Literature DB >> 30794314

Effect of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy vs Placebo on Reaction to Peanut Protein Ingestion Among Children With Peanut Allergy: The PEPITES Randomized Clinical Trial.

David M Fleischer1, Matthew Greenhawt1, Gordon Sussman2, Philippe Bégin3, Anna Nowak-Wegrzyn4, Daniel Petroni5, Kirsten Beyer6, Terri Brown-Whitehorn7, Jacques Hebert8, Jonathan O'B Hourihane9, Dianne E Campbell10, Stephanie Leonard11, R Sharon Chinthrajah12, Jacqueline A Pongracic13, Stacie M Jones14, Lars Lange15, Hey Chong16, Todd D Green16,17, Robert Wood18, Amarjit Cheema19, Susan L Prescott20, Peter Smith21, William Yang22, Edmond S Chan23, Aideen Byrne24, Amal Assa'ad25, J Andrew Bird26, Edwin H Kim27, Lynda Schneider28, Carla M Davis29, Bruce J Lanser30, Romain Lambert17, Wayne Shreffler31.   

Abstract

Importance: There are currently no approved treatments for peanut allergy. Objective: To assess the efficacy and adverse events of epicutaneous immunotherapy with a peanut patch among peanut-allergic children. Design, Setting, and Participants: Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted at 31 sites in 5 countries between January 8, 2016, and August 18, 2017. Participants included peanut-allergic children (aged 4-11 years [n = 356] without a history of a severe anaphylactic reaction) developing objective symptoms during a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge at an eliciting dose of 300 mg or less of peanut protein. Interventions: Daily treatment with peanut patch containing either 250 μg of peanut protein (n = 238) or placebo (n = 118) for 12 months. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the percentage difference in responders between the peanut patch and placebo patch based on eliciting dose (highest dose at which objective signs/symptoms of an immediate hypersensitivity reaction developed) determined by food challenges at baseline and month 12. Participants with baseline eliciting dose of 10 mg or less were responders if the posttreatment eliciting dose was 300 mg or more; participants with baseline eliciting dose greater than 10 to 300 mg were responders if the posttreatment eliciting dose was 1000 mg or more. A threshold of 15% or more on the lower bound of a 95% CI around responder rate difference was prespecified to determine a positive trial result. Adverse event evaluation included collection of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).
Results: Among 356 participants randomized (median age, 7 years; 61.2% male), 89.9% completed the trial; the mean treatment adherence was 98.5%. The responder rate was 35.3% with peanut-patch treatment vs 13.6% with placebo (difference, 21.7% [95% CI, 12.4%-29.8%; P < .001]). The prespecified lower bound of the CI threshold was not met. TEAEs, primarily patch application site reactions, occurred in 95.4% and 89% of active and placebo groups, respectively. The all-causes rate of discontinuation was 10.5% in the peanut-patch group vs 9.3% in the placebo group. Conclusions and Relevance: Among peanut-allergic children aged 4 to 11 years, the percentage difference in responders at 12 months with the 250-μg peanut-patch therapy vs placebo was 21.7% and was statistically significant, but did not meet the prespecified lower bound of the confidence interval criterion for a positive trial result. The clinical relevance of not meeting this lower bound of the confidence interval with respect to the treatment of peanut-allergic children with epicutaneous immunotherapy remains to be determined. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02636699.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30794314      PMCID: PMC6439674          DOI: 10.1001/jama.2019.1113

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  19 in total

1.  Long-term follow-up of oral immunotherapy for cow's milk allergy.

Authors:  Corinne A Keet; Shannon Seopaul; Sarah Knorr; Satya Narisety; Justin Skripak; Robert A Wood
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2013-06-25       Impact factor: 10.793

2.  Work Group report: oral food challenge testing.

Authors:  Anna Nowak-Wegrzyn; Amal H Assa'ad; Sami L Bahna; S Allan Bock; Scott H Sicherer; Suzanne S Teuber
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 10.793

3.  Fatalities due to anaphylactic reactions to foods.

Authors:  S A Bock; A Muñoz-Furlong; H A Sampson
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 10.793

4.  Standardizing double-blind, placebo-controlled oral food challenges: American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology-European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology PRACTALL consensus report.

Authors:  Hugh A Sampson; Roy Gerth van Wijk; Carsten Bindslev-Jensen; Scott Sicherer; Suzanne S Teuber; A Wesley Burks; Anthony E J Dubois; Kirsten Beyer; Philippe A Eigenmann; Jonathan M Spergel; Thomas Werfel; Vernon M Chinchilli
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 10.793

5.  Prospective Validation of the NIAID/FAAN Criteria for Emergency Department Diagnosis of Anaphylaxis.

Authors:  Caitlin E Loprinzi Brauer; Megan S Motosue; James T Li; John B Hagan; M Fernanda Bellolio; Sangil Lee; Ronna L Campbell
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract       Date:  2016-07-09

6.  Understanding caregiver goals, benefits, and acceptable risks of peanut allergy therapies.

Authors:  Matthew Greenhawt; Rebekah Marsh; Hannah Gilbert; Scott Sicherer; Audrey DunnGalvin; Dan Matlock
Journal:  Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol       Date:  2018-06-27       Impact factor: 6.347

7.  Evaluation of national institute of allergy and infectious diseases/food allergy and anaphylaxis network criteria for the diagnosis of anaphylaxis in emergency department patients.

