Effects of immunotherapy with a purified standardized allergen preparation of Dermatophagoides farinae in adults with perennial allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

Presentation, diagnosis, and the role of subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy in the management of ocular allergy

Allergic eye disease or ocular allergy is a debilitating condition with a significant impact on quality of life and productivity. As atopy continues to be on the rise, primary care providers are likely to encounter increasing numbers of patients with allergic eye disease. This review outlines the classification and pathophysiology of allergic eye disease and its clinical presentation. This paper does not detail traditional first-line therapies of allergic eye disease but describes the interdisciplinary management between the eye-care provider and allergist. It is recommended that patients with ongoing signs and symptoms of ocular allergy despite first-line therapies be referred for allergen immunotherapy, as it is highly effective for treatment of allergic eye disease. Through induction of immune tolerance, allergen immunotherapy is a disease-modifying therapy that can result in long-term improvement of ocular allergy. A thorough literature review was conducted on the efficacy and safety of allergen immunotherapy, including subcutaneous immunotherapy and sublingual immunotherapy, and its role in allergic eye disease.

ICON: Diagnosis and management of allergic conjunctivitis

Ocular allergy (OA), interchangeably known as allergic conjunctivitis, is a common immunological hypersensitivity disorder affecting up to 40% of the population. Ocular allergy has been increasing in frequency, with symptoms of itching, redness, and swelling that significantly impacts an individual's quality of life (QOL). Ocular allergy is an often underdiagnosed and undertreated health problem, because only 10% of patients with OA symptoms seek medical attention, whereas most patients manage with over-the-counter medications and complementary nonpharmacological remedies. The clinical course, duration, severity, and co-morbidities are varied and depend, in part, on the specific ocular tissues that are affected and on immunologic mechanism(s) involved, both local and systemic. It is frequently associated with allergic rhinitis (commonly recognized as allergic rhino conjunctivitis), and with other allergic comorbidities. The predominance of self-management increases the risk of suboptimal therapy that leads to recurrent exacerbations and the potential for development of more chronic conditions that can lead to corneal complications and interference with the visual axis. Multiple, often co-existing causes are seen, and a broad differential diagnosis for OA, increasing the difficulty of arriving at the correct diagnosis(es). Ocular allergy commonly overlaps with other anterior ocular disease disorders, including infectious disorders and dry eye syndromes. Therefore, successful management includes overcoming the challenges of underdiagnosis and even misdiagnosis by a better understanding of the subtleties of an in-depth patient history, ophthalmologic examination techniques, and diagnostic procedures, which are of paramount importance in making an accurate diagnosis of OA. Appropriate cross-referral between specialists (allergists and eyecare specialists) would maximize patient care and outcomes. This would significantly improve OA management and overcome the unmet needs in global health.

Reliability of a New Symptom Score in a Titrated Quantitative Conjunctival Provocation Test Supported by an Objective Photodocumentation

BACKGROUND

Allergen provocation tests are useful methods for proving the clinical relevance of an allergen-specific sensitization. Among these methods, the conjunctival provocation test (CPT) represents an easy-to-use tool. However, its readout parameters have not yet been internationally standardized or validated. Photodocumentation has been shown as a good option for objectifying a CPT reaction, supporting the local investigator assessment. Based on test-retest reliability of the score and an objective digital photoanalysis of the conjunctival redness, this study aimed to prove the reproducibility of a new CPT scoring system for use in clinical trials (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02690740).

METHODS

A titrated quantitative CPT was conducted outside of the pollen season in a final cohort of 23 adult patients with birch or grass pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. Conjunctival symptoms were analyzed using a standardized symptom score. Conjunctival redness was also evaluated by an external observer and correlated with a digital photoanalysis using MATLAB software.

RESULTS

A test-retest correlation of 0.6 (p < 0.01) was found for the symptom score results. Likewise, a correlation of 0.65 (p < 0.01) was observed in the digital photoanalysis. The total symptom score showed a decrease in the mean value of 0.48 score points in the retest.

CONCLUSIONS

This study reveals both a valuable test-retest correlation of the proposed score as well as a good correlation of eye redness with the (objective) photodocumentation. Based on our results, we can recommend the use of this scoring system as a valuable clinical protocol for future clinical trials.

