Background Open-label oral immunotherapy (OIT) protocols have been used to treat small numbers of patients with peanut allergy. Peanut OIT has not been evaluated in double-blind, placebo-controlled ...trials. Objective To investigate the safety and effectiveness of OIT for peanut allergy in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Methods In this multicenter study, children ages 1 to 16 years with peanut allergy received OIT with peanut flour or placebo. Initial escalation, build-up, and maintenance phases were followed by an oral food challenge (OFC) at approximately 1 year. Titrated skin prick tests (SPTs) and laboratory studies were performed at regular intervals. Results Twenty-eight subjects were enrolled in the study. Three peanut OIT subjects withdrew early in the study because of allergic side effects. During the double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge, all remaining peanut OIT subjects (n = 16) ingested the maximum cumulative dose of 5000 mg (approximately 20 peanuts), whereas placebo subjects (n = 9) ingested a median cumulative dose of 280 mg (range, 0-1900 mg; P < .001). In contrast with the placebo group, the peanut OIT group showed reductions in SPT size ( P < .001), IL-5 ( P = .01), and IL-13 ( P = .02) and increases in peanut-specific IgG4 ( P < .001). Peanut OIT subjects had initial increases in peanut-specific IgE ( P < .01) but did not show significant change from baseline by the time of OFC. The ratio of forkhead box protein 3 (FoxP3)hi : FoxP3intermediate CD4+ CD25+ T cells increased at the time of OFC ( P = .04) in peanut OIT subjects. Conclusion These results conclusively demonstrate that peanut OIT induces desensitization and concurrent immune modulation. The current study continues and is evaluating the hypothesis that peanut OIT causes long-term immune tolerance.
Background There are presently no available therapeutic options for patients with peanut allergy. Objective We sought to investigate the safety, efficacy, and immunologic effects of peanut sublingual ...immunotherapy (SLIT). Methods After a baseline oral food challenge (OFC) of up to 2 g of peanut powder (approximately 50% protein; median successfully consumed dose SCD, 46 mg), 40 subjects, aged 12 to 37 years (median, 15 years), were randomized 1:1 across 5 sites to daily peanut or placebo SLIT. A 5-g OFC was performed after 44 weeks, followed by unblinding; placebo-treated subjects then crossed over to higher dose peanut SLIT, followed by a subsequent crossover Week 44 5-g OFC. Week 44 OFCs from both groups were compared with baseline OFCs; subjects successfully consuming 5 g or at least 10-fold more peanut powder than the baseline OFC threshold were considered responders. Results After 44 weeks of SLIT, 14 (70%) of 20 subjects receiving peanut SLIT were responders compared with 3 (15%) of 20 subjects receiving placebo ( P < .001). In peanut SLIT responders, median SCD increased from 3.5 to 496 mg. After 68 weeks of SLIT, median SCD significantly increased to 996 mg (compared with Week 44, P = .05). The median SCD at the Week 44 Crossover OFC was significantly higher than baseline (603 vs 71 mg, P = .02). Seven (44%) of 16 crossover subjects were responders; median SCD increased from 21 to 496 mg among responders. Of 10,855 peanut doses through the Week 44 OFCs, 63.1% were symptom free; excluding oral-pharyngeal symptoms, 95.2% were symptom free. Conclusions Peanut SLIT safely induced a modest level of desensitization in a majority of subjects compared with placebo. Longer duration of therapy showed statistically significant increases in the SCD.
