Efficacy and safety of oral immunotherapy with short ragweed extract

Immunology of allergen immunotherapy

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease-modifying therapy for allergic disease. Through repeated inoculations of low doses of allergen-either as whole proteins or peptides-patients can achieve a homeostatic balance between inflammatory effectors induced and/or associated with allergen contact, and mediators of immunologic non-responsiveness, potentially leading to sustained clinical improvements. AIT for airborne/respiratory tract allergens and insect venoms have traditionally been supplied subcutaneously, but other routes and modalities of administration can also be effective. Despite differences of allergen administration, there are some similarities of immunologic responses across platforms, with a general theme involving the restructuring and polarization of adaptive and innate immune effector cells. Here we review the immunology of AIT across various delivery platforms, including subcutaneous, sublingual, epicutaneous, intradermal, and intralymphatic approaches, emphasizing shared mechanisms associated with achieving immunologic non-responsiveness to allergen.

International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Critical examination of the quality and validity of available allergic rhinitis (AR) literature is necessary to improve understanding and to appropriately translate this knowledge to clinical care of the AR patient. To evaluate the existing AR literature, international multidisciplinary experts with an interest in AR have produced the International Consensus statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR:AR).

METHODS

Using previously described methodology, specific topics were developed relating to AR. Each topic was assigned a literature review, evidence-based review (EBR), or evidence-based review with recommendations (EBRR) format as dictated by available evidence and purpose within the ICAR:AR document. Following iterative reviews of each topic, the ICAR:AR document was synthesized and reviewed by all authors for consensus.

RESULTS

The ICAR:AR document addresses over 100 individual topics related to AR, including diagnosis, pathophysiology, epidemiology, disease burden, risk factors for the development of AR, allergy testing modalities, treatment, and other conditions/comorbidities associated with AR.

CONCLUSION

This critical review of the AR literature has identified several strengths; providers can be confident that treatment decisions are supported by rigorous studies. However, there are also substantial gaps in the AR literature. These knowledge gaps should be viewed as opportunities for improvement, as often the things that we teach and the medicine that we practice are not based on the best quality evidence. This document aims to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the AR literature to identify areas for future AR research and improved understanding.

Allergen immunotherapy: routes, safety, efficacy, and mode of action

Allergic rhinitis, allergic conjunctivitis, and allergic asthma have been steadily increasing in prevalence in recent years. These allergic diseases have a major impact on quality of life and are a major economic burden in the US. Although allergen avoidance and pharmacotherapy are currently the mainstays of therapy, they are not always successful in treating patients' symptoms effectively. If a patient fails allergen avoidance and medical therapy, immunotherapy may be indicated. Furthermore, immunotherapy is the only therapy that may change the course of the disease and induce long-term remission. Though subcutaneous administration has been the standard route for immunotherapy for many decades, there are several other routes of administration that have been and are currently being studied. The goal of utilizing alternative routes of immunotherapy is to improve safety without decreasing the efficacy of treatment. This paper will review the novel routes of immunotherapy, including sublingual, oral, local nasal, epicutaneous, and intralymphatic.

Treatment of congestion in upper respiratory diseases

Congestion, as a symptom of upper respiratory tract diseases including seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis, acute and chronic rhinosinusitis, and nasal polyposis, is principally caused by mucosal inflammation. Though effective pharmacotherapy options exist, no agent is universally efficacious; therapeutic decisions must account for individual patient preferences. Oral H₁-antihistamines, though effective for the common symptoms of allergic rhinitis, have modest decongestant action, as do leukotriene receptor antagonists. Intranasal antihistamines appear to improve congestion better than oral forms. Topical decongestants reduce congestion associated with allergic rhinitis, but local adverse effects make them unsuitable for long-term use. Oral decongestants show some efficacy against congestion in allergic rhinitis and the common cold, and can be combined with oral antihistamines. Intranasal corticosteroids have broad anti-inflammatory activities, are the most potent long-term pharmacologic treatment of congestion associated with allergic rhinitis, and show some congestion relief in rhinosinusitis and nasal polyposis. Immunotherapy and surgery may be used in some cases refractory to pharmacotherapy. Steps in congestion management include (1) diagnosis of the cause(s), (2) patient education and monitoring, (3) avoidance of environmental triggers where possible, (4) pharmacotherapy, and (5) immunotherapy (for patients with allergic rhinitis) or surgery for patients whose condition is otherwise uncontrolled.

Sublingual immunotherapy: a novel, albeit not so new, immunotherapy treatment modality

BACKGROUND

Specific allergy immunotherapy traditionally has been thought of as subcutaneous injection immunotherapy (SCIT). There also are noninjection routes for the administration of immunotherapy. The best-known and studied of these noninjection routes is the sublingual route, usually known as sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). SLIT has been in use for many decades; however, to this date, it is not well known to the majority of allergy practitioners in this country. The purpose of this study is to help change this perception so that SLIT eventually can be considered one more tool in the allergist's armamentarium.

