Major allergen content consistency of SQ house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy tablets and relevance across geographic regions

The Art of Dosing for Subcutaneous Immunotherapy in North America

Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is a long-established treatment option for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. Proper dosing of the allergens is critical for the efficacy and safety of SCIT. Of the hundreds of liquid allergen extracts in the United States, effective and well-tolerated SCIT dosing has only been established for a small number. Thus, SCIT dosing remains largely empiric and continues to be, by necessity, an art. To highlight the complexity of SCIT dosing, this review summarizes the historical and current landscape of U.S. allergen extracts, differences among U.S. and European allergen extracts, allergen selection for SCIT, considerations for compounding of allergen extract mixtures, and recommended dosing. As of 2021, 18 standardized allergen extracts are available in the United States; all other extracts remain unstandardized without characterization of allergen content or potency. U.S. allergen extracts differ from European extracts in formulation and potency characterization. There is no standardized methodology for SCIT allergen selection, and interpretation of allergen sensitization is not straightforward. Compounding of SCIT mixtures requires consideration of potential dilution effects, allergen cross-reactivity, proteolytic activity, and additives. Probable effective dose ranges for SCIT are recommended in U.S. allergy immunotherapy practice parameters, although there are few studies using U.S. extracts supporting these doses as therapeutic. In contrast, optimized doses of sublingual immunotherapy tablets have been confirmed in North American phase 3 trials. The SCIT dosing for each patient remains an art that requires clinical experience and consideration of polysensitization, tolerability, compounding of allergen extract mixtures, and the range of recommended doses within the context of extract potency variability.

Delivery options for sublingual immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: clinical considerations for North America

Background: Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) can be delivered via tablets (SLIT-T) or aqueous drops (SLIT-D). SLIT-D dosing recommendations using North American extracts were published in 2015. We review the 2015 recommendations in the context of recent research, and compare and contrast dosing, efficacy, safety, adherence, and cost of SLIT-T and SLIT-D for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC) in North America. Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCT) of SLIT-D and SLIT-T trials were identified by a systematic PubMed search through March 1, 2022. Results: Dose-finding studies have been conducted for all approved SLIT-T; efficacy in North American populations was demonstrated in 11 RCTs. Approved SLIT-T are uniform internationally. Few dose-finding studies for SLIT-D have been conducted using North American extracts; efficacy was demonstrated in 2 RCTs. Extrapolation of dosing from SLIT-D studies conducted with extracts from other geographic regions is unreliable. Since the 2015 SLIT-D dosing recommendations, no new RCTs of SLIT-D have been conducted with North American extracts, whereas 6 SLIT-T RCTs have since been conducted in North America. Local allergic reactions are the most common adverse events with SLIT-T and SLIT-D, but both can induce systemic allergic reactions. Adherence to SLIT-D and SLIT-T remains a challenge. Patients must pay for SLIT-D directly, whereas SLIT-T is usually covered by insurance. Conclusion: As part of shared decision-making, patients should be informed about the scientific evidence supporting the use of SLIT-T and SLIT-D for ARC.

Precision medicine in the allergy clinic: the application of component resolved diagnosis

INTRODUCTION

A precise diagnosis is key for the optimal management of allergic diseases and asthma. In vivo or in vitro diagnostic methods that use allergen extracts often fail to identify the molecules eliciting the allergic reactions.

AREAS COVERED

Component-resolved diagnosis (CRD) has solved most of the limitations of extract-based diagnostic procedures and is currently valuable tool for the precision diagnosis in the allergy clinic, for venom and food allergy, asthma, allergic rhinitis, and atopic dermatitis. Its implementation in daily practice facilitates: a) the distinction between genuine multiple sensitizations and cross-reactive sensitization in polysensitized patients; b) the prediction of a severe, systemic reaction in food or insect venom allergy; c) the optimal selection of allergen immunotherapy based on the patient sensitization profile. This paper describes its main advantages and disadvantages, cost-effectiveness and future perspectives.

EXPERT OPINION

The diagnostic strategy based on CRD is part of the new concept of precision immunology, which aims to improve the management of allergic diseases.

