Long-lasting effect of sublingual immunotherapy in children with asthma due to house dust mite: a 10-year prospective study

Allergen immunotherapy in asthma

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT), including SCIT and SLIT, is a treatment that involves the administration of allergens to which patients with allergic diseases have been sensitized. HDM-SCIT for asthma is indicated in cases of HDM-sensitized allergic asthma with normal lung function. HDM-SCIT improves asthma symptoms and AHR, and decreases the medication dose. Importantly, AIT can improve other allergic diseases complicated by asthma, such as allergic rhinitis, which can also contribute to the improvement of asthma symptoms. Several studies have suggested that HDM-SLIT also attenuates the risk of asthma exacerbations, and improves lung function in asthma cases with allergic rhinitis. Furthermore, AIT can modify the natural course of allergic diseases, including asthma. For example, the effects of AIT are maintained for at least several years after treatment discontinuation. AIT can prevent the onset of asthma when introduced in allergic rhinitis, and can also inhibit or reduce new allergen sensitizations. Recent data have suggested that AIT may suppress non-targeted allergen-induced immune responses in addition to targeted allergen-induced responses, and suppress infections of the lower respiratory tract by enhancing IFN responses.

Preventive allergen immunotherapy with inhalant allergens in children

The efficacy and safety of preventive allergen immunotherapy (pAIT) in children are currently under investigation. Here, we provide an overview of pAIT with respiratory allergens concerning the prevention of new sensitizations, allergic disease onset and progression as well as further immunomodulatory effects. Three databases were searched for clinical pAIT studies in children. Selected publications were reviewed for preventive outcomes according to prevention level (primary, secondary, and tertiary), allergen type, administration route, dose, and treatment duration. The primary prevention approach appears safe but showed no allergen-specific effect on new sensitizations. Secondary prevention seems feasible and may induce regulatory T cell-mediated immunotolerance. The number of studies at these prevention levels is limited. Tertiary prevention with grass and/or tree pollen-based pAIT has shown efficacy in preventing disease progression from allergic rhinitis/conjunctivitis to asthma. Data on tertiary pAIT with house dust mites and other allergen types are inconclusive. Subcutaneous and sublingual routes appear similarly effective, but head-to-head comparative paediatric studies are scarce. Additionally, there are fewer placebo-controlled studies. Nevertheless, immunomodulatory outcomes of pAIT are encouraging. Currently, limited but favourably suggestive evidence is available for preventing respiratory allergic diseases in children by pAIT. Primary and secondary prevention have potential and warrant further investigation through well-designed studies.

Potential Effects of AIT on Nonspecific Allergic Immune Responses or Symptoms

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a treatment in which clinically corresponding allergens are administered to patients with allergic diseases, either by subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), or by oral immunotherapy (OIT) in the case of food allergy. Since etiological allergens are administered to patients, AIT is presumed to modify mainly allergen-specific immune responses. In bronchial asthma, AIT with house dust mites (HDM) alleviates clinical symptoms, suppresses airway hyperresponsiveness, and reduces medication doses of HDM-sensitive asthmatics. Moreover, AIT can suppress the symptoms of other allergic diseases associated with asthma including allergic rhinitis. However, AIT sometimes reduces allergic symptoms not induced by the responsible allergens, such as non-targeted allergens, in clinical settings. Furthermore, AIT can suppress the spread of sensitization to new allergens that are not targeted allergens by AIT, suggesting the suppression of allergic immune responses in an allergen-nonspecific manner. In this review, the nonspecific suppression of allergic immune responses by AIT is discussed. AIT has been reported to increase regulatory T cells that produce IL-10, transforming growth factor-β, and IL-35, IL-10-producing regulatory B cells, and IL-10-producing innate lymphoid cells. These cells can suppress type-2 mediated immune responses mainly through the production of anti-inflammatory cytokines or a cell-cell contact mechanism, which may be involved in the nonspecific suppression of allergic immune responses by AIT.

Long-term efficacy of HDM-SCIT in pediatric and adult patients with allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is a well-validated and effective disease modification treatment for house dust mites (HDM)-induced allergic rhinitis (AR). Long-term post-treatment comparisons in children and adults treated with SCIT have rarely been published. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term efficacy of HDM-SCIT administered under a cluster schedule in children compared to adults.

METHODS

This was an open-design, observational, long-term clinical follow-up study on children and adults with perennial AR treated with HDM-SCIT. The follow-up consisted of a three-year treatment duration plus a post-treatment follow-up of over three years.

RESULTS

Patients in the pediatric (n = 58) and adult (n = 103) groups completed a post-SCIT follow-up of over three years. The total nasal symptom score (TNSS), combined symptom medication score (CSMS), and rhinoconjunctivitis quality-of-life questionnaire (RQLQ) score decreased significantly at T1 (three-year SCIT completed) and T2 (follow-up completed) in the pediatric and adult groups. In both groups, the improvement rate of TNSS (T0-T1) was moderately correlated with the baseline TNSS (r = 0.681, p < 0.001 and r = 0.477, p < 0.001 for children and adults, respectively). Only in the pediatric group, TNSS was significantly lower at T2 compared with that right after SCIT cessation (T1) (p = 0.030).

CONCLUSIONS

Children and adults with HDM-induced perennial AR could achieve a sustainable post-treatment efficacy for over three years (up to 13 years) following a three-year SCIT. Patients with relatively severe nasal symptoms at baseline may benefit more from SCIT. Children who have completed an adequate course of SCIT may gain further improvement in nasal symptoms after SCIT cessation.

Real-Life Effectiveness of Subcutaneous Immune Therapy with Carbamylated Monomeric Allergoids on Mite, Grass, and Pellitory Respiratory Allergy: A Retrospective Study

Background: real-life studies are encouraged to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of allergen immunotherapy (AIT). In this context, a retrospective cohort study was conducted to assess the effectiveness and safety of carbamylated monomeric allergoid subcutaneous immunotherapy (MA-SCIT), along with patient satisfaction. Methods: a total of 291 patients with rhinoconjunctivitis with or without asthma with inhalant (house dust mite, grass, and pellitory) allergies were enrolled in this study. Perceived efficacy and perceived satisfaction with MA-SCIT, symptom score by VAS, ARIA classification of rhinitis, drug consumption, number of asthma worsening episodes, and asthma symptom control were evaluated by questionnaires before, after one year, at the end of treatment, and after one or two years of MA-SCIT. Results: the overall symptom score significantly decreased over the years of MA-SCIT, irrespective of specific sensitization (p < 0.01). There was a substantial amelioration of rhinitis severity, with a significant reduction (p < 0.01) in drug use. A significant reduction was observed in the asthma symptom VAS score and asthma-worsening episodes requiring systemic steroids. None of the patients reported any severe adverse reactions. Finally, 90% of the patients reported full satisfaction with the treatment. Conclusions: the study showed that AIT with carbamylated monomeric allergoids of grass, pellitory, and mites was effective and well tolerated by patients.

