Recommendations for standardization of clinical trials with Allergen Specific Immunotherapy for respiratory allergy. A statement of a World Allergy Organization (WAO) taskforce

Quality of life and healthcare costs of patients with allergic respiratory diseases: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis (AR) and allergic asthma (AA) are chronic respiratory diseases that represent a global health problem. One aim of this study was to analyze the Health-related Quality of Life (HRQoL) of the patients in order to identify statistically significant influencing factors that determine HRQoL. Another aim was to assess and analyze data on cost-of-illness from a statutory health insurance perspective.

METHODS

 The EQ-5D-5L was used to evaluate the patients' HRQoL. To identify the factors influencing the HRQoL, a multinomial logistic regression analysis was conducted using groups based on the EQ-5D-5L index value as dependent variable. Routine data were analyzed to determine total healthcare costs.

RESULTS

 The average EQ-5D-5L index was 0.85 (SD 0.20). A high age, the amount of disease costs, low internal health-related control beliefs and high ozone exposure in the residential area were found to be statistically significant influencing factors for a low HRQoL, whereas low age, male sex and a good possibility to avoid the allergens were found to be statistically significant factors influencing a high HRQoL. On average, the study participants incurred annual costs of €3072 (SD: 3485), of which €699 (SD: 743) could be assigned to allergic respiratory diseases.

CONCLUSIONS

 Overall, the patients in the VerSITA study showed a high level of HRQoL. The identified influencing factors can be used as starting points for improving the HRQoL of patients with allergic respiratory diseases. From the perspective of a statutory health insurance, per person expenditures for allergic respiratory diseases are rather low.

Allergen Immunotherapy: The Evidence Supporting the Efficacy and Safety of Subcutaneous Immunotherapy and Sublingual Forms of Immunotherapy for Allergic Rhinitis/Conjunctivitis and Asthma

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a recognized key therapeutic modality for the treatment of allergic respiratory disease. Definitive studies have provided evidence-based data to demonstrate its effectiveness in allergic rhinitis and asthma due to the inhalation of proteinaceous allergic substances from specific seasonal pollens, dust mites, animal allergens, and certain mold spores. Over the ensuing decades, laboratory investigations have provided objective evidence to demonstrate immunologic changes, including production of protective IgG antibody, suppression of IgE antibody, upregulation of regulatory T cells, and induction of a state of immune tolerance to the offending allergen(s). Tangential to this work were carefully designed clinical studies that defined allergen dose and duration of treatment, established the importance of preparing extracts with standardized allergens (or well-defined extracts) based on major protein moieties, and used allergen provocation models to demonstrate efficacy superior to placebo. In the United States, the use of subcutaneous immunotherapy extracts for AIT was grandfathered in by the Food and Drug Administration based on expert literature review. In contrast, sublingual tablet immunotherapy underwent formal clinical development programs (phase I-III clinical trials) that provided the necessary clinical evidence for safety and efficacy that led to regulatory agency approvals for the treatment of allergic rhinitis in properly characterized patients with allergy. The allergy specialist's treatment options currently include traditional subcutaneous AIT and specific sublingual tablets approved for grass, ragweed, house dust mites, trees belonging to the birch-homologous group, and Japanese cedar. Tangential to this are sublingual drops that are increasingly being used off-label (albeit not approved by the Food and Drug Administration) in the United States. This article will review the evidence-based literature supporting the use of these forms of AIT, as well as focus on several current controversies and gaps in our knowledge base that have relevance for the appropriate selection of patients for treatment with specific AIT.

From Skin to Solution: Exploring Epicutaneous Immunotherapy for Peanut Allergy-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Peanut allergy is a leading cause of severe food reactions. This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy and safety of epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) compared to placebo for peanut-allergic individuals. After prospectively registering on PROSPERO, we searched three databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane CENTRAL) and 2 trial registries till September 2023. Analysis was conducted via RevMan where data was computed using risk ratios (RR). The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and GRADE criteria were used to appraise and evaluate the evidence. From 4927 records, six multicenter randomized placebo-controlled trials comprising 1453 participants were included. The 250 µg EPIT group had a significant increase in successful desensitization compared to placebo (RR: 2.13 (95% C.I: 1.72, 2.64), P < 0.01, I2 = 0%), while the 100 µg EPIT group did not (RR: 1.54 (95% C.I: 0.92, 2.58), P = 0.10, I2 = 0%) (moderate certainty evidence). Moreover, there was a significant increase in local (RR: 1.69 (95% C.I: 1.06, 2.68), P = 0.03, I2 = 89%) and systemic adverse events (RR: 1.75 (95% C.I: 1.14, 2.69), P = 0.01, I2 = 0%) with EPIT. Additionally, individuals administered EPIT have an increased probability of requiring rescue medications like epinephrine (RR: 1.91 (95% C.I: 1.12, 3.28), P = 0.02, I2 = 0%) and topical corticosteroids (RR: 1.49 (95% C.I: 1.29, 1.73), P < 0.01, I2 = 0%) to treat adverse events. The association of adverse events post-treatment including anaphylaxis (RR: 2.31 (95% C.I: 1.00, 5.33), P = 0.05, I2 = 36%), skin/subcutaneous disorders like erythema or vesicles (RR: 0.93 (95% C.I: 0.79, 1.08), P = 0.33, I2 = 0%), and respiratory disorders like dyspnea or wheezing (RR: 0.94 (95% C.I: 0.77, 1.15), P = 0.55, I2 = 0%) with EPIT is inconclusive. EPIT, although effective in desensitization, is linked to an increased risk of adverse events. PROSPERO registration: CRD42023466600.

SQ sublingual immunotherapy tablets for children with allergic rhinitis: A review of phase three trials

AIM

To provide paediatricians with a summary of efficacy and safety of SQ sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets from phase three, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials in children and adolescents with allergic rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis, with and without asthma.

METHODS

PubMed searches were conducted and unpublished data were included if necessary.

RESULTS

Of the 93 publications, 12 were identified reporting 10 trials. One trial was excluded as paediatric-specific efficacy data were unavailable. The nine eligible trials evaluated grass, house dust mite, ragweed and tree SLIT tablets. Consistent reductions in allergic rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis symptoms and medication use were observed with SQ SLIT tablets versus placebo. In a five-year trial, sustained reduction of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis symptoms, asthma symptoms and medication use were observed with SQ grass SLIT tablet versus placebo. The number-needed-to-treat to prevent asthma symptoms and medication use in one additional child during follow-up was lowest in younger children. SQ SLIT tablets were generally well tolerated across trials.

CONCLUSION

Evidence supports use of SQ SLIT tablets in children and adolescents with allergic rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis, with and without asthma. Long-term data demonstrate disease-modifying effects of SQ grass SLIT tablet and suggest the clinical relevance of initiating allergy immunotherapy earlier in the disease course.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Immunotherapy for Inhalant Allergy

OBJECTIVE

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the therapeutic exposure to an allergen or allergens selected by clinical assessment and allergy testing to decrease allergic symptoms and induce immunologic tolerance. Inhalant AIT is administered to millions of patients for allergic rhinitis (AR) and allergic asthma (AA) and is most commonly delivered as subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Despite its widespread use, there is variability in the initiation and delivery of safe and effective immunotherapy, and there are opportunities for evidence-based recommendations for improved patient care.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this clinical practice guideline (CPG) is to identify quality improvement opportunities and provide clinicians trustworthy, evidence-based recommendations regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. Specific goals of the guideline are to optimize patient care, promote safe and effective therapy, reduce unjustified variations in care, and reduce the risk of harm. The target patients for the guideline are any individuals aged 5 years and older with AR, with or without AA, who are either candidates for immunotherapy or treated with immunotherapy for their inhalant allergies. The target audience is all clinicians involved in the administration of immunotherapy. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence-based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the guideline development group (GDG). It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. The statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experience and assessment of individual patients.

ACTION STATEMENTS

The GDG made a strong recommendation that (Key Action Statement [KAS] 10) the clinician performing allergy skin testing or administering AIT must be able to diagnose and manage anaphylaxis. The GDG made recommendations for the following KASs: (KAS 1) Clinicians should offer or refer to a clinician who can offer immunotherapy for patients with AR with or without AA if their patients' symptoms are inadequately controlled with medical therapy, allergen avoidance, or both, or have a preference for immunomodulation. (KAS 2A) Clinicians should not initiate AIT for patients who are pregnant, have uncontrolled asthma, or are unable to tolerate injectable epinephrine. (KAS 3) Clinicians should evaluate the patient or refer the patient to a clinician who can evaluate for signs and symptoms of asthma before initiating AIT and for signs and symptoms of uncontrolled asthma before administering subsequent AIT. (KAS 4) Clinicians should educate patients who are immunotherapy candidates regarding the differences between SCIT and SLIT (aqueous and tablet) including risks, benefits, convenience, and costs. (KAS 5) Clinicians should educate patients about the potential benefits of AIT in (1) preventing new allergen sensitizations, (2) reducing the risk of developing AA, and (3) altering the natural history of the disease with continued benefit after discontinuation of therapy. (KAS 6) Clinicians who administer SLIT to patients with seasonal AR should offer pre- and co-seasonal immunotherapy. (KAS 7) Clinicians prescribing AIT should limit treatment to only those clinically relevant allergens that correlate with the patient's history and are confirmed by testing. (KAS 9) Clinicians administering AIT should continue escalation or maintenance dosing when patients have local reactions (LRs) to AIT. (KAS 11) Clinicians should avoid repeat allergy testing as an assessment of the efficacy of ongoing AIT unless there is a change in environmental exposures or a loss of control of symptoms. (KAS 12) For patients who are experiencing symptomatic control from AIT, clinicians should treat for a minimum duration of 3 years, with ongoing treatment duration based on patient response to treatment. The GDG offered the following KASs as options: (KAS 2B) Clinicians may choose not to initiate AIT for patients who use concomitant beta-blockers, have a history of anaphylaxis, have systemic immunosuppression, or have eosinophilic esophagitis (SLIT only). (KAS 8) Clinicians may treat polysensitized patients with a limited number of allergens.

