Go to The Journal of Clinical Investigation
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Transfers
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
  • Physician-Scientist Development
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • By specialty
    • COVID-19
    • Cardiology
    • Immunology
    • Metabolism
    • Nephrology
    • Oncology
    • Pulmonology
    • All ...
  • Videos
  • Collections
    • In-Press Preview
    • Resource and Technical Advances
    • Clinical Research and Public Health
    • Research Letters
    • Editorials
    • Perspectives
    • Physician-Scientist Development
    • Reviews
    • Top read articles

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Specialties
  • In-Press Preview
  • Resource and Technical Advances
  • Clinical Research and Public Health
  • Research Letters
  • Editorials
  • Perspectives
  • Physician-Scientist Development
  • Reviews
  • Top read articles
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Transfers
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact

Usage Information

Phase 2a randomized, placebo-controlled study of anti–IL-33 in peanut allergy
Sharon Chinthrajah, Shu Cao, Cherie Liu, Shu-Chen Lyu, Sayantani B. Sindher, Andrew Long, Vanitha Sampath, Daniel Petroni, Marco Londei, Kari C. Nadeau
Sharon Chinthrajah, Shu Cao, Cherie Liu, Shu-Chen Lyu, Sayantani B. Sindher, Andrew Long, Vanitha Sampath, Daniel Petroni, Marco Londei, Kari C. Nadeau
View: Text | PDF
Clinical Research and Public Health Clinical trials Immunology

Phase 2a randomized, placebo-controlled study of anti–IL-33 in peanut allergy

  • Text
  • PDF
Abstract

BACKGROUND IL-33, found in high levels in participants with allergic disorders, is thought to mediate allergic reactions. Etokimab, an anti–IL-33 biologic, has previously demonstrated a good safety profile and favorable pharmacodynamic properties in many clinical studies.METHODS In this 6-week placebo-controlled phase 2a study, we evaluated the safety and the ability of a single dose of etokimab to desensitize peanut-allergic adults. Participants received either etokimab (n = 15) or blinded placebo (n = 5). Clinical tests included oral food challenges and skin prick tests at days 15 and 45. Blood samples were collected for IgE levels and measurement of ex vivo peanut-stimulated T cell cytokine production.RESULTS Efficacy measurements for active vs. placebo participants at the day 15 and 45 food challenge (tolerating a cumulative 275 mg of peanut protein, which was the food challenge outcome defined in this paper) demonstrated, respectively, 73% vs. 0% (P = 0.008) to 57% vs. 0% (ns). The etokimab group had fewer adverse events compared with placebo. IL-4, IL-5, IL-9, IL-13, and ST2 levels in CD4+ T cells were reduced in the active vs. placebo arm upon peanut-induced T cell activation (P = 0.036 for IL-13 and IL-9 at day 15), and peanut-specific IgE was reduced in active vs. placebo (P = 0.014 at day 15).CONCLUSION The phase 2a results suggest etokimab is safe and well tolerated and that a single dose of etokimab could have the potential to desensitize peanut-allergic participants and possibly reduce atopy-related adverse events.TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02920021.FUNDING This work was supported by NIH grant R01AI140134, AnaptysBio, the Hartman Vaccine Fund, and the Sean N. Parker Center for Allergy and Asthma Research at Stanford University.

Authors

Sharon Chinthrajah, Shu Cao, Cherie Liu, Shu-Chen Lyu, Sayantani B. Sindher, Andrew Long, Vanitha Sampath, Daniel Petroni, Marco Londei, Kari C. Nadeau

×

Usage data is cumulative from March 2025 through March 2026.

Usage JCI PMC
Text version 2,100 379
PDF 196 94
Figure 572 3
Table 171 0
Supplemental data 74 5
Citation downloads 138 0
Totals 3,251 481
Total Views 3,732
(Click and drag on plot area to zoom in. Click legend items above to toggle)

Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.

Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.

Advertisement

Copyright © 2026 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN 2379-3708

Sign up for email alerts