Cost-effectiveness of GRAZAX for prevention of grass pollen induced rhinoconjunctivitis in Southern Europe

Quantifying the benefits of early sublingual allergen immunotherapy tablet initiation in children

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a chronic inflammatory disease of the upper airway, which progresses into allergic asthma (AA) in up to 45% of children. This analysis aimed to investigate clinical and economic benefits of sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT tablets) initiated early in childhood for the treatment of AR by quantifying the long-term reduction in new cases of AA.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to estimate the long-term effects of SLIT tablets on the risk of developing asthma. Key parameters were primarily based on data from the GRAZAX® Asthma Prevention trial and included the age- and treatment-dependent risk of developing AA as well as annual probabilities of progression/remission in AR severity. Healthcare costs were estimated using data from the REACT study.

RESULTS

In a modelled cohort of children with moderate-to-severe seasonal AR initiated on SLIT tablets at ages 7 and 12, 24% and 29%, respectively, develop AA during a 20-year period. In comparison, when initiated at age 5, 19% develop AA. Additionally, initiation of SLIT tablets at age 5 is associated with a total healthcare cost of EUR 20,429 per patient, whereas initiation at ages 7 and 12 is associated with, respectively, EUR 21,050 and EUR 22,379 per patient 20 years after AR diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Initiation of SLIT tablets in early childhood is associated with a clinically meaningful and permanent reduction in new cases of AA and lower healthcare costs among children with AR. This finding supports the clinical relevance of initiating SLIT tablets early for children with AR to obtain long-term clinical benefits.

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.

Mapping naso-ocular symptom scores to EQ-5D-5L utility values in Japanese cedar pollinosis

BACKGROUND

The total naso-ocular symptom score (TSS) is widely used as an endpoint to evaluate the severity of seasonal allergic rhinitis. However, it is not a generic preference-based measure. We sought to develop an algorithm for mapping between the TSS and health utility in Japanese cedar pollinosis (JCP). We also performed a cost-utility analysis of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for JCP by using this algorithm.

METHODS

Patients with JCP filled out the TSS questionnaire and EQ-5D-5L simultaneously during the pollen season in 2019 and in 2020. We estimated a direct utility mapping model by regressing responses to individual TSS questions directly onto utility. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of active SLIT to a placebo was determined by examining the drug expense and the estimated quality-adjusted life year (QALY) using a dataset from a double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial.

RESULTS

A total of 238 records were included for analysis. The estimated utility decreased with increasing severity of rhinitis. Patients with comorbid asthma showed lower utility. A negative and significant correlation was seen between the TSS and utility in both 2019 and 2020. The estimated equations were: Y(utility) = -0.0161∗X(TSS) + 1.005 in non-asthmatic JCP patients. The ICER of active SLIT to the placebo was estimated to be 4,049,720 and 6,011,218 JPY/QALY in the first and second year, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

It is possible to reasonably predict utility from the total naso-ocular symptom score by using regression models. In the estimated algorithm, pre-seasonal SLIT for JCP is cost-effective.

New insights in mite immunotherapy - sublingual tablets

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Sublingual tablet immunotherapy has been demonstrated to be effective for allergies induced by exposure to grass, ragweed, specific trees (Japanese Cedar; birch homologous tree mix), and house dust mites (HDM). This review provides both an overview of the evidence-based clinical studies that address the use of the HDM SLIT-tablet for the treatment of HDM-induced allergic rhinitis/conjunctivitis and its appropriate use in carefully selected asthmatic patients and provides the clinician with practical management considerations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Solid evidence-based clinical studies have shown that the HDM SLIT-tablet is both well tolerated in patients with mild-to-moderate asthma and has demonstrated a meaningful improvement in exacerbations, need for rescue medication, quality of life, and asthma control.

SUMMARY

The HDM SLIT-tablet provides the allergy specialist with a well-tolerated treatment that has established superior safety to subcutaneous injection therapy, which can be administered easily as a sublingual dissolvable tablet, and which provides the opportunity to address one of the more difficult aspects in the management of an inducer of perennial allergic disease - that of persistent airway inflammation and allergic asthma.

Pharmacoeconomics of allergy immunotherapy versus pharmacotherapy

Introduction: The purpose of this review is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of allergy immunotherapy (AIT) in the treatment of allergic rhinitis, asthma, and other allergic conditions.Area covered: An extensive search of the PubMed and Medline database (January 1996 up to June of 2020) was conducted using the search terms allergy immunotherapy, pharmacoeconomics, cost-effectiveness, allergic rhinitis, and asthma. Studies were included if they included information on the economics of AIT in comparison to pharmacotherapy in the treatment of allergic rhinitis or asthma either as actual costs or based on theoretical models. Systematic reviews were included if they included information about the cost-effectiveness of AIT.Most clinical trials found significant cost-savings with AIT. The cost-effective time-point ranged from a few months to several years after treatment initiation.. Cost savings were demonstrated as early as 3 months after treatment initiation and were as great as 80% less than SDT in some studies.Expert opinion: There is strong evidence in the collective literature that AIT is cost-effective as compared to SDT alone. The magnitude of AIT's cost-effectiveness is likely underestimated because most of the studies considered during treatment costs and not AIT's long-term benefits or preventive/prophylactic effects or its impact on co-morbid conditions.

Are Unit Costs the Same? A Case Study Comparing Different Valuation Methods for Unit Cost Calculation of General Practitioner Consultations

OBJECTIVES

To inform allocation decisions in any healthcare system, robust cost data are indispensable. Nevertheless, recommendations on the most appropriate valuation approaches vary or are nonexistent, and no internationally accepted gold standard exists. This costing analysis exercise aims to assess the impact and implications of different calculation methods and sources based on the unit cost of general practitioner (GP) consultations in Austria.

METHODS

Six costing methods for unit cost calculation were explored, following 3 Austrian methodological approaches (AT-1, AT-2, AT-3) and 3 approaches applied in 3 other European countries (Germany, The Netherlands, United Kingdom). Drawing on Austrian data, mean unit costs per GP consultation were calculated in euros for 2015.

RESULTS

Mean unit costs ranged from €15.6 to €42.6 based on the German top-down costing approach (DE) and the Austrian Physicians' Chamber's price recommendations (AT-3), respectively. The mean unit cost was estimated at €18.9 based on Austrian economic evaluations (AT-1) and €17.9 based on health insurance payment tariffs (AT-2). The Dutch top-down (NL) and the UK bottom-up approaches (UK) yielded higher estimates (NL: €25.3, UK: €29.8). Overall variation reached 173%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study is the first to systematically investigate the impact of differing calculation methods on unit cost estimates. It shows large variations with potential impact on the conclusions in an economic evaluation. Although different methodological choices may be justified by the adopted study perspective, different costing approaches introduce variation in cross-study/cross-country cost estimates, leading to decreased confidence in data quality in economic evaluations.