Immune mechanisms induced by sublingual immunotherapy in allergic respiratory diseases

Allergic respiratory diseases (ARDs) are still a major burden on global public health. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is a mode of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) which involves administration of the allergen under the tongue, and benefits from tolerogenic properties of the oral mucosa. Studies revealed reduced levels of eosinophilia and eosinophil-dominated inflammation in airways of both animals and humans after SLIT. SLIT was also suggested to lower basophil responsiveness and innate lymphoid cell-2 function in blood samples collected from patients with ARD. Moreover, apart from shifting pathogenic type 2 (TH2) to a type 1 (TH1) and protective regulatory (Treg) polarization of helper T-cell immune response, antibody isotype switch from IgE to IgG1, IgG2, IgG4 and IgA was also reported in patients with ARD receiving SLIT. Today, the literature on SLIT-mediated activities is still scarce and more studies are required to further enlighten the mechanisms utilized by SLIT for the induction of tolerance. The aim of this review is to summarize the current knowledge about the immune-regulatory mechanisms induced by SLIT against ARDs.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of house dust mite allergen immunotherapy in children with allergic asthma

BACKGROUND

Cost-effectiveness studies evaluating allergen immunotherapy (AIT) in children are limited but needed to drive clinical and policy-making decisions such as reimbursement of new interventions. In this study, we compared the cost effectiveness of subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets to the standard of care (SOC) treatment in children with house dust mite-driven (HDM) allergic asthma.

METHODS

We developed a hypothetical Markov model based on the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) severity steps to compare the three strategies over a 10-year horizon divided by cycles of 6 months. SOC was used as a reference to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to assess models' uncertainty. Other scenarios were evaluated to strengthen the presentation of results.

RESULTS

The ICER for SCIT and SLIT tablets was 1281€ and 7717€, respectively. The cost-effectiveness threshold for Portugal was 18,482.80€; both treatment approaches were below this limit. The major contributors to these results were the AIT effects on reducing moderate and severe exacerbations and asthma controller medication. In the sensitivity analysis, SCIT revealed a higher probability of cost-effectiveness than SLIT. When including allergic rhinitis as comorbidity, ICER values reduced markedly, especially for SCIT intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

AIT was cost effective in children with HDM-driven allergic asthma, especially when given by the subcutaneous route. The high probability of cost effectiveness, especially for SCIT, may drive future policy decisions and AIT-prescribing habits. AIT adherence greatly influenced the results highlighting the value of implementing strategies to promote adherence rates.

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

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

Allergen Immunotherapy in Asthma

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a specific treatment involving the administration of relevant allergens to allergic patients, with subtypes including subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). In asthma, AIT using the house dust mite (HDM) alleviates clinical symptoms and decreases airway hyper responsiveness and medication dose. In addition, AIT can improve the natural course of asthma. For example, the effects of AIT can be preserved for at least a few years, even after ending treatment. AIT may increase the remission rate of asthma in children and suppress sensitization to new allergens. If AIT is introduced in pollinosis, AIT may prevent the development of asthma. Moreover, AIT can control other allergic diseases complicated by asthma, such as allergic rhinitis, which also improves the control of asthma. The indication of HDM-SCIT for asthma is mild-to-moderate HDM-sensitized allergic asthma in a patient with normal respiratory function. To date, HDM-SLIT is applicable in Japan for allergic rhinitis, not for asthma. However, the effect of SLIT on asthma has been confirmed internationally, and SLIT is available for asthma in Japan if allergic rhinitis is present as a complication.

Effectiveness of Sublingual Immunotherapy in the Treatment of HDM-Induced Nasobronchial Allergies: A 3-Year Randomized Case-Control Study From Kashmir

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease-modifying treatment for allergic disorders that induces immunological tolerance through administration of specific allergens. Studies on AIT for subcutaneous route are in abundance; however, the efficacy of AIT in tablet form through sublingual route has not been well elucidated. The present prospective, parallel-group, controlled study sought to compare the efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets with pharmacotherapy (PT) in 332 house dust mite (HDM)-specific allergic asthma and/or rhinitis patients over a period of 3 years. Patients were followed up for a 6-month run-in period and then randomly stratified as those who would receive SLIT, SLIT in addition to PT (SLIT+PT), and PT alone. AIT was administered in the form of sublingual tablets. Symptom and medication scores were measured every 3 months. In vitro evaluation of serum total and HDM specific immunoglobulin E (HDM sIgE) levels was carried out every 3 months, whereas in vivo skin prick test was performed annually for 3 years. Our study demonstrated sustained clinical improvement, reduction in inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dose and duration as well as prevention from development of neosensitization to other aero allergens in HDM-allergic asthmatics and/or rhinitis patients treated with 3 years SLIT. Despite a remarkable clinical improvement with AIT, we observed that SLIT did not significantly change the skin reactivity to HDM at 3 years and there was no significant change in the ratio of serum total and HDM sIgE. Given the immune and disease modifying effects of AIT in allergic diseases, the present study supports the notion of its sublingual mode being an effective long-term immunomodulator in HDM-sensitized nasobronchial allergies.

Allergic Rhinitis in Children and Adolescents

Allergic rhinitis is a common disorder that regularly occurs in children and adolescents. The disease is associated with other allergic diseases, such as asthma, and it carries a heavy burden, with effects on sleep, school performance, and quality of life. Classic symptoms include sneezing, rhinorrhea, nasal obstruction, and nasal itching. When the eyes are involved, the term allergic rhinoconjunctivitis is used. Triggers may include airborne pollens, molds, dust mites, and animals. Skin or blood allergy testing can be a useful diagnostic modality that may guide therapy. Immunotherapy can prevent the development of further allergic sensitizations as well as subsequent asthma.

Allergen immunotherapy for respiratory allergy: Quality appraisal of observational comparative effectiveness studies using the REal Life Evidence AssessmeNt Tool. An EAACI methodology committee analysis

Background

Observational comparative effectiveness studies in allergen immunotherapy (AIT) represent an important evidence source answering research questions that can be challenging to obtain from randomized controlled trials (RCTs), such as long-term benefits of AIT, the effects on asthma prevention and the onset of new allergen sensitizations. However, observational studies are prone to several sources of bias, which limit their reliability.The REal Life Evidence AssessmeNt Tool (RELEVANT) was recently developed to assist in quality appraisal of observational comparative research to enable identification of useful nonrandomized studies to be considered within guideline development.

