Elucidating allergic reaction mechanisms in response to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination in adults.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, novel nanoparticle-based mRNA vaccines were developed. A small number of individuals developed allergic reactions to these vaccines although the mechanisms remain undefined. METHODS: To understand COVID-19 vaccine-mediated allergic reactions, we enrolled 19 participants who developed allergic events within 2 h of vaccination and 13 controls, nonreactors. Using standard hemolysis assays, we demonstrated that sera from allergic participants induced stronger complement activation compared to nonallergic subjects following ex vivo vaccine exposure. RESULTS: Vaccine-mediated complement activation correlated with anti-polyethelyne glycol (PEG) IgG (but not IgM) levels while anti-PEG IgE was undetectable in all subjects. Depletion of total IgG suppressed complement activation in select individuals. To investigate the effects of vaccine excipients on basophil function, we employed a validated indirect basophil activation test that stratified the allergic populations into high and low responders. Complement C3a and C5a receptor blockade in this system suppressed basophil response, providing strong evidence for complement involvement in vaccine-mediated basophil activation. Single-cell multiome analysis revealed differential expression of genes encoding the cytokine response and Toll-like receptor (TLR) pathways within the monocyte compartment. Differential chromatin accessibility for IL-13 and IL-1B genes was found in allergic and nonallergic participants, suggesting that in vivo, epigenetic modulation of mononuclear phagocyte immunophenotypes determines their subsequent functional responsiveness, contributing to the overall physiologic manifestation of vaccine reactions. CONCLUSION: These findings provide insights into the mechanisms underlying allergic reactions to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, which may be used for future vaccine strategies in individuals with prior history of allergies or reactions and reduce vaccine hesitancy.

The Stress Phenotyping Framework: A multidisciplinary biobehavioral approach for assessing and therapeutically targeting maladaptive stress physiology.

Although dysregulated stress biology is becoming increasingly recognized as a key driver of lifelong disparities in chronic disease, we presently have no validated biomarkers of toxic stress physiology; no biological, behavioral, or cognitive treatments specifically focused on normalizing toxic stress processes; and no agreed-upon guidelines for treating stress in the clinic or evaluating the efficacy of interventions that seek to reduce toxic stress and improve human functioning. We address these critical issues by (a) systematically describing key systems and mechanisms that are dysregulated by stress; (b) summarizing indicators, biomarkers, and instruments for assessing stress response systems; and (c) highlighting therapeutic approaches that can be used to normalize stress-related biopsychosocial functioning. We also present a novel multidisciplinary Stress Phenotyping Framework that can bring stress researchers and clinicians one step closer to realizing the goal of using precision medicine-based approaches to prevent and treat stress-associated health problems.

Preparing Patients for Oral Immunotherapy (PPOINT): International Delphi consensus for procedural preparation and consent.

BACKGROUND: Despite the promise of oral immunotherapy (OIT) to treat food allergies, this procedure is associated with potential risk. There is no current agreement about what elements should be included in the preparatory or consent process. OBJECTIVE: We developed consensus recommendations about the OIT process considerations and patient-specific factors that should be addressed before initiating OIT and developed a consensus OIT consent process and information form. METHODS: We convened a 36-member Preparing Patients for Oral Immunotherapy (PPOINT) panel of allergy experts to develop a consensus OIT patient preparation, informed consent process, and framework form. Consensus for themes and statements was reached using Delphi methodology, and the consent information form was developed. RESULTS: The expert panel reached consensus for 4 themes and 103 statements specific to OIT preparatory procedures, of which 76 statements reached consensus for inclusion specific to the following themes: general considerations for counseling patients about OIT; patient- and family-specific factors that should be addressed before initiating OIT and during OIT; indications for initiating OIT; and potential contraindications and precautions for OIT. The panel reached consensus on 9 OIT consent form themes: benefits, risks, outcomes, alternatives, risk mitigation, difficulties/challenges, discontinuation, office policies, and long-term management. From these themes, 219 statements were proposed, of which 189 reached consensus, and 71 were included on the consent information form. CONCLUSION: We developed consensus recommendations to prepare and counsel patients for safe and effective OIT in clinical practice with evidence-based risk mitigation. Adoption of these recommendations may help standardize clinical care and improve patient outcomes and quality of life.

Corrigendum: Advances and potential of omics studies for understanding the development of food allergy.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/falgy.2023.1149008.].

