Sublingual immunotherapy for asthma

A Meta-Analysis Investigating the Efficacy and Safety of Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy in the Management of Respiratory Allergies

Background: This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and adverse effects of specific immunotherapy (SIT) in the management of respiratory allergens, including allergic asthma, rhinitis, and related disorders, based on a review of current literature up to November 8, 2022.Methods: We conducted a search of databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science, to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing respiratory allergy-specific immunotherapy. We employed the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement to select RCTs that adhered to rigorous reporting standards. Specifically, we focused on double-blind placebo-controlled (DBPC) trials and open studies involving both adults and children, considering factors such as dosage, inclusion criteria, allergens, and primary outcome measurements.Results: A total of 25 meta-analyses were included in this study. Among them, 14 evaluated sublingual specific allergen immunotherapy (SLIT), 4 assessed subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT), 4 explored both sublingual and subcutaneous immunotherapy, and 3 investigated intralymphatic immunotherapy. The outcomes of these meta-analyses indicated a reduction in medication scores in 20 cases and a decrease in symptom scores in 23 cases. Additionally, six studies reported on changes in IgE levels, seven studies focused on IgG4, four studies examined FEV1 (forced expiratory volume in one second), and eight studies reported on symptom and medication scores. Furthermore, eleven studies reported on differences in adverse reactions.Conclusion: The results of our meta-analysis suggest that specific immunotherapy, while associated with some adverse effects, effectively reduces the symptoms of asthma and rhinitis. Therefore, we recommend its use in the treatment of respiratory allergies.

How can we improve our use of allergen immunotherapy as a treatment option for asthma and severe asthma?

INTRODUCTION

In patients suffering from allergic asthma, especially in the pediatric age-group, allergen immunotherapy (AIT) could be of benefit and has the potential of long-term disease modification.

AREAS COVERED

We reviewed the evidence for a beneficial effect of AIT in allergic asthma. A correct selection of the possible candidates for AIT is crucial. We define the comprehensive allergic asthma diagnosis: confirming asthma, confirming allergic sensitization and having symptoms on exposure to the relevant allergens.We analyze why the first trials on AIT for asthma were contradictory; we consider the results of systematic reviews and discuss the high degree of heterogeneity often found in meta-analysis. We assess recent, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials in sublingual AIT that provide robust evidence for a reduction in acute asthma exacerbations and a decrease in the use of inhaled corticosteroids. Further, we demonstrate how real-world trials and large pharmacy data-based analyses confirm these findings for SLIT and SCIT. Finally, we explore the option of AIT in severe asthma patients, once well-controlled on biologic therapy.

EXPERT OPINION

Clear indications for AIT in asthma guidelines would benefit allergic asthmatics. AIT is a therapeutic option in appropriately selected asthmatics. Three years treatment has the potential for long-term tolerance, with persisting benefits years after discontinuation.

Extracellular Vesicles Derived from Allergen Immunotherapy-Treated Mice Suppressed IL-5 Production from Group 2 Innate Lymphoid Cells

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT), such as subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT), is a treatment targeting the causes of allergic diseases. The roles of extracellular vesicles (EVs), bilayer lipid membrane blebs released from all types of cells, in AIT have not been clarified. To examine the roles of EVs in SCIT, it was analyzed whether (1) EVs are phenotypically changed by treatment with SCIT, and (2) EVs derived from SCIT treatment suppress the function of group 2 innate lymphoid cells (ILC2s), which are major cells contributing to type 2 allergic inflammation. As a result, (1) expression of CD9, a canonical EV marker, was highly up-regulated by SCIT in a murine model of asthma; and (2) IL-5 production from ILC2s in vitro was significantly decreased by the addition of serum EVs derived from SCIT-treated but not non-SCIT-treated mice. In conclusion, it was indicated that EVs were transformed by SCIT, changing to a suppressive phenotype of type 2 allergic inflammation.

Impact of Therapeutics on Unified Immunity During Allergic Asthma and Respiratory Infections

Asthma is a common chronic respiratory disease that affects millions of people worldwide. Patients with allergic asthma, the most prevalent asthma endotype, are widely considered to possess a defective immune response against some respiratory infectious agents, including viruses, bacteria and fungi. Furthermore, respiratory pathogens are associated with asthma development and exacerbations. However, growing data suggest that the immune milieu in allergic asthma may be beneficial during certain respiratory infections. Immunomodulatory asthma treatments, although beneficial, should then be carefully prescribed to avoid misuse and overuse as they can also alter the host microbiome. In this review, we summarize and discuss recent evidence of the correlations between allergic asthma and the most significant respiratory infectious agents that have a role in asthma pathogenesis. We also discuss the implications of current asthma therapeutics beyond symptom prevention.

Recent Advances in Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy as Treatment for Allergic Asthma: A Practical Overview

The Global Initiative for Asthma Report updated in 2019 stated that potential benefits of allergen immunotherapy (AIT), compared to pharmacological and avoidance options, must be weighed against the risk of adverse effects and the inconvenience and cost of the prolonged course of therapy in asthma. Thus, with the aim of clarifying some aspects with regard to the possible use of AIT in allergic asthma treatment armamentarium, a group of expert allergists from the Spanish Allergy and Clinical Immunology Scientific Society (SEAIC), particularly from the Immunotherapy and Asthma Interest Groups developed a frequently asked questions in clinical practice. This document updates relevant topics on the use of AIT in asthma and could facilitate physician clinical decisions and improve health outcomes for individual patients.

