Chemically modified peanut extract shows increased safety while maintaining immunogenicity.
BACKGROUND: Peanuts are most responsible for food-induced anaphylaxis in adults in developed countries. An effective and safe immunotherapy is urgently needed. The aim of this study was to investigate the immunogenicity, allergenicity and immunotherapeutic efficacy of a well characterized chemically modified peanut extract (MPE) adsorbed to Al(OH)3. METHODS: Peanut extract (PE) was modified by reduction and alkylation. Using sera of peanut allergic patients, competitive IgE-binding assays and mediator release assays were performed. The immunogenicity of MPE was evaluated by measuring activation of human PE-specific T-cell lines and the induction of PE-specific IgG in mice. The safety and efficacy of MPE adsorbed to Al(OH)3 was tested in two mouse models by measuring allergic manifestations upon peanut challenge in peanut allergic mice. RESULTS: Compared to PE, the IgE-binding and capacity to induce allergic symptoms of MPE was lower in all patients. PE and MPE displayed similar immunogenicity in vivo and in vitro. In mice sensitized to PE, the threshold for anaphylaxis (drop in BT) upon subcutaneous challenge with PE was 0.01 mg, while at 0.3 mg MPE no allergic reaction occurred. Anaphylaxis was not observed when PE and MPE were fully adsorbed to Al(OH)3 . Both PE and MPE + Al(OH)3 showed to be efficacious in a model for immunotherapy. CONCLUSION: In our studies an Al(OH)3 adsorbed MPE showed reduced allergenicity compared to unmodified PE, while the efficacy of immunotherapy is maintained. The preclinical data presented in this study supports further development of modified peanut allergens for IT.
Oral peanut immunotherapy‐How much is too much? How much is enough?.
Efficacy of Food allergy immunotherapy (FA-AIT) for cow's milk, hen's egg and peanut at the level of desensitization is established via several small placebo-controlled trials and a number of open label trials1 . First approved treatments for peanut allergy are projected to become available soon including oral immunotherapy (OIT). But there is still a discussion which group of patients might profit most of OIT and what amount of maintenance dose to apply.
Peanut allergy–individual molecules as a key to precision medicine.
Peanut allergy is one of the most severe food allergies affecting millions of individuals worldwide. In German-speaking countries, peanutallergy is the most important cause of anaphylaxis in children and adolescents. This Editorial highlights the impact of individual peanutallergens on the severity of symptoms and summarizes the allergens' biological characteristics and usefulness as tools for precision diagnostic tests.
Feasibility of desensitizing children highly allergic to peanut by high‐dose oral immunotherapy.
BACKGROUND: There is limited data on feasibility, efficacy and safety of high-dose oral immunotherapy (OIT) in children highly allergic to peanuts. OBJECTIVE: In children highly allergic to peanut, we primarily aimed to determine the feasibility of reaching the maximum maintenance dose (MMD) of 5000 mg peanut protein or alternatively, a lower individual maintenance dose (IMD), by OIT up-dosing. Secondarily, we aimed to identify adverse events (AEs), and determine factors associated with reaching a maintenance dose. METHODS: The TAKE-AWAY peanut OIT trial enrolled 77 children 5-15 years -old, with a positive oral peanut challenge. Fifty-seven were randomized to OIT with bi-weekly dose step-up until reaching MMD or IMD, and 20 to observation only. Demographic and biological characteristics, AEs, medication and protocol-deviations were explored for associations with reaching maintenance dose. RESULTS: All children had anaphylaxis defined by objective symptoms in minimum two organ systems during baseline challenge. The MMD was reached by 21.1%, while 54.4% reached an IMD of median (minimum, maximum) 2700 (250, 4000) mg peanut protein, whereas 24.5% discontinued OIT. During up-dosing, 19.4% experienced anaphylaxis. Not reaching the MMD was caused by distaste for peanuts (66.7%), unacceptable AEs (26.7%) and social reasons (6.7%). Increased peanut s-IgG₄/s-IgE ratio (OR (95% CI)) 1.02 (1.00, 1.04) was associated with reaching MMD. CONCLUSION: Although 75.5% of children with peanut anaphylaxis reached a maintenance dose of 0.25 - 5 g, only 21.1% reached the MMD. Distaste for peanuts and AEs, including high risk of anaphylaxis, limited feasibility of reaching MMD.
" To Screen or not to Screen": Comparing the Health and Economic Benefits of Early Peanut Introduction Strategies in Five Countries.
