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.).

Baked Milk and Baked Egg Survey: A Work Group Report of the AAAAI Adverse Reactions to Foods Committee.

Most milk- and egg-allergic children can tolerate milk and egg in baked forms. Some allergists have extended the use of baked milk (BM) and baked egg (BE) to advocating for the stepwise introduction of small amounts of BM and BE to children who are reactive to larger amounts of BM and BE. Little is known about the practice of introducing BM and BE and existing barriers to this approach. The purpose of this study was to gather a current assessment of the implementation of BM and BE oral food challenges and diets for milk- and egg-allergic children. We conducted an electronic survey of North American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology members offering BM and BE introduction in 2021. The response rate was 10.1% of distributed surveys (72 of 711). Surveyed allergists had a similar approach to both BM and BE introduction. Demographic features of time in practice and region of practice were significantly associated with the odds of introducing BM and BE. A wide variety of tests and clinical features guided decisions. Some allergists determined BM and BE to be appropriate for home introduction and offered this for BM and BE more often than other foods. The use of BM and BE as a food for oral immunotherapy was endorsed by almost half of respondents. Less time in practice was the most significant factor associated with offering this approach. Published recipes were used and written information was widely provided to patients by most allergists. The wide practice variabilities reveal a need for more structured guidance about oral food challenges, in-office versus home procedures, and patient education.

Retail Food Equivalents for Post-Oral Immunotherapy Dosing in the Omalizumab as Monotherapy and as Adjunct Therapy to Multi-Allergen Oral Immunotherapy in Food-Allergic Children and Adults (OUtMATCH) Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with food allergy may be advised to introduce specific foods into their diets, both to increase tolerance gradually and as next steps after completing oral immunotherapy or other therapeutic interventions. However, the safe use of retail foods depends on the ability to establish the specific allergen protein content of these foods. OBJECTIVE: To develop a systematic approach to estimate the protein content of peanut, milk, egg, wheat, cashew, hazelnut, and walnut in a variety of retail food equivalents for each allergen and associated patient education materials. METHOD: We created an algorithm that used a multistep process with information from product food labels, nutrient databases, independent weighing and measuring of foods, and information provided by manufacturers, including certificates of analysis, and e-mail communication to estimate the allergen protein content of multiple retail foods for each of seven allergens. Once a variety of retail food equivalents for each allergen and allergen serving size was determined, we developed participant education handouts, which were reviewed by study teams at 10 food allergy centers, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and the Consortium for Food Allergy Research coordinating center. After 1 year of use, multiple queries were addressed and the retail food equivalents and educational materials were reviewed and edited. RESULTS: We identified a variety of retail food equivalents for seven allergens at six serving sizes, and created 48 unique patient education materials. CONCLUSION: Our results provide extensive guidance on a variety of retail equivalents for seven foods, and a method to estimate retail food protein equivalents systematically with ongoing reassessment.

Updating the CoFAR Grading Scale for Systemic Allergic Reactions in Food Allergy.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy is promising as an efficacious treatment for food allergy. Other food allergy treatments are also under development. However, adverse allergic events during treatment, as well as during oral food challenges, are common and reporting is not standardized. OBJECTIVE: A more nuanced grading scale is needed to create a comprehensive and universal system to categorize adverse events and their severity for food allergy clinical trials. METHODS: Starting with the 2012 Consortium for Food Allergy Research (CoFAR) Grading Scale and the World Allergy Organization Grading System, we developed the CoFAR Grading Scale for Systemic Allergic Reactions, Version 3.0, in collaboration with industry partners with expert opinion. RESULTS: The revised CoFAR Grading Scale for Systemic Allergic Reactions has 5 levels of increasing severity, ranging from generalized urticaria, localized angioedema, rhinitis, and abdominal pain (grade 1) to death (grade 5). Systemic reactions are further categorized within each grade by relevant organ system. Mild, single-system reactions are differentiated from mild, multisystem reactions. Lower respiratory tract symptoms are graded on the basis of response to therapy; those that are refractory to standard treatment (eg, requiring >3 doses of intramuscular epinephrine, continuous intravenous epinephrine infusion, and continuous albuterol nebulization) and respiratory compromise requiring mechanical ventilation are classified as grade 4, life-threatening reactions. CONCLUSIONS: Universal and consistent use of the revised CoFAR Grading Scale beyond the CoFAR centers would allow for better data aggregation and safety comparisons in clinical trials for food allergy.