Safety, Efficacy, and Preventive Role of Subcutaneous and Sublingual Allergen Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Pediatric Asthma

Allergen-specific immunotherapy is currently the only treatment with the potential to modify and prevent progression of allergic asthma in children. In clinical practice, it is available in two forms: subcutaneous immunotherapy and sublingual immunotherapy. Trials and meta-analyses showed both the safety and the short- and long-term benefits of allergen-specific immunotherapy in asthmatic children. However, its use and role in asthma remains controversial, since studies are largely heterogeneous. This is mainly due to the lack of consensus on the optimal primary outcome to be considered for clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of allergen-specific immunotherapy in asthma. Therefore, well-conducted researchis needed using standardized and validated tools to evaluate key outcomes in asthmatic children.

Use of Sublingual Immunotherapy for Aeroallergens in Children with Asthma

Asthma is a heterogeneous disease that in children is often allergen-driven with a type 2 inflammation. Sublingual immunotherapy represents an important progress in the use of personalized medicine in children with allergic asthma. It is a viable option for house dust mite-driven asthma and in subjects with the asthma associated with allergic rhinitis. The use and indications for isolated asthma caused by other allergens are still controversial owing to heterogeneity of commercially available products and methodological limitations of studies in children. Nevertheless, most studies and meta-analyses found the efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy. Sublingual immunotherapy is safe but cannot be recommended in children with uncontrolled asthma.

Sublingual immunotherapy for asthma

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a common long-term respiratory disease affecting approximately 300 million people worldwide. Approximately half of people with asthma have an important allergic component to their disease, which may provide an opportunity for targeted treatment. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) aims to reduce asthma symptoms by delivering increasing doses of an allergen (e.g. house dust mite, pollen extract) under the tongue to induce immune tolerance. Fifty-two studies were identified and synthesised in the original Cochrane Review in 2015, but questions remained about the safety and efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy for people with asthma.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy compared with placebo or standard care for adults and children with asthma.

SEARCH METHODS

The original searches for trials from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register (CAGR), ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, and reference lists of all primary studies and review articles found trials up to 25 March 2015. The most recent search for trials for the current update was conducted on 29 October 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel randomised controlled trials, irrespective of blinding or duration, that evaluated sublingual immunotherapy versus placebo or as an add-on to standard asthma management. We included both adults and children with asthma of any severity and with any allergen-sensitisation pattern. We included studies that recruited participants with asthma, rhinitis, or both, providing at least 80% of trial participants had a diagnosis of asthma. We selected outcomes to reflect recommended outcomes for asthma clinical trials and those most important to people with asthma. Primary outcomes were asthma exacerbations requiring a visit to the emergency department (ED) or admission to hospital, validated measures of quality of life, and all-cause serious adverse events (SAEs). Secondary outcomes were asthma symptom scores, exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids, response to provocation tests, and dose of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the search results for included trials, extracted numerical data, and assessed risk of bias, all of which were cross-checked for accuracy. Any disagreements were resolved by discussion. We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (ORs) or risk differences (RDs) using study participants as the unit of analysis; we analysed continuous data as mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) using random-effects models. We considered the strength of evidence for all primary and secondary outcomes using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty-six studies met the inclusion criteria for this update, including 52 studies from the original review. Most studies were double-blind and placebo-controlled, varied in duration from one day to three years, and recruited participants with mild or intermittent asthma, often with comorbid allergic rhinitis. Twenty-three studies recruited adults and teenagers; 31 recruited only children; three recruited both; and nine did not specify. The pattern of reporting and results remained largely unchanged from the original review despite 14 further studies and a 50% increase in participants studied (5077 to 7944). Reporting of primary efficacy outcomes to measure the impact of SLIT on asthma exacerbations and quality of life was infrequent, and selective reporting may have had a serious effect on the completeness of the evidence; 16 studies did not contribute any data, and a further six studies could only be included in a post hoc analysis of all adverse events. Allocation procedures were generally not well described; about a quarter of the studies were at high risk of performance or detection bias (or both); and participant attrition was high or unknown in around half of the studies. The primary outcome in most studies did not align with those of interest to the review (mostly asthma or rhinitis symptoms), and only two small studies reported our primary outcome of exacerbations requiring an ED or hospital visit; the pooled estimate from these studies suggests SLIT may reduce exacerbations compared with placebo or usual care, but the evidence is very uncertain (OR 0.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 1.20; n = 108; very low-certainty evidence). Nine studies reporting quality of life could not be combined in a meta-analysis and, whilst the direction of effect mostly favoured SLIT, the effects were often uncertain and small. SLIT likely does not increase SAEs compared with placebo or usual care, and analysis by risk difference suggests no more than 1 in 100 people taking SLIT will have a serious adverse event (RD -0.0004, 95% CI -0.0072 to 0.0064; participants = 4810; studies = 29; moderate-certainty evidence). Regarding secondary outcomes, asthma symptom and medication scores were mostly measured with non-validated scales, which precluded meaningful meta-analysis or interpretation, but there was a general trend of SLIT benefit over placebo. Changes in ICS use (MD -17.13 µg/d, 95% CI -61.19 to 26.93; low-certainty evidence), exacerbations requiring oral steroids (studies = 2; no events), and bronchial provocation (SMD 0.99, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.82; low-certainty evidence) were not often reported. Results were imprecise and included the possibility of important benefit or little effect and, in some cases, potential harm from SLIT. More people taking SLIT had adverse events of any kind compared with control (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.49 to 2.67; high-certainty evidence; participants = 4251; studies = 27), but events were usually reported to be transient and mild. Lack of data prevented most of the planned subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite continued study in the field, the evidence for important outcomes such as exacerbations and quality of life remains too limited to draw clinically useful conclusions about the efficacy of SLIT for people with asthma. Trials mostly recruited mixed populations with mild and intermittent asthma and/or rhinitis and focused on non-validated symptom and medication scores. The review findings suggest that SLIT may be a safe option for people with well-controlled mild-to-moderate asthma and rhinitis who are likely to be at low risk of serious harm, but the role of SLIT for people with uncontrolled asthma requires further evaluation.