Cost-effectiveness of grass pollen allergen immunotherapy in adults

BACKGROUND

Major scientific societies, such as the EAACI or the AAAAI, do not express any suggestion on which form of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is to be preferred (subcutaneous immunotherapy, SCIT, vs sublingual immunotherapy, SLIT). This choice could depend on their relative pharmacoeconomic value.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of AIT for grass pollen, administered as SCIT or SLIT.

METHODS

We created a Markovian Model, to evaluate, in a hypothetical cohort of adult patients suffering from moderate-to-severe rhino-conjunctivitis with or without allergic asthma, the cost-effectiveness of SLIT (tablets, Grazax^® and Oralair^® ) or SCIT (various currently available products, plus indirect nonmedical costs, such as travel and productivity costs) in addition to pharmacological therapy, assuming a 9-year horizon to capture AIT long-term effects. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated assuming pharmacological therapy as the reference comparator.

RESULTS

In the base case, SCIT was slightly more expensive, but more effective than SLIT, being the most cost-effective option (ICER for SCIT, €11 418; ICER for SLIT, €15 212). ICERs greater than €120 000 for both SCIT and SLIT were demonstrated in a scenario assuming that low treatment persistence rates, which are common in real-life, lead to absence of long-term AIT clinical benefit. Considering indirect nonmedical costs SLIT resulted more cost-effective than SCIT (ICER for SCIT, €17 318; ICER for SLIT, €15 212).

CONCLUSION

In daily practice, AIT for grass pollens may be a cost-effective option only in patients with low discontinuation rates. SCIT, which is less affected by this limitation than SLIT, seems the most cost-effective AIT form.

A Systematic Review of Economic Studies Evaluating Ophthalmic Drugs: An Analysis of the Health-state Utilities

PURPOSE

To characterize the techniques used to derive health-state utilities (HSU) in the cost-utility studies (CUS) of ophthalmic drugs.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted in Pubmed/Embase until October 2019. CUS evaluating ophthalmic drugs were included. Therapeutic area, technique to derive HSU and sources of HSU were extracted. It was assessed if the HSU and the other parameters of CUS were collected from the same population. The techniques to derive HSU used in the CUS were compared to the techniques recommended by the country-specific economic evaluation guidelines.

RESULTS

Seventy CUS were included. Forty-three (61.4%) used direct techniques to derive HSU, 19 (27.1%) used indirect, 1 (1.4%) used direct and indirect and the remaining (n = 7; 10.0%) used other or unknown techniques. Twelve (17.1%) CUS collected the HSU and the other parameters from the same population: nine (12.9%) retrieved utility data from experimental studies, two (2.9%) from observational and one (1.4%) from other sources. Forty-eight (68.6%) CUS collected the HSU and the other parameters from different populations: eight (11.4%) retrieved utility data from experimental studies, 33 (47.1%) from observational, one (1.4%) from both experimental and observational and six (8.6%) from other sources. It was not possible to identify the population from whom data were obtained in 10 (14.3%) CUS. Eleven (15.7%) CUS followed the recommendations of guidelines, 21 (30.0%) did not follow and for 38 (54.3%), it was not possible to assess.

CONCLUSION

Choosing different techniques to derive HSU may result in different results, which can preclude the comparison between cost-utility studies.

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

This article evaluates the cost-effectiveness of allergy immunotherapy (AIT) in the treatment of allergic rhinitis, asthma, and other allergic conditions. An extensive search of the PubMed and Medline databases (up to December 2018) was conducted. There is strong evidence in the collective literature, which included individual studies and systematic reviews, that AIT is cost-effective in the management of allergic rhinitis and asthma as compared with standard drug treatment alone. The magnitude of AIT's cost-effectiveness is likely underestimated because most of the studies considered during-treatment costs and not the long-term benefits or preventive or prophylactic effects of AIT.

Approach to Patients with Allergic Rhinitis: Testing and Treatment

This article evaluates the role of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) in the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR). AIT has been shown to be effective in treating AR symptoms with resultant improvements in overall quality of life, comorbid illnesses, and medication requirements. Persistent clinical benefits have been shown years after AIT treatment discontinuation. AIT may prevent the progression of AR to asthma. AIT may more cost-effective than pharmacotherapy. Multiple individual studies and systematic reviews provide strong evidence for the clinical effectiveness of AIT in the treatment of AR. Cost-effectiveness and disease modification of AIT compared with standard drug treatment are additional advantages.

Allergen Immunotherapy and Atopic Dermatitis: the Good, the Bad, and the Unknown

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In light of the recent advancements in atopic dermatitis treatment, this review aims to summarize the utility and efficacy of allergy immunotherapy in atopic dermatitis patients. We examine its mechanism, pathophysiology, cost-efficacy, and current guidelines for clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

The literature supports the use of allergy immunotherapy in atopic conditions such as allergic rhinitis and asthma but insufficient evidence exists to suggest its efficacy in atopic dermatitis. The use of allergy immunotherapy has been shown to provide long-term cost savings in both the USA and the European Union in certain populations but differences in prescribing patterns and manufacturing make it difficult to study its impact on a larger, generalizable scale. Conflicting meta-analyses data and conclusions highlight the need for better, higher quality research to better understand allergy immunotherapy utility in atopic dermatitis.

Cost-Effectiveness Of The SQ® Grass SLIT-Tablet In Children With Allergic Rhinitis: A German Payer Perspective

Background

The Grazax Asthma Prevention (GAP) trial has recently demonstrated significant reductions in the odds of asthma symptoms or medication use in patients treated with SQ^® grass SLIT-tablet relative to placebo, both in combination with allergy and asthma pharmacotherapy. The objective of the present analysis was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of SQ grass SLIT-tablet relative to placebo in children with AR from the perspective of a German healthcare payer.

