Five-grass pollen 300IR SLIT tablets: efficacy and safety in children and adolescents

Pharmacological Management of Allergic Rhinitis: A Consensus Statement from the Malaysian Society of Allergy and Immunology

The goal of allergic rhinitis (AR) management is to achieve satisfactory symptom control to ensure good quality of life. Most patients with AR are currently treated with pharmacotherapy. However, knowledge gaps on the use of pharmacotherapy still exist among physicians, particularly in the primary care setting, despite the availability of guideline recommendations. Furthermore, it is common for physicians in the secondary care setting to express uncertainty regarding the use of new combination therapies like intranasal corticosteroid plus antihistamine combinations. Inadequate treatment leads to significant reduction of quality of life that affects daily activities at home, work, and school. With these concerns in mind, a practical consensus statement was developed to complement existing guidelines on the rational use of pharmacotherapy in both the primary and secondary care settings.

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.

EAACI Allergen Immunotherapy User's Guide

Allergen immunotherapy is a cornerstone in the treatment of allergic children. The clinical efficiency relies on a well-defined immunologic mechanism promoting regulatory T cells and downplaying the immune response induced by allergens. Clinical indications have been well documented for respiratory allergy in the presence of rhinitis and/or allergic asthma, to pollens and dust mites. Patients who have had an anaphylactic reaction to hymenoptera venom are also good candidates for allergen immunotherapy. Administration of allergen is currently mostly either by subcutaneous injections or by sublingual administration. Both methods have been extensively studied and have pros and cons. Specifically in children, the choice of the method of administration according to the patient's profile is important. Although allergen immunotherapy is widely used, there is a need for improvement. More particularly, biomarkers for prediction of the success of the treatments are needed. The strength and efficiency of the immune response may also be boosted by the use of better adjuvants. Finally, novel formulations might be more efficient and might improve the patient's adherence to the treatment. This user's guide reviews current knowledge and aims to provide clinical guidance to healthcare professionals taking care of children undergoing allergen immunotherapy.

Management of ocular allergy

The treatment and management of ocular allergy (OA) remain a major concern for different specialties, including allergists, ophthalmologists, primary care physicians, rhinologists, pediatricians, dermatologists, clinical immunologists, and pharmacists. We performed a systematic review of all relevant publications in MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web Science including systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Publications were considered relevant if they addressed treatments, or management strategies of OA. A further wider systematic literature search was performed if no evidence or good quality evidence was found. There are effective drugs for the treatment of OA; however, there is a lack an optimal treatment for the perennial and severe forms. Topical antihistamines, mast cell stabilizers, or double-action drugs are the first choice of treatment. All of them are effective in reducing signs and symptoms of OA. The safety and optimal dosing regimen of the most effective topical anti-inflammatory drugs, corticosteroids, are still a major concern. Topical calcineurin inhibitors may be used in steroid-dependent/resistant cases of severe allergic keratoconjunctivitis. Allergen-specific immunotherapy may be considered in cases of failure of first-line treatments or to modify the natural course of OA disease. Based on the current wealth of publications and on the collective experience, recommendations on management of OA have been proposed.

Allergy and the Pediatric Otolaryngologist

Food allergy and allergic rhinitis are childhood diseases with special relevance to the pediatric otolaryngologist. Much of the diagnosis of food allergy can be made on history alone; strict avoidance is the mainstay treatment. Skin prick testing and serum-specific IgE testing play a stronger role in allergic rhinitis diagnosis. If pharmacotherapy fails, allergen immunotherapy is an option. Currently, there is intense investigation on diagnostic tests, novel treatments, and prevention strategies that could dramatically affect the way these diseases are identified and managed. This article summarizes the epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of food allergy and allergic rhinitis.

BSACI guideline for the diagnosis and management of allergic and non-allergic rhinitis (Revised Edition 2017; First edition 2007)

This is an updated guideline for the diagnosis and management of allergic and non-allergic rhinitis, first published in 2007. It was produced by the Standards of Care Committee of the British Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, using accredited methods. Allergic rhinitis is common and affects 10-15% of children and 26% of adults in the UK, it affects quality of life, school and work attendance, and is a risk factor for development of asthma. Allergic rhinitis is diagnosed by history and examination, supported by specific allergy tests. Topical nasal corticosteroids are the treatment of choice for moderate to severe disease. Combination therapy with intranasal corticosteroid plus intranasal antihistamine is more effective than either alone and provides second line treatment for those with rhinitis poorly controlled on monotherapy. Immunotherapy is highly effective when the specific allergen is the responsible driver for the symptoms. Treatment of rhinitis is associated with benefits for asthma. Non-allergic rhinitis also is a risk factor for the development of asthma and may be eosinophilic and steroid-responsive or neurogenic and non- inflammatory. Non-allergic rhinitis may be a presenting complaint for systemic disorders such as granulomatous or eosinophilic polyangiitis, and sarcoidoisis. Infective rhinitis can be caused by viruses, and less commonly by bacteria, fungi and protozoa.

Real-life safety of 5-grass pollen tablet in 5-to-9-year-old children with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

BACKGROUND

Although 5-grass pollen sublingual immunotherapy has a good safety profile in controlled clinical trials, additional safety information among pediatric patients in a real-world setting would be useful.

OBJECTIVE

To further document the safety of 5-grass tablet among children aged 5 to 9 years with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC).

METHODS

This multicenter, observational study included allergy immunotherapy-naïve 5- to 9-year-old children with grass pollen-induced ARC prescribed with 5-grass tablet daily (3-day dose escalation