The Cost-Effectiveness of Allergen Immunotherapy Compared with Pharmacotherapy for Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma

Focused allergic rhinitis practice parameter for Canada

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a prevalent disease in Canada that affects both children and adults. Several guidelines for the management of AR have been published by professional allergy societies worldwide. However, there are regional differences in the clinical management of AR, and regulatory approval of some AR pharmacotherapies varies among countries. Thus, six research questions specific to the treatment of AR in Canada were identified for this focused practice parameter. Reviews of the literature published since 2016 were conducted to obtain evidence-based support for the responses of the Work Group to each research question. In response to research question 1 "In patients with symptoms indicative of AR, is serum-specific IgE sufficient to identify candidates for immunotherapy or is a skin prick test mandatory?" the Work Group concluded that either sIgE testing or skin prick test are acceptable for diagnosing AR and guiding immunotherapy. In response to research question 2 "When taking into account the preferences of the patient and the prescriber (stakeholder engagement) should second-generation oral antihistamine (OAH) or intranasal corticosteroid (INCS) be first line?" the Work Group concluded that existing guidelines generally agree on the use of INCS as a first-line therapy used for AR, however, patient and provider preferences and considerations can easily shift the first choice to a second-generation OAH. In response to research question 3 "Is a combination intranasal antihistamine (INAH)/INCS formulation superior to INCS plus OAH? Do they become equivalent after prolonged use?" the Work Group concluded that that the combination INAH/INCS is superior to an INCS plus OAH. However, there was insufficient evidence to answer the second question. In response to research question 4 "Do leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA) have a greater benefit than OAH in AR for some symptoms to justify a therapeutic trial in those who cannot tolerate INCS?" the Work Group concluded that LTRAs have inferior, or at best equivalent, daytime or overall symptom control compared with OAH, but LTRAs may improve nighttime symptom control and provide benefits in patients with AR and concomitant asthma. In response to research question 5 "Should sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets be considered first-line immunotherapeutic options over subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) based on the evidence of efficacy?" the Work Group concluded that the choice of SLIT or SCIT cannot be made on efficacy alone, and differences in other factors outweigh any differences in efficacy. In response to research question 6 "Based on efficacy data, should ALL patients seen by an allergist be offered SLIT or SCIT as a treatment option?" the Work Group concluded that the efficacy data suggests that SLIT or SCIT should be used broadly in patients with AR, but other clinical concerns also need to be taken into consideration.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Inferior Turbinate Reduction and Immunotherapy in Allergic Rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a common condition that is frequently associated with atopic inferior turbinate hypertrophy (ITH) resulting in nasal obstruction. Current guidelines support the use of subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT) when patients fail pharmacologic management. However, there is a lack of consensus regarding the role of inferior turbinate reduction (ITR), a treatment that we hypothesize is cost-effective compared with other available treatments.

METHODS

We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the following treatment combinations over a 5-year time horizon for AR patients presenting with atopic nasal obstruction who fail initial pharmacotherapy: (1) continued pharmacotherapy alone, (2) allergy testing and SCIT, (3) allergy testing and SCIT and then ITR for SCIT nonresponders, and (4) ITR and then allergy testing and SCIT for ITR nonresponders. Results were reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

RESULTS

For patients who fail initial pharmacotherapy, prioritizing ITR, either by microdebrider-assisting submucous resection or radiofrequency ablation, before SCIT was the most cost-effective strategy. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that prioritizing ITR before SCIT was the most cost-effective option in 95.4% of scenarios. ITR remained cost-effective even with the addition of concurrent septoplasty.

CONCLUSION

For many AR patients who present with nasal obstruction secondary to atopic inferior turbinate hypertrophy that is persistent despite pharmacotherapy, ITR is a cost-effective treatment that should be considered prior to immunotherapy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

NA - Laryngoscope, 2023 Laryngoscope, 134:1572-1580, 2024.

