ABSTRACT
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.).
Subject(s)
Anti-Allergic Agents , Desensitization, Immunologic , Food Hypersensitivity , Omalizumab , Adolescent , Child , Humans , Infant , Allergens/adverse effects , Arachis/adverse effects , Desensitization, Immunologic/methods , Food Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Food Hypersensitivity/drug therapy , Food Hypersensitivity/immunology , Food Hypersensitivity/therapy , Omalizumab/adverse effects , Omalizumab/therapeutic use , Peanut Hypersensitivity/drug therapy , Peanut Hypersensitivity/immunology , Peanut Hypersensitivity/therapy , Anti-Allergic Agents/administration & dosage , Anti-Allergic Agents/therapeutic use , Child, Preschool , Young Adult , Adult , Middle AgedABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Over the past two decades, the involvement of a Pharmacist Scientist in clinical settings has improved patient safety, decreased medication errors, and enabled successful conduct of clinical trials and faster product development [1-5]. The impact of an oversight by a Pharmacist Scientist on clinical trial performance and execution in terms of Pharmacy and Investigational Product (IP)-related deviations has not been evaluated by a sponsor. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study conducted by the Division of Allergy, Immunology and Transplantation (DAIT), National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). We assessed the association of the number of Pharmacy and Investigational Product (IP)-related deviations with Pharmacist oversight and use of DAIT Pharmacy/ Pharmaceutical services in two groups: Intervention Group (IG) and the Control Group (CG). RESULTS: We evaluated monitoring data from 116 studies conducted between 2006 through 2020. Forty-one eligible clinical trials were included and analyzed: 13 trials were in the IG with Pharmacist oversight and use of Pharmacy Services; 28 trials were in the CG with no Pharmacist oversight and zero to partial use DAIT Pharmacy/ Pharmaceutical Services. The evaluation revealed the expected risk of having a pharmacy and IP-related deviations were 2.94 times higher (95% CI 1.28, 6.67, = 0.01) in trials not having Pharmacist oversight and zero to partial use of Pharmaceutical/ Pharmacy Program services. This significant finding was associated with having Pharmacist oversight when adjusting for study size (# of sites and patients needed), anticipated study duration, design complexity, and whether recruitment was completed or not. CONCLUSION: We found a statistically significant association between Pharmacist Scientist involvement and oversight from protocol development to study execution and a reduction in Pharmacy and IP-related deviations.