Food Insecurity in the Food Allergic Population: A Work Group Report of the AAAAI Adverse Reactions to Foods Committee.

Food allergies affect 32 million Americans. Restricted diets due to food allergies can be difficult to maintain especially when the household is food insecure. Food insecurity is defined as the inability to acquire food for household members due to insufficient money or resources for food. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused many people to face food insecurity for the first time with Latinx, Native American, and Black communities disproportionately affected. Because of the increase in food insecurity, this work group developed a survey regarding food insecurity screening. This survey was sent out to a random sample of American Academy of Allergy Asthma & Immunology members to assess food insecurity knowledge and practices. The majority of survey participants did not routinely screen their patients for food insecurity. The biggest barrier identified to screening was lack of knowledge of how to perform a screen and resources available when a patient screened positive. This work group report provides guidance on how to implement and perform a food insecurity screen, including federal resources and assistance programs.

Safety of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy in Peanut-Allergic Children: REALISE Randomized Clinical Trial Results.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options for peanut allergy are limited. In previous clinical trials, epicutaneous immunotherapy with a patch containing 250-µg peanut protein (Viaskin Peanut 250 µg [VP250]) was well tolerated and statistically superior to placebo in desensitizing peanut-allergic children. OBJECTIVE: To examine the safety of VP250 in children, using a study design approximating potential real-world use. METHODS: REAL LIfe Use and Safety of EPIT (REALISE) is a phase 3 multicenter study consisting of a 6-month, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled period followed by open-label active treatment. Children aged 4 to 11 years with physician diagnosis of peanut allergy received daily treatment with placebo (6 months) or VP250 (up to 36 months). Data from the 6-month, randomized, controlled phase of REALISE are reported. RESULTS: Three hundred ninety-three children were randomized 3:1 to receive VP250 (n = 294) or placebo (n = 99) for 6 months; 284 (72.3%) children had a history of peanut anaphylaxis. According to parent diary, all participants receiving VP250 and 83.8% receiving placebo reported at least 1 episode of local skin reaction, with frequency decreasing over time. Only 4 participants (1.4%) receiving VP250 discontinued because of adverse events (AEs). Epinephrine was administered for allergic reactions attributed to VP250 in 7 children (2.4%), of whom 5 remained in the study; none involved severe anaphylaxis. Overall, AE rates were similar among participants with and without a history of peanut anaphylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: In a study designed to mirror real-world use, VP250 was observed to be well tolerated in peanut-allergic children, consistent with previous phase 2b and 3 studies.

Continuous and Daily Oral Immunotherapy for Peanut Allergy: Results from a 2-Year Open-Label Follow-On Study.

BACKGROUND: The randomized, controlled PALISADE trial demonstrated the benefit of daily oral immunotherapy with Peanut (Arachis Hypogaea) allergen powder-dnfp (PTAH, formerly AR101) in peanut-allergic children and adolescents. OBJECTIVE: ARC004, the open-label follow-on study to PALISADE, used 5 dosing cohorts to explore PTAH treatment beyond 1 year and alternative dosing regimens in peanut-allergic individuals. METHODS: Active arm (PTAH-continuing) PALISADE participants who tolerated 300-mg peanut protein at the exit double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge and placebo arm (PTAH-naive) participants could enter ARC004. PTAH-continuing participants were assigned to receive daily (cohorts 1 and 3A) or non-daily (cohorts 2, 3B, and 3C) dosing regimens; PTAH-naive participants were built up to 300 mg/d PTAH, followed by maintenance dosing. At study completion, participants underwent an exit double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge with doses up to 2000 mg peanut protein. Data were assessed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Overall, 358 (87.5%) eligible participants (4-17 years) entered ARC004 (PTAH-continuing, n = 256; PTAH-naive, n = 102). Among PTAH-continuing participants, exposure-adjusted adverse event rates were 12.94 to 17.54/participant-year and 25.95 to 42.49/participant-year in daily and non-daily dosing cohorts, respectively; most participants (83%) experienced mild or moderate adverse events. Daily dosing cohorts appeared to have higher desensitization rates than non-daily dosing cohorts. Of all PTAH-continuing cohorts, cohort 3A had the longest daily dosing duration and the highest desensitization rates. Changes in immune markers with PTAH continuation demonstrated ongoing immunomodulation. Outcomes in PTAH-naive participants mirrored those of the PALISADE active arm. CONCLUSIONS: Continued daily PTAH treatment beyond 1 year showed sustained safety and efficacy. Ongoing immunomodulation was observed during the second year of treatment.

