studies are scarce. Additionally, there are fewer placebo-controlled studies. Nevertheless, immunomodulatory outcomes of pAIT are encouraging. Currently, limited but favourably suggestive evidence is available for preventing respiratory allergic diseases in children by pAIT. Primary and secondary prevention have potential and warrant further investigation through well-designed studies.

Nasal allergen-neutralizing antibodies correlate closely with tolerated intranasal allergen challenge dose following grass pollen subcutaneous immunotherapy in patients with local allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is defined by chronic nasal symptoms, absence of atopy, positive nasal allergen challenge (NAC) and a good response to subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT). We sought to investigate SCIT capacity to induce local and systemic blocking antibodies in LAR patients. METHODS: A RDBPC study of grass SCIT was performed, with participants receiving either SCIT (Group A; n = 10) or placebo (Group B; n = 14) in the first 6 months. Both groups subsequently received SCIT for 12 months at Year 2. Nasal and serum antibodies (IgG4, IgA1 and IgA2) and their inhibitory capacity were measured at multiple timepoints. RESULTS: The allergen concentration tolerated increased significantly at 6 months (Group A; p = .047) and 24 months (Group B; p = .049) compared with baseline and persisted until the end of the study. Induction of serum sIgA1 to Phl p was seen in Groups A and B, albeit the former being induced earlier (1.71-fold, p = .027). A significant induction in sIgG4 to Phl p 1 and 5 was observed in serum of Group A (p = .047 and p = .0039) and sIgA2 to Phl p in Group B (p = .032 and p = .0098) at 18 and 24 months, respectively. Both local and systemic blocking antibodies can inhibit allergen-IgE complexes binding to CD23 on B cells, and this correlated with level of allergen tolerated intra-nasally in Group A (serum; 𝜌 = -.47, p = .0006, nasal; 𝜌 = -.38, p = .0294). CONCLUSIONS: Grass pollen SCIT induced functional systemic blocking antibodies that correlate with the concentration of allergen tolerated following NAC, highlighting their potential as a biomarker of SCIT in LAR.

Real-Life Adherence to Venom Immunotherapy and Adrenaline Autoinjector.

INTRODUCTION: Venom immunotherapy (VIT) and adrenaline autoinjector (AAI) are important therapies in venom anaphylaxis. Adherence to VIT and AAI in patients with venom allergy has been evaluated in a few studies; however, solid data are lacking. This study aimed to evaluate VIT and AAI retrieval rates in patients with venom allergy with a special focus on adherence to treatment. Adherence was compared to subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) with inhalant allergens. METHODS: This was a retrospective study among patients registered for allergen immunotherapy at the Allergy Center, Odense University Hospital, Denmark, from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2014. Data on purchased immunotherapy and AAI were obtained from the Danish National Health Service Prescription Database. Multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze if allergen, age, sex, mastocytosis, and treatment site affected adherence. RESULTS: The 3-year adherence to VIT was 92.4% (244/264) compared to 87.4% (215/246) in SCIT with inhalant allergens, and the 5-year adherence to VIT was 84.1% (222/264) compared to 74.8% (184/246) in SCIT with inhalant allergens (p = 0.045). Females treated with VIT were more adherent than males (p = 0.45 [3-year], p = 0.008 [5-year]), whereas allergen, age, mastocytosis, or treatment site did not significantly affect adherence. Only 28.6% of patients (12/42) purchased an AAI after premature termination of VIT. CONCLUSION: In this register-based study, we found that the 3- and 5-year adherences to VIT and SCIT with inhalant allergens are at the upper end of the spectrum hitherto reported. Patients' 5-year adherence to VIT was higher than patients' 5-year adherence to SCIT with inhalant allergens. If VIT was prematurely terminated, less than 1/3 would have purchased an AAI.

One-Bag 8-Step Ferric Carboxymaltose Desensitization Protocol for Patients with a History of Hypersensitivity Reactions to Iron Preparations.