Objective

To systematically appraise the quality of published observational comparative AIT studies using RELEVANT.

Methods

Observational studies comparing AIT to pharmacotherapy for respiratory allergies, assessing as outcome measures reduction of symptoms and/or medication use reduction, were retrieved by computerized bibliographic searches. According to RELEVANT, a failure to meet any one of primary items (background, design, measures, analysis, results, discussion/interpretation, and conflict of interest) represents a critical flaw, significantly undermining the validity of the study results.

Results

The 14 studies identified supported the benefit of AIT in real-life, which persists after treatment discontinuation. However, none of them met all the 7 primary RELEVANT criteria. The main defects were reported in the design (28.6% of studies), measures and analysis (64.3% of studies), and results (78.6% of studies) items, due to selection bias and lack of methods for adjusting controls. Half of the studies did not report on conflict of interest.

Conclusion

There is a need for more robust observational research in AIT. RELEVANT appears as an easy-to-use and sensitive tool for quality appraisal in AIT studies.

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.

Recent Advances in Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy as Treatment for Allergic Asthma: A Practical Overview

The Global Initiative for Asthma Report updated in 2019 stated that potential benefits of allergen immunotherapy (AIT), compared to pharmacological and avoidance options, must be weighed against the risk of adverse effects and the inconvenience and cost of the prolonged course of therapy in asthma. Thus, with the aim of clarifying some aspects with regard to the possible use of AIT in allergic asthma treatment armamentarium, a group of expert allergists from the Spanish Allergy and Clinical Immunology Scientific Society (SEAIC), particularly from the Immunotherapy and Asthma Interest Groups developed a frequently asked questions in clinical practice. This document updates relevant topics on the use of AIT in asthma and could facilitate physician clinical decisions and improve health outcomes for individual patients.

Role of Allergen Immunotherapy in Asthma Treatment and Asthma Development

Allergen immunotherapy may modify the natural course of allergic diseases and induce remission. It includes subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). For asthma, allergen immunotherapy using house dust mite (HDM) improves clinical symptoms and airway hyperresponsiveness and decreases drug requirements. Furthermore, it has been suggested that allergen immunotherapy also has the following effects: (1) the effect can be maintained for more than a year even if the treatment is terminated, (2) the remission rate of childhood asthma can be increased, (3) new allergen sensitization can be suppressed, and (4) asthma development can be prevented if allergen immunotherapy was performed in the case of pollinosis. Allergen immunotherapy differs from conventional drug therapy, in particular the effect of modifying the natural course of allergic diseases and the effect of controlling complicated allergic diseases such as rhinoconjunctivitis. The general indication for HDM-SCIT in asthma is HDM-sensitized atopic asthma with mild-to-moderate disease and normal respiratory function. HDM allergens should be involved in the pathogenesis of asthma, and a duration of illness of less than 10 years is desirable. HDM-SLIT is available for allergic rhinitis but not for asthma in Japan. However, as the efficacy of SLIT for asthma has been fully proven internationally, SLIT is also applied in asthmatics with complicated allergic rhinitis in Japan.

Predictors of Completion of Sublingual Immunotherapy

OBJECTIVES

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has emerged as an effective treatment alternative to subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) given its improved safety profile and more convenient dosing. However, SLIT still relies on daily dosing for many years to optimize effectiveness. This study sought to investigate factors that influence patient completion of SLIT.

METHODS

We performed an institutional retrospective review of patients who received SLIT (2008-2020). Completion was defined as completing at least 36 months of SLIT. Patient demographics and characteristics, including the number of allergens treated, history of asthma and sinus surgery, number of clinic visits, and total time undergoing SLIT, were documented. Multivariate models were used to analyze predictors of SLIT completion. Subgroup analysis was performed among pediatric patients and patients who discontinued SLIT.

RESULTS

Of the 404 total patients, 249 (61.6%) discontinued, 47 (11.6%) completed, and 108 (26.7%) were currently undergoing SLIT. The mean duration of therapy was 11.2 months for those who discontinued and 49.4 months for patients who completed SLIT. The odds of SLIT completion were twice as high with each additional clinic visit (P < .001), and twice as high when the dosage was increased during therapy (P = .06). Pediatric patients younger than age 12 with a history of asthma were over five times more likely to complete therapy (P = .045). Patients with more clinic visits (P < .001) and higher associated costs (P = .003) were less likely to be lost to follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Increasing the frequency of clinic visits, improving therapy availability, and mitigating concerns about clinical efficacy may increase patient completion of SLIT.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 Laryngoscope, 131:E2111-E2115, 2021.

Safety, Efficacy, and Preventive Role of Subcutaneous and Sublingual Allergen Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Pediatric Asthma

Allergen-specific immunotherapy is currently the only treatment with the potential to modify and prevent progression of allergic asthma in children. In clinical practice, it is available in two forms: subcutaneous immunotherapy and sublingual immunotherapy. Trials and meta-analyses showed both the safety and the short- and long-term benefits of allergen-specific immunotherapy in asthmatic children. However, its use and role in asthma remains controversial, since studies are largely heterogeneous. This is mainly due to the lack of consensus on the optimal primary outcome to be considered for clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of allergen-specific immunotherapy in asthma. Therefore, well-conducted researchis needed using standardized and validated tools to evaluate key outcomes in asthmatic children.

Sublingual immunotherapy for asthma

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a common long-term respiratory disease affecting approximately 300 million people worldwide. Approximately half of people with asthma have an important allergic component to their disease, which may provide an opportunity for targeted treatment. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) aims to reduce asthma symptoms by delivering increasing doses of an allergen (e.g. house dust mite, pollen extract) under the tongue to induce immune tolerance. Fifty-two studies were identified and synthesised in the original Cochrane Review in 2015, but questions remained about the safety and efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy for people with asthma.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy compared with placebo or standard care for adults and children with asthma.