Biologics for the Treatment of Food Allergies.

Food allergy is increasingly prevalent and poses a life-threatening risk to those afflicted. The health care costs associated with food allergies are also increasing. Current and emerging treatments for food allergies aim at protecting against reactions caused by accidental ingestion and increasing the food allergen reaction threshold, although this protection is often temporary. In the future, ideal biologic therapies would target key mediators of the type II immune pathway, essential in development of the atopic march to prevent development of food allergies. Biologics offering long-term protection against allergic reactions to food are needed, and several agents are already in development.

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.

Food Allergy Management at School in the Era of Immunotherapy.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Food allergy is increasing in prevalence, and management focuses on strict avoidance of known allergens and appropriately treating reactions. Any reaction has the potential to result in anaphylaxis, which can be fatal. Children spend a significant amount of time in the childcare or school setting, and interactions between families, school personnel, and clinicians are important to ensure the health and safety of children with allergies and asthma. RECENT FINDINGS: This review examines current food allergy guidelines and legislation, an assessment of allergen-free schools, the importance of written anaphylaxis action plans, training and education of school personnel, emerging treatment options, and the social implications of having food allergies. As the clinical use and research into food allergen immunotherapy continues to expand, an additional level of education and management is required of school personnel and caregivers. Food allergy has both medical and social implications, which are magnified in the school setting.

Expression and activation of the steroidogenic enzyme CYP11A1 is associated with IL-13 production in T cells from peanut allergic children.

Activation of the steroidogenic enzyme CYP11A1 was shown to be necessary for the development of peanut-induced intestinal anaphylaxis and IL-13 production in allergic mice. We determined if levels of CYP11A1 in peripheral blood T cells from peanut-allergic (PA) children compared to non-allergic controls were increased and if levels correlated to IL-13 production and oral challenge outcomes to peanut. CYP11A1 mRNA and protein levels were significantly increased in activated CD4+ T cells from PA patients. In parallel, IL-13 production was significantly increased; IFNγ levels were not different between groups. There were significant correlations between expression levels of CYP11A1 mRNA and levels of IL13 mRNA and protein, levels of serum IgE anti-Ara h 2 and to outcomes of peanut challenge. The importance of CYP11A1 on cytokine production was tested using a CYP11A1 CRISPR/Cas9 KO plasmid or an inhibitor of enzymatic CYP11A1 activity. Inhibition of CYP11A1 activation in patient cells treated with the inhibitor, aminoglutethimide, or CD4+ T cell line transfected with the CYP11A1 KO plasmid resulted in reduced IL-13 production. These data suggest that the CYP11A1-CD4+Tcell-IL-13 axis in activated CD4+ T cells from PA children is associated with development of PA reactions. CYP11A1 may represent a novel target for therapeutic intervention in PA children.

Conducting an Oral Food Challenge: An Update to the 2009 Adverse Reactions to Foods Committee Work Group Report.