INTRODUCTION: Iron deficiency is the most common cause of anemia in both sexes, although it is more common in women. Intravenous (IV) iron replacement is preferred in patients who cannot tolerate oral treatment or when iron stores need to be replenished rapidly. In this study, we wanted to share the ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) desensitization protocol that we self-created and successfully applied. METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional study included patients with a history of hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to IV or oral iron replacement and patients who were planned to receive IV iron replacement but were referred to the allergy clinic because of have risk factors (atopic diseases, history of HSR to other drugs, high serum tryptase levels, etc.) for HSRs. Before desensitization, some of the patients underwent skin tests (skin prick test and intradermal test) with FCM, and the results were recorded. Skin tests were not performed in patients with a history of drug use (antihistamine, systemic steroid, omalizumab, etc.) that affected the results of skin tests. All patients underwent a one-bag 8-step desensitization protocol with 500 mg FCM and were observed for 2 h after desensitization. RESULTS: A total of 15 patients (14 females and 1 male) with a mean age of 41.13 ± 11.18 years were included in the study. When the patients were evaluated in terms of the risk of allergic reactions according to their clinical history, 8 patients had a history of anaphylaxis with iron preparations (FCM, n = 4; ferric hydroxide sucrose, n = 2; iron [II] glycine sulfate, n = 1; and iron [III] hydroxide polymaltose, n = 1), and 7 patients had a history of HSR other than anaphylaxis with iron preparations (urticaria, n = 6 [FCM, n = 2; iron (II) glycine sulfate, n = 2; and iron (III) hydroxide polymaltose, n = 2] and urticaria + angioedema [ferric hydroxide sucrose, n = 1]). Desensitization was successfully completed in all patients. No HSR was observed during or after the procedure in any of the patients. CONCLUSION: IV iron replacement is a very effective method, especially in cases where iron stores need to be replenished more rapidly. In patients with a history of iron HSR or at risk of developing HSR, replacement can be safely performed without an allergic reaction with successful desensitization protocols.

Transcriptomic changes associated with oral immunotherapy for food allergy.

This review summarizes recent advances in characterizing the transcriptional pathways associated with outcomes following Oral Immunotherapy. Recent technological advances including single-cell sequencing are transforming the ways in which the transcriptional landscape is understood. The application of these technologies is still in its infancy in food allergy but here we summarize current understanding of gene expression changes following oral immunotherapy for food allergy and specific signatures underpinning the different clinical outcomes of desensitization and remission (sustained unresponsiveness). T helper 2A cells have been identified as a cell type which correlates with disease activity and is modified by treatment. Molecular features at study entry may differentiate individuals who achieve more positive outcomes during OIT. Recent findings point to T cell anergy and Type 1 interferon pathways as potential mechanisms supporting redirection of the allergen-specific immune response away from allergy towards remission. Despite these developments in our understanding of immune mechanisms following OIT, there are still significant gaps. Additional studies examining immune signatures associated with long term and well-defined clinical outcomes are required to gain a more complete understanding of the pathways leading to remission of allergy, in order to optimize treatments and gain improved outcomes for patients.

Leveraging learning systems to improve quality and patient safety in allergen immunotherapy.

Adverse events occur in all fields of medicine, including allergy-immunology, in which allergen immunotherapy medical errors can cause significant harm. Although difficult to experience, such errors constitute opportunities for improvement. Identifying system vulnerabilities can allow resolution of latent errors before they become active problems. We review key aspects and frameworks of the medical error response, acknowledging the fundamental responsibility of clinical teams to learn from harm. Adverse event response comprises 4 major phases: (1) event recognition and reporting, (2) investigation (for which root cause analysis can be helpful), (3) improvement (inclusive of the plan-do-study-act cycle), and (4) communication and resolution. Throughout the process, clinician wellness must be maintained. Adverse event prevention should be prioritized, and a human factors engineering approach can be useful. Quality improvement tools and approaches complement one another and together offer a meaningful avenue for error recovery and prevention.

Oral food immunotherapy in patients with atopic dermatitis.

