Phase 2a randomized, placebo-controlled study of anti-IL-33 in peanut allergy.
2019; 4 (22)
Conflicting verdicts on peanut OIT from the ICER and FDA Advisory Committee; where do we go from here?
The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology
ICER report for peanut OIT comes up short.
Annals of allergy, asthma & immunology : official publication of the American College of Allergy, Asthma, & Immunology
Can food allergy be cured? What are the future prospects?
BACKGROUNDIL-33, found in high levels in participants with allergic disorders, is thought to mediate allergic reactions. Etokimab, an anti-IL-33 biologic, has previously demonstrated a good safety profile and favorable pharmacodynamic properties in many clinical studies.METHODSIn this 6-week placebo-controlled phase 2a study, we evaluated the safety and the ability of a single dose of etokimab to desensitize peanut-allergic adults. Participants received either etokimab (n = 15) or blinded placebo (n = 5). Clinical tests included oral food challenges and skin prick tests at days 15 and 45. Blood samples were collected for IgE levels and measurement of ex vivo peanut-stimulated T cell cytokine production.RESULTSEfficacy measurements for active vs. placebo participants at the day 15 and 45 food challenge (tolerating a cumulative 275 mg of peanut protein, which was the food challenge outcome defined in this paper) demonstrated, respectively, 73% vs. 0% (P = 0.008) to 57% vs. 0% (ns). The etokimab group had fewer adverse events compared with placebo. IL-4, IL-5, IL-9, IL-13, and ST2 levels in CD4+ T cells were reduced in the active vs. placebo arm upon peanut-induced T cell activation (P = 0.036 for IL-13 and IL-9 at day 15), and peanut-specific IgE was reduced in active vs. placebo (P = 0.014 at day 15).CONCLUSIONThe phase 2a results suggest etokimab is safe and well tolerated and that a single dose of etokimab could have the potential to desensitize peanut-allergic participants and possibly reduce atopy-related adverse events.TRIAL REGISTRATIONClinicalTrials.gov NCT02920021.FUNDINGThis work was supported by NIH grant R01AI140134, AnaptysBio, the Hartman Vaccine Fund, and the Sean N. Parker Center for Allergy and Asthma Research at Stanford University.
View details for DOI 10.1172/jci.insight.131347
View details for PubMedID 31723064
Analysis of a Large Standardized Food Challenge Data Set to Determine Predictors of Positive Outcome Across Multiple Allergens
FRONTIERS IN IMMUNOLOGY
The Use of Biomarkers to Predict Aero-Allergen and Food Immunotherapy Responses
CLINICAL REVIEWS IN ALLERGY & IMMUNOLOGY
2018; 55 (2): 190–204
Eliciting Dose and Safety Outcomes From a Large Dataset of Standardized Multiple Food Challenges
FRONTIERS IN IMMUNOLOGY
Comparison of sublingual immunotherapy and oral immunotherapy in peanut allergy
2018; 27 (6): 22–30
Efficacy and safety of omalizumab in pediatric patients with high immunoglobulin E levels: A case series
ALLERGY AND ASTHMA PROCEEDINGS
2018; 39 (4): 289–91
New treatment directions in food allergy
ANNALS OF ALLERGY ASTHMA & IMMUNOLOGY
2018; 120 (3): 254–62
The Use of Biomarkers to Predict Aero-Allergen and Food Immunotherapy Responses.
Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology
Food allergies have become a significant heath burden as prevalence continues to rise, affecting 6-13% of the global population. In the absence of drugs approved by regulatory agencies, the current standard of care remains avoidance of allergenic foods and management of acute allergic reactions with antihistamines and epinephrine auto-injectors. Allergen immunotherapy has been shown to increase the threshold of reactivity in the majority of food-allergic individuals. However, challenges include long treatment periods, high rates of adverse reactions, and lack of permanence of desensitization and established protocols. To address these limitations, adjunctive allergen-specific immunotherapy, vaccines, and non-allergen specific therapies (e.g., monoclonal antibodies) are being explored. The future of food allergy treatment is promising with a number of clinical trials in progress. Currently, although desensitization can be achieved for the majority of individuals with food allergy through immunotherapy, continued ingestion of allergen is needed for most individuals to maintain desensitization. Further understanding of the mechanisms of food allergy and identification of biomarkers to distinguish between temporary and permanent resolution of allergies is needed before a cure, where reactivity to the allergen is permanently lost enabling the individual to consume the allergen in any amount at any time, can be envisioned.
