Omalizumab for the Treatment of Multiple Food Allergies.

BACKGROUND: Food allergies are common and are associated with substantial morbidity; the only approved treatment is oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy. METHODS: In this trial, we assessed whether omalizumab, a monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, would be effective and safe as monotherapy in patients with multiple food allergies. Persons 1 to 55 years of age who were allergic to peanuts and at least two other trial-specified foods (cashew, milk, egg, walnut, wheat, and hazelnut) were screened. Inclusion required a reaction to a food challenge of 100 mg or less of peanut protein and 300 mg or less of the two other foods. Participants were randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive omalizumab or placebo administered subcutaneously (with the dose based on weight and IgE levels) every 2 to 4 weeks for 16 to 20 weeks, after which the challenges were repeated. The primary end point was ingestion of peanut protein in a single dose of 600 mg or more without dose-limiting symptoms. The three key secondary end points were the consumption of cashew, of milk, and of egg in single doses of at least 1000 mg each without dose-limiting symptoms. The first 60 participants (59 of whom were children or adolescents) who completed this first stage were enrolled in a 24-week open-label extension. RESULTS: Of the 462 persons who were screened, 180 underwent randomization. The analysis population consisted of the 177 children and adolescents (1 to 17 years of age). A total of 79 of the 118 participants (67%) receiving omalizumab met the primary end-point criteria, as compared with 4 of the 59 participants (7%) receiving placebo (P<0.001). Results for the key secondary end points were consistent with those of the primary end point (cashew, 41% vs. 3%; milk, 66% vs. 10%; egg, 67% vs. 0%; P<0.001 for all comparisons). Safety end points did not differ between the groups, aside from more injection-site reactions in the omalizumab group. CONCLUSIONS: In persons as young as 1 year of age with multiple food allergies, omalizumab treatment for 16 weeks was superior to placebo in increasing the reaction threshold for peanut and other common food allergens. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03881696.).

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.).

Esophageal Remodeling Correlates With Eating Behaviors in Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

INTRODUCTION: There are limited data characterizing eating habits among pediatric patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We compared eating behaviors in pediatric patients with EoE with healthy controls and assessed the degree of correlation with symptomatology, endoscopic and histologic findings, and esophageal distensibility. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, observational study where subjects consumed 4 food textures (puree, soft solid, chewable, and hard solid) and were scored for eating behaviors including number of chews per bite, sips of fluid per food, and consumption time. Symptomatic, endoscopic, histologic, and esophageal distensibility data were collected for case subjects. RESULTS: Twenty-seven case subjects and 25 healthy controls were enrolled in our study (mean age 11.0 years, 63.5% male). Compared with healthy controls, pediatric patients with EoE demonstrated more chews per bite with soft solid (13.6 vs 9.1, P = 0.031), chewable (14.7 vs 10.7, P = 0.047), and hard solid foods (19.0 vs 12.8, P = 0.037). Patients with EoE also demonstrated increased consumption time with soft solid (94.7 vs 58.3 seconds, P = 0.002), chewable (90.0 vs 65.1 seconds, P = 0.005), and hard solid foods (114.1 vs 76.4 seconds, P = 0.034) when compared with healthy controls. Subgroup analysis based on disease status showed no statistically significant differences in eating behaviors between active and inactive EoE. Total endoscopic reference score positively correlated with consumption time ( r = 0.53, P = 0.008) and number of chews ( r = 0.45, P = 0.027) for chewable foods and with number of chews ( r = 0.44, P = 0.043) for hard solid foods. Increased consumption time correlated with increased eosinophil count ( r = 0.42, P = 0.050) and decreased esophageal distensibility ( r = -0.82, P < 0.0001). DISCUSSION: Altered eating behaviors including increased chewing and increased consumption time can be seen in pediatric patients with EoE, can persist despite histologic remission, and may be driven by changes in esophageal distensibility.

Improvement in eosinophilic esophagitis when using dupilumab for other indications or compassionate use.