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is one of the main risk factors for infants in the development of food allergy. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) in early childhood has been found to be highly effective and safe in preschoolers with and without AD, especially in young infants. Delays in initiation of OIT in infants and children due to uncontrolled AD risk expansion of the number of foods children develop allergy to through unnecessary avoidance of multiple foods. Parents and caregivers may attribute eczema flares to OIT doses, which physicians usually ascribe to non-food triggers such as weather changes, psychological stress, and infection. There is a lack of published literature confirming OIT as a trigger of AD flares, and the degree to which OIT may be associated with AD flares needs to be further studied. We describe 8 case scenarios with varying degrees of AD flare before and during OIT. We propose management algorithms for children with preexisting concurrent AD and food allergy who are being considered for starting OIT and children with AD flares during OIT. Optimizing AD control strategies and providing adequate AD care education before starting OIT can reduce confusion for both parents and allergists if rashes arise during OIT, thus improving adherence to OIT.

Impact of COVID-19 on adverse reactions to subcutaneous specific immunotherapy in children:a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is a new infectious disease. To investigate whether severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection increases the adverse reactions of subcutaneous specific immunotherapy (SCIT) in children. METHODS: This study was conducted by collecting relevant data from children who underwent house dust mite SCIT from April 3, 2021, to March 18, 2023, including information on the time of COVID-19 infection, symptoms, and adverse reactions after each allergen injection. A mixed effects model was used to analyze the changes in adverse reactions before and after the COVID-19 infection. RESULTS: Among the records of adverse reactions from 2658 injections in 123 children who underwent SCIT, the overall adverse reaction rate before COVID-19 infection was 39.8% and 30.0% after COVID-19 infection. Compared with pre-infection with COVID-19, the risks of overall adverse reactions, local adverse reactions, and systemic adverse reactions of immunotherapy after COVID-19 infection were reduced (odds ratio [OR] = 0.24, 0.31, and 0.28, all P < 0.05). Among the local adverse reactions, the incidence of the unvaccinated group was the highest (15.3% vs. 7.1%). The incidence of overall and local adverse reactions to SCIT decreased in 2-vaccinated COVID-19 recipients (OR = 0.29-0.31, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In children, SARS-CoV-2 infection does not increase the incidence of adverse reactions to SCIT. This finding can provide a basis for the implementation of allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) during the COVID-19 pandemic.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Eosinophilic esophagitis as a side-effect of allergen immunotherapy: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Summary: Background. Sensitization to food and airborne allergens is common in the majority of patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Although there is not a direct cause-effect relationship of IgE-mediated allergy with the pathogenesis of EoE, there is a growing evidence that oral desensitization to food and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) may induce the development of EoE as an adverse effect. As part of the 'EoE and Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT)' Task Force funded by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), a systematic approach will be followed to review the evidence from the published scientific literature on the development of EoE in children and adults under any type of AIT. Methods. This systematic review will be carried out following the PRISMA statement guidelines. Studies will be assessed for inclusion in the review according to the Population-Interventions-Comparators-Outcomes (PICO) criteria. Results. Expected outcomes will provide evidence on the AIT-EoE development connection. Conclusions. The findings from this review will be used as a reference to provide useful guidelines for physicians treating patients with EoE and/or are practicing AIT.

Incorporating genetics in identifying peanut allergy risk and tailoring allergen immunotherapy: A perspective on the genetic findings from the LEAP trial.

Examining the genetics of peanut allergy (PA) in the context of clinical trial interventions and outcomes provides an opportunity to not only understand gene-environment interactions for PA risk but to also understand the benefit of allergen immunotherapy. A consistent theme in the genetics of food allergy is that in keeping with the dual allergen exposure hypothesis, barrier- and immune-related genes are most commonly implicated in food allergy and tolerance. With a focus on PA, we review how genetic risk factors across 3 genes (FLG, MALT1, and HLA-DQA1) have helped delineate distinct allergic characteristics and outcomes in the context of environmental interventions in the Learning Early about Peanut Allergy (LEAP) study and other clinical trials. We specifically consider and present a framework for genetic risk prediction for the development of PA and discuss how genetics, age, and oral consumption intertwine to predict PA outcome. Although there is some promise in this proposed framework, a better understanding of the mechanistic pathways by which PA develops and persists is needed to develop targeted therapeutics for established disease. Only by understanding the mechanisms by which PA develops, persists, and resolves can we identify adjuvants to oral immunotherapy to make older children and adults immunologically similar to their younger, more malleable counterparts and thus more likely to achieve long-term tolerance.

