Richard L Wasserman1, Angela R Hague2, Deanna M Pence2, Robert W Sugerman3, Stacy K Silvers4, Joanna G Rolen2, Morley Herbert5. 1. Allergy Partners of North Texas, Dallas, Texas; Medical City Children's Hospital, Dallas, Texas. Electronic address: drrichwasserman@gmail.com. 2. Allergy Partners of North Texas, Dallas, Texas. 3. Allergy Partners of North Texas, Dallas, Texas; Medical City Children's Hospital, Dallas, Texas. 4. Medical City Children's Hospital, Dallas, Texas; Texan Allergy and Sinus Center, Austin, Texas. 5. Medical City Hospital, Dallas, Texas.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Peanut allergy (PA) is a significant and increasing problem, interfering with psychological development and family life. The standard recommendation to avoid peanut products and have access to injectable epinephrine is often inadequate. Oral immunotherapy for PA has been formally studied. Clinical observations of allergen immunotherapy have repeatedly enhanced patient care. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to report observations on the treatment of 270 patients with PA over 8.5 years. METHODS: This is a retrospective record review of patients beginning peanut oral immunotherapy between January 1, 2009, and June 1, 2017, approved by the North Texas Institutional Review Board. RESULTS: A total of 270 patients aged 4 to 18 years comprising 107 girls and 163 boys were treated. A total of 214 of 270 patients (79%) completed immunotherapy escalation. Age (P < .001) and peanut IgE (P < .001) correlate inversely with completing dose escalation. Epinephrine-treated reactions in 63 and isolated gastrointestinal symptoms in 101 patients, respectively, were the most common adverse reactions to treatment but did not preclude success. Peanut IgE decreased by 65% after 3 years of maintenance treatment and 14 of 214 patients (6.5%) were able to achieve sustained unresponsiveness. CONCLUSIONS: In an allergy office practice setting, 79% of patients are able to complete a peanut desensitization protocol and maintain the desensitized state indefinitely with daily dosing. With appropriate planning and precautions, peanut oral immunotherapy may be performed in an allergy office. Careful observations of clinical treatment can contribute to the development of effective treatment strategies.
BACKGROUND:Peanutallergy (PA) is a significant and increasing problem, interfering with psychological development and family life. The standard recommendation to avoid peanut products and have access to injectable epinephrine is often inadequate. Oral immunotherapy for PA has been formally studied. Clinical observations of allergen immunotherapy have repeatedly enhanced patient care. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to report observations on the treatment of 270 patients with PA over 8.5 years. METHODS: This is a retrospective record review of patients beginning peanut oral immunotherapy between January 1, 2009, and June 1, 2017, approved by the North Texas Institutional Review Board. RESULTS: A total of 270 patients aged 4 to 18 years comprising 107 girls and 163 boys were treated. A total of 214 of 270 patients (79%) completed immunotherapy escalation. Age (P < .001) and peanut IgE (P < .001) correlate inversely with completing dose escalation. Epinephrine-treated reactions in 63 and isolated gastrointestinal symptoms in 101 patients, respectively, were the most common adverse reactions to treatment but did not preclude success. Peanut IgE decreased by 65% after 3 years of maintenance treatment and 14 of 214 patients (6.5%) were able to achieve sustained unresponsiveness. CONCLUSIONS: In an allergy office practice setting, 79% of patients are able to complete a peanut desensitization protocol and maintain the desensitized state indefinitely with daily dosing. With appropriate planning and precautions, peanut oral immunotherapy may be performed in an allergy office. Careful observations of clinical treatment can contribute to the development of effective treatment strategies.
Authors: Stacie M Jones; Edwin H Kim; Kari C Nadeau; Anna Nowak-Wegrzyn; Robert A Wood; Hugh A Sampson; Amy M Scurlock; Sharon Chinthrajah; Julie Wang; Robert D Pesek; Sayantani B Sindher; Mike Kulis; Jacqueline Johnson; Katharine Spain; Denise C Babineau; Hyunsook Chin; Joy Laurienzo-Panza; Rachel Yan; David Larson; Tielin Qin; Don Whitehouse; Michelle L Sever; Srinath Sanda; Marshall Plaut; Lisa M Wheatley; A Wesley Burks Journal: Lancet Date: 2022-01-22 Impact factor: 202.731
Authors: P Bégin; E S Chan; H Kim; M Wagner; M S Cellier; C Favron-Godbout; E M Abrams; M Ben-Shoshan; S B Cameron; S Carr; D Fischer; A Haynes; S Kapur; M N Primeau; J Upton; T K Vander Leek; M M Goetghebeur Journal: Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol Date: 2020-03-18 Impact factor: 3.406