Efficacy and safety of intralymphatic immunotherapy in allergic rhinitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

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 1 s), and eight studies reported on symptom and medication scores. Furthermore, 11 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.

Comparison of clinical research trends and hotspots in allergic rhinitis and asthma from 2013 to 2023 based on bibliometric analysis

Purpose

To analyze and compare clinical research trends and hot topics in allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma and provide valuable theoretical data and references for future research.

Methods

Clinical studies focusing on AR or asthma published from 2013 to 2023 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection. Eligible articles were screened and analyzed using bibliometrics from multiple indicators.

Results

A total of 261 eligible articles on AR and 991 qualified articles on asthma were screened. The following bibliometric analyses identified the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology as the most influential publication on AR and asthma and proved the significant contributions of Harvard University in clinical studies on AR and asthma. The analyses also revealed that the top ten prolific authors for AR were from China, the United Kingdom, Japan, and Germany, whereas the top ten productive authors for asthma were mainly from the USA. Collaborations among countries for AR were relatively concentrated in the Occident, whereas international cooperation on asthma was mainly achieved by the Occident and certain Eastern countries.

Conclusions

This study compared and analyzed the current status and evolution of AR and asthma-related clinical research using bibliometric analysis. Additionally, the study comprehensively summarized the impactful authors, institutions, and countries, and revealed the replacement and evolution of hotspots.

Targeting lymph nodes for enhanced cancer vaccination: From nanotechnology to tissue engineering

Lymph nodes (LNs) occupy a critical position in initiating and augmenting immune responses, both spatially and functionally. In cancer immunotherapy, tumor-specific vaccines are blooming as a powerful tool to suppress the growth of existing tumors, as well as provide preventative efficacy against tumorigenesis. Delivering these vaccines more efficiently to LNs, where antigen-presenting cells (APCs) and T cells abundantly reside, is under extensive exploration. Formulating vaccines into nanomedicines, optimizing their physiochemical properties, and surface modification to specifically bind molecules expressed on LNs or APCs, are common routes and have brought encouraging outcomes. Alternatively, porous scaffolds can be engineered to attract APCs and provide an environment for them to mature, proliferate and migrate to LNs. A relatively new research direction is inducing the formation of LN-like organoids, which have shown positive relevance to tumor prognosis. Cutting-edge advances in these directions and discussions from a future perspective are given here, from which the up-to-date pattern of cancer vaccination will be drawn to hopefully provide basic guidance to future studies.

Promising New Diagnostic and Treatment Modalities for Allergic Rhinitis: What's Coming Next?

Novel diagnostic tests may help diagnose patients with local allergic rhinitis (AR) when systemic testing is negative or inconclusive. Surgical approaches including septoplasty, inferior turbinate reduction, nasal swell body reduction, and posterior nasal nerve ablation may improve symptoms in patients whose symptoms are refractory to medical therapy, though high-quality evidence is lacking in the AR population. Intralymphatic and epicutaneous immunotherapy have the potential to improve adherence to allergen immunotherapy, though comparisons with current gold standard treatments are lacking and studies reporting long-term outcomes are needed. Immunomodulatory agents in combination with subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) may improve tolerance of SCIT but reports to date do not demonstrate a clear benefit in symptom alleviation. Future work in these areas may support these options as beneficial for testing and treatment of AR.

A Review on Novel Therapeutic Modalities and Evidence-based Drug Treatments against Allergic Rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is an IgE-mediated atopic disease that occurs due to inhaled antigens in the immediate phase. Misdiagnosis, insufficient treatment, or no treatment at all are frequent problems associated with the widespread condition known as chronic allergic rhinitis. AR symptoms include runny, itchy, stuffy, and sneezing noses. Asthma and nasal polyps, for example, sometimes occur simultaneously in patients. In order for people living with AR to be as comfortable and productive as possible, treatment should center on reducing their symptoms. The online sources and literature, such as Pubmed, ScienceDirect, and Medline, were reviewed to gather information regarding therapeutic modalities of AR and evidence-based treatments for the disease as the objectives of the present study. An increasing number of people are suffering from AR, resulting in a heavy financial and medical burden on healthcare systems around the world. Undertreating AR frequently results in a decline in quality of life. Treatment compliance is a critical challenge in the administration of AR. Innovative therapies are needed for RA to provide patients with symptom alleviation that is less expensive, more effective, and longer duration of action. Evidence-based guidelines are helpful for managing AR illness. Treating AR according to evidence-based standards can help in disease management. AR treatment includes allergen avoidance, drug therapy, immunotherapy, patient education, and follow-up. However, AR treatment with intranasal corticosteroids is more popular. Hence, in this review article, treatment options for AR are discussed in depth. We also discussed the incidence, causes, and new treatments for this clinical condition.