BACKGROUND: Dupilumab has been approved to treat atopic dermatitis, asthma, and nasal polyps and is in active clinical trials for the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Given its shared immunopathology, we hypothesized that EoE symptoms and inflammation would improve when dupilumab therapy was used for other allergic indications. OBJECTIVE: To measure the clinical and histologic response in EoE to dupilumab when treating other atopic diseases. METHODS: We completed a retrospective chart review of all patients at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and Rady Children Hospital who were prescribed dupilumab for atopic dermatitis, asthma, or nasal polyps and had a concomitant clinical diagnosis of EoE. Demographic information along with histology, symptom scores, medications, and diet information were collected. Response to dupilumab was evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 45 patients were identified. Of which, 11 patients were prescribed dupilumab for asthma, 27 for atopic dermatitis, 3 for nasal polyps, and 4 for compassionate use for EoE. There was no follow-up data for 8 patients. Follow-up histology was available for 26 patients: 22 of 26 had less than 6 eosinophils per high power field after the initiation of dupilumab with significant improvement (pre: 52.9 + 35.1 to post: 4.5 + 10.9 eosinophils/high power field, P < .005). A total of 28 patients had improvement of symptoms, with 24 patients reporting complete resolution of symptoms after dupilumab initiation. Reductions in EoE treatment medications (swallowed steroids, proton pump inhibitors) or expansion of diet occurred in 29 patients treated with dupilumab. CONCLUSION: Dupilumab therapy initiated for atopic disease effectively induces symptomatic and histologic remission of esophageal disease and reduces the need for EoE-directed therapy in patients with concomitant EoE.

Food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome oral food challenge: Time for a change?

OBJECTIVE: Food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES) is typically diagnosed based on a characteristic clinical history; however, an oral food challenge (OFC) may be necessary to confirm the diagnosis or evaluate for the development of tolerance. FPIES OFC methods vary globally, and there is no universally agreed upon protocol. The objective of this review is to summarize reported FPIES OFC approaches and consider unmet needs in diagnosing and managing FPIES. DATA SOURCES: PubMed database was searched using the keywords food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome, oral food challenge, cow milk allergy, food allergy, non-immunoglobulin E-mediated food allergy and FPIES. STUDY SELECTIONS: Primary and review articles were selected based on relevance to the diagnosis of FPIES and the FPIES OFC. RESULTS: We reviewed the history of FPIES and the evolution and variations in the FPIES OFC. A summary of current literature suggests that most patients with FPIES will react with 25% to 33% of a standard serving of the challenged food, there is little benefit to offering a divided dose challenge unless there is suspicion of specific immunoglobulin E to the food being challenged, reactions typically appear within 1 to 4 hours of ingestion, and reactions during OFC rarely result in emergency department or intensive care unit admission. CONCLUSION: International standardization in the FPIES OFC approach is necessary with particular attention to specific dose administration across challenged foods, timing between the patient's reaction and offered OFC to verify tolerance, patient safety considerations before the OFC, and identification of characteristics that would indicate home reintroduction is appropriate.

Long-term, open-label extension study of the efficacy and safety of epicutaneous immunotherapy for peanut allergy in children: PEOPLE 3-year results.

BACKGROUND: The PEPITES (Peanut EPIT Efficacy and Safety) trial, a 12-month randomized controlled study of children with peanut allergy and 4 to 11 years old, previously reported the safety and efficacy of epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) for peanut allergy (250 µg, daily epicutaneous peanut protein; DBV712 250 µg). OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess interim safety and efficacy of an additional 2 years of EPIT from the ongoing (5-year treatment) PEOPLE (PEPITES Open-Label Extension) study. METHODS: Subjects who completed PEPITES were offered enrollment in PEOPLE. Following an additional 2 years of daily DBV712 250 µg, subjects who had received DBV712 250 µg in PEPITES underwent month-36 double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge with an optional month-38 sustained unresponsiveness assessment. RESULTS: Of 213 eligible subjects who had received DBV712 250 µg in PEPITES, 198 (93%) entered PEOPLE, of whom 141 (71%) had assessable double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge at month 36. At month 36, 51.8% of subjects (73 of 141) reached an eliciting dose of ≥1000 mg, compared with 40.4% (57 of 141) at month 12; 75.9% (107 of 141) demonstrated increased eliciting dose compared with baseline; and 13.5% (19 of 141) tolerated the full double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge of 5444 mg. Median cumulative reactive dose increased from 144 to 944 mg. Eighteen subjects underwent an optional sustained unresponsiveness assessment; 14 of those (77.8%) maintained an eliciting dose of ≥1000 mg at month 38. Local patch-site skin reactions were common but decreased over time. There was no treatment-related epinephrine use in years 2 or 3. Compliance was high (96.9%), and withdrawals due to treatment-related adverse events were low (1%). CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that daily EPIT treatment for peanut allergy beyond 1 year leads to continued response from a well-tolerated, simple-to-use regimen.

