Dendritic Cells in Food Allergy, Treatment, and Tolerance.

Food allergy is a growing problem with limited treatment options. It is important to understand the mechanisms of food tolerance and allergy to promote the development of directed therapies. Dendritic cells are specialized antigen presenting cells that prime adaptive immune responses, such as those involved in the development of oral tolerance and food allergies. The dendritic cell subsets in the gut and skin are defined by their surface markers and function. The default response to an ingested innocuous antigen is oral tolerance, which requires either gut dendritic cells or a subset of newly identified RORγt+ antigen presenting cells to induce the development of gut peripheral T regulatory cells. However, dendritic cells in the skin, gut, and lung can also promote allergic sensitization when they are activated under certain inflammatory conditions, such as with alarmin release or gut dysbiosis. Dendritic cells also play a role in the responses to the various modalities of food immunotherapy. Langerhans cells in the skin appear to be necessary for the response to epicutaneous immunotherapy. It will be important to determine which real-world stimuli activate the dendritic cells that prime allergic sensitization and discover methods to selectively initiate a tolerogenic program in antigen presenting cells.

Evaluation of clinical outcomes of efficacy in food allergen immunotherapy trials, COFAITH EAACI task force.

Food allergy is a global public health problem that until recent years lacked any aetiological treatment supported by academy, industry and regulators. Food immunotherapy (AIT) is an evolving treatment option, supported by clinical practice and industry trial data. Recent AIT meta-analyses have highlighted the difficulty in pooling safety and efficacy data from AIT trials, due to secondary heterogeneity in the study. An EAACI task force (CO-FAITH) initiated by the Paediatric Section was created to focus on AIT efficacy outcomes for milk, egg and peanut allergy rather than in trial results. A systematic search and a narrative review of AIT controlled clinical trials and large case series was conducted. A total of 63 manuscripts met inclusion criteria, corresponding to 23, 21 and 22 studies of milk, egg and peanut AIT, respectively. The most common AIT efficacy outcome was desensitization, mostly defined as tolerating a maintenance phase dose, or reaching a particular dose upon successful exit oral food challenge (OFC). However, a large degree of heterogeneity was identified regarding the dose quantity defining this outcome. Sustained unresponsiveness and patient-reported outcomes (e.g. quality of life) were explored less frequently, and to date have been most rigorously described for peanut AIT versus other allergens. Change in allergen threshold assessed by OFC remains the most common efficacy measure, but OFC methods suffer from heterogeneity and methodological disparity. This review has identified multiple heterogeneous outcomes related to measuring the efficacy of AIT. Efforts to better standardize and harmonize which outcomes, and how to measure them must be carried out to help in the clinical development of safe and efficacious food allergy treatments.

The Future of Food Allergy Management: Advancements in Therapies.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review current and future treatment options for IgE-mediated food allergy. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent years have seen major developments in both allergen-specific and allergen-non-specific treatment options, with the first FDA-approved peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT) product becoming available in 2020. In addition to OIT, other immunotherapy modalities, biologics, adjunct therapies, and novel therapeutics are under investigation. Food allergy is a potentially life-threatening condition associated with a significant psychosocial impact. Numerous products and protocols are under investigation, with most studies focusing on OIT. A high rate of adverse events, need for frequent office visits, and cost remain challenges with OIT. Further work is needed to unify outcome measures, develop treatment protocols that minimize adverse events, establish demographic and clinical factors that influence candidate selection, and identify patient priorities.

The Hydrogel Based Allergen-Coated Gold Nanoparticles for Topical Administration: A Possible Epicutaneous Immunotherapy in Pollen-Sensitized Mice?

