Atopic dermatitis (AD) is one of the main risk factors for infants in the development of food allergy. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) in early childhood has been found to be highly effective and safe in preschoolers with and without AD, especially in young infants. Delays in initiation of OIT in infants and children due to uncontrolled AD risk expansion of the number of foods children develop allergy to through unnecessary avoidance of multiple foods. Parents and caregivers may attribute eczema flares to OIT doses, which physicians usually ascribe to non-food triggers such as weather changes, psychological stress, and infection. There is a lack of published literature confirming OIT as a trigger of AD flares, and the degree to which OIT may be associated with AD flares needs to be further studied. We describe 8 case scenarios with varying degrees of AD flare before and during OIT. We propose management algorithms for children with preexisting concurrent AD and food allergy who are being considered for starting OIT and children with AD flares during OIT. Optimizing AD control strategies and providing adequate AD care education before starting OIT can reduce confusion for both parents and allergists if rashes arise during OIT, thus improving adherence to OIT.

UNASSIGNED: Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is a promising allergen-specific approach in the management of food allergy; however, studies on OIT for allergic rhinitis (AR) have rarely been reported. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of OIT using enteric-coated capsules for AR induced by house dust mites.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 49 patients with AR were enrolled, including 25 who received subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and 24 who received OIT. The clinical efficacy and safety in both groups were evaluated.
UNASSIGNED: After 1 year of treatment, both SCIT and OIT demonstrated significant therapeutic effects. OIT was found to be more effective than SCIT in reducing the total AR symptom score and improving the results of nasal provocation tests. Local and systemic adverse reactions were observed in the SCIT group, while none were reported in the OIT group.
UNASSIGNED: OIT is an effective and safe treatment for mite-induced AR.

BACKGROUND: Food ladders are tools designed to facilitate home-based dietary advancement in children with food allergies through stepwise exposures to increasingly allergenic forms of milk and egg. Several studies have now documented safety and efficacy of food ladders. In 2021, we published a Canadian adaptation of the previously existing milk and egg ladders originating in Europe using foods more readily available/consumed in Canada. Our study adds to the growing body of evidence supporting food ladder use and provides safety and effectiveness data for our Canadian adaptation of the milk and egg ladders.
METHODS: Surveys were distributed to families of children using the Canadian Milk Ladder and/or the Canadian Egg Ladder at baseline, with follow up surveys at 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months. Data were analyzed using REDCap and descriptive and inferential statistics are presented.
RESULTS: One hundred and nine participants were started on milk/egg ladders between September 2020 and June 2022. 53 participants responded to follow up surveys. Only 2 of 53 (3.8%) participants reported receiving epinephrine during the study. Severe grade 4 reactions (defined according to the modified World Allergy Organization grading system) were not reported by any participants. Minor cutaneous adverse reactions were common, with about 71% (n = 10/14) of respondents reporting cutaneous adverse reactions by 1 year of food ladder use. An increasing proportion of participants could tolerate most foods from steps 2-4 foods after 3, 6, and 12 months of the food ladder compared to baseline.
CONCLUSIONS: The Canadian food ladders are safe tools for children with cow\'s milk and/or egg allergies, and participants tolerated a larger range of foods with food ladder use compared to baseline.

UNASSIGNED: Previous studies support the effectiveness of sesame oral immunotherapy (S-OIT) in patients >4 years old using maintenance doses of 1200 mg protein. However, tahini is often not palatable to children, and high-maintenance doses may not be possible for preschoolers.
UNASSIGNED: We studied the safety and effectiveness outcomes of preschoolers with sesame allergy who underwent low-dose S-OIT of 200 mg protein.
UNASSIGNED: Preschoolers with sesame allergy, with a history of objective reaction to sesame, and with either a positive skin prick test result (wheal diameter ≥3 mm) or sesame-specific IgE level ≥0.35 kU/L were included. Doses were escalated every 2 to 4 weeks until the maintenance dose of 200 mg of sesame protein was reached. The maintenance dose was continued daily for 1 year, followed by exit oral food challenge (OFC). Primary safety outcomes included allergic reactions grade 2 or higher and the need for epinephrine therapy during buildup. The primary effectiveness outcome was proportion of patients tolerating a minimum of 2000 mg sesame protein at exit OFC.
UNASSIGNED: Twenty-eight preschoolers (median age, 33.5 months) were enrolled to receive S-OIT. During the buildup phase, 9 subjects (32.1%) had no reaction, and 8 (28.6%) and 11 (39.3%) had grade 1 and 2 reactions, respectively. One patient (3.57%) received epinephrine for a grade 2 reaction. Twenty-one (91.3%) of 23 eligible subjects underwent exit OFC; 18 (85.7%) of these 21 patients successfully completed exit OFC. One (4.8%) and 2 (9.5%) subjects had grade 1 and 2 reactions, respectively, during OFC.
UNASSIGNED: A lower and age-appropriate maintenance dose is safe and effective in desensitizing preschoolers with sesame allergy.

