Journal Mobile Options
Table of Contents
Vol. 154, No. 4, 2011
Issue release date: March 2011
Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2011;154:299–309
(DOI:10.1159/000321822)

Epicutaneous Immunotherapy Using a New Epicutaneous Delivery System in Mice Sensitized to Peanuts

Mondoulet L. · Dioszeghy V. · Vanoirbeek J.A.J. · Nemery B. · Dupont C. · Benhamou P.-H.
To view the fulltext, log in and/or choose pay-per-view option

Individual Users: Register with Karger Login Information

Please create your User ID & Password





Contact Information











I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.

To view the fulltext, please log in

To view the pdf, please log in

Abstract

Background: Peanut allergy is a life-threatening condition for which new efficient and safe treatment is expected. We evaluated epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) as a new alternative treatment for peanut allergy in sensitized mice. Methods: Sixty BALB/c mice were sensitized by gavages with peanut protein extract (PPE) mixed with cholera toxin. An epicutaneous delivery system, coated with 100 µg PPE (Viaskin®, DBV Technologies, Paris, France), was applied to intact skin every week during 48 h (EPIT; n = 20). This group was compared with sensitized mice treated with subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT; n = 20), untreated sensitized mice (sham, n = 20), and naive mice (naive; n = 20). After the 8-week treatment, a histamine release test, airway hyperreactivity measurement by plethysmography, and a resistance-compliance measurement after the challenge were performed. Blood and bronchoalveolar lavage were sampled for serology, cytokines, and cytology. Results: Specific IgE (sIgE) increased after sensitization in the EPIT (0.26 µg/ml) and SCIT (0.21 µg/ml) groups and decreased after treatment (0.09 µg/ml, p < 0.001 and 0.06 µg/ml, p < 0.001, respectively). The IgG1/IgG2a ratio decreased in the EPIT and SCIT groups versus the sham group (3.7; p < 0.001 and 2.7; p < 0.01 and 15.1, respectively). At the higher metacholine concentration, enhanced pause values were lower in the EPIT and SCIT groups than in the sham group (7.29, 6.74, and 10.99, p < 0.01, respectively), and did not differ from that of the naive group (5.06). Resistance-compliance was reversed in the treated groups versus the sham group (p < 0.001). IL-4, IL-5, IL-13, eotaxin, and eosinophils were reduced in the BAL of the EPIT and SCIT groups versus the sham group (p < 0.001). Conclusion: In peanut-sensitized mice, based on biological and physiological responses, EPIT is as efficient as subcutaneous treatment which is the reference method in immunotherapy.



Copyright / Drug Dosage

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in goverment regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

References

  1. Eigenmann PA: Future therapeutic options in food allergy. Allergy 2003;58:1217–1223.
  2. Sicherer SH, Sampson HA: Peanut allergy: emerging concepts and approaches for an apparent epidemic. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2007;120:491–503.
  3. Du Toit G, Katz Y, Sasieni P, Mesher D, Maleki SJ, Fisher HR, Fox AT, Turcanu V, Amir T, Zadik-Mnuhin G, Cohen A, Livne I, Lack G: Early consumption of peanuts in infancy is associated with a low prevalence of peanut allergy. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2008;122:984–991.
  4. Greenberger PA, Ballow M, Casale TB, Platts-Mills TA, Sampson HA: Sublingual immunotherapy and subcutaneous immunotherapy: issues in the United States. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2007;120:1466–1468.
  5. Bousquet J: Sublingual immunotherapy: validated. Allergy 2006;61:5–6.