[Allergic immunotherapy in children and adolescents]

L’immunothérapie spécifique allergénique nécessite l’administration répétée d’allergènes dans le but de provoquer une tolérance clinique et immunologique. C’est la seule thérapeutique à visée étiologique qui permet de modifier l’évolution de la maladie en assurant une rémission après l’interruption de la procédure. La prévention de nouvelles sensibilisations par l’immunothérapie reste discutée. Nous envisagerons dans cette revue les principaux mécanismes immunologiques et les indications de l’immunothérapie chez l’enfant et l’adolescent.

Allergen Immunotherapy in Pediatric Asthma: A Pragmatic Point of View

To date, the only disease-modifying treatment strategy for allergic rhinitis and asthma is allergen immunotherapy (AIT). There is evidence that AIT improves allergic rhinitis and asthma, such as reducing symptom severity and medication use and improving of quality of life, with a long-lasting effect after the end of the course. The recent clinical trials evidenced AIT effectiveness and safety in allergic asthma. Consequently, the current version of the GINA (Global Initiative for Asthma) guidelines recommend AIT as an add-on therapy for asthma. There is also evidence that AIT may exert preventive activity on the possible progression from allergic rhinitis to asthma in children and the onset of new sensitizations. The present review provides a pragmatic summary of the clinical indications of AIT in pediatric asthma, including the immunological mechanisms, the predictive biomarkers, and the safety issues in clinical practice.

Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy With Liposome Containing CpG-ODN in Murine Model of Asthma Relies on MyD88 Signaling in Dendritic Cells

Changing the immune responses to allergens is the cornerstone of allergen immunotherapy. Allergen-specific immunotherapy that consists of repeated administration of increasing doses of allergen extract is potentially curative. The major inconveniences of allergen-specific immunotherapy include failure to modify immune responses, long-term treatment leading to non-compliance and the potential for developing life-threating anaphylaxis. Here we investigated the effect of a novel liposomal formulation carrying low dose of allergen combined with CpG-ODN, a synthetic TLR9 agonist, on established allergic lung inflammation. We found that challenge with allergen (OVA) encapsulated in cationic liposome induced significantly less severe cutaneous anaphylactic reaction. Notably, short-term treatment (three doses) with a liposomal formulation containing co-encapsulated allergen plus CpG-ODN, but not allergen or CpG-ODN alone, reversed an established allergic lung inflammation and provided long-term protection. This liposomal formulation was also effective against allergens derived from Blomia tropicalis mite extract. The attenuation of allergic inflammation was not associated with increased numbers of Foxp3-positive or IL-10-producing regulatory T cells or with increased levels of IFN-gamma in the lungs. Instead, the anti-allergic effect of the liposomal formulation was dependent of the innate immune signal transduction generated in CD11c-positive putative dendritic cells expressing MyD88 molecule. Therefore, we highlight the pivotal role of dendritic cells in mediating the attenuation of established allergic lung inflammation following immunotherapy with a liposomal formulation containing allergen plus CpG-ODN.

A meta-analysis of baseline characteristics in trials on mite allergen avoidance in asthmatics: room for improvement

BACKGROUND

Evidence regarding the clinical effectiveness of mite allergen avoidance for the treatment of asthma is lacking. In previous meta-analyses on mite allergen control, the baseline data were not discussed in detail. This study updates and extends the existing Cochrane review by Gøtzsche and Johansen (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2008, Art. No: CD001187), with a focus on baseline asthma outcomes and allergen exposures.

METHODS

We used the existing trials in the original Cochrane review and included newly published studies. The baseline data for the mite allergen load from the mattress, the standardized asthma symptom score (ASS), the forced expiratory volume in 1 s percentage of predicted (FEV1 %pred.), and the histamine provocative concentration causing a 20% drop in FEV1 (PC20) were extracted. First, the mean values of the outcomes were calculated. The influence of the mite allergen load was examined with a random-effect meta-regression using the Metafor package in R.

RESULTS

Forty-five trials were included; 39 trials reported strategies for concurrent bedroom interventions, and 6 trails reported strategies for air purification. The mite allergen load ranged from 0.44 to 24.83 μg/g dust, with a mean of 9.86 μg/g dust (95% CI 5.66 to 14.05 μg/g dust, I2 = 99.8%). All health outcomes showed considerable heterogeneity (standardized ASS mean: 0.13, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.18, I2 = 99.9%; FEV1 %pred. mean: 85.3%, 95% CI 80.5 to 90.1%, I2 = 95.8%; PC20 mean: 1.69 mg/mL, 95% CI 0.86 to 2.52 mg/mL, I2 = 95.6%). The covariate mite allergen load did not significantly influence health outcomes.

DISCUSSION

This meta-analysis shows that mite avoidance studies are characterized by the inclusion of patients with rather mild to moderate asthma and with varying and sometimes negligible levels of allergen exposure. Future studies should focus on patients with severe asthma and increased levels of allergen exposure.

