NCT00580606

Brief Summary

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety and immune response to daily sublingual (under the tongue) immunotherapy (SLIT) with peanut extract in adults and children with peanut allergies.

Trial Health

87
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
40

participants targeted

Target at P50-P75 for phase_1

Timeline
Completed

Started Dec 2007

Longer than P75 for phase_1

Geographic Reach
1 country

5 active sites

Status
completed

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

Study Start

First participant enrolled

December 1, 2007

Completed
17 days until next milestone

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

December 18, 2007

Completed
7 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

December 25, 2007

Completed
2.9 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

December 1, 2010

Completed
1.9 years until next milestone

Results Posted

Study results publicly available

October 30, 2012

Completed
2.1 years until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

December 1, 2014

Completed
Last Updated

August 21, 2019

Status Verified

August 1, 2019

Enrollment Period

3 years

First QC Date

December 18, 2007

Results QC Date

September 28, 2012

Last Update Submit

August 12, 2019

Conditions

Keywords

Food AllergyPeanut AllergySublingual Immunotherapy

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Percent of Participants Who Successfully Consumed 5,000 mg of Peanut Powder or at Least a 10-fold Increase in the Amount of Peanut Powder Compared to Their Baseline Oral Food Challenge

    Desensitization Assessment: Participants who successfully consumed without dose-limiting symptoms 5,000 mg of peanut powder or at least a 10-fold increase in the amount of peanut powder compared to their baseline oral food challenge during a double-blind placebo-controlled oral food challenge were counted as successes.

    Week 44 (Double Blind Period)

Secondary Outcomes (6)

  • Percent of Participants Who Achieved a Maintenance Dose of 1,386 mcg

    Week 44 (Double Blind Period)

  • Percent of Crossover Participants Who Successfully Consumed 5,000 mg of Peanut Powder or at Least a 10-fold Increase in the Amount of Peanut Powder Compared to Their Baseline Oral Food Challenge After 44 Weeks of Open Label Peanut Protein Consumption

    Week 44 after initiating crossover open label peanut protein consumption

  • Percent of Crossover Participants Who Achieved an Open Label Peanut Protein Consumption Maintenance Dose of 3,696 mcg

    Week 44 after initiating crossover open label peanut protein consumption

  • Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)

    Baseline through Week 44 (Double Blind Period)

  • Number of Crossover Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) During 44 Weeks of Open Label Peanut Protein Consumption

    Initiation of open label peanut protein study therapy through Week 44 of open label peanut protein consumption

  • +1 more secondary outcomes

Study Arms (2)

Low Dose Peanut SLIT (Double Blind to Open Label)

EXPERIMENTAL

Subjects ingest peanut protein (glycerinated peanut allergenic extract) daily starting with 0.000165 mcg, followed by a build-up phase (escalating peanut doses every 2 weeks, achieving maintenance dose by 36 weeks). Thereafter, subjects are on a maximally tolerated maintenance dose (165 mcg to 1,386 mcg) for \>= 8 weeks. After Week 44, subjects are given a 5,000 mg Oral Food Challenge (OFC) using peanut powder. Subjects/study staff are unblinded following this OFC and continue on an open label peanut protein maintenance dose of 1,386 mcg/day or may attempt escalation up to this dose. Subjects who at the Week 116 OFC are unable to consume \>= 5,000 mg peanut powder or 10-fold the amount of peanut powder compared to the baseline OFC will discontinue study therapy. SLIT=Sublingual Immunotherapy.

Drug: Glycerinated peanut allergenic extract

Placebo (DB) Crossed Over to High Dose Peanut SLIT (OL)

PLACEBO COMPARATOR

Subjects ingest placebo (glycerin) daily beginning with a dose of 0.000165 mcg, followed by a build-up phase (escalating placebo doses every 2 weeks, achieving a maintenance dose by 36 weeks). Thereafter, subjects are on a maximally tolerated maintenance dose (165 mcg to 1,386 mcg) for \>= 8 weeks. After Week 44, subjects are given a 5,000 mg Oral Food Challenge (OFC) using peanut powder. Subjects/study staff are unblinded following this OFC and subjects no longer receive placebo dosing but are crossed over and receive open label high dose peanut SLIT; the study procedures and schedule are the same as for the Low Dose Peanut SLIT group, the only difference is the maximum maintenance dose is almost 3-fold higher at 3,696 mcg/day. DB=Double Blind, SLIT=Sublingual Immunotherapy, OL=Open Label.

Drug: Placebo for peanut extract (glycerin)

Interventions

Glycerinated peanut extract delivered sublingually.

Also known as: Peanut SLIT
Low Dose Peanut SLIT (Double Blind to Open Label)

Placebo (glycerin) delivered sublingually.