Efficacy of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy in Children With Milk-Induced Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is caused by an immune response to specific food allergens. There are no approved therapies beyond avoidance of the allergen(s) or treatment of inflammation. Epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) reduces features of eosinophilic gastrointestinal disease in mice and pigs. We performed randomized, placebo-controlled study to determine the safety and efficacy of EPIT with Viaskin milk in children with milk-induced EoE. METHODS: In a double-blind study, 20 children (4-17 years old) with milk-induced EoE were randomly assigned to groups given EPIT with Viaskin milk (n = 15) or placebo (n = 5) for 9 months during a milk-free period, followed by milk-containing diet for 2 months with EPIT. Then, subjects underwent upper endoscopy analysis, biopsies were collected, and maximum esophageal eosinophil counts were determined and was the primary endpoint. After upper endoscopy, patients were given open-label EPIT for 11 months (open-label phase). The subjects were allowed to consume milk if they had maximum values of fewer than 10 eosinophils/high-power field (eos/hpf); otherwise, they remained on a milk-free diet until the last 2 months of the open-label phase. RESULTS: In the intent to treat population, there was no significant difference between the Viaskin milk group in mean eos/hpf (50.1 ± 43.97 eos/hpf) vs the placebo group (48.20 ± 56.98 eos/hpf). However, in the per-protocol population (7 patients given Viaskin milk and 2 patients given placebo), patients given Viaskin milk patients had a significantly lower mean eos/hpf count (25.57 ± 31.19) than patients given placebo (95.00 ± 63.64) (p = .038). At the end of the open-label phase, 9 of 19 evaluable subjects had mean values of fewer than 15 eos/hpf (47% response). The number of adverse events did not differ significantly between the Viaskin milk and placebo groups; there was 1 serious adverse event in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: In a pilot study of pediatric patients with EoE given EPIT with Viaskin milk or placebo for 11 months, we found no significant difference between groups for the maximum eosinophil count at the end of the study. However, findings from a per-protocol analysis indicate that Viaskin milk can reduce eos/hpf. At study completion, 47% of patients who continued open-label Viaskin milk for an additional 11 months had mean values of fewer than 15 eos/hpf. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02579876.

Food avoidance strategies in eosinophilic oesophagitis.

Eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) is a chronic disease associated with significant morbidity that can result in permanent fibrosis and stricture formation. Given the complexity, a multidisciplinary approach is recommended to manage these patients. In the majority of children with EoE not responsive to proton-pump inhibitor (PPI), inflammation is driven by sensitivity to foods and treatment with an elimination diet can be effective. Foods most commonly identified to trigger EoE in children are milk and wheat, but egg, soy, meats and grains can also be triggers. Foods can be eliminated using a step-down or step-up approach. If the goal is to achieve quick remission, elemental diet or six food elimination diets are the most effective. A step-up approach starting from a 1-2 food elimination diet and increasing the number of foods based on a personalized dietary approach is recommended if the goal is to achieve remission using the least number of endoscopies and with increased acceptability to the patient. Children with EoE on elimination diets require frequent monitoring of growth and nutrition, as well as screening for symptoms of EoE, allergy and mindfulness regarding psychosocial impact of chronic disease on the family and child. Current research focused on tools to select patients who mostly will benefit from dietary treatment, identify relevant food allergens, obtain oesophageal tissue non-invasively and induce tolerance will greatly improve the treatment of EoE.

Effect of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy vs Placebo on Reaction to Peanut Protein Ingestion Among Children With Peanut Allergy: The PEPITES Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: There are currently no approved treatments for peanut allergy. Objective: To assess the efficacy and adverse events of epicutaneous immunotherapy with a peanut patch among peanut-allergic children. Design, Setting, and Participants: Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted at 31 sites in 5 countries between January 8, 2016, and August 18, 2017. Participants included peanut-allergic children (aged 4-11 years [n = 356] without a history of a severe anaphylactic reaction) developing objective symptoms during a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge at an eliciting dose of 300 mg or less of peanut protein. Interventions: Daily treatment with peanut patch containing either 250 µg of peanut protein (n = 238) or placebo (n = 118) for 12 months. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the percentage difference in responders between the peanut patch and placebo patch based on eliciting dose (highest dose at which objective signs/symptoms of an immediate hypersensitivity reaction developed) determined by food challenges at baseline and month 12. Participants with baseline eliciting dose of 10 mg or less were responders if the posttreatment eliciting dose was 300 mg or more; participants with baseline eliciting dose greater than 10 to 300 mg were responders if the posttreatment eliciting dose was 1000 mg or more. A threshold of 15% or more on the lower bound of a 95% CI around responder rate difference was prespecified to determine a positive trial result. Adverse event evaluation included collection of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Results: Among 356 participants randomized (median age, 7 years; 61.2% male), 89.9% completed the trial; the mean treatment adherence was 98.5%. The responder rate was 35.3% with peanut-patch treatment vs 13.6% with placebo (difference, 21.7% [95% CI, 12.4%-29.8%; P < .001]). The prespecified lower bound of the CI threshold was not met. TEAEs, primarily patch application site reactions, occurred in 95.4% and 89% of active and placebo groups, respectively. The all-causes rate of discontinuation was 10.5% in the peanut-patch group vs 9.3% in the placebo group. Conclusions and Relevance: Among peanut-allergic children aged 4 to 11 years, the percentage difference in responders at 12 months with the 250-µg peanut-patch therapy vs placebo was 21.7% and was statistically significant, but did not meet the prespecified lower bound of the confidence interval criterion for a positive trial result. The clinical relevance of not meeting this lower bound of the confidence interval with respect to the treatment of peanut-allergic children with epicutaneous immunotherapy remains to be determined. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02636699.