Evaluation of Intralymphatic Immunotherapy in Allergic Rhinitis Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

Intralymphatic immunotherapy (ILIT) is short-course administration of allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT). This study is aimed at assessing the clinical efficacy and safety of ILIT in patients with allergic rhinitis (AR).

Methods

MEDLINE, PUBMED, and Cochrane Library were used to conduct electronic searches for clinical trials comparing ILIT and placebo in patients with AR. The final search took place on August 24, 2022. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions was used to assess the risk of bias in the included studies. The outcomes included combined symptom and medication scores (CSMS), visual analog scale (VAS), allergic rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life (RQLQ), Skin-prick test (SPT), and adverse events (AEs). Data were synthesized as mean difference (MD)/standard mean difference (SMD) or risk difference (RD) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results

Thirteen studies (454 participants) were included in this study. The ILIT group had better clinical improvement on the CSMS (random effects model, SMD-0.85, 95% CI [-1.58, -0.11], P = 0.02) and RQLQ (fixed-effects model, MD-0.42, 95% CI [0.69, 0.15], P = 0.003) than the placebo group. The booster injection was beneficial for CSMS (P < 0.0001), and the 4-week injection interval was superior to the 2-week injection period for improving VAS (P < 0.0001). Local swelling or erythema was the main AE following injection (random effects model, RD 0.16, 95% CI [0.05, 0.27], P = 0.005). Discussion. For individuals with AR, ILIT is safe and effective. ILIT alleviates clinical symptoms and reduces pharmaceutical consumption without causing severe AEs. However, the validity of this study is compromised by the substantial heterogeneity and risk of bias in the included researches. RegistrationCRD42022355329.

International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: Allergic rhinitis - 2023

BACKGROUND

In the 5 years that have passed since the publication of the 2018 International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2018), the literature has expanded substantially. The ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update presents 144 individual topics on allergic rhinitis (AR), expanded by over 40 topics from the 2018 document. Originally presented topics from 2018 have also been reviewed and updated. The executive summary highlights key evidence-based findings and recommendation from the full document.

METHODS

ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 employed established evidence-based review with recommendation (EBRR) methodology to individually evaluate each topic. Stepwise iterative peer review and consensus was performed for each topic. The final document was then collated and includes the results of this work.

RESULTS

ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 includes 10 major content areas and 144 individual topics related to AR. For a substantial proportion of topics included, an aggregate grade of evidence is presented, which is determined by collating the levels of evidence for each available study identified in the literature. For topics in which a diagnostic or therapeutic intervention is considered, a recommendation summary is presented, which considers the aggregate grade of evidence, benefit, harm, and cost.

CONCLUSION

The ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update provides a comprehensive evaluation of AR and the currently available evidence. It is this evidence that contributes to our current knowledge base and recommendations for patient evaluation and treatment.

A Synopsis of Guidance for Allergic Rhinitis Diagnosis and Management From ICAR 2023

An updated edition of the International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR:AR) has recently been published. This consensus document, which included the participation of 87 primary authors and 40 additional consultant authors, who critically appraised evidence on 144 individual topics concerning allergic rhinitis, provides guidance for health care providers using the evidence-based review with recommendations (EBRR) methodology. This synopsis highlights topical areas including pathophysiology, epidemiology, disease burden, risk and protective factors, evaluation and diagnosis, aeroallergen avoidance and environmental controls, single and combination pharmacotherapy options, allergen immunotherapy (subcutaneous, sublingual, rush, cluster), pediatric considerations, alternative and emerging therapies, and unmet needs. Based on the EBRR methodology, ICAR:AR includes strong recommendations for the treatment of allergic rhinitis: (1) for the use of newer generation antihistamines compared with first-generation alternatives, intranasal corticosteroid, intranasal saline, combination therapy with intranasal corticosteroid plus intranasal antihistamine for patients not responding to monotherapy, and subcutaneous immunotherapy and sublingual tablet immunotherapy in properly selected patients; (2) against the use of oral decongestant monotherapy and routine use of oral corticosteroids.

