BACKGROUND: Allergy to peanuts is associated with considerable morbidity and, in a minority of cases, mortality. Natural resolution to peanut allergy occurs in only a few cases, hence the need to find effective interventions. Peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT) is a potentially important new therapeutic development. AIMS: To assess the benefits and harms of OIT for peanut allergy. METHODS: Fourteen databases were searched for published reports and unpublished/in-progress studies. We included studies employing randomised controlled trial (RCT), quasi-RCT, controlled clinical trial, controlled before-and-after, interrupted time series, and case series designs. RESULTS: Six studies enrolling a total of 85 participants satisfied our inclusion criteria. All studies employed a case series design and were thus judged to be at high risk of bias. Overall, this body of evidence provided suggestive evidence that it is possible for many participants to increase their threshold dose for peanut exposure whilst receiving treatment. Adverse reactions were common and, whilst most of these were relatively minor, some were potentially life-threatening. CONCLUSIONS: OIT appears to be a potentially promising new therapy for the short- to medium-term management of carefully selected and monitored patients with peanut allergy. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of OIT - particularly over the longer term - need to be clearly established using more robust designs before its clinical use can be contemplated. Given the risk of triggering serious adverse reactions, OIT should not be administered outside clinical trial settings.
BACKGROUND: Allergy to peanuts is associated with considerable morbidity and, in a minority of cases, mortality. Natural resolution to peanut allergy occurs in only a few cases, hence the need to find effective interventions. Peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT) is a potentially important new therapeutic development. AIMS: To assess the benefits and harms of OIT for peanut allergy. METHODS: Fourteen databases were searched for published reports and unpublished/in-progress studies. We included studies employing randomised controlled trial (RCT), quasi-RCT, controlled clinical trial, controlled before-and-after, interrupted time series, and case series designs. RESULTS: Six studies enrolling a total of 85 participants satisfied our inclusion criteria. All studies employed a case series design and were thus judged to be at high risk of bias. Overall, this body of evidence provided suggestive evidence that it is possible for many participants to increase their threshold dose for peanut exposure whilst receiving treatment. Adverse reactions were common and, whilst most of these were relatively minor, some were potentially life-threatening. CONCLUSIONS: OIT appears to be a potentially promising new therapy for the short- to medium-term management of carefully selected and monitored patients with peanut allergy. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of OIT - particularly over the longer term - need to be clearly established using more robust designs before its clinical use can be contemplated. Given the risk of triggering serious adverse reactions, OIT should not be administered outside clinical trial settings.
Authors: Dominique Biarent; Robert Bingham; Sam Richmond; Ian Maconochie; Jonathan Wyllie; Sheila Simpson; Antonio Rodriguez Nunez; David Zideman Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: L Heinzerling; A J Frew; C Bindslev-Jensen; S Bonini; J Bousquet; M Bresciani; K-H Carlsen; P van Cauwenberge; U Darsow; W J Fokkens; T Haahtela; H van Hoecke; B Jessberger; M L Kowalski; T Kopp; C N Lahoz; K C Lodrup Carlsen; N G Papadopoulos; J Ring; P Schmid-Grendelmeier; A M Vignola; S Wöhrl; T Zuberbier Journal: Allergy Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 13.146
Authors: Jasmeet Soar; Richard Pumphrey; Andrew Cant; Sue Clarke; Allison Corbett; Peter Dawson; Pamela Ewan; Bernard Foëx; David Gabbott; Matt Griffiths; Judith Hall; Nigel Harper; Fiona Jewkes; Ian Maconochie; Sarah Mitchell; Shuaib Nasser; Jerry Nolan; George Rylance; Aziz Sheikh; David Joseph Unsworth; David Warrell Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2008-03-20 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: R A Wood; S H Sicherer; A W Burks; A Grishin; A K Henning; R Lindblad; D Stablein; H A Sampson Journal: Allergy Date: 2013-04-29 Impact factor: 13.146
Authors: David M Fleischer; A Wesley Burks; Brian P Vickery; Amy M Scurlock; Robert A Wood; Stacie M Jones; Scott H Sicherer; Andrew H Liu; Donald Stablein; Alice K Henning; Lloyd Mayer; Robert Lindblad; Marshall Plaut; Hugh A Sampson Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 10.793
Authors: Giorgio Walter Canonica; Linda Cox; Ruby Pawankar; Carlos E Baena-Cagnani; Michael Blaiss; Sergio Bonini; Jean Bousquet; Moises Calderón; Enrico Compalati; Stephen R Durham; Roy Gerth van Wijk; Désirée Larenas-Linnemann; Harold Nelson; Giovanni Passalacqua; Oliver Pfaar; Nelson Rosário; Dermot Ryan; Lanny Rosenwasser; Peter Schmid-Grendelmeier; Gianenrico Senna; Erkka Valovirta; Hugo Van Bever; Pakit Vichyanond; Ulrich Wahn; Osman Yusuf Journal: World Allergy Organ J Date: 2014-03-28 Impact factor: 4.084
Authors: Andrew W O'Keefe; Sarah De Schryver; Jennifer Mill; Christopher Mill; Alizee Dery; Moshe Ben-Shoshan Journal: J Asthma Allergy Date: 2014-10-24