Decision-making for pediatric allergy immunotherapy for aeroallergens: a narrative review

There has been exciting progress in diagnosis and in the treatment of allergic patients. The objective of this review is to summarize the most relevant contributions in the past 10 years with a special focus on the pediatric population allergic to aeroallergens and provide the most relevant references and practical issues for the decision-making. Current guidelines on allergy diagnosis recommend a thorough clinical history as the first step, followed by allergen extract testing using an in vivo prick test and/or an in vitro specific IgE test. Molecular diagnosis is recommended when previous tests are inconclusive. In practice, the most important factors to decide the AIT treatment are the actual intensity and duration of the patient's symptoms and the availability of appropriate AIT products for the patient's sensitization profile at high allergen concentrations and with confirmed efficacy and safety from clinical trials. This document summarizes outstanding references for allergic immunotherapy decision-making and provides summary tables and figures analyzing the most important factors related to the decision for allergen immunotherapy and the safety risks related. The experts concluded that AIT is efficacious and safe for the treatment of allergic patients that is available for the most frequent aeroallergens.What is Known:• The prevalence of allergic asthma and rhinitis in children has increased in recent decades.• The efficacy and safety of allergen immunotherapy has been shown in multiple studies and systematic reviews.What is New:• This document summarizes outstanding references for allergic immunotherapy decision-making and provides summary tables and figures analyzing the most important factors related to the decision for allergen immunotherapy and the safety risks related. Recommendations of expert authors for the decision of the patients more suitable for allergen immunotherapy are included.

ERS/EAACI statement on severe exacerbations in asthma in adults: facts, priorities and key research questions

Despite the use of effective medications to control asthma, severe exacerbations in asthma are still a major health risk and require urgent action on the part of the patient and physician to prevent serious outcomes such as hospitalisation or death. Moreover, severe exacerbations are associated with substantial healthcare costs and psychological burden, including anxiety and fear for patients and their families. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) and the European Respiratory Society (ERS) set up a task force to search for a clear definition of severe exacerbations, and to also define research questions and priorities. The statement includes comments from patients who were members of the task force.

Sublingual Immunotherapy Tablets Relieve Symptoms in Adults with Allergic Rhinitis: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Background:

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has been proven to be effective against house dust mite-induced allergic rhinitis. However, the efficacy in adults with allergic rhinitis has never been reported on SLIT tablets. The current meta-analysis aimed to illustrate the differentiated efficacy of SLIT tablets on allergic rhinitis.

Methods:

Our systematic review and meta-analysis were performed on allergic rhinitis patients and aimed to summarize those randomized controlled studies (RCTs). PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and MEDLINE were screened for associated articles. We included RCTs on allergic rhinitis patients undergoing SLIT therapy and reporting outcomes on symptom relief and serum-specific IgE levels. The effect of SLIT tablets on the Rhinitis Quality Life Questionnaire Score (RQLQ), Rhinitis Total Symptom Score (RTSS), and serum-specific IgE levels was evaluated using RevMan 5.3.

Results:

Seven studies were included, with 2723 patients identified. All of the studies were RCT. The included seven studies were all conducted on adults. Among the included seven articles, five researches administered patients with SLIT tablets and were eligible for meta-analysis of RTSS, consisting of 1490 patients. Overall, RTSS was significantly reduced in the SLIT tablet group compared with that in the placebo group (standard mean difference = −0.33, 95% confidence interval [−0.54, −0.13], P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in specific IgE levels between SLIT and placebo patients.

Conclusions:

SLIT tablets effectively relieve rhinitis symptoms in adults with allergic rhinitis. Nevertheless, the current evidence may be limited due to sample size and the heterogeneity between studies. Large sample size and multiple center RCTs on the efficacy of different formulations of SLIT drugs are still needed to provide further evidence and a more precise recommendation.

Two decades with omalizumab: what we still have to learn

From its availability for clinical use nearly two decades ago for severe asthma, omalizumab has gained strong evidence of efficacy and safety in the treatment of severe asthma not controlled by standard-of-care therapy. It has been acknowledged by Global Initiative on Asthma guidelines as add-on therapy against severe uncontrolled asthma. Thanks to controlled trials supporting its efficacy, omalizumab has also been licensed for the treatment of chronic spontaneous urticaria. The optimal duration of treatment in either disease has not been established. Despite its high price, omalizumab appears to be cost-effective in severe uncontrolled asthma as well as in chronic urticaria. The literature suggests a wide range of applications for omalizumab in various disorders regardless of allergic or non-allergic pathophysiology.

Oral immunotherapy with the ingestion of house dust mite extract in a murine model of allergic asthma

Background

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (ASIT) has the potential to modify allergic diseases, and it is also considered a potential therapy for allergic asthma. House dust mite (HDM) allergens, a common source of airborne allergen in human diseases, have been developed as an immunotherapy for patients with allergic asthma via the subcutaneous and sublingual routes. Oral immunotherapy with repeated allergen ingestion is emerging as another potential modality of ASIT. The aim of this study was to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of the oral ingestion of HDM extracts in a murine model of allergic asthma.

Methods

BABL/c mice were sensitized twice by intraperitoneal injection of HDM extracts and Al(OH)₃ on day 1 and day 8. Then, the mice received challenge to induce airway inflammation by intratracheal instillation of HDM extracts on days 29–31. The treatment group received immunotherapy with oral HDM extracts ingestion before the challenge. All the mice were sacrificed on day 32 for bronchoalveolar inflammatory cytokines, mediastinal lymph node T cells, lung histology, and serum HDM-specific immunoglobulins analyses.