Methods

A cost-utility model was developed in Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, USA) to evaluate the cost-utility of SQ grass SLIT-tablet in combination with pharmacotherapy versus pharmacotherapy alone in patients with AR. Transition probabilities were derived from the GAP trial, and costs were taken from a real-world insurance database analysis. Future costs and effects were discounted at 3% per annum, and extensive deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

Results

Over a 10-year time horizon, the base case analysis showed an increase in overall treatment costs of €897 per child being treated with SQ grass SLIT-tablet relative to pharmacotherapy alone. The increased treatment costs were accompanied by an improvement in patient quality of life of 0.10 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) yielding an ICER of €8978 per QALY gained, falling well below a willingness-to-pay threshold of €17,800 per QALY gained. The base case results were insensitive to changes in all individual model parameters.

Discussion

Improvements in quality of life with the SQ grass SLIT-tablet would be accompanied by only a modest increase in costs over a 10-year time horizon, with the SQ grass SLIT-tablet therefore representing excellent value for money from the German healthcare payer perspective.

ImmunoCAP® ISAC and Microtest for multiplex allergen testing in people with difficult to manage allergic disease: a systematic review and cost analysis

BACKGROUND

Allergy is a form of immune-mediated exaggerated sensitivity (hypersensitivity) to a substance that is either inhaled, swallowed, injected or comes into contact with the skin. Foreign substances that provoke allergies are called allergens. It has been claimed that multiplex allergen testing may help in diagnosing the cause of symptoms in patients with an unclear cause of allergy or who are allergic to more than one substance.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate multiplex allergen testing [devices that can measure the presence of multiple immunoglobulin E (IgE) antibodies in a patient's blood at the same time], by assessing (1) clinical effectiveness (allergy symptoms, incidence of acute exacerbations, mortality, adverse events of testing and treatment, health-care presentations or admissions, health-related quality of life); (2) effects on treatment (diet, immunotherapy medications, other potential testing); (3) any additional diagnostic information provided by multiplex allergen testing; and (4) cost-effectiveness (cost of different assessment strategies).

METHODS

Fifteen databases were searched from 2005 to April 2015, including MEDLINE (via OvidSp), MEDLINE In-Process Citations, MEDLINE Daily Update, PubMed (National Library of Medicine), EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database, Science Citation Index (SCI), Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S), BIOSIS Previews, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) HTA programme, and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA); supplementary searches of conference proceedings and trials registries were performed. Review methods followed published guidance from the Cochrane Collaboration and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, UK. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using appropriate published tools or a review-specific tool designed by the project team. Studies were summarised in a narrative synthesis. Owing to a lack of data on the clinical effectiveness of multiplex allergen testing, no long-term cost-effectiveness model was developed. A conceptual model structure was developed and cost analyses were performed to examine the short-term costs of various possible diagnostic pathways.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included in the review. The very limited available data indicated that the addition of multiplex allergen testing [ImmunoCAP(®) Immuno Solid-phase Allergen Chip (ISAC), Thermo Fisher Scientific/Phadia AB, Uppsala, Sweden] to standard diagnostic work-up can change the clinicians' views on the diagnosis, management and treatment of patients. There was some indication that the use of ImmunoCAP ISAC testing may be useful to guide decisions on the discontinuation of restrictive diets, the content of allergen-specific immunotherapy (SIT) prescriptions, and whether or not patients should receive SIT. However, none of the studies that we identified reported any information on clinical outcomes subsequent to changes in treatment or management. There was some evidence that ImmunoCAP ISAC may be useful for discriminating allergens that are structurally similar and are recognised by the same IgE antibody (cross-immunoreactive). No data were available for Microtest (Microtest Matrices Ltd, London, UK). Detailed cost analyses suggested that multiplex allergen testing would have to result in a substantial reduction of the proportions of patients receiving single IgE testing and oral food challenge tests in order to be cost-saving in the short term.

CONCLUSIONS

No recommendations for service provision can be made based on the analyses included in this report. It is suggested that a consensus-based protocol for the use of multiplex allergen testing be developed. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the proposed protocol should then be assessed by comparing long-term clinical and quality of life outcomes and resource use in patients managed using the protocol with those managed using a standard diagnostic pathway.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015019739.

FUNDING

This project was a Diagnostic Assessment Report commissioned by the NIHR HTA programme on behalf of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.

Health economic analysis of allergen immunotherapy for the management of allergic rhinitis, asthma, food allergy and venom allergy: A systematic overview

BACKGROUND

The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is developing guidelines for allergen immunotherapy (AIT) for the management of allergic rhinitis, allergic asthma, IgE-mediated food allergy and venom allergy. To inform the development of clinical recommendations, we undertook systematic reviews to critically assess evidence on the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of AIT for these conditions. This study focusses on synthesizing data and gaps in the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of AIT for these conditions.

METHODS

We produced summaries of evidence in each domain, and then, synthesized findings on health economic data identified from four recent systematic reviews on allergic rhinitis, asthma, food allergy and venom allergy, respectively. The quality of these studies was independently assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool for health economic evaluations.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies satisfied our inclusion criteria. Of these, 19 studies investigated the cost-effectiveness of AIT in allergic rhinitis, of which seven were based on data from randomized controlled trials with economic evaluations conducted from a health system perspective. This body of evidence suggested that sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) and subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) would be considered cost-effective using the (English) National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY). However, the quality of the studies and the general lack of attention to characterizing uncertainty and handling missing data should be taken into account when interpreting these results. For asthma, there were three eligible studies, all of which had significant methodological limitations; these suggested that SLIT, when used in patients with both asthma and allergic rhinitis, may be cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £10 726 per QALY. We found one economic modelling study for venom allergy which, despite being based largely on expert opinion and plausible assumptions, suggested that AIT for bee and wasp venom allergy is only likely to be cost-effective for very high-risk groups who may be exposed to multiple exposures to venom/year (eg bee keepers). We found no eligible studies investigating the cost-effectiveness of AIT for food allergy.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the evidence to support the cost-effectiveness of AIT is limited and of low methodological quality, but suggests that AIT may be cost-effective for people with allergic rhinitis with or without asthma and in high-risk subgroups for venom allergy. We were unable to draw any conclusions on the cost-effectiveness of AIT for food allergy.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Cost-effectiveness of SQ® HDM SLIT-tablet in addition to pharmacotherapy for the treatment of house dust mite allergic rhinitis in Germany

Background

Allergic rhinitis is a global health problem that burdens society due to associated health care costs and its impact on health. Standardized quality (SQ^®) house dust mite (HDM) sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablet is a sublingually administered allergy immunotherapy tablet for patients with persistent moderate to severe HDM allergic rhinitis despite use of allergy pharmacotherapy.

