Safety aspects of Cluster immunotherapy with semi-depot allergen extracts in seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

Allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is in the process of developing Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) for Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis. To inform the development of clinical recommendations, we undertook a systematic review to assess the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and safety of AIT in the management of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.

METHODS

We searched nine international biomedical databases for published, in-progress, and unpublished evidence. Studies were independently screened by two reviewers against predefined eligibility criteria and critically appraised using established instruments. Our primary outcomes of interest were symptom, medication, and combined symptom and medication scores. Secondary outcomes of interest included cost-effectiveness and safety. Data were descriptively summarized and then quantitatively synthesized using random-effects meta-analyses.

RESULTS

We identified 5960 studies of which 160 studies satisfied our eligibility criteria. There was a substantial body of evidence demonstrating significant reductions in standardized mean differences (SMD) of symptom (SMD -0.53, 95% CI -0.63, -0.42), medication (SMD -0.37, 95% CI -0.49, -0.26), and combined symptom and medication (SMD -0.49, 95% CI -0.69, -0.30) scores while on treatment that were robust to prespecified sensitivity analyses. There was in comparison a more modest body of evidence on effectiveness post-discontinuation of AIT, suggesting a benefit in relation to symptom scores.

CONCLUSIONS

AIT is effective in improving symptom, medication, and combined symptom and medication scores in patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis while on treatment, and there is some evidence suggesting that these benefits are maintained in relation to symptom scores after discontinuation of therapy.

Incidence and risk factors for subcutaneous immunotherapy anaphylaxis: the optimization of safety

Fatal reactions related to subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy are rare: one event in 2.5 million injections has been reported in the USA and none in Europe. The prevalence of very severe systemic reactions (systemic adverse events [SAEs]) is one in 1 million injections. Though the serious events rate is decreasing and the majority of SAEs (∼0.2% per injection) are moderate and reversible, they still represent a major concern. Uncontrolled asthma, long-term therapy with β-blockers and high degree of allergen sensitivity are generally considered risk factors. The relevance of other conditions, like previous local reactions, the use of extracts conjugated with adjuvants and accelerated build-up schedules is controversial, as well as the role of preventative strategies. A careful risk assessment of patients and optimal administration procedures may significantly decrease the risk of SAEs. However, more uniform safety data are required and an accurate safety profile should be provided for every allergen product.

A high polymerized grass pollen extract is efficacious and safe in a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled study using a novel up-dosing cluster-protocol

BACKGROUND

Cluster immunotherapy represents an interesting alternative to conventional up-dosing schedules because it allows achieving the maintenance dose within a shorter time interval. In this study, the efficacy and safety of cluster immunotherapy with a high polymerized allergen extract of a grass/rye pollen mixture have been evaluated in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study.

METHODS

In total, 121 patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis due to grass pollen were randomized 1 : 1 to verum or placebo group. A short cluster up-dosing schedule of only 1 week was applied to achieve the maintenance dose which was administered monthly during the study period of 1 year. Total combined symptom and medication score (TCS) was defined as primary outcome parameter. Secondary outcome parameters were individual symptom and medication scores, 'well days,' global improvement as well as immunological effects and nasal allergen challenge. The safety profile was evaluated based on the European academy of allergy and clinical immunology grading system.

RESULTS

Significant reduction in the verum compared to the placebo group (intention-to-treat, population, verum: n = 55; placebo: n = 47) was found regarding TCS (P = 0.005), rhinoconjunctivitis total symptom score (RTSS, P = 0.006), and total rescue medication score (TRMS, P = 0.002). Additionally, secondary outcomes such as 'well days,' nasal challenge results, and increase of specific IgG4 were in favor of the active treatment. All systemic adverse reactions (0.8% of all injections in the verum group) were of mild intensity. No severe reactions related to the study medication were observed.

CONCLUSION

Cluster immunotherapy with high polymerized grass pollen extracts resulted in significant clinical efficacy and has been shown to be a safe treatment for grass pollen-allergic patients.

Safety and efficacy of tree pollen specific immunotherapy on the ultrarush administration schedule method using purethal trees

Background. Specific immunotherapy (SIT) with an ultrarush administration schedule with Purethal for tree pollen allergens has been evaluated to assess its efficacy and safety. Methods. The study group consisted of 22 patients with symptoms of allergic rhinitis and confirmed allergy to tree pollens. Patients were randomized and given an administration schedule of either ultrarush therapy or conventional preseasonal SIT. Treatment was performed during three consecutive years. Results. After three years of treatment, a similar reduction in nasal symptoms was observed; according to the visual analog scale, there was a decrease from 3.991 ± 0.804 points to 1.634 ± 0.540 in the ultrarush group and from 3.845 ± 0.265 to 1.501 ± 0.418 in the group desensitized using the conventional method (P > 0.05). There was also a comparable reduction in the use of relief drugs during pollen season and an increase in the serum concentration of IgG4 to tree pollens. No significant differences in the safety profile were observed. Conclusion. An administration schedule of ultrarush SIT with Purethal Trees is a safe treatment in preliminary observations. This therapy is comparable with conventional administration of SIT in the field of efficacy and safety.

