Allergy Therapeutics (United Kingdom)

In the original publication [...].

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease-modifying treatment in allergic airway diseases. Underlying immunological mechanisms and candidate biomarkers, which may be translated into predictive/surrogate measures of clinical efficacy, remain an active area of research. The aim of this study was to evaluate Pollinex Quattro (PQ) Grass AIT induced immunomodulatory mechanisms, based on transcriptome profiling of peripheral blood mononuclear cells. 119 subjects with grass pollen induced seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) were randomized in a 2:2:1:1 ratio to receive a cumulative dose of PQ Grass as a conventional or extended pre-seasonal regimen, placebo, or placebo with MicroCrystalline Tyrosine. Gene expression analysis was an exploratory endpoint evaluated in a subgroup of 30 subjects randomly selected from the four treatment arms. Samples were collected at three time points: screening (baseline), before the start of the grass pollen season and at the end of the season. This study was funded by the manufacturer of PQ. Transcriptome analysis demonstrated that the most significant changes in gene expression, for both treatment regimens, were at the end of the grass pollen season, with the main Th1 candidate molecules (IL-12A, IFNγ) upregulated and Th2 signature cytokines downregulated (IL-4, IL-13, IL-9) (p < .05). Canonical pathways analysis demonstrated Th1, Th2, Th17 and IL-17 as the most significantly enriched pathways based on absolute value of activation z-score (IzI score ≥ 2, p < .05). Upstream regulator analysis showed pronounced inhibition of pro-inflammatory allergic molecules IgE, IL-17A, IL-17F, IL-25 (IL-17E) (IzI score ≥ 2, FDR < 0.05) and activation of pro-tolerogenic molecules IL-12A, IL-27, IL-35 (EBI3) at the end of the grass pollen season. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells transcriptome profile showed an inhibition of Th2, Th17 pro-inflammatory allergic responses and immune deviation towards Th1 responses. PQ Grass extended regimen exhibited a superior mechanistic efficacy profile in comparison with PQ conventional regimen.

IntroductionFood hypersensitivity (FHS), including food allergy, coeliac disease and food intolerance, is a major public health issue. The Food Standards Agency (FSA), an independent UK Government department working to protect public health and consumers’ wider interests in food, sought to identify research priorities in the area of FHS.MethodsA priority setting exercise was undertaken, using a methodology adapted from the James Lind Alliance—the first such exercise with respect to food hypersensitivity. A UK‐wide public consultation was held to identify unanswered research questions. After excluding diagnostics, desensitization treatment and other questions which were out of scope for FSA or where FSA was already commissioning research, 15 indicative questions were identified and prioritized by a range of stakeholders, representing food businesses, patient groups, health care and academia, local authorities and the FSA.Results295 responses were received during the public consultation, which were categorized into 70 sub‐questions and used to define 15 key evidence uncertainties (‘indicative questions’) for prioritization. Using the JLA prioritization framework, this resulted in 10 priority uncertainties in evidence, from which 16 research questions were developed. These could be summarized under the following 5 themes: communication of allergens both within the food supply chain and then to the end consumer (ensuring trust in allergen communication); the impact of socio‐economic factors on consumers with FHS; drivers of severe reactions; mechanism(s) underlying loss of tolerance in FHS; and the risks posed by novel allergens/processing.DiscussionIn this first research prioritization exercise for food allergy and FHS, key priorities identified to protect the food‐allergic public were strategies to help allergic consumers to make confident food choices, prevention of FHS and increasing understanding of socio‐economic impacts. Diagnosis and treatment of FHS was not considered in this prioritization.