SQ house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy for the treatment of adults with house dust mite-induced allergic rhinitis

Clinical benefits with 300 IR HDM SLIT tablet in Europeans with house dust mite allergic rhinitis: Post hoc analysis of a large phase 3 trial

Background

House dust mite (HDM)-induced allergic rhinitis (AR) is a major cause of allergic respiratory disease. The efficacy and safety of the 300 IR HDM sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablet in patients with moderate-to-severe HDM-AR was confirmed in a large, international, phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Here, we analyzed the results in the European population.

Methods

Data from 91 European centers that participated in the international, double-blind, RCT (EudraCT 2014-004223-46, NCT02443805) with the 300 IR HDM SLIT tablet versus placebo over 12 months were analyzed post hoc. The treatment effect in European adults and adolescents was notably assessed through the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI)-recommended combined symptom and medication score (CSMS0-6, pre-defined endpoint) and the total combined rhinitis score (TCRS0-24, post hoc endpoint, also balanced) during the primary evaluation period (4 weeks at the end of treatment period) using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA).

Results

There were 818 patients who comprised the modified full analysis set in Europe. Over the primary period, the differences in CSMS0-6 and TCRS0-24 between the 300 IR and placebo groups were statistically significant (p < 0.0001): -0.32 (95%CI [-0.46; -0.17]) and -1.28 (95%CI [-1.63; -0.94]), respectively, with relative differences of -20.9% and -21.2%. All post hoc and the rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life endpoints were significantly improved with 300 IR versus placebo. The 300 IR HDM tablet was generally well tolerated.

Conclusion

This RCT sub-analysis confirmed the 300 IR HDM SLIT tablet is an effective and safe treatment for European adults and adolescents with HDM-AR with clinically meaningful benefits from the patients' perspective.

Trial registration

NCT02443805. Registered on April 29, 2015./EudraCT 2014-004223-46. Registered on September 16, 2015.

Efficacy and safety of sublingual versus subcutaneous immunotherapy in children with allergic rhinitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aim

To systematically compare the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in children with allergic rhinitis (AR).

Methods

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched from inception to March 2, 2023. Outcomes included symptom scores (SSs), medication scores (MSs), symptom and medication scores (SMSs), new sensitizations, development of asthma, improvement, and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). The quality of the included studies was assessed by the modified Jadad scale and Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). Meta-regression was carried out to explore the source of heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis was further conducted in terms of study design [randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies], allergen [house dust mites (HDMs), grass pollen], treatment duration (≥ 24, 12-23 or < 12 months), allergen immunotherapy (AIT) modality (drops or tablets), and AIT protocol [continuous, pre-seasonal, co-seasonal, or after the grass pollen season (GPS)]. Sensitivity analysis was conducted for all outcomes. A Bayesian framework and a Monte Carlo Markov Chain (MCMC) model were developed for indirect comparison.

Results

Totally 50 studies with 10813 AR children were included, with 4122 treated with SLIT, 1852 treated with SCIT, and 4839 treated with non-SLIT or non-SCIT therapy. For direct comparison, the SLIT group had a similar SS to the SCIT group [pooled standardized mean difference (SMD): 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.46, 1.28, P = 0.353]. Comparable MSs were observed in the SLIT and SCIT groups (pooled SMD: 0.82, 95%CI: -0.88, 2.53, P = 0.344). For indirect comparison, no significant differences were found in SSs (pooled SMD: 1.20, 95% credibility interval (CrI): -1.70, 4.10), MSs (pooled SMD: 0.57, 95%CrI: -1.20, 2.30), SMSs (pooled SMD: 1.80, 95%CrI: -0.005, 3.60), new sensitizations [pooled relative risk (RR): 0.34, 95%CrI: 0.03, 3.58], and development of asthma (pooled RR: 0.68, 95%CrI: 0.01, 26.33) between the SLIT and SCIT groups; the SLIT group illustrated a significantly lower incidence of TRAEs than the SCIT group (pooled RR: 0.17, 95%CrI: 0.11, 0.26).

Conclusion

Considering both efficacy and safety, SLIT might be a more favorable AIT than SCIT in the treatment of pediatric AR, which may serve as a decision-making reference for clinicians.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO (CRD42023460693).

