Shrimp-allergic patients in a multi-food oral immunotherapy trial.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Nguyen DI
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9297938 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundFood allergy (FA) negatively affects quality of life in caregivers of food-allergic children, imposing a psychosocial and economic burden. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is a promising investigational therapy for FA. However, OIT can be a source of anxiety as it carries risk for allergic reactions. The effect of OIT with multiple food allergens (mOIT) on FA-specific health-related quality of life (HRQL) has never been studied in participants with multiple, severe food allergies. This study is the first to investigate the effects of mOIT on FA-related HRQL in caregivers of pediatric subjects.MethodsCaregiver HRQL was assessed using a validated Food Allergy Quality of Life - Parental Burden (FAQL-PB) Questionnaire (J Allergy Clin Immunol 114(5):1159-1163, 2004). Parents of participants in two single-center Phase I clinical trials receiving mOIT (n = 29) or rush mOIT with anti-IgE (omalizumab) pre-treatment (n = 11) completed the FAQL-PB prior to study intervention and at 2 follow-up time-points (6 months and 18 months). Parents of subjects not receiving OIT (control group, n = 10) completed the FAQL-PB for the same time-points.ResultsHRQL improved with clinical (change < -0.5) and statistical (p < 0.05) significance in the mOIT group (baseline mean 3.9, 95% CI 3.4-4.4; 6-month follow-up mean 2.5, 95% CI 2.0-3.0; 18-month follow-up mean 1.8, 95% CI 1.4-2.1) and rush mOIT group (baseline mean 3.9, 95% CI 3.1-4.7; 6-month follow-up mean 1.7, 95% CI 0.9-2.6; 18-month follow-up mean 1.3, 95% CI 0.3-2.4). HRQL scores did not significantly change in the control group (n = 10).ConclusionMulti-allergen OIT with or without omalizumab leads to improvement in caregiver HRQL, suggesting that mOIT can help relieve the psychosocial and economic burden FA imposes on caregivers of food-allergic children.
| S-EPMC4032627 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Placebo control in allergen immunotherapy (AIT) trials presents ethical and blinding concerns. We tested a trial design with an "active allergen placebo," as proposed by ARIA-GA2 LEN, to investigate in a double-blind trial the efficacy and safety of AIT in dual-allergic patients (grass and birch pollen) using active untargeted treatments as controls. METHODS:We randomized 95 patients to receive either grass (N = 47) or birch AIT (N = 48). Patients were exposed to both allergens in an allergen challenge chamber (ACC) before and after 9 months of AIT. Targeted (ACC-allergen = AIT-allergen) and untargeted (ACC-allergen ≠ AIT-allergen) treatment effects were assessed. RESULTS:Immunotherapy reduced significantly the mean (95% confidence interval) area under the curve of total nasal symptom score (targeted effects) by -13.55 (-17.56, -9.54; P < 0.001) after grass and -9.81 (-14.13, -5.50; P < 0.001) after birch AIT. Differences in targeted vs untargeted effects between AIT groups (utility of control group) were statistically significant for both grass (P = 0.02) and birch (P = 0.02) allergens. Targeted vs untargeted differences within-treatment groups (specificity of ACC measurement) were significant for grass AIT (P < 0.001) but not significant for birch AIT group (P = 0.24). Specific immunoglobulin G4 to both allergens increased significantly (P < 0.001) after targeted treatment, while remained unchanged for untargeted treatments. Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS:Immunotherapies for both grass and birch allergens were efficacious and safe. The study confirms the specificity of AIT. Untargeted treatment groups could serve as controls in future AIT trials.
| S-EPMC6773203 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background:Previous proof-of-concept studies have shown that a short course of omalizumab can safely accelerate the oral immunotherapy schedule for multiple allergens simultaneously. Considering the high cost of medication, the dose-related efficacy of omalizumab at decreasing the duration of oral immunotherapy up-dosing phase must be objectively quantified before cost-benefit analyses can be performed. The primary objective of this trial will be to compare the efficacy of 2 omalizumab dosages to placebo at decreasing time-to-maintenance dose during a symptom-driven multi-food OIT protocol. Methods:A total of 90 participants aged 6 to 25 with multiple food allergies (3 or more) will be enrolled at four sites in Canada. Participants will be randomized to: (A) Omalizumab 8 mg/kg per month (n?=?36); (B) Omalizumab 16 mg/kg per month (n?=?36); or (C) Placebo (n?=?18). Study drug will be administered at full dosage for 12 weeks, then progressively tapered at 50% dosage (8 mg/kg vs 4 mg/kg vs placebo) for 4 weeks and at 25% dosage (4 mg/kg vs 2 mg/kg vs placebo) for another 4 weeks. After a pre-treatment period of 8 weeks, participants will undergo an initial food escalation (IFE) to an OIT mix containing 3 allergens and start daily home dosing with biweekly increases until a target daily maintenance of 1500 mg protein is achieved. The amount escalated at each visit will vary based on treatment tolerance according to a standardized up-dosing algorithm. Participants will be followed for at least 12 months following the initial food escalation. The primary endpoint will be time from IFE to the target maintenance dose of 1500 mg protein. Time-to-event analytic methods, including the log-rank test, will be used to compare the 3 arms. Discussion:This trial uses a novel pragmatic approach to compare OIT with omalizumab to OIT without omalizumab in a blinded manner, which allows to single out the effect of this anti-IgE medication on treatment effectiveness speed without the recourse to predetermined schedules. The innovative patient-centered up-dosing algorithm allows to maximise treatment effectiveness speed without compromising patient safety, regardless of whether the patient is on omalizumab or not. This study will also provide novel prospective data to inform on the optimal and most cost-effective dosage for this indication.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04045301, Registered 5 August 2019, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04045301.