Oral food challenges are an integral part of an allergist's practice and are used to evaluate the presence or absence of allergic reactivity to foods. A work group within the Adverse Reactions to Foods Committee of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology was formed to update a previously published oral food challenge report. The intention of this document was to supplement the previous publication with additional focus on safety, treatment of IgE-mediated allergic reactions, guidance for challenges in infants and adults, psychosocial considerations for children and families participating in an oral food challenge, specific guidance for baked milk or baked egg challenges, masking agents and validated blinding recipes for common food allergens, and recommendations for conducting and interpreting challenges in patients with suspected food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome. Tables and figures within the report and an extensive online appendix detail age-specific portion sizes, appropriate timing for antihistamine discontinuation, serum and skin test result interpretation, written consents, and instructional handouts that may be used in clinical practice.

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.

The Current State of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy for Food Allergy: a Comprehensive Review.

The food allergy epidemic of recent years has led to the search for safe and effective methods of immunotherapy for foods. Studies of epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) in mice have shown promising safety and efficacy data. Murine models have also identified probable mechanisms for the development of tolerance to food allergens, including the induction of regulatory T cells. Clinical data is lacking, but relatively small and early studies among peanut and cow's milk allergic subjects suggest that EPIT has an excellent safety profile, particularly compared to other methods of specific allergen immunotherapy. Efficacy data are also promising for peanut allergy, among younger patients (ages 4-11 years of age), suggesting that a majority of young patients will experience an increase in reaction threshold with therapy. The goal of this therapy is the protection from accidental exposures to a known food allergen. Additional clinical data is needed to prove efficacy and further demonstrate the safety profile of EPIT for food allergy, prior to approval by the Food and Drug Administration.

The Role of Baked Egg and Milk in the Diets of Allergic Children.

Baked egg and baked milk are tolerated by most children who are allergic to hen's egg and cow's milk. Incorporating baked goods into the diets of allergic children may help them outgrow their primary allergy more quickly, with changes observed akin to immunotherapy. Benefits may also include increased quality of life and improved nutritional status. The search for a reliable biomarker to predict tolerance to baked goods is ongoing. Most children with a milk or egg allergy who are not previously tolerating egg or milk in baked goods should be offered an observed oral food challenge.

Food allergy needs assessment, training curriculum, and knowledge assessment for child care.

BACKGROUND: More than half of preschool-aged children are enrolled in child care in the United States. Roughly 8% of children between 3 and 5 years of age have a food allergy. Child care center workers (CCCWs) are important caregivers who frequently encounter food allergies, but little is known about their education and understanding of food allergy and anaphylaxis. OBJECTIVE: To perform a food allergy and anaphylaxis educational needs assessment, provide a training curriculum for CCCWs, and assess the effectiveness of the training curriculum. METHODS: An online educational needs assessment and live training curriculum addressing food allergy recognition, treatment, and food labeling with pretests and posttests were created, and content and face validity were obtained. A needs assessment survey was sent to centers in Dallas and Tarrant counties. The training curriculum was performed at continuing education conferences. RESULTS: Seventy-three workers responded to the needs assessment, with 46% reporting prior food allergy training. They reported information sources as parents (73%), self (54%), educational curricula (21%), and conferences (19%). Most believed they have a high or moderately high proficiency in food allergy management. Forty-five workers participated in the training curriculum. Total scores improved from 54% correct on the pretest to 83% correct on the posttest (P < .001). Categorical subanalysis reveals similar results, with statistically significant improvement in all areas. CONCLUSION: CCCWs have diverse educational backgrounds and infrequently experience standardized training about food allergies. There is a significant lack of knowledge regarding food allergies and anaphylaxis. The curriculum was successful at increasing food allergy knowledge among CCCWs.

Current Options for the Treatment of Food Allergy.

Food allergy is increasing in prevalence; as a result, there is intense focus on developing safe and effective therapies. Current methods of specific immunotherapy include oral, sublingual, and epicutaneous, while nonspecific methods that have been investigated include: Chinese herbal medicine, probiotics, and anti-IgE antibodies. Although some studies have demonstrated efficacy in inducing desensitization, questions regarding safety and the potential for achieving immune tolerance remain. Although some of these therapies demonstrate promise, further investigation is required before their incorporation into routine clinical practice.