BACKGROUND: The rapid uptake of antigens by antigen-presenting cells (APCs) and their migration to draining lymph nodes in the initial hours after antigen administration in epicutaneous allergen specific immunotherapy (EPIT) prompted us to investigate whether the topical administration of allergens without patch application could alleviate allergy in pollen-sensitized mice. We evaluated the immunotherapeutic effect of topically administering hydrogel-based Gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) loaded with a total extract of Platanus orientalis pollen (Pla. ext (50 µg)-AuNPs) on intact skin. METHODS: Mice sensitized to P. orientalis pollen were divided into three groups and treated with Pla. ext (50 µg)-AuNPs: 1) patch with Pla. ext (50 µg)-AuNPs, 2) patch with Pla. ext (50 µg)-AuNPs in combination with hydrogel, and 3) topical application of Pla. ext (50 µg)-AuNPs in combination with hydrogel. The immunotherapeutic effects were evaluated by measuring serum specific and total IgE antibodies, total cell and eosinophil count in nasopharyngeal lavage fluid, cytokines in the supernatants of re-stimulated splenocytes by the total extract, and histological examination of lung and nasal mucosa. RESULTS: Topical administration of Pla. ext (50 µg)-AuNPs, like patch-based administration, significantly downregulated specific and total IgE and IL-4 production, promoted secretion of IFN-γ and IL-10, markedly reduced the number of inflammatory cells, particularly eosinophils, in nasopharyngeal lavage fluid (p < .05), and inhibited inflammation and pathological damage in lung and nasal mucosa. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that topical administration of AuNPs loaded with P. orientalis total pollen extract on intact skin could be a potential application for EPIT in the P. orientalis pollen -sensitized mice.

Treatment for food allergy: Current status and unmet needs.

The treatment of food allergy has traditionally relied on avoidance of the offending food(s) and use of emergency medications in the event of accidental exposures. However, this long-standing paradigm is beginning to shift, as a variety of treatment approaches have been and are being developed. This report provides an overview of the past, present, and future landscape of interventional clinical trials for the treatment of food allergy. It focuses on specific issues related to participant characteristics, protocol design, and study end points in the key clinical trials in the literature and examine how differences between studies may impact the clinical significance of the study results. Recommendations are provided for the optimization of future trial designs and focus on specific unmet needs in this rapidly evolving field.

Food Allergen Immunotherapy in the Treatment of Patients with IgE-Mediated Food Allergy.

The prevalence of allergic diseases, including food allergy, is increasing, especially in developed countries. Implementation of an elimination diet is not a sufficient therapeutic strategy in patients with food allergy, whose quality of life is significantly impaired. In recent years, new effective therapeutic strategies have been developed, such as the application of oral, sublingual, and epicutaneous immunotherapy. Oral immunotherapy is the most often applied strategy because of its effectiveness and ease of application, with an acceptable safety profile. The effectiveness of oral immunotherapy in patients with egg, cow's milk, and peanut allergy has been proven both in terms of raising of the threshold and the development of tolerance, and in some patients, the development of sustainable unresponsiveness. Although oral immunotherapy is an effective treatment for food allergy, several limitations, including a long duration and a significant rate of reported adverse events, reduces its success. Therefore, new therapeutic options, such as treatment with biologicals, either as combinations with food allergen immunotherapy or as monotherapy with the aim of improving the efficacy and safety of treatment, are being investigated.

Immune response evolution in peanut epicutaneous immunotherapy for peanut-allergic children.

BACKGROUND: Epicutaneous immunotherapy with investigational Viaskin™ Peanut 250 µg (DBV712) has demonstrated statistically superior desensitization versus placebo in peanut-allergic children in clinical trials. It is unclear whether serologic biomarkers predict response. METHODS: Serum-specific IgG4 and IgE (whole peanut and components) from subjects enrolled in the phase 3 Efficacy and Safety of Viaskin Peanut in Children With IgE-Mediated Peanut Allergy study were examined by exploratory univariate and multivariate analyses to determine trajectories and predictors of treatment response, based upon peanut protein eliciting dose (ED) at Month (M) 12 double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge. RESULTS: Among Viaskin Peanut-treated subjects, peanut sIgG4 significantly increased from baseline through M12 and peanut sIgE peaked at M3 and fell below baseline by M12, with sIgG4 and sIgE peanut components mirroring these trajectories. Placebo subjects had no significant changes. By univariate analysis, M12 peanut sIgG4/sIgE was higher in treatment responders (p < 0.001) and had highest area under the curve (AUC) for predicting ED ≥300 mg and ≥1000 mg (AUC 69.5% and 69.9%, respectively). M12 peanut sIgG4/sIgE >20.1 predicted M12 ED ≥300 mg (80% positive predictive value). The best performing component was Ara h 1 sIgE <15.7 kUA /L (AUC 66.5%). A multivariate model combining Ara h 1 and peanut sIgG4/sIgE had an AUC of 68.2% (ED ≥300 mg) and 67.8% (ED ≥1000 mg). CONCLUSIONS: Peanut sIgG4 rise most clearly differentiated Viaskin Peanut versus placebo subjects. sIgG4/sIgE ratios >20.1 and the combination of Ara h 1 and peanut sIgG4/sIgE had moderate ability to predict treatment response and could potentially be useful for clinical monitoring. Additional data are needed to confirm these relationships.