New biologics for food allergy.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review aims to explore role of emerging biologics, including ligelizumab, UB-221, dupilumab, and antialarmins, in food allergy management. With a focus on recent developments, we evaluate their promise in mitigating adverse events during oral immunotherapy (OIT), reducing allergic reactions, and addressing the limitations of current therapeutic options. RECENT FINDINGS: Antiimmunoglobulin E mAbs, exemplified by omalizumab, demonstrate efficacy in desensitization and safety improvement during multiallergen OIT. Next-generation antibodies like ligelizumab and UB-221 exhibit enhanced potency and unique mechanisms, holding promise for food allergy treatment. Dupilumab, targeting IL-4 receptor alpha, presents potential benefits in decreasing allergen-specific IgE and modifying the atopic march. Exploration of antialarmins, specifically anti-IL-33 (etokimab) and anti-TSLP (tezepelumab), reveals encouraging results, with etokimab showing early success in peanut allergy trials. SUMMARY: Biologics hold promising potential for food allergy treatment. Tailoring therapeutic approaches based on shared decision-making becomes pivotal. While omalizumab remains a significant option, next-generation anti-IgE antibodies and agents targeting alarmins exhibit unique strengths. Dupilumab, despite limited success as monotherapy, shows promise as an adjunct for OIT. Careful consideration of treatment goals, patient preferences, and the evolving landscape of biologics will shape future clinical practice, offering allergists an expanded toolbox for personalized food allergy management.

Varying Doses of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy With Viaskin Milk vs Placebo in Children With Cow's Milk Allergy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: No approved treatment exists for allergen-specific immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated cow's milk allergy (CMA), a common childhood food allergy. Objective: To assess dose, efficacy, and safety of epicutaneous immunotherapy with Viaskin milk in children with IgE-mediated CMA. Design, Setting, and Participants: A phase 1/2, 2-part, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled dose-ranging clinical trial in children aged 2 to 17 years with IgE-mediated CMA was conducted between November 2014 through December 2017. It took place at 17 trial sites in the US and Canada. Current CMA was confirmed by double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge at study entry. Part A assessed the short-term safety of 150 µg, 300 µg, or 500 µg of Viaskin milk; part B evaluated the efficacy and safety of the 3 doses vs placebo over 12 months of treatment. Of the 308 screened participants with physician-diagnosed CMA, 198 met eligibility criteria (including an eliciting dose 300 mg or less) and were randomized. Intervention: Safety of Viaskin milk (150-µg, 300-µg, or 500-µg doses) was evaluated over a 3-week period (part A). In part B, 180 additional participants were randomized to receive Viaskin milk at doses of 150 µg, 300 µg, or 500 µg or placebo (1:1:1:1) for 12 months. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of treatment responders, defined as a 10-fold or more increase in the cumulative reactive dose of cow's milk protein (reaching at least 144 mg) or a cumulative reactive dose of cow's milk protein at 1444 mg or more at the month 12 double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge. Results: A total of 95.5% of the randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 8 [4.17] years; 124 of 198 were male [62.6%]) completed treatment. The highest response rate was observed in participants who received Viaskin milk at the 300-µg dose with 24 of 49 responders (49.0%) overall vs 16 of 53 responders (30.2%) in the placebo group (odds ratio, 2.19; 95% CI, 0.91-5.41; P = .09), highest in the 2 to 11 years age group (22 of 38 [57.9%] vs 13 of 40 [32.5%]; P = .04). Most treatment-emergent adverse events were mild or moderate application-site reactions. One participant in the 500-µg Viaskin milk dose group experienced treatment-related anaphylaxis. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, 12 months of daily epicutaneous immunotherapy with a dose of Viaskin milk at 300 µg was associated with a statistically significant treatment response in 2- to 11-year-old children with IgE-mediated CMA. Treatment-related anaphylaxis and treatment-related discontinuation rates were low. Further research is needed to explore Viaskin milk as a viable treatment option for children with IgE-mediated CMA. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02223182.

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.).

Skin as the target for allergy prevention and treatment.