Short-term and long-term efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy in different courses for house dust mite-induced allergic rhinitis

PURPOSE

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has been proven to be an effective and safe treatment for patients with house dust mite (HDM)-induced allergic rhinitis (AR) to achieve short-term and long-term efficacy. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between SLIT duration and long-term efficacy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study involved 134 patients who underwent SLIT between 2019 and 2021 (in the 2-year group), between 2018 and 2021(in the 3-year group), or between 2017 and 2021 (in the 4-year group). The total nasal symptoms score (TNSS), total medication score (TMS), visual analogue scale (VAS), the Mini Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (MiniRQLQ) and adverse events (AEs) were assessed at baseline, after treatment (2021) and one year after the treatment completion (2022). The correlation between MiniRQLQ and other indicators was also analyzed.

RESULTS

After SLIT, patients in all three groups showed significant improvements in TNSS, TMS, VAS and MiniRQLQ scores (all p < 0.001). These improvements were sustained even one year after SLIT. Patients who received 3-4 years of SLIT showed significant improvement compared with those who received 2 years of SLIT in all clinical outcomes (all p < 0.01). The analysis showed positive correlations between the MiniRQLQ and TNSS, TMS, and VAS (all p < 0.001). No significant difference was observed in the AE rate in all three groups (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Different duration of HDM SLIT could generate various short-term and long-term clinical efficacy. The MiniRQLQ could be applied to evaluate SLIT efficacy in clinical practice.

Efficacy and safety of intratonsillar immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

A lower adherence rate existed in patients receiving allergen-specific immunotherapy due to its lengthy period and adverse effects even though it is the only curative treatment for IgE-mediated allergies. Therefore, exploring innovative allergen-specific immunotherapy routes is necessary.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the efficacy and safety of the intratonsillar injection of house dust mite (HDM) extract in patients with HDM-induced allergic rhinitis (AR).

METHODS

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial was conducted. A total of 80 patients with HDM-induced AR were randomized to receive 6 intratonsillar injections with HDM extract or placebo in 3 months. The total nasal symptom score (TNSS), visual analogue scale of nasal symptoms, combined symptom and medication score, mini rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire, and serum allergen-specific IgG4 to Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus were all monitored at baseline and 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after the treatment was finished. The intent-to-treat and per-protocol set (PPS) are both analyzed.

RESULTS

The primary end points TNSS and ΔTNSS were improved significantly at 3 months after the patients with AR finished a 3-month 6-injection intratonsillar immunotherapy compared with those in the placebo treatment in both intent-to-treat and PPS. Results of visual analogue scale, combined symptom and medication score, and mini rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire were also improved significantly at 3 months after the treatment in PPS. However, the improvement effect of intratonsillar immunotherapy at 6 and 12 months was limited and uncertain based on the data. The increase of serum Der p IgG4 in the active group was significantly higher than that in the placebo group at 3, 6, and 12 months after the treatment was finished. Adverse events were monitored, and no systemic adverse reactions were observed.

CONCLUSION

The clinical trial revealed that intratonsillar injection with HDM extract was safe and effective in patients with AR. Optimizing the protocol and allergen formulations is expected to increase and maintain the efficacy of this novel approach.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://www.chictr.org.cn/index.html, identifier: ChiCTR-TRC-13003600.

Effectiveness of sublingual immunotherapy in pediatric cedar pollinosis: A real-world database study

BACKGROUND

Pediatric allergic rhinitis (AR), including cedar pollinosis (CP), is increasing in Japan. We investigated the effects of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), which has limited studies of its effectiveness in real-world settings, on children with CP.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used a claim database in 2018-2021. Children aged ≤15 years with CP records in 2019 were eligible and were followed up through 2021. We included 2962 CP children undergoing SLIT and 547 who were not. The medication score was used to evaluate SLIT effectiveness in the cedar pollen dispersal season each year. Adverse events and the occurrence of allergic diseases were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Medication score was higher in the SLIT group during the index period but lower in 2021 compared to the non-SLIT group (mean ± standard deviation: 5.17 ± 2.39 and 4.74 ± 2.38 in 2019, 3.13 ± 2.30 and 3.55 ± 2.48 in 2021, respectively). The adjusted mean difference between groups from 2019 to 2021 was -0.62 (95% confidence interval: -0.86 to -0.39, p < .0001), and the medication score was reduced in the SLIT group (risk ratio: 1.2: 1.1 to 1.3). The occurrence of adverse events involving abdominal disorders (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.64: 0.51 to 0.81), asthma exacerbation (aOR: 0.37: 0.24 to 0.57), and allergic diseases involving hay fever unrelated to CP (aOR: 0.60: 0.45 to 0.80) or asthma (aOR: 0.71: 0.58 to 0.86) was lower in the SLIT group.

CONCLUSION

In children with CP, SLIT is effective, well tolerated, and could decrease the occurrence of other allergic diseases.

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.

Limited beneficial effects of systemic steroids when added to standard of care treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis

Intramuscular injections with methylprednisolone treating allergic rhinitis (AR) have a long history. Modern guidelines are designed to dissuade this treatment, but it´s frequently used, especially in primary care. This despite of concern for side effects and lack of modern placebo-controlled studies. This study was designed to evaluate if methylprednisolone, could significantly improve symptoms of birch pollen induced AR and reduce the concomitant use of standard of care medication. Forty-two patients with birch pollen induced AR were randomized to treatment with methylprednisolone (80 mg) or placebo (NaCl 0.9%). Daily symptom- and medication scores was registered for 3 weeks. Quality of life questionnaires Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22) and Juniper Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionaire (Juniper RQLQ) were registered at trial start and at the end of the 3 weeks period. The combined symptom- and medication scores indicate that the methylprednisolone treated group [mean Area Under the Curve (AUC) 37.1 (SD 16.2 (95% CI 29.9-44.6))] was significantly better off than the placebo group [mean AUC 49.1 (SD 10.1 (95% CI 44.5-53.7))], p = 0.008. No significant difference between the groups were found in the SNOT-22 and Juniper RQLQ analysis. Registered side effects were few and mild. The limited beneficial effects of systemic steroids when added to standard of care in combination of its potential risk for side effects, speaks against its use for treatment of severe seasonal allergic rhinitis. The lack of difference in quality-of-life further underscores this result.

Beyond ARIA: Will e-diaries replace retrospective questionnaires in measuring the severity of allergic rhinitis in clinical research and daily practice?

Retrospective questionnaires are used since decades to assess the severity and/or control of allergic diseases. Applications on smartphones have recently facilitated the use of prospective clinical diaries, based on questionnaires filled every day by the patient. Once limited to clinical trials, these e-diaries, based on validated disease control scores and visual analogue scales, permit a quantitative day-by-day measure free of recall bias. Given the advantages of this procedure, its use could be extended to the daily clinical practice. E-diaries may facilitate (1) a more precise identification of the culprit allergen in the diagnostic work-up of poly-sensitized patients, (2) the stratification of patients for treatment, (3) the follow-up of the patients under treatment for optimized shared decision-making, and (4) a careful assessment of preventive therapies. While a few apps are being used in scientific studies, consensus on their use in daily practice should be reached and guidelines for specialists should be elaborated by scientific associations.

Factors predicting the outcome of allergen-specific nasal provocation test in children with grass pollen allergic rhinitis

Background

Nasal provocation testing (NPT) is a reference methodology to identify the culprit allergen in patients with allergic rhinitis. Selecting the right allergen for NPT is particularly difficult in poly-sensitized patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). Predictors of NPT outcomes may facilitate the proper use of this test or even substitute it.

Objective

To identify predictors of grass pollen NPT outcome from an array of clinical data, e-diary outcomes, and allergy test results in poly-sensitized pediatric patients with SAR.

