Local Side Effects of Sublingual and Oral Immunotherapy

Safety of 300IR house dust mite sublingual tablet from pooled clinical trial and post-marketing data

Background

The 300IR house dust mite (HDM) sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablet is approved for treatment of HDM-induced allergic rhinitis (AR). To provide a comprehensive review of the 300IR HDM-SLIT tablet safety profile based on randomized controlled trial (RCT) pooled data and post-marketing (PM) pharmacovigilance data.

Methods

Subjects (5-65 years) with confirmed HDM-AR with or without controlled asthma were treated with 300IR or placebo in 8 RCTs. Reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were pooled and analyzed descriptively in subsets of adults/adolescents and children. Adverse reactions (ADRs) collected from spontaneous reporting and PM studies through a pharmacovigilance system since the first marketing authorization were also analyzed.

Results

Across RCTs, 1853 subjects were treated with the 300IR HDM-SLIT tablet and 1846 with placebo. In both subsets of adults/adolescents and children whichever their asthma status, treatment-related TEAEs of higher incidence in active groups vs placebo were mostly consistent with mild or moderate local application-site reactions. They were mainly reported on the first days of treatment and decreased over time. 4 severe laryngopharyngeal reactions (2 requiring adrenaline/epinephrine) and 1 moderate eczema considered serious rapidly resolved with medications; no anaphylaxis was reported. In PM settings, ADRs reported in more than 235,000 patients were in line with RCT findings. Severe systemic reactions occurred rarely; 12 anaphylactic reactions resolved safely (5 with adrenaline). No new safety signal was raised.

Conclusion

Safety data from RCTs and more than 7 years of real-life experience confirmed the favorable safety profile of 300IR HDM-SLIT tablet in patients across different regions, regardless of age and asthma status.

Clinical trial registrations

NCT00674700; Retrospectively registered 06 May 2008.NCT01199133; Retrospectively registered 09 September 2010.NCT01527188; Retrospectively registered 01 February 2012.NCT02443805; Registered 29 April 2015/EudraCT 2014-004223-46; Registered 16 September 2015.jRCT2080221872/JapicCTI-121917; Registered 01 August 2012.jRCT2080222929/JapicCTI-15298; Registered 04 August 2015.

Exploring Side Effects of Sublingual Immunotherapy: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective: Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has emerged as a potentially safe and convenient option for allergen immunotherapy for patients with inhalant allergy. Larger studies on the overall side effects and severe reactions anaphylaxis are still lacking. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Setting: Author's review was completed in the University of Texas Medical Branch. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective clinical trials focusing on SLIT safety published from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2021, was conducted. Results: Twenty-six studies were included with analysis of 7827 patients, representing over 2.7 million SLIT doses. All studies focused on single-antigen immunotherapy. The mean duration of treatment was 11.54 months. Local side effects were present in 40.83% of patients [95% confidence interval (CI) 24.78-57.96]. Systemic side effects were encountered in 1.09% of SLIT patients (95% CI 0.57-1.78). Anaphylaxis was reported in 0.13% of patients (95% CI 0.06-0.22). Discontinuation rates due to side effects were low, at 4.32% of patients (95% CI 3.28-5.49). Conclusion: This meta-analysis shows that single-antigen SLIT is well-tolerated, with overall low rates of systemic side effects including anaphylaxis. Although there is a high rate of minor local side effect, the treatment attrition during the first year is low. With growing allergy burden worldwide, SLIT is a convenient and economically feasible option for immunotherapy. Further work is needed to evaluate long-term safety and efficacy of single as well as multi-antigen SLIT, including quality of life assessments.

Allergen Immunotherapy: The Evidence Supporting the Efficacy and Safety of Subcutaneous Immunotherapy and Sublingual Forms of Immunotherapy for Allergic Rhinitis/Conjunctivitis and Asthma

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a recognized key therapeutic modality for the treatment of allergic respiratory disease. Definitive studies have provided evidence-based data to demonstrate its effectiveness in allergic rhinitis and asthma due to the inhalation of proteinaceous allergic substances from specific seasonal pollens, dust mites, animal allergens, and certain mold spores. Over the ensuing decades, laboratory investigations have provided objective evidence to demonstrate immunologic changes, including production of protective IgG antibody, suppression of IgE antibody, upregulation of regulatory T cells, and induction of a state of immune tolerance to the offending allergen(s). Tangential to this work were carefully designed clinical studies that defined allergen dose and duration of treatment, established the importance of preparing extracts with standardized allergens (or well-defined extracts) based on major protein moieties, and used allergen provocation models to demonstrate efficacy superior to placebo. In the United States, the use of subcutaneous immunotherapy extracts for AIT was grandfathered in by the Food and Drug Administration based on expert literature review. In contrast, sublingual tablet immunotherapy underwent formal clinical development programs (phase I-III clinical trials) that provided the necessary clinical evidence for safety and efficacy that led to regulatory agency approvals for the treatment of allergic rhinitis in properly characterized patients with allergy. The allergy specialist's treatment options currently include traditional subcutaneous AIT and specific sublingual tablets approved for grass, ragweed, house dust mites, trees belonging to the birch-homologous group, and Japanese cedar. Tangential to this are sublingual drops that are increasingly being used off-label (albeit not approved by the Food and Drug Administration) in the United States. This article will review the evidence-based literature supporting the use of these forms of AIT, as well as focus on several current controversies and gaps in our knowledge base that have relevance for the appropriate selection of patients for treatment with specific AIT.