View details for DOI 10.1111/all.14116
View details for PubMedID 31733120
Eliciting Dose and Safety Outcomes From a Large Dataset of Standardized Multiple Food Challenges.
Frontiers in immunology
2018; 9: 2057
The incidence of allergic conditions has continued to rise over the past several decades, with a growing body of research dedicated toward the treatment of such conditions. By driving a complex range of changes in the underlying immune response, immunotherapy is the only therapy that modulates the immune system with long-term effects and is presently utilized for the treatment of several atopic conditions. Recent efforts have focused on identifying biomarkers associated with these changes that may be of use in predicting patients with the highest likelihood of positive clinical outcomes during allergen immunotherapy (AIT), providing guidance regarding AIT discontinuation, and predicting symptomatic relapse and the need for booster AIT after therapy. The identification of such biomarkers in food allergy has the additional benefit of replacing oral food challenges, which are presently the gold standard for diagnosing food allergies. While several markers have shown early promise, research has yet to identify a marker that can invariably predict clinical response to AIT. Skin prick testing (SPT) and specific IgE have commonly been used as inclusion criteria for the initiation of AIT and prediction of reactions during subsequent allergen challenge; however, existing data suggests that changes in these markers are not always associated with clinical improvement and can be widely variable, reducing their utility in predicting clinical response. Similar findings have been described for the use of allergen-specific functional IgG4 antibodies, basophil activation and histamine release, and type 2 innate lymphoid cells. There appears to be a promising association between changes in the expression of dendritic cell-associated markers, as well as the use of DNA promoter region methylation patterns in the prediction of allergy status following therapy. The cellular and molecular changes brought about by immunotherapy are still under investigation, but major strides in our understanding are being made.
View details for PubMedID 29455358
Efficacy and safety of omalizumab in pediatric patients with high immunoglobulin E levels: A case series.
Allergy and asthma proceedings
2018; 39 (4): 289–91
Background: Food allergy prevalence has continued to rise over the past decade. While studies have reported threshold doses for multiple foods, large-scale multi-food allergen studies are lacking. Our goal was to identify threshold dose distributions and predictors of severe reactions during blinded oral food challenges (OFCs) in multi-food allergic patients. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed on all Stanford-initiated clinical protocols involving standardized screening OFCs to any of 11 food allergens at 7 sites. Interval-censoring survival analysis was used to calculate eliciting dose (ED) curves for each food. Changes in severity and ED were also analyzed among participants who had repeated challenges to the same food. Results: Of 428 participants, 410 (96%) had at least one positive challenge (1445 standardized OFCs with 1054 total positive challenges). Participants undergoing peanut challenges had the highest ED50 (29.9 mg), while those challenged with egg or pistachio had the lowest (7.07 or 1.7 mg, respectively). The most common adverse event was skin related (54%), followed by gastrointestinal (GI) events (33%). A history of asthma was associated with a significantly higher risk of a severe reaction (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.37, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.36, 4.13). Higher values of allergen-specific IgE (sIgE) and sIgE to total IgE ratio (sIgEr) were also associated with higher risk of a severe reaction (1.49 [1.19, 1.85] and 1.84 [1.30, 2.59], respectively). Participants undergoing cashew, peanut, pecan, sesame, and walnut challenges had more severe reactions as ED increased. In participants who underwent repeat challenges, the ED did not change (p = 0.66), but reactions were more severe (p = 0.02). Conclusions: Participants with a history of asthma, high sIgEr, and/or high values of sIgE were found to be at higher risk for severe reactions during food challenges. These findings may help to optimize food challenge dosing schemes in multi-food allergic, atopic patients, specifically at lower doses where the majority of reactions occur. Trials Registration Number: ClinicalTrials. gov number NCT03539692; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03539692.
View details for PubMedID 30298065
Analysis of a Large Standardized Food Challenge Data Set to Determine Predictors of Positive Outcome Across Multiple Allergens.