SEARCH METHODS

The original searches for trials from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register (CAGR), ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, and reference lists of all primary studies and review articles found trials up to 25 March 2015. The most recent search for trials for the current update was conducted on 29 October 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel randomised controlled trials, irrespective of blinding or duration, that evaluated sublingual immunotherapy versus placebo or as an add-on to standard asthma management. We included both adults and children with asthma of any severity and with any allergen-sensitisation pattern. We included studies that recruited participants with asthma, rhinitis, or both, providing at least 80% of trial participants had a diagnosis of asthma. We selected outcomes to reflect recommended outcomes for asthma clinical trials and those most important to people with asthma. Primary outcomes were asthma exacerbations requiring a visit to the emergency department (ED) or admission to hospital, validated measures of quality of life, and all-cause serious adverse events (SAEs). Secondary outcomes were asthma symptom scores, exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids, response to provocation tests, and dose of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the search results for included trials, extracted numerical data, and assessed risk of bias, all of which were cross-checked for accuracy. Any disagreements were resolved by discussion. We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (ORs) or risk differences (RDs) using study participants as the unit of analysis; we analysed continuous data as mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) using random-effects models. We considered the strength of evidence for all primary and secondary outcomes using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty-six studies met the inclusion criteria for this update, including 52 studies from the original review. Most studies were double-blind and placebo-controlled, varied in duration from one day to three years, and recruited participants with mild or intermittent asthma, often with comorbid allergic rhinitis. Twenty-three studies recruited adults and teenagers; 31 recruited only children; three recruited both; and nine did not specify. The pattern of reporting and results remained largely unchanged from the original review despite 14 further studies and a 50% increase in participants studied (5077 to 7944). Reporting of primary efficacy outcomes to measure the impact of SLIT on asthma exacerbations and quality of life was infrequent, and selective reporting may have had a serious effect on the completeness of the evidence; 16 studies did not contribute any data, and a further six studies could only be included in a post hoc analysis of all adverse events. Allocation procedures were generally not well described; about a quarter of the studies were at high risk of performance or detection bias (or both); and participant attrition was high or unknown in around half of the studies. The primary outcome in most studies did not align with those of interest to the review (mostly asthma or rhinitis symptoms), and only two small studies reported our primary outcome of exacerbations requiring an ED or hospital visit; the pooled estimate from these studies suggests SLIT may reduce exacerbations compared with placebo or usual care, but the evidence is very uncertain (OR 0.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 1.20; n = 108; very low-certainty evidence). Nine studies reporting quality of life could not be combined in a meta-analysis and, whilst the direction of effect mostly favoured SLIT, the effects were often uncertain and small. SLIT likely does not increase SAEs compared with placebo or usual care, and analysis by risk difference suggests no more than 1 in 100 people taking SLIT will have a serious adverse event (RD -0.0004, 95% CI -0.0072 to 0.0064; participants = 4810; studies = 29; moderate-certainty evidence). Regarding secondary outcomes, asthma symptom and medication scores were mostly measured with non-validated scales, which precluded meaningful meta-analysis or interpretation, but there was a general trend of SLIT benefit over placebo. Changes in ICS use (MD -17.13 µg/d, 95% CI -61.19 to 26.93; low-certainty evidence), exacerbations requiring oral steroids (studies = 2; no events), and bronchial provocation (SMD 0.99, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.82; low-certainty evidence) were not often reported. Results were imprecise and included the possibility of important benefit or little effect and, in some cases, potential harm from SLIT. More people taking SLIT had adverse events of any kind compared with control (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.49 to 2.67; high-certainty evidence; participants = 4251; studies = 27), but events were usually reported to be transient and mild. Lack of data prevented most of the planned subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite continued study in the field, the evidence for important outcomes such as exacerbations and quality of life remains too limited to draw clinically useful conclusions about the efficacy of SLIT for people with asthma. Trials mostly recruited mixed populations with mild and intermittent asthma and/or rhinitis and focused on non-validated symptom and medication scores. The review findings suggest that SLIT may be a safe option for people with well-controlled mild-to-moderate asthma and rhinitis who are likely to be at low risk of serious harm, but the role of SLIT for people with uncontrolled asthma requires further evaluation.

Allergen Immunotherapy in Pediatric Asthma: A Pragmatic Point of View

To date, the only disease-modifying treatment strategy for allergic rhinitis and asthma is allergen immunotherapy (AIT). There is evidence that AIT improves allergic rhinitis and asthma, such as reducing symptom severity and medication use and improving of quality of life, with a long-lasting effect after the end of the course. The recent clinical trials evidenced AIT effectiveness and safety in allergic asthma. Consequently, the current version of the GINA (Global Initiative for Asthma) guidelines recommend AIT as an add-on therapy for asthma. There is also evidence that AIT may exert preventive activity on the possible progression from allergic rhinitis to asthma in children and the onset of new sensitizations. The present review provides a pragmatic summary of the clinical indications of AIT in pediatric asthma, including the immunological mechanisms, the predictive biomarkers, and the safety issues in clinical practice.

A Comparison of the Bacterial Nasal Microbiome in Allergic Rhinitis Patients Before and After Immunotherapy

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

Recent research has examined the nasal microbiome in rhinosinusitis and nondiseased states. Given immunologic alterations in allergic rhinitis (AR) and after allergen immunotherapy (IT), we evaluated the nasal microbiome in these conditions.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional comparison.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, nasal swabs for microbiome analysis were collected from three patient groups: IT-naïve AR patients, AR patients undergoing IT for greater than 12 months, and a control group without sinonasal inflammatory disease.

RESULTS

Nasal swabs were successfully collected for 14 IT-naïve AR patients, 20 post-IT patients, and 17 controls. The α diversity showed a statistical difference in evenness but not in richness amongst samples, whereas the β-diversity was significantly different between groups. Corynebacterium and Staphylococcus were the most prevalent bacteria across all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

β-diversity was found to be significantly different across the three groups, but the AR groups were found to be more similar to each other than to the controls. Although there is symptomatic improvement in the AR group undergoing IT, the microbiome does not appear to transition to a healthy microbiome composition.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 Laryngoscope, 2020.

Allergic Rhinitis in Children and Adolescents

Allergic rhinitis is a common disorder that regularly occurs in children and adolescents. The disease is associated with other allergic diseases, such as asthma, and it carries a heavy burden, with effects on sleep, school performance, and quality of life. Classic symptoms include sneezing, rhinorrhea, nasal obstruction, and nasal itching. When the eyes are involved, the term allergic rhinoconjunctivitis is used. Triggers may include airborne pollens, molds, dust mites, and animals. Skin or blood allergy testing can be a useful diagnostic modality that may guide therapy. Immunotherapy can prevent the development of further allergic sensitizations as well as subsequent asthma.

