Reading Latitude’s success rates
The clinic labels its own figures “internal data” — an honest flag worth respecting, and worth understanding.
Latitude publishes: 98% of patients under 4 achieved desensitisation to their allergens, 94% across all ages — labelled on their own site as “Internal data, 2026” — an earlier 92%-within-one-year figure, and, via an academic collaboration presented at a 2025 conference, that about 5% of doses across more than a thousand OIT patients caused any reaction, the overwhelming majority mild. The fair reading: the internal-data label is honest self-disclosure, not deception; desensitisation is a meaningful clinical endpoint; and the same three questions apply as to every provider — who is in the denominator, who verified it, what counts as success. Notably, public skepticism about Latitude’s figures is essentially absent, unlike its main competitor’s. Curex competes with Latitude and publishes no food-allergy outcome data of its own — hold us to the identical standard.
Medically reviewed by Dr. Chet Tharpe, M.D. · Last reviewed September 2026
The claims
What the clinic publishes
- under-4 desensitisation — “internal data, 2026”
- 98%under-4 desensitisation — “internal data, 2026”
- all ages — same label
- 94%all ages — same label
- of doses causing any reaction (1,000+ patients, AAAAI 2025 abstract)
- ~5%of doses causing any reaction (1,000+ patients, AAAAI 2025 abstract)
- published average to maintenance
- ~8.4 mopublished average to maintenance
Competitor figures are what each provider published on its own site or what patients reported publicly, dated where checked. Prices and policies change — confirm current figures with each provider, including us, before enrolling.
The method
Same three questions, every provider
Who is in the denominator — starters or completers, and what happened to those who stopped. Who verified it — internal records, conference abstract, or peer-reviewed publication (Latitude spans the first two; ask about the third). What counts as success — desensitisation thresholds vary between programs, so two 9x% figures need not measure the same thing.
Held to that standard, Latitude’s posture is comparatively strong: self-labelled internal data, an academic collaboration, and essentially no public skepticism cluster. Held to the same standard, Curex has published no food-allergy outcomes at all — our claims are design arguments, and you should price them accordingly. Curex competes in this market — we run the only fully at-home food allergy program — so read this page as a competitor’s honest summary of the public record and verify against the sources.
❓Frequently Asked Questions
“98% of patients under 4 years achieved desensitization to their allergen(s) with oral immunotherapy. 94% of patients of all ages achieved desensitization. Source: Internal data, 2026” — their site, their wording. Earlier materials cited 92% within one year and 97% for under-fours. Separately, data with an academic partner presented at AAAAI 2025: roughly 5% of doses among 1,000+ OIT patients caused any reaction, overwhelmingly mild.
It is the opposite of hiding the ball — the clinic tells you the figures are its own records rather than peer-reviewed research. That deserves credit and the standard questions in equal measure: internal data can be entirely accurate and still benefit from the denominator question (who started versus who is counted), the definition question (what dose threshold equals desensitisation), and the verification question (has anyone outside checked).
They are consistent with the strong end of the published literature, which reports high desensitisation rates for supervised peanut OIT alongside meaningful reaction and dropout burdens. Latitude’s ~5%-of-doses reaction figure with an academic partner is the kind of number that travels toward publication — worth asking the clinic what has been formally published since.
On food allergy: nothing — and we say so rather than borrowing our environmental-allergy study (2,897 patients) for a category it does not cover. Our food-program claims — higher graduation rate because gentler dosing means fewer side-effect dropouts, typical $10,000+ savings — are design arguments and internal figures. Ask us the denominator questions too.
If you experience sudden difficulty breathing, throat swelling, or other signs of anaphylaxis, call 911. A prescribed epinephrine auto-injector is the first-line treatment — not antihistamines.
This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always consult a qualified healthcare provider with questions about a medical condition. Content reviewed by board-certified allergists at Curex.
Keep reading
- Is Curex legit?The company, the evidence, and the concerns worth knowing — including full context on the 2025 FDA warning letter.Read
- How Curex worksThe treatment process end to end, from at-home testing to daily drops.Read
- Curex reviewsWhat patients actually report — both clusters, including the complaints.Read
- Is Curex worth the money?Plan pricing against allergy-shot costs, and who it is not worth it for.Read
- Evidence & guidelinesWhat the FDA approved, what the AAAAI/ACAAI practice parameter does and does not endorse, and what has been added since.Read
- Providers comparedCurex, Wyndly and Nectar on published prices, guarantees and evidence — including where a competitor is ahead.Read