The fact that genetic and environmental factors could trigger disruption of the epithelial barrier and subsequently initiate a TH2 inflammatory cascade conversely proposes that protecting the same barrier and promoting adequate interactions with other organs, such as the gut, may be crucial for lowering the risk and preventing atopic diseases, particularly, food allergies. In this review, we provide an overview of structural characteristics that support the epithelial barrier hypothesis in patients with atopic dermatitis, including the most relevant filaggrin gene mutations, the recent discovery of the role of the transient receptor potential vanilloid 1, and the role involvement of the microbiome in healthy and damaged skin. We present experimental and human studies that support the mechanisms of allergen penetration, particularly the dual allergen exposure and the outside-in, inside-out, and outside-inside-outside hypotheses. We discuss classic skin-targeted therapies for food allergy prevention, including moisturizers, steroids, and topical calcineurin inhibitors, along with pioneering trials proposed to change their current use (Prevention of Allergy via Cutaneous Intervention and Stopping Eczema and ALlergy). We provide an overview of the novel therapies that enhance the skin barrier, such as probiotics and prebiotics topical application, read-through drugs, direct and indirect FLG replacement, and interleukin and janus kinases inhibitors. Last, we discuss the newer strategies for preventing and treating food allergies in the form of epicutaneous immunotherapy and the experimental use of single-dose of adeno-associated virus vector gene immunotherapy.

Combining avidin with CD63 improves basophil activation test accuracy in classifying peanut allergy.

BACKGROUND: Conventional basophil activation tests (BATs) measure basophil activation by the increased expression of CD63. Previously, fluorophore-labeled avidin, a positively-charged molecule, was found to bind to activated basophils, which tend to expose negatively charged granule constituents during degranulation. This study further compares avidin versus CD63 as basophil activation biomarkers in classifying peanut allergy. METHODS: Seventy subjects with either a peanut allergy (N = 47), a food allergy other than peanut (N = 6), or no food allergy (N = 17) were evaluated. We conducted BATs in response to seven peanut extract (PE) concentrations (0.01-10,000 ng/mL) and four control conditions (no stimulant, anti-IgE, fMLP (N-formylmethionine-leucyl-phenylalanine), and anti-FcεRI). We measured avidin binding and CD63 expression on basophils with flow cytometry. We evaluated logistic regression and XGBoost models for peanut allergy classification and feature identification. RESULTS: Avidin binding was correlated with CD63 expression. Both markers discriminated between subjects with and without a peanut allergy. Although small by percentage, an avidin+ /CD63- cell subset was found in all allergic subjects tested, indicating that the combination of avidin and CD63 could allow a more comprehensive identification of activated basophils. Indeed, we obtained the best classification accuracy (97.8% sensitivity, 96.7% specificity) by combining avidin and CD63 across seven PE doses. Similar accuracy was obtained by combining PE dose of 10,000 ng/mL for avidin and PE doses of 10 and 100 ng/mL for CD63. CONCLUSIONS: Avidin and CD63 are reliable BAT activation markers associated with degranulation. Their combination enhances the identification of activated basophils and improves the classification accuracy of peanut allergy.

The Role of Biologics in the Treatment of Food Allergy.

The landscape of food allergy (FA) treatment is poised for a paradigm shift with the emergence of biologic therapies. The Food and Drug Administration approval of a standardized peanut powder for oral immunotherapy in 2020 marked a milestone, signaling a departure from allergen avoidance toward proactive treatment strategies. Although oral immunotherapy has been proven effective in desensitizing patients to specific allergens, there are several limitations such as lacking standardization, a long-time commitment to achieve maintenance, and adverse events. Biologics, including omalizumab, dupilumab, and antialarmins, have shown promise in treating various allergic diseases, including FA. These biologics target the underlying immunologic pathways driving allergic reactions, offering an antigen-agnostic approach. Omalizumab (anti-IgE) has been the most studied biologic in this space and can be used both as an adjunct therapy with oral immunotherapy and as monotherapy. Dupilumab targeting IL-4 and IL-13 also shows promise as an adjunct therapy. The emergence of antialarmins further broadens the spectrum of FA treatment possibilities. Biologics represent a transformative approach to FA treatment, directly addressing the underlying mechanisms. Future research should focus on patient selection criteria, personalized biomarker panels, optimal timing of intervention, and treatment durations.

Recent Mechanistic Studies in Allergic Diseases.

Allergic diseases, such as food allergies, asthma, and allergic rhinitis, continue to present a significant challenge for a broad cross-section of the population, despite recent advancements in their treatment and prevention [...].