METHODS

A literature review was performed. It included articles from the early American clinicians and present publications that are mostly of European origin.

RESULTS

It will become clear to the reader that the key features of SLIT are its efficacy, great safety, and simplicity of administration.

CONCLUSION

SLIT is a safe treatment modality that should be considered as a useful additional tool in the therapeutic armamentarium.

Gantrez® AN nanoparticles as an adjuvant for oral immunotherapy with allergens

The aim of this study was to investigate the adjuvant properties of oral-administered Gantrez AN nanoparticles with ovalbumin (as allergen model) and, in some cases, lipopolysaccharide of Brucella ovis as immunomodulator. For this purpose, BALB/c mice were administered by oral gavage with OVA nanoparticles and both Th1 and Th2 markers (IgG2a and IgG1, respectively) were enhanced. On the other hand, these carriers administered by oral route were able to protect a model of sensitized mice to ovalbumin from anaphylactic shock. These results are highly suggestive for the valuable use of Gantrez nanoparticles in oral immunotherapy with allergens.

Multiple daily administrations of low-dose sublingual immunotherapy in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

BACKGROUND

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is an efficacious treatment for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether the number of daily administrations of SLIT can affect its efficacy.

METHODS

In an open study, 64 patients with allergic seasonal rhinoconjunctivitis to grass or birch pollens were assigned to the following 2-year daily treatment schedules: "3-3" group, 1 drop 3 times daily for 2 years; "2-3" group, 1 drop twice daily in year 1 and 1 drop 3 times daily in year 2; "1-3" group, 1 drop once daily in year 1 and 1 drop 3 times daily in year 2; and control group, no treatment. One fifth of the allergen concentration recommended by the manufacturer as maintenance treatment was used throughout the study. Patients were monitored for skin reactivity to the allergen used for SLIT using an end point dilution technique and for drug use.

RESULTS

No treatment-related adverse effects were observed. Skin reactivity to allergen decreased compared with controls in the first treatment year only in the "3-3" group and in all treated patients in year 2. Drug use decreased in the first treatment year in the "3-3" and "2-3" groups vs controls. This outcome extended to "1-3" patients in treatment year 2. Antihistamine use decreased significantly compared with baseline in year 1 in "3-3" and "2-3" patients and in all treated patients in year 2. No changes were observed in controls.

CONCLUSION

The number of daily administrations seems to correlate with the efficacy of SLIT.

Novel approaches to vaccine delivery

Although the currently available vaccines represent an outstanding success story in modern medicine and have had a dramatic effect on morbidity and mortality worldwide, it is clear that improvements are required in the current vaccine delivery technologies. Improvements are required to enable the successful development of vaccines against infectious diseases that have so far proven difficult to control with conventional approaches. Improvements may include the addition of novel injectable adjuvants or the use of novel routes of delivery, including mucosal immunization. Mucosal delivery may be required to provide protection against pathogens that infect at mucosal sites, including sexually transmitted diseases. Alternatively, novel approaches to delivery, including mucosal administration, may be used to improve compliance for existing vaccines. Of particular interest for safer mass immunization campaigns are needle-free delivery devices, which would avoid problems due to needle re-use in many parts of the world and would avoid needle-stick injuries.

Review of novel particulate antigen delivery systems with special focus on treatment of type I allergy

For the treatment of infectious diseases, cancer and allergy, the directed induction of an appropriate immune response is the ultimate goal. Therefore, with the development of pure, often very small proteins, peptides or DNA by molecular biology techniques, the research for suitable adjuvants or delivery systems became increasingly important. Particle formulations are made of a variety of materials, including lipids, proteins or amino acids, polysaccharides, polyacrylic substances or organic acids. Microparticles serve as vehicles and provide a depot for the entrapped or coupled antigen. The release occurs in a pulsatile or continuous manner, a feature, which is well controllable for many particulate systems. Particles attract antigen presenting cells to the administration site, thereby guaranteeing the efficient presentation of the antigen to the immune system. Importantly, particles also protect the entrapped substance. This is especially necessary after oral application to avoid gastric or tryptic breakdown. In this article, the design and construction of different antigen delivery systems and their immune effects, with special focus on the suitability for allergy treatment, are discussed.

Effect of Oral Immunotherapy on Nasal Blockage in Experimental Allergic Rhinitis

We previously reported that when Japanese cedar pollen was prophylactically p.o. administered before a sensitization stage in a guinea-pig model of allergic rhinitis, pollen-induced nasal blockage was suppressed. In this study, we evaluated whether the oral immunotherapy is also effective when the pollen extract was administered starting from the day when the nasal blockage was clearly induced and whether the effectiveness continued after cessation of the immunotherapy. Sensitized animals were repeatedly challenged by pollen inhalation once every week. After the 7th challenge, the extract was orally administered twice a week until the 30th challenge. At the 11th challenge, the oral immunotherapy showed inhibition of the biphasic nasal blockage. The effectiveness was consistently observed during the immunotherapy until the 30th challenge. Furthermore, the increased nasal responsiveness to intranasal application of leukotriene D4 was markedly suppressed by the immunotherapy. Interestingly, even after cessation of the therapy, inhibition of the nasal blockage was sustained for more than 2 months. Nevertheless, neither sneezing nor antigen-specific IgE antibody production was substantially influenced by the immunotherapy. In conclusion, Oral immunotherapy may be clinically useful for allergic nasal blockage. Mechanisms underlying the effectiveness may be associated with the hyporesponsiveness of the nasal mucosa to released mediators.

