Background: Benralizumab is an anti‐interleukin‐5 receptor α monoclonal antibody approved as an add‐on maintenance treatment for patients with uncontrolled severe asthma. Prior Phase 3 studies have evaluated benralizumab in patients aged ≥12 years with severe uncontrolled asthma. The TATE study evaluated the pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and safety of benralizumab treatment in children.Methods: TATE was an open‐label, Phase 3 study of benralizumab in children aged 6–11 years from the United States and Japan (plus participants aged 12–14 years from Japan) with severe eosinophilic asthma. Participants received benralizumab 10/30 mg according to weight (<35/≥35 kg). Primary endpoints included maximum serum concentration (C_max), clearance, half‐life (t_1/2), and blood eosinophil count. Clearance and t_1/2 were derived from a population PK (popPK) analysis. Safety and tolerability were also assessed.Results: Twenty‐eight children aged 6–11 years were included, with an additional two participants from Japan aged 12–14 years also included in the popPK analysis. Mean C_max was 1901.2 and 3118.7 ng/mL in the 10 mg/<35 kg and 30 mg/≥35 kg groups, respectively. Clearance was 0.257, and mean t_1/2 was 14.5 days. Near‐complete depletion of blood eosinophils was shown across dose/weight groups. Exploratory efficacy analyses found numerical improvements in mean FEV₁, mean ACQ‐IA, patient/clinician global impression of change, and exacerbation rates. Adverse events occurred in 22/28 (78.6%) of participants; none led to discontinuation/death.Conclusion: PK, PD, and safety data support long‐term benralizumab in children with severe eosinophilic asthma, and were similar to findings in adolescents and adults.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov‐ID: NCT04305405.

Food allergy is a serious public health problem with an increasing prevalence. Current management is limited to food avoidance and emergency treatment. Research into the pathogenesis of food allergy has helped to shape our understanding of how patients become sensitized to an allergen. Classically, food sensitization was thought to occur through the gastrointestinal tract, but alternative routes of sensitization are being explored, specifically through the skin. Damaged skin barrier may play a crucial role in the development of food sensitization. Better understanding of how patients initially become sensitized may help lead to the development of a safe and effective treatment for food allergies or better prevention strategies.

Non-IgE (immunoglobulin E) mediated gastrointestinal food allergies include several separate clinical entities, including food protein‐induced allergic proctocolitis (FPIAP) and food protein‐induced enteropathy (FPE). Although FPIAP and FPE both primarily affect the gastrointestinal tract, their presentations are vastly different. FPIAP presents with bloody stools in otherwise healthy infants, whereas FPE presents with chronic diarrhea, vomiting, malabsorption, and hypoproteinemia. These both typically present in infancy and resolve by early childhood. Although the presenting signs and symptoms may be different, management is similar in that both require avoidance of the suspected causal food.