Modelling the impact of sublingual immunotherapy versus subcutaneous immunotherapy on patient travel time and CO2 emissions in Sweden

In Sweden, allergy immunotherapy (AIT) is available as either subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) injections or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets and is used to treat moderate-severe allergic rhinitis (AR). This study sought to determine treatment-related CO2 emissions and travel times in Swedish patients receiving either SCIT or SLIT-tablets. A list of specialized Swedish AR clinics that administer AIT was determined, and respective co-ordinates retrieved. Swedish municipality population data were obtained from a national database. The mean distance from each Swedish municipality to the nearest AR clinic was calculated, adjusted using a detour index, and weighted by estimated patient population size. Transport modality data were obtained from a Swedish urban transport study and CO2 emissions were obtained from Government sources. The mean number of annual SLIT-tablets and SCIT doses required were calculated based on product labels and clinical expert input. The annual number of healthcare professional interactions were layered into the model to estimate changes in mean patient travel time, distance, and travel-related CO2 emissions associated with using SCIT versus SLIT-tablets. Mean annual travel-related CO2 emissions were 410 tonnes (to two significant figures [s.f.]; standard deviation [SD] 90) with SLIT-tablets, versus 1700 tonnes (SD 380) for SCIT, resulting in mean annual savings of approximately 1300 tonnes (SD 290) of CO2 if all AIT patients were to receive SLIT-tablets instead of SCIT, over 380 times greater than 2021 average Swedish CO2 emissions per capita. Approximate mean annual travel times for patients taking SLIT-tablets were 66,500 h (three s.f.; SD 14,400), and 278,000 h (SD 60,200) for SCIT, resulting in mean annual savings of 211,000 h (SD 45,800) if all AIT patients were to receive SLIT-tablets instead of SCIT. Compared with SCIT injections, SLIT-tablets led to substantial reductions in treatment-related CO2 emissions and travel times for Swedish patients.

Minimization of ragweed allergy immunotherapy costs through use of the sublingual immunotherapy tablet in Canadian children with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

BACKGROUND

Allergy immunotherapy (AIT), in the form of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) with alum-precipitated aqueous extracts, SCIT with a modified ragweed pollen allergen tyrosine adsorbate (MRPATA; Pollinex^®-R), or a sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablet are options for the treatment of ragweed pollen allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC) in Canadian children. A cost minimization analysis evaluated the economic implications of the use of the ragweed SLIT-tablet vs SCIT in Canadian children with ragweed ARC.

METHODS

A cost minimization analysis was conducted comparing the short ragweed SLIT-tablet, 12 Amb a 1-U, preseasonally with preseasonal ragweed SCIT, annual ragweed SCIT, or MRPATA. The analysis was conducted over a time horizon of 3 years from a public payer perspective in Ontario and Quebec. Resources and costs associated with medication and services of healthcare professionals were considered for each treatment. The resource and cost input values for the model were obtained from published literature and validated by Canadian clinical experts in active allergy practice. A discount rate of 1.5% was applied. Several scenario analyses were conducted to determine the impact of many of the key base case assumptions on the outcomes.

RESULTS

Over the total 3-year time horizon, the ragweed SLIT-tablet had a potential cost savings of $900.14 in Ontario and $1023.14 in Quebec when compared with preseasonal ragweed SCIT, of $6613.22 in Ontario and $8750.64 in Quebec when compared with annual ragweed SCIT, and $79.62 in Ontario and $429.49 in Quebec when compared with MRPATA. The ragweed SLIT-tablet had higher drug costs compared with the other AIT options, but lower costs for healthcare professional services. The lower costs for healthcare professional services with the ragweed SLIT-tablet were driven by the need for fewer office visits than SCIT. Scenario analysis indicated that costs were most impacted by including societal costs (e.g., costs associated with patient/caregiver travel and time lost). The potential cost savings of the ragweed SLIT-tablet versus SCIT and MRPATA was maintained in most scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cost minimization analysis, the ragweed SLIT-tablet provided estimated cost savings from a public payer perspective for the treatment of ragweed ARC in Canadian children compared with SCIT or MRPATA.

Health and economic impact of subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy in patients with pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: real-word evidence from the Czech Republic

Background: The prevalence of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (AR) has been increasing over the years, and allergen immunotherapy (AIT) remains the only disease-modifying treatment. However, cost-effectiveness data remain scarce. Methods: In this single-arm, noninterventional, prospective, multicenter study, we describe the effectiveness, safety and costs of subcutaneous AIT for pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. Results: Of 471 new AIT users, 317 completed three courses of treatment, and symptoms improved in 96%; no serious adverse reactions were reported. The cost of symptomatic medication decreased by 49% and the cost of unscheduled specialist visits decreased by 73%. Except for AIT administration, total healthcare costs decreased by 54% compared with the baseline pollen season without AIT. Conclusion: In clinical practice, subcutaneous AIT is an effective treatment generating savings on symptomatic medication and unscheduled consultations.