The Prevention of House Dust Mite Allergies in Pediatric Asthma

This review provides a concise overview of preventive measures against dust mite allergies in pediatric populations, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive and evolving approach. Dust mites, ubiquitous microscopic arachnids, pose a significant threat to children's health, triggering allergies and asthma. Traditional preventive strategies such as regular cleaning, mattress covers, and humidity control are essential but warrant refinement. Empowering children through personalized hygiene education and exploring innovative bedding solutions showcase a forward-thinking paradigm. Collaboration with healthcare professionals and embracing technology-driven solutions ensures a holistic and adaptable approach to safeguarding pediatric health against dust mite-related ailments. This abstract underscores the importance of continually reassessing and innovating preventive measures to create resilient and health-conscious living environments for children.

Updates in food allergen immunotherapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Food allergies are on the rise. Though allergen avoidance and management of acute reactions have been the backbone of therapy, complete avoidance and timely acute care is often not feasible. Food allergen immunotherapy (FAIT) is a novel and evolving treatment option intended to induce desensitization and potential sustained unresponsiveness (SU) to food allergens. This review addresses the methods, mechanisms, efficacy, and adverse effects of oral immunotherapy (OIT), sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), and epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) for food allergens in the published literature.

RECENT FINDINGS

Single FAIT has been most extensively studied in peanut, milk, and hen's egg allergic patients and has been successful in achieving desensitization in treated individuals through various modalities. Long-term data regarding SU is limited; however, current data suggests subsets of patients may be more likely to achieve SU compared to others. Other studies are actively assessing multifood AIT and novel FAIT protocols with adjunctive therapies.

SUMMARY

Food allergy constitutes a prevalent problem with far-reaching consequences. The emergence of FAIT may mitigate the burden of food allergy. Current evidence is promising for specific allergens and pediatric patient populations. Future studies are needed to further assess efficacy between different modalities of immunotherapy for food allergens across an age continuum.

Efficacy of Sublingual Immunotherapy in Allergic Rhinitis Patients with Asthma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has been widely applied to treat patients with allergic rhinitis (AR). However, meta-analyses on the efficacy of SLIT in AR patients with asthma are still limited.

METHODS

Literature without language limitation published before October 28, 2022, were retrieved from PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. STATA 16.0 software was used for the meta-analysis of the extracted data. The results reported were symptom scores, drug scores, adverse effects rates, and cost of treatment.

RESULTS

Ten studies involving 1722 patients met the inclusion criteria. The total rhinitis score (TRSS) (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -1.23, 95% CI: -1.39--1.06, P < .001) and total asthma symptom score (TASS) (WMD = -1.00, 95% CI: -1.12-0.89, P < .001) were significantly lower in the SLIT group than the placebo group. The SLIT group had higher rates of treatment-related adverse events (relative risk [RR] = 2.82, 95% CI: 1.77-4.48, P < .001) and total costs of treatment (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.45-0.97, P < .001). There was no significant difference in inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) dose (P = .195), fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) (P = .158), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) (P = .237), and direct costs of treatment (P = .630) between the SLIT and placebo groups.

CONCLUSION

SLIT may be a therapeutic method for improving rhinitis symptoms and asthma symptoms in AR patients with asthma. However, as there was significant heterogeneity in results, more high-quality and well-designed studies are needed in the future to elucidate the efficacy of SLIT.

Recent Updates of Immunotherapy for Allergic Rhinitis in Children

Purpose of Review

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a novel treatment approach with disease-modifying and preventative benefits that are not shared with other strategies for treating allergic illnesses. It has been demonstrated to be safe and effective in children. This review provides the most recent information on AIT in children as well as any pertinent updates.

Recent Findings

Although there is not a standard way to begin AIT, there are clear indications for AIT. Each case needs to be evaluated on its own by weighing the pros and downsides. AIT has been proven to significantly improve symptoms and quality of life in children with allergic illness, reduce medication use, stop the development of new allergen sensitizations, and stop the progression of allergic rhinitis to asthma. Novel approaches are under investigation to overcome some known AIT disadvantages.

Summary

This review provides a thorough summary of the most recent research and updates on AIT in children.