| S-EPMC7165401 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The incidence of food allergy, a disease characterized by adverse immune responses that can render common foods life-threatening, is rising. Yet our current standard of care is simply avoidance of allergenic foods and administration of emergency medications upon accidental exposure. Significant advances have been made in food allergy oral immunotherapy, which is emerging as a potential preventive and curative treatment for this disease. The fundamental strategy of oral immunotherapy is to mitigate adverse immune responses to allergenic food proteins through repeated exposure; reduced reactivity to food allergens (desensitization) often results, but the establishment of sustained immune unresponsiveness or of permanent resolution (tolerance) is not certain. This review examines exciting recent developments in oral immunotherapy for food allergy.
| S-EPMC5178145 | biostudies-other
Project description:Food allergy is a common condition for which the only currently approved treatments are avoidance of the allergenic food and the administration of emergency medications upon accidental exposure. Over the past 10 years, significant advances have been made in the field of food immunotherapy, with efforts focusing on allergen exposure via the oral mucosa. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) are the two modalities that have been most extensively studied, and this article will review recent advances in our knowledge of the efficacy and safety of these treatments.
| S-EPMC4892109 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND:Despite progress in single food oral immunotherapy, there is little evidence concerning the safety and efficacy of treating individuals with multiple food (multifood) allergies. We did a pilot study testing whether anti-IgE (omalizumab) combined with multifood oral immunotherapy benefited multifood allergic patients. METHODS:We did a blinded, phase 2 clinical trial at Stanford University. We enrolled participants, aged 4-15 years, with multifood allergies validated by double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges to their offending foods. Inclusion criteria included a positive skin prick test of 6 mm or more (wheal diameter, above the negative control), a food-specific serum IgE concentration of more than 4 kU/L for each food, or both, and a positive double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge at 500 mg or less of food protein. Exclusion criteria included eosinophilic oesophagitis and severe asthma. Participants were randomised (3:1) with a block size of four, to receive multifood oral immunotherapy to two to five foods, together with omalizumab (n=36) or placebo (n=12). 12 individuals who fulfilled the same inclusion and exclusion criteria were included as controls. These individuals were not randomised and received neither omalizumab nor oral immunotherapy. Omalizumab or placebo was administered subcutaneously for 16 weeks, with oral immunotherapy starting at week 8, and was stopped 20 weeks before the exit double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge at week 36. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants who passed double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges to at least two of their offending foods. This completed trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02643862. FINDINGS:Between March 25, 2015, and Aug 18, 2016, 165 participants were assessed for eligibility, of whom 84 did not meet the inclusion criteria and 21 declined to participate. We enrolled and randomised 48 eligible participants and the remaining 12 patients were included as nonrandomised, untreated controls. At week 36, a significantly greater proportion of the omalizumab-treated (30 [83%] of 36) versus placebo (four [33%] of 12) participants passed double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges to 2 g protein for two or more of their offending foods (odds ratio 10·0, 95% CI 1·8-58·3, p=0·0044). All participants completed the study. There were no serious or severe (grade 3 or worse) adverse events. Participants in the omalizumab group had a significantly lower median per-participant percentage of oral immunotherapy doses associated with any adverse events (27% vs 68%; p=0·0082). The most common adverse events in both groups were gastrointestinal events. INTERPRETATION:In multifood allergic patients, omalizumab improves the efficacy of multifood oral immunotherapy and enables safe and rapid desensitisation. FUNDING:US National Institutes of Health (NIH).
| S-EPMC6944204 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has been considered a promising approach for food allergies (FAs). However, the current OIT strategy is limited in terms of the long-term efficacy and safety. We have previously demonstrated that kakkonto, a traditional Japanese herbal medicine, suppresses the occurrence of allergic symptoms in a murine model of ovalbumin (OVA)-induced FA, which is attributed to the induction of the Foxp3+ CD4+ regulatory T cells. In this study, we established an OIT model using the FA mice with already established allergic symptoms and determined whether kakkonto could improve the efficacy of OIT. The OIT method consisted of initially administrating a very small amount of OVA and slowly increasing the amount. Allergic symptoms decreased in the OIT-treated FA mice. OIT significantly downregulated Th2 immune response-related gene expression in the FA mouse colon, and decreased a level of mouse mast cell protease-1, a marker of mast cell degranulation in the FA mouse plasma. Furthermore, the concomitant use of kakkonto significantly enhanced the effectiveness of OIT on the allergic symptoms, the Th2 immune responses and the mast cell degranulation in the OIT-treated FA mice. In addition, OIT significantly increased the population of Foxp3+ CD4+ regulatory T cells in the FA mouse colon, and this population was further increased by OIT in combination with kakkonto. Furthermore, the combined therapy with kakkonto reduced the expression of RA-degrading enzyme CYP26B1 mRNA in the FA mouse colon. These findings indicated that the combination of OIT with kakkonto represents a promising approach for FA treatment.