Cell-penetrating albumin enhances the sublingual delivery of antigens through macropinocytosis

Innovations in oral immunotherapy have greatly advanced the therapeutic control of allergies. However, these therapeutic effects suffer from the fact that the amount of antigen delivered to antigen-presenting cells is limited given the formulations that are currently available. We recently designed a cell-penetrating albumin and found that this modified albumin enters cells via the induction of macropinocytosis. Herein, we report on a novel system for delivering antigens based on cell-penetrating albumin-inducible macropinocytosis that allows larger amounts of antigens to be delivered to antigen-presenting cells. A treatment with cell-penetrating albumin significantly increased the permeability of ovalbumin (45 kDa) or dextran (2000 kDa) on monolayers derived from human oral squamous carcinoma cells. Flow cytometric analyses showed that the cell-penetrating albumin treatment resulted in a significant elevation in the amount of dextran that was delivered to two types of antigen-presenting cells. Finally, mice that had been sensitized by Japanese cedar pollen extract (JCPE) and cell-penetrating albumin showed a decline in the frequency of nose-rubbing against a subsequent intranasal administration of JCPE. These findings suggest that the sublingual administration of cell-penetrating albumin efficiently delivers antigens to antigen-presenting cells via the induction of macropinocytosis, resulting in an enhancement in the therapeutic effect of sublingual immunotherapy.

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.

The impact of omalizumab on paid and unpaid work productivity among severe Japanese cedar pollinosis (JCP) patients

AIMS

Japanese cedar pollinosis (JCP) is a form of seasonal allergic rhinitis that affects 38.8% of the Japanese population. Particularly severe and most severe symptoms among JCP patients can lead to impairments of paid work productivity and unpaid work activities. Indeed, the current standard of care (SoC) is not always able to relieve these symptoms. Omalizumab, a novel JCP treatment recently approved in Japan, provides an effective add-on therapy to the SoC. This study estimates the effect of omalizumab on paid and unpaid work activities (i.e. its social impact) in patients with severe and most severe JCP symptoms in Japan.

METHODS

The impact of omalizumab was estimated through a one-year static cohort model using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Allergy Specific (WPAI-AS) questionnaire derived from a clinical trial on omalizumab enrolling patients with severe and most severe JCP symptoms, which had been conducted in Japan. This effect was quantified using Japanese official statistics on employment and time use. The human capital approach and the proxy good approach were employed to monetize paid and unpaid work activities, respectively. A sensitivity analysis was implemented to account for modeling structural uncertainties.

RESULTS

Our results show that the use of omalizumab might reduce the paid and unpaid work productivity losses due to severe and most severe JCP by nearly one-third. In the severe symptom period of three weeks, 36.6 million hours of lost paid and unpaid work hours could be avoided, which sums up to a monetized productivity loss of 728.3 million USD.

CONCLUSIONS

Omalizumab could provide substantial benefits in terms of paid and unpaid work activities in patients with severe and most severe JCP. Our results also highlight the importance of considering unpaid work in estimating productivity costs due to poor health.

Indonesia-Based Study of the Clinical and Cost-Saving Benefits of Subcutaneous Allergen Immunotherapy for Children with Allergic Rhinitis in Private Practice

BACKGROUND

Until now, the cost of allergy treatment in the insured public health care system and the non-insured self-financing private health care system in Indonesia has not been well documented and published, as well as the cost of allergy treatment with subcutaneous immunotherapy.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical and cost benefits of allergic rhinitis treatment in children with subcutaneous immunotherapy in a non-insured self-financing private health care system.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study conducted from 2015 until 2020 that compared the clinical improvement and health care costs over 18 months in newly diagnosed AR children who received SCIT versus matched AR control subjects who did not receive SCIT, with each group consisting of 1098 subjects.

RESULTS

A decrease in sp-HDM-IgE level (kU/mL) from 20.5 + 8.75 kU/mL to 12.1 + 3.07 kU/mL was observed in the SCIT group. To reduce the symptom score of allergic rhinitis by 1.0 with SCIT, it costs IDR 21,753,062.7 per child, and for non-SCIT, it costs IDR 104,147,878.0 per child. Meanwhile, to reduce the medication score (MS) by 1.0 with SCIT, it costs IDR 17,024,138.8, while with non-SCIT, it costs IDR 104,147,878.0. Meanwhile, to lower combination symptoms and medication score (CSMS) by 1.0, with SCIT, it costs IDR 9,550,126.6, while with non-SCIT, it costs IDR 52,073,938.9.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, this first Indonesia-based study demonstrates substantial health care cost savings associated with SCIT for children with AR in an uninsured private health care system and provides strong evidence for the clinical benefits and cost-savings benefits of AR treatment in children.