Changes in skin reactivity and associated factors in patients sensitized to house dust mites after 1 year of allergen-specific immunotherapy

Background

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (SIT) can significantly improve symptoms and reduce the need for symptomatic medication.

Objective

The aim of this study was to investigate changes in skin reactivity to house dust mites (HDMs) as an immunologic response and associated factors after 1 year of immunotherapy.

Methods

A total of 80 patients with allergic airway diseases who received subcutaneous SIT with HDMs from 2009 to 2014 were evaluated. The investigated parameters were basic demographic characteristics, skin reactivity and specific IgE for HDM, serum total IgE level, blood eosinophil counts, and medication score.

Results

The mean levels of skin reactivity to HDMs, blood eosinophil counts, and medication scores after 1 year were significantly reduced from baseline. In univariate comparison of the changes in skin reactivity to HDMs, age ≤30 years, HDMs only as target of immunotherapy, and high initial skin reactivity (≥2) to HDMs were significantly associated with the reduction in skin test reactivity. In multivariate analysis, high initial skin reactivity and HDMs only as target allergens were significantly associated with changes in skin reactivity to HDMs. In the receiver operating characteristic curve of the initial mean skin reactivity to HDMs for more than 50% reduction, the optimal cutoff value was 2.14.

Conclusion

This study showed significant reductions in allergen skin reactivity to HDMs after 1 year of immunotherapy in patients sensitized to HDMs. The extent of initial allergen skin reactivity and only HDMs as target allergen were important predictive factors for changes in skin reactivity.

Open-label parallel dose tolerability study of three subcutaneous immunotherapy regimens in house dust mite allergic patients

Background

The current maintenance dose (10,000 AUeq/monthly) of a subcutaneous allergoid for house dust mite (HDM) immunotherapy has previously shown significant clinical efficacy in patients with HDM induced allergic rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis. In order to comply with the 2009 EMA guidelines on immunotherapy products, a study was conducted to evaluate the safety, tolerability and short-term treatment effects of up-dosing regimens with high doses (up to 40,000 AUeq) of allergoid HDM immunotherapy.

Methods

In total 48 patients with HDM-allergic rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis (29 M/19 F; 18–53 years) were included and enrolled into one of three up-dosing regimens (1:4:4): 1) a regular regimen with up-dosing to 40,000 AUeq followed by two maintenance doses (total duration 17 weeks), 2) an intermediate regimen (14 weeks) or 3) a fast regimen (11 weeks). Safety and tolerability were evaluated by monitoring of early and late local reactions and systemic reactions. In addition, short-term effects were assessed by conjunctival provocation test (CPT) and levels of serum allergen-specific IgE, IgG and IgG₄.

Results

Thirty-nine patients completed the study according to protocol. No early local reactions occurred. Late local reactions (LLR) were observed in 12% of the injections. In total, 31 systemic reactions, all grade 1, were reported of which two needed oral antihistamine treatment. No grade 2 or higher systemic reactions were observed. Six patients (15%) did not reach the highest dose due to LLR and/or systemic reactions needing antihistamines (20% in the regular regimen, 16% in the intermediate regimen and 13% in the fast regimen). At the end of the study, an improvement in the CPT was observed in 82.1% of patients, indirectly indicating an early treatment effect at the current dose and higher doses. In addition, IgG₄ immunoglobulin levels were significantly increased in all groups following treatment.

Conclusions

In this open-label study, allergoid HDM immunotherapy in doses up to 40,000 AUeq was generally well tolerated and no clinically relevant safety issues were identified. In the safety aspects of the three up-dosing regimens no clinically relevant differences were encountered. Therefore, these dose ranges and up-dosing regimens can be safely included in future dose-finding efficacy studies.