Characteristics of dust mite sublingual immunotherapy-associated adverse events in the early phase

Background

Few studies reported the characteristics of house dust mite (HDM) sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) adverse events (AEs) during early phase treatment. The aim of this prospective study was mainly to explore the characteristics of AEs in allergic rhinitis (AR) patients during 6 months of HDM SLIT.

Methods

A total of 242 patients with AR were enrolled in this study. Telephone follow-up and administration were conducted in the every week of the first month, the third month, and the sixth month of SLIT treatment. Furthermore, the early efficacy, AEs, and compliance were analyzed in our study.

Results

Overall, 70.25% (170/242) of the AR patients completed the study, while 29.75% (72/242) of the AR patients failed to complete the whole 6 months of SLIT treatment process. On the whole, symptoms improved in 87.65% (149/170) of patients including 34.12% (58/170) well-controlled and 53.53% (91/170) partially controlled. The correlation analysis results showed that the treatment effect was negatively correlated with the age (r = −0.1614, P = 0.0355). The AEs mainly occurred in the first month, comprised of local rashes, gastrointestinal reactions, and itching of mouth and tongue. Subgroup analysis in the first month showed the itching of mouth and tongue, gastrointestinal reactions, fatigue, and other AEs in ≥14 years old group (14–65 years old, n = 42) were significant differences when compared with that in the &lt;14 years old group (4–13 years old, n = 128, all P &lt; 0.05). In the study, the main reasons for terminated immunotherapy were drug inaccessibility, loss of follow-up and long course of treatment.

Conclusion

Patients with AR who received HDM SLIT revealed an early efficacy after 6 months, with AEs mostly occurred in the first month.

Good clinical practice recommendations in allergen immunotherapy: Position paper of the Brazilian Association of Allergy and Immunology - ASBAI

Background

Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) represents one of the pillars in the treatment of allergic diseases. AIT is the only therapeutic strategy with curative potential, promoting the reduction of drug use and long-term symptom control even after the end of the treatment. The European Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (EAACI) guidelines, position papers of World Allergy Organization (WAO), and the US Practice Parameters are the leading official documents that set scientific standard for the use of AIT in the world. The use of AIT in Brazil has specific regional conditions due to the pattern of allergen sensitization, as well as genetic, socioeconomic, and cultural characteristics, climate conditions, and the availability of allergenic extracts. The most prevalent house dust mites are Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, Dermatophagoides farinae and their allergens have the highest clinical relevance. Blomia tropicalis is also very frequent. This position paper has been prepared by the Brazilian Association of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (ASBAI) Taskforce on AIT for respiratory allergy and Hymenoptera venom allergy.

Objective

According to the current scientific literature adapted to the Brazilian reality, this position paper aims to establish the main recommendations for the good clinical practice parameters for AIT in Brazil.

Methods

A systematic review using the Pub Med and Cochrane databases was performed, and the websites of major allergy and immunology organizations were consulted. The research was limited to English language literature and was conducted between March 30, 2002, and March 30, 2022. The terms used for the research were: Allergen Immunotherapy, sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT), venom-specific immunotherapy (VIT), and allergen extract.

Results

The several recommendations that establish the clinical practices for AIT recommended by the main Allergy, Asthma and Immunology world organizations were analyzed and adapted to the Brazilian situation.

Conclusion

This position paper establishes the main recommendations for the effective clinical practice of AIT in Brazil, using current knowledge of evidence-based medicine and precision medicine.

Efficacy and Safety of House Dust Mite Sublingual Immunotherapy Tablet in Allergic Asthma: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

House dust mite sublingual immunotherapy (HDM SLIT) effectively treats allergic rhinitis (AR). However, the evidence of HDM SLIT for allergic asthma remained limited.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the efficacy and safety of HDM SLIT tablets in patients with allergic asthma.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search through PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Center of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that addressed the efficacy and safety of HDM SLIT tablets compared with placebo or no intervention in allergic asthma from their inception date until September 2021. The primary outcome was the reduction in inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) dose. Additional outcomes were asthma control, exacerbation, lung function, quality-of-life, and adverse events.

RESULTS

There were 7 RCTs, 5 studies in allergic asthma (4 in adults and 1 in children), and 2 in AR with or without asthma. The 6 standardized quality (SQ) HDM effectively reduced ICS dose in well- to partly controlled mild-to-moderate asthma in 1 RCT. Two RCTs evaluated the efficacy of 6 SQ and 12 SQ HDM in reducing asthma exacerbation in partly controlled moderate-to-severe asthma, and their results were inconsistent. One study in children with mild-to-moderate asthma found no benefit of HDM SLIT. Two RCTs in AR with or without mild-to-moderate asthma showed improvement of asthma symptoms. Adverse events were primarily local, and anaphylaxis treated with epinephrine was reported in 3 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The HDM SLIT tablets tend to effectively reduce ICS use in adults and adolescents with well- to partly controlled mild-to-moderate allergic asthma with a favorable safety profile.