Background Although peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT) has been conclusively shown to cause desensitization, it is currently unknown whether clinical protection persists after stopping therapy. ...Objective Our primary objective was to determine whether peanut OIT can induce sustained unresponsiveness after withdrawal of OIT. Methods We conducted a pilot clinical trial of peanut OIT at 2 US centers. Subjects age 1 to 16 years were recruited and treated for up to 5 years with peanut OIT. The protocol was modified over time to permit dose increases to a maximum of 4000 mg/d peanut protein. Blood was collected at multiple time points. Clinical end points were measured with 5000-mg double-blinded, placebo-controlled food challenges once specific criteria were met. Results Of the 39 subjects originally enrolled, 24 completed the protocol and had evaluable outcomes. Twelve (50%) of 24 successfully passed a challenge 1 month after stopping OIT and achieved sustained unresponsiveness. Peanut was added to the diet. At baseline and the time of challenge, such subjects had smaller skin test results, as well as lower IgE levels specific for peanut, Ara h 1, and Ara h 2 and lower ratios of peanut-specific IgE/total IgE compared with subjects not passing. There were no differences in peanut IgG4 levels or functional activity at the end of the study. Conclusions This is the first demonstration of sustained unresponsiveness after peanut OIT, occurring in half of subjects treated for up to 5 years. OIT favorably modified the peanut-specific immune response in all subjects completing the protocol. Smaller skin test results and lower allergen-specific IgE levels were predictive of successful outcome.
Background We previously reported the initial results of the first multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of peanut sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), observing a ...favorable safety profile associated with modest clinical and immunologic effects in the first year. Objective We sought to provide long-term (3-year) clinical and immunologic outcomes for our peanut SLIT trial. Key end points were (1) percentage of responders at 2 years (ie, could consume 5 g of peanut powder or a 10-fold increase from baseline), (2) percentage reaching desensitization at 3 years, (3) percentage attaining sustained unresponsiveness after 3 years, (4) immunologic end points, and (5) assessment of safety parameters. Methods Response to treatment was evaluated in 40 subjects aged 12 to 40 years by performing a 10-g peanut powder oral food challenge after 2 and 3 years of daily peanut SLIT therapy. At 3 years, SLIT was discontinued for 8 weeks, followed by another 10-g oral food challenge and an open feeding of peanut butter to assess sustained unresponsiveness. Results Approximately 98% of the 18,165 doses were tolerated without adverse reactions beyond the oropharynx, with no severe symptoms or uses of epinephrine. A high rate (>50%) discontinued therapy. By study's end, 4 (10.8%) of 37 SLIT-treated participants were fully desensitized to 10 g of peanut powder, and all 4 achieved sustained unresponsiveness. Responders at 2 years showed a significant decrease in peanut-specific basophil activation and skin prick test titration compared with nonresponders. Conclusions Peanut SLIT induced a modest level of desensitization, decreased immunologic activity over 3 years in responders, and had an excellent long-term safety profile. However, most patients discontinued therapy by the end of year 3, and only 10.8% of subjects achieved sustained unresponsiveness.
Development of active therapies for IgE-mediated food allergy is a critical action step toward alleviating the adverse medical, psychosocial, and economic burdens on affected patients and families. ...Significant progress has been observed specifically in the application of single-allergen oral and sublingual immunotherapy for treatment of IgE-mediated food allergy, with emphasis on milk, egg, and peanut as the primary allergens. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has demonstrated efficacy in promoting immunomodulatory effects that lead to the clinical outcome of desensitization, defined as reduced reactivity while on active OIT, in the majority of treated individuals; however, achievement of sustained unresponsiveness following cessation of therapy has been observed in a smaller subset of treated subjects. The potential therapeutic benefits of OIT must be carefully considered in light of the significant potential for adverse events ranging from self-limited or easily treated oropharyngeal, respiratory or gastrointestinal symptoms, to persistent abdominal complaints that lead to cessation of therapy in an estimated 10–15% of treated individuals. To date, the majority of studies have focused on single-allergen OIT approaches; however, multi-allergen OIT has shown promise in initial trials and is the subject of ongoing investigation to address the complex needs of multi-food allergic individuals. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has been utilized for the treatment of food allergy and pollen-food allergy syndrome, demonstrating moderate efficacy, a favorable safety profile and variable tolerability, with oropharyngeal symptoms most commonly observed. Although studies directly comparing OIT and SLIT are limited, in general, the favorable safety profile associated with SLIT comes at the expense of reduced efficacy, while the more robust clinical effects observed with OIT come at the risk of potentially intolerable, treatment-limiting side effects. Future investigation to address specific knowledge gaps including optimal dose, duration, age of initiation, maintenance schedule, mechanisms, predictors of risk and therapeutic response will be important to maximize efficacy, minimize risk and develop personalized, effective approaches to targeting food allergy.