Objective

To assess the cost-effectiveness of SQ HDM SLIT-tablet in Germany for patients suffering from HDM allergic rhinitis.

Methods

A pharmacoeconomic analysis, based on data collected in a double-blinded, phase III randomized placebo-controlled trial (n=992), was undertaken to compare SQ HDM SLIT-tablet in addition to allergy pharmacotherapy to placebo plus allergy pharmacotherapy. Quality-adjusted life year (QALY) scores and health care resource use data recorded in the trial were applied to each treatment group and extrapolated over a nine-year time horizon. A series of scenarios were used to investigate the impact of changes on long-term patient health for both treatment groups, which was measured by annual changes in QALY scores. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were also performed.

Results

In the base case analysis, compared with allergy pharmacotherapy, SQ HDM SLIT-tablet led to a QALY gain of 0.31 at an incremental cost of €2,276 over the nine-year time horizon, equating to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €7,519. The treatment was cost-effective for all scenarios analyzed; however, results were sensitive to changes in individual parameter values during the deterministic sensitivity analysis.

Conclusion

SQ HDM SLIT-tablet in addition to pharmacotherapy is cost-effective compared with allergy pharmacotherapy plus placebo for the treatment of persistent moderate to severe HDM allergic rhinitis that is not well controlled by allergy pharmacotherapy.

Clinical management, expectations, and satisfaction of patients with moderate to severe allergic rhinoconjunctivitis treated with SQ-standardized grass-allergen tablet under routine clinical practice conditions in Spain

BACKGROUND

Sublingual immunotherapy has been proven as a well-tolerated and effective treatment for allergic rhinitis. Within this type of treatment, GRAZAX® is the most documented product in terms of safety and efficacy. The objective of this study was to identify the patients' expectations and level of treatment satisfaction, as well as the clinical management of patients with moderate/severe allergic rhinoconjunctivitis treated with GRAZAX®.

METHODS

This was a non-interventional, observational, multi-centre, open-label study involving a total of 131 adult patients aged 18-66 years with confirmed diagnosis of grass-allergy and initiated treatment with GRAZAX® between June 2010 and April 2011.

RESULTS

In the pollen season after starting treatment, 56.6% of patients stated that their symptoms were much less/less intense, 86% needed less symptomatic medication for control of their symptoms, and 74.4% manifested to have improved (quite/a lot) as regards their allergic disease since treatment was initiated as compared with previous grass pollen season. The patient satisfaction with GRAZAX® was measured using a visual analogue scale (VAS) between 0 (minimum satisfaction) and 100 (maximum satisfaction) comprising five different items: effectiveness, tolerability, cost, convenience and overall satisfaction. The results obtained for each item were [mean (SD)]: 74.7 (18.1), 70.3 (36.1), 39.3 (25.8), 86.2 (12.6), 78.4 (15.8) respectively. The patient's level of satisfaction is highly influenced, especially in terms of assessment of effectiveness, tolerability and convenience, by the information provided by the specialist.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, it can be concluded that improved communication leads to increased patient knowledge, greater patient compliance, and increased patient satisfaction.

Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy

Allergen-specific immunotherapy remains the only causal treatment of allergic disease to date. Its efficacy in symptom reduction was demonstrated in double blind, placebo-controlled studies of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, allergic asthma, and Hymenoptera venom hypersensitivity, including long-term effects after discontinuation of treatment. In addition, immunotherapy decreases the risk of developing new sensitisations to aeroallergens in monosensitised patients and allergic asthma in patients with mere allergic rhinitis. The mechanism of immunotherapy entails redirection of the T lymphocyte response from a T helper cell Type 2 phenotype in favour of induction of regulatory T cells and/or immune deviation toward a T helper cell Type 1 phenotype, with resulting inhibition of downstream effector pathways and induction of immunoglobulin G-associated blocking antibodies. Two main application forms are used in clinical practice: subcutaneous immunotherapy and sublingual immunotherapy. The advantage of subcutaneous immunotherapy is its proven efficacy over a broad range of indications. Disadvantages are systemic allergic reactions and inconvenience for the patient due to frequent doctor visits. Sublingual immunotherapy has been shown to result in less systemic allergic reactions and may be more convenient due to home application; however, efficacy has only been proven for allergic rhinitis. For clinicians, the adherence to practice guidelines and thorough knowledge of allergen products, application routes, indications, immunomodulatory mechanisms, efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness is important for successful treatment and will be addressed in this review article.

International Consensus on Allergen Immunotherapy II: Mechanisms, standardization, and pharmacoeconomics

This article continues the comprehensive international consensus (ICON) statement on allergen immunotherapy (AIT). The initial article also recently appeared in the Journal. The conclusions below focus on key mechanisms of AIT-triggered tolerance, requirements in allergen standardization, AIT cost-effectiveness, and regulatory guidance. Potential barriers to and facilitators of the use of AIT are described in addition to future directions. International allergy specialists representing the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology; the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology; the American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology; and the World Allergy Organization critically reviewed the existing literature and prepared this summary of recommendations for best AIT practice. The authors contributed equally and reached consensus on the statements presented herein.

Allergy immunotherapy in reducing healthcare cost

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) in the treatment of allergic rhinitis and asthma. Individual studies and systematic reviews that included information on AIT economic outcomes as compared with symptomatic drug treatment (SDT) were evaluated.

RECENT FINDINGS

One systematic review that included 14 studies concluded that subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy may be cost-effective compared with SDT from around 6 years. Another systematic review of 24 studies comparing economic outcomes of subcutaneous allergy immunotherapy and/or sublingual allergy immunotherapy with SDT found compelling evidence for cost-savings with both forms of AIT over SDT. There was no strong evidence indicating superior cost-efficacy of subcutaneous allergy immunotherapy or sublingual allergy immunotherapy over SDT in either of these systematic reviews. Individual studies have demonstrated AIT cost-savings as high as 80% compared with SDT. Significant cost-savings were reported as early as 3 months after AIT initiation. In some studies, cost-efficacy time-point was not established until after treatment discontinuation - presumably due to time required for the clinical benefits to outweigh the AIT treatment costs. Although some economic modeling studies included the costs of 'asthma prevented', the collective literature of AIT economics provides very little to no information about the cost benefits of the preventive aspect of AIT.

SUMMARY

Overall, individual studies and systematic reviews provide strong evidence for the cost-effectiveness of AIT over SDT. The magnitude of cost-efficacy is likely underestimated in that few studies consider the cost-savings due to AIT's long-term benefits or preventive effect.