The year in food allergy.

Research into food allergy continues to rapidly evolve, accompanying and driving real changes in the clinical approach to these diseases. The past year has seen the rollout of the first treatment approved for active management of food allergy, more data on alternative methods of treatment, the continued evolution of strategies for prevention of food allergy, a renewed interest in phenotyping food allergy subtypes, and, importantly, key new insights into the pathophysiology of food allergy. We expect that in the coming years, the therapies that are in preclinical or early clinical evaluation now will make their way to the clinic, finally allowing the possibility of safe and effective treatments for food allergy.

Epicutaneous allergen immunotherapy induces a profound and selective modulation in skin dendritic-cell subsets.

BACKGROUND: Epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) protocols have recently been developed to restore tolerance in patients with food allergy. The mechanisms by which EPIT protocols promote desensitization rely on a profound immune deviation of pathogenic T- and B-cell responses. OBJECTIVE: To date, little is known about the contribution of skin dendritic cells (skDCs) to T-cell remodeling and EPIT efficacy. METHODS: We capitalized on a preclinical model of food allergy to ovalbumin (OVA) to characterize the phenotype and functions of OVA+ skDCs throughout the course of EPIT. RESULTS: Our results showed that both Langerhans cells and dermal conventional cDC1 and cDC2 subsets retained their ability to capture OVA in the skin and to migrate toward the skin-draining lymph nodes during EPIT. However, their activation/maturation status was significantly impaired, as evidenced by the gradual and selective reduction of CD86, CD40, and OVA protein expression in respective subsets. Phenotypic changes during EPIT were also characterized by a progressive diversification of single-cell gene signatures within each DC subset. Interestingly, we observed that OVA+ Langerhans cells progressively lost their capacity to prime CD4+ TEFF cells, but gained regulatory T-cell stimulatory properties. In contrast, cDC1 were inefficient in priming CD4+ TEFF cells or in reactivating TMEM cells in vitro, whereas cDC2 retained moderate stimulatory properties, and progressively biased type 2 immunity toward type 1 and type 17 responses. CONCLUSIONS: Our results therefore emphasize that the acquisition of distinct phenotypic and functional specializations by skDCs during EPIT is at the cornerstone of the desensitization process.

Allergen-specific T cells and clinical features of food allergy: Lessons from CoFAR immunotherapy cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Allergen-specific IL-4+ and IL-13+ CD4+ cells (type 2 cells) are essential for helping B cells to class-switch to IgE and establishing an allergic milieu in the gastrointestinal tract. The role of T cells in established food allergy is less clear. OBJECTIVE: We examined the food allergen-specific T-cell response in participants of 2 food allergen immunotherapy trials to assess the relationship of the T-cell response to clinical phenotypes, including response to immunotherapy. METHODS: Blood was obtained from 84 participants with peanut allergy and 142 participants with egg allergy who underwent double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges. Peanut- and egg-responsive T cells were identified by CD154 upregulation after stimulation with the respective extract. Intracellular cytokines and chemokine receptors were also detected. The response to peanut epicutaneous immunotherapy (Peanut Epicutaneous Phase II Immunotherapy Clinical Trial [CoFAR6]; 49 participants receiving epicutaneous immunotherapy) and egg oral immunotherapy or a baked egg diet (Baked Egg or Egg Oral Immunotherapy for Children With Egg Allergy [CoFAR7]; 92 participants) was monitored over time. RESULTS: Peanut-specific type 2 and CCR6+ T cells were negatively correlated with each other and differently associated with immune parameters, including specific IgE level and basophil activation test result. At baseline, type 2 cells, but not CCR6+ cells, were predictive of clinical parameters, including a successfully consumed dose of peanut and baked egg tolerance. Exposure to peanut or egg immunotherapy was associated with a decrease in type 2 cell frequency. At baseline, high egg-specific type 2 cell frequency was the immune feature most predictive of oral immunotherapy failure. CONCLUSION: Food-specific type 2 T cells at baseline are informative of threshold of reactivity and response to immunotherapy.