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.).

Food allergy risks and dining industry - an assessment and a path forward.

Food allergies have increased in prevalence over the last few decades and continue to grow. Consumption of even trace amounts of common foods can cause a rapid allergic reaction (generally within minutes) which can be mild to severe to even life-threatening. Eating at restaurants poses a risk of allergic reactions for those with food allergies due to inadequate, inconsistent labeling of allergens in foods. Here, we review food labeling rules and practices in the restaurant industry and compare and contrast it with food labeling for prepackaged foods. We review global and United States trends, and provide a brief historical overview. The paper describes the key legal and economic motivations behind restaurant food labeling. Next, we describe novel risk-driven policies and new biotechnologies that have the potential to change food labeling practices worldwide. Finally, we outline desirable federal regulations and voluntary information disclosures that would positively impact the public health aspects of restaurant food labeling and improve the quality of life for people with severe food allergies.

Advances and potential of omics studies for understanding the development of food allergy.

The prevalence of food allergy continues to rise globally, carrying with it substantial safety, economic, and emotional burdens. Although preventative strategies do exist, the heterogeneity of allergy trajectories and clinical phenotypes has made it difficult to identify patients who would benefit from these strategies. Therefore, further studies investigating the molecular mechanisms that differentiate these trajectories are needed. Large-scale omics studies have identified key insights into the molecular mechanisms for many different diseases, however the application of these technologies to uncover the drivers of food allergy development is in its infancy. Here we review the use of omics approaches in food allergy and highlight key gaps in knowledge for applying these technologies for the characterization of food allergy development.

Treatment of food allergy: Oral immunotherapy, biologics, and beyond.

The prevalence of food allergy (FA) has been increasing globally and comes with a heavy burden not just economically, but also on quality of life. Although oral immunotherapy (OIT) is effective at inducing desensitization to food allergens, it has several limitations that weaken its success. Limitations include a long duration of build-up, especially when used for multiple allergens, and a high rate of reported adverse events. Furthermore, OIT may not be effective in all patients. Efforts are underway to identify additional treatment options, either as monotherapy or in combination, to treat FA or enhance the safety and efficacy of OIT. Biologics such as omalizumab and dupilumab, which already have US Food and Drug Administration approval for other atopic conditions have been the most studied, but additional biologics and novel strategies are emerging. In this review, we discuss therapeutic strategies including immunoglobulin E inhibitors, immunoglobulin E disruptors, interleukin-4 and interleukin-13 inhibitors, antialarmins, JAK1 and BTK inhibitors, and nanoparticles, and the data surrounding their application in FA and highlighting their potential.

The role of biologics in pediatric food allergy and eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders.

Continuing insight into the molecular mechanisms of atopic disorders has enabled the development of biologics to precisely target these diseases. Food allergy (FA) and eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders (EGIDs) are driven by similar inflammatory molecular mechanisms and exist along the same atopic disease spectrum. Therefore, many of the same biologics are being investigated to target key drivers of mechanisms shared across the disease states. The enormous potential of biologics for the treatment of FA and EGIDs is highlighted by the significant increases in the number of ongoing clinical trials (more than 30) evaluating their use in these disease states, as well as by the recent US Food and Drug Administration approval of dupilumab for the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis. Here we discuss past and current research into the use of biologics in FA and EGIDs and their potential role in improving treatment options in the future, with the need to have biologics widely clinically available.

Spheromers reveal robust T cell responses to the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine and attenuated peripheral CD8+ T cell responses post SARS-CoV-2 infection.

T cells are a critical component of the response to SARS-CoV-2, but their kinetics after infection and vaccination are insufficiently understood. Using "spheromer" peptide-MHC multimer reagents, we analyzed healthy subjects receiving two doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2 vaccine. Vaccination resulted in robust spike-specific T cell responses for the dominant CD4+ (HLA-DRB1∗15:01/S191) and CD8+ (HLA-A∗02/S691) T cell epitopes. Antigen-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses were asynchronous, with the peak CD4+ T cell responses occurring 1 week post the second vaccination (boost), whereas CD8+ T cells peaked 2 weeks later. These peripheral T cell responses were elevated compared with COVID-19 patients. We also found that previous SARS-CoV-2 infection resulted in decreased CD8+ T cell activation and expansion, suggesting that previous infection can influence the T cell response to vaccination.