Allergists addressing gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms during oral immunotherapy (OIT) may be biased toward diagnoses related to OIT; however, non-OIT causes may occur. Although there is currently a lack of robust data for evidence-based treatment recommendations, we provide 3 real-world illustrative cases along with a proposed management algorithm for GI symptoms encountered during OIT. This algorithm was developed because of a significant clinical need, given the number of new-to-OIT providers that include practicing allergists, trainees transitioning into practice, and allied health care providers who manage GI symptoms in OIT patients. We developed the algorithm based on the opinions of community and academic allergy clinics across Canada with significant clinical experience offering infant, preschool, and school-aged OIT patients, with gastroenterologist input. Further research is needed to fill the knowledge gaps in the management of GI symptoms during OIT before formal recommendations can be suggested.

BACKGROUND: Cow\'s milk allergy (CMA) is the most common allergy in infants that decreases the quality of life of patients and their families. Standard treatment for CMA is the strict avoidance of milk; new treatment strategies such as oral immunotherapy (OIT) have been sought for patients with CMA. We aimed to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of OIT in the treatment of children with immunoglobulin E-mediated CMA (IMCMA).
METHODS: We searched all randomized controlled trials in which OIT is used to treat children with IMCMA from five international electronic databases. We estimated a pooled risk ratio (RR) for each outcome using a Mantel-Haenzel fixed-effects model if statistical heterogeneity was low.
RESULTS: Eleven studies were chosen for meta-analysis, including a total of 469 children (242 OITs, 227 controls). One hundred and seventy-six patients (72.7%) in the OIT were desensitized compared with 49 patients (21.6%) in the control group (RR: 7.35, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.82-19.13, p < .0001). The desensitization effect of OIT was particularly significant in children over 3 years old (RR: 18.05, 95% CI: 6.48-50.26, p < .00001). Although adverse effects were common, they usually involved mild reactions, but epinephrine use was more common in the OIT group (RR: 7.69, 95% CI: 2.16-27.33, p < .002).
CONCLUSIONS: OIT can lead to desensitization in the majority of individuals with IMCMA, especially in patients over 3 years old. A major problem of OIT is the frequency of adverse events, although most are mild. OIT may be an alternative treatment in the future.

Food allergy (FA) is a global health problem that affects a large population, and thus effective treatment is highly desirable. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has been showing reasonable efficacy and favorable safety in most FA subjects. Dependable biomarkers are needed for treatment assessment and outcome prediction during OIT. Several immunological indicators have been used as biomarkers in OIT, such as skin prick tests, basophil and mast cell reactivity, T cell and B cell responses, allergen-specific antibody levels, and cytokines. Other novel indicators also could be potential biomarkers. In this review, we discuss and assess the application of various immunological indicators as biomarkers for OIT.

Recent guideline recommendations have shifted from recommending prolonged avoidance of allergenic foods in the first 3 years of life to a primary prevention approach involving the deliberate early introduction to infants at risk of developing food allergy. Despite this, some infants, especially those with severe eczema who are at highest risk for developing peanut allergy, fail to receive the preventative benefits of early peanut introduction due to hesitancy and other factors. Difficulty adhering to regular ingestion after introduction further reduces the effectiveness of primary prevention. As emerging real-world evidence has demonstrated that performing peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT) among infants is effective and safe, peanut OIT could be a treatment option for infants with peanut allergy. This review discusses the benefits, risks, and barriers to offering peanut OIT to infants who fail primary prevention strategies. We propose the novel concept that infants with peanut allergy be offered peanut OIT as soon as possible after failed peanut introduction through a shared decision-making process with the family, where there is a preference for active management rather than avoidance.

BACKGROUND: Allergen-specific immunotherapy (ASIT) has the potential to modify allergic diseases, and it is also considered a potential therapy for allergic asthma. House dust mite (HDM) allergens, a common source of airborne allergen in human diseases, have been developed as an immunotherapy for patients with allergic asthma via the subcutaneous and sublingual routes. Oral immunotherapy with repeated allergen ingestion is emerging as another potential modality of ASIT. The aim of this study was to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of the oral ingestion of HDM extracts in a murine model of allergic asthma.
METHODS: BABL/c mice were sensitized twice by intraperitoneal injection of HDM extracts and Al(OH)3 on day 1 and day 8. Then, the mice received challenge to induce airway inflammation by intratracheal instillation of HDM extracts on days 29-31. The treatment group received immunotherapy with oral HDM extracts ingestion before the challenge. All the mice were sacrificed on day 32 for bronchoalveolar inflammatory cytokines, mediastinal lymph node T cells, lung histology, and serum HDM-specific immunoglobulins analyses.
RESULTS: Upon HDM sensitization and following challenge, a robust Th2 cell response and eosinophilic airway inflammation were observed in mice of the positive control group. The mice treated with HDM extracts ingestion had decreased eosinophilic airway inflammation, suppressed HDM-specific Th2 cell responses in the mediastinal lymph nodes, and attenuated serum HDM-specific IgE levels.
CONCLUSIONS: Oral immunotherapy with HDM extracts ingestion was demonstrated to have a partial therapeutic effect in the murine model of allergic asthma. This study may serve as the basis for the further development of oral immunotherapy with HDM extracts in allergic asthma.