Ragweed sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Ragweed allergen causes Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and sublingual immunotherapy is one of the treatment modalities to desensitize allergic individuals. This systematic review assesses the effectiveness and safety of sublingual immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis caused due to Ragweed.

METHODS

The databases search was done through December 2020. English-language randomized controlled trials were included if they compared sublingual immunotherapy with placebo, pharmacotherapy, or other sublingual immunotherapy regimens, and reported clinical outcomes. The strength of the evidence for each comparison and outcome was graded based on the risk of bias, consistency, magnitude of effect, and the directness of the evidence.

RESULTS

The searches performed according to the protocol identified 134 abstracts of which 67 were duplicates. A total of 37 full papers were therefore reviewed of which 5 were included for the final study. Participants' ages ranged from 4 to 58 years. The risk of bias was low in most studies. The review suggests that sublingual immunotherapy improves rhinoconjunctivitis symptoms, with 4 of 4 studies reporting efficacy showed improvement in the symptom score of SLIT groups compared to placebo. Local reactions were frequent, but anaphylaxis was not reported in any of the studies. Serious adverse events were very few in all the studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall evidence showed the effectiveness of sublingual immunotherapy for the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis with or without asthma, but high-quality studies are still needed to answer questions regarding optimal dosing strategies.

Safety of the standardized quality tree sublingual immunotherapy tablet: Pooled safety analysis of clinical trials

BACKGROUND

The standardized quality (SQ) tree sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablet has recently been approved for treatment of tree pollen allergy. Healthcare workers should be provided with detailed safety data for clinical use.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the tolerability and safety of the SQ tree SLIT-tablet (12 SQ-Bet) in adults and adolescents.

METHODS

Safety data were pooled from three double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trials (2 phase-II/1 phase-III) including adults and adolescents 12-65 years with allergic rhinitis and/or conjunctivitis treated before and during one pollen season once-daily with 12 SQ-Bet (n = 471) or placebo (n = 458): EudraCT no: 2012-000031-59; NCT02481856; EudraCT 2015-004821-15.

RESULTS

The most frequently reported investigational medicinal product (IMP)-related AEs with 12 SQ-Bet were oral pruritis (39% of subjects) and throat irritation (29%). IMP-related AEs were mainly mild or moderate in severity, and the majority resolved without treatment and did not lead to treatment interruption/discontinuation. With 12 SQ-Bet, oral pruritus was more frequent among subjects with pollen food syndrome (PFS) (45%) than without PFS (29%). The 12 SQ-Bet did not seem to induce an increased risk of asthma: 7 events were reported in 7 subjects with 12 SQ-Bet and 11 in 10 subjects with placebo. No differences were seen in the risk of moderate-to-severe IMP-related AEs regardless of age, PFS status and asthma medical history.

CONCLUSIONS

The 12 SQ tree SLIT-tablet was well tolerated in tree pollen allergic subjects with no major safety concerns detected. This safety profile supports daily at-home sublingual administration once the first dose is tolerated when administered under medical supervision.

Latest Developments in the Management of Nut Allergies

Purpose of review

In this review, we sought to describe the most recent advances in the dietary and medical management of peanut and tree nut allergy, including selective introduction and immunotherapy.

Recent findings

Dietary updates include changes to labeling laws, improved information sources, and new apps for buying foods in shops and overseas to better protect individuals with nut allergies. There are still issues in the management of nut allergies in schools, such as parents having to resort to packed lunches instead of school meals and patients experiencing bullying. Air travel also poses concern, but additional resources are now available to travelers, and recent evidence suggest limited airborne exposure to nuts. The medical management of anaphylaxis is use of epinephrine; however, this remains underutilized. Needle length and administration devices have been recently debated considering the risk of bone penetration vs subcutaneous administration, and autoinjectors seem to deliver higher peak concentrations than syringes. Selective nut introduction has gained momentum in the last 5 years, demonstrating improved quality of life but with the need for motivated parents for continued consumption and available resources for challenges. Immunotherapy to nuts is also a rapidly developing field, with the balance of efficacy and safety being important considerations in the differing modes of administration.

Summary

The management of nut allergies is a rapidly developing field, and dietary and medical management have progressed significantly in the last 5 years. Future research directions include improving safety and efficacy of food immunotherapy and examining patients’ goals for therapy and treatment outcomes.

Allergen immunotherapy for pediatric asthma: current evidence and knowledge gaps

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The introduction of high-quality and standardized extracts for immunotherapy has renewed the interest in the treatment of pediatric allergic asthma that represents a high-prevalence disease.

RECENT FINDINGS

In addition to clinical trials, several systematic reviews and metaanalyses were published, confirming overall the clinical efficacy of allergen immunotherapy in pediatric asthma. In addition, new data on the preventive effect of the treatment on asthma onset were published. Despite this, many intriguing questions emerged, in parallel to the development of knowledge.