Quality of life in allergic rhinitis patients treated with intralymphatic immunotherapy (ILIT): A 19-year follow-up

Background

In 2002-2005, we conducted a phase I/II clinical trial where a new allergy immunotherapy (AIT) route was introduced: intralymphatic immunotherapy (ILIT). Ultrasound guidance allowed injection of allergen directly into inguinal lymph nodes. Grass pollen-allergic patients received 3 injections with 1-month intervals. The short ILIT was more patient-friendly, required lower dosing, and was comparable with SCIT regarding short-term efficacy, which was used as a reference.

Objective

Nineteen years after ILIT, the same patients were followed up to assess the long-term effect on quality of life and efficacy of the treatment.

Methods

Patients who received ILIT and SCIT in 2002-2005 and an additional group of patients, who completed SCIT in 2015-2018, were recruited. All participants received a trial-specific in-house questionnaire and a standardized Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire. Data were recorded off- (February 2021) and on- (May-June 2021) season. Descriptive statistics were applied.

Results

Of 58 and 54 patients who originally received ILIT or SCIT, 25 (43%) and 29 (54%) patients, respectively, returned the questionnaires for analysis. Four (16%) and 3 (11%) of the ILIT and SCIT patients, respectively, developed complete protection against grass pollen-mediated rhinitis, whereas another 15 (60%) and 20 (69%) expressed satisfaction with the received AIT. In both groups, any persistent symptoms were reported as mild. Medication usage in the ILIT and SCIT groups was comparable. Nineteen (76%) and 23 (79%) patients, respectively, expressed satisfaction with their AIT.

Conclusions

Grass pollen ILIT leads to long-term significant improvement in rhinitis-associated quality of life 19 years after treatment, and the ILIT quality-of-life effect was not inferior to that of SCIT.

Strengthening the case for intralymphatic immunotherapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Intralymphatic immunotherapy (ILIT) is a promising novel method of immunotherapy, that is short and convenient, and may be very effective. Results have been varied, and efforts to unravel the real value of the treatment are ongoing. Methods used to assess the effect in clinical trials have been so varied that it is difficult to compare studies with each other.

RECENT FINDINGS

Some advances have been made; the importance of injecting into the lymph node has been illustrated, and treatment with a range of medicines has proven to be successful. In meta-analyses the treatment has been shown to have no serious side effects and to be an effective short term desensitizing agent. Now it remains to be shown that ILIT also has long-term effects of tolerance. Preliminary data suggest that there is a long-term effect.

SUMMARY

Injecting allergen directly into a lymph node strengthens the protective immune response. ILIT is safe and induces desensitization and very likely also induces tolerance. Compliance will improve compared with other treatment forms. If ILIT holds its promise, it will become an attractive option for patients with allergy.

Immunology of allergen immunotherapy

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease-modifying therapy for allergic disease. Through repeated inoculations of low doses of allergen-either as whole proteins or peptides-patients can achieve a homeostatic balance between inflammatory effectors induced and/or associated with allergen contact, and mediators of immunologic non-responsiveness, potentially leading to sustained clinical improvements. AIT for airborne/respiratory tract allergens and insect venoms have traditionally been supplied subcutaneously, but other routes and modalities of administration can also be effective. Despite differences of allergen administration, there are some similarities of immunologic responses across platforms, with a general theme involving the restructuring and polarization of adaptive and innate immune effector cells. Here we review the immunology of AIT across various delivery platforms, including subcutaneous, sublingual, epicutaneous, intradermal, and intralymphatic approaches, emphasizing shared mechanisms associated with achieving immunologic non-responsiveness to allergen.

Recent Advances in Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy in Humans: A Systematic Review

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is presumed to modulate the natural course of allergic disease by inducing immune tolerance. However, conventional AITs, such as subcutaneous immunotherapy and sublingual immunotherapy, require long treatment durations and often provoke local or systemic hypersensitivity reactions. Therefore, only <5% of allergy patients receive AIT as second-line therapy. Novel administration routes, such as intralymphatic, intradermal and epicutaneous immunotherapies, and synthetic recombinant allergen preparations have been evaluated to overcome these limitations. We will review the updated views of diverse AIT methods, and discuss the limitations and opportunities of the AITs for the treatment of allergic diseases in humans.