Real-world evidence costs of allergic rhinitis and allergy immunotherapy in the commercially insured United States population

OBJECTIVE

To assess total and allergic rhinitis (AR)-related healthcare costs among AR patients residing in the United States with a focus on patients persisting with AIT.

METHODS

AR patients were identified in the IBM MarketScan database between 1 January 2014 to 31 March 2017. Patients receiving allergy immunotherapy (AIT) were identified with relevant billing codes (earliest AIT claim = index date); non-AIT patients were identified with claims containing a diagnosis code for AR (earliest AR claim = index date). AIT patients reaching 25+ injection claims were analyzed as a separate maintenance cohort. All patients were required to have continuous enrollment for 12 months preceding and following index.

RESULTS

A total of 2,334,530 AR patients were included; 103,207 had at least 1 AIT claim, with 45,279 (43.9%) of these patients reaching maintenance, and 24,640 AIT patients (23.9%) never presenting a single injection claim. Compared to non-AIT patients, patients initiating AIT presented higher rates of baseline comorbidities, including asthma (30.1% vs. 7.5%) and conjunctivitis (21.7% vs. 4.4%). During the follow-up period, patients reaching the maintenance phase of AIT incurred lower total costs than the overall AIT cohort ($10,431±$16,606 vs. $11,612±$24,797), and also presented lower follow-up hospitalization costs ($698±$7,248 vs. $1,281±$12,991) and total medical costs ($7950±$13,844 vs. $8989±$22,019).

CONCLUSIONS

Continued efforts are needed to increase patient awareness of available options and adherence to AIT, along with reducing wastage. Despite AIT patients presenting fairly progressed disease at the time of treatment initiation, this therapy remains an economical treatment option, as it was not accompanied by substantial increases in overall healthcare expenditure, and may promote positive societal impacts beyond the direct medical costs.What is known on this topicThe prevalence of allergic diseases has increased over the past 50 years and affects between 10-30% of the world population.Allergic rhinitis (AR) poses a significant economic burden in the form of both direct and indirect costsAllergy immunotherapy (AIT) is the only treatment option able to modify the underlying course of the disease.What this study addsSpecific all-cause and AR-related healthcare costs decreased following the initiation of AIT among patients diagnosed with AR, with the largest decreases observed among AIT patients reaching the maintenance phase of treatment, while non-AIT patients showed increases in all categories assessed over a similar follow-up period.Cost decreases among AIT patients were observed despite increased levels of comorbidities compared to non-AIT patients, as the AIT cohort presented elevated rates of atopic dermatitis (7.1% vs. 2.7%), conjunctivitis (21.7% vs. 4.4%), asthma (30.1% vs. 7.5%), and chronic sinusitis (22.6% vs. 4.9%).An analysis of patients' index subcutaneous AIT consultation revealed substantial variability in the initial treatment costs, with nearly 20% of paid amounts exceeding $1,000; given nearly 1 in 4 AIT patients who get AIT mixed never came back for their first injection, this highlights an opportunity to target frontloaded billing practices and the timing of mixing/injection as an area to minimize healthcare waste.

Personalized medicine for allergy treatment: Allergen immunotherapy still a unique and unmatched model

The introduction of personalized medicine (PM) has been a milestone in the history of medical therapy, because it has revolutionized the previous approach of treating the disease with that of treating the patient. It is known today that diseases can occur in different genetic variants, making specific treatments of proven efficacy necessary for a given endotype. Allergic diseases are particularly suitable for PM, because they meet the therapeutic success requirements, including a known molecular mechanism of the disease, a diagnostic tool for such disease, and a treatment blocking the mechanism. The stakes of PM in allergic patients are molecular diagnostics, to detect specific IgE to single-allergen molecules and to distinguish the causative molecules from those merely cross-reactive, pursuit of patient's treatable traits addressing genetic, phenotypic, and psychosocial features, and omics, such as proteomics, epi-genomics, metabolomics, and breathomics, to forecast patient's responsiveness to therapies, to detect biomarker and mediators, and to verify the disease control. This new approach has already improved the precision of allergy diagnosis and is likely to significantly increase, through the higher performance achieved with the personalized treatment, the effectiveness of allergen immunotherapy by enhancing its already known and unique characteristics of treatment that acts on the causes.