Also known as: Placebo
Placebo (DB) Crossed Over to High Dose Peanut SLIT (OL)

Eligibility Criteria

Age12 Years - 40 Years
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsChild (0-17), Adult (18-64)

You may qualify if:

  • Physician-diagnosed peanut allergy OR convincing clinical history of peanut allergy
  • Reacts to a cumulative dose of 2,000 mg or less of peanut powder
  • Positive peanut allergy skin prick test OR detectable serum peanut-specific IgE level
  • Willing to use an acceptable method of contraception for the duration of the study
  • Ability to perform spirometry maneuver in accordance with the American Thoracic Society guidelines

You may not qualify if:

  • History of severe anaphylaxis to peanut
  • Currently participating in a study using a new investigational new drug
  • Participation in any interventional study for the treatment of food allergy in the 12 months prior to study entry
  • Allergic to placebo ingredients (glycerin or oat flour) OR reacts to any dose of placebo during study entry oral food challenge (OFC)
  • Currently in a buildup phase of any allergy immunotherapy
  • Poor control of atopic dermatitis
  • Moderate or severe asthma despite therapy
  • Current treatment with greater than medium daily doses of inhaled corticosteroids
  • Use of steroid medications
  • Use of omalizumab or other nontraditional forms of allergen immunomodulatory therapy (not including corticosteroids) or biologic therapy in the 12 months prior to study entry
  • Use of beta blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, or calcium channel blockers
  • Inability to discontinue antihistamines for skin testing and OFCs
  • History of ischemic cardiovascular disease
  • History of alcohol or drug abuse
  • Other significant medical conditions that, in the opinion of the investigator, prevent participation in the study
  • +3 more criteria

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (5)

University of Arkansas

Little Rock, Arkansas, 72202, United States

Location

National Jewish Medical and Research Center

Denver, Colorado, 80208, United States

Location

Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine

Baltimore, Maryland, 21218, United States

Location

Mount Sinai School of Medicine

New York, New York, 10029, United States

Location

University of North Carolina

Durham, North Carolina, 27706, United States

Location

Related Publications (5)

  • de Leon MP, Rolland JM, O'Hehir RE. The peanut allergy epidemic: allergen molecular characterisation and prospects for specific therapy. Expert Rev Mol Med. 2007 Jan 9;9(1):1-18. doi: 10.1017/S1462399407000208.

    PMID: 17210088BACKGROUND
  • Enrique E, Cistero-Bahima A. Specific immunotherapy for food allergy: basic principles and clinical aspects. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol. 2006 Dec;6(6):466-9. doi: 10.1097/01.all.0000246618.41871.a4.

    PMID: 17088653BACKGROUND
  • Sicherer SH, Sampson HA. Peanut allergy: emerging concepts and approaches for an apparent epidemic. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2007 Sep;120(3):491-503; quiz 504-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2007.07.015. Epub 2007 Aug 8.

    PMID: 17689596BACKGROUND
  • Fleischer DM, Burks AW, Vickery BP, Scurlock AM, Wood RA, Jones SM, Sicherer SH, Liu AH, Stablein D, Henning AK, Mayer L, Lindblad R, Plaut M, Sampson HA; Consortium of Food Allergy Research (CoFAR). Sublingual immunotherapy for peanut allergy: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter trial. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2013 Jan;131(1):119-27.e1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2012.11.011.

  • Burks AW, Wood RA, Jones SM, Sicherer SH, Fleischer DM, Scurlock AM, Vickery BP, Liu AH, Henning AK, Lindblad R, Dawson P, Plaut M, Sampson HA; Consortium of Food Allergy Research. Sublingual immunotherapy for peanut allergy: Long-term follow-up of a randomized multicenter trial. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2015 May;135(5):1240-8.e1-3. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2014.12.1917. Epub 2015 Feb 3.

Related Links

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Food HypersensitivityHypersensitivityHypersensitivity, ImmediatePeanut Hypersensitivity

Interventions

Glycerol

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Immune System DiseasesNut and Peanut Hypersensitivity

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Triose Sugar AlcoholsSugar AlcoholsAlcoholsOrganic ChemicalsCarbohydrates

Limitations and Caveats

Refer to the original results published in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Vol 135, Number 5, page 1247 for a full description of the limitations of the current study.

Results Point of Contact

Title
Director, Clinical Research Operations Program
Organization
DAIT/NIAID

Study Officials

  • Wesley Burks, MD

    Duke University

    STUDY CHAIR
  • David Fleischer, MD

    National Jewish Health

    STUDY CHAIR
  • Hugh A. Sampson, MD

    Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
  • Stacie Jones, MD

    Arkansas Children's Hospital Research Institute

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
  • Robert Wood, MD

    Johns Hopkins University

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Publication Agreements

PI is Sponsor Employee
No
Restrictive Agreement
No

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
phase 1
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
TRIPLE
Who Masked
PARTICIPANT, CARE PROVIDER, INVESTIGATOR
Purpose
TREATMENT
Intervention Model
CROSSOVER
Sponsor Type
NIH
Responsible Party
SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

December 18, 2007

First Posted

December 25, 2007

Study Start

December 1, 2007

Primary Completion

December 1, 2010

Study Completion

December 1, 2014

Last Updated

August 21, 2019

Results First Posted

October 30, 2012

Record last verified: 2019-08

Locations