Oral Immunotherapy for Peanut Allergy in Children 1 to Less Than 4 Years of Age.

Oral Immunotherapy for Peanut Allergy in ChildrenThis trial enrolled children 1 to <4 years of age who had allergic symptoms from peanut protein during screening. Participants received peanut allergen powder-dnfp (PTAH) or placebo for approximately 12 months; 73.5% of participants receiving PTAH tolerated a single dose of ≥600 mg peanut protein versus 6.3% of the placebo group.

Participant characteristics and safety outcomes of peanut oral immunotherapy in the RAMSES and ARC011 trials.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials (PALISADE [ARC003], ARTEMIS [ARC010]) proving efficacy and safety of peanut (Arachis hypogaea) allergen powder-dnfp (PTAH) have used double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFCs) to screen for eligibility and to evaluate efficacy. In routine clinical practice, individuals with peanut allergy do not always undergo food challenges to confirm diagnosis or determine candidacy for treatment. OBJECTIVE: To describe PTAH safety and tolerability in participants selected by clinical history and peanut sensitization parameters not undergoing DBPCFCs during trials and to compare findings with previously published data. METHODS: RAMSES (ARC007) was a 6-month, phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in children aged 4 to 17 years with physician-confirmed peanut allergy. ARC011 was the subsequent 6-month follow-on maintenance PTAH study. The primary end point for RAMSES and ARC011 was the frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs). We descriptively compared baseline characteristics and safety outcomes from RAMSES and ARC011 to participants undergoing DBPCFCs in phase 3 PALISADE and ARTEMIS trials. RESULTS: In 506 patients randomized to study treatment, baseline characteristics appeared balanced among groups. Proportion of participants with at least 1 AE was 55% for PTAH vs 33.9% for placebo during initial dose escalation and 98.8% vs 94.0% during updosing, respectively. Most participants with AEs had mild or moderate events. The most common AEs were gastrointestinal. Comparisons to pooled PALISADE and ARTEMIS data revealed higher baseline median peanut-specific immunoglobulin E and skin prick test values for RAMSES participants. Safety outcomes during trial periods were comparable. CONCLUSION: Safety data from clinically selected children with peanut allergy receiving PTAH do not seem different from those in phase 3 trials requiring DBPCFC to enter trials.

Safety of peanut (Arachis hypogaea) allergen powder-dnfp in children and teenagers with peanut allergy: Pooled summary of phase 3 and extension trials.

BACKGROUND: Peanut (Arachis hypogaea) allergen powder-dnfp (PTAH; previously known as AR101) is a daily oral immunotherapy approved to mitigate allergic reactions after accidental peanut exposure in peanut-allergic individuals aged 4-17 years. OBJECTIVE: We sought to comprehensively summarize the PTAH safety profile for up to ∼2 years of treatment. METHODS: Safety and adverse event (AE) data from participants aged 4-17 years from 3 controlled, phase 3 and 2 open-label extension trials were pooled and assessed. RESULTS: Of the 944 individuals receiving ≥1 PTAH dose, median exposure was ∼49 weeks; most participants experienced ≥1 treatment-related AE (TRAE; n = 853; 90.4%). A total of 829 participants experienced TRAEs with a maximum severity of mild (497, 52.6%) or moderate (332, 35.2%); 24 participants (2.5%) experienced TRAEs graded as severe. Overall, 80 participants (9.5%) discontinued as a result of AEs; most experienced gastrointestinal symptoms and discontinued during the first 6 months. When adjusted for exposure, AEs and TRAEs occurred at a rate of 76.4 and 58.7 events per participant-year of exposure (PYE), respectively, during updosing; AEs and TRAEs decreased to 23.0 and 14.2, respectively, during 300 mg maintenance. Overall, exposure-adjusted rates of systemic allergic reactions were 0.12 events/PYE (mild), 0.11 events/PYE (moderate), and 0.01 events/PYE (severe [anaphylaxis]). CONCLUSION: The safety profile of PTAH was consistent across trials, manageable, and improved over time. AEs were predominantly mild to moderate, and all grades declined in frequency with continued treatment. These data can be used to facilitate shared decision-making discussions with patients and families considering treatment with PTAH.

Maternal dietary intake in pregnancy and lactation and allergic disease outcomes in offspring.

As the prevalence of allergic disease dramatically rises worldwide, prevention strategies are increasingly being considered. Given the potential modulatory effect of nutritional factors on disease, altering maternal diet during pregnancy and/or lactation has been considered in preventing allergic disease in offspring. Although there are a number of observational studies that have examined possible associations between maternal diet and allergic outcomes in offspring, interventional trials are limited. Furthermore, there is a paucity of studies that have prospectively studied maternal dietary intake as well as measuring maternal and infant biologic samples (blood, urine, breast milk) and their relation to allergic outcomes in infants. There is also a particular need to define terminology such as 'fruit and vegetables intake', 'healthy diet', and 'diet diversity' in order to make studies comparable. In this review, we discuss current evidence of maternal dietary factors during pregnancy and/or lactation that may play a role in the offspring developing allergic disease, including factors such as overall dietary intake patterns, specific whole food consumption (fish, fruit and vegetables, and common allergic foods), and individual immunomodulatory nutrient intakes. Additionally, we discuss the limitations of previous studies and propose improvements to study design for future investigation.

Clinically relevant outcome measures of novel pharmacotherapy for nonallergic rhinitis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to briefly provide the current understanding of the pathogenesis of nonallergic rhinitis (NAR), currently available pharmacotherapies as well as some recent advancement in pharmacotherapy for this condition. With this background on NAR, we then describe and contrast outcome measures used in previous NAR and allergic rhinitis clinical trials. Finally, we conclude with a brief discussion on which of these outcomes might be most suitable for future NAR clinical trials. RECENT FINDINGS: NAR is a heterogeneous condition in which multiple mechanisms have been postulated to be involved. Patients with NAR commonly experience chronic nasal congestion and anterior and/or posterior drainage, which significantly affects their quality of life. Current standard of care is primarily symptom based, as specific therapies that target the underlying mechanisms of this condition are lacking. As there are no current treatment algorithms for NAR, clinical response and outcomes can vary widely between patients. Intranasal corticosteroids and intranasal antihistamines have been found to be effective in well designed clinical trials in the treatment of NAR and are therefore considered first-line therapies. Recently, studies investigating a combination of intranasal antihistamine/corticosteroid and an intranasal decongestant and with an intranasal corticosteroid have shown promise for allergic rhinitis and may also be more effective than monotherapy for NAR. Multiple outcome measures have been used in previous NAR trials, the most common being variations of nasal symptoms scores. Given the differences in prominent symptoms typically experienced by allergic rhinitis and NAR, accurate clinical outcomes used to evaluate new treatments for these two patient groups will likely differ. Further studies specifically designed to investigate the efficacy of various therapeutic agents in NAR are required to improve the management and outcomes of this chronic condition. SUMMARY: Further research is required to expand our understanding of the pathobiology of NAR that should lead to novel therapeutic approaches for managing this condition. It will be necessary to have well established validated NAR outcomes that can be used to study these novel therapies.