Cargando…
Oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy: The con argument
BACKGROUND: In some countries of the world, peanut allergy represents an important source of anaphylactic reactions. Traditionally treated with the avoidance of responsible allergens, this condition can also be targeted by oral peanut immunotherapy. METHODS: In this study, we review the beneficial a...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
World Allergy Organization
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7897709/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33664931 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.waojou.2020.100445 |
_version_ | 1783653722750976000 |
---|---|
author | Fiocchi, Alessandro Artesani, Maria Cristina Fierro, Vincenzo Riccardi, Carla Dahdah, Lamia Mennini, Maurizio |
author_facet | Fiocchi, Alessandro Artesani, Maria Cristina Fierro, Vincenzo Riccardi, Carla Dahdah, Lamia Mennini, Maurizio |
author_sort | Fiocchi, Alessandro |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In some countries of the world, peanut allergy represents an important source of anaphylactic reactions. Traditionally treated with the avoidance of responsible allergens, this condition can also be targeted by oral peanut immunotherapy. METHODS: In this study, we review the beneficial and side effects of currently available forms of peanut oral immunotherapy (POIT). We report the discussions resulting from the publication of a meta-analysis that brought to light the downsides of oral immunotherapy for peanuts. RESULTS: In some clinical situations, the risk-benefit ratio can favor peanut oral immunotherapy over avoidance. In many other situations, this is not the case. The decision must be based on the values and preferences of clinicians and patients. Those not ready to accept serious adverse effects from POIT are likely to continue the elimination diet; those motivated to achieving desensitization, and prepared to accept serious adverse effects, may choose to undergo POIT. CONCLUSIONS: Without being prejudiced against peanut oral immunotherapy, we indicate the possible evolution of treatment for this condition is in a rapidly evolving broader scenario. Among the future options, sublingual immunotherapy, parenteral immunotherapy with modified allergens, transcutaneous immunotherapy, and the use of biologics will become important options. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7897709 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | World Allergy Organization |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78977092021-03-03 Oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy: The con argument Fiocchi, Alessandro Artesani, Maria Cristina Fierro, Vincenzo Riccardi, Carla Dahdah, Lamia Mennini, Maurizio World Allergy Organ J Regular Issue paper BACKGROUND: In some countries of the world, peanut allergy represents an important source of anaphylactic reactions. Traditionally treated with the avoidance of responsible allergens, this condition can also be targeted by oral peanut immunotherapy. METHODS: In this study, we review the beneficial and side effects of currently available forms of peanut oral immunotherapy (POIT). We report the discussions resulting from the publication of a meta-analysis that brought to light the downsides of oral immunotherapy for peanuts. RESULTS: In some clinical situations, the risk-benefit ratio can favor peanut oral immunotherapy over avoidance. In many other situations, this is not the case. The decision must be based on the values and preferences of clinicians and patients. Those not ready to accept serious adverse effects from POIT are likely to continue the elimination diet; those motivated to achieving desensitization, and prepared to accept serious adverse effects, may choose to undergo POIT. CONCLUSIONS: Without being prejudiced against peanut oral immunotherapy, we indicate the possible evolution of treatment for this condition is in a rapidly evolving broader scenario. Among the future options, sublingual immunotherapy, parenteral immunotherapy with modified allergens, transcutaneous immunotherapy, and the use of biologics will become important options. World Allergy Organization 2020-09-18 /pmc/articles/PMC7897709/ /pubmed/33664931 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.waojou.2020.100445 Text en © 2020 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Regular Issue paper Fiocchi, Alessandro Artesani, Maria Cristina Fierro, Vincenzo Riccardi, Carla Dahdah, Lamia Mennini, Maurizio Oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy: The con argument |
title | Oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy: The con argument |
title_full | Oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy: The con argument |
title_fullStr | Oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy: The con argument |
title_full_unstemmed | Oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy: The con argument |
title_short | Oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy: The con argument |
title_sort | oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy: the con argument |
topic | Regular Issue paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7897709/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33664931 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.waojou.2020.100445 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT fiocchialessandro oralimmunotherapyforpeanutallergytheconargument AT artesanimariacristina oralimmunotherapyforpeanutallergytheconargument AT fierrovincenzo oralimmunotherapyforpeanutallergytheconargument AT riccardicarla oralimmunotherapyforpeanutallergytheconargument AT dahdahlamia oralimmunotherapyforpeanutallergytheconargument AT menninimaurizio oralimmunotherapyforpeanutallergytheconargument |