Options of immunotherapeutic treatments for children with asthma

Introduction: Asthma is the most common chronic disease in children. Avoiding triggers, and pharmacologic treatment with short acting beta-agonist, inhaler corticosteroids and anti-leukotriene are often enough to obtain symptoms control. Nevertheless, there is a subset of children with severe asthma and poor symptom control despite maximal therapy. In these patients, anti-IgE and anti-IL5 monoclonal antibodies are suggested as the fifth step of Global Initiative for Asthma guidelines. Area covered: Immunotherapeutic treatments are now suggested for asthma management. This article will discuss the available evidence on allergen immunotherapy and biologic drugs in pediatric asthma treatment. Expert opinion: Previously published studies demonstrated a good efficacy and safety profile of Allergen Immunotherapy in patients with mild-moderate asthma and sensitization to one main allergen. New understanding of mechanisms underlying severe asthma inflammation has allowed the identifications of specific biomarkers guiding the clinician in the choice of patient specific drug. Among the suggested immunotherapeutic options, omalizumab (blocking IgE) remains the first choice for atopic 'early onset' asthma in patients aged over 6 years. Instead, mepolizumab (blocking the IL5 ligand) should be considered for 'eosinophilic' asthma. Other biologic drugs are under consideration but data on the pediatric population are still lacking.

Novel therapeutic targets for allergic airway disease in children

The aim of precision medicine is setting up targeted therapies for selected patients that would ideally have high effectiveness and few side effects. This is made possible by targeted therapy drugs that selectively act on a specific pathway. Precision medicine is spreading to many medical specialties, and there is increasing interest in the context of allergic airway diseases, such as allergic rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, and asthma. This review is an update of new targets in the treatment of childhood allergic upper airway diseases and asthma, including the most recent biologic drugs that have already been licensed or are in the pipeline to be tested with children.

Long-Term Efficacy of Sublingual Mite Immunotherapy in Monosensitized and Polysensitized Children with Allergic Rhinitis: A 7-Year Prospective Study

BACKGROUND

Several foreign studies have shown long-term efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), but data on the long-term efficacy of SLIT in China are still lacking.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to prospectively evaluate the long-term efficacy of a 2-year SLIT with Dermatophagoides farinae(D. farinae) drops in mono- and polysensitized children with allergic rhinitis (AR).

METHODS

Eighty house dust mite (HDM)-sensitized children (aged 4-11 years) with AR were enrolled in this prospective study. There were 40 children in both the monosensitized (to HDM only) and polysensitized groups. Both groups were treated with standardized SLIT (D. farinae drops) for 2 years, combined with pharmacotherapy according to their individual requirements, and were followed up for 7 years. A combined symptom and medication score (CSMS) was assessed and compared between the 2 groups during and after SLIT. Safety was evaluated based on adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

There were 31 (77.5%) monosensitized and 29 (72.5%) polysensitized children who completed the study. After 2-year SLIT, the CSMS of 2 groups significantly decreased compared to baseline. The improvement persisted during the first 5 years at each visit, with a significant difference (all p < 0.01). In the monosensitized group, the CSMS significantly increased during the 6th and the 7th year compared to year 2 (both p < 0.05). Meanwhile, the polysensitized group showed a significant worsening of CSMS from the 5th to the 7th year (all p < 0.05). Furthermore, there was a statistical difference between the 2 groups in the 5th year of the study (p < 0.05). No severe AEs were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

The study confirmed the long-term effects which lasted for 7 years after 2-year SLIT in mono- and polysensitized children. Compared with the polysensitized children, the monosensitized children noted a more sustained benefit.

[Costs of allergic diseases and saving potential by allergen-specific immunotherapy : A personal assessment]

BACKGROUND

The burden of allergic diseases is of particular relevance for the economy and the social welfare and health insurance framework. Allergic rhinitis (AR) has a life-time prevalence of approximately 30% and is one of the most common chronic diseases with considerable socioeconomic impact thus leading to substantial direct, indirect and intangible costs. This article explores the common hypothesis that allergen-specific immunotherapy (ASIT) saves national economic expenses in the long term in comparison to other standard symptomatic treatment or no therapy.

METHODS

We conducted a selective search and analysis of the literature in PubMed and Medline including otherwise listed publications in German. Using a predefined model and data extrapolation over 9 years for data from different sources and short-term clinical studies we further discuss the problems and difficulties in analyzing heterogeneous datasets.

RESULTS

Using a health-economic model with currently available and accepted variables ASIT proves to be cost-effective in comparison to symptomatic treatment in allergic rhinitis; however, numerous parameters from other models have to be controlled, such as adherence to therapy and therapy discontinuation, heterogeneous costs for different treatment modalities, effect sizes with respect to symptoms including cross-influences with symptomatic rescue medication, duration of efficacy after treatment discontinuation and asthma protection.

DISCUSSION

The personal appraisal of the authors demonstrates not only the current knowledge but also the problems in health economical evaluation of ASIT in allergic diseases.

EAACI Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy: House dust mite-driven allergic asthma

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) has been in use for the treatment of allergic disease for more than 100 years. Asthma treatment relies mainly on corticosteroids and other controllers recommended to achieve and maintain asthma control, prevent exacerbations, and improve quality of life. AIT is underused in asthma, both in children and in adults. Notably, patients with allergic asthma not adequately controlled on pharmacotherapy (including biologics) represent an unmet health need. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology has developed a clinical practice guideline providing evidence-based recommendations for the use of house dust mites (HDM) AIT as add-on treatment for HDM-driven allergic asthma. This guideline was developed by a multi-disciplinary working group using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. HDM AIT was separately evaluated by route of administration and children and adults: subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual AIT (SLIT), drops, and tablets. Recommendations were formulated for each. The important prerequisites for successful treatment with HDM AIT are (a) selection of patients most likely to respond to AIT and (b) use of allergen extracts and desensitization protocols of proven efficacy. To date, only AIT with HDM SLIT-tablet has demonstrated a robust effect in adults for critical end points (exacerbations, asthma control, and safety). Thus, it is recommended as an add-on to regular asthma therapy for adults with controlled or partially controlled HDM-driven allergic asthma (conditional recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). HDM SCIT is recommended for adults and children, and SLIT drops are recommended for children with controlled HDM-driven allergic asthma as the add-on to regular asthma therapy to decrease symptoms and medication needs (conditional recommendation, low-quality evidence).