Sublingual and oral immunotherapy

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is a viable alternative to the subcutaneous route for the treatment of respiratory allergy, whereas the pure oral route has been abandoned because of its lack of efficacy. The main distinctive feature of SLIT is its optimal safety profile, which has been demonstrated in adults and children. The indications for SLIT are similar to those for the subcutaneous route. A long-lasting effect has been demonstrated for the sublingual route, but data are needed to determine the optimal dose and the preventive effect in asthma.

Canadian trial of sublingual swallow immunotherapy for ragweed rhinoconjunctivitis

BACKGROUND

Sublingual swallow immunotherapy has been increasingly recognized as a safe and efficacious alternative to parenteral specific immunotherapy.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the safety and efficacy of sublingual swallow immunotherapy ragweed allergen extract for rhinoconjunctivitis treatment starting just before and continuing through the ragweed pollen season.

METHODS

This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was performed in children and adults with a documented history of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis during ragweed season at 9 Canadian allergy centers. Active treatment was standardized extract of ragweed allergen administered as sublingual swallow drops at increasing doses starting shortly before the pollen season and maintenance doses continued daily during the season. Primary efficacy variables were symptom and medication scores, and secondary variables included global evaluation of efficacy and immunologic measurements.

RESULTS

Eighty-three patients were included in the safety analysis; 76 patients were included in the intent-to-treat analysis. Nine placebo recipients and 1 treatment recipient withdrew for lack of efficacy (P = .004). Nine patients in the treatment group withdrew because of adverse events, none serious (P = .003). Investigator evaluation of efficacy showed that significantly more patients improved and fewer deteriorated in the treatment group vs the placebo group (P = .047). Ragweed IgE and IgG4 levels increased significantly in treatment recipients vs placebo users (P < .001). Sneezing and nasal pruritus approached significant improvement in the treatment group vs the placebo group (P = .09 and .06, respectively). Quebec City experienced low pollen counts. Excluding Quebec City, significant improvement was seen for these 2 symptoms (P = .04).

CONCLUSION

Sublingual swallow immunotherapy seems to be safe and efficacious for ragweed rhinoconjunctivitis even when started immediately before the ragweed pollen season.

Oral and sublingual immunotherapy in paediatric patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Sublingual immunotherapy is becoming a routine treatment for respiratory allergy in several countries and it has been validated in international documents. This article will review the available literature on oral and sublingual immunotherapy, discussing the possible use of sublingual immunotherapy in paediatric patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

As oral immunotherapy was found to be poorly effective in clinical trials, its use has been discontinued. In contrast, several controlled studies have shown the efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy in children with allergic asthma and rhinitis, and a postmarketing survey has confirmed its safety. Moreover, new data on the long-lasting efficacy of this treatment and on the absence of local immunological effects have recently been published.

SUMMARY

The clinical efficacy and the optimal safety profile of sublingual immunotherapy make it a good candidate for treating respiratory allergy in children. Some aspects, such as the dose-response relationship and preventive effect, will be a research challenge for future developments and better definition of indications in children.

Noninjection routes for immunotherapy

Allergen specific immunotherapy, together with drugs and allergen avoidance, is a cornerstone in the management of respiratory allergy. The traditional subcutaneous route is burdened with the risk of severe adverse events; therefore, safer routes of administration (noninjection or local routes) have been investigated and developed. Controlled trials failed to demonstrate the clinical efficacy and the safety of oral and bronchial administration, and these routes have been abandoned. Local nasal immunotherapy proved effective and safe in 17 of 18 controlled trials; thus it is considered a viable route of immunotherapy. Nevertheless, nasal immunotherapy is effective in rhinitis only and requires a particular administration technique; therefore its use is slowly declining. The sublingual route is supported by numerous controlled trials showing its efficacy in asthma and rhinitis in adults and children. The safety profile, assessed in clinical trials and postmarketing surveillance studies, is satisfactory; the most frequent side effects are gastrointestinal complaints, which can be easily managed by proper dose adjusting. Sublingual immunotherapy is now accepted by the World Health Organization as a valid alternative to the subcutaneous route also in children. Although the long-lasting efficacy has been recently documented for the sublingual route, several points still need to be elucidated, including mechanisms of action, optimal dosage, cost-effectiveness, and adherence.