SUMMARY

Allergen immunotherapy is overall effective for the treatment of asthma in children, but a class-effect should not be claimed, rather the efficacy of each single product. According to the recent findings, the challenge for the future research will be to clarify: when to start immunotherapy in children, which are (if they exist) the predictive biomarkers for efficacy in the single individual, the magnitude of the preventive effect and the optimal duration of the treatment.

Allergen Immunotherapy in Pediatric Respiratory Allergy

Purpose of Review

Atopic diseases such as asthma and allergic rhinitis are highly prevalent in children. Common triggers include tree and grass pollens, house dust mites, molds, and animal dander. These diseases are most often treated symptomatically; however, many patients show partial or poor response and require long-term medication use. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) stands as the only treatment modality that can alter the underlying disease process and potentially offer a cure. In this review article, we discuss the merits of AIT with particular emphasis on its efficacy and safety in pediatric patients. We also discuss the challenges for AIT implementation and present an overview of current research that aims at improving its applicability for the treatment of allergic diseases.

Recent Findings

Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) are both safe and efficacious treatment options in children with allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma. Additionally, AIT has efficacy in preventing the development of asthma in children. Although there are clear advantages with AIT, there are challenges to overcome to optimize treatment. Solutions include improved diagnostics with pre-treatment biomarkers and molecular multiplex assays, biomarkers for prediction of response (e.g., basophil activation markers), improved allergen immunogenicity with the use of recombinant AIT, adjuvants, and allergoids, and lastly improved safety with the concurrent use of omalizumab.

Summary

AIT has shown safety and efficacy in major clinical trials for the treatment of allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma in children. AIT provides a curative treatment option for atopic disorders and should be considered in children with allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma. There are many continued advances being made in the field of allergy to further improve the safety and efficacy profile and shorten the duration of AIT treatment.

Use of Sublingual Immunotherapy for Aeroallergens in Children with Asthma

Asthma is a heterogeneous disease that in children is often allergen-driven with a type 2 inflammation. Sublingual immunotherapy represents an important progress in the use of personalized medicine in children with allergic asthma. It is a viable option for house dust mite-driven asthma and in subjects with the asthma associated with allergic rhinitis. The use and indications for isolated asthma caused by other allergens are still controversial owing to heterogeneity of commercially available products and methodological limitations of studies in children. Nevertheless, most studies and meta-analyses found the efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy. Sublingual immunotherapy is safe but cannot be recommended in children with uncontrolled asthma.

Allergen Immunotherapy in children with respiratory allergic diseases

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a well-established treatment for allergic respiratory diseases. It represents a cornerstone in the clinical management of allergic children since it is the only curative option to date able to modify the natural history of Ig-E mediated allergic diseases. Through a well-defined immunologic mechanism, AIT promotes regulatory T cells and cuts down the immune response induced by allergens. According to current guidelines based on up-to-date evidence, AIT should be offered to children with moderate-severe allergic rhinitis and/or controlled asthma starting from 5 years of age, further to an adequate risk-benefit assessment which includes patient's adherence to the treatment and a proper selection of the right product. Younger age and mild disease could be considered based on an individual evaluation. Both subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual (SLIT) routes of administration have a good efficacy and safety profile with safer outcomes for SLIT compared to SCIT. Only standardized products with documented evidence of clinical efficacy should be used. Although AIT is used worldwide, there are still gaps and limitations, including the lack of reliable biomarkers predictive of the clinical outcome. Novel adjuvants are currently under investigations to boost the strength and efficiency of the immune response, as well as new formulations with better efficacy and better patient's adherence to the treatment. Herein, we aim to provide an overview of current key evidence with major regard to clinical practice as well as knowledge gaps and future research needs in the context of AIT in children with respiratory allergic diseases.

Sublingual immunotherapy for food allergy and its future directions

Food allergy is an important medical problem with increasing prevalence throughout the world. Different approaches of food immunotherapy are being investigated including oral, epicutaneous and sublingual routes. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for food allergy involves placement of glycerinated allergen under the tongue daily to achieve allergen-specific desensitization. SLIT has been studied in the treatment of hazelnut, peach, apple, milk and peanut allergies with substantial focus on the treatment of peanut allergy. Phase II studies have shown SLIT for treatment of peanut allergy increases the tolerated dose of peanut by a substantial margin with fewer and less severe side effects than other modalities. This review discusses the mechanisms of SLIT, early studies of its use in food allergy and larger randomized controlled trials for treatment of peanut allergy. Future directions using the mechanisms involved in SLIT include oral mucosal immunotherapy for peanut allergy.