Critical appraisal of Timothy grass pollen extract GRAZAX in the management of allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis is one of the most common diseases of adult and pediatric age, associated with grass pollen (GP) allergy in >50% cases, with a consistent impact on quality of life of affected patients. A grass allergen tablet, containing standardized extract derived from Timothy grass (Phleum pratense) pollen and ~15 μg major allergen P. pratense (rPhl p 5), may be the future of allergen-specific immunotherapy (IT) for GP allergy. The aim of this review was to critically evaluate the role of Timothy GP extract IT for the management of allergic rhinitis. For this purpose, we have tried to analyze potential mechanisms of action at the basis of Timothy GP extract, we have reviewed efficacy studies to establish potential benefits and clinical response, and we have also evaluated safety and tolerability profiles and patient focus perspective, such as quality of life, satisfaction and acceptability, and compliance to this IT.

Allergy immunotherapy: the future of allergy treatment

Allergic respiratory disease represents a significant and expanding health problem worldwide. Allergic symptoms, such as asthma and hay fever, cause sleep impairment and reduce school and work performance. The cost to society is substantial. Allergen avoidance and pharmacotherapy cannot control the disease. Only allergy immunotherapy has disease-modifying potential and should be included in optimal treatment strategies. Allergy immunotherapy was first administered as subcutaneous injections and has been practiced for the past 100 years or so. Recently, tablet-based sublingual allergy immunotherapy (SLIT) was introduced with comprehensive clinical documentation. SLIT tablets represent a more patient-friendly concept because they can be used for self-treatment at home.

Economic Evaluation alongside Multinational Studies: A Systematic Review of Empirical Studies

Purpose of the study

This study seeks to explore methods for conducting economic evaluations alongside multinational trials by conducting a systematic review of the methods used in practice and the challenges that are typically faced by the researchers who conducted the economic evaluations.

Methods

A review was conducted for the period 2002 to 2012, with potentially relevant articles identified by searching the Medline, Embase and NHS EED databases. Studies were included if they were full economic evaluations conducted alongside a multinational trial.

Results

A total of 44 studies out of a possible 2667 met the inclusion criteria. Methods used for the analyses varied between studies, indicating a lack of consensus on how economic evaluation alongside multinational studies should be carried out. The most common challenge appeared to be related to addressing differences between countries, which potentially hinders the generalisability and transferability of results. Other challenges reported included inadequate sample sizes and choosing cost-effectiveness thresholds.

Conclusions

It is recommended that additional guidelines be developed to aid researchers in this area and that these be based on an understanding of the challenges associated with multinational trials and the strengths and limitations of alternative approaches. Guidelines should focus on ensuring that results will aid decision makers in their individual countries.

Choosing wisely: practical considerations on treatment efficacy and safety of asthma in the elderly

The prevalence of asthma in the most advanced ages is similar to that of younger ages. However, the concept that older individuals may suffer from allergic asthma has been largely denied in the past, and a common belief attributes to asthma the definition of "rare" disease. Indeed, asthma in the elderly is often underdiagnosed or diagnosed as COPD, thus leading to undertreatment of improper treatment. This is also due to the heterogeneity of clinical and functional presentations of geriatric asthma, including the partial loss of reversibility and the lower occurrence of the allergic component in this age range. The older asthmatic patients are also characterized the coexistence of comorbid conditions that, in conjunction with age-associated structural and functional changes of the lung, may contribute to complicate the management of asthma. The current review addresses the main issues related to the management of allergic asthma in the geriatric age. In particular, the paper aims at revising current pharmacological and non pharmacological treatments for allergic asthmatics of advanced ages, primarily focusing on their safety and efficacy, although most behaviors are an arbitrary extrapolation of what has been tested in young ages. In fact, age has always represented an exclusion criterion for eligibility to clinical trials. Experimental studies and real life observations specifically testing the efficacy and safety of therapeutic approaches in allergic asthma in the elderly are urgently needed.

Health economic comparison of SLIT allergen and SCIT allergoid immunotherapy in patients with seasonal grass-allergic rhinoconjunctivitis in Germany

BACKGROUND

Allergoids are chemically modified allergen extracts administered to reduce allergenicity and to maintain immunogenicity. Oralair® (the 5-grass tablet) is a sublingual native grass allergen tablet for pre- and co-seasonal treatment. Based on a literature review, meta-analysis, and cost-effectiveness analysis the relative effects and costs of the 5-grass tablet versus a mix of subcutaneous allergoid compounds for grass pollen allergic rhinoconjunctivitis were assessed.

METHODS

A Markov model with a time horizon of nine years was used to assess the costs and effects of three-year immunotherapy treatment. Relative efficacy expressed as standardized mean differences was estimated using an indirect comparison on symptom scores extracted from available clinical trials. The Rhinitis Symptom Utility Index (RSUI) was applied as a proxy to estimate utility values for symptom scores. Drug acquisition and other medical costs were derived from published sources as well as estimates for resource use, immunotherapy persistence, and occurrence of asthma. The analysis was executed from the German payer's perspective, which includes payments of the Statutory Health Insurance (SHI) and additional payments by insurants. Comprehensive deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses and different scenarios were performed to test the uncertainty concerning the incremental model outcomes.

RESULTS

The applied model predicted a cost-utility ratio of the 5-grass tablet versus a market mix of injectable allergoid products of € 12,593 per QALY in the base case analysis. Predicted incremental costs and QALYs were € 458 (95% confidence interval, CI: € 220; € 739) and 0.036 (95% CI: 0.002; 0.078), respectively. Compared to the allergoid mix the probability of the 5-grass tablet being the most cost-effective treatment option was predicted to be 76% at a willingness-to-pay threshold of € 20,000. The results were most sensitive to changes in efficacy estimates, duration of the pollen season, and immunotherapy persistence rates.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis suggests the sublingual native 5-grass tablet to be cost-effective relative to a mix of subcutaneous allergoid compounds. The robustness of these statements has been confirmed in extensive sensitivity and scenario analyses.

Economic evaluation of SQ-standardized grass allergy immunotherapy tablet (Grazax(®)) in children

Background

Grass pollen-induced rhinoconjunctivitis is a common allergic respiratory disorder affecting over 20% of the UK population in terms of quality of life and sleep, work, and school patterns. The SQ-standardized grass allergy immunotherapy tablet (AIT) has been demonstrated as a disease-modifying treatment which gives a sustained effect even after completion of a treatment course. The objective of this study was to provide an economic assessment of whether treatment with the SQ-standardized grass AIT, Grazax^® (Phleum pratense) in combination with symptomatic medications is preferable to the standard of care using symptomatic medications only. The analysis was performed for children with grass pollen-induced rhinoconjunctivitis, with or without concomitant asthma, in the UK.