For egg allergy, dietary avoidance is the only currently approved treatment. We evaluated oral immunotherapy using egg-white powder for the treatment of children with egg allergy.
In this ...double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study, 55 children, 5 to 11 years of age, with egg allergy received oral immunotherapy (40 children) or placebo (15). Initial dose-escalation, build-up, and maintenance phases were followed by an oral food challenge with egg-white powder at 10 months and at 22 months. Children who successfully passed the challenge at 22 months discontinued oral immunotherapy and avoided all egg consumption for 4 to 6 weeks. At 24 months, these children underwent an oral food challenge with egg-white powder and a cooked egg to test for sustained unresponsiveness. Children who passed this challenge at 24 months were placed on a diet with ad libitum egg consumption and were evaluated for continuation of sustained unresponsiveness at 30 months and 36 months.
After 10 months of therapy, none of the children who received placebo and 55% of those who received oral immunotherapy passed the oral food challenge and were considered to be desensitized; after 22 months, 75% of children in the oral-immunotherapy group were desensitized. In the oral-immunotherapy group, 28% (11 of 40 children) passed the oral food challenge at 24 months and were considered to have sustained unresponsiveness. At 30 months and 36 months, all children who had passed the oral food challenge at 24 months were consuming egg. Of the immune markers measured, small wheal diameters on skin-prick testing and increases in egg-specific IgG4 antibody levels were associated with passing the oral food challenge at 24 months.
These results show that oral immunotherapy can desensitize a high proportion of children with egg allergy and induce sustained unresponsiveness in a clinically significant subset. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00461097.).
Background We previously reported the results of a randomized placebo-controlled study of egg oral immunotherapy (eOIT) in which 27.5% of subjects achieved sustained unresponsiveness (SU) after ...2 years. Here we report the results of treatment through 4 years and long-term follow-up. Objective We sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of eOIT in participants treated up to 4 years. Methods Children with egg allergy (5-18 years old) received eOIT (n = 40) for up to 4 years or placebo (n = 15) for 1 year or less. The key outcome was the percentage of subjects achieving SU by year 4. Safety and immunologic assessments were performed, and long-term follow-up questionnaires (LFQs) were administered after study conclusion (LFQ-1) and 1 year later (LFQ-2). Results Of 40 eOIT-treated subjects, 20 (50.0%) of 40 demonstrated SU by year 4. For those subjects still dosing during years 3 and 4, mild symptoms were present in 12 (54.5%) of 22 subjects. At the time of the LFQ, more subjects receiving eOIT (LFQ-1, 23/34 68%; LFQ-2, 21/33 64%) were consuming unbaked and baked egg versus placebo (LFQ-1, 2/11 18%, P = .006; LFQ-2, 3/12 25%, P = .04). Of subjects achieving SU, 18 (90%) of 20 completed the LFQ, with 18 (100%) of 18 reporting consumption of all forms of egg. When compared with subjects not achieving SU, subjects achieving SU had higher IgG4 values ( P = .001) and lower egg skin prick test scores ( P = .0002) over time and a lower median baseline ratio of egg-specific IgE to total IgE (1.1% vs 2.7%, P = .04). Conclusions SU after eOIT is enhanced with longer duration of therapy and increases the likelihood of tolerating unbaked egg in the diet.