BACKGROUND: Early peanut introduction (EPI) in the first year of life is associated with reduced risk of developing peanut allergy in children with either severe eczema and/or egg allergy. However, EPI recommendations differ among countries with formal guidelines. METHODS: Using simulation and Markov modeling over a 20-year horizon to attempt to explore optimal EPI strategies applied to the US population, we compared high-risk infant specific IgE peanut screening (US/Canadian) with the Australiasian Society for Clinical Immunology and Allergy (Australia/New Zealand) (ASCIA) and the United Kingdom Department of Health (UKDOH) published EPI approaches. RESULTS: Screening peanut skin testing of all children with early onset eczema and/or egg allergy before in-office peanut introduction was dominated by a no-screen approach, in terms of number of cases of peanut allergy prevented, QALY's, and healthcare costs, though screening resulted in a slightly lower rate of allergic reactions to peanut per-patient in high-risk children. Considering costs of peanut allergy in high-risk children, the per-patient cost of early introduction without screening over the model horizon was $6,556.69 (95%CI, $6,512.76-$6,600.62), compared with a cost of $7,576.32 (95%CI, $7,531.38-$7,621.26) for skin test screening prior to introduction. From a US societal perspective, screening prior to introduction cost $654,115,322 and resulted in 3,208 additional peanut allergy diagnoses. Both screening and non-screening approaches dominated deliberately delayed peanut introduction. CONCLUSIONS: A no-screening approach for EPI has superior health and economic benefits in terms of number of peanut allergy cases prevented, QALY's, and total health care costs compared to screening and in-office peanut introduction.
Diagnostic accuracy, risk assessment, and cost‐effectiveness of component‐resolved diagnostics for food allergy: a systematic review.
BACKGROUND: Component-resolved diagnostics (CRD) are promising tools for diagnosing food allergy, offering the potential to determine specific phenotypes and to develop patient-tailored risk profiles. Nevertheless, the diagnostic accuracy of these tests varies across studies; thus, their clinical utility remains unclear. Therefore, we synthesized the evidence from studies investigating the diagnostic accuracy, risk assessment ability, and cost-effectiveness of CRD for food allergy. METHODS: We systematically searched 10 electronic databases and four clinical trial registries for studies published January 2000-February 2017. The quality of included studies was assessed using QUADAS-2. Due to heterogeneity, we narratively synthesized the evidence. RESULTS: Eleven studies met inclusion criteria, altogether recruiting 1,098 participants. The food allergies investigated were cow's milk, hen's egg, peanut, hazelnut, and shrimp. The components with the highest diagnostic accuracy for each allergen, along with their sensitivity-specificity pairs, were: Bos d 4 for cow's milk (62.0% and 87.5%), Gal d 1 for hen's egg (84.2% and 89.8% for heated egg, and 60.6% and 97.1% for raw egg), Ara h 2 for peanut (80.3% and 95.1%), Cor a 14 for hazelnut (100% and 93.8%), and Lit v 1 for shrimp (82.8% and 56.3%) allergy. CONCLUSION: Selected components of cow's milk, hen's egg, peanut, hazelnut, and shrimp allergen showed high specificity, but lower sensitivity. However, few studies exist for each component, and studies vary widely regarding the cut-off values used, making it challenging to synthesize findings across studies. Further research is needed to determine clinically appropriate cut-off values, risk assessment abilities, and cost-effectiveness of CRD approaches.
Prediction of the severity of allergic reactions to foods.
BACKGROUND: There is currently considerable uncertainty regarding what the predictors of the severity of diagnostic or accidental food allergic reactions are, and to what extent the severity of such reactions can be predicted. OBJECTIVE: To identify predictors for the severity of diagnostic and accidental food allergic reactions and to quantify their impact. METHODS: The study population consisted of children with a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) confirmed food allergy to milk, egg, peanut, cashew nut and/or hazelnut. The data was analyzed using multiple linear regression analysis. Missing values were imputed using multiple imputation techniques. Two scoring systems were used to determine the severity of the reactions. RESULTS: 734 children were included. Independent predictors for the severity of the DBPCFC reaction were: age (B=0.04, p=0.001), skin prick test ratio (B=0.30, p<0.001), eliciting dose (B=-0.09, p<0.001), level of specific immunoglobulin E (B=0.15, p<0.001), reaction time during the DBPCFC (B=-0.01, p=0.004), and severity of accidental reaction (B=0.08, p=0.015). The total explained variance of this model was 23.5%, and the eliciting dose only contributed 4.4% to the model. Independent predictors for more severe accidental reactions with an explained variance of 7.3% were: age (B=0.03, p=0.014), milk as causative food (B=0.77, p<0.001), cashew as causative food (B=0.54, p<0.001), history of atopic dermatitis (B=-0.47, p=0.006), and severity of DBPCFC reaction (B=0.12, p=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The severity of DBPCFCs and accidental reactions to food remain largely unpredictable. Clinicians should not use the eliciting dose obtained from a graded food challenge for the purposes of making risk-related management decisions.