Comparison of weight per volume and protein nitrogen units in non-standardized allergen extracts: implications for prescribing subcutaneous immunotherapy

Background

Allergen extracts used in subcutaneous immunotherapy can be standardized or non-standardized. Standardized extracts are available in specific biological potencies, presumably making their biological activity more consistent. The majority of allergen extracts are non-standardized and may have less consistent potencies. Non-standardized extracts are labeled as weight per volume or protein nitrogen units (PNUs). Neither method provides direct information regarding the extract’s biologic potency. The purpose of this study was to compare weight per volume versus PNU concentrations for 4 non-standardized allergen extracts prepared by two allergen manufacturers. The potencies were compared to current North American practice recommendations.

Methods

The weight per volume and PNU values were provided for 4 non-standardized extracts—birch, short ragweed, dog hair and Alternaria—from HollisterStier and Stallergenes Greer. Weight per volume and PNU concentrations were compared for each of these extracts from both manufacturers. From the raw data, we calculated the corresponding PNU values for a weight per volume of 1:100 and 1:200 for each extract. Similarly, we calculated the corresponding weight per volume including a range of PNU values, for 1000, 2000, 3000, 4000 and 5000 PNU/ml.

Results

Birch extract has low PNU concentration, below 5000, for a weight per volume of 1:200 for both HollisterStier and Stallergenes Greer. In contrast, for both HollisterStier and Stallergenes Greer ragweed extract, a weight per volume of 1:200 corresponds to a PNU concentration greater than 5000. Dog extract for a weight per volume of 1:200, and even for 1:100, corresponds to very low PNUs for both companies. For Alternaria, corresponding PNU concentrations for HollisterStier is low at only 500 while over 5000 for Stallergenes Greer.

Conclusions

Our results show variability when comparing weight per volume and PNU concentrations for both Hollister-Stier and Stallergenes Greer products. We suggest selecting a PNU dose that corresponds to a weight per volume of 1:200 as this may improve patient safety. Our recommendations for starting PNU dose for the four non-standardized extracts are 1500 for birch, 5000 for ragweed, 25 for dog, and 500 for Alternaria when using HollisterStier products; 2300 for birch, 5000 for ragweed, 1200 for dog, and 5000 for Alternaria when using Stallergenes Greer products. If the starting PNU concentration is considerably below 5000 for a weight per volume of 1:200 slow up-titration is advised. Conversely, for PNU concentrations above 5000 for weight per volume of 1:200 we suggest a maintenance dose of 5000 PNU.

[Significance of molecular diagnostics in allergen immunotherapy : Practical tips for the application in various groups of allergens with exemplary cases]

The basis of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the diagnosis of the eliciting allergen sources, which is a challenge, especially in the case of multiple sensitizations. Molecular allergy diagnostics can be of special help, since detection of "marker allergens", usually important major allergens, allows to distinguish between primary sensitization and cross-reactions. Thus, the indication and extract selection for AIT can be facilitated. While molecular diagnosis is particularly useful for double-sensitized hymenoptera venom and polysensitized pollen allergic patients, the benefit is probably lower in case of house dust mite allergy.

Efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy tablets in dust mite and pollen allergy

The latest evidence on the mechanisms, efficacy, and safety of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) was reviewed. Interleukin (IL) 35 and IL-35-producing regulatory T cells were assessed as new biomarkers for SLIT responsiveness. A detailed analysis of clinical studies, including timothy grass pollen, 5-grass pollen, ragweed, and house-dust mite SLIT tablets, was provided, including a comparative analysis of efficacy and safety of SLIT versus subcutaneous immunotherapy.