30 years of sublingual immunotherapy

Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) was introduced in clinical practice on an empirical basis more than 100 years ago. Since the first attempts, AIT was administered subcutaneously. Indeed, other routes of administration were proposed and studied, in particular to improve the safety, but only the sublingual route (SLIT) achieved a credibility based on evidence and was then accepted as a viable "alternative" option to the subcutaneous route. SLIT was largely used in clinical trials and clinical practice in this last 30 years. Thus, a large amount of data is available, coming from either controlled trials and postmarketing surveillance studies. It is clear that SLIT is overall effective, but it is also clear that the efficacy is not "class-related," as derived from meta-analyses, but restricted to each specific product. The 30-year lasting use of SLIT allowed to clarify many clinical aspects, such as efficacy, safety, use in asthma, regimens of administration, and optimal doses. In parallel, the mechanisms of action of AIT were elucidated, and new indications were proposed (eg food allergy, atopic dermatitis). In addition, the introduction of molecular-based diagnosis, allowed to better refine the prescription of SLIT, based on specific sensitization profiles. The present article will describe the origin and evolution of SLIT for respiratory allergy, taking into account the clinical context that suggested this form of treatment, the recently developed aspects, the future perspectives and unmet needs, This is not, therefore, a systematic review, rather a narrative historical description of the past history, and a look forward to the future opportunities.

A role for early oral exposure to house dust mite allergens through breast milk in IgE-mediated food allergy susceptibility

BACKGROUND

Successful prevention of food allergy requires the identification of the factors adversely affecting the capacity to develop oral tolerance to food antigen in early life.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to determine whether oral exposure to Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus through breast milk affects gut mucosal immunity with long-term effects on IgE-mediated food allergy susceptibility.

METHODS

Gut immunity was explored in 2-week-old mice breast-fed by mothers exposed to D pteronyssinus, protease-inactivated D pteronyssinus, or to PBS during lactation. We further analyzed oral tolerance to a bystander food allergen, ovalbumin (OVA). In a proof-of-concept study, Der p 1 and OVA levels were determined in 100 human breast milk samples and the association with prevalence of IgE-mediated egg allergy at 1 year was assessed.

RESULTS

Increased permeability, IL-33 levels, type 2 innate lymphoid cell activation, and T_h2 cell differentiation were found in gut mucosa of mice nursed by mothers exposed to D pteronyssinus compared with PBS. This pro-T_h2 gut mucosal environment inhibited the induction of antigen-specific FoxP3 regulatory T cells and the prevention of food allergy by OVA exposure through breast milk. In contrast, protease-inactivated D pteronyssinus had no effect on offspring gut mucosal immunity. Based on the presence of Der p 1 and/or OVA in human breast milk, we identified groups of lactating mothers, which mirror the ones found in mice to be responsible for different egg allergy risk.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights an unpredicted potential risk factor for the development of food allergy, that is, D pteronyssinus allergens in breast milk, which disrupt gut immune homeostasis and prevents oral tolerance induction to bystander food antigen through their protease activity.

Allergen immunotherapy as add-on to biologic agents

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this review, we sought to outline many of the recent evidences about the available clinical trials in which biologic agents [i.e. omalizumab (OMA)] were associated as add-on to allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT).

RECENT FINDINGS

The available literature shows that OMA may be a valuable option as add-on to AIT for respiratory allergy, or food desensitization, especially in the escalation or build-up phases, in which adverse events are more commonly expected. The encouraging data for hymenoptera venom allergy remain limited to case reports, and no structured clinical trial is available.

SUMMARY

Over the past decade, studies of OMA used with AIT have shown promising results. Today, big randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials are needed to better select those patients who would benefit from the addition of OMA (or other biologic agents) to AIT, as well as optimal dosing schedules, optimal duration of treatments and, finally, adequate evaluation about pharmacoeconomic aspects.

Current insights in allergen immunotherapy

OBJECTIVE

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) in its subcutaneous and sublingual forms is currently a well-established and experimentally supported treatment for respiratory allergy and hymenoptera venom allergy. There have been advances in its use linked strictly to the advancement in the knowledge of the molecular mechanisms of allergy, the production of well-characterized extracts, and diagnostic techniques. The use of AIT in asthma and the application of new approaches are expanding. We briefly review the advances and concerns in the use of AIT.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed and Scopus.

STUDY SELECTIONS

The most recent and clinically relevant literature was selected and reviewed.

RESULTS

The introduction of high-quality products supported by large dose-finding trials has yielded better defined indications, contraindications, and modalities of use. Some specific products in tablet form have recently been approved in the United States. Sublingual immunotherapy has been found to be effective in asthma, which until recently had been a matter of debate. Another promising therapy is oral and sublingual desensitization for food allergy, for which encouraging results have recently been reported. In the near future, other options will be available, including new routes of administration (intralymphatic and epicutaneous), allergoids, engineered allergens, and peptides. The use of component-resolved diagnosis techniques will further refine and target AIT prescriptions.

