Sublingual (SLIT) versus oral immunotherapy (OIT) for food allergy.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: McGowan EC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4892109 | biostudies-other | 2014 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Publications
Sublingual (SLIT) versus oral immunotherapy (OIT) for food allergy.
McGowan Emily C EC Wood Robert A RA
Current allergy and asthma reports 20141201 12
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 wil ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Food allergies are increasing in prevalence and present an emerging epidemic for westernized countries. Strict dietary avoidance is the only approved management for food allergy, but accidental exposures regularly occur, leading to significant patient anxiety and decreased quality of life. Over the past decade, oral and sublingual immunotherapies have emerged as potential treatments for food allergy. While several small clinical trials have demonstrated that immunotherapy can desensitize food-allergic individuals, strategies for further enhancing safety and definitively establishing long-term efficacy are needed. This review presents an overview of recent oral and sublingual immunotherapy trials, and provides a glimpse into what the next generation of food immunotherapy may entail.
| S-EPMC3935613 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6494514 | 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:BackgroundOral immunotherapy (OIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) are potential therapies for food allergy, but the optimal method of administration, mechanism of action, and duration of response remain unknown.ObjectiveWe sought to explore the safety and efficacy of OIT and SLIT for the treatment of cow's milk (CM) allergy.MethodsWe randomized children with CM allergy to SLIT alone or SLIT followed by OIT. After screening double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges and initial SLIT escalation, subjects either continued SLIT escalation to 7 mg daily or began OIT to either 1000 mg (the OITB group) or 2000 mg (the OITA group) of milk protein. They were challenged with 8 g of milk protein after 12 and 60 weeks of maintenance. If they passed the 60-week challenge, therapy was withdrawn, with challenges repeated 1 and 6 weeks later. Mechanistic correlates included end point titration skin prick testing and measurement of CM-specific IgE and IgG(4) levels, basophil histamine release, constitutive CD63 expression, CD203c expression, and intracellular spleen tyrosine kinase levels.ResultsThirty subjects with CM allergy aged 6 to 17 years were enrolled. After therapy, 1 of 10 subjects in the SLIT group, 6 of 10 subjects in the SLIT/OITB group, and 8 of 10 subjects in the OITA group passed the 8-g challenge (P = .002, SLIT vs OIT). After avoidance, 6 of 15 subjects (3 of 6 subjects in the OITB group and 3 of 8 subjects in the OITA group) regained reactivity, 2 after only 1 week. Although the overall reaction rate was similar, systemic reactions were more common during OIT than during SLIT. By the end of therapy, titrated CM skin prick test results and CD63 and CD203c expression decreased and CM-specific IgG(4) levels increased in all groups, whereas CM-specific IgE and spontaneous histamine release values decreased in only the OIT group.ConclusionOIT was more efficacious for desensitization to CM than SLIT alone but was accompanied by more systemic side effects. Clinical desensitization was lost in some cases within 1 week off therapy.
| S-EPMC3437605 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough promising results have emerged regarding oral immunotherapy (OIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for the treatment of peanut allergy (PA), direct comparisons of these approaches are limited.ObjectiveThis study was conducted to compare the safety, efficacy, and mechanistic correlates of peanut OIT and SLIT.MethodsIn this double-blind study children with PA were randomized to receive active SLIT/placebo OIT or active OIT/placebo SLIT. Doses were escalated to 3.7 mg/d (SLIT) or 2000 mg/d (OIT), and subjects were rechallenged after 6 and 12 months of maintenance. After unblinding, therapy was modified per protocol to offer an additional 6 months of therapy. Subjects who passed challenges at 12 or 18 months were taken off treatment for 4 weeks and rechallenged.ResultsTwenty-one subjects aged 7 to 13 years were randomized. Five discontinued therapy during the blinded phase. Of the remaining 16, all had a greater than 10-fold increase in challenge threshold after 12 months. The increased threshold was significantly greater in the active OIT group (141- vs 22-fold, P = .01). Significant within-group changes in skin test results and peanut-specific IgE and IgG4 levels were found, with overall greater effects with OIT. Adverse reactions were generally mild but more common with OIT (P < .001), including moderate reactions and doses requiring medication. Four subjects had sustained unresponsiveness at study completion.ConclusionOIT appeared far more effective than SLIT for the treatment of PA but was also associated with significantly more adverse reactions and early study withdrawal. Sustained unresponsiveness after 4 weeks of avoidance was seen in only a small minority of subjects.
| S-EPMC4430665 | 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
Project description:We have prepared this document, "Sublingual Immunotherapy: World Allergy Organization Position Paper 2013 Update", according to the evidence-based criteria, revising and updating chapters of the originally published paper, "Sublingual Immunotherapy: World Allergy Organization Position Paper 2009", available at http://www.waojournal.org. Namely, these comprise: "Mechanisms of sublingual immunotherapy;" "Clinical efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy" - reporting all the data of all controlled trials published after 2009; "Safety of sublingual immunotherapy" - with the recently published Grading System for adverse reactions; "Impact of sublingual immunotherapy on the natural history of respiratory allergy" - with the relevant evidences published since 2009; "Efficacy of SLIT in children" - with detailed analysis of all the studies; "Definition of SLIT patient selection" - reporting the criteria for eligibility to sublingual immunotherapy; "The future of immunotherapy in the community care setting"; "Methodology of clinical trials according to the current scientific and regulatory standards"; and "Guideline development: from evidence-based medicine to patients' views" - including the evolution of the methods to make clinical recommendations.Additionally, we have added new chapters to cover a few emerging crucial topics: "Practical aspects of schedules and dosages and counseling for adherence" - which is crucial in clinical practice for all treatments; "Perspectives and new approaches" - including recombinant allergens, adjuvants, modified allergens, and the concept of validity of the single products. Furthermore, "Raising public awareness about sublingual immunotherapy", as a need for our patients, and strategies to increase awareness of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) among patients, the medical community, all healthcare stakeholders, and public opinion, are also reported in detail.
| S-EPMC3983904 | biostudies-other
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:BackgroundThirty percent of children with food allergy are allergic to more than one food. Previous studies on oral immunotherapy (OIT) for food allergy have focused on the administration of a single allergen at the time. This study aimed at evaluating the safety of a modified OIT protocol using multiple foods at one time.MethodsParticipants underwent double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFC) up to a cumulative dose of 182 mg of food protein to peanut followed by other nuts, sesame, dairy or egg. Those meeting inclusion criteria for peanut only were started on single-allergen OIT while those with additional allergies had up to 5 foods included in their OIT mix. Reactions during dose escalations and home dosing were recorded in a symptom diary.ResultsForty participants met inclusion criteria on peanut DBPCFC. Of these, 15 were mono-allergic to peanut and 25 had additional food allergies. Rates of reaction per dose did not differ significantly between the two groups (median of 3.3% and 3.7% in multi and single OIT group, respectively; p = .31). In both groups, most reactions were mild but two severe reactions requiring epinephrine occurred in each group. Dose escalations progressed similarly in both groups although, per protocol design, those on multiple food took longer to reach equivalent doses per food (median +4 mo.; p < .0001).ConclusionsPreliminary data show oral immunotherapy using multiple food allergens simultaneously to be feasible and relatively safe when performed in a hospital setting with trained personnel. Additional, larger, randomized studies are required to continue to test safety and efficacy of multi-OIT.Trial registrationClinicaltrial.gov NCT01490177.
| S-EPMC3913318 | biostudies-literature