Sublingual immunotherapy of house dust mite respiratory allergy in China

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has been widely used for the treatment of allergic respiratory diseases, but many problems remain unsolved. Currently available data suggest that SLIT is very effective in children and adults with IgE-mediated respiratory diseases. Most allergists in China generally believe that SLIT is suitable for allergic rhinitis and asthma due to its safety and tolerability. SLIT for three years is suitable for patients to acquire stable therapeutic effects, and the efficacy of single-allergen SLIT for polysensitized patients has also been confirmed. Nevertheless, there are still several factors restricting its application in China, such as the uncertainty of its long-term effects and the prevention of new sensitizations onset, the risk of asthma attacks, the low public awareness of SLIT and poor compliance by patients. This is a narrative review of current evidence on SLIT coming from China.

Clinical Applications of Sublingual Immunotherapy

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is effective for the treatment of allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma in adults and children. In a limited number of studies, SLIT efficacy has been demonstrated for the treatment of food allergy. SLIT has a higher safety profile versus subcutaneous immunotherapy, although some systemic reactions have been reported. Appropriate patient selection, meticulous patient education, and routine follow-up are key for the safe and effective administration of SLIT. With organization and attention to detail, adding SLIT to one's practice can provide a highly valued patient service.

SLIT's Prevention of the Allergic March

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The progression of atopic disorders from atopic dermatitis in infants to allergic rhinitis and asthma in children, adolescents, and adults defines the allergy march. Allergen immunotherapy is the only causal treatment altering the immunological mechanism underlying the allergic diseases. The sublingual administration route is more acceptable than the subcutaneous one in pediatric age.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several studies show the efficacy and safety profile of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for the treatment of respiratory allergy diseases, but few data are available on its effect of primary and secondary prevention of allergic disease. The purpose of this manuscript is to review the latest studies addressing the effect of SLIT on the development of new sensitizations in not sensitized or already sensitized patients and progression of the allergy march.

Immunotherapy and Asthma in Children

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is still the only disease-modifying treatment strategy for IgE-mediated allergic diseases, with consolidated evidence both in adults and children. AIT is effective in determining clinical improvement of allergic rhinitis and asthma, such as reduced symptoms, medication use, and improvement of quality of life, with a long-lasting effect after cessation of treatment. Results from recent clinical studies have implemented the evidence of effectiveness and safety of allergen immunotherapy for the treatment of allergic asthma, so that the current asthma guidelines now recommend sublingual immunotherapy as an add-on therapy for asthma in adults and adolescents with house dust mite allergy, allergic rhinitis, and exacerbations despite low-to-moderate dose ICS, with forced expiratory volume in 1 second more than 70% predicted. AIT may also reduce the risk of progression from allergic rhinitis to asthma in children and prevent the onset of new sensitizations, thus representing a potentially preventive method of treatment. The aim of this review is to present an updated overview of the clinical indications of AIT, with particular reference to pediatric asthma, of the mechanisms of clinical and immunological tolerance to allergens, and of the potential biomarkers predicting clinical response.

EAACI guidelines on allergen immunotherapy: Prevention of allergy

Allergic diseases are common and frequently coexist. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a disease-modifying treatment for IgE-mediated allergic disease with effects beyond cessation of AIT that may include important preventive effects. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) has developed a clinical practice guideline to provide evidence-based recommendations for AIT for the prevention of (i) development of allergic comorbidities in those with established allergic diseases, (ii) development of first allergic condition, and (iii) allergic sensitization. This guideline has been developed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE II) framework, which involved a multidisciplinary expert working group, a systematic review of the underpinning evidence, and external peer-review of draft recommendations. Our key recommendation is that a 3-year course of subcutaneous or sublingual AIT can be recommended for children and adolescents with moderate-to-severe allergic rhinitis (AR) triggered by grass/birch pollen allergy to prevent asthma for up to 2 years post-AIT in addition to its sustained effect on AR symptoms and medication. Some trial data even suggest a preventive effect on asthma symptoms and medication more than 2 years post-AIT. We need more evidence concerning AIT for prevention in individuals with AR triggered by house dust mites or other allergens and for the prevention of allergic sensitization, the first allergic disease, or for the prevention of allergic comorbidities in those with other allergic conditions. Evidence for the preventive potential of AIT as disease-modifying treatment exists but there is an urgent need for more high-quality clinical trials.

Sublingual Immunotherapy Dosing Regimens: What Is Ideal?

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is a treatment for allergic respiratory diseases that has demonstrated efficacy and safety. Several formulations of SLIT are now available worldwide for treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR). Grass tablets containing 15 to 25 μg of group 5 major allergen reduced combined AR symptoms and medication use by 23% to 41% in 3 treatment years and 2 follow-up years. Ragweed pollen tablets (12 μg of Ambrosia artemisiifolia 1) and liquid extracts (50 μg of Ambrosia artemisiifolia 1) reduced combined AR symptoms and medication use by 26% and 43%, respectively. House dust mite tablets containing 300 index of reactivity (16 μg of Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus 1 and 68 μg of Dermatophagoides farinae 1) reduced AR symptoms by 17.9% and 17.0% in 1 treatment year and 1 follow-up year, respectively. A different house dust mite tablet (12 standardized quality house dust mite) was able to reduce the risk of asthma exacerbation compared with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.50-0.96). Most adverse events were local and mild to moderate in severity. For SLIT products reviewed herein, effective doses range from 1.12 to 84 μg of major allergen(s). However, allergen content is not uniformly standardized, can be expressed in arbitrary or proprietary units (depending on the manufacturer), and assays for determination of allergen content are highly variable. Thus, results from one study of a given product cannot be extrapolated to other products. Despite these limitations, this Clinical Management Review aims to provide practitioners with relevant information on the dosing of selected SLIT formulations in the treatment of allergic respiratory disease.

Plasticity of immune system vs. memory therapy IST

BACKGROUND

Pharmacotherapy and immunotherapy are the main treatments for allergic diseases to inhalants.

OBJECTIVE

This study investigates whether to repeat short cycles of immunotherapy after 3 or 5 years the from interruption of the first therapeutic cycle, lasting 3-4 years, to maintain immune memory in individuals subjected to IST.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We have compared two groups, one of 452 patients who, after the first treatment for 3-4 years of IST, performed a cycle of four months after three and 10 years from the suspension, and a second group of 126 individuals who have performed only the IST treatment for 3-4 years. The best results were obtained in the first group.

CONCLUSIONS

These results are due to the immune system's plasticity, a very important concept in clinical practice.

Preventive actions of allergen immunotherapy: the facts and the effects in search of evidence

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only treatment that works on the causes of allergy. Available AIT nowadays are subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for allergic rhinitis and asthma, while for allergy to Hymenoptera venom only subcutaneous route is recommended. A bulk of trials and meta-analyses demonstrated that efficacy and safety of AIT in decreasing allergic clinical symptoms and use of rescue medications, while its preventive capacity is yet under investigation. The most important of these effects is the prevention of potentially fatal anaphylactic reactions to Hymenoptera stings by venom immunotherapy (VIT). A certain number of studies thus far available showed that AIT, in both forms, is able to prevent the progress of allergic rhinitis into asthma and the development of new sensitizations. These effects should be related to the mechanisms of action of AIT. In fact, it has been demonstrated that both SCIT and SLIT are able to modify the allergen presentation by dendritic cells, with result in modification of the phenotype of allergen-specific T cells, switching from the typical of allergic inflammation Th2-type response to a Th1-type one. Also allergen-specific T regulatory (Treg) cells play a pivotal role by producing suppressive cytokines, such as IL-10 and TGF-beta. However, the only plain evidence of a preventive effect concerns VIT, while the other outcomes need to be furtherly investigated.

The effect of allergen immunotherapy in the onset of new sensitizations: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although the preventive efficacy of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) in the onset of new allergen sensitizations has been asserted by many reviews, position papers, and consensus conferences, the evidence available is from only 3 studies. The objective of this work was a systematic review to evaluate the preventive efficacy of AIT in the onset of new allergen sensitizations. The end-point was the risk difference (RD) in the onset of new allergen sensitizations between patients treated with AIT and pharmacotherapy.

METHODS

Computerized bibliographic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (until November 30th, 2016) were done. Random-effects and fixed-effects model meta-analyses were performed. Randomized controlled trials or observational studies comparing children treated with AIT with house dust mite (HDM) to subjects who did not receive AIT, with a long-term observation period (at least 3 years including treatment and follow-up) have been included.

RESULTS

Eight studies totaling 721 children (390 treated with AIT and 331 with pharmacotherapy) met the inclusion criteria. The risk of bias was high. Low evidence supports the conclusion that AIT prevents the onset of new allergen sensitizations, with 3 of 8 studies reporting a reduction in the onset of new sensitizations in patients treated with AIT vs pharmacotherapy. Our meta-analysis found no difference between AIT and pharmacotherapy, with high heterogeneity (RD, -0.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.31 to 0.11; p = 0.32; I² = 91.4%).

CONCLUSION

The data of this systematic review do not support a preventive effect in the onset of new allergen sensitizations, in children treated with AIT in comparison with those treated with pharmacotherapy.

Efficacy of allergen immunotherapy in reducing the likelihood of developing new allergen sensitizations: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Guidelines and position papers indicate that allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease-modifying treatment, including prevention of the onset of new allergen sensitizations. However, this preventive effect was shown by only a few observational studies. Our aim was to systematically review the efficacy of AIT in preventing the onset of new allergen sensitizations.

METHODS

Computerized bibliographic searches of Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (through June 2015) were supplemented with manual searches of reference lists. Observational studies or randomized controlled trials with a long-term observation period were included. Paired reviewers extracted data about study characteristics and assessed biases. The end point was the risk difference in the onset of new allergen sensitizations between patients treated with AIT and pharmacotherapy. The strength of the evidence was graded based on the risk of bias, consistency, and magnitude of effect, according to the GRADE Working Group's guide.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies (1049 children, 10 057 adults) met the inclusion criteria. The risk of bias was high in all but one study. Low evidence supports the position that AIT prevents the onset of new allergen sensitizations, with 10 of 18 studies reporting a reduction in the onset of new sensitizations in patients treated with AIT vs placebo. Small studies and studies with a shorter follow-up showed the highest benefit of AIT.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall evidence provides a low-grade level of the evidence supporting the efficacy of AIT in preventing the onset of new allergen sensitizations, but high-quality studies could change this estimate.

Japanese guidelines for adult asthma 2017

Adult bronchial asthma is characterized by chronic airway inflammation, and presents clinically with variable airway narrowing (wheezes and dyspnea) and cough. Long-standing asthma induces airway remodeling, leading to intractable asthma. The number of patients with asthma has increased; however, the number of patients who die of asthma has decreased (1.2 per 100,000 patients in 2015). The goal of asthma treatment is to enable patients with asthma to attain normal pulmonary function and lead a normal life, without any symptoms. A good relationship between physicians and patients is indispensable for appropriate treatment. Long-term management by therapeutic agents and elimination of the causes and risk factors of asthma are fundamental to its treatment. Four steps in pharmacotherapy differentiate between mild and intensive treatments; each step includes an appropriate daily dose of an inhaled corticosteroid, varying from low to high levels. Long-acting β₂-agonists, leukotriene receptor antagonists, sustained-release theophylline, and long-acting muscarinic antagonist are recommended as add-on drugs, while anti-immunoglobulin E antibody and oral steroids are considered for the most severe and persistent asthma related to allergic reactions. Bronchial thermoplasty has recently been developed for severe, persistent asthma, but its long-term efficacy is not known. Inhaled β₂-agonists, aminophylline, corticosteroids, adrenaline, oxygen therapy, and other approaches are used as needed during acute exacerbations, by choosing treatment steps for asthma in accordance with the severity of exacerbations. Allergic rhinitis, eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis, eosinophilic otitis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, aspirin-induced asthma, and pregnancy are also important issues that need to be considered in asthma therapy.

Allergen immunotherapy for the prevention of allergy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is a need to establish the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and safety of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) for the prevention of allergic disease.

METHODS

Two reviewers independently screened nine international biomedical databases. Studies were quantitatively synthesized using random-effects meta-analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 32 studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. Overall, meta-analysis found no conclusive evidence that AIT reduced the risk of developing a first allergic disease over the short term (RR = 0.30; 95% CI: 0.04-2.09) and no randomized controlled evidence was found in relation to its longer-term effects for this outcome. There was, however, a reduction in the short-term risk of those with allergic rhinitis developing asthma (RR = 0.40; 95% CI: 0.30-0.54), with this finding being robust to a pre-specified sensitivity analysis. We found inconclusive evidence that this benefit was maintained over the longer term: RR = 0.62; 95% CI: 0.31-1.23. There was evidence that the risk of new sensitization was reduced over the short term, but this was not confirmed in the sensitivity analysis: RR = 0.72; 95% CI: 0.24-2.18. There was no clear evidence of any longer-term reduction in the risk of sensitization: RR = 0.47; 95% CI: 0.08-2.77. AIT appeared to have an acceptable side effect profile.