Improving allergy office scheduling increases patient follow up and reduces asthma readmission after pediatric asthma hospitalization.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric asthma is a major contributor to emergency room utilization and hospital readmission rates. OBJECTIVE: To develop an allergy department‒based intervention to improve follow-up appointment scheduling processes for pediatric asthma patients after discharge for asthma exacerbation. METHODS: This quality improvement study was conducted in the allergy clinic of an urban, tertiary children's hospital. Children receiving subspecialty allergy care for asthma were included into the intervention group during the intervention period. The quality improvement intervention consisted of 3 attempts by telephone to reach the family to schedule the follow-up appointment. If this was unsuccessful or if the appointment was not kept, then a reminder letter was sent to the family. The primary outcome of interest in this study was the percent of postdischarge follow-up appointments scheduled within 30 days of discharge. Secondary outcomes measured were the percent of allergy appointments attended within 30 days of discharge and the 30-day hospital readmission rate. RESULTS: Demographics did not differ significantly between the intervention and baseline preintervention year. The initial baseline scheduled allergy follow-up visit rate was 48.8 ± 13.3% of patients discharged per month. This increased to an overall rate of 75.7 ± 20.1% patients scheduling allergy follow-up within 30 days of discharge during the intervention year. We also observed a significant increase in attended allergy visits 30 days postdischarge from 35.5 ± 15.6% in year 1 to 53.9 ± 25.5% during the intervention year and a significant decrease in the 30-day readmission rate on the allergy service. CONCLUSION: These data suggests that minor changes in allergy practice organization can significantly affect posthospitalization follow-up rates and decrease asthma readmission rates.

Elevated expression of activated TH2 cells and milk-specific TH2 cells in milk-induced eosinophilic esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an allergic inflammatory disease that is triggered by food allergens and characterized by progressive esophageal dysfunction. Esophageal biopsy specimens are characterized by eosinophilia and expression of TH2 cytokines. OBJECTIVE: To ascertain whether TH2 cells can exist in the peripheral blood in patients with milk-induced EoE. METHODS: Peripheral blood mononuclear cells from 20 children with milk-induced EoE were collected during active EoE (EoE-A) while consuming milk and inactive EoE (EoE-I) while not consuming milk, and 8 healthy patients without EoE were used as controls. The samples were analyzed for T-cell phenotype, including intracellular cytokines before and after incubation with milk antigens and assessed by flow cytometry. RESULTS: We found a significant increase in CD4+ TH2 cells in the peripheral blood of patients with EoE-A compared with the controls. Furthermore, we observed a significant mean (SD) increase in the activation marker of CD154+ T cells (0.17% [0.047%]) in patients with EoE-A compared with control patients (0.034% [0.007%]) and EoE-I (0.025% [0.008]). These CD4+ T cells expressed significantly increase levels of TH2 cytokines (interleukins 4, 5, and 13) compared with the EoE-I and control groups. CD3+CD4+CD154+IL-5+ cells were significantly increased by milk antigens in both milk-induced EoE-A (0.050% [0.008%] to 0.079% [0.017%]) and EoE-I (0.0045% [0.002%] to 0.014% [0.008%]) compared with the controls (0.008% [0.003%] to 0.003% [0.001%]). CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that in EoE peripheral T cells have specific activation to milk allergens.

Medication contaminants as a potential cause of anaphylaxis to vincristine.

Vincristine (VCR) is a vinca alkaloid and common chemotherapeutic that is used to treat multiple pediatric and adult malignancies. Despite its common use, cases of anaphylaxis to VCR are rare and typically isolated to a single individual. We report a series of eight patients with adverse reactions to VCR over the course of 11 months at a single institution, four of which progressed to anaphylaxis and one of which resulted in cardiac arrest. Mass spectrometry analysis of medication lots was performed to test for possible contaminant(s). Our findings highlight the risk of anaphylaxis during therapy with VCR.