CONCLUSION

This condensed and updated review shows that AIT remains a viable treatment option, especially after the introduction of standardized tablets for some allergens. Food allergy and new administration routes represent a promising expansion.

Food immunotherapy for children with food allergies: state of the art and science

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review examines the current literature and provides insight into the role of food immunotherapy in the management of food-allergic children. Key food immunotherapy trials, benefits, and risks of the intervention, as well as areas requiring further study are all discussed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Research studies have reported encouraging results regarding the efficacy of food immunotherapy in desensitizing food-allergic patients with an acceptable safety profile and a documented improvement in quality of life. The role of biologics and long-term effects of food immunotherapy are still under investigation.

SUMMARY

The burden of food allergy is significant, multifaceted, and well documented. Food immunotherapy is a novel treatment option and an exciting area of research that has seen tremendous progress over the last decade, presenting encouraging results for the treatment of children with food allergies.

Dose-finding study of carbamylated monomeric allergoid tablets in grass-allergic rhinoconjunctivitis patients

AIM

To determine the optimal effective and safe dose of sublingual immunotherapy tablets containing carbamylated monomeric allergoids in patients with grass pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.

METHODS

In this prospective, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, multicenter, Phase II study, four different daily doses were applied preseasonally for 12 weeks.

RESULTS

Of 158 randomized adults, 155 subjects (safety population) received 300 units of allergy (UA)/day (n = 36), 600 UA/day (n = 43), 1000 UA/day (n = 39), or 2000 UA/day (n = 37). After treatment, 54.3, 47.6, 59.0 and 51.4% of patients, respectively, ceased to react to the highest allergen concentration in a conjunctival provocation test. Furthermore, the response threshold improved in 70.4, 62.9, 76.7 and 66.7% of patients, respectively. No serious adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSION

This study found 1000 UA/day to be the optimal effective and safe dose.

Impact of allergen immunotherapy in allergic asthma

Although traditional pharmacological approaches improve outcomes in disease management for allergic asthma, these fail to modify the underlying immune responses. Allergen immunotherapy remains the only etiological therapy for the treatment of respiratory allergies for which clinical efficacy has been demonstrated through several well-controlled studies. In this review, we examine evidence from the past 5 years regarding the impact of allergen immunotherapy on allergic asthma to inform practitioners and stimulate further discussion and research.

A critical appraisal on AIT in childhood asthma

ABSTRACT

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease-modifying treatment approved for allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma and represents a suitable therapeutic option, especially in childhood, to modify the progression of respiratory allergic diseases. Starting from the previous "generic class effect" evaluation, as testified by the numerous meta analyses, AIT is now considered a product-specific pathogenic-oriented treatment.

BACKGROUND

AIT was empirically proposed more than one century ago in the subcutaneous form (SCIT), but the IgE-mediated mechanism of allergy was elucidated only after 50 years of clinical use of the treatment. The sublingual administration (SLIT) was developed during the 1980 ties, to achieve an improvement in safety and convenience. While SCIT is approved in the United States for the treatment of asthmatic patients with more than 12 years, so far few trials evaluated the clinical efficacy and safety of SLIT in children with allergic asthma, although the indications and some aspects remain unclear. Certainly, due to compliance problems, the age below 3 years may be reasonably considered a practical contraindication.

CONCLUSIONS

Given that some specific AIT products are effective and approved as drugs (AIFA, EMA, FDA), the use in children is still debated. Some aspects still need robust confirm: (a) the safety of AIT in asthma; (b) the optimal regimen of administration; (c) the role of AIT as preventative treatment for asthma development.

The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice 2017 Year in Review

An impressive number of clinically impactful studies and reviews were published in The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice in 2017. As a service to our readers, the editors provide this Year in Review article to highlight and contextualize the advances published over the past year. We include information from articles on asthma, allergic rhinitis, rhinosinusitis, immunotherapy, atopic dermatitis, contact dermatitis, food allergy, anaphylaxis, drug hypersensitivity, urticarial/angioedema, eosinophilic disorders, and immunodeficiency. Within each topic, epidemiologic findings are presented, relevant aspects of prevention are described, and diagnostic and therapeutic advances are enumerated. Treatments discussed include behavioral therapy, allergen avoidance therapy, positive and negative effects of pharmacologic therapy, and various forms of immunologic and desensitization management. We hope this review will help readers consolidate and use this extensive and practical knowledge for the benefit of patients.