Methods

Poly-sensitized, SAR patients with grass pollen allergy, participating in the @IT.2020 pilot project in Rome and Pordenone (Italy), participated in a baseline (T0) visit with questionnaires, skin prick testing (SPT), and blood sampling to measure total (ImmunoCAP, TFS, Sweden) and specific IgE antibodies to grass pollen extracts and their major allergenic molecules (ESEP, Euroimmun Labordiagnostika, Germany). During the pollen season, patients filled the AllergyMonitor® e-diary app measuring their symptoms, medication intake, and allergy-related well-being via the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). After the pollen season (T1), patients answered clinical questionnaires and underwent a nasal provocation test (NPT) with grass pollen extract.

Results

We recruited 72 patients (age 14.3 ± 2.8 years, 46 males) sensitized to grass and/or other pollens, including olive (63; 87.5%) and pellitory (49; 68.1%). Patients positive to grass pollen NPT (61; 84.7%), compared to the negative ones, had worse VAS values in the e-diary, larger SPT wheal reactions, and higher IgE levels, as well as specific activity to timothy and Bermuda grass extracts, rPhl p 5 and nCyn d 1. A positive NPT to grass pollen was predicted by an index combining the specific activity of IgE towards Phl p 5 and Cyn d 1 (AUC: 0.82; p < 0.01; best cut-off ≥7.25%, sensitivity 70.5%, specificity: 90.9%). VAS results also predicted NPT positivity, although with less precision (AUC: 0.77, p < 0.01; best cut-off ≥7, sensitivity: 60.7%, specificity: 81.8%).

Conclusions

An index combining the specific activity of IgE to rPhl p 5 and nCyn d 1 predicted with moderate sensitivity and high specificity the outcome of a grass pollen NPT in complex, poly-sensitized pediatric patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Further studies are needed to improve the index sensitivity and to assess its usefulness for NPT allergen selection or as an alternative to this demanding test procedure.

Salivary IgG4 Levels Contribute to Assessing the Efficacy of Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus Subcutaneous Immunotherapy in Children with Asthma or Allergic Rhinitis

At present, there are no effective, non-invasive, and objective indicators to evaluate the efficacy of pediatric house dust mite (HDM)-specific allergen immunotherapy (AIT). A prospective, observational study was performed in children with Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (Der p) asthma and/or allergic rhinitis (AR). Forty-four patients received subcutaneous Der p-AIT for 2 years, and eleven patients received only symptomatic treatment. The patients needed to finish their questionnaires at each visit. Serum and salivary Der p-specific IgE, IgG4, and IgE-blocking factors (IgE-BFs) were measured at 0, 4, 12, and 24 months during AIT. A correlation between them was also evaluated. Subcutaneous Der p-specific AIT improved the clinical symptoms of children with asthma and/or AR. The Der p-specific IgE-BF significantly increased at 4, 12, and 24 months after AIT treatment. Serum and salivary Der p-specific IgG4 significantly increased with the time of the AIT treatment, and significant correlations between them at different time points were observed (p < 0.05). Furthermore, there were significant correlations (R = 0.31-0.62) between the serum Der p-specific IgE-BF and Der p-specific IgG4 at the baseline, 4, 12, and 24 months after the AIT (p < 0.01). The salivary Der p-specific IgG4 levels also demonstrated a certain correlation with the Der p-specific IgE-BF. Der p-specific AIT is an effective treatment for children with asthma and/or AR. Its effect was associated with increased serum and salivary-specific IgG4 levels, as well as an increased IgE-BF. Non-invasive salivary-specific IgG4 may be useful for monitoring the efficacy of AIT in children.

Specific immunoglobulin G4 correlates with Th2 cytokine reduction in patients with allergic asthma treated by Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus subcutaneous immunotherapy

Background

The modulations of lymphocyte subsets and cytokine production due to subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT) are not fully clarified.

Objective

We investigated the changes in T-lymphocyte subsets and serum Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus-specific immunoglobulin G4 (Der-p sIgG4), as well as cytokine production during Der-p SCIT, in patients with allergic asthma.

Methods

This study involved 20 patients with allergic asthma who were receiving 156-week Der-p SCIT and 20 patients without SCIT (non-SCIT). We measured symptom and medication scores (SMS), serum Der-p sIgG4 levels, CD4⁺CD25⁺Foxp3⁺ T regulatory (Treg), CD4⁺IL-4^-IFN-γ⁺ T-helper (Th) 1, and CD4⁺IL-4⁺IFN-γ^- Th2 lymphocyte percentages in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) with/without Der-p extract stimulation at weeks 0, 4, 12, 16, 52, 104, and 156. Cytokine release inhibition assays were performed by incubation with serum from SCIT and non-SCIT patients, Der-p allergen, and PBMCs. Levels of interleukin (IL)-4, IL-5, IL-10, IL-13, IL-17, interferon (IFN)-γ, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, and transforming growth factor (TGF)-β1 were evaluated in supernatant.

Results

We found that SCIT patients had significantly lower SMS after week 52. Der-p sIgG4 levels in SCIT patients significantly increased at week 16 compared with non-SCIT subjects. CD4⁺IL-4⁺IFN-γ^- Th2% in SCIT patients showed a significant decrease from weeks 104-156 compared with week 0, while no change was observed in CD4⁺CD25⁺Foxp3⁺ Treg and CD4⁺IL-4^-IFN-γ⁺ Th1 percentages. IL-5, IL-13, IL-4, IL-17, and TNF-α levels in supernatant of PBMCs cultured with serum of SCIT patients after 16 weeks showed significant lower levels compared with non-SCIT patients, and showed significant reverse associations with Der-p sIgG4 levels.

Conclusion

SCIT induced Dep-p sIgG4 may be involved in downregulating Th2 cytokine production in Der-p allergic asthma patients.

Strengthening the case for intralymphatic immunotherapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Intralymphatic immunotherapy (ILIT) is a promising novel method of immunotherapy, that is short and convenient, and may be very effective. Results have been varied, and efforts to unravel the real value of the treatment are ongoing. Methods used to assess the effect in clinical trials have been so varied that it is difficult to compare studies with each other.

RECENT FINDINGS

Some advances have been made; the importance of injecting into the lymph node has been illustrated, and treatment with a range of medicines has proven to be successful. In meta-analyses the treatment has been shown to have no serious side effects and to be an effective short term desensitizing agent. Now it remains to be shown that ILIT also has long-term effects of tolerance. Preliminary data suggest that there is a long-term effect.

SUMMARY

Injecting allergen directly into a lymph node strengthens the protective immune response. ILIT is safe and induces desensitization and very likely also induces tolerance. Compliance will improve compared with other treatment forms. If ILIT holds its promise, it will become an attractive option for patients with allergy.

Effectiveness and adverse reactions to subcutaneous immunotherapy in children with allergic rhinitis/asthma

OBJECTIVE

Adverse reactions, which are mostly local and rarely systemic, can be seen during subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT). It was not possible to continue SCIT at times due to systemic reactions. The purpose of the present study was to identify the incidence and risk factors associated with adverse reactions during subcutaneous allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT).

METHODS

A total number of 344 patients under 18 years old with allergic rhinitis and/or asthma who underwent SCIT between 2005 and 2021 were included in the study. Demographic characteristics of the patients, laboratory findings [Total Immunglobulin E(IgE), aeroallergen prick test, inhaler, and allergen specific IgE(sIgE) and eosinophil counts], and adverse events observed during AIT were recorded retrospectively. Descriptive and univariate/multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify risk factors for adverse events.

RESULTS

Among 344 patients, 33.4% (n = 115) were female, mean age was 133.1 ± 41.0 months, and 42.2% (n = 145) were >12 years old. One hundred-thirty eight (40.1%) of the patients were mono-sensitized, 47 (13.7%) had asthma, 207 (60.2%) allergic rhinitis, and 90 (26.2%) asthma and allergic rhinitis. Single allergen content was administered to 187 (54.4%) patients (62 mite, 114 grass mix, 11 olea), and multiple allergens to 157 (45.6%) patients (121 pollen mix, 36 other (mite/alternaria)]. A total number of 33.008 injections were administered. 840 adverse reactions (262 (31.1%) at up-dosing phase, 578 (68.8%) at maintenance phase) in 195 (56.7%) patients were observed. Among the adverse reactions, 632 (75.2%) were local, 160 (19%) large local, and 48 (5.7%) (39 at maintenance, 9 at up-dosing) (in 31 patients) were systemic (28 Grade 1, 12 Grade 2, 8 Grade 3). Adrenalin was administered to 8 patients with Grade 3 systemic reaction (8/33008; %0.024). Adverse reactions, especially local ones, were seen more frequently in children under 12 years old (p < 0.001). Patients sensitized with grass pollen (p:0.01) and mite (p:0.004), and those who had received SCIT with pollen mixture had more adverse reactions than the others. More adverse reactions were observed in SCIT containing calcium-phosphate as adjuvant (p: 0.01). Local reactions were risk factors for large local (OR = 3.591, %95 CI:2.064-6.247, p < 0.001) and systemic (OR = 2.190, %95 CI:1.005-4.722 p = 0.046) reactions at univariate analyses. Total nasal symptom scores, Visual Analog Scale and asthma symptom control test decreased after one year of treatment (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

SCIT is a safe and effective treatment method in childhood that leads to improvements in all nasal symptoms and asthma after one year of treatment.