International consensus guidelines for the diagnosis and management of food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome: Executive summary-Workgroup Report of the Adverse Reactions to Foods Committee, American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology.

Food protein-induced enterocolitis (FPIES) is a non-IgE cell- mediated food allergy that can be severe and lead to shock. Despite the potential seriousness of reactions, awareness of FPIES is low; high-quality studies providing insight into the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management are lacking; and clinical outcomes are poorly established. This consensus document is the result of work done by an international workgroup convened through the Adverse Reactions to Foods Committee of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology and the International FPIES Association advocacy group. These are the first international evidence-based guidelines to improve the diagnosis and management of patients with FPIES. Research on prevalence, pathophysiology, diagnostic markers, and future treatments is necessary to improve the care of patients with FPIES. These guidelines will be updated periodically as more evidence becomes available.

The immune deficiency of chromosome 22q11.2 deletion syndrome.

The syndrome originally described by Dr. Angelo DiGeorge had immunodeficiency as a central component. When a 22q11.2 deletion was identified as the cause in the majority of patients with DiGeorge syndrome, the clinical features of 22q11.2 deletion syndrome became so expansive that the immunodeficiency became less prominent in our thinking about the syndrome. This review will focus on the immune system and the changes in our understanding over the past 50 years. Initially characterized as a pure defect in T cell development, we now appreciate that many of the clinical features related to the immunodeficiency are well downstream of the limitation imposed by a small thymus. Dysfunctional B cells presumed to be secondary to compromised T cell help, issues related to T cell exhaustion, and high rates of atopy and autoimmunity are aspects of management that require consideration for optimal clinical care and for designing a cogent monitoring approach. New data on atopy are presented to further demonstrate the association.

Effect of Varying Doses of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy vs Placebo on Reaction to Peanut Protein Exposure Among Patients With Peanut Sensitivity: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Epicutaneous immunotherapy may have potential for treating peanut allergy but has been assessed only in preclinical and early human trials. Objective: To determine the optimal dose, adverse events (AEs), and efficacy of a peanut patch for peanut allergy treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: Phase 2b double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging trial of a peanut patch in peanut-allergic patients (6-55 years) from 22 centers, with a 2-year, open-label extension (July 31, 2012-July 31, 2014; extension completed September 29, 2016). Patients (n = 221) had peanut sensitivity and positive double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges to an eliciting dose of 300 mg or less of peanut protein. Interventions: Randomly assigned patients (1:1:1:1) received an epicutaneous peanut patch containing 50 µg (n = 53), 100 µg (n = 56), or 250 µg (n = 56) of peanut protein or a placebo patch (n = 56). Following daily patch application for 12 months, patients underwent a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge to establish changes in eliciting dose. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary efficacy end point was percentage of treatment responders (eliciting dose: ≥10-times increase and/or reaching ≥1000 mg of peanut protein) in each group vs placebo patch after 12 months. Secondary end points included percentage of responders by age strata and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Results: Of 221 patients randomized (median age, 11 years [quartile 1, quartile 3: 8, 16]; 37.6% female), 93.7% completed the trial. A significant absolute difference in response rates was observed at month 12 between the 250-µg (n = 28; 50.0%) and placebo (n = 14; 25.0%) patches (difference, 25.0%; 95% CI, 7.7%-42.3%; P = .01). No significant difference was seen between the placebo patch vs the 100-µg patch. Because of statistical testing hierarchical rules, the 50-µg patch was not compared with placebo. Interaction by age group was only significant for the 250-µg patch (P = .04). In the 6- to 11-year stratum, the response rate difference between the 250-µg (n = 15; 53.6%) and placebo (n = 6; 19.4%) patches was 34.2% (95% CI, 11.1%-57.3%; P = .008); adolescents/adults showed no difference between the 250-µg (n = 13; 46.4%) and placebo (n = 8; 32.0%) patches: 14.4% (95% CI, -11.6% to 40.4%; P = .40). No dose-related serious AEs were observed. The percentage of patients with 1 or more TEAEs (largely local skin reactions) was similar across all groups in year 1: 50-µg patch = 100%, 100-µg patch = 98.2%, 250-µg patch = 100%, and placebo patch = 92.9%. The overall median adherence was 97.6% after 1 year; the dropout rate for treatment-related AEs was 0.9%. Conclusions and Relevance: In this dose-ranging trial of peanut-allergic patients, the 250-µg peanut patch resulted in significant treatment response vs placebo patch following 12 months of therapy. These findings warrant a phase 3 trial. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01675882.