Benefit of SLIT and SCIT for Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) has been in use since more than one century, when Leonard Noon experimentally proved its efficacy in hayfever (Noon, in Lancet 1:1572-3, 1911). Since then, AIT was administered only as subcutaneous injections (SCIT) until the sublingual route (SLIT) was proposed in 1986. The use of SLIT was proposed following several surveys from the USA and UK that repeatedly reported fatalities due to SCIT (Lockey et al. in J Allergy Clin Immunol 75(1): 166, 1985; Lockey et al. in J Allergy Clin Immunol 660-77, 1985; Committee on the safety of medicines. CSM update. Desensitizing vaccines. Br Med J, 293: 948, 1986). These reports raised serious concerns about the safety and the risk/benefit ratio of AIT. Many cases of life-threatening events with SCIT were due to avoidable human errors in administration, but a relevant fraction of them remained unexplained and unpredictable (Aaronson and Gandhi in J Allergy Clin Immunol 113: 1117-21, 2014). Subsequently, in a few years, SLIT gained credibility and was included in the official documents and guidelines (Table 1) (Bousquet et al. in J Allergy Clin Immunol 108(5 Supp):S146-S150, 2001; Canonica et al. in Allergy 64 (Supp 91):1-59, 2009) as a viable alternative to traditional SCIT. Of note, the local bronchial (aerosol) and the intranasal route of administration were attempted after the 1970s as alternatives to SCIT: the bronchial route was soon abandoned due to the poor efficacy and/or side effects, and the local nasal route, although effective and safe, was judged substantially impractical (Canonica and Passalacqua in J Allergy Clin Immunol 111: 437-48, 2003). In contrast to SCIT, SLIT was tested in very large clinical trials (need references), including hundreds of patients and with dose-ranging experimental designs, so that some products (tablets) for grass, mite, and ragweed were officially approved as commercial drugs by regulatory agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency and the optimal content for the maintenance dose was identified for selected allergens. In parallel, the knowledge on the mechanisms of action of AIT was rapidly refined, leading to further improvements, such as the chemically modified extracts and the use of adjuvants to enhance efficacy and safety. In addition, in the last 10 years, there has been an increasing scientific and clinical interest in AIT applied to food allergies, in particular in children, with the use of orally administered extracts (Albin and Nowak-Węgrzyn in Immunol Allergy Clin North Am 35: 77-100, 2015). The results are so far encouraging, at least for cow's milk, egg, and peanut, although the use of treatment is still restricted to clinical trials or within specialized centers. Finally, the introduction of molecular- or component-resolved diagnosis has allowed detailing the prescription of AIT, by better delineating true sensitization versus cross-reactivity (Canonica et al. in World Allergy Organ J 6(1):17, 2013). This latter point is also in strict relation to the use of recombinant, engineered or highly purified molecules, instead of raw extracts, for the desensitization process.

Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy for Respiratory Allergy in Children: Unmet Needs and Future Goals

Allergen-specific immunotherapy for the treatment of respiratory allergy is currently supported, at least for selected products, by evidence of efficacy and effectiveness in the pediatric age. However, unmet needs remain in terms of administration regimens, duration of treatment, biomarkers, and preventive effects. These knowledge gaps need to be urgently addressed to provide pediatricians and pediatric allergists with more definite recommendations for the use of this treatment in children. This article critically appraises the most relevant debated issues on allergen-specific immunotherapy in children, focusing on allergen standardization procedures, heterogeneity of clinical studies, and regulatory and pharmacoeconomic aspects.

Subcutaneous and Sublingual Immunotherapy in Allergic Asthma in Children

This review presents up-to-date understanding of immunotherapy in the treatment of children with allergic asthma. The principal types of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) are subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Both of them are indicated for patients with allergic rhinitis and/or asthma, who have evidence of clinically relevant allergen-specific IgE, and significant symptoms despite reasonable avoidance measures and/or maximal medical therapy. Studies have shown a significant decrease in asthma symptom scores and in the use of rescue medication, and a preventive effect on asthma onset. Although the safety profile of SLIT appears to be better than SCIT, the results of some studies and meta-analyses suggest that the efficacy of SCIT is better and that SCIT has an earlier onset than SLIT in children with allergic asthma. Severe, not controlled asthma, and medical error were the most frequent causes of SCIT-induced adverse events.

Current Evidence on Safety and Practical Considerations for Administration of Sublingual Allergen Immunotherapy (SLIT) in the United States

Liquid sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT) has been used off-label for decades, and Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved grass and ragweed SLIT tablets have been available in the United States since 2014. Potentially life-threatening events from SLIT do occur, although they appear to be very rare, especially for FDA-approved products. Practice guidelines that incorporate safety precautions regarding the use of SLIT in the United States are needed. This clinical commentary attempts to address unresolved issues including controversy regarding the FDA mandate for the prescription of epinephrine autoinjectors for patients on SLIT; how to approach polysensitized patients; optimal timing and duration of SLIT administration; how to address gaps in therapy; whether antihistamines can prevent local reactions, if certain patient populations (such as persistent asthmatics) should not receive SLIT; and when to instruct patients to self-administer epinephrine. Key points are that physicians should focus on educating patients regarding: (1) when not to administer SLIT; (2) how to recognize a potentially serious allergic reaction to SLIT; and (3) when to administer epinephrine and seek emergency care.