Subcutaneous immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis: an evidence based review of the recent literature with recommendations

Presentation, diagnosis, and the role of subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy in the management of ocular allergy

Allergic eye disease or ocular allergy is a debilitating condition with a significant impact on quality of life and productivity. As atopy continues to be on the rise, primary care providers are likely to encounter increasing numbers of patients with allergic eye disease. This review outlines the classification and pathophysiology of allergic eye disease and its clinical presentation. This paper does not detail traditional first-line therapies of allergic eye disease but describes the interdisciplinary management between the eye-care provider and allergist. It is recommended that patients with ongoing signs and symptoms of ocular allergy despite first-line therapies be referred for allergen immunotherapy, as it is highly effective for treatment of allergic eye disease. Through induction of immune tolerance, allergen immunotherapy is a disease-modifying therapy that can result in long-term improvement of ocular allergy. A thorough literature review was conducted on the efficacy and safety of allergen immunotherapy, including subcutaneous immunotherapy and sublingual immunotherapy, and its role in allergic eye disease.

Chronic Rhinosinusitis and Allergy: Increased Allergen Sensitization Versus Real Allergic Rhinitis Multimorbidity: a Systematic Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The objective of this article is to provide a recent update of the association between allergic inflammation and chronic rhinosinusitis. The systematic approach of this review article critically evaluates the literature published over the past few years and summarizes the specific pathophysiologic pathway of chronic sinonasal inflammation that has been postulated.

RECENT FINDINGS

From a systematic search of the Ovid Medline and Embase, 11 studies were included in a qualitative analysis of the association between systemic allergy and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Of the 11 studies, four showed an association, three were inconclusive, and four did not show any association. From the systematic search, 50 studies suggested four possible pathophysiologic pathways that may explain the association of allergic inflammation and CRS, namely, (1) staphylococcal enterotoxin, (2) the innate immunity pathway, (3) mast cell-associated inflammation, and (4) dysbiosis of microbiota. The association of systematic allergy and CRS remains inconclusive. The recent advances in the study of the pathophysiologic pathway of CRS may lead to the possibility of a targeted treatment option for CRS.

Effects of Perennial Allergen Immunotherapy in Allergic Rhinitis in Patients with/without Asthma: A-Randomized Controlled Real-Life Study

BACKGROUND

There have been very few studiesin real-life settingscomparing the treatment effects of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) and pharmacotherapy for perennial allergic rhinitis (AR).

OBJECTIVE

This study was performed to compare AIT and pharmacotherapy in terms of their effects on the symptom control and quality of life (QOL) of AR patients with/without asthma.

METHODS

A total of 250 patients diagnosed with AR with/without asthma were included and assigned to the immunotherapy (AIT plus pharmacological treatment) or control (pharmacological treatment only) group. Clinical and medication scores, QOL scores, and lung function (forced expiratory volume in one second as a percentage; FEV1%) were measured at baseline and 3 years after the start of treatment.

RESULTS

This study showed that there was clinical improvement in AR symptoms in the AIT group, whereas standard pharmacotherapy alone had no significant effect on nasal symptoms. The QOL and satisfaction scores, as evaluated with a visual analogue scale (VAS), were further improved compared to the pharmacotherapy group. There was a significant improvement in medication scores in both AIT groups. According to our results, while total asthma scores and asthma control test scores were significantly improved in the HDM AIT group, they did not change in the Parietaria pollen AIT group. In our study FEV1% was increased compared to the baseline value in the AIT group, but it was not statistically significant. On the other hand, FEV1% remained without any improvement in patients on standard pharmacotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Perennial AIT was found to be superior to pharmacotherapy in decreasing symptoms as well as in improving QOL scores in AR patients with/without asthma. HDM AIT was more effective for asthma symptoms than Parietaria pollen AIT.

Evidence-based dosing of maintenance subcutaneous immunotherapy: a contemporary review of state-of-the-art practice

BACKGROUND

Subcutaneous immunotherapy is an effective allergy treatment only if properly dosed. In this article we review the data on the probable effective dose range for subcutaneous immunotherapy and convert the recommended doses into a clinically relevant format.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search of dose-response subcutaneous immunotherapy studies was done of EBM databases, Medline database, PreMedline, and the National Guideline Clearinghouse for the period 1980-2016. Recommended doses were converted to the volume of allergen extract that should be added to a 5-mL maintenance vial.