YouTube as a source of (mis)information on allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a very common chronic condition that affects nearly one-quarter of the adult population worldwide. The optimal management of AR includes useful information on the several aspects of the condition. Social media and online platforms are increasingly being used to obtain health related information.

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to examine and evaluate the popularity and usefulness of YouTube videos on allergic rhinitis.

METHODS

Out of 225 screened videos, 86 met the inclusion criteria. A scoring scheme was designed to evaluate and rate the content of the extracted data. Data on views, likes, dislikes, and comments were extracted, and data on source of uploader, duration and content quality were recorded.

RESULTS

43% of the videos were classified as useful, 36 % as misleading, and 21 % as neither useful nor misleading. Although professional health care providers uploaded two-thirds of the videos, they accounted for only 24.4% of the total videos. Videos uploaded by TV shows and YouTube channels had by far the most user interaction, accounting for 66.9% of the total likes, 66.8 % of the total dislikes, and 54.0 % of the total comments. This source alone accounted for 23.4% of the total views, but for 48% of the total misleading videos.

CONCLUSION

The usefulness of YouTube videos on allergic rhinitis is varying and less than half of the videos provided useful information. If the proper conditions are met, selected YouTube videos on allergic rhinitis can be used as a source of information for patient education.

Treatment Response Biomarkers in Asthma and COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma are two of the most common chronic diseases worldwide. Both diseases are heterogenous and complex, and despite their similarities, they differ in terms of pathophysiological and immunological mechanisms. Mounting evidence supports the presence of several phenotypes with various responses to treatment. A systematic and thorough assessment concerning the diagnosis of both asthma and COPD is crucial to the clinical management of the disease. The identification of different biomarkers can facilitate targeted treatment and monitoring. Thanks to the presence of numerous immunological studies, our understanding of asthma phenotypes and mechanisms of disease has increased markedly in the last decade, and several treatments with monoclonal antibodies are available. There are compelling data that link eosinophilia with an increased risk of COPD exacerbations but a greater treatment response and lower all-cause mortality. Eosinophilia can be considered as a treatable trait, and the initiation of inhaled corticosteroid in COPD patients with eosinophilia is supported in many studies. In spite of advances in our understanding of both asthma and COPD in terms pathophysiology, disease mechanisms, biomarkers, and response to treatment, many uncertainties in the management of obstructive airways exist.

Circulating MIF Associated With Disease Severity and Clinical Response of Sublingual Immunotherapy in House Dust Mite-Induced Allergic Rhinitis

Background: Macrophage migration inhibitory factor (MIF) is described as a pro-inflammatory cytokine involved in many inflammatory and allergic disorders, but the role of MIF in allergic rhinitis (AR) remains poorly clarified. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between circulating MIF levels and house dust mite (HDM)-induced AR, and evaluate MIF as a potential biomarker in reflecting disease severity and predicting the clinical response of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in HDM-induced AR patients.

Methods: In this study, we enrolled 160 persistent HDM-induced AR patients (AR group), including 48 mild AR patients (MAR group) and 112 moderate–severe AR patients (MSAR group), and 77 healthy controls (HC group). Circulating levels of MIF were measured by ELISA, and the relationship between MIF concentrations and disease severity was assessed. In the MSAR group, 106 patients were assigned to receive SLIT for 3 years. At the end of the study, patients were categorized into good response group and poor response group, and associations between clinical variables or biomarkers and clinical response were analyzed by the multivariate regression analysis.

Results: The concentrations of serum MIF were significantly higher in AR patients than in HCs, especially in those with MSAR. Moreover, circulating MIF levels were positively correlated with TNSS, VAS, serum HDM–specific IgE, total IgE, blood eosinophil count, and blood eosinophil percentage (all p < 0.05). Eighty MSAR patients finally completed SLIT, 45 patients obtained good response, and 35 patients resulted in poor response. The serum levels of MIF were significantly lower in the good-response group than in the poor-response group (p < 0.001). The receiver operating characteristic analysis for MIF showed good accuracy for predicting clinical response of SLIT (area under the curve = 0.877, p < 0.001). The multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that serum MIF was an independent factor for SLIT responsiveness.

Conclusion: Serum MIF appeared to be an important biological indicator in reflecting disease severity and an independent predictor for clinical responsiveness of SLIT in HDM-induced AR patients.