Results

Upon HDM sensitization and following challenge, a robust Th2 cell response and eosinophilic airway inflammation were observed in mice of the positive control group. The mice treated with HDM extracts ingestion had decreased eosinophilic airway inflammation, suppressed HDM-specific Th2 cell responses in the mediastinal lymph nodes, and attenuated serum HDM-specific IgE levels.

Conclusions

Oral immunotherapy with HDM extracts ingestion was demonstrated to have a partial therapeutic effect in the murine model of allergic asthma. This study may serve as the basis for the further development of oral immunotherapy with HDM extracts in allergic asthma.

Clinical trials in allergen immunotherapy: current concepts and future needs

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a safe, effective treatment for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and allergic asthma. However, AIT's clinical effect is still contested—primarily due to heterogeneity in clinical trial designs, study populations, therapeutic formulations, and efficacy criteria. After discussing current concepts and unmet needs, an international panel of experts made several recommendations: (i) explore and validate definitions for (clinical) responders in AIT trials; (ii) use of well‐documented, standardized provocation tests prior to inclusion of subjects with relevant diseases in AIT trials; (iii) monitoring neo‐sensitizations and occurrence of new allergy in extended AIT trials, and exclusion of polyallergic participants; (iv) validation of allergen exposure chambers with regard to natural exposure; (v) in studies of seasonal allergies, focus on peak exposure but also consider organizing two parallel, geographically distinct but otherwise identical trials; (vi) discuss adaptive trial designs with the regulatory authorities; (vii) use e‐health and m‐health technologies to capture more information on individual exposure to allergens; (viii) initiate research on potential psychological, biochemical, immune, neural, and even genomic markers of the placebo response; (ix) identify trial designs and primary endpoints that will give children with allergies easier, faster access to AIT formulations; and (x) promote and apply standardized methods for reporting systemic and local adverse events. The latest technologies and trial designs may provide novel, ethical ways of reducing bias and heterogeneity in AIT clinical trials. There is scope for physicians, patient organizations, companies, and regulators to improve clinical trials in AIT and, ultimately, to provide patients with better treatments.

Clinical Applications of Sublingual Immunotherapy

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is effective for the treatment of allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma in adults and children. In a limited number of studies, SLIT efficacy has been demonstrated for the treatment of food allergy. SLIT has a higher safety profile versus subcutaneous immunotherapy, although some systemic reactions have been reported. Appropriate patient selection, meticulous patient education, and routine follow-up are key for the safe and effective administration of SLIT. With organization and attention to detail, adding SLIT to one's practice can provide a highly valued patient service.

Allergic sensitization and clinical outcomes in urban children with asthma, 2013-2016

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to examine if food and/or aeroallergen sensitization was associated with worse asthma, pulmonary function tests (PFT), and laboratory markers.

METHODS

At our institution, 386 children with asthma were divided into allergic and nonallergic groups based on allergen-specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) testing classes 1-6 versus 0. Asthma severity and/or control, IgE level, eosinophil counts and/or percentages, forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in the first second of expiration (FEV1), and FEV1/FVC, were compared by using bivariate, regression, and subgroup analyses for children who were highly allergic (≥4 allergens).

RESULTS

A total of 291 subjects with asthma were allergic, significantly older, and had higher mean IgE levels and eosinophil counts and percentages (all p < 0.001). A total of 203 subjects who were highly allergic had worse obstruction on PFTs. Increasing age predicted allergen sensitization after confounder adjustment, odds ratio (OR) 1.54 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18-2.02). Similarly, PFT obstruction was associated with multiple allergen sensitization (OR 0.97 [95% CI, 0.93-1.02]).

CONCLUSION

Increasing age predicted allergic sensitization and multiple allergen sensitization. Worse obstruction on PFT also predicted multiple allergen sensitization. Continued surveillance of aeroallergen sensitization and PFT results may be beneficial in asthma management, particularly in older urban children.

Positive and negative AIT trials: What makes the difference?

Background

Allergen immunotherapy has proven to be efficacious in allergic rhinitis and asthma. However, results from randomised clinical trials may vary substantially. Clinical trials may unexpectedly fail. The purpose of this review is to discuss the possible factors that may contribute to a successful or unsuccessful study.

Methods

Descriptive review exploring the possible causes of negative outcomes in allergen immunotherapy trials.

Results

A series of factors may lead to negative results. Among of these are underpowering of the study, low allergen content in tested extracts, insufficient allergen exposure during monitoring and recruitment of inappropriate patients. In addition, the choice of the primary endpoint may be critical.

Discussion

A clinical trial aims to evaluate the efficacy of an agent. However, studies with potential effective compounds may fail because of methodical issues. Sometimes, they are the cause of discrepancies between successful phase II and unsuccessful phase III trials. To understand more about failure of studies, investigators and editors should be encouraged to publish negative trials.

Immunotherapy for pet allergies

Allergic diseases compose a serious challenge for modern societies. Their individual, medical and economical burden is large. As humans spend most of their time indoors, exposure to indoor allergens is a significant contributor to the development of allergic sensitization and respiratory allergies, such as allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma. One important source of indoor allergens are pets, in particular cats and dogs. Allergens from these and other mammals spread effectively and they are encountered widely in public places. If patient education, allergen avoidance and pharmacotherapy do not suffice for controlling the symptoms of pet allergy, allergen immunotherapy can be a treatment option. Current information on allergen immunotherapy in pet allergy suggests that it can be effective in reducing allergic symptoms. However, the low number of high-quality randomized controlled trials of allergen immunotherapy in pet allergy warrants for further investigations.