2016-12-29 | GSE92339 | GEO
Project description:BackgroundAllergen specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) levels predictive of shrimp allergy have not been identified, but these may be helpful in identifying patients at risk for shrimp-induced allergic reactions.ObjectiveThis study sought to identify component resolved diagnostic tests useful for diagnosis of shrimp allergy in patients with or without house-dust mite (HDM) sensitization to the major allergen cysteine protease (Der p 1).MethodsPatients with positive skin-prick test (SPT) results and/or sIgE values were recruited. Shrimp allergy was classified by oral food challenge (OFC) or by a clear history of anaphylaxis after shrimp ingestion. Patients with shrimp allergy and patients who were tolerant were further classified based on HDM sensitivity (Der p 1 > 0.35 kUA/L). Testing for sIgE to total shrimp, and shrimp and HDM components was performed. The Fisher exact test, Wilcoxon sum rank test, and receiver operating characteristics analyses were used to compare sIgE levels in patients with allergy and patients who were tolerant.ResultsOf 79 patients recruited, 12 patients with shrimp allergy (7 with positive OFC results and 5 with a history of anaphylaxis) and 18 patients who were shrimp tolerant were enrolled. Of the patients not HDM sensitized, sIgE levels to shrimp (10.5 kUA/L, p = 0.012) and Der p 10 (4.09 kUA/L, p = 0.035) were higher in patients with shrimp allergy. Shrimp sIgE of ?3.55 kUA/L had 100% diagnostic sensitivity and 85.7% specificity (receiver operating characteristic 0.94 [0.81, 1.0] 95% CI) and Der p 10 sIgE levels of ?3.98 kUA/L had a diagnostic sensitivity of 80% and specificity of 100% (receiver operating characteristic 0.86 [0.57, 1.0] 95% CI) for prediction of clinical reactivity.ConclusionHDM sensitization influences shrimp and HDM component sIgE levels and, consequently, their diagnostic accuracy in shrimp allergy. In our series, in the patients who were non-HDM sensitized, a shrimp sIgE level of >3.55 kUA/L showed 100% sensitivity and, Der p 10 sIgE of >3.98 kUA/L showed 100% specificity for the diagnosis of shrimp allergy. These levels may not be applicable to every patient and, therefore, may not obviate the need for OFC.
| S-EPMC6122289 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is evidence that in children with persistent IgE-mediated food allergy (FA) to cow's milk, hen's egg, and peanut, oral allergen-specific immunotherapy (OIT) may increase the reaction threshold to the culprit food allergen(s). OIT may protect patients from the occurrence of severe reactions in case of accidental ingestion of the culprit food during treatment. Notwithstanding, many gaps are still unsolved, including safety issues, identification of predictive biomarkers, and post-desensitization efficacy. In this perspective, the use of omalizumab (Anti-IgE monoclonal antibody) has been proposed as an adjunctive treatment to OIT in order to reduce the risk of allergic reactions related to OIT. This review aims to summarize the current evidence and unmet needs on OIT in children with FA to enhance the development of longitudinal, prospective, and well-designed studies able to fill the current gaps soon.
| S-EPMC8901728 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Food allergy is a major public health problem in children, impacting upon the affected individual, their families and others charged with their care, for example educational establishments, and the food industry. In contrast to most other paediatric diseases, there is no established cure: current management is based upon dietary avoidance and the provision of rescue medication in the event of accidental reactions, which are common. This strategy has significant limitations and impacts adversely on health-related quality of life. In the last decade, research into disease-modifying treatments for food allergy has emerged, predominantly for peanut, egg and cow's milk. Most studies have used the oral route (oral immunotherapy, OIT), in which increasing amounts of allergen are given over weeks-months. OIT has proven effective to induce immune modulation and 'desensitization' - that is, an increase in the amount of food allergen that can be consumed, so long as regular (typically daily) doses are continued. However, its ability to induce permanent tolerance once ongoing exposure has stopped seems limited. Additionally, the short- and long-term safety of OIT is often poorly reported, raising concerns about its implementation in routine practice. Most patients experience allergic reactions and, although generally mild, severe reactions have occurred. Long-term adherence is unclear, which rises concerns given the low rates of long-term tolerance induction. Current research focuses on improving current limitations, especially safety. Strategies include alternative routes (sublingual, epicutaneous), modified hypoallergenic products and adjuvants (anti-IgE, pre-/probiotics). Biomarkers of safe/successful OIT are also under investigation.
| S-EPMC4950028 | biostudies-literature