Oralair®: sublingual immunotherapy for the treatment of grass pollen allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

Oralair(®) is a sublingual grass pollen immunotherapy tablet that was authorized for use in Europe on 26 November 2009 and is currently in Phase III clinical trials in the USA. It is indicated for the management of grass pollen allergic rhinitis with or without conjunctivitis in adults, adolescents and children (above the age of 5) with clinically relevant symptoms, confirmed by a positive cutaneous test and/or a positive titer of the specific IgE to the grass pollen. Treatment is composed of an initiation phase (3-day dose escalation: 100 IR [index of reactivity] on day 1, 200 IR on day 2 and 300 IR on day 3) and a continuation phase at a dosage of 300 IR/day. Treatment is scheduled to start approximately 4 months before the actual start of the pollen season and should be continued throughout the season. The treatment should be prescribed and initiated by an experienced allergy specialist.

Allergen-specific immunotherapy: which outcome measures are useful in monitoring clinical trials?

Various clinical outcome measures are commonly applied in clinical trials on specific immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis with or without asthma to provide evidence of its clinical efficacy. These "primary endpoints" measure clinical symptoms as well as the use for concomitant medication. "Secondary outcome endpoints" are represented by health-related quality of life (HRQoL), "well-days," provocation-tests, in vitro tests and others. This article reviews different methods assessing the clinical outcome of trials on both subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy, and highlights potential advantages and drawbacks of each method.

A review of allergen-specific immunotherapy in human and veterinary medicine

This article reviews allergen-specific immunotherapy in human and veterinary medicine. Current hypotheses of possible mechanisms of actions are outlined. Indications, success rates, adverse effects and factors influencing outcome of therapy are discussed in humans, dogs, cats and horses.

Safety and efficacy of radioallergosorbent test-based allergen immunotherapy in treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis and asthma

OBJECTIVE

This study was undertaken to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of in vitro, radioallergosorbent test (RAST)-based inhalant allergen immunotherapy.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Prospective 22 year single site clinical study, with outcome evaluations of 480 perennial allergic rhinitis patients, including 96 with concomitant asthma.

RESULTS

Rhinitis symptom control after 2 years of immunotherapy was excellent in 32.5% of patients, good in 45.6%, and fair in 14.2%. There was no improvement in 7.7%. For patients with asthma, 81% had good or excellent pulmonary symptom improvement, and no patient failed to improve. No severe reactions occurred, but there were 5 limited systemic reactions, or 0.008% of injections, during a 2.5-year mean immunotherapy treatment course.

CONCLUSION

RAST-based immunotherapy is safe and effective for patients with perennial allergic rhinitis, with or without concomitant asthma. Significance This is the first large, multiyear study of safety and efficacy of RAST-based immunotherapy for treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis and asthma.

EBM RATING

C.

Usefulness of specific immunotherapy in patients with severe perennial allergic rhinitis induced by house dust mite: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of specific immunotherapy (SIT) in patients with severe house dust mite (HDM)-induced perennial allergic rhinitis using diary cards and objective endpoints.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-six adult patients were selected with moderate to severe allergic rhinitis due to HDM allergy uncontrolled by regular anti-allergic drugs. Twenty-eight patients completed the study, 22 of these patients also had mild asthma. Subjects were stratified for HDM sensitivity on the basis of their 4-week diary card score and the size of their immediate and late-phase skin reaction to HDM. The groups were well matched for all relevant parameters. Patients were randomized to receive active preparation (Alutard(R)-SQ, ALK, Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus extract) or an identical placebo preparation. Increasing doses were administered until the maintenance dose was reached. This dose was then given once a month for 12 months.

RESULTS

Clinical efficacy was evaluated by symptom medication diary cards recorded for 4 weeks after 12 months of continuous treatment and compared with pre-treatment scores. Skin test reactivity was re-measured after 12 months of treatment to HDM, cat dander and codeine phosphate. After 1 year of treatment, the actively treated group showed a 58% reduction in diary card symptom scores (P<0.002) and a 20% reduction in the use of rescue medication. The placebo group had a 32% reduction in symptom scores (P=NS), but no reduction in rescue medication requirements. The active group showed 36% reduction in skin prick test sensitivity to D. pteronyssinus (P=0.006), while the placebo group values were unchanged. Skin reactivity to codeine was unchanged in both groups. No significant adverse reactions to SIT were encountered.

