Introduction Sesame allergy, though with low prevalence, can result in severe, potentially life-threatening reactions and poses challenges in allergen avoidance due to hidden sources. In the majority of patients, sesame allergy persists and there is currently no effective long-term treatment available. Therefore, oral immunotherapy (OIT) is a promising alternative approach to managing sesame allergy. In this study protocol, we present a randomised controlled trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of OIT with low-dose sesame protein in paediatric patients. The study’s aim is to compare OIT with a 300 mg maintenance dose of sesame protein against controls. Methods and analysis 39 participants aged 3–17 with IgE-mediated sesame allergy confirmed by oral food challenge will be enrolled into the study. The trial will be conducted at the Paediatric Hospital of the Medical University of Warsaw, Poland. The study comprises two arms—sesame OIT and control. In the sesame OIT group, interventions will be administered once daily for up to 18 months. During the first phase, the dose will be escalated every 2–4 weeks, and in the second phase, the maintenance dose of 300 mg sesame protein will continue for 3 months. Members of the control group will receive standard treatment, which includes an elimination diet and will remain under observation for 1 year. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants tolerating a single dose of 4000 mg of sesame protein during the final oral food challenge in the experimental group versus the control group. Secondary outcomes assess adverse events, changes in immunological parameters and the maximum tolerated doses of sesame protein in each group. Ethics and dissemination This study has been approved by the Ethics Committee of the Medical University of Warsaw (approval number: KB/269/2023). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated via presentations at international conferences. Trial registration number NCT06261554.

Peanut allergy, one of the most frequently occurring allergies, usually starts in childhood and rarely subsides—often persisting throughout adult life. Accidental exposure to peanuts can often result in adverse reactions ranging from mild to life-threatening, such as anaphylactic shock. Historically, food avoidance and the use of rescue drugs have remained a fundamental management mechanism for dealing with food allergy. However, prevention of adverse reactions to food allergy is playing an increasing role. This is possible through the early introduction of peanuts into the diet, especially in infants at risk of this allergy. In recent years, specific immunotherapy has been used to develop desensitisation and, in some patients, tolerance—defined as a persistent state of clinical non-reactivity to the allergen after therapy is finished. The aim of this article is to summarise the current state of knowledge on the prevention and treatment of peanut allergy, with a focus on clinical trials, current guidelines, and recent experimental studies. This review may be particularly useful for paediatricians and general practitioners.

(1) Peanut allergy is associated with high risk of anaphylaxis which could be prevented by oral immunotherapy. Patients eligible for immunotherapy are selected on the basis of a food challenge, although currently the assessment of antibodies against main peanut molecules (Ara h 1, 2, 3 and 6) is thought to be another option. (2) The current study assessed the relationship between the mentioned antibodies, challenge outcomes, skin tests and some other parameters in peanut-sensitized children. It involved 74 children, divided into two groups, based on their response to a food challenge. (3) Both groups differed in results of skin tests, levels of component-specific antibodies and peanut exposure history. The antibody levels were then used to calculate thresholds for prediction of challenge results or symptom severity. While the antibody-based challenge prediction revealed statistical significance, it failed in cases of severe symptoms. Furthermore, no significant correlation was observed between antibody levels, symptom-eliciting doses and the risk of severe anaphylaxis. Although in some patients it could result from interference with IgG4, the latter would not be a universal explanation of this phenomenon. (4) Despite some limitations, antibody-based screening may be an alternative to the food challenge, although its clinical relevance still requires further studies.

Background: Oral food challenge (OFC) remains the gold standard for diagnosing food allergy; however, it is time-consuming and associated with the risk of allergic reactions. The identification of reliable biomarkers capable of predicting OFC outcomes could improve patient selection and reduce the number of OFCs required in clinical practice. Among the most widely used biomarkers are skin prick tests (SPTs) and serum-specific IgE (sIgE) measurements, including component-resolved diagnostics. However, their diagnostic utility, as well as the comparability of different diagnostic platforms, remains incompletely defined in cow’s milk (CM) and hen’s egg (HE) allergy. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed results of diagnostic tests obtained in children undergoing OFCs to baked milk, raw milk, baked egg, and boiled egg. Diagnostic performance of SPTs to either allergen extracts or native food allergens, as well as sIgE measured using ImmunoCAP and ALEX2 platforms, was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and logistic regression models. Results: Diagnostic performance varied across allergy phenotypes. SPTs to native food allergens demonstrated good discriminative capacity for raw milk and boiled egg allergy, whereas SPTs to standardized extracts showed limited diagnostic utility overall. In baked milk allergy, casein-sIgE measured by ImmunoCAP demonstrated the best diagnostic performance. In raw milk allergy, α-lactalbumin-sIgE measured using ALEX2 platform and β-lactoglobulin-sIgE measured by ImmunoCAP showed greater diagnostic relevance than casein-sIgE. In boiled egg allergy, SPT to raw egg yolk demonstrated the highest diagnostic value. In baked egg allergy, ovalbumin-sIgE measured using the ALEX2 platform showed the best performance, while ovomucoid-sIgE did not demonstrate clear superiority. ALEX2 showed good concordance with ImmunoCAP despite systematic differences in absolute sIgE values. Combined multivariable models provided only modest improvements over single predictors and did not achieve sufficient accuracy to replace OFCs. Conclusions: SPTs to either allergen extracts or native food allergens, as well as sIgE measurements, demonstrate moderate and heterogeneous utility in predicting OFC outcomes for CM and HE allergy. Although ALEX2 and ImmunoCAP showed comparable overall performance, platform-specific interpretation may be required. OFC remains indispensable for definitive diagnosis.