Egg oral immunotherapy in nonanaphylactic children with egg allergy
ABSTRACT There is no current active treatment for food allergy. Traditional injection immunotherapy has been proved unsafe, and thus there is a need for other forms of immunotherapy.
The purpose was to study the safety and immunologic effects of egg oral immunotherapy (OIT). The short-term goal was to desensitize subjects to protect against accidental ingestion reactions. The eventual goal was to induce lasting clinical and immunologic tolerance.
Subjects with a history of egg allergy but without a history of anaphylaxis to egg underwent a 24-month egg OIT protocol involving modified rush, build-up, and maintenance phases. Double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges were performed at study conclusion. Egg-specific IgE and IgG concentrations were followed.
Seven subjects completed the protocol. Egg-specific IgG concentrations increased significantly, whereas egg-specific IgE concentrations did not significantly change. Three subjects tolerated known or possible accidental egg ingestions while receiving OIT. During double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges at study conclusion, all tolerated significantly more egg protein than at study onset and than that found in the typical accidental exposure. Two subjects demonstrated oral tolerance.
This study provides proof of concept that OIT can be safely used for patients with egg allergy without a history of anaphylaxis to egg. Egg OIT does not heighten sensitivity to egg and might protect against reaction on accidental ingestion. Whether OIT will induce clinical oral tolerance cannot be concluded from this initial cohort.
Use of allergen-specific OIT to protect subjects with food allergy from reaction on accidental ingestion would represent a significant paradigm change in the treatment of food allergy.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This article presents an overview of potential treatments of food allergy, with an emphasis on various forms of immunotherapy (including oral immunotherapy, sublingual immunotherapy, epicutaneous immunotherapy, immunotherapy with modified food antigens, and immunotherapy with a recombinant peanut vaccine). Allergen nonspecific treatments, such as Chinese herbal formulas, probiotics/prebiotics, helminths, monoclonal antibodies, and toll-like receptor agonists, are also summarized. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.Immunology and Allergy Clinics of North America 11/2014; 35(1). DOI:10.1016/j.iac.2014.09.011 · 2.22 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Clinical egg allergy is a common food allergy. Current management relies upon strict allergen avoidance. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) might be an optional treatment, through desensitization to egg allergen. We aimed to assess the successful desensitization and development of tolerance to egg protein and the safety of egg oral and sublingual immunotherapy in children and adults with immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated egg allergy as compared to a placebo treatment or an avoidance strategy. We searched 13 databases for journal articles, conference proceedings, theses and unpublished trials using a combination of subject headings and text words (the last search was on 5 December 2013). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. All age groups with clinical egg allergy were to be included. We retrieved 83 studies from the electronic searches. We selected studies, extracted data and assessed the methodological quality. We attempted to contact the study investigators to obtain the unpublished data, wherever possible. We used the I² statistic to assess statistical heterogeneity. We estimated a pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for each outcome using a Mantel-Haenzel fixed-effect model if statistical heterogeneity was low (I² value less than 50%). We included four RCTs with a total of 167 recruited individuals (OIT 100; control 67 participants), all of whom were children (aged four to 15 years). One study used a placebo and three studies used an avoidance diet as the control. Each study used a different OIT protocol. Thirty nine per cent of OIT participants were able to tolerate a full serving of egg compared to 11.9% of the controls (RR 3.39, 95% CI 1.74 to 6.62). Forty per cent of OIT participants could ingest a partial serving of egg (1 g to 7.5 g; RR 5.73, 95% CI 3.13 to 10.50). Sixty nine per cent of the participants presented with mild-to-severe adverse effects (AEs) during OIT (RR 6.06, 95% CI 3.11 to 11.83). Five of the 100 participants receiving OIT required epinephrine. We cannot comment on whether over- or under-reporting of AEs was a concern based on the available data. Overall there was inconsistent methodological rigour in the trials. The studies were small and the quality of evidence was low. Current evidence suggests that OIT can desensitize a large number of egg-allergic patients, although it remains unknown whether long-term tolerance develops. A major difficulty of OIT is the frequency of AEs, though these are usually mild and self-limiting. The use of epinephrine while on OIT seems infrequent. There are no standardized protocols for OIT and guidelines would be required prior to incorporating desensitization into clinical practice.Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) 11/2014; 11(11):CD010638. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD010638.pub2 · 5.70 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The prevalence of food allergy is rising for unclear reasons, with prevalence estimates in the developed world approaching 10%. Knowledge regarding the natural course of food allergies is important because it can aid the clinician in diagnosing food allergies and in determining when to consider evaluation for food allergy resolution. Many food allergies with onset in early childhood are outgrown later in childhood, although a minority of food allergy persists into adolescence and even adulthood. More research is needed to improve food allergy diagnosis, treatment, and prevention. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.Immunology and Allergy Clinics of North America 11/2014; 35(1). DOI:10.1016/j.iac.2014.09.004 · 2.22 Impact Factor