Integrating oral immunotherapy into clinical practice.

In 2020, the first food allergy treatment, an oral immunotherapy (OIT) product for peanut allergy, was approved by the Food and Drug Administration, and a peanut epicutaneous immunotherapy patch was under review. As food allergy therapies become available and widespread, allergy offices will need to adjust practices to be able to offer their patients these new treatments. OIT is an intensive therapy that requires commitment from patients and their families, and open communication with the practice is paramount. OIT may not be the right therapy for every patient, and although identifying good candidates is still an area rich for research opportunity, experience from cohorts and clinical trials provides some insight. It is important to understand the scope of practice for each member of the OIT team based on state regulations for a particular location. Staffing and space will likely dictate how many patients at an individual office could be on active OIT at one time. Emergency medications, supplies, and protocols must be in place. Screening, scheduling, visit procedures, monitoring, home dosing, dose modifications, safety precautions, adverse reactions, and maintenance will be addressed in this article. Finally, adjunct therapies under investigation will be reviewed.

Epicutaneous immunotherapy for treatment of peanut allergy: Follow-up from the Consortium for Food Allergy Research.

BACKGROUND: Consortium for Food Allergy Research investigators previously reported 52-week outcomes from a randomized controlled trial of peanut epicutaneous immunotherapy, observing modest and statistically significant induction of desensitization, highest in children ages 4 to 11 years. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate changes in efficacy, safety, and mechanistic parameters following extended open-label peanut epicutaneous immunotherapy. METHODS: Peanut-allergic participants (4-25 years) received 52 weeks of placebo (PLB), Viaskin Peanut 100 µg (VP100) or 250 µg (VP250), and then crossed over to VP250 for PLB (PLB-VP250) and VP100 (VP100-VP250) participants and continued treatment for VP250 participants (total = 130 weeks of active epicutaneous immunotherapy). Efficacy was assessed by double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (5044 mg peanut protein), and adherence, safety, and mechanistic parameters were evaluated. RESULTS: At week 130, desensitization success was achieved in 1 of 20 (5%) PLB-VP250, 5 of 24 (20.8%) VP100-VP250, and 9 of 25 (36%) VP250 participants, with median successfully consumed dose change from baseline of 11.5 mg, 141.5 mg, and 400 mg, respectively. Median age (years) for week 130 desensitization success was 6.2 years (interquartile range, 5.2-9.1) versus 9.4 years (interquartile range, 7.6-12.8) for failures (P < .001). Adherence was 96%. Adverse reactions were predominantly local patch-site reactions. Significant increases in peanut- and Ara h2-specific IgG4 observed at week 52 persisted to week 130. By a post hoc analysis, there were no statistically significant increases from week 52 to week 130 in either desensitization success or successfully consumed dose. CONCLUSIONS: Extended treatment with VP250 was well tolerated, and desensitization observed at week 52 persisted between weeks 52 and 130. Treatment success was observed predominantly in younger participants, with younger age at initiation of active therapy an important predictor of success.