EAACI Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy: Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (AR) is an allergic disorder of the nose and eyes affecting about a fifth of the general population. Symptoms of AR can be controlled with allergen avoidance measures and pharmacotherapy. However, many patients continue to have ongoing symptoms and an impaired quality of life; pharmacotherapy may also induce some side-effects. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) represents the only currently available treatment that targets the underlying pathophysiology, and it may have a disease-modifying effect. Either the subcutaneous (SCIT) or sublingual (SLIT) routes may be used. This Guideline has been prepared by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology's (EAACI) Taskforce on AIT for AR and is part of the EAACI presidential project "EAACI Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy." It aims to provide evidence-based clinical recommendations and has been informed by a formal systematic review and meta-analysis. Its generation has followed the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) approach. The process included involvement of the full range of stakeholders. In general, broad evidence for the clinical efficacy of AIT for AR exists but a product-specific evaluation of evidence is recommended. In general, SCIT and SLIT are recommended for both seasonal and perennial AR for its short-term benefit. The strongest evidence for long-term benefit is documented for grass AIT (especially for the grass tablets) where long-term benefit is seen. To achieve long-term efficacy, it is recommended that a minimum of 3 years of therapy is used. Many gaps in the evidence base exist, particularly around long-term benefit and use in children.

Astragalus Oral Solution Ameliorates Allergic Asthma in Children by Regulating Relative Contents of CD4+CD25highCD127low Treg Cells

Objective: To explore the effects of Astragalus oral solution (AOS) on allergic asthma in children by investigating relative contents of CD4⁺CD25^highCD127^low Treg cells. Methods: The contents of Astragaloside A in AOS were detected by using HPLC. Eighty children with allergic asthma were recruited from February 2016 to June 2017, and randomly assigned into the control group (received placebo, 0.1% quinine chloride in deionized water, daily) and the AOS group (received 10 mL AOS daily). After 6-month treatment, therapeutic results were compared between the two groups. Serum levels of IL-10 and TGF-beta, Th1 cytokines (IL-2 and IFN-γ), and Th2 cytokines (IL-4 and IL-6) were measured by using ELISA kits. Relative contents of CD4⁺CD25^highCD127^low Treg cells were determined by using flow cytometry. Results: Astragaloside A was the main ingredient of AOS with 0.216 ± 0.027 mg/mL from six-batch samples. After 6-month therapy, the AOS group showed improved forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and the Pediatric Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (PAQLQ) scores compared with the control group (P < 0.05). Serum level of IL-10 was higher and the levels of TGF-beta, Th1 cytokines (IL-2 and IFN-γ), and Th2 cytokines (IL-4 and IL-6) were lower in the AOS group than in the control group (P < 0.05). AOS treatment increased the percentage of gated CD4⁺ T cells, CD4⁺CD25⁺ T cells, CD4⁺CD25^high Treg cells, CD4⁺CD25⁺FoxP3⁺ Treg cells and CD4⁺CD25^highCD127^low Treg cells when compared with the control group (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Astragaloside A was the main component of AOS, and AOS ameliorated allergic asthma in children by regulating relative contents of CD4⁺CD25^highCD127^low Treg cells.

Immunotherapy and Asthma in Children

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is still the only disease-modifying treatment strategy for IgE-mediated allergic diseases, with consolidated evidence both in adults and children. AIT is effective in determining clinical improvement of allergic rhinitis and asthma, such as reduced symptoms, medication use, and improvement of quality of life, with a long-lasting effect after cessation of treatment. Results from recent clinical studies have implemented the evidence of effectiveness and safety of allergen immunotherapy for the treatment of allergic asthma, so that the current asthma guidelines now recommend sublingual immunotherapy as an add-on therapy for asthma in adults and adolescents with house dust mite allergy, allergic rhinitis, and exacerbations despite low-to-moderate dose ICS, with forced expiratory volume in 1 second more than 70% predicted. AIT may also reduce the risk of progression from allergic rhinitis to asthma in children and prevent the onset of new sensitizations, thus representing a potentially preventive method of treatment. The aim of this review is to present an updated overview of the clinical indications of AIT, with particular reference to pediatric asthma, of the mechanisms of clinical and immunological tolerance to allergens, and of the potential biomarkers predicting clinical response.

Applicability of evidence from previous systematic reviews on immunotherapy in current practice of childhood asthma treatment: a GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Because most children with asthma now use inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), the added benefit of immunotherapy in asthmatic children needs to be examined. We re-assessed the effectiveness of subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in childhood asthma treatment focusing on studies with patient-relevant outcome measures and children using ICS.

METHODS

We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to systematically search and appraise the evidence using predefined critical patient-relevant outcomes (asthma symptoms, asthma control and exacerbations). We searched to retrieve systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials on immunotherapy for asthma in children (1960-2017). We assessed the quality of the body of evidence with GRADE criteria.

RESULTS

The quality of the evidence for SCIT was very low due to a large risk of bias and indirectness (dated studies in children not using ICS). No effect of SCIT was found for asthma symptoms; no studies reported on asthma control. For asthma exacerbations, studies favoured SCIT. We have little confidence in this effect estimate, due to the very low quality of evidence. For SLIT, quality of the evidence was very low due to a large risk of bias, indirectness and imprecision. The outcome 'asthma symptoms' could not be calculated due to lack of standardisation and large clinical heterogeneity. Other predefined outcomes were not reported.