Background Oral immunotherapy (OIT) offers a promising therapeutic option for peanut allergy. Given that during OIT an allergic patient ingests an allergen that could potentially cause a serious ...reaction, the safety of OIT is of particular concern. Objective The purpose of this study was to examine safety during the initial escalation day, buildup phase, and home dosing phase in subjects enrolled in a peanut OIT study. Methods Skin, upper respiratory tract, chest, and abdominal symptoms were recorded with initial escalation day and buildup phase dosings. Subjects also maintained daily diaries detailing symptoms after each home dosing. A statistical analysis of these data was performed. Results Twenty of 28 patients completed all phases of the study. During the initial escalation day, upper respiratory tract (79%) and abdominal (68%) symptoms were the most likely symptoms experienced. The risk of mild wheezing during the initial escalation day was 18%. The probability of having any symptoms after a buildup phase dose was 46%, with a risk of 29% for upper respiratory tract symptoms and 24% for skin symptoms. The risk of reaction with any home dose was 3.5%. Upper respiratory tract (1.2%) and skin (1.1%) symptoms were the most likely after home doses. Treatment was given with 0.7% of home doses. Two subjects received epinephrine after 1 home dose each. Conclusions Subjects were more likely to have significant allergic symptoms during the initial escalation day when they were in a closely monitored setting than during other phases of the study. Allergic reactions with home doses were rare.
For young children with peanut allergy, dietary avoidance is the current standard of care. We aimed to assess whether peanut oral immunotherapy can induce desensitisation (an increased allergic ...reaction threshold while on therapy) or remission (a state of non-responsiveness after discontinuation of immunotherapy) in this population.
We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in five US academic medical centres. Eligible participants were children aged 12 to younger than 48 months who were reactive to 500 mg or less of peanut protein during a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC). Participants were randomly assigned by use of a computer, in a 2:1 allocation ratio, to receive peanut oral immunotherapy or placebo for 134 weeks (2000 mg peanut protein per day) followed by 26 weeks of avoidance, with participants and study staff and investigators masked to group treatment assignment. The primary outcome was desensitisation at the end of treatment (week 134), and remission after avoidance (week 160), as the key secondary outcome, were assessed by DBPCFC to 5000 mg in the intention-to-treat population. Safety and immunological parameters were assessed in the same population. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03345160.
Between Aug 13, 2013, and Oct 1, 2015, 146 children, with a median age of 39·3 months (IQR 30·8–44·7), were randomly assigned to receive peanut oral immunotherapy (96 participants) or placebo (50 participants). At week 134, 68 (71%, 95% CI 61–80) of 96 participants who received peanut oral immunotherapy compared with one (2%, 0·05–11) of 50 who received placebo met the primary outcome of desensitisation (risk difference RD 69%, 95% CI 59–79; p<0·0001). The median cumulative tolerated dose during the week 134 DBPCFC was 5005 mg (IQR 3755–5005) for peanut oral immunotherapy versus 5 mg (0–105) for placebo (p<0·0001). After avoidance, 20 (21%, 95% CI 13–30) of 96 participants receiving peanut oral immunotherapy compared with one (2%, 0·05–11) of 50 receiving placebo met remission criteria (RD 19%, 95% CI 10–28; p=0·0021). The median cumulative tolerated dose during the week 160 DBPCFC was 755 mg (IQR 0–2755) for peanut oral immunotherapy and 0 mg (0–55) for placebo (p<0·0001). A significant proportion of participants receiving peanut oral immunotherapy who passed the 5000 mg DBPCFC at week 134 could no longer tolerate 5000 mg at week 160 (p<0·001). The participant receiving placebo who was desensitised at week 134 also achieved remission at week 160. Compared with placebo, peanut oral immunotherapy decreased peanut-specific and Ara h2-specific IgE, skin prick test, and basophil activation, and increased peanut-specific and Ara h2-specific IgG4 at weeks 134 and 160. By use of multivariable regression analysis of participants receiving peanut oral immunotherapy, younger age and lower baseline peanut-specific IgE was predictive of remission. Most participants (98% with peanut oral immunotherapy vs 80% with placebo) had at least one oral immunotherapy dosing reaction, predominantly mild to moderate and occurring more frequently in participants receiving peanut oral immunotherapy. 35 oral immunotherapy dosing events with moderate symptoms were treated with epinephrine in 21 participants receiving peanut oral immunotherapy.
In children with a peanut allergy, initiation of peanut oral immunotherapy before age 4 years was associated with an increase in both desensitisation and remission. Development of remission correlated with immunological biomarkers. The outcomes suggest a window of opportunity at a young age for intervention to induce remission of peanut allergy.
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, Immune Tolerance Network.
PDF