Allergen immunotherapy: past, present and future

Allergen immunotherapy is a form of therapeutic vaccination for established IgE-mediated hypersensitivity to common allergen sources such as pollens, house dust mites and the venom of stinging insects. The classical protocol, introduced in 1911, involves repeated subcutaneous injection of increasing amounts of allergen extract, followed by maintenance injections over a period of 3 years, achieving a form of allergen-specific tolerance that provides clinical benefit for years after its discontinuation. More recently, administration through the sublingual route has emerged as an effective, safe alternative. Oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy induces effective ‘desensitization’ but not long-term tolerance. Research and clinical trials over the past few decades have elucidated the mechanisms underlying immunotherapy-induced tolerance, involving a reduction of allergen-specific T helper 2 (T_H2) cells, an induction of regulatory T and B cells, and production of IgG and IgA ‘blocking’ antibodies. To better harness these mechanisms, novel strategies are being explored to achieve safer, effective, more convenient regimens and more durable long-term tolerance; these include alternative routes for current immunotherapy approaches, novel adjuvants, use of recombinant allergens (including hypoallergenic variants) and combination of allergens with immune modifiers or monoclonal antibodies targeting the T_H2 cell pathway.

Durham and Shamji review the history and future of allergen immunotherapy for established IgE-mediated hypersensitivity to common allergens. They describe the mechanisms of immunotherapy-induced tolerance and the new strategies being explored to achieve safer, more effective, long-term tolerance.

Health and economic impact of subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy in patients with pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: real-word evidence from the Czech Republic

Background: The prevalence of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (AR) has been increasing over the years, and allergen immunotherapy (AIT) remains the only disease-modifying treatment. However, cost-effectiveness data remain scarce. Methods: In this single-arm, noninterventional, prospective, multicenter study, we describe the effectiveness, safety and costs of subcutaneous AIT for pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. Results: Of 471 new AIT users, 317 completed three courses of treatment, and symptoms improved in 96%; no serious adverse reactions were reported. The cost of symptomatic medication decreased by 49% and the cost of unscheduled specialist visits decreased by 73%. Except for AIT administration, total healthcare costs decreased by 54% compared with the baseline pollen season without AIT. Conclusion: In clinical practice, subcutaneous AIT is an effective treatment generating savings on symptomatic medication and unscheduled consultations.

First-in-human phase 2 trial with mite allergoids coupled to mannan in subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Polymerized allergens conjugated to non-oxidized mannan (PM-allergoids) are novel vaccines targeting dendritic cells (DCs). Previous experimental data indicate that PM-allergoids are readily taken up by DCs and induce Treg cells. This first-in-human study was aimed to evaluate safety and to find the optimal dose of house dust mite PM-allergoid (PM-HDM) administered subcutaneously (SC) or sublingually (SL).

METHODS

In a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled trial, 196 subjects received placebo or PM-HDM at 500, 1000, 3000, or 5000 mannan-conjugated therapeutic units (mTU)/mL in 9-arm groups for 4 months. All subjects received 5 SC doses (0.5 ml each) every 30 days plus 0.2 ml SL daily. The primary efficacy outcome was the improvement of titrated nasal provocation tests (NPT) with D. pteronyssinus at baseline and at the end of the study. All adverse events and reactions were recorded and assessed. Secondary outcomes were the combination of symptom and medication scores (CSMS) and serological markers.

RESULTS

No moderate or severe adverse reactions were reported. Subjects improving the NPT after treatment ranged from 45% to 62% in active SC, 44% to 61% in active SL and 16% in placebo groups. Statistical differences between placebo and active groups were all significant above 500 mTU, being the highest with 3000 mTU SL (p = 0.004) and 5000 mTU SC (p = 0.011). CSMS improvement over placebo reached 70% (p < 0.001) in active 3000 mTU SC and 40% (p = 0.015) in 5000 mTU SL groups.

CONCLUSIONS

PM-HDM immunotherapy was safe and successful in achieving primary and secondary clinical outcomes in SC and SL at either 3000 or 5000 mTU/ml.

Efficacy and safety of house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy tablets in allergic rhinitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

House dust mite (HDM) sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets have been approved for the treatment of patients with allergic rhinitis (AR). However, the meta-analysis on the efficacy of HDM-SLIT tablets for HDM-induced AR patients remained limited.

Methods

Five databases were searched including: PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and CINAHL for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that addressed the efficacy and safetyof HDM-SLIT tablets compared with placebo until January 2022. The primary outcome was a combined symptom and medication score (CSMS) after treatment.

Results

Eight eligible RCTs were identified with a total of 3601 patients treated with HDM-SLIT tablets and 2783 patients who received a placebo. The CSMS was significantly lower in the HDM-SLIT tablet group compared with the placebo (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.28 [95% CI: -0.32 to -0.23]). There was a significant reduction in rhinitis symptom scores, rhinitis medication scores, total combined conjunctivitis scores, and rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire scores. The consistent efficacy compared to the placebo has been exhibited over the different kinds and doses of HDM tablets (6 SQ, 12 SQ, 300 IR, and 500 IR) and age groups (>5 years old, adolescents and adults) with low degrees of variability across the studies. There was no significant difference in proportions of participants who were injected with epinephrine between the treatment- and placebo groups.

Conclusions

HDM-SLIT tablet is an effective treatment in reducing rhinitis symptoms and medication use in AR patients with favorable safety. They also improve quality of life and conjunctivitis symptoms.

Long-term efficacy of the sublingual and subcutaneous routes in allergen immunotherapy

Allergen immunotherapy is highly effective in selected patients with allergic rhinitis, allergic asthma, and Hymenoptera venom allergy. Unlike anti-allergic drugs, both subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapies have been shown to modify the underlying cause of the disease, with proved long-term clinical benefits after treatment cessation. In this review, we analyzed 10 randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled clinical trials of allergen immunotherapy that included blinded follow-up for at least 1 year after treatment withdrawal. Three studies of pollen subcutaneous immunotherapy provided evidence that a sustained, tolerogenic effect of subcutaneous immunotherapy can be achieved after 3 years of treatment. Six trials of sublingual immunotherapy provided robust evidence for long-term clinical benefit and persistent immunologic changes after grass pollen, house-dust mite, or Japanese cedar immunotherapy, whereas a clinical trial of both sublingual and subcutaneous grass pollen immunotherapies showed that 2 years of immunotherapy were efficacious but insufficient to induce long-term tolerance. These studies strongly supported international guidelines that recommend at least 3 years of allergen immunotherapy of proven value to achieve disease modification and sustained clinical and immunologic tolerance.

Circulating MMP-12 as Potential Biomarker in Evaluating Disease Severity and Efficacy of Sublingual Immunotherapy in Allergic Rhinitis

Background

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a highly heterogeneous disease, and allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is an effective treatment. This study aims to evaluate the circulating mas-related G protein-coupled receptor-X2 (MRGPRX2) and matrix metalloproteinase-12 (MMP-12) levels in evaluating disease severity and predicting efficacy of SLIT in AR patients.

Methods

We enrolled 110 moderate-severe persist AR patients (AR group) and 40 healthy controls (HC group). Circulating levels of MRGPRX2 and MMP-12 were measured, and their associations with disease severity were evaluated. All AR patients were assigned to receive sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), and the efficacy was evaluated, and serum samples were collected at 1 year and 3 years after treatment. The correlations between serum MRGPRX2 and MMP-12 and clinical efficacy were assessed.

Results

The serum concentrations of MRGPRX2 and MMP-12 were significantly higher in the AR group than the HC group, and the elevated MMP-12 levels were correlated with VAS and TNSS, and serum MRGPRX2 levels were correlated with VAS. Finally, 100 and 80 patients completed 1-year and 3-year follow-up and were classified into effective and ineffective groups. Serum MRGPRX2 and MMP-12 levels were lower in the effective group than the ineffective group. Although serum MRGPRX2 and MMP-12 levels did not significantly change after 1 year SLIT, serum MMP-12 levels were decreased 3 years post-SLIT than baseline and 1 year post-SLIT levels. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) showed that serum MMP-12 was a potential biomarker for predicting the efficacy of SLIT.

Conclusion

Serum MRGPRX2 and MMP-12 appeared to be promising biological indicators in reflecting disease severity in AR patients. Moreover, circulating MMP-12 might serve as a reliable predictor for clinical responsiveness of SLIT.

Validation Parameters of Patient-Generated Data for Digitally Recorded Allergic Rhinitis Symptom and Medication Scores in the @IT.2020 Project: Exploratory Study

Background

Mobile health technologies enable allergists to monitor disease trends by collecting daily patient-reported outcomes of allergic rhinitis. To this end, patients with allergies are usually required to enter their symptoms and medication repetitively over long time periods, which may present a risk to data completeness and quality in the case of insufficient effort reporting. Completeness of patient’s recording is easily measured. In contrast, the intrinsic quality and accuracy of the data entered by the patients are more elusive.