Epicutaneous immunotherapy protects cashew-sensitized mice from anaphylaxis.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of tree nut allergy has increased worldwide, and cashew has become one of the most common food allergens. More critically, cashew allergy is frequently associated with severe anaphylaxis. Despite the high medical need, no approved treatment is available and strict avoidance and preparedness for prompt treatment of allergic reactions are considered dual standard of care. In the meantime, Phase III study results suggest investigational epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) may be a relevant and safe treatment for peanut allergy and may improve the quality of life for many peanut allergic children. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the capacity of EPIT to provide protection against cashew-induced anaphylaxis in a relevant mouse model. METHODS: The efficacy of EPIT was evaluated by applying patches containing cashew allergens to cashew-sensitized mice. As negative control, sham mice received patches containing excipient. Following treatment, mice were challenged orally to cashew and anaphylactic symptoms, as well as plasmatic levels of mast-cell proteases (mMCP)-1/7, were quantified. RESULTS: Of 16 weeks of EPIT significantly protects against anaphylaxis by promoting a faster recovery of challenged mice. This protection was characterized by a significant reduction of temperature drop and clinical symptoms, 60 minutes after challenge. This was associated with a decrease in mast-cell reactivity as attested by the reduction of mMCP-1/7 in plasma, suggesting that EPIT specifically decrease IgE-mediated anaphylaxis. CONCLUSION: We demonstrate that EPIT markedly reduced IgE-mediated allergic reactions in a mouse model of cashew allergy, which suggests that EPIT may be a relevant approach to treating cashew allergy.

Laser-facilitated epicutaneous immunotherapy with hypoallergenic beta-glucan neoglycoconjugates suppresses lung inflammation and avoids local side effects in a mouse model of allergic asthma.

BACKGROUND: Allergen-specific immunotherapy via the skin targets a tissue rich in antigen-presenting cells, but can be associated with local and systemic side effects. Allergen-polysaccharide neoglycogonjugates increase immunization efficacy by targeting and activating dendritic cells via C-type lectin receptors and reduce side effects. OBJECTIVE: We investigated the immunogenicity, allergenicity, and therapeutic efficacy of laminarin-ovalbumin neoglycoconjugates (LamOVA). METHODS: The biological activity of LamOVA was characterized in vitro using bone marrow-derived dendritic cells. Immunogenicity and therapeutic efficacy were analyzed in BALB/c mice. Epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) was performed using fractional infrared laser ablation to generate micropores in the skin, and the effects of LamOVA on blocking IgG, IgE, cellular composition of BAL, lung, and spleen, lung function, and T-cell polarization were assessed. RESULTS: Conjugation of laminarin to ovalbumin reduced its IgE binding capacity fivefold and increased its immunogenicity threefold in terms of IgG generation. EPIT with LamOVA induced significantly higher IgG levels than OVA, matching the levels induced by s.c. injection of OVA/alum (SCIT). EPIT was equally effective as SCIT in terms of blocking IgG induction and suppression of lung inflammation and airway hyperresponsiveness, but SCIT was associated with higher levels of therapy-induced IgE and TH2 cytokines. EPIT with LamOVA induced significantly lower local skin reactions during therapy compared to unconjugated OVA. CONCLUSION: Conjugation of ovalbumin to laminarin increased its immunogenicity while at the same time reducing local side effects. LamOVA EPIT via laser-generated micropores is safe and equally effective compared to SCIT with alum, without the need for adjuvant.

Aggravation of Food Allergy by Skin Sensitization via Systemic Th2 Enhancement.

BACKGROUND: Recently, the relationship between antigen contact via skin (skin sensitization) and the development of food allergies has gained increasing attention. However, few studies have examined the effects of skin sensitization on healthy skin. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of sensitization in healthy skin on IgE and cytokine production during food allergy development. METHODS: The effect of skin sensitization on food allergy was evaluated using DO11.10 mice whose T cells express ovalbumin (OVA)-specific T-cell receptors. OVA was applied to the back skin of mice dehaired by various methods, and then food allergy was induced by providing them with an OVA-containing diet. OVA-specific IgE production in the sera and decreases in body temperature due to anaphylactic reaction were measured as indicators of food allergy. In addition, IL-4 production and proliferation of splenocytes were measured in mice with food allergy after skin sensitization. RESULTS: Skin sensitization in healthy skin increased IgE production and exacerbated anaphylactic symptoms induced by ingesting the antigen. Moreover, skin sensitization enhanced IL-4 production from splenocytes during the onset of food allergy. In contrast, oral tolerance was induced even after establishing skin sensitization. CONCLUSION: Skin sensitization temporarily exacerbated food allergy by enhancing systemic Th2 responses. These findings will help identify the mechanisms involved in food allergy and help develop treatments.