Frontiers in immunology
2018; 9: 2689
The efficacy and safety of omalizumab has been demonstrated in children as young as 6 years of age. Omalizumab is currently approved for a range of immunoglobulin E (IgE) levels that differ by age. In patients with IgE levels higher than the indicated therapeutic window, only a few studies have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of its use. Specifically, no reported studies exist to describe the use of omalizumab in pediatric patients with asthma ages <12 years and with high IgE levels.We reported a series of pediatric patients who were initiated on omalizumab despite an IgE level higher than the age-indicated therapeutic windows and aimed to describe whether omalizumab was safe and improved asthma outcomes.Patients who initiated omalizumab in our pediatric allergy clinic between January 2008 and December 2015, with serum IgE levels higher than the age-indicated therapeutic ranges were included. Patient charts were reviewed to determine the number of asthma-related events in the 12 months before and after initiation of omalizumab and the Asthma Control Test™ scores at the time of initiation and at 12 months of therapy.Eleven patients were identified with pretreatment IgE levels higher than the age-approved thresholds. Five patients were ages <12 years, and six patients were ages >12 years. For all but one patient, the maximum recommended dose of 375 mg every 2 weeks was effective in reducing the need for corticosteroids, emergency department visits, or hospitalizations in the year after initiation of therapy. During the period of therapy, there were no reports of severe reactions.Despite a small study group, our results indicated that omalizumab may be safely used in pediatric patients with IgE levels higher than the indicated therapeutic windows.
View details for PubMedID 30095394
Comparison of sublingual immunotherapy and oral immunotherapy in peanut allergy.
Allergo journal international
2018; 27 (6): 153–61
Background: Double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFCs) remain the gold standard for the diagnosis of food allergy; however, challenges require significant time and resources and place the patient at an increased risk for severe allergic adverse events. There have been continued efforts to identify alternative diagnostic methods to replace or minimize the need for oral food challenges (OFCs) in the diagnosis of food allergy. Methods: Data was extracted for all IRB-approved, Stanford-initiated clinical protocols involving standardized screening OFCs to a cumulative dose of 500 mg protein to any of 11 food allergens in participants with elevated skin prick test (SPT) and/or specific IgE (sIgE) values to the challenged food across 7 sites. Baseline population characteristics, biomarkers, and challenge outcomes were analyzed to develop diagnostic criteria predictive of positive OFCs across multiple allergens in our multi-allergic cohorts. Results: A total of 1247 OFCs completed by 427 participants were analyzed in this cohort. Eighty-five percent of all OFCs had positive challenges. A history of atopic dermatitis and multiple food allergies were significantly associated with a higher risk of positive OFCs. The majority of food-specific SPT, sIgE, and sIgE/total IgE (tIgE) thresholds calculated from cumulative tolerated dose (CTD)-dependent receiver operator curves (ROC) had high discrimination of OFC outcome (area under the curves > 0.75). Participants with values above the thresholds were more likely to have positive challenges. Conclusions: This is the first study, to our knowledge, to not only adjust for tolerated allergen dose in predicting OFC outcome, but to also use this method to establish biomarker thresholds. The presented findings suggest that readily obtainable biomarker values and patient demographics may be of use in the prediction of OFC outcome and food allergy. In the subset of patients with SPT or sIgE values above the thresholds, values appear highly predictive of a positive OFC and true food allergy. While these values are relatively high, they may serve as an appropriate substitute for food challenges in clinical and research settings.
View details for PubMedID 30538699
The prevalence of food allergy has been increasing over the past few decades at an alarming rate with peanut allergy affecting about 2% of children. Both oral immunotherapy (OIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) have shown promise as a treatment option for peanut allergy. Immunotherapy induces desensitization and reduces the risk of reaction during accidental ingestion and may also enable those who are successfully desensitized to include the food allergen in their diet. OIT has been very well studied and has been found to be more efficacious that SLIT with an acceptable safety profile. However, SLIT is associated with fewer side effects. Studies indicate that a combination of SLIT and OIT may together induce a significant increase in challenge thresholds with fewer adverse events. More head-to-head clinical trials that direct compare OIT and SLIT as well as SLIT and OIT combination studies are warranted.
View details for DOI 10.1007/s40629-018-0067-x
View details for PubMedID 31440440
View details for PubMedCentralID PMC6705598