RESULTS

A safe and effective dose for subcutaneous immunotherapy is likely 5-20 μg of major allergen per injection. A 0.5-mL injection from a 5-mL maintenance vial containing 0.2 mL of manufacturer's extract of each allergen should reach the lower end of the probable effective dose range for most allergens. A larger volume of extract is required to reach that range when treatment includes cat, dog, or only 1 dust mite. Increasing beyond the commonly prescribed 0.2 mL of manufacturer's extract added to a 5-mL treatment vial is reasonable for nearly all allergens to achieve a maintenance dose higher in the probable effective dose range.

CONCLUSION

Current otolaryngic allergy practice usually escalates patients to 0.5-mL injections from 5-mL maintenance vials containing 0.2 mL of manufacturer's extract of each allergen. With the main exceptions of cat and dog, those injections administered 1 or 2 times per month likely provide an efficacious dose of allergen and are consistent with published guidelines. A larger volume of extract should be considered in certain clinical situations.

International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Critical examination of the quality and validity of available allergic rhinitis (AR) literature is necessary to improve understanding and to appropriately translate this knowledge to clinical care of the AR patient. To evaluate the existing AR literature, international multidisciplinary experts with an interest in AR have produced the International Consensus statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR:AR).

METHODS

Using previously described methodology, specific topics were developed relating to AR. Each topic was assigned a literature review, evidence-based review (EBR), or evidence-based review with recommendations (EBRR) format as dictated by available evidence and purpose within the ICAR:AR document. Following iterative reviews of each topic, the ICAR:AR document was synthesized and reviewed by all authors for consensus.

RESULTS

The ICAR:AR document addresses over 100 individual topics related to AR, including diagnosis, pathophysiology, epidemiology, disease burden, risk factors for the development of AR, allergy testing modalities, treatment, and other conditions/comorbidities associated with AR.

CONCLUSION

This critical review of the AR literature has identified several strengths; providers can be confident that treatment decisions are supported by rigorous studies. However, there are also substantial gaps in the AR literature. These knowledge gaps should be viewed as opportunities for improvement, as often the things that we teach and the medicine that we practice are not based on the best quality evidence. This document aims to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the AR literature to identify areas for future AR research and improved understanding.

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

Background

The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is developing Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) for Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC). To inform the development of recommendations, we sought to critically assess the systematic review evidence on the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of AIT for ARC.

Methods

We undertook a systematic overview, which involved searching nine international biomedical databases from inception to October 31, 2015. Studies were independently screened by two reviewers against pre-defined eligibility criteria and critically appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) Systematic Review Checklist for systematic reviews. Data were descriptively synthesized.

Results

Our searches yielded a total of 5932 potentially eligible studies, from which 17 systematic reviews met our inclusion criteria. Eight of these were judged to be of high, five moderate and three low quality. These reviews suggested that, in carefully selected patients, subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual (SLIT) immunotherapy resulted in significant reductions in symptom scores and medication requirements. Serious adverse outcomes were rare for both SCIT and SLIT. Two systematic reviews reported some evidence of potential cost savings associated with use of SCIT and SLIT.

Conclusions

We found moderate-to-strong evidence that SCIT and SLIT can, in appropriately selected patients, reduce symptoms and medication requirements in patients with ARC with reassuring safety data. This evidence does however need to be interpreted with caution, particularly given the heterogeneity in the populations, allergens and protocols studied. There is a lack of data on the relative effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of SCIT and SLIT. We are now systematically reviewing all the primary studies, including recent evidence that has not been incorporated into the published systematic reviews.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13601-017-0159-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

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.

Semi-depot house-dust mite allergen extract for Chinese with allergic rhinitis and asthma

BACKGROUND

Real-world data of the subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) with semi-depot house-dust mite (HDM) allergen extract (a HDM allergen extract that contains a 50%-50% mixture of Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus and Dermatophagoides farina) for allergic rhinitis and asthma was unavailable in China until recently.

AIM

To investigate the effectiveness and safety of a HDM-SCIT for allergic rhinitis and asthma in Chinese patients.

METHODS

A multicenter, single-arm, open-label, self-controlled study. Chinese patients with allergic rhinitis or allergic asthma and with a history of symptoms from HDM exposure were included and received allergen-specific immunotherapy for 1 year by subcutaneous injection of HDM-SCIT. The primary outcome measure was the percentage of patients with an improvement in symptom severity assessed at 12 months after initiation of the treatment. The occurrence of adverse events and compliance of treatment were also evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 272 outpatients were included for effectiveness analysis. The subject-evaluated improvement rate in the visual analog scale (VAS) was 76.1% and 71.3% at 6 and 12 months, respectively; corresponding values for investigator-evaluated VAS were 77.9% and 71.7%, respectively (p < 0.0001). Symptom score changes were -2.43 and -3.79 at 6 and 12 months, respectively (both p < 0.0001); the VAS improvement rate and symptom score change did not differ significantly between children and adolescents and/or adults. Good injection schedule adherence was found in 98.8% of the patients. No study drug-related serious adverse events or serious systemic allergic reactions occurred.

