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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fiocchi, Alessandro, Artesani, Maria Cristina, Fierro, Vincenzo, Riccardi, Carla, Dahdah, Lamia, Mennini, Maurizio
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