Persistence of treatment with 5-grass pollen tablets in patients with allergic rhinitis: a real-life study

Sublingual immunotherapy persistence and adherence in real-world settings: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) adherence in the literature is often evaluated in closely monitored trials that may impact patient behavior; real-world SLIT adherence is relatively unknown. This systematic review intends to assess SLIT adherence in studies that reflect real-world settings.

METHODS

A literature search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Scopus for real-world studies examining SLIT adherence was performed. Monitored clinical trials were excluded. Paired investigators independently reviewed all articles. For this review, "persistence" was defined as continuing therapy and not being lost to follow-up and "adherence" as persistence in accordance with prescribed SLIT dose, dosing schedule, and duration. Article quality was assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale and then converted to AHRQ standards (good, fair, and poor).

RESULTS

The search yielded 1596 nonduplicate abstracts, from which 32 articles (n = 63,683 patients) met criteria. Twenty-six (81%) studies reported persistence rates ranging from 7.0% to 88.7%, and 18 (56%) reported adherence rates ranging from 9.6% to 97.0%. Twenty-one (66%) studies surveyed reasons for discontinuing SLIT. All studies were Oxford level of evidence 2b and of good (n = 12) to fair (n = 20) quality.

CONCLUSION

Reported rates of real-world SLIT persistence and adherence varied widely by study methodology (e.g., follow-up duration, objective vs subjective assessment). Studies with longer follow-up generally reported lower rates; 3-year persistence ranged from 7% to 59.0% and 3-year adherence from 9.6% to 49.0%. Future studies of SLIT adherence would benefit from following concordant definitions of persistence/adherence and standardized reporting metrics. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Update about Oralair® as a treatment for grass pollen allergic rhinitis

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is a well-tolerated, safe, and effective approach to treating allergic rhinitis (AR). Oralair® is a five-grass pollen SLIT tablet containing natural pollen allergens from five of the major grass species responsible for seasonal AR due to grass pollen allergy. Recommended use is in a pre-coseasonal regimen, starting daily treatment approximately 4 months before the start of the pollen season, with treatment then continued daily throughout the season; treatment should continue for 3–5 y. Clinical efficacy and safety of Oralair® in patients with grass pollen-induced AR has been demonstrated in a comprehensive clinical development program of randomized controlled trials. Effectiveness has been substantiated in subsequent observational studies with sustained efficacy following treatment cessation and a favorable level of adherence, quality of life, benefit, and satisfaction for the patients. Supportive evidence for a benefit in reducing the risk or delaying the development of allergic asthma is emerging.

Clinical aspects of sublingual immunotherapy tablets and drops

BACKGROUND

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is administered via tablets (SLIT-T) or liquid drops (SLIT-D). In North America, currently 4 SLIT-T formulations are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for allergy immunotherapy, and SLIT-D is an off-label use of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) extracts.

OBJECTIVE

To compare and contrast aspects of SLIT-T and SLIT-D, including physical characteristics, mechanism of action, dosing, efficacy, safety, adherence, and cost.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed literature review (no limits), product prescribing information, and manufacturer websites.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Publications related to physical characteristics, mechanism of action, dosing, efficacy, safety, and adherence.

RESULTS

Published evidence indicates that tablet and drop formulations differ in regard to physical characteristics, dosing, and strength of evidence for efficacy. Whether there are any differences in absorption and mechanism of action between the 2 formulations is currently unknown. Optimal dosing, efficacy, and safety have been established for SLIT-T. In contrast, in North America there is little support for efficacy of SLIT-D from randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, and dose ranges have not been appropriately evaluated. SLIT-T treats a single allergen, whereas in the United States SLIT-D often contains multiple allergens to treat polysensitization. The safety profiles of SLIT-T and SLIT-D appear similar, and both formulations are considered safer than SCIT.

CONCLUSION

Professional guidelines should make a clear distinction between SLIT-T and SLIT-D in their recommendations to minimize confusion with the umbrella term SLIT.

Adherence to treatment in allergic respiratory diseases

Introduction: Asthma and allergic rhinitis (AR) are chronic conditions in which management needs adherence to prescribed drugs. Despite the benefits of regular maintenance of asthma and AR therapy, low adherence is a frequent issue in clinical practice. Areas covered: The aim of this review is to provide a targeted analysis of the more recent literature on adherence in asthma and AR, focused on the following areas: adherence extent, barriers and consequences, effects of educational interventions and use of new technologies to improve the level of adherence. Expert commentary: Despite the extent, reasons and effects of this problem being well known, non-adherence in asthma and allergic AR remains worryingly high. Poor adherence leads to unsatisfactory health outcomes, with a negative impact on patients and society. Recent literature suggests that successful programs to improve adherence should include a combination of strategies. The new technologies represent a promising tool to improve adherence.