CONCLUSION

HDM-SCIT was safe and effective in the treatment of allergic rhinitis and asthma in a Chinese population, with good compliance.

Exploratory study of tolerability and immunological effect of a short up-dosing immunotherapy phase with a standardised allergen extract derived from pollen of Olea europaea

BACKGROUND

A new subcutaneous specific immunotherapy (SCIT) product adsorbed on aluminium hydroxide has been developed with a short and simplified up-dosing phase, containing a biologically standardized allergen pollen extract from Olea europaea.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the tolerability profile of the updosing phase and its immunological effect, in terms of specific IgG4 and IgE levels and immediate skin reactivity.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study was an exploratory, multi-centre, open-label, single-arm, phase II/III clinical trial. Adults with a clinical history of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis with/without asthma due to sensitization to olive pollen were selected. Five up-dosing doses (300, 600, 3000, 6000 and 15000SQ+) were administered at weekly intervals, followed by a maintenance dose (15000SQ+) after 2 weeks. Adverse events were collected during the 30 min observation period after injections, after a telephone contact 2 days after each visit, and after reviewing the subjects' diary. IgG4 and IgE levels and immediate skin reactivity were evaluated at the beginning and at the end of the trial.

RESULTS

Ninety-three subjects were included in the trial (mean age, 35.7 ± 10.3 years; women, 66.7 %). A total of 95 adverse drug reactions, all mild in intensity and non-serious, were reported during the trial: 85 local in 34.4 % subjects, 9 systemic in 4.3 % subjects and one non-specific (grade 0). Within 6 weeks, significant changes in IgG4 and IgE levels and in immediate skin reactivity to Olea europaea were accomplished.

CONCLUSION

This new SCIT derived from pollen of Olea europaea presented a good tolerability profile and induced significant immunological responses already after a 6 week treatment. However, the non-controlled design may limit the interpretation of these results.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

EudraCT no: 2011-004852-20; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01674595.

Systematic review of immunotherapy for chronic rhinosinusitis

BACKGROUND

Immunotherapy (IT) has been well established as an effective treatment for allergic rhinitis (AR), but little is known about the benefits of IT on clinical outcomes of comorbid chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). The goal of this publication is to systematically review the literature regarding outcomes of IT in patients with atopic CRS.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was conducted including studies that assessed the efficacy of IT on clinical outcome measures in CRS including without polyp, with polyp, and allergic fungal rhinosinusitis subgroups. Excluded articles were those only reporting outcomes specific to asthma or AR.

RESULTS

Seven studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria for this review, none of which were randomized controlled trials. Generally, symptom scores improved in patients treated with IT when compared with baseline data and control patients. Objective endoscopic exam measures improved with IT treatment in short-term studies. Significant improvements were observed in radiographic assessments, and there was a decreased necessity for revision surgery, interventional office visits, and intranasal and oral steroid use.

CONCLUSION

Conclusions are limited by the paucity of available data on the efficacy of IT for treating CRS-specific outcome measures. There is weak evidence to support the use of IT as an adjunctive treatment in CRS patients, particularly in the postoperative period.

Medical management of allergic fungal rhinosinusitis following endoscopic sinus surgery: an evidence-based review and recommendations

BACKGROUND

Allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS) is a subset of polypoid chronic rhinosinusitis that is characterized by the presence of eosinophilic mucin with fungal hyphae within the sinuses and a Type I hypersensitivity to fungi. The treatment of AFRS usually involves surgery in combination with medical therapies to keep the disease in a dormant state. However, what constitutes an optimal medical regimen is still controversial. Hence, the purpose of this article is to provide an evidence-based approach for the medical management of AFRS.

METHODS

A systemic review of the literature on the medical management of AFRS was performed using Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Review Databases up to March 15, 2013. The inclusion criteria were as follows: patients >18 years old; AFRS as defined by Bent and Kuhn; post-sinus surgery; studies with a clearly defined end point to evaluate the effectiveness of medical therapy in postoperative AFRS patients.

RESULTS

This review identified and assessed 6 medical modalities for AFRS in the literature: oral steroids; topical steroids; oral antifungals; topical antifungals; immunotherapy; and leukotriene modulators.

CONCLUSION

Based on available evidence in the literature, postoperative systemic and standard topical nasal steroids are recommended in the medical management of AFRS. Nonstandard topical nasal steroids, oral antifungals, and immunotherapy are options in cases of refractory AFRS. No recommendations can be provided for topical antifungals and leukotriene modulators due to insufficient clinical research reported in the literature.