CONCLUSIONS

One year of SIT for D. pteronyssinus in patients with poorly controlled rhinitis (+/-mild asthma) produced clinically useful improvement as shown by symptom-medication diary cards and reductions in immediate skin reactions compared with placebo treatment.

Current opinion of immunotherapy for ocular allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Allergic conjunctivitis is common and may be the most prominent or the only feature of allergies. Immunotherapy has been used as a primary treatment for allergies since the early 1900s. Currently the use of immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis is well established and has been shown to decrease the development of bronchial hyperreactivity and asthma. However, the role of immunotherapy for primary treatment of allergic conjunctivitis is unclear. We reviewed the studies where immunotherapy was used with particular attention to the affects on ocular allergies.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are many schedules and methods of delivering immunotherapy. Recent studies have started to assess ocular symptoms as one of the parameters to monitor efficacy of therapy. They follow the affects of immunotherapy on conjunctival provocation tests, ocular symptoms, or the use of eye drops. The literature suggests that using the various immunotherapy modalities at different schedules, ocular symptoms improved even when immunotherapy was used on a rush schedule.

SUMMARY

The initiation of immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis has been shown to switch the immune response to T helper 1 and thus avoid the progression of other atopic conditions. Current literature shows that using many allergens with different forms of immunotherapy appear to have a significant improvement in ocular allergy symptoms and this can be achieved rapidly and safely in most patients. Whether using immunotherapy early in allergic conjunctivitis will alter the progression of other atopic conditions remains to be investigated.

Immunotherapy for inhalant allergies. Guidelines for why, when, and how to use this treatment

Great-grandma was probably on the right track when she said, "A little dirt won't hurt you. It builds immunity." In fact, some evidence suggests that our "hygienic" environment may be increasing our vulnerabilities to some maladies, especially allergic disorders. Although the principles of immunotherapy have been known for nearly a century, guidelines for its use are still evolving. In this article, Dr Portnoy discusses the role of immunotherapy in patients with symptoms triggered by airborne allergens.

Sublingual immunotherapy

Recent claims have been made that sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) may be a viable alternative to injection immunotherapy (SIT). Animal studies show that when allergens are administered topically, they are handled differently, and IgE responses can be reduced. Most published studies of human SLIT have been small but show fairly consistent benefits on symptom scores, with few systemic side effects. Objective measures of allergen reactivity usually do not change. Relatively few subjects have been treated in SLIT trials compared with the numbers that would be required to validate new drug therapies. On the plus side, SLIT appears to work in adults and in children; it offers some logistic advantages and seems to be safe. Giving allergen by mouth rather than by injection should decrease the costs of immunotherapy, but the cumulative dose of allergen used in SLIT has been between 20 to 375 times the dose given in conventional SIT. Further cost-benefit analysis is needed. On the other hand, standard SIT is effective and is supported by better clinical and experimental evidence. The balance sheet for SLIT is improving, but on the current evidence, SLIT requires further evaluation before it could be recommended for use in routine clinical practice.

Specific immunotherapy with Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus and D. farinae results in decreased bronchial hyperreactivity

To evaluate the tolerability and efficacy of specific immunotherapy with mite extracts, we performed a double-blind, placebo-controlled immunotherapy study in 30 patients with proven allergy to mite allergens. The specific immunotherapy with standardized extracts of Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus and D. farinae by a clustered rush protocol was well tolerated. After 1 year of treatment, the actively treated group showed a significant improvement compared to their starting value as well as to the placebo-treated patients with regard to skin prick test, conjunctival provocation test, and subjective rhinitis score. The subjective asthma score and bronchial hyperreactivity, measured by the methacholine provocation test, was improved in comparison to the starting value, but not to the placebo group, after 12 months. However, a further, open comparison of the placebo- and verum-treated groups at 18 months revealed a significant reduction. The drug intake was not increased in the verum-treated group. Exposure to mite levels was constant throughout this time period, as revealed by antigen measurement. We conclude that specific immunotherapy in perennial, mite-allergen-induced asthma may reduce not only immediate, IgE-mediated symptoms but, after a rather long time period of 12-18 months, also the inflammatory component of bronchial asthma, thus leading to a reduction of unspecific hyperreactivity.