22
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A Phase 2 Randomized Controlled Multisite Study Using Omalizumab-facilitated Rapid Desensitization to Test Continued vs Discontinued Dosing in Multifood Allergic Individuals

      research-article
      a , b , c , 1 , a , b , c , 1 , a , b , c , a , b , c , a , b , c , d , d , e , e , f , g , g , h , h , a , b , c , a , i , j , a , b , c , h , 1 , a , b , c , 1 , g , 1 , e , 1 , k , 1 , f , 1 , d , 1 , a , b , c , * , 1
      EClinicalMedicine
      Elsevier
      Food allergy, Oral immunotherapy, Omalizumab, Sustained unresponsiveness, Food allergen

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          As there is limited data on the sustainability of desensitization of multifood-oral immunotherapy (multifood-OIT), we conducted a multisite multifood-OIT study to compare the efficacy of successful desensitization with sustained dosing vs discontinued dosing after multifood-OIT.

          Methods

          We enrolled 70 participants, aged 5–22 years with multiple food allergies confirmed by double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFCs). In the open-label phase of the study, all participants received omalizumab (weeks 1–16) and multi-OIT (2–5 allergens; weeks 8–30) and eligible participants (on maintenance dose of each allergen by weeks 28–29) were randomized 1:1:1 to 1 g, 300 mg, or 0 mg arms (blinded, weeks 30–36) and then tested by food challenge at week 36. Success was defined as passing 2 g food challenge to at least 2 foods in week 36.

          Findings

          Most participants were able to reach a dose of 2 g or higher of each of 2, 3, 4, and 5 food allergens (as applicable to the participant's food allergens in OIT) in week 36 food challenges. Using an intent-to-treat analysis, we did not find evidence that a 300 mg dose was effectively different than a 1 g dose in maintaining desensitization, and both together were more effective than OIT discontinuation (0 mg dose) (85% vs 55%, P = 0.03). Fifty-five percent of the intent-to-treat participants and 69% of per protocol participants randomized to the 0 mg arm showed no objective reactivity after 6 weeks of discontinuation. Cross-desensitization was found between cashew/pistachio and walnut/pecan when only one of the foods was part of OIT. No statistically significant safety differences were found between the three arms.

          Interpretation

          These results suggest that sustained desensitization after omalizumab-facilitated multi-OIT best occurs through continued maintenance OIT dosing of either 300 mg or 1 g of each food allergen as opposed to discontinuation of multi-OIT.

          Funding

          Sean N. Parker Center for Allergy and Asthma Research at Stanford University, Jeff and MacKenzie Bezos, NIAID AADCRC U19AI104209.

          Trial Registration Number

          ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02626611.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Peanut oral immunotherapy results in increased antigen-induced regulatory T-cell function and hypomethylation of forkhead box protein 3 (FOXP3).

          The mechanisms contributing to clinical immune tolerance remain incompletely understood. This study provides evidence for specific immune mechanisms that are associated with a model of operationally defined clinical tolerance. Our overall objective was to study laboratory changes associated with clinical immune tolerance in antigen-induced T cells, basophils, and antibodies in subjects undergoing oral immunotherapy (OIT) for peanut allergy. In a phase 1 single-site study, we studied participants (n = 23) undergoing peanut OIT and compared them with age-matched allergic control subjects (n = 20) undergoing standard of care (abstaining from peanut) for 24 months. Participants were operationally defined as clinically immune tolerant (IT) if they had no detectable allergic reactions to a peanut oral food challenge after 3 months of therapy withdrawal (IT, n = 7), whereas those who had an allergic reaction were categorized as nontolerant (NT; n = 13). Antibody and basophil activation measurements did not statistically differentiate between NT versus IT participants. However, T-cell function and demethylation of forkhead box protein 3 (FOXP3) CpG sites in antigen-induced regulatory T cells were significantly different between IT versus NT participants. When IT participants were withdrawn from peanut therapy for an additional 3 months (total of 6 months), only 3 participants remained classified as IT participants, and 4 participants regained sensitivity along with increased methylation of FOXP3 CpG sites in antigen-induced regulatory T cells. In summary, modifications at the DNA level of antigen-induced T-cell subsets might be predictive of a state of operationally defined clinical immune tolerance during peanut OIT. Copyright © 2014 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of omalizumab combined with oral immunotherapy for the treatment of cow's milk allergy

