Allergy Experience Study

August 6, 2018 updated by: Alia Crum, Stanford University

Changing Mindsets About Oral Immunotherapy for Peanut Allergies Via Informing Patients That Symptoms Are a Sign of Treatment Efficacy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

People who are undergoing oral immunotherapy for food allergy treatment can feel anxious about the treatment process, particularly when they have allergic responses (e.g., hives, vomiting, nausea) during the dosing process. People may commonly believe that these symptoms are simply side effects that must be endured or avoided. However, the investigators propose that changing participants' mindsets about the meaning of symptoms-toward viewing them as a sign that the treatment is working and desensitization is increasing-during the treatment process will reduce anxiety and improve treatment outcomes.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Participants: The investigators will recruit participants who will receive treatment for peanut allergies through oral immunotherapy at the Sean N. Parker Center for Allergy & Asthma Research.

Procedures: The investigators will divide recruited participants into two groups (random assignment). Each group will receive different messages about oral immunotherapy, one defined as "Symptoms as Side Effects Mindset" (in which symptoms are described as an unfortunate side effect of treatment). The other group will receive messages that help foster a "Symptoms as Positive Signals Mindset" (in which symptoms are described as a sign of increasing desensitization). These messages will be conveyed verbally and through activities by the study staff and participants will also receive pamphlets emphasizing these messages.

The investigators expect that adopting a "Symptoms as Positive Signals" mindset will improve OIT outcomes in five ways:

  1. Decrease anxiety about symptoms,
  2. Increase treatment completion,
  3. Decrease the likelihood of participants reducing dose size or skipping a dose because of anxiety about symptoms,
  4. Reduce the experience of non-life-threatening symptoms during the study, and
  5. Improve physiological treatment outcomes at the conclusion of the study, as measured through peanut blood IgG4 and IgE levels.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

50

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

7 years to 17 years (Child)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • peanut-specific blood IgE level >=60 Ku/L
  • or, if IgE levels <60, need to have a skin prick test greater than 3mm and IgE >5 Ku/L

Exclusion Criteria:

  • having previously participated in an OIT treatment or having a family member who had done so (since the study focused on educating participants about OIT)
  • being in the updose phase of allergy shots or sublingual therapy
  • having been intubated or admitted to an ICU because of allergic reaction
  • having a heart disorder
  • diagnosed eosinophilic esophagitis
  • being on oral steroids or Xolair
  • diagnosed anxiety disorders, as we expected this group to have higher baseline anxiety about treatment.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Basic Science
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Symptoms as Side Effects Mindset
Both arms are given identical treatment instructions at their first clinic visit, including practical strategies for taking doses and managing symptoms. Families are given comprehensive instructions for recognizing life-threatening symptoms and administering epinephrine when appropriate. However, information about the implications of non-life-threatening symptoms differs between arms. At the first clinic visit, families are given verbal (e.g., provider explanations) and written information (e.g., brochures on symptom management) informing them about symptoms in different ways. In this arm, families are informed that these non-life-threatening symptoms are an unfortunate part of treatment that must be endured, similar to side effects from common medications.
In this intervention, both arms receive the same strategies for managing symptoms and receive the same level of support regarding symptoms. For each arm, four families (six to seven patients per group) meet monthly for eight months in the clinic with at least two members of the patient support team. These visits are an opportunity for families to harness peer support and ask questions, and include a variety of activities that depict symptoms in different ways.
Experimental: Symptoms as Positive Signals Mindset
Both arms are given identical treatment instructions at their first clinic visit, including practical strategies for taking doses and managing symptoms. Families are given comprehensive instructions for recognizing life-threatening symptoms and administering epinephrine when appropriate. However, information about the implications of non-life-threatening symptoms differs between arms. At the first clinic visit, families are given verbal (e.g., provider explanations) and written information (e.g., brochures on symptom management) informing them about symptoms in different ways. In this arm, families are informed that symptoms are a sign that that their bodies are gradually increasing desensitization, similar to having sore muscles after a difficult workout.
In this intervention, both arms receive the same strategies for managing symptoms and receive the same level of support regarding symptoms. However, Symptoms as Positive Signals Mindset families are additionally encouraged to think of symptoms as a positive signal that their immune system is becoming increasingly desensitized to their allergen. For each arm, four families (six to seven patients per group) meet monthly for eight months in the clinic with at least two members of the patient support team. These visits are an opportunity for families to harness peer support and ask questions, and include a variety of activities that depict symptoms in different ways.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Anxiety about symptoms
Time Frame: Throughout 7 months of treatment
Measured through daily REDCap surveys and monthly in clinic surveys; measured through parent contacting staff with concerns about symptoms
Throughout 7 months of treatment
Occurrence of non-life-threatening symptoms
Time Frame: Throughout 7 months of treatment
Measured through daily REDCap surveys
Throughout 7 months of treatment
Treatment completion
Time Frame: Up to 6 months and 2 weeks after the first clinic visit
Number of patients who complete within 2 weeks of the target end date
Up to 6 months and 2 weeks after the first clinic visit
Treatment adherence
Time Frame: Throughout 7 months of treatment
Number of doses skipped or reduced because of anxiety
Throughout 7 months of treatment
Change in peanut blood IgG4 levels
Time Frame: Change from baseline IgG4 levels after 6 months of treatment
Two blood samples assayed for IgG4 levels; one pre-treatment and one post-treatment
Change from baseline IgG4 levels after 6 months of treatment
Change in peanut blood IgE levels
Time Frame: Change from baseline IgE levels after 6 months of treatment
Two blood samples assayed for IgE levels; one pre-treatment and one post-treatment
Change from baseline IgE levels after 6 months of treatment

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Alia J Crum, PhD, Stanford University

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

January 5, 2017

Primary Completion (Actual)

August 3, 2017

Study Completion (Actual)

July 1, 2018

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

April 12, 2018

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 1, 2018

First Posted (Actual)

May 2, 2018

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

August 7, 2018

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 6, 2018

Last Verified

August 1, 2018

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

UNDECIDED

IPD Plan Description

If made publicly available, all data will be de-identified and the anonymous data will be shared with researchers on the Open Science Framework

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Peanut Allergy

Clinical Trials on Symptoms as Side Effects Mindset

3
Subscribe