Pathogenesis of IgE-mediated food allergy and implications for future immunotherapeutics.

Our understanding of the immune basis of food allergy has grown rapidly in parallel with the development of new immune-targeted interventions for the treatment of food allergy. Local tissue factors, including the composition of skin and gastrointestinal microbiota and production of Th2-inducing cytokines (TSLP, IL-33, and IL-25) from barrier sites, have been shown not only to contribute to the development of food allergy, but also to act as effective targets for treatment in mice. Ongoing clinical trials are testing the targeting of these factors in human disease. There is a growing understanding of the contribution of IL-13 to the induction of high-affinity IgE and the need for continual T-cell help in the maintenance of long-lived IgE. This provides a strong rationale to test biologics targeting both IL-4 and IL-13 in the treatment of established food allergy. Various forms of allergen immunotherapy for food allergy have clearly shown that low specific IgE and elevated specific IgG4 are predictive of sustained treatment effect. Treatments that mimic that immune response, for example, lowering IgE, with monoclonal antibodies such as omalizumab, or administering allergen-specific IgG, are in various stages of investigation. As we gain more opportunities to use immune-modifying treatments for the treatment of food allergy, studies of the immune and clinical response to those interventions will continue to rapidly advance our understanding of the immune basis of food allergy and tolerance.

Delivery of allergen powder for safe and effective epicutaneous immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: More effective and safer immunotherapies to manage peanut allergy are in great demand despite extensive investigation of sublingual/oral immunotherapy and epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) currently in the clinics. OBJECTIVE: We sought to develop a powder-laden, dissolvable microneedle array (PLD-MNA) for epidermal delivery of powdered allergens and to evaluate the efficacy of this novel EPIT in peanut-sensitized mice. METHODS: PLD-MNA was packaged with a mixture of powdered peanut allergen (PNA), 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 (VD3), and CpG. Its epidermal delivery and therapeutic efficacy were evaluated alongside PNA-specific forkhead box P3-positive regulatory T cells and IL-10+ and TGF-ß1+ skin-resident macrophages. RESULTS: PLD-MNA was successfully laden with PNA/VD3/CpG powder and capable of epidermal delivery of most of its content 1 hour after application onto intact mouse skin concomitant with no significant leakage into the circulation or skin irritation. PLD-MNA-mediated EPIT substantially reduced clinical allergy scores to 1 from 3.5 in sham control mice (P < .001) after 6 treatments accompanied by lower levels of PNA-specific IgE and intestinal mucosal mast cells and eosinophils over sham treatments. Moreover, in comparison with allergens administered intradermally, powdered allergens delivered by means of PLD-MNA preferentially attracted immunoregulatory macrophages and stimulated the cells to produce IL-10, TGF-ß, or both at the immunization site, which might account for increased numbers of regulatory T-like cells in lymph tissues in association with systemic tolerance. PNA/VD3/CpG-laden PLD-MNA was safe and required only 6 treatments and one fifth of the PNA adjuvant dose, with improved outcomes when compared with 12 conventional intradermal immunotherapies. CONCLUSIONS: PLD-MNA holds great promise as a novel, safe, effective, and self-applicable modality to manage IgE-mediated allergies.

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.

[The route is the destination-novel forms of application of allergen immunotherapy]. / Der Weg ist das Ziel ­ neue Applikationsverfahren der Allergenimmuntherapie.

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only causal therapy of IgE-mediated allergies if allergen avoidance is not feasible. Already well established are subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual (SLIT) allergen application, and recently the first oral immunotherapy (OIT) for treating peanut allergy was approved. Interesting and promising new forms of allergen administration are intralymphatic (ILIT) and epicutaneous (EPIT) immunotherapy. Immunologic and clinical efficiency in terms of tolerance induction have been investigated in animal and clinical studies, including the first phase 3 studies. The findings as well as advantages and disadvantages, potential risks and challenges that still have to be addressed before routine clinical application can be envisioned will be comprehensively presented and discussed.

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.