Objective

The aim of this study was to explore the association of adherence to digital symptom recording with a predefined set of parameters of the patient-generated symptom and medication scores and to identify parameters that may serve as proxy measure of the quality and reliability of the information recorded by the patient.

Methods

The @IT.2020 project investigates the diagnostic synergy of mobile health and molecular allergology in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. In its pilot phase, 101 children with seasonal allergic rhinitis were recruited in Rome and instructed to record their symptoms, medication intake, and general conditions daily via a mobile app (AllergyMonitor) during the relevant pollen season. We measured adherence to daily recording as the percentage of days with data recording in the observation period. We examined the patient’s trajectories of 3 disease indices (Rhinoconjunctivitis Total Symptom Score [RTSS], Combined Symptom and Medication Score [CSMS], and Visual Analogue Scale [VAS]) as putative proxies of data quality with the following 4 parameters: (1) intravariation index, (2) percentage of zero values, (3) coefficient of variation, and (4) percentage of changes in trend. Lastly, we examined the relationship between adherence to recording and each of the 4 proxy measures.

Results

Adherence to recording ranged from 20% (11/56) to 100% (56/56), with 64.4% (65/101) and 35.6% (36/101) of the patients’ values above (highly adherent patients) or below (low adherent patients) the threshold of 80%, respectively. The percentage of zero values, the coefficient of variation, and the intravariation index did not significantly change with the adherence to recording. By contrast, the proportion of changes in trend was significantly higher among highly adherent patients, independently from the analyzed score (RTSS, CSMS, and VAS).

Conclusions

The percentage of changes in the trend of RTSS, CSMS, and VAS is a valuable candidate to validate the quality and accuracy of the data recorded by patients with allergic rhinitis during the pollen season. The performance of this parameter must be further investigated in real-life conditions before it can be recommended for routine use in apps and electronic diaries devoted to the management of patients with allergic rhinitis.

Local nasal immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Local nasal immunotherapy (LNIT), an alternative noninjection immunotherapy method, is theoretically an efficient method for inducing immunotolerance directly in the affected organ. LNIT is more convenient and less invasive than injection immunotherapy, with fewer systemic reactions. The development of adjuvants to overcome LNIT's limitations raises the possibility of it being an alternative allergen immunotherapy.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the clinical and immunological efficacy and safety of LNIT for patients with allergic rhinitis.

METHODS

A systematic search for randomized controlled trials comparing LNIT and placebo was performed using OVID Medline and Embase. Outcomes were total nasal symptom score (TNSS), symptom-medication score (SMS), medication score, immunological assessment, and nasal provocation threshold. Data were pooled for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 20 studies with 698 participants were included. The LNIT group had greater posttreatment improvement in TNSS, SMS, and medication score than control (TNSS: standardized mean difference [SMD], -1.37 [95% confidence interval [CI], -2.04 to -0.69]; SMS: SMD, -1.55 [95% CI, -2.83 to -0.28]; and medication score: SMD, -1.09 [95% CI, -1.35 to -0.83]). Immunological assessments showed no significant differences in serum-specific IgE (mean difference [MD], 6.35; 95% CI, -4.62 to 17.31), nasal IgE (MD, -0.59; 95% CI, -1.99 to 0.81), or nasal eosinophil cationic protein (MD, 7.63; 95% CI, -18.65 to 33.91). Only serum IgG significantly increased with LNIT (MD, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.20, 0.70). Posttreatment, nasal provocation threshold was higher with LNIT (MD, 27.30; 95% CI, 10.13-44.46). No significant adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

LNIT is a safe alternative allergen immunotherapy route without significant adverse events. It improves clinical symptoms, reduces medication usage, and increases the nasal provocation threshold.

High-dose pollen intralymphatic immunotherapy: Two RDBPC trials question the benefit of dose increase

BACKGROUND

The same dosing schedule, 1000 SQ-U times three, with one-month intervals, have been evaluated in most trials of intralymphatic immunotherapy (ILIT) for the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR). The present studies evaluated if a dose escalation in ILIT can enhance the clinical and immunological effects, without compromising safety.

METHODS

Two randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trials of ILIT for grass pollen-induced AR were performed. The first included 29 patients that had recently ended 3 years of SCIT and the second contained 39 not previously vaccinated patients. An up-dosage of 1000-3000-10,000 (5000 + 5000 with 30 minutes apart) SQ-U with 1 month in between was evaluated.

RESULTS

Doses up to 10,000 SQ-U were safe after recent SCIT. The combined symptom-medication scores (CSMS) were reduced by 31% and the grass-specific IgG4 levels in blood were doubled. In ILIT de novo, the two first patients that received active treatment developed serious adverse reactions at 5000 SQ-U. A modified up-dosing schedule; 1000-3000-3000 SQ-U appeared to be safe but failed to improve the CSMS. Flow cytometry analyses showed increased activation of lymph node-derived dendritic but not T cells. Quality of life and nasal provocation response did not improve in any study.

CONCLUSION

Intralymphatic immunotherapy in high doses after SCIT appears to further reduce grass pollen-induced seasonal symptoms and may be considered as an add-on treatment for patients that do not reach full symptom control after SCIT. Up-dosing schedules de novo with three monthly injections that exceeds 3000 SQ-U should be avoided.

One hundred and ten years of Allergen Immunotherapy: A journey from empiric observation to evidence

One hundred and ten years after Noon's first clinical report of the subcutaneous application of allergen extracts, allergen immunotherapy (AIT) has evolved as the most important pillar of the treatment of allergic patients. It is the only disease-modifying treatment option available and the evidence for its clinical efficacy and safety is broad and undisputed. Throughout recent decades, more insights into the underlying mechanisms, in particular the modulation of innate and adaptive immune responses, have been described. AIT is acknowledged by worldwide regulatory authorities, and following the regulatory guidelines for product development, AIT products are subject to a rigorous evaluation before obtaining market authorization. Knowledge and practice are anchored in international guidelines, such as the recently published series of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI). Innovative approaches continue to be further developed with the focus on clinical improvement by, for example, the usage of adjuvants, peptides, recombinants, modification of allergens, new routes of administration, and the concomitant use of biologicals. In addition, real-life data provide complementary and valuable information on the effectiveness and tolerability of this treatment option in the clinical routine. New mobile health technologies and big-data approaches will improve daily treatment convenience, adherence, and efficacy of AIT. However, the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has also had some implications for the feasibility and practicability of AIT. Taken together, AIT as the only disease-modifying therapy in allergic diseases has been broadly investigated over the past 110 years laying the path for innovations and further improvement.

Heterogeneous validity of daily data on symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis recorded by patients using the e-diary AllergyMonitor®

BACKGROUND

Patient-generated symptom and medication scores are essential for diagnostic and therapeutic decisions in seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). Previous studies have shown solid consistencies between different scores at population level in real-life data and trials. For clinicians, the evaluation of individual data quality over time is essential to decide whether to rely on these data in clinical decision-making.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the consistency of different symptom (SS) and symptom medication scores (SMSs) at individual level in two study cohorts with different characteristics and explore individual patient trajectories over time.

METHODS

Within the pilot phase of the @IT.2020 project on diagnostic synergy of mobile health and molecular IgE assessment in patients with SAR, we analyzed data of 101 children and 93 adults with SAR and instructed them to record their symptoms and medication intake daily via the mobile app AllergyMonitor®. We then assessed the correlation between different SMS and a visual analogue scale (VAS) on the impact of allergy symptoms on daily life at population and individual level.

RESULTS

At population level, the Rhinoconjunctivitis total symptom score (RTSS) correlated better with VAS than the combined symptom and medication score (CSMS). At individual level, consistency among RTSS and VAS was highly heterogeneous and unrelated to disease severity or adherence to recording. Similar heterogeneity was observed for CSMS and VAS.

CONCLUSIONS

The correlation of clinical information provided by different disease severity scores based on data collected via electronic diaries (e-diaries), is sufficient at population level, but broadly heterogeneous for individual patients. Consistency of the recorded data must be examined for each patient before remotely collected information is used for clinical decision making.

Randomized controlled trial of ragweed sublingual immunotherapy tablet in the subpopulation of Canadian children and adolescents with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

Background

Post hoc analyses of randomized placebo-controlled trials have demonstrated efficacy and tolerability of the ragweed sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablet in Canadian adults with ragweed pollen-induced allergic rhinitis/conjunctivitis (AR/C). This post hoc analysis evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of the ragweed SLIT-tablet in the subpopulation of Canadian children and adolescents with AR/C in a previously described randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Methods

The trial (NCT02478398) was conducted in North American and European children/adolescents ages 5–17 years with ragweed pollen-induced AR/C with or without asthma (FEV1 ≥ 80% predicted). Participants were randomized to daily ragweed SLIT-tablet (12 Amb a 1-U) or placebo for up to 28 weeks. The primary endpoint was the average total combined score (TCS; sum of rhinoconjunctivitis daily symptom score [DSS] and daily medication score [DMS]) during peak ragweed pollen season (RPS). Key secondary endpoints were TCS during the entire RPS, and DSS and DMS during peak RPS. Post hoc analyses of the primary and key secondary endpoints were conducted in the subpopulation of Canadian participants.