            Although studies of oral immunotherapy (OIT) for food allergy have shown promise, treatment is frequently complicated by adverse reactions and, even when successful, has limited long-term efficacy because benefits usually diminish when treatment is discontinued.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A pilot study of omalizumab to facilitate rapid oral desensitization in high-risk peanut-allergic patients.

              Peanut allergy is a major public health problem that affects 1% of the population and has no effective therapy. To examine the safety and efficacy of oral desensitization in peanut-allergic children in combination with a brief course of anti-IgE mAb (omalizumab [Xolair]). We performed oral peanut desensitization in peanut-allergic children at high risk for developing significant peanut-induced allergic reactions. Omalizumab was administered before and during oral peanut desensitization. We enrolled 13 children (median age, 10 years), with a median peanut-specific IgE level of 229 kU(A)/L and a median total serum IgE level of 621 kU/L, who failed an initial double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge at peanut flour doses of 100 mg or less. After pretreatment with omalizumab, all 13 subjects tolerated the initial 11 desensitization doses given on the first day, including the maximum dose of 500 mg peanut flour (cumulative dose, 992 mg, equivalent to >2 peanuts), requiring minimal or no rescue therapy. Twelve subjects then reached the maximum maintenance dose of 4000 mg peanut flour per day in a median time of 8 weeks, at which point omalizumab was discontinued. All 12 subjects continued on 4000 mg peanut flour per day and subsequently tolerated a challenge with 8000 mg peanut flour (equivalent to about 20 peanuts), or 160 to 400 times the dose tolerated before desensitization. During the study, 6 of the 13 subjects experienced mild or no allergic reactions, 5 subjects had grade 2 reactions, and 2 subjects had grade 3 reactions, all of which responded rapidly to treatment. Among children with high-risk peanut allergy, treatment with omalizumab may facilitate rapid oral desensitization and qualitatively improve the desensitization process. Copyright © 2013 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                EClinicalMedicine
                EClinicalMedicine
                EClinicalMedicine
                Elsevier
                2589-5370
                21 January 2019
                January 2019
                21 January 2019
                : 7
                : 27-38
                Affiliations
                [a ]Sean N. Parker Center for Allergy and Asthma Research at Stanford University, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
                [b ]Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
                [c ]Division of Allergy, Immunology and Rheumatology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
                [d ]Division of Allergy and Immunology, Department of Pediatrics, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
                [e ]Division of Allergy and Immunology, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia Department of Pediatrics, Perelman School of Medicine at University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
                [f ]ASTHMA Inc. Clinical Research Center, Northwest Asthma and Allergy Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
                [g ]Division of Allergy and Immunology, the Ann and Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
                [h ]Division of Allergy and Immunology, Cincinnati Children's Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA
                [i ]Department of Pathology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
                [j ]Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
                [k ]Division of Clinical Immunology and Allergy, Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author at: Sean N. Parker Center for Allergy and Asthma Research at Stanford University, 269 Campus Drive, CCSR 3215, MC 5366, Stanford, CA 94305-5101, USA. knadeau@ 123456stanford.edu
                [1]

                These authors contributed equally to the work.

                Article
                S2589-5370(18)30061-0
                10.1016/j.eclinm.2018.12.006
                6537534
                31193674
                11f7acd5-5538-4e15-9cad-43384b368542
                © 2018 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

                History
                : 2 November 2018
                : 19 December 2018
                Categories
                Research Paper

                food allergy,oral immunotherapy,omalizumab,sustained unresponsiveness,food allergen

                Comments

                Comment on this article