Open-label study of the efficacy, safety, and durability of peanut sublingual immunotherapy in peanut-allergic children.

BACKGROUND: Studies on the efficacy of peanut sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) are limited. The durability of desensitization after SLIT has not been well described. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 4-mg peanut SLIT and persistence of desensitization after SLIT discontinuation. METHODS: Challenge-proven peanut-allergic 1- to 11-year-old children were treated with open-label 4-mg peanut SLIT for 48 months. Desensitization after peanut SLIT was assessed by a 5000-mg double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC). A novel randomly assigned avoidance period of 1 to 17 weeks was followed by the DBPCFC. Skin prick test results immunoglobulin levels, basophil activation test results, TH1, TH2, and IL-10 cytokines were measured longitudinally. Safety was assessed through patient-reported home diaries. RESULTS: Fifty-four participants were enrolled and 47 (87%) completed peanut SLIT and the 48-month DBPCFC per protocol. The mean successfully consumed dose (SCD) during the DBPCFC increased from 48 to 2723 mg of peanut protein after SLIT (P < .0001), with 70% achieving clinically significant desensitization (SCD > 800 mg) and 36% achieving full desensitization (SCD = 5000 mg). Modeled median time to loss of clinically significant desensitization was 22 weeks. Peanut skin prick test; peanut-specific IgE, IgG4, and IgG4/IgE ratio; and peanut-stimulated basophil activation test, IL-4, IL-5, IL-13, IFN-γ, and IL-10 changed significantly compared with baseline, with changes seen as early as 6 months. Median rate of reaction per dose was 0.5%, with transient oropharyngeal itching being the most common, and there were no dosing symptoms requiring epinephrine. CONCLUSIONS: In this open-label, prospective study, peanut SLIT was safe and induced clinically significant desensitization in most of the children, lasting more than 17 weeks after discontinuation of therapy.

Allergen immunotherapy for atopic dermatitis: Systematic review and meta-analysis of benefits and harms.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD, eczema) is driven by a combination of skin barrier defects, immune dysregulation, and extrinsic stimuli such as allergens, irritants, and microbes. The role of environmental allergens (aeroallergens) in triggering AD remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: We systematically synthesized evidence regarding the benefits and harms of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) for AD. METHODS: As part of the 2022 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology/American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD Guideline update, we searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, LILACS, Global Resource for Eczema Trials, and Web of Science databases from inception to December 2021 for randomized controlled trials comparing subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT), sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), and/or no AIT (placebo or standard care) for guideline panel-defined patient-important outcomes: AD severity, itch, AD-related quality of life (QoL), flares, and adverse events. Raters independently screened, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias in duplicate. We synthesized intervention effects using frequentist and Bayesian random-effects models. The GRADE approach determined the quality of evidence. RESULTS: Twenty-three randomized controlled trials including 1957 adult and pediatric patients sensitized primarily to house dust mite showed that add-on SCIT and SLIT have similar relative and absolute effects and likely result in important improvements in AD severity, defined as a 50% reduction in SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (risk ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.53 [1.31-1.78]; 26% vs 40%, absolute difference 14%) and QoL, defined as an improvement in Dermatology Life Quality Index by 4 points or more (risk ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.44 [1.03-2.01]; 39% vs 56%, absolute difference 17%; both outcomes moderate certainty). Both routes of AIT increased adverse events (risk ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.61 [1.44-1.79]; 66% with SCIT vs 41% with placebo; 13% with SLIT vs 8% with placebo; high certainty). AIT's effect on sleep disturbance and eczema flares was very uncertain. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were consistent with the main findings. CONCLUSIONS: SCIT and SLIT to aeroallergens, particularly house dust mite, can similarly and importantly improve AD severity and QoL. SCIT increases adverse effects more than SLIT. These findings support a multidisciplinary and shared decision-making approach to optimally managing AD.