Safety of immunotherapy in patients with rhinitis, asthma or atopic dermatitis using an ultra-rush buildup. A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Allergen-specific immunotherapy is a proven, highly effective treatment for IgE-mediated diseases. However, ultra-rush immunotherapy is prescribed infrequently because of the perception that accelerated immunotherapy buildup leads to a higher rate of systemic reactions.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the frequency of adverse reactions in patients with IgE-mediated diseases receiving house dust mite (HDM) ultra-rush immunotherapy.

METHODS

A retrospective, observational study was conducted for patients with IgE-mediated diseases receiving allergen-specific immunotherapy. Subcutaneous immunotherapy with depigmented polymerized mites extract was administered in two refracted doses of 0.2 and 0.3 ml at first injection, and in single 0.5 ml doses in subsequent monthly injections. A 30 min observation time was required after each injection. Systemic reactions were graded using the World Allergy Organisation grading system.

RESULTS

575 patients were included. The age range was 1-83 years. Most patients had respiratory diseases (544) and 101 patients had atopic dermatitis. A total of 27 patients (4.6%) experienced 139 reactions (reactions/injections: 1.9%); 22 patients (3.8%) experienced 134 local reactions (local reactions/injections: 1.8%). Eight patients (1.3%) experienced eight systemic reactions (systemic reactions/injections: 0.1%). Five systemic reactions were grade 2 and three grade 1. Two systemic reactions were reported during buildup. There were no fatalities.

CONCLUSION

Taking into account the possible bias for the retrospective design of this study we observed that immunotherapy for patients with IgE-mediated diseases using a depigmented polymerized mites extract, with an ultra-rush buildup, has similar frequency of systemic reactions than that seen in slower buildup immunotherapy in other studies. Accelerated buildup could improve patients' adherence and reduce dropout rates.

Cluster subcutaneous allergen specific immunotherapy for the treatment of allergic rhinitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Although allergen specific immunotherapy (SIT) represents the only immune- modifying and curative option available for patients with allergic rhinitis (AR), the optimal schedule for specific subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is still unknown. The objective of this study is to systematically assess the efficacy and safety of cluster SCIT for patients with AR.

Methods

By searching PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane clinical trials database from 1980 through May 10th, 2013, we collected and analyzed the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of cluster SCIT to assess its efficacy and safety.

Results

Eight trials involving 567 participants were included in this systematic review. Our meta-analysis showed that cluster SCIT have similar effect in reduction of both rhinitis symptoms and the requirement for anti-allergic medication compared with conventional SCIT, but when comparing cluster SCIT with placebo, no statistic significance were found in reduction of symptom scores or medication scores. Some caution is required in this interpretation as there was significant heterogeneity between studies. Data relating to Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) in 3 included studies were analyzed, which consistently point to the efficacy of cluster SCIT in improving quality of life compared to placebo. To assess the safety of cluster SCIT, meta-analysis showed that no differences existed in the incidence of either local adverse reaction or systemic adverse reaction between the cluster group and control group.

Conclusion

Based on the current limited evidence, we still could not conclude affirmatively that cluster SCIT was a safe and efficacious option for the treatment of AR patients. Further large-scale, well-designed RCTs on this topic are still needed.

Accelerated immunotherapy schedules

Rush and cluster immunotherapy schedules are accelerated immunotherapy build-up schedules. A cluster immunotherapy schedule involves the patient receiving several allergen injections (generally 2-4) sequentially in a single day of treatment on nonconsecutive days. The maintenance dose is generally reached in 4-8 weeks. In rush immunotherapy protocols, higher doses are administered at 15- to 60-min intervals over a 1- to 3-day period until the maintenance dose is achieved. This review will serve as an update for accelerated immunotherapy schedules. The review will include recent investigations demonstrating the safety of cluster schedules in atopic dermatitis, pediatric patients, and inhalant allergen mixtures and an accelerated protocol utilizing an infusion pump for allergen delivery. There has also been further elucidation on the immunological changes which occur during accelerated immunotherapy. Finally, new studies analyzing systemic reaction risk factors are discussed.

Factors affecting time required to reach maintenance dose during subcutaneous immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) demands a significant time commitment on the part of the patient, especially during the escalation period when weekly visits are required. Many patients refuse or discontinue treatment in spite of the demonstrated clinical efficacy of SCIT. Understanding the factors that affect the length of the escalation phase would allow for counseling of patients, which may improve patient compliance. The aims of this study were to determine the mean time required to reach maintenance dose during conventional protocol SCIT and to identify factors that significantly affect the time required to reach maintenance dose.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review of 55 patients (total of 79 treatment vials) who began SCIT between January 2007 and December 2010 and reached maintenance dose. The effect of demographic data, medical and social history, and SCIT allergen data on the time required to reach maintenance dose were examined using bivariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

The mean time to maintenance dose for the 79 treatment vials was 240.2 days (range, 76-720 days). Males (mean 294.7 days) took significantly longer than females (mean 205.1 days) to reach maintenance dose (p = 0.007). Asthmatics (mean 285.5 days) took significantly longer than nonasthmatics (mean 218.0 days) to reach maintenance dose (p = 0.008). Age also significantly affected the length of the escalation phase; each additional year of age was associated with an increase in 3.9 days needed to reach maintenance dose (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Gender, asthma, and age significantly impact the time required to reach maintenance dose during SCIT.