CONCLUSION

The beneficial effects of immunotherapy in childhood asthma found in earlier reviews are no longer considered applicable, because of indirectness (studies performed in children not being treated according to current asthma guidelines with ICS). There was absence of evidence to properly determine the effectiveness or lack thereof of immunotherapy in asthma treatment in children with ICS.

Current and future management of the young child with early onset wheezing

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this review, we discuss current thinking in relation to available guidelines for the care of preschool-aged children with recurrent wheezing, while highlighting the gaps in our knowledge and discussing changes that could occur over the next 5 years.

RECENT FINDINGS

The Asthma Predictive Index as well as allergen-specific IgE, peripheral eosinophil count and exhaled nitric oxide are perhaps underutilized sources of information that can assist in predicting progression to asthma and response to therapies. Inhaled corticosteroids and leukotriene receptor antagonists decrease impairment and exacerbation frequency in wheezing children but are not disease modifying. Macrolides may be useful during acute wheezing episodes for preventing progression to more severe symptoms. Monoclonal antibodies targeting IgE and TH2 cytokines have been successful in trials of adults and older children with asthma, but trials in younger children are needed.

SUMMARY

Establishing the phenotype and endotype of young wheezing children can be useful for prognostication of future asthma risk as well as for selection of the most appropriate treatment. Primary asthma prevention strategies are needed during the critical developmental window in early life prior to the onset of irrecoverable loss of lung function.

Allergen immunotherapy for allergic asthma: a systematic overview of systematic reviews

Background

There is clinical uncertainty about the effectiveness and safety of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) for the treatment of allergic asthma.

Objectives

To undertake a systematic overview of the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of AIT for the treatment of allergic asthma.

Methods

We searched nine electronic databases from inception to October 31, 2015. Systematic reviews were independently screened by two reviewers against pre-defined eligibility criteria and critically appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme quality assessment tool for systematic reviews. Data were descriptively and thematically synthesized.

Results

We identified nine eligible systematic reviews; these focused on delivery of AIT through the following routes: subcutaneous (SCIT; n = 3); sublingual (SLIT; n = 4); and both SCIT and SLIT (n = 2). This evidence found that AIT delivered by SCIT and SLIT can improve medication and symptom scores and measures of bronchial hyper-reactivity. The impact on measures of lung function or asthma control was however less clear. We found no systematic review level evidence on the cost-effectiveness of SCIT or SLIT. SLIT had a favorable safety profile when compared to SCIT, particularly in relation to the risk of systemic reactions.

Conclusions

AIT has the potential to achieve reductions in symptom and medication scores, but there is no clear or consistent evidence that measures of lung function can be improved. Bearing in mind the limitations of synthesizing evidence from systematic reviews and the fact that these reviews include mainly dated studies, a systematic review of current primary studies is now needed to update this evidence base, estimate the effectiveness of AIT on asthma outcomes and to investigate the relative effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of SCIT and SLIT.

Allergen immunotherapy for the treatment of allergic rhinitis and/or asthma: an umbrella review

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis and asthma are important public health concerns, yet there is no consensus about the benefits and harms of allergen-specific immunotherapy to treat these conditions. We performed an umbrella review of systematic reviews summarizing the current evidence for the benefits and harms of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT).

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library and the grey literature from Jan. 1, 2010 to Nov. 20, 2016 for systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials or prospectively controlled studies involving children or adults with allergic rhinitis or asthma. Outcomes were summarized narratively (benefits: total combined symptom-medication score, symptom score, medication score, disease-specific quality of life, adherence; harms: anaphylaxis, death, local and systemic reactions).

RESULTS

Twenty-three systematic reviews were included. SCIT and SLIT were more effective than placebo for most outcomes. SCIT was better than SLIT at improving medication and symptom scores, with no differences in quality of life; however, data were limited for this comparison. Anaphylaxis and death were infrequently reported. Few reviews assessed benefits or harms among children.

INTERPRETATION

Allergen immunotherapy appears to be effective among patients with allergic rhinitis and asthma. The safety of allergen immunotherapy is not conclusively established, although death and anaphylaxis appear to be rare. PROSPERO no.: CRD42015024590.

Allergen Immunotherapy

Allergies affect a large proportion of the population. Allergies can adversely affect productivity, sleep, and quality of life and can lead to life-threatening reactions. Allergies can spread to affect multiple organ systems. Allergen immunotherapy is the only therapy that can change the natural history of allergic disease.

Immunotherapy in allergic rhinitis and lower airway outcomes

Allergic rhinitis and asthma constitute two clinical expressions of a single-condition, respiratory allergy. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a form of treatment specifically aimed at modifying the response to sensitizing allergens. The inherent potential benefit of AIT is the simultaneous treatment of all clinical expressions of respiratory allergy. Current data support the effectiveness of subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy in rhinitis. Studies also provide proof for a beneficial effect in allergic asthma. Even more, substantial evidence points to the preventive effect on the progression from rhinitis to asthma. Despite the current knowledge on the basic mechanisms underlying the immunological effect of AIT is vast, the specific mechanisms for the preventive effect of primary sensitization or new sensitizations are poorly understood. This review aimed to provide a critical overview of the current knowledge on the effectiveness of AIT and its potential role in secondary prevention of respiratory allergy progression.

Selling falsehoods? A cross-sectional study of Canadian naturopathy, homeopathy, chiropractic and acupuncture clinic website claims relating to allergy and asthma

OBJECTIVE

To identify the frequency and qualitative characteristics of marketing claims made by Canadian chiropractors, naturopaths, homeopaths and acupuncturists relating to the diagnosis and treatment of allergy and asthma.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Canada.