Methods

The model evaluated the two treatment regimens in a cohort of 1,000 children from a payer’s perspective. Treatment was modeled in terms of management of symptoms, impact on resource use, and development of allergic asthma. The analysis modeled the use of SQ-standardized grass AIT and the sustained effects of treatment over a 9-year time horizon (ie, 3 years of treatment, with modeled long-term benefits). Data inputs were drawn from a recent clinical trial, published studies, and databases.

Results

SQ-standardized grass AIT improves patient outcomes, generating an incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained of £12,168. This is below commonly accepted thresholds in the UK.

Conclusion

The resulting incremental cost per QALY falls below commonly accepted willingness to pay thresholds. Therefore, the SQ-standardized grass AIT is a cost-effective option for the treatment of grass pollen-induced rhinoconjunctivitis in the UK pediatric population.

Sublingual immunotherapy: World Allergy Organization position paper 2013 update

We have prepared this document, "Sublingual Immunotherapy: World Allergy Organization Position Paper 2013 Update", according to the evidence-based criteria, revising and updating chapters of the originally published paper, "Sublingual Immunotherapy: World Allergy Organization Position Paper 2009", available at http://www.waojournal.org. Namely, these comprise: "Mechanisms of sublingual immunotherapy;" "Clinical efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy" - reporting all the data of all controlled trials published after 2009; "Safety of sublingual immunotherapy" - with the recently published Grading System for adverse reactions; "Impact of sublingual immunotherapy on the natural history of respiratory allergy" - with the relevant evidences published since 2009; "Efficacy of SLIT in children" - with detailed analysis of all the studies; "Definition of SLIT patient selection" - reporting the criteria for eligibility to sublingual immunotherapy; "The future of immunotherapy in the community care setting"; "Methodology of clinical trials according to the current scientific and regulatory standards"; and "Guideline development: from evidence-based medicine to patients' views" - including the evolution of the methods to make clinical recommendations.Additionally, we have added new chapters to cover a few emerging crucial topics: "Practical aspects of schedules and dosages and counseling for adherence" - which is crucial in clinical practice for all treatments; "Perspectives and new approaches" - including recombinant allergens, adjuvants, modified allergens, and the concept of validity of the single products. Furthermore, "Raising public awareness about sublingual immunotherapy", as a need for our patients, and strategies to increase awareness of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) among patients, the medical community, all healthcare stakeholders, and public opinion, are also reported in detail.

Economic evidence on the health impacts of climate change in europe

BACKGROUND

In responding to the health impacts of climate change, economic evidence and tools inform decision makers of the efficiency of alternative health policies and interventions. In a time when sweeping budget cuts are affecting all tiers of government, economic evidence on health protection from climate change spending enables comparison with other public spending.

METHODS

The review included 53 countries of the World Health Organization (WHO) European Region. Literature was obtained using a Medline and Internet search of key terms in published reports and peer-reviewed literature, and from institutions working on health and climate change. Articles were included if they provided economic estimation of the health impacts of climate change or adaptation measures to protect health from climate change in the WHO European Region. Economic studies are classified under health impact cost, health adaptation cost, and health economic evaluation (comparing both costs and impacts).

RESULTS

A total of 40 relevant studies from Europe were identified, covering the health damage or adaptation costs related to the health effects of climate change and response measures to climate-sensitive diseases. No economic evaluation studies were identified of response measures specific to the impacts of climate change. Existing studies vary in terms of the economic outcomes measured and the methods for evaluation of health benefits. The lack of robust health impact data underlying economic studies significantly affects the availability and precision of economic studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Economic evidence in European countries on the costs of and response to climate-sensitive diseases is extremely limited and fragmented. Further studies are urgently needed that examine health impacts and the costs and efficiency of alternative responses to climate-sensitive health conditions, in particular extreme weather events (other than heat) and potential emerging diseases and other conditions threatening Europe.

The road not taken: transferability issues in multinational trials

BACKGROUND

National regulatory agencies often have to use cost-effectiveness (CE) data from multinational randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for national decision making on reimbursement of new drugs. We need to make the best use of these patient-level data to obtain estimates of country-specific CE. Several methods, ranging from simple to statistically complex, have existed for years. We investigated which of these methods are used to estimate CE ratios in economic evaluations performed alongside recent, multinational RCTs that enrolled at least 500 patients.

METHODS

In this systematic literature review, studies were classified based on whether resource use, unit costs, health outcomes and utility value sets were obtained from all countries, a subset of countries or one country. We recorded if the study presented trial-wide and country-specific CE results and reported the statistical analyses that were used to estimate them.

RESULTS

We included 21 studies, of which the majority used measurements of health care utilization and health outcomes from all countries to estimate CE. Thirteen studies used a one-country valuation of health care utilization; six used a multi-country valuation. Despite the availability of country-specific utility value sets, none of the studies that presented quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) used multi-country valuation. Valuation of health care utilization and health outcomes was not always consistent within a study: three studies combined a multi-country valuation of health care utilization, with a one-country valuation of health outcomes. Most studies calculated trial-wide CE estimates, while 11 studies calculated country- or region-specific estimates. Thirteen studies used relatively simple methods, which do not take the possible interaction between the country and treatment effect on health care utilization and health outcomes into account. Eight studies used more advanced statistical methods. Three of them used a fixed-effects modeling approach. Five studies explicitly took the hierarchical structure of the data into account, which leads to more appropriate estimates of population average results and associated standard errors. In this way, they help improve transferability of the published results.

CONCLUSION

Based on this systematic review, we concluded that the uptake of more advanced statistical methods has been relatively slow, while simpler naïve methods are still routinely employed.