With tree nut sensitization, take the current when it serves, or lose our ventures.
Tree nut allergy affects approximately 1.4-2.3%, depending on the study methodology, patient age, and region in which the study was conducted. Tree nut allergy can be severe, and tends to persist throughout life. Tree nut is not a singular allergen like the other allergens-we use the term "tree nut" to refer to these items, but in essence it can refer to one nut, eight nuts, or per the US Food and Drug Agency classification, on the order of 19 items. Older, more conservative practice is to treat one nut as "all nuts", and instruct avoidance of all tree nuts where there is a clinical allergy proven to just one. This is often supported by high rates of co-sensitization, which is high among tree nuts because of structural similarity, and fueled concerns of cross-contamination, proper identification, or labeling confusion.
The longitudinal impact of probiotic and peanut oral immunotherapy on health‐related quality of life.
BACKGROUND: We previously reported that probiotic and peanut oral immunotherapy (PPOIT) was effective at inducing sustained unresponsiveness compared with placebo in a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial. This study evaluated the impact of PPOIT on health-related quality of life (HRQL). METHOD: Fifty-one participants (PPOIT 24; placebo 27) from the PPOIT trial completed Food Allergy Quality of Life Questionnaire (FAQLQ-PF) and Food Allergy Independent Measure (FAIM) at pre-treatment, end-of-treatment and 3 months after end-of-treatment. A total of 42 participants (20 PPOIT; 22 placebo) completed measures at 12 months post-treatment. Changes over time in PPOIT and placebo groups were examined by repeated-measures analysis of variance and paired t tests. RESULTS: Probiotic and peanut oral immunotherapy was associated with significant improvement in FAQLQ-PF (F = 3.63, P = .02), with mean difference 0.8 at 3 months post-treatment (P = .05) and 1.3 at 12 months post-treatment (P = .005), exceeding the 0.5 minimal clinically important difference for FAQLQ-PF. For FAIM, mean difference was 0.5 (P = .03) at 3 months and 0.4 (P = .04) at 12 months post-treatment. In placebo group, post-treatment FAQLQ and FAIM remained unchanged from pretreatment. Improvement in FAQLQ-PF and FAIM scores related specifically to acquisition of sustained unresponsiveness rather than to receiving PPOIT treatment or participation in the trial. CONCLUSIONS: Probiotic and peanut oral immunotherapy has a sustained beneficial effect on psychosocial impact of food allergy at 3 and 12 months after end-of-treatment. Treatment was not associated with reduced HRQL relative to baseline in either PPOIT or placebo groups, indicating that PPOIT was well tolerated and psychological well-being was not negatively impacted. Improved HRQL was specifically associated with acquisition of sustained unresponsiveness.
EAACI Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy: IgE‐mediated Food Allergy.
Food allergy can result in considerable morbidity, impairment of quality of life, and healthcare expenditure. There is therefore interest in novel strategies for its treatment, particularly food allergen immunotherapy (FA-AIT) through the oral (OIT), sublingual (SLIT), or epicutaneous (EPIT) routes. This Guideline, prepared by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) Task Force on Allergen Immunotherapy for IgE-mediated Food Allergy, aims to provide evidence-based recommendations for active treatment of IgE-mediated food allergy with FA-AIT. Immunotherapy relies on the delivery of gradually increasing doses of specific allergen to increase the threshold of reaction while on therapy (also known as desensitization) and ultimately to achieve post-discontinuation effectiveness (also known as tolerance or sustained unresponsiveness). Oral FA-AIT has most frequently been assessed: here, the allergen is either immediately swallowed (OIT) or held under the tongue for a period of time (SLIT). Overall, trials have found substantial benefit for patients undergoing either OIT or SLIT with respect to efficacy during treatment, particularly for cow's milk, hen's egg, and peanut allergies. A benefit post-discontinuation is also suggested, but not confirmed. Adverse events during FA-AIT have been frequently reported, but few subjects discontinue FA-AIT as a result of these. Taking into account the current evidence, FA-AIT should only be performed in research centers or in clinical centers with an extensive experience in FA-AIT. Patients and their families should be provided with information about the use of FA-AIT for IgE-mediated food allergy to allow them to make an informed decision about the therapy.