DATA SET

392 chiropractic, naturopathic, homeopathic and acupuncture clinic websites located in 10 of the largest metropolitan areas in Canada, as identified using 400 Google search results. Duplicates were not excluded from data analysis.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Mention of allergy, sensitivity or asthma, claim of ability to diagnose allergy, sensitivity or asthma, claim of ability to treat allergy, sensitivity or asthma, and claim of allergy, sensitivity or asthma treatment efficacy. Tests and treatments promoted were noted as qualitative examples.

RESULTS

Naturopath clinic websites have the highest rates of advertising at least one of diagnosis, treatment or efficacy for allergy or sensitivity (85%) and asthma (64%), followed by acupuncturists (68% and 53%, respectively), homeopaths (60% and 54%) and chiropractors (33% and 38%). Search results from Vancouver, British Columbia were most likely to advertise at least one of diagnosis, treatment or efficacy for allergy or sensitivity (72.5%) and asthma (62.5%), and results from London, Ontario were least likely (50% and 40%, respectively). Of the interventions advertised, few are scientifically supported; the majority lack evidence of efficacy, and some are potentially harmful.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of alternative healthcare clinics studied advertised interventions for allergy and asthma. Many offerings are unproven. A policy response may be warranted in order to safeguard the public interest.

Critical appraisal of the clinical utility of sublingual immunotherapy in allergy

Since it was introduced by Noon in 1911, allergen-specific immunotherapy or desensitization has been widely prescribed in the management of allergic diseases. Aimed at the etiology, it represents the only effective treatment for allergy. The basic mechanisms of immunotherapy are becoming better understood and allow us to improve this technique in the future. The sublingual immunotherapy as an alternative to subcutaneous route has been widely studied. Several clinical trials confirmed that sublingual immunotherapy is efficient in reducing allergic respiratory symptoms. The sublingual immunotherapy reduces the risk of developing serious side effects due to desensitization. We performed a literature review in order to remind the mechanisms of action and to demonstrate efficacy and tolerability of the sublingual immunotherapy in the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma and its impact on the quality of life.

Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy

Allergen-specific immunotherapy remains the only causal treatment of allergic disease to date. Its efficacy in symptom reduction was demonstrated in double blind, placebo-controlled studies of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, allergic asthma, and Hymenoptera venom hypersensitivity, including long-term effects after discontinuation of treatment. In addition, immunotherapy decreases the risk of developing new sensitisations to aeroallergens in monosensitised patients and allergic asthma in patients with mere allergic rhinitis. The mechanism of immunotherapy entails redirection of the T lymphocyte response from a T helper cell Type 2 phenotype in favour of induction of regulatory T cells and/or immune deviation toward a T helper cell Type 1 phenotype, with resulting inhibition of downstream effector pathways and induction of immunoglobulin G-associated blocking antibodies. Two main application forms are used in clinical practice: subcutaneous immunotherapy and sublingual immunotherapy. The advantage of subcutaneous immunotherapy is its proven efficacy over a broad range of indications. Disadvantages are systemic allergic reactions and inconvenience for the patient due to frequent doctor visits. Sublingual immunotherapy has been shown to result in less systemic allergic reactions and may be more convenient due to home application; however, efficacy has only been proven for allergic rhinitis. For clinicians, the adherence to practice guidelines and thorough knowledge of allergen products, application routes, indications, immunomodulatory mechanisms, efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness is important for successful treatment and will be addressed in this review article.

Allergen-specific immunotherapy in pediatric allergic asthma

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is the only curative way that can change the immunologic response to allergens and thus can modify the natural progression of allergic diseases. There are some important criteria which contributes significantly on efficacy of AIT, such as the allergen extract used for treatment, the dose and protocol, patient selection in addition to the severity and control of asthma. The initiation of AIT in allergic asthma should be considered in intermittent, mild and moderate cases which coexisting with other allergic diseases such as allergic rhinitis, and in case of unacceptable adverse effects of medications. Two important impact of AIT; steroid sparing effect and preventing from progression to asthma should be taken into account in pediatric asthma when making a decision on starting of AIT. Uncontrolled asthma remains a significant risk factor for adverse events and asthma should be controlled both before and during administration of AIT. The evidence concerning the efficacy of subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for treatment of pediatric asthma suggested that SCIT decreases asthma symptoms and medication scores, whereas SLIT can ameliorate asthma symptoms. Although the effectiveness of SCIT has been shown for both seasonal and perennial allergens, the data for SLIT is less convincing for perennial allergies in pediatric asthma.

Exosomes for Immunoregulation and Therapeutic Intervention in Cancer

Exosomes, as a subset of extracellular vesicles, function as a mode of intercellular communication and molecular transfer, and facilitate the direct extracellular transfer of proteins, lipids, and miRNAs/mRNAs/DNAs between cells. Cancers have adapted exosomes and related microvesicles as a pathway that can suppress the immune system and establish a fertile local and distant environment to support neoplastic growth, invasion, and metastasis; these tumor-derived exosomes affect immunoregulation mechanisms, including immune activation and immune suppression. Immune cell-derived exosomes can modulate the immune response in cancer, which supports the belief that these membranous vesicles are immunotherapeutic reagents. In this review, we discuss the recent advances in the cancer immunotherapy, roles of exosomes in cancer, immunoregulation of tumor-derived exosomes, and immunomodulation by immune cell-derived exosomes. The topics covered here highlight novel insights into the development of efficient exosome-based cancer vaccines for cancer therapeutic intervention.