Article

Allergen-specific oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy

Allergy & Respiratory Research Group, Centre for Population Health Sciences, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) (Impact Factor: 5.94). 01/2012; 9(9):CD009014. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009014.pub2
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Peanut allergy is one of the most common forms of food allergy encountered in clinical practice. In most cases, it does not spontaneously resolve; furthermore, it is frequently implicated in acute life-threatening reactions. The current management of peanut allergy centres on meticulous avoidance of peanuts and peanut-containing foods. Allergen-specific oral immunotherapy (OIT) for peanut allergy aims to induce desensitisation and then tolerance to peanut, and has the potential to revolutionise the management of peanut allergy. However, at present there is still considerable uncertainty about the effectiveness and safety of this approach.
To establish the effectiveness and safety of OIT in people with IgE-mediated peanut allergy who develop symptoms after peanut ingestion.
We searched in the following databases: AMED, BIOSIS, CAB, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Global Health, Google Scholar, IndMed, ISI Web of Science, LILACS, MEDLINE, PakMediNet and TRIP. We also searched registers of on-going and unpublished trials. The date of the most recent search was January 2012.
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs or controlled clinical trials involving children or adults with clinical features indicative of IgE-mediated peanut allergy treated with allergen-specific OIT, compared with control group receiving either placebo or no treatment, were eligible for inclusion.
Two review authors independently checked and reviewed titles and abstracts of identified studies and assessed risk of bias. The full text of potentially relevant trials was assessed. Data extraction was independently performed by two reviewers with disagreements resolved through discussion.
We found one small RCT, judged to be at low risk of bias, that enrolled 28 children aged 1 to 16 years with evidence of sensitisation to peanut and a clinical history of reaction to peanut within 60 minutes of exposure. The study did not include children who had moderate to severe asthma or who had a history of severe peanut anaphylaxis. Randomisation was in a 2:1 ratio resulting in 19 children being randomised to the intervention arm and nine to the placebo arm. Intervention arm children received OIT with peanut flour and control arm participants received placebo comprising of oat flour. The primary outcome was assessed using a double-blind, placebo controlled oral food challenge (OFC) at approximately one year. No data were available on longer term outcomes beyond the OFC conducted at the end of the study.Because of adverse events, three patients withdrew from the intervention arm before the completion of the study. Therefore, only 16 participants received the full course of peanut OIT, whereas all nine patients receiving placebo completed the trial. The per-protocol analysis found a significant increase in the threshold dose of peanut allergen required to trigger a reaction in those in the intervention arm with all 16 participants able to ingest the maximum cumulative dose of 5000 mg of peanut protein (which the authors equate as being equivalent to approximately 20 peanuts) without developing symptoms, whereas in the placebo group they were able to ingest a median cumulative dose of 280 mg (range: 0 to 1900 mg, P < 0.001) before experiencing symptoms. Per-protocol analyses also demonstrated that peanut OIT resulted in reductions in skin prick test size (P < 0.001), interleukin-5 (P = 0.01), interleukin-13 (P = 0.02) and an increase in peanut-specific immunoglobulin G(4) (IgG(4)) (P < 0.01).Children in the intervention arm experienced more adverse events during treatment than those in the placebo arm. In the initial day escalation phase, nine (47%) of the 19 participants initially enrolled in the OIT arm experienced clinically-relevant adverse events which required treatment with H(1)-antihistamines, two of which required additional treatment with epinephrine (adrenaline).
The one small RCT we found showed that allergen-specific peanut OIT can result in desensitisation in children, and that this is associated with evidence of underlying immune-modulation. However, this treatment approach was associated with a substantial risk of adverse events, although the majority of these were mild. In view of the risk of adverse events and the lack of evidence of long-term benefits, allergen-specific peanut OIT cannot currently be recommended as a treatment for the management of patients with IgE-mediated peanut allergy. Larger RCTs are needed to investigate the acceptability, long-term effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of safer treatment regimens, particularly in relation to the induction of clinical and immunological tolerance.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Ulugbek Nurmatov, Jun 18, 2015
1 Follower
 · 
119 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Allergic diseases are an increasing health concern, particularly in the developed world. The standard clinical approach to treatment of allergic disease focuses on allergen avoidance and symptom control but does little to address the underlying Th2 bias of disease. Specific immunotherapy (SIT) consisting of controlled administration of allergen, however, has been demonstrated to successfully induce desensitization and tolerance in an antigen-specific manner for a variety of Th2-mediated diseases. This review focuses on the mechanisms by which current SIT approaches induce tolerance as well as discussing attempts to modify the safety and efficacy of SIT. These refinements focus on three major aspects of SIT: the route of antigen administration, modification of the antigen to remove allergenic epitopes and reduce adverse events and choice of adjuvant used to induce tolerance and/or immune deviation from Th2 to Th1 and regulatory T-cell (Treg) phenotypes. Synthesis of these recent developments in SIT provides considerable promise for more robust therapies with improved safety profiles to improve resolution of allergic disease and its associated costs.
    Critical Reviews in Immunology 01/2013; 33(5):389-414. DOI:10.1615/CritRevImmunol.2013007046 · 3.89 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Immune tolerance is defined as nonresponsiveness of the adaptive immune system to antigens. Immune mechanisms preventing inappropriate immune reactivity to innocuous antigens include deletion of reactive lymphocytes and generation of regulatory T (Treg) cells. The normal response to food antigens is the generation of antigen-specific Treg cells. In patients with food allergy, the dominant immune response is a T(H)2-skewed T-cell response and the generation of food-specific IgE antibodies from B cells. It is not known whether a failure of the Treg cell response is behind this inappropriate immune response, but interventions that boost the Treg cell response, such as mucosal immunotherapy, might lead to a restoration of immune tolerance to foods. Tolerance has been notoriously difficult to restore in animal disease models, but limited data from human trials suggest that tolerance (sustained nonresponsiveness) can be re-established in a subset of patients. Furthermore, studies on the natural history of food allergy indicate that spontaneous development of tolerance to foods over time is not uncommon. The current challenge is to understand the mechanisms responsible for restoration of natural or induced tolerance so that interventions can be developed to more successfully induce tolerance in the majority of patients with food allergy.
    The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology 01/2013; 131(1):14-22. DOI:10.1016/j.jaci.2012.10.058 · 11.25 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The prevalence of peanut allergy in the United States and other Westernized countries has tripled in the past 15 years, now affecting more than 1% of the population. Strict peanut avoidance is the current standard of care. In the past decade, a number of small, largely uncontrolled clinical trials have suggested that oral immunotherapy (OIT) can effectively desensitize most children with peanut allergy. Some in the allergy community now feel that OIT is ready for clinical practice. In this review, the evidence base in the medical literature is examined. Although peanut OIT shows promise, the evidence currently available on its effectiveness, risk benefit, and potential long-term consequences is insufficient to support its use in clinical practice. Appropriately designed, prospective clinical trials are urgently needed to determine whether OIT is a safe, effective form of therapy for food allergy.
    01/2013; 1(1):15-21. DOI:10.1016/j.jaip.2012.10.009
Show more