House dust mites-driven allergic rhinitis: could its natural history be modified?

INTRODUCTION

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is the most common IgE-mediated disease. House dust mites (HDMs)-sensitization is the main cause of AR. HDM-driven AR is characterized by a typical natural history consisting of possible progression to asthma. Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) is, at present, a unique treatment to modify the natural history of allergic diseases. Tablets AIT (TAIT) represents a new era in AIT. There is evidence that TAIT could prevent asthma in AR patients.

AREAS COVERED

The literature search methodology was based on the articles cited by PubMed from 1980 to 2020. AIT's rationale is to restore an immunological and, consequently, clinical tolerance toward the causal allergen. The progression from rhinitis to asthma may be influenced by a relevant risk factor, such as the persistent type 2 inflammation of airways. HDMs are perennial allergens and allergen exposure is the condicio sine qua non to maintain inflammation. AIT could modify the progression toward asthma restoring physiologic immune response to the causal allergen and consequently dampening type 2 inflammation.

EXPERT OPINION

Patients with HDM-driven AR are susceptible to develop asthma over time. Many studies explored this topic. Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies identified some markers which predict the risk of developing asthma. They include bronchial airflow limitation, bronchial hyperresponsiveness, type 2 inflammation, and rhinitis duration. TAIT could block this progression by acting on this vicious circle. Future studies should explore this issue using adequate methodology.

Past, present, and future of allergen immunotherapy vaccines

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is an allergen-specific form of treatment for patients suffering from immunoglobulin E (IgE)-associated allergy; the most common and important immunologically mediated hypersensitivity disease. AIT is based on the administration of the disease-causing allergen with the goal to induce a protective immunity consisting of allergen-specific blocking IgG antibodies and alterations of the cellular immune response so that the patient can tolerate allergen contact. Major advantages of AIT over all other existing treatments for allergy are that AIT induces a long-lasting protection and prevents the progression of disease to severe manifestations. AIT is cost effective because it uses the patient´s own immune system for protection and potentially can be used as a preventive treatment. However, broad application of AIT is limited by mainly technical issues such as the quality of allergen preparations and the risk of inducing side effects which results in extremely cumbersome treatment schedules reducing patient´s compliance. In this article we review progress in AIT made from its beginning and provide an overview of the state of the art, the needs for further development, and possible technical solutions available through molecular allergology. Finally, we consider visions for AIT development towards prophylactic application.

Biologics and Allergy Immunotherapy in the Treatment of Allergic Diseases

Allergic diseases represent some of the most chronic and costly chronic conditions. Medical management may require long-term pharmacotherapy, which is often associated with poor adherence. Although medications provide symptomatic control, they do not modify the allergic disease. Patients may prefer disease-modifying treatments that provide lasting benefits after discontinuation. To date, allergy immunotherapy is the only proved disease modification therapy associated with lasting benefits after discontinuation. However, allergy immunotherapy safety and efficacy has only been established in allergic rhinitis, mild to moderate asthma, and some patients with atopic dermatitis.

Advances in allergen immunotherapy for asthma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a well-known disease-modifying intervention for allergic diseases. Its benefit in allergic asthma, ranging from prevention to facilitating asthma control, is yet to be clarified.

RECENT FINDINGS

In 2017, following several well-designed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with house-dust mites (HDM) sublingual (SLIT) tablets in asthma, global initiative for asthma (GINA) guidelines highlighted the need to treat the allergic component of asthma. In 2019, the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology published the first comprehensive guidelines for HDM AIT in allergic asthma, formulating separate recommendations for subcutaneous, SLIT drops, and SLIT tablets. Significant steps were undertaken in understanding the mechanisms of allergic asthma, facilitating the stratified approach for selecting responders and in translating the immune-modulation effect in achieving long-term control of the chronic inflammation in asthma.

SUMMARY

Currently existing guidelines recommend AIT as a therapeutic option in controlled or partially controlled HDM allergic asthma. Limited data are available for pollen, molds and pets, as well as for the severe allergic asthma population. The challenge for the future research will be to clarify the subendotypes of allergic asthma responding to AIT, the mechanisms facilitating its' preventive and disease-modifying effect, the optimal duration of the treatment, and route of administration.