The cost-effectiveness of immunotherapy for respiratory allergy: a review

This article reviews the international literature on the cost-effectiveness of immunotherapy for respiratory allergy. Included studies conducted an economic evaluation of immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, allergic conjunctivitis, allergic rhinitis, asthma or allergic rhinitis in combination with asthma. Although there were few economic evaluations and these suffered from methodological shortcomings, the evidence appears to support the cost-effectiveness of immunotherapy as compared with pharmacotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, subcutaneous immunotherapy as compared with pharmacotherapy for allergic rhinitis and immunotherapy as compared with pharmacotherapy for allergic rhinitis and asthma. One economic evaluation suggested that immunotherapy as compared with pharmacotherapy is unlikely to be cost-effective for asthma. The questions of the cost-effectiveness of sublingual vs subcutaneous immunotherapy and of the cost-effectiveness of immunotherapy for allergic conjunctivitis have not been resolved to date. The cost-effectiveness of immunotherapy depends on the duration of the clinical benefit of immunotherapy following treatment cessation, and on the break-even point of cumulative costs between immunotherapy and pharmacotherapy. There is a need for economic evaluations based on high-quality prospective and long-term clinical studies comparing immunotherapy with pharmacotherapy in real-life practice and comparing sublingual with subcutaneous immunotherapy.

Cost effectiveness analysis of immunotherapy in patients with grass pollen allergic rhinoconjunctivitis in Germany

OBJECTIVES

An economic evaluation was conducted to assess the outcomes and costs as well as cost-effectiveness of the following grass-pollen immunotherapies: OA (Oralair; Stallergenes S.A., Antony, France) vs GRZ (Grazax; ALK-Abelló, Hørsholm, Denmark), and ALD (Alk Depot SQ; ALK-Abelló) (immunotherapy agents alongside symptomatic medication) and symptomatic treatment alone for grass pollen allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.

METHODS

The costs and outcomes of 3-year treatment were assessed for a period of 9 years using a Markov model. Treatment efficacy was estimated using an indirect comparison of available clinical trials with placebo as a common comparator. Estimates for immunotherapy discontinuation, occurrence of asthma, health state utilities, drug costs, resource use, and healthcare costs were derived from published sources. The analysis was conducted from the insurant's perspective including public and private health insurance payments and co-payments by insurants. Outcomes were reported as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and symptom-free days. The uncertainty around incremental model results was tested by means of extensive deterministic univariate and probabilistic multivariate sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

In the base case analysis the model predicted a cost-utility ratio of OA vs symptomatic treatment of €14,728 per QALY; incremental costs were €1356 (95%CI: €1230; €1484) and incremental QALYs 0.092 (95%CI: 0.052; 0.140). OA was the dominant strategy compared to GRZ and ALD, with estimated incremental costs of -€1142 (95%CI: -€1255; -€1038) and -€54 (95%CI: -€188; €85) and incremental QALYs of 0.015 (95%CI: -0.025; 0.056) and 0.027 (95%CI: -0.022; 0.075), respectively. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of €20,000, the probability of OA being the most cost-effective treatment was predicted to be 79%. Univariate sensitivity analyses show that incremental outcomes were moderately sensitive to changes in efficacy estimates. The main study limitation was the requirement of an indirect comparison involving several steps to assess relative treatment effects.

CONCLUSION

The analysis suggests OA to be cost-effective compared to GRZ and ALD, and a symptomatic treatment. Sensitivity analyses showed that uncertainty surrounding treatment efficacy estimates affected the model outcomes.

Molecular profiles of IgE to Phleum pratense in children with grass pollen allergy: implications for specific immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

The so-called component-resolved immunotherapy of allergies proposes an immunization tailored to the molecular sensitization profiles of individual patients.

OBJECTIVES

We sought (1) to investigate the profiles of IgE sensitization to Phleum pratense in children with grass pollen allergy and (2) to define the compatibility of these profiles with a mixture of recombinant allergenic molecules of P pratense previously proposed for specific immunotherapy.

METHODS

We examined 200 children (age, 4-18 years; 126 boys) with allergic rhinitis, asthma, or both ascertained through validated questionnaires. Each child underwent skin prick testing (ALK-Abelló) and serum IgE assays (ImmunoCAP, Phadia) with 9 pollen extracts. Sera reacting against P pratense were tested for the individual molecules (rPhl p 1, rPhl p 2, rPhl p 4, nPhl p 4, rPhl p 5b, rPhl p 6, rPhl p 7, rPhl p 11, and Phl p 12). Through a combinatorial approach, the IgE individual sensitization profiles were matched against an experimental allergen-specific immunotherapy (SIT) preparation containing Phl p 1, Phl p 2, Phl p 5, and Phl p 6.

RESULTS

Among the 176 of 200 children with IgE sensitization to P pratense extract, 39 profiles of sensitization to the 8 allergenic molecules tested (cutoff, 0.35 kU/L) were identified. This high heterogeneity was reduced by considering only 6 or 4 P pratense molecules but not by increasing the cutoff levels of IgE positivity. The molecular profile of the experimental SIT preparation matched that of 7 (4%) of 176 patients only; the remaining 169 patients were classified in 4 mismatch categories: underpowered (29%), overpowered (32%), underpowered/overpowered (32%), and unrelated (3%).

CONCLUSIONS

IgE sensitization profiles to P pratense are highly heterogeneous. Molecularly designed SIT preparations tailored to patients' needs should consider this high heterogeneity and be driven by locally performed population studies.

How to design and evaluate randomized controlled trials in immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis: an ARIA-GA(2) LEN statement

Specific immunotherapy (SIT) is one of the treatments for allergic rhinitis. However, for allergists, nonspecialists, regulators, payers, and patients, there remain gaps in understanding the evaluation of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Although treating the same diseases, RCTs in SIT and pharmacotherapy should be considered separately for several reasons, as developed in this study. These include the severity and persistence of allergic rhinitis in the patients enrolled in the study, the problem of the placebo, allergen exposure (in particular pollen and mite), the analysis and reporting of the study, the level of symptoms of placebo-treated patients, the clinical relevance of the efficacy of SIT, the need for a validated combined symptom-medication score, the differences between children and adults and pharmacoeconomic analyses. This statement reviews issues raised by the interpretation of RCTs in sublingual immunotherapy. It is not possible to directly extrapolate the rules or parameters used in medication RCTs to SIT. It also provides some suggestions for the research that will be needed. Interestingly, some of the research questions can be approached with the available data obtained from large RCTs.

Specific immunotherapy by the sublingual route for respiratory allergy

Specific immunotherapy is the only treatment able to act on the causes and not only on the symptoms of respiratory allergy. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) was introduced as an option to subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT), the clinical effectiveness of which is partly counterbalanced by the issue of adverse systemic reactions, which occur at a frequency of about 0.2% of injections and 2-5% of the patients and may also be life-threatening. A large number of trials, globally evaluated by several meta-analyses, demonstrated that SLIT is an effective and safe treatment for allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma, severe reactions being extremely rare. The application of SLIT is favored by a good compliance, higher than that reported for SCIT, in which the injections are a major factor for noncompliance because of inconvenience, and by its cost-effectiveness. In fact, a number of studies showed that SLIT may be very beneficial to the healthcare system, especially when its effectiveness persists after treatment withdrawal because of the induced immunologic changes.