Results

Of the 1025 randomized participants, 246 (SLIT-tablet, n = 116; placebo, n = 130) were in the Canadian subpopulation. In the total study population, relative TCS (95% CI) improvement with ragweed SLIT-tablet versus placebo was − 38.3% (− 46.0%, − 29.7%; least square [LS] mean difference, − 2.73; P < 0.001) during peak RPS. In the Canadian subpopulation, relative TCS improvements with ragweed SLIT-tablet versus placebo were − 40.8% (− 54.5%, − 20.2%; LS mean difference, − 1.59; P = 0.001) during peak RPS and − 36.6% (− 50.2%, − 16.5%; LS mean difference, − 1.36; P = 0.002) during the entire RPS. DSS and DMS during peak RPS in the Canadian subpopulation improved with SLIT-tablet versus placebo by − 30.6% (− 45.2%, − 7.7%; LS mean difference, − 0.94; P = 0.010) and − 77.2% (− 97.5%, − 44.2%; LS mean difference, − 0.66; P = 0.003), respectively. No events of anaphylaxis, airway compromise, intramuscular epinephrine administration, eosinophilic esophagitis, or severe treatment-related systemic allergic reactions were reported in the overall population or Canadian subpopulation.

Conclusion

Efficacy and safety of the ragweed SLIT-tablet in Canadian children/adolescents with ragweed pollen-induced AR/C was consistent with the total study population. The ragweed SLIT-tablet resulted in clinically meaningful improvement in symptoms, decreased symptom-relieving medication use, and was well tolerated in Canadian children/adolescents.

Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02478398. Registered June 23, 2015, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02478398?term=NCT02478398&draw=2&rank=1

Clinical Relevance and Advantages of Intradermal Test Results in 371 Patients with Allergic Rhinitis, Asthma and/or Otitis Media with Effusion

Background: We evaluated the value of positive intradermal dilution testing (IDT) after negative skin prick tests (SPT) by retrospectively determining allergy immunotherapy (AIT) outcomes. Methods: This private practice, cohort study compared the relative value of SPT vs. IDT in 371 adults and children with suspected manifestations of allergy: chronic allergic rhinitis (AR), asthma and/or chronic otitis media with effusion (OME). The primary outcome measure was symptom resolution following immunotherapy, as determined by symptom severity questionnaires completed by patients before and after AIT. Results: Positive IDT identified 193 (52%) patients who would not otherwise have been diagnosed. IDT detected 3.7-fold more allergens per patient than SPT (8.56 vs. 2.3; p < 0.01). Patients positive only on IDT responded to AIT equally well as those identifiable by SPT, independent of allergen sensitivity (67% by SPT vs. 62% by IDT; p = 0.69, not significantly different). Conclusion: Intradermal titration can identify patients who will benefit from allergy immunotherapy more accurately than SPT. Outcomes analysis in 371 patients shows that IDT doubled their chance of successful treatment with no greater risk of therapeutic failure. Positive IDT, following negative SPT, is clinically relevant and offers superior sensitivity over SPT for detecting allergens clinically relevant to diagnosis of AIT-responsive atopic disease.

Dogmas, challenges, and promises in phase III allergen immunotherapy studies

The concept of treatment of an allergy with the offending allergen was introduced more than a century ago. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease modifying treatment of allergic diseases caused by inhalational allergens and insect venoms. Despite this, only few AIT products have reached licensure in the US or an official marketing authorization status in European countries. Moreover, most of these AIT products are provided on an individual patient basis as named patient products (NPP) in Europe, while individualized preparations of (mixed) allergenic extract vials for subcutaneous administration (compounding) is common practice in the US. AIT products are generally considered safe and well tolerated, but the major practical clinical development challenge is to define the optimal dose and prove the efficacy and safety of these products using state-of-the art Phase II and pivotal Phase III studies. In planning Phase II-III AIT studies, a thorough understanding of the study challenges is essential (e.g. variability and non-validated status of subjective primary endpoints, limitations of pollen season definitions) and dogmas of these products (e.g., for sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) trials double-blinding conditions cannot be maintained, resulting in stronger placebo responses in the active treatment group and inflated treatment effects in Phase III). There is future promise for more objective biomarker endpoints (e.g. basophil activation (CD63 and CD203c), subsets of regulatory dendritic, T and B cells, IL-10–producing group 2 innate lymphoid cells; alone or in combination) to overcome several of these dogmas and challenges; innovation in AIT clinical trials can only progress with integral biomarker research to complement the traditional endpoints in Phase II-III clinical development. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of these dogmas, challenges and recommendations based on published data, to facilitate the design of Phase III studies and improve the evidence basis of safe and effective AIT products.

Efficacy and safety of intralymphatic immunotherapy in allergic rhinitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Intralymphatic immunotherapy (ILIT) is a potential treatment option for allergic rhinitis (AR). We aimed to determine the efficacy (primary outcomes) and safety (secondary outcomes) of ILIT in treating patients with AR.

METHODS

An electronic literature search was performed using MEDLINE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials CENTRAL (from their inception to December 2020). A random-effects model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence with 95% confidence intervals. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019126271).

RESULTS

We retrieved a total of 285 articles, of which 11 satisfied our inclusion criteria. There were 452 participants with age ranged from 15 to 58 years old. Intralymphatic immunotherapy was given in three doses with intervals of four weeks between doses in 10 trials. One trial gave three and six doses with an interval of two weeks. Both primary and secondary outcomes showed no difference between ILIT and placebo for all trials. There was no difference in the combined symptoms and medication score (SMD -0.51, 95% CI -1.31 to 0.28), symptoms score (SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.91 to 0.38), medication score (SMD -6.56, 95% CI -21.48 to 8.37), rescue medication (RR 12.32, 95% CI 0.72-211.79) and the overall improvement score (MD -0.07, 95% CI -2.28 to 2.14) between ILIT and placebo. No major adverse events noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Intralymphatic immunotherapy possibly has a role in the treatment of AR patients. This review found it is safe but not effective, which could be contributed by the high variation amongst the trials. Future trials should involve larger numbers of participants and report standardized administration of ILIT and outcome measures.

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.

Intralymphatic immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Only a fraction of patients with allergic rhinitis receive allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT). AIT is most commonly delivered subcutaneously in a series of injections over 3-5 years. Common obstacles to completing this therapy include cost and inconvenience. Intralymphatic immunotherapy (ILIT) has been proposed as a faster alternative, which requires as few as three injections spaced 4 weeks apart. Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the current evidence that supports the use of ILIT for allergic rhinitis. Methods: Clinical trials were identified in the published literature by using an electronic search strategy and were evaluated by using a risk of bias tool. Treatment outcome (symptom scores, medication scores, and combined symptom and medication scores) and provocation testing results (nasal provocation and skin-prick testing) were included in a meta-analysis of standardized mean difference with subgrouping by using a random-effects model. Overall adverse event rates were tabulated, and overall risk ratios were calculated by using a random-effects model. Results: We identified 17 clinical trials that met eligibility criteria. The standardized mean difference of ILIT on the symptom and medication score was -0.72 (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.98 to -0.46; p < 0.0001) (n = 10). The standardized mean difference of ILIT on nasal provocation and skin-prick testing was -1.00 (95% CI, -1.38 to -0.61; p < 0.0001) (n = 7) and -0.73 (95% CI, -0.99 to -0.47; p < 0.0001) (n = 7), respectively. No statistically significant heterogeneity was detected. The overall adverse event rate was 39.5% for ILIT and 23.5% for placebo. Also, 98.4% of adverse events were mild. Conclusion: Our meta-analysis demonstrated that ILIT was safe, conferred desensitization to seasonal and nonseasonal allergens, alleviated allergic rhinitis symptoms, and reduced medication use. A larger randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trial will be necessary for wider adaptation of this form of AIT.

Serum Soluble ST2 Correlated with Symptom Severity and Clinical Response of Sublingual Immunotherapy for House Dust Mite-Induced Allergic Rhinitis Patients

Background

Suppressor of tumorigenicity 2 (ST2) is a key biomarker in inflammation and cardiovascular diseases, but limited data is available on its role in allergic rhinitis (AR).

Objective

The aim of this study is to explore the role of serum soluble ST2 (sST2) in evaluating disease severity and predicting the efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in house dust mite- (HDM-) induced AR patients.

Methods

Eighty healthy controls (HC group) and 160 HDM-induced AR patients, including 40 mild patients (MAR group) and 120 moderate-severe patients (MSAR group), were recruited in this study. Serum was collected from all participants and levels of sST2 were determined by ELISA and the relationship between sST2 levels and disease severity was assessed. In the MSAR group, 109 patients received 3 years of SLIT, and the relationship between serum levels of sST2 and efficacy of SLIT was exampled.