Authors:  Ronna L Campbell; John B Hagan; Veena Manivannan; Wyatt W Decker; Abhijit R Kanthala; Maria Fernanda Bellolio; Vernon D Smith; James T C Li
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2011-11-01       Impact factor: 10.793

8.  Novel baseline predictors of adverse events during oral immunotherapy in children with peanut allergy.

Authors:  Yamini V Virkud; A Wesley Burks; Pamela H Steele; Lloyd J Edwards; Jelena P Berglund; Stacie M Jones; Amy M Scurlock; Tamara T Perry; Robert D Pesek; Brian P Vickery
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2016-09-05       Impact factor: 10.793

9.  Effect of Varying Doses of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy vs Placebo on Reaction to Peanut Protein Exposure Among Patients With Peanut Sensitivity: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Hugh A Sampson; Wayne G Shreffler; William H Yang; Gordon L Sussman; Terri F Brown-Whitehorn; Kari C Nadeau; Amarjit S Cheema; Stephanie A Leonard; Jacqueline A Pongracic; Christine Sauvage-Delebarre; Amal H Assa'ad; Frederic de Blay; J Andrew Bird; Stephen A Tilles; Franck Boralevi; Thierry Bourrier; Jacques Hébert; Todd D Green; Roy Gerth van Wijk; André C Knulst; Gisèle Kanny; Lynda C Schneider; Marek L Kowalski; Christophe Dupont
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2017-11-14       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Analysis of food-allergic and anaphylactic events in the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System.

Authors:  Marianne Phelan Ross; Martine Ferguson; Debra Street; Karl Klontz; Tom Schroeder; Stefano Luccioli
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 10.793

View more
  45 in total

Review 1.  Evolution of Immune Responses in Food Immunotherapy.

Authors:  Johanna M Smeekens; Michael D Kulis
Journal:  Immunol Allergy Clin North Am       Date:  2019-11-06       Impact factor: 3.479

Review 2.  Could This Be IT? Epicutaneous, Sublingual, and Subcutaneous Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Food Allergies.

Authors:  Mary Grace Baker; Julie Wang
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2019-11-25       Impact factor: 4.806

3.  COVID-19, allergic disease and asthma: Extraordinary challenges for the allergist/immunologist.

Authors:  Joseph A Bellanti; Russell A Settipane
Journal:  Allergy Asthma Proc       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 2.587

4.  Novel diagnostic techniques and therapeutic strategies for IgE-mediated food allergy.

Authors:  Stefano Passanisi; Fortunato Lombardo; Giuseppe Crisafulli; Giuseppina Salzano; Tommaso Aversa; Giovanni B Pajno
Journal:  Allergy Asthma Proc       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 2.587

Review 5.  Eosinophilic esophagitis during sublingual and oral allergen immunotherapy.

Authors:  Joseph Cafone; Peter Capucilli; David A Hill; Jonathan M Spergel
Journal:  Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2019-08

6.  Long-term sublingual immunotherapy for peanut allergy in children: Clinical and immunologic evidence of desensitization.

Authors:  Edwin H Kim; Luanna Yang; Ping Ye; Rishu Guo; Quefeng Li; Michael D Kulis; A Wesley Burks
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2019-09-04       Impact factor: 10.793

Review 7.  Biomarkers in Food Allergy Immunotherapy.

Authors:  LaKeya C Hardy; Johanna M Smeekens; Michael D Kulis
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2019-12-04       Impact factor: 4.806

Review 8.  Dietary and Microbial Determinants in Food Allergy.

Authors:  Emmanuel Stephen-Victor; Elena Crestani; Talal A Chatila
Journal:  Immunity       Date:  2020-08-18       Impact factor: 31.745

9.  Expansion of the CD4+ effector T-cell repertoire characterizes peanut-allergic patients with heightened clinical sensitivity.

Authors:  Bert Ruiter; Neal P Smith; Brinda Monian; Ang A Tu; Elizabeth Fleming; Yamini V Virkud; Sarita U Patil; Charles A Whittaker; J Christopher Love; Wayne G Shreffler
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 10.793

10.  Microneedles coated with peanut allergen enable desensitization of peanut sensitized mice.

Authors:  Akhilesh Kumar Shakya; Rohan S J Ingrole; Gaurav Joshi; Md Jasim Uddin; Sara Anvari; Carla M Davis; Harvinder Singh Gill
Journal:  J Control Release       Date:  2019-10-15       Impact factor: 9.776

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.