The CONSORT statement checklist in allergen-specific immunotherapy: a GA2LEN paper

The methodology of randomized clinical trials is essential for the critical assessment and registration of therapeutic interventions. The CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement was developed to alleviate the problems arising from the inadequate reporting of randomized controlled trials. The present article reflects on the items that we believe should be included in the CONSORT checklist in the context of conducting and reporting trials in allergen-specific immunotherapy. Only randomized, blinded (in particular blinding of patients, health care providers, and outcome assessors), placebo-controlled Phase III studies in this article. Our analysis focuses on the definition of patients' inclusion and exclusion criteria, allergen standardization, primary, secondary and exploratory outcomes, reporting of adverse events and analysis.

Economic evaluation of sublingual immunotherapy vs. symptomatic treatment in allergic asthma

BACKGROUND

The worldwide increased prevalence of allergic diseases, and especially of respiratory allergy, is paralleled by increased health costs. This requires consideration of the cost to efficacy ratio of the available treatment to identify the optimal choice.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the different economic relevance, over a long evaluation time, of symptomatic pharmacologic therapy and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in patients with allergic asthma.

METHODS

Seventy patients with perennial allergic asthma, sensitized to dust mites, were enrolled; 50 of these patients were treated with SLIT against house dust mites and 20 were treated with symptomatic drugs. The patients were evaluated for 2 years after discontinuing immunotherapy, which was performed for 3 years, to obtain a more complete follow-up. Symptom scores, medication scores, and all other direct medical costs were evaluated with a specific questionnaire.

RESULTS

Patients treated with SLIT plus drugs had a higher mean annual cost in the first year of SLIT treatment compared with patients only receiving drug treatment, but the mean annual cost became significantly lower since the end of SLIT both in the whole population and in the subgroups defined by disease severity.

CONCLUSION

The economic advantage measured alongside this prospective observational study was long lasting and still present at the fifth year of the follow-up (2 years after discontinuing SLIT) and could positively be related to the persistent good clinical control of patients.

Economic studies of immunotherapy: a review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To analyse and discuss the growing body of evidence on the economic advantages offered by immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis and asthma, in the various perspectives (society, national healthcare system, patients, etc) and according to the various types of standardized economic evaluations.

RECENT FINDINGS

This review shows that the economic studies of allergic rhinitis and asthma focus on three main research areas: studies aimed at determining the cost of illness and studies focused either on a simple cost comparison amongst available therapeutic alternatives, or directly comparing alternatives using full economic evaluations (cost-effectiveness, cost-utility measures, etc).

SUMMARY

Studies exploring the full cost of allergic rhinitis and asthma are still lacking; on the contrary, studies on immunotherapy (in its many administration forms, subcutaneous, sublingual, tablet, etc) in comparison with standard pharmaceutical treatment, have shown that immunotherapy may be very beneficial to the healthcare systems, in that either it could bring more clinical outcome at a reduced cost, versus standard therapy alone, or it could bring extra benefit at a very acceptable extra cost. This is even more correct under the societal perspective, that is, when indirect costs of lost productivity are considered and included in the economic analysis.

Utility weights for allergic rhinitis based on a community survey with a time trade-off technique in Japan

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis is not a fatal disease, but its symptoms deteriorate the quality of life. High morbidity raises a concern about its impact on health care resources. Utility weights, which are required for cost-utility analysis by the level of severity, have not been established to date. This study aims to derive the weights based on a community survey with a time trade-off technique.

METHODS

Self-administered monthly time trade-off questionnaires were administered to representative samples in the community. Four levels of severity were defined by clinical stratification proposed in the "Practical Guideline for the Management of Allergic Rhinitis in Japan".

RESULTS

146 responses (response rate: 51.0%) were collected. Utility weights by the four levels of severity were found to be 0.96, 0.94, 0.89 and 0.83, from mild to severest symptoms, respectively. These values were found to be statistically independent from the respondent's characteristics such as sex, age, existence of current nasal symptoms or history of allergic rhinitis.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors consider that the elicited utility weights are reliable. The results of this study could facilitate economic evaluations regarding allergic rhinitis in various contexts, contributing to better management of the disease.

Cost-effectiveness of specific subcutaneous immunotherapy in patients with allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma

BACKGROUND

Specific immunotherapy is the only potentially curative treatment in patients with allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma. Health economic evaluations on this treatment, particularly in a German context, are sparse.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of specific subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) in addition to symptomatic treatment (ST) compared with ST alone in a German health care setting.

METHODS

The analysis was performed as a health economic model calculation based on Markov models. In addition, we performed a concomitant expert board composed of allergy experts in pediatrics, dermatology, pneumology, and otolaryngology. The primary perspective of the study was societal. Additional sensitivity analyses were performed to prove our results for robustness.

RESULTS

The SCIT and ST combination was associated with annual cost savings of Euro140 per patient. After 10 years of disease duration, SCIT and ST reach the breakeven point. The overall incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was Euro-19,787 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), with a range that depended on patient age (adults, Euro-22,196; adolescents, Euro-14,747; children, Euro-12,750). From a third-party payer's perspective, SCIT was associated with slightly additional costs. Thus, the resulting ICER was Euro8,308 per QALY for all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional SCIT was associated with improved medical outcomes and cost savings compared with symptomatic treatment alone according to a societal perspective. Taking a European accepted ICER threshold of up to Euro50,000 per QALY into account, additional SCIT is considered clearly cost-effective compared with routine care in Germany. The degree of cost-effectiveness is strongly affected by costs related to SCIT and the target population receiving such treatment.

Is sublingual immunotherapy the final answer? Implications for the allergist

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is now accepted as a viable alternative to the traditional injection route based on more than 40 clinical trials and several meta-analyses of efficacy. In addition, the safety profile is very favorable, also in younger children. Although some aspects need to be further clarified (eg, optimal doses, patient selection, and mechanisms of action), SLIT can be currently regarded as an additional therapeutic option that allergists have available. The main distinctive feature of SLIT is certainly its tolerability, safety, and convenience for the patient. Nonetheless, as happens with injection immunotherapy, it is mandatory that the prescription of SLIT is made by a trained specialist, and that a detailed diagnosis is made before prescribing it.