Results

Serum sST2 levels were increased in HDM-induced AR patients compared to the HC group (P < 0.001), and the concentrations were higher in the MSAR group than in the MAR group and HC group (all P < 0.05). Moreover, sST2 levels positively correlated with the total nasal symptom score (TNSS), visual analogue scale (VAS), and specific IgE levels (P < 0.05). Seventy-eight MSAR patients accomplished SLIT, and they were divided into an effective group (n = 40) and an ineffective group (n = 38). The serum sST2 levels in the effective group were lower than those in the ineffective group (P < 0.001). In addition, patients in the effective group levels exhibited significantly lower sST2 levels post-SLIT than pre-SLIT (P < 0.001), but no statistic difference was observed in the ineffective group (P > 0.05). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve showed promising accuracy for predicting clinical efficacy of SLIT in AR patients (area under the curve = 0.839, P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Serum sST2 is a potential biomarker for assessing disease severity and may serve as a sensitive biomarker for predicting the therapeutic response of SLIT in HDM-induced AR patients.

Recent development on the use of sublingual immunotherapy tablets for allergic rhinitis

OBJECTIVE

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is an immunoglobulin (Ig) E-mediated inflammatory condition that causes sneezing, nasal congestion, rhinorrhea, and nasal itch. Although subcutaneous immunotherapy for the treatment of AR has been in use and well established as a treatment modality, sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is increasingly considered to be the safer and more convenient alternative. Thus, the objective of this review is to describe recent findings pertaining to the use of SLIT tablets (SLIT-T) for AR.

DATA SOURCES

A database search (PubMed.gov) for articles published between January 1, 2017, and February 9, 2021, was conducted using the following key words: "allergic rhinitis," AND-ed "sublingual immunotherapy." Included were randomized placebo-controlled trials. Other experimental design studies were excluded.

STUDY SELECTIONS

A total of 11 randomized placebo-controlled trials were selected for full-text review and included in the analysis. All studies investigated the use of SLIT on patients with seasonal AR (4 tree pollen, 1 grass pollen, and 1 Japanese cedar) or perennial AR (3 house dust mite).

RESULTS

Our review of 7 recently published randomized placebo-controlled trials with 2348 subjects receiving SLIT reported increased efficacy, safety, supportive immunologic parameters (IgE and IgG4 pre- and posttreatment levels), and improved quality of life. All studies excluded subjects with overlapping seasonal or perennial allergens, a history of moderate-to-severe uncontrolled asthma, or reduced lung function.

CONCLUSION

Our review highlights that SLIT is a safe and effective treatment that considerably reduces symptoms and medication requirements in AR and improves quality of life.

A Retrospective Cohort Study of Sublingual Immunotherapy with Standardized Dermatophagoides farinae Drops for Allergic Rhinitis

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) with standardized Dermatophagoides farinae (Df) drops in monosensitized and polysensitized patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) and to analyze the adverse events (AEs).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed using data for 68 patients with AR who received SLIT. The patients were divided into a monosensitized group (36 cases) and a polysensitized group (32 cases) based on serum-specific IgE test results. In the two groups of patients, total nasal symptoms score (TNSS), total medication score (TMS), visual analog scale (VAS) score, and AEs before treatment and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months of treatment were evaluated.

RESULTS

Compared with that before treatment, the TNSS, TMS, and VAS score in the monosensitized and polysensitized groups all decreased significantly at 3, 6, and 12 months of SLIT (all P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in treatment efficacy indicators between the two groups at all treatment time points (all P > 0.05). In terms of safety, compared with 1 month after initiating SLIT, the incidence of AEs in the monosensitized and polysensitized groups at 6 and 12 months of treatment significantly decreased (all P < 0.05). There was a statistically significant decrease in the incidence of AEs in both groups at 6 months compared with 3 months of treatment (χ² = 1.92 and 5.85, respectively, all P < 0.05). The difference in incidence of AEs between the monosensitized and polysensitized groups was not statistically significant at any treatment time point (all P > 0.05). AEs in all patients were local mild reactions; no serious AEs were found.

CONCLUSION

SLIT with standardized Df drops has similar efficacy and safety for monosensitized and polysensitized patients with AR. AEs mostly occurred during the first 3 months of SLIT in both the monosensitized and polysensitized groups, and the incidence of AEs gradually decreased as the course of treatment extended.

Subcutaneous Versus Sublingual Immunotherapy for Adults with Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analyses

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) better improves patient outcomes and quality of life for adults with allergic rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis (AR/C) with or without mild to moderate asthma.

METHODS

Systematic review methodology was based on the Cochrane Collaboration handbook and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses. Four databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science) were queried from inception to July 30, 2020. Two independent reviewers screened potentially relevant studies and assessed risk of bias. Outcomes of interest were symptom score (SS), medication score (MS), combined symptom medication score (CSMS), and Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ). Meta-analyses with an adjusted indirect comparison were conducted in RevMan 5.4.1.

RESULTS

Seven SCIT versus SLIT randomized controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrated no significant differences for any outcomes, but insufficient data precluded direct meta-analysis. For the adjusted indirect comparison, 46 RCTs over 39 studies were included for SCIT versus placebo (n = 13) and SLIT versus placebo (n = 33). Statistically significant results favoring SCIT were found for SS (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.31-0.49), MS (SMD = 0.26; 95% CI = 0.14-0.39), CSMS (SMD = 0.42; 95% CI = 0.17-0.67), and RQLQ (MD = 0.24; 95% CI = 0.04-0.44). Statistically significant results favoring SLIT were found for SS (SMD = 0.42; 95% CI = 0.32-0.53), MS (SMD = 0.40; 95% CI = 0.28-0.53), CSMS (SMD = 0.37; 95% CI = 0.29-0.45), and RQLQ (MD = 0.32; 95% CI = 0.20-0.43). No significant differences were found between SCIT and SLIT for SS (SMD = -0.02; 95% CI = -0.15 to 0.11), MS (SMD = -0.14; 95% CI = -0.31 to 0.03), CSMS (SMD = 0.05; 95% CI = -0.21 to 0.31), or RQLQ (MD = -0.08; 95% CI = -0.31 to 0.15).

CONCLUSION

SCIT and SLIT are comparably effective treatments for adults with AR/C. More RCTs analyzing SCIT versus SLIT are needed to directly compare the two. Laryngoscope, 2021.

Intradermal Testing Doubles Identification of Allergy among 110 Immunotherapy-Responsive Patients with Eustachian Tube Dysfunction

The purpose of this study was to determine whether the sensitivity advantage of intradermal dilutional testing (IDT) is clinically relevant in patients with obstructive Eustachian tube dysfunction (ETD) or otitis media with effusion (OME). This retrospective, private-practice cohort study compared the sensitivity of skin prick tests (SPT) vs. IDT in 110 adults and children with suspected allergy and OME. Primary outcome measure was symptom resolution from allergy immunotherapy (AIT). IDT identified 57% more patients as being allergic, and 8.6 times more reactive allergens than would have been diagnosed using only SPT. Patients diagnosed by IDT had the same degree of symptom improvement from immunotherapy, independent of allergen sensitivity (66% by SPT vs. 63% by IDT; p = 0.69, not different). Low-sensitivity allergy tests, which may fail to identify allergy in over two thirds of children aged 3 to 15 as being atopic, or among 60% of patients with ETD, may explain why many physicians do not consider allergy as a treatable etiology for their patient's OME/ETD. IDT offers superior sensitivity over SPT for detecting allergens clinically relevant to treating OME/ETD. These data strongly support increased utilization of intradermal testing and invite additional clinical outcome studies.

Allergen Immunotherapy: Biomarkers and Clinical Outcome Measures

Clinical trials for allergen immunotherapy products’ development and approval are conducted, aiming to monitor safety and efficacy of them. Symptom scores and the use of rescue medication are the primary clinical endpoints used in the conducted clinical trials, while Quality of Life scores and symptom-free days are measurements also used as secondary endpoints. Although the use of in vitro biomarkers might have been more practical and objective, there are yet no broadly used reliable ones accurately reflecting the clinical effects of allergen immunotherapy. On the contrary, in vivo biomarkers, such as the nasal allergy provocation test, are reliable and successfully used. The aim of this review is to describe how to adapt and use biomarkers and clinical outcomes in the everyday practice of Allergists who perform allergen immunotherapy.

A proposed medication score for long-term trials of treatment of canine atopic dermatitis sensu lato

BACKGROUND

The use of concurrent medications is necessary in trials of treatment of canine atopic dermatitis. Our aim was to use the best available evidence to construct and then to validate a medication score (MS) formula that will estimate the impact of concurrent medications on trial outcomes.

METHODS

Trials of 15 interventions were scrutinized to find those that were consistent in terms of specific medication, administration route and dosage regimen. A MS was constructed in five steps, starting from assigning a score of 1 for each day on oral prednisone, prednisolone or methylprednisolone at 0.5-1.0 mg/kg. The MS score was validated using the clinical records of 35 dogs with atopic dermatitis that had been treated for a period of 12 ± 2 weeks with six of these medications and compared with a previously published non-validated MS.

