ArticleThe journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global2026
Peanut oral immunotherapy at a single academic medical center using a volume-based approach with store-purchased peanut products.
Article in The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Incorporation of peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT) into clinical practice is increasing, but the approaches used and reported outcomes vary. Objective: Our aim was to describe a volume-based dosing approach for OIT using store-bought peanut powder in a pediatric population and report initial outcomes. Methods: A standardized, volume-based OIT protocol using non-pharmaceutical-grade peanut powder was developed at a single academic center. Retrospective chart review was completed for patients (aged 8 months-18 years) who underwent single-food peanut OIT using this approach. OIT effectiveness was evaluated by determining the proportion of patients who (1) reached maintenance therapy and (2) tolerated a cumulative desensitization challenge using 6 g of peanut protein after 1 year of high-dose maintenance therapy. Tolerance to alternative peanut products with estimated equivalent peanut protein was also evaluated. Safety was assessed through clinical reporting of adverse reactions, retrospective assessment of severity of reaction symptoms, epinephrine use, and diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis. Results: Of the 76 patients, 82% reached maintenance therapy. The 31 patients who achieved a high daily maintenance dose for at least 1 year completed a desensitization challenge; 94% demonstrated clinical tolerance. All patients challenged with equivalent doses of alternative peanut products were tolerant. The most common adverse symptoms were gastrointestinal symptoms (43%); 5 patients (6.6%) received treatment with epinephrine, and 1 patient (1.3%) was diagnosed with eosinophilic esophagitis. Conclusions: A volume-based approach using store-bought peanut powder can be implemented in clinical practice for oral desensitization in pediatric patients with peanut allergy. Although mild adverse symptoms are common, patients can tolerate transitions between peanut products, and some tolerate desensitization challenge, allowing for limited dietary consumption.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.