    External Resources

  6. Valenta R: The future of antigen-specific immunotherapy of allergy. Nat Rev Immunol 2002;2:446–453.
  7. de Boissieu D, Dupont C: Sublingual immunotherapy for cow’s milk protein allergy: a preliminary report. Allergy 2006;61:1238–1239.
  8. Longo G, Barbi B, Berti I, Meneghetti R, Pittalis A, Ronfani L, Ventura A: Specific oral tolerance induction in children with very severe cow’s milk-induced reactions. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2008;121:343–347.
  9. Mondoulet L, Dioszeghy V, Ligouis M, Dhelft V, Dupont C, Benhamou PH: Epicutaneous immunotherapy on intact skin using a new delivery system in a murine model of allergy. Clin Exp Allergy 2010;40:659–667.
  10. Sampson HA, Mendelson L, Rosen JP: Fatal and near-fatal anaphylactic reactions to food in children and adolescents. N Engl J Med 1992;327:380–384.
  11. Bock SA, Munoz-Furlong A, Sampson HA: Fatalities due to anaphylactic reactions to foods. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2001;107:191–193.
  12. Kalach N, Soulaines P, de Boissieu D, Dupont C: A pilot study of the usefulness and safety of a ready-to-use atopy patch test (Diallertest) versus a comparator (Finn Chamber) during cow’s milk allergy in children. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2005;116:1321–1326.
  13. Lagranderie M, Abolhassani M, Vanoirbeek J, Lefort J, Nahori MA, Lapa E, Silva JR, Huerre M, Vargaftig B, Marchal G: Mycobacterium bovis BCG killed by extended freeze-drying reduces airway hyperresponsiveness in 2 animal models. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2008;121:471–478.
  14. Li XM, Serebrisky D, Lee SY, Huang CK, Bardina L, Schofield BH, Stanley JS, Burks AW, Bannon GA, Sampson HA: A murine model of peanut anaphylaxis: T- and B-cell responses to a major peanut allergen mimic human responses. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2000;106:150–158.
  15. Hamelmann E, Schwarze J, Takeda K, Oshiba A, Larsen GL, Irvin CG, Gelfand EW: Noninvasive measurement of airway responsiveness in allergic mice using barometric plethysmography. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1997;156:766–775.
  16. Vanoirbeek JA, Vanhooren HM, Nawrot TS, Nemery B, Hoet PH: How long do the systemic and ventilatory responses to toluene diisocyanate persist in dermally sensitized mice? J Allergy Clin Immunol 2008;121:456–463.
  17. Vanoirbeek JA, Rinaldi M, De Vooght V, Haenen S, Bobic S, Gayan-Ramirez G, Hoet PH, Verbeken E, Decramer M, Nemery B, Janssens W: Noninvasive and invasive pulmonary function in mouse models of obstructive and restrictive respiratory diseases. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol 2010;42:96–104.
  18. Adel-Patient K, Bernard H, Ah-Leung S, Creminon C, Wal JM: Peanut- and cow’s milk-specific IgE, Th2 cells and local anaphylactic reaction are induced in Balb/c mice orally sensitized with cholera toxin. Allergy 2005;60:658–664.
  19. von der Weid T, Bulliard C, Fritsche R: Suppression of specific and bystander IgE responses in a mouse model of oral sensitization to beta-lactoglobulin. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2001;125:307–315.
  20. Strid J, Callard R, Strobel S: Epicutaneous immunization converts subsequent and established antigen-specific T helper type 1 (Th1) to Th2-type responses. Immunology 2006;119:27–35.
  21. Strid J, Hourihane J, Kimber I, Callard R, Strobel S: Epicutaneous exposure to peanut protein prevents oral tolerance and enhances allergic sensitization. Clin Exp Allergy 2005;35:757–766.
  22. Strid J, Thomson M, Hourihane J, Kimber I, Strobel S: A novel model of sensitization and oral tolerance to peanut protein. Immunology 2004;113:293–303.
  23. Van Oosterhout AJ, Van Esch B, Hofman G, Hofstra CL, Van Ark I, Nijkamp FP, Kapsenberg ML, Savelkoul HF, Weller FR: Allergen immunotherapy inhibits airway eosinophilia and hyperresponsiveness associated with decreased IL-4 production by lymphocytes in a murine model of allergic asthma. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol 1998;19:622–628.
  24. Poulsen OM, Nielsen BR, Basse A, Hau J: Comparison of intestinal anaphylactic reactions in sensitized mice challenged with untreated bovine milk and homogenized bovine milk. Allergy 1990;45:321–326.
  25. Li XM, Serebrisky D, Lee SY, Huang CK, Bardina L, Schofield BH, Stanley JS, Burks AW, Bannon GA, Sampson HA: A murine model of peanut anaphylaxis: T- and B-cell responses to a major peanut allergen mimic human responses. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2000;106:150–158.
  26. Li XM, Kleiner G, Huang CK, Lee SY, Schofield B, Soter NA, Sampson HA: Murine model of atopic dermatitis associated with food hypersensitivity. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2001;107:693–702.
  27. Li XM, Schofield BH, Huang CK, Kleiner GI, Sampson HA: A murine model of IgE-mediated cow’s milk hypersensitivity. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1999;103:206–214.
  28. Spergel J, Mizoguchi E, Brewer JP, Martin TR, Bahn AK, Geha RS: Epicutaneous sensitization with protein antigen induces localized allergic dermatitis and hyperresponsiveness to methacholine after single exposure to aerosolized antigen in mice. J Clin Invest 1998;101:1614–1622.
  29. Lundblad LK, Irvin CG, Adler A, Bates JH: A reevaluation of the validity of unrestrained plethysmography in mice. J Appl Physiol 2002;93:1198–1207.
  30. Hoymann HG: New developments in lung function measurements in rodents. Exp Toxicol Pathol 2006;57(suppl 2):5–11.
  31. Glaab T, Mitzner W, Braun A, Ernst H, Korolewitz R, Hohlfeld JM, Krug N, Hoymann HG: Repetitive measurements of pulmonary mechanics to inhaled cholinergic challenge in spontaneously breathing mice. J Appl Physiol 2004;97:1104–1111.
  32. Turcanu V, Maleki SJ, Lack G: Characterization of lymphocyte responses to peanuts in normal children, peanut-allergic children, and allergic children who acquired tolerance to peanuts. J Clin Invest 2003;111:1065–1072.
  33. Fulkerson PC, Rothenberg ME: Origin, regulation and physiological function of intestinal oeosinophils. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2008;22:411–423.
  34. Collins PD, Marleau S, Griffiths-Johnson DA, Jose PJ, Williams TJ: Cooperation between interleukin-5 and the chemokine eotaxin to induce eosinophil accumulation in vivo. J Exp Med 1995;82:1169–1174.

    External Resources

  35. Wang Y, McCusker CT: Interleukin-13-dependent bronchial hyper-responsiveness following isolated upper-airway allergen challenge in a murine model of allergic rhinitis and asthma. Clin Exp Allergy 2005;35:1104–1111.
  36. Senti G, Graf N, Haug S, Ruedi N, von Moos S, Sonderegger T, Johansen P, Kundig TM: Epicutaneous allergen administration as a novel method of allergen-specific immunotherapy. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2009;124:997–1002.
  37. Dupont C, Kalach N, Soulaines P, Legoué-Morillon S, Benhamou PH: Cow’s milk epicutaneous immunotherapy in children: a pilot trial of safety, acceptability and impact on allergic reactivity. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2010;125:1165–1167.


Pay-per-View Options
Direct payment This item at the regular price: USD 38.00
Payment from account With a Karger Pay-per-View account (down payment USD 150) you profit from a special rate for this and other single items.
This item at the discounted price: USD 26.50