RESULTS

A MS could be assigned to eight treatments, six of which had been administered to the 35 dogs. A positive correlation was seen with the previously published MS and a negative correlation with changes in lesional and pruritus scores.

CONCLUSION

This MS may be a useful tool in new studies evaluating the efficacy of treatments in canine atopic dermatitis.

[Clinical post-approval studies as part of the Therapy Allergen Regulation (TAV): A systematic review]

With the introduction of the Therapy Allergens Ordinance (TAV) the previously unapproved therapeutic allergens on the existing market need to be checked for their risk-benefit ratio as a basic prerequisite for approval under pharmaceutical law. This process is criticized because it can lead to long transition periods so that patients will probably be treated for two decades with preparations whose effectiveness has not yet been proven and may never be proven. The aim of this work is to list the critical preparations for which no publicly accessible study activity has been recorded since the beginning of the TAV in 2008. For this purpose, the European Clinical Trials Register (clinicaltrialsregister.eu) and the American study register (ClinicalTrials.gov) are systematically searched. The following hypothesis, consistent with the TAV, will be checked: "In the past years, study programs were carried out for the preparations in the process of the TAV - the majority of these preparations are about to be approved by PEI". The hypothesis is refuted with the findings of this work. In fact, no preparation can currently be identified that is about to be TAV approved. 61 preparations are currently in the TAV process; only two preparations have already passed this successfully. If the total of 63 (61+2) preparations are combined in the homologous groups - trees, grasses, mites and mixtures -, there are 33 preparations that can be classified as follows: For the 33 preparations in the TAV process, 36 studies (phase II and III) that may potentially be relevant for TAV were found as part of the screening. For 15 of these studies the results have duly been entered in the European study register. The results of another 13 studies have not been stored in the study register although they are marked as completed. No information has been stored in the European study register for four studies so that the status of these studies remains unclear. Four studies have not yet been completed. Responsible doctors can make recommendations for the prescription of a certain SIT preparation only if there is adequate evidence of its effectiveness. For preparations that have not yet started studies more than ten years after the introduction of the TAV, it is very doubtful whether approval can still be obtained or whether it is even being sought. For the three main inhaled allergens (grasses, trees and mites) there is already a selection of approved, evidence-based and effective alternatives for both subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual (SLIT) application from various manufacturers on the market. The use of therapies that have been approved and proven effective is essential in terms of guideline-compliant, sensible care for patients.

Compliance, efficacy, and safety of subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy in children with allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Although previous studies had confirmed the effectiveness and safety of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), respectively, direct head-to-head comparison of SCIT vs SLIT is sparse. We aimed to compare the efficacy, safety, and compliance of SCIT and SLIT in allergic rhinitis (AR) children.

METHODS

This study is a prospective, open-label, and single-center study performed between June 2017 and June 2018. A total of 325 children were grouped into SLIT, Alutard (SCIT1), and NovoHelisen Depot (NHD) (SCIT2) according to the parents' wishes. The adherence and reasons for dropout were recorded. The efficacy of SLIT and SCIT was evaluated by a combined symptom medication score. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded and graded during the whole treatment.

RESULTS

The compliance rate was higher in the SCIT group compared with the SLIT group (P < .05). The total nasal symptom score (TNSS), rescue medication score (RMS), and symptom medication score (SMS) after 6-month, 12-month, and 2-year treatment were lower in the SCIT group compared with the SLIT group (P < .05). But the scores between the Alutard and NHD groups were not significantly different. The occurrence of AEs in the SCIT group was significantly higher compared with the SLIT group (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggested SCIT is more effective compared with SLIT to a certain degree, whereas SLIT had less AEs compared with SCIT. The AIT routes can be chosen according to personal specific conditions.

Comparison of nasal airway obstruction with sonoelastography and nose obstruction symptom evaluation scores in children with allergic rhinitis

Objective

Nasal airway obstruction caused by inferior turbinate hypertrophy is the most troublesome symptom for patients with allergic rhinitis. The aim of this study was to determine any correlation between different nasal obstruction measurements in children with allergic rhinitis.

Material and Methods

Nasal airway obstruction was assessed with Sonoelastography, Turkish version of the Nose Obstruction Symptom Evaluation scale, Rhinoconjunctivitis Total Symptom Score and visual analog scale methods in children with allergic rhinitis and the results were compared with a healthy control group.

Results

Evaluation was made of a total of 68 patients (40 boys and 28 girls [male: female ratio, 1.42]) with a mean age of 13.35±3.35 (range, 7-18) years. The Rhinoconjunctivitis Total Symptom Score, visual analog scale, and Turkish version of the Nose Obstruction Symptom Evaluation scale scores were significantly higher in the AR group than in the control group (p=0.001, p=0.001, p=0.001, respectively). The sonoelastography scores were significantly higher in the AR group than in the control group (p=0.001). Although a positive significant correlation was determined between Rhinoconjunctivitis Total Symptom Score, visual analog scale, and Turkish version of the Nose Obstruction Symptom Evaluation scale scores in terms of AR severity, no relationship was found with the sonoelastography scores (p=0.022, p=0.009, p=0.001, and p=0.0751, respectively).

Conclusion

The Turkish version of the Nose Obstruction Symptom Evaluation scale and sonoelastography can be used to evaluate nasal obstruction due to inferior turbinate hypertrophy in children with allergic rhinitis.

Artemisia Annua sublingual immunotherapy for seasonal allergic rhinitis: A multicenter, randomized trial

Background

Artemisia annua is the most common outdoor aeroallergen throughout Northern China; however, no multicenter study has investigated sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) as a treatment option for Artemisia annua-induced allergic rhinitis (AR). The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of an innovative SLIT for Artemisia annua-related AR.

Methods

This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, phase 3 clinical trial conducted in China (NCT XXX). A total of 702 Artemisia annua-sensitized eligible patients were randomized in a ratio of 2:1 to receive Artemisia annua-SLIT or placebo. The treatment lasted 32 weeks; including 5-weeks up-dosing phase and 27-weeks maintenance phase. The primary endpoint was the daily combined score of medication and rhinoconjunctivitis symptom (CSMRS), and secondary endpoints were daily total nasal symptom score (dTNSS) and daily rescue medication score (dRMS) during peak pollen period. Safety of treatment was evaluated according to adverse events (AEs) experienced.

Results

Mean daily CSMRS was significantly improved during the peak pollen period in the SLIT group compared with the placebo group (1.46 ± 0.47 vs 1.88 ± 0.42, P < 0.0001 in full analysis set [FAS]; 1.49 ± 0.52 vs 1.95 ± 0.46, P < 0.0001 in per protocol set [PPS]); representing a 22.3% and 23.6% reduction, respectively, relative to placebo. In specifically Artemisia annua monosensitized patients, mean daily CSMRS reductions were demonstrated as 24.1% and 27.0% in the FAS and PPS populations, respectively, when comparing the active treatment to placebo treatment. Similarly, SLIT decreased dTNSS in peak pollen period by 19.0% in FAS and 22.3% in PPS, respectively, relative to placebo. In coincidence, dRMS in peak pollen period was reduced by 22.0% in FAS and 26.0% in PPS. 65.8% patients in SLIT group experienced treatment-related AEs, none of which was serious.

Conclusion

This study indicates that SLIT with Artemisia annua drops is an effective and safe treatment option in Chinese patients with Artemisia Annua-induced AR.

"Whole" vs. "fragmented" approach to EAACI pollen season definitions: A multicenter study in six Southern European cities

BACKGROUND

The adequate definition of pollen seasons is essential to facilitate a correct diagnosis, treatment choice, and outcome assessment in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. A position paper by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) proposed season definitions for Northern and Middle Europe.

OBJECTIVE

To test the pollen season definitions proposed by EAACI in six Mediterranean cities for seven pollen taxa.

METHODS

As part of the @IT.2020 multi-center study, pollen counts for Poaceae, Oleaceae, Fagales, Cupressaceae, Urticaceae (Parietaria spp.), and Compositae (Ambrosia spp., Artemisia spp.) were collected from January 1 to December 31, 2018. Based on these data, pollen seasons were identified according to EAACI criteria. A unified monitoring period for patients in AIT trials was created and assessed for feasibility.

RESULTS

The analysis revealed a great heterogeneity between the different locations in terms of pattern and length of the examined pollen seasons. Further, we found a fragmentation of pollen seasons in several segments (max. 8) separated by periods of low pollen counts (intercurrent periods). Potential monitoring periods included often many recording days with low pollen exposure (max. 341 days).

CONCLUSION

The Mediterranean climate leads to challenging pollen exposure times. Monitoring periods for AIT trials based on existing definitions may include many intermittent days with low pollen concentrations. Therefore, it is necessary to find an adapted pollen season definition as individual solution for each pollen and geographical area.