The global development and clinical efficacy of sublingual tablet immunotherapy for allergic diseases

Allergy immunotherapy (AIT) is a treatment option for respiratory allergy that is complementary to pharmacotherapy, with a distinct mechanism of action. Alternative methods to subcutaneous administration of AIT that enable patients to safely self-administer AIT is considered an unmet clinical need. The sublingual immunotherapy tablet (SLIT-tablet) is an orally disintegrating pharmaceutical formulation (oral lyophilisate) containing standardized allergens. SLIT-tablets have been developed for sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) of cedar-pollen, grass-pollen, ragweed-pollen, tree-pollen, and house dust mite allergies. It is a once-daily tablet treatment to be self-administered after the first dose has been provided under the supervision of a physician with experience in the diagnosis and treatment of allergic diseases. Once the first dose is adequately tolerated, subsequent doses may be self-administered. SLIT-tablets have proven efficacy for allergic rhinitis (AR) with and without conjunctivitis (C) and allergic asthma (AA) in adults, children, and poly-sensitized allergic patients. Meta-analyses indicate that SLIT-tablets have superior or similar efficacy compared with anti-allergic pharmacotherapies for seasonal AR and superior efficacy for perennial AR. SLIT-tablets have also demonstrated clinically relevant improvements of asthma, with significant reductions in the following: daily inhaled corticosteroid use, risk of asthma exacerbations, and asthma symptoms. SLIT-tablets are generally well tolerated, with a low risk of systemic allergic reactions. The most common treatment-related adverse events are mild-moderate oral reactions. Current evidence supports SLIT-tablets to be considered as an alternative or add-on treatment to pharmacotherapy for AR/C and asthma. Future SLIT developments may include early intervention to prevent the development or progression of allergic disease in children.

Sensitization to various minor house dust mite allergens is greater in patients with atopic dermatitis than in those with respiratory allergic disease

BACKGROUND

Various allergenic proteins are produced by house dust mites (HDM). However, the allergenicity and clinical implications of these allergens are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to identify allergens in Dermatophagoides farinae and elucidate the sensitization profiles to these in Korean patients suffering from respiratory (allergic rhinitis and/or asthma) and atopic dermatitis symptoms.

METHODS

IgE reactivities in sera from 160 HDM allergy patients were analysed by one- and two-dimensional gel electrophoresis and immunoblotting. IgE-reactive components were identified by liquid chromatography-coupled electrospray ionization-tandem mass spectrometry. Nine recombinant mite allergens (Der f 1, Der f 2, Der f 10, Der f 11, Der f 13, Der f 14, Der f 30, Der f 32 and Der f Alt a 10) were produced, and the IgE reactivity in sera to each was determined by ELISAs.

RESULTS

Der f 1 and Der f 2 were recognized by IgE in serum samples from 88.1% and 78.1% of all patients, respectively. Patients with respiratory allergies were mainly sensitized to these major allergens, whereas patients with atopic dermatitis symptoms showed polysensitization to major and minor allergen components (including Der f 11, Der f 13, Der f 14, Der f 32 and Der f Alt a 10).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with respiratory allergic disease sensitize to major allergen components of HDM. Those with atopic dermatitis were sensitized to a broader range of minor allergen components of HDM (Der f 11, Der f 13, Der f 14, Der f 32 and Der f Alt a 10).

Mass spectrometry to complement standardization of house dust mite and other complex allergenic extracts

In the United States, the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research of the US Food and Drug Administration regulates biologics used for diagnosis and treatment of allergic diseases. The Code of Federal Regulations 21CFR680.3(e) states that when measured, the potency of an allergenic extract is assessed according to its allergenic activity. As of 2016, 19 allergenic extracts are standardized for potency in the United States. While these standardized extracts constitute a minority of those available, they treat the most prevalent allergies (e.g. grass and ragweed pollens, dust mites, and cat) and those that induce life-threatening anaphylaxis (e.g. Hymenoptera venom). Standardization for potency enhances safety and efficacy of immunotherapy by minimizing the risks of variations in allergen dosing when switching from one lot of manufactured extract to another, and by providing an objective measure of stability of each lot of allergenic extract over time. Allergenic extracts that have multiple immunodominant allergenic proteins are standardized with little or no information about compositional differences among extracts. Here, we propose application of mass spectrometry towards measurement of compositional differences among extracts that may affect the efficacy and safety of allergen immunotherapy. In addition, we discuss of house dust mite allergen extracts as a prototypical complex extract that may be standardized by mass spectrometry.