CONCLUSIONS

AIT did not result in a statistically significant reduction in the risk of developing a first allergic disease. There was, however, evidence of a reduced short-term risk of developing asthma in those with allergic rhinitis, but it is unclear whether this benefit was maintained over the longer term. We are unable to comment on the cost-effectiveness of AIT.

Clinical practice recommendations for allergen-specific immunotherapy in children: the Italian consensus report

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is currently recognized as a clinically effective treatment for allergic diseases, with a unique disease-modifying effect. AIT was introduced in clinical practice one century ago, and performed in the early years with allergenic extracts of poor quality and definition. After the mechanism of allergic reaction were recognized, the practice of AIT was refined, leading to remarkable improvement in the efficacy and safety profile of the treatment. Currently AIT is accepted and routinely prescribed worldwide for respiratory allergies and hymenoptera venom allergy. Both the subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual (SLIT) routes of administration are used in the pediatric population.AIT is recommended in allergic rhinitis/conjunctivitis with/without allergic asthma, with an evidence of specific IgE-sensitization towards clinically relevant inhalant allergens. Long-term studies provided evidence that AIT can also prevent the onset of asthma and of new sensitizations. The favorable response to AIT is strictly linked to adherence to treatment, that lasts 3-5 years. Therefore, several factors should be carefully evaluated before starting this intervention, including the severity of symptoms, pharmacotherapy requirements and children and caregivers' preference and compliance.In recent years, there have been increasing interest in the role of AIT for the treatment of IgE-associated food allergy and extrinsic atopic dermatitis. A growing body of evidence shows that oral immunotherapy represents a promising treatment option for IgE-associated food allergy. On the contrary, there are still controversies on the effectiveness of AIT for patients with atopic dermatitis.This consensus document was promoted by the Italian Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology (SIAIP) to provide evidence-based recommendations on AIT in order to implement and optimize current prescription practices of this treatment for allergic children.

Critical appraisal of the clinical utility of sublingual immunotherapy in allergy

Since it was introduced by Noon in 1911, allergen-specific immunotherapy or desensitization has been widely prescribed in the management of allergic diseases. Aimed at the etiology, it represents the only effective treatment for allergy. The basic mechanisms of immunotherapy are becoming better understood and allow us to improve this technique in the future. The sublingual immunotherapy as an alternative to subcutaneous route has been widely studied. Several clinical trials confirmed that sublingual immunotherapy is efficient in reducing allergic respiratory symptoms. The sublingual immunotherapy reduces the risk of developing serious side effects due to desensitization. We performed a literature review in order to remind the mechanisms of action and to demonstrate efficacy and tolerability of the sublingual immunotherapy in the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma and its impact on the quality of life.

Evidence in immunotherapy for paediatric respiratory allergy: Advances and recommendations

Allergic respiratory diseases are major health problems in paediatric population due their high level of prevalence and chronicity, and to their relevance in the costs and quality of life. One of the most important risk factors for the development of airway diseases in children and adolescents is atopy. The mainstays for the treatment of these diseases are avoiding allergens, controlling symptoms, and preventing them through sustained desensitization by allergen immunotherapy (AIT). AIT is a treatment option that consists in the administration of increasing amounts of allergens to modify the biological response to them, inducing long-term tolerance even after treatment has ended. This treatment approach has shown to decrease symptoms and improve quality of life, becoming cost effective for a large number of patients. In addition, it is considered the only treatment that can influence the natural course of the disease by targeting the cause of the allergic inflammatory response. The aim of this publication is to reflect the advances of AIT in the diagnosis and treatment of allergic respiratory diseases in children and adolescents reviewing articles published since 2000, establishing evidence categories to support the strength of the recommendations based on evidence. The first part of the article covers the prerequisite issues to understand how AIT is effective, such as the correct etiologic and clinical diagnosis of allergic respiratory diseases. Following this, the article outlines the advancements in understanding the mechanisms by which AIT achieve immune tolerance to allergens. Administration routes, treatment regimens, dose and duration, efficacy, safety, and factors associated with adherence are also reviewed. Finally, the article reviews future advances in the research of AIT.

New pharmaceutical approaches for the treatment of food allergies

INTRODUCTION

Allergic diseases constitute one of the most common causes of chronic illness in developed countries. The main mechanism determining allergy is an imbalance between Th1 and Th2 response towards Th2.

AREAS COVERED

This review describes the mechanisms underlying the natural tolerance to food components and the development of an allergic response in sensitized individuals. Furthermore, therapeutic approaches proposed to manage these abnormal immunologic responses food are also presented and discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

In the past, management of food allergies has consisted of the education of patients to avoid the ingestion of the culprit food and to initiate the therapy (e.g. self-injectable epinephrine) in case of accidental ingestion. In recent years, sublingual/oral immunotherapies based on the continuous administration of small amounts of the allergen have been developed. However, the long periods of time needed to obtain significant desensitization and the generation of adverse effects, limit their use. In order to solve these drawbacks, strategies to induce tolerance are being studied, such as the use of either adjuvant immunotherapy in order to facilitate the reversion of the Th2 response towards Th1 or the use of monoclonal antibodies to block the main immunogenic elements.

Effect of asthma therapies on the natural course of asthma

OBJECTIVE

To provide an evidence-based review on the role of pharmacologic (inhaled corticosteroids, leukotriene receptor antagonists, biologic therapies, aeroallergen immunotherapy) and nonpharmacologic therapies (environmental modifications, microbiome) in secondary and tertiary asthma prevention.

DATA SOURCES

A PubMed search for English-language publications regarding asthma and secondary or tertiary prevention was performed. Some articles cited in selected studies were also considered for inclusion in this review.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Studies were included that were original research and specifically addressed the question of asthma prevention and use of pharmacologic or nonpharmacologic therapies. When possible, we selected the articles with the most robust level of evidence.

RESULTS

More than 100 articles were initially identified, 79 were reviewed in depth, and 60 were included in this review. Several studies suggest no disease-modifying effect for inhaled corticosteroids. Small studies suggest a tertiary preventive effect for leukotriene receptor antagonists. Biological therapies have somewhat conflicting evidence with a paucity of pediatric data, although some have tremendous promise. A role of allergen immunotherapy (specifically pollen) in secondary asthma prevention has been suggested, with no firm conclusions possible for tertiary prevention. One large trial suggests a role for environmental modifications in secondary asthma prevention, whereas the preponderance of evidence does not suggest a role in tertiary prevention. The microbiome is an active area of research that has promise for a disease-modifying effect.

CONCLUSION

Further work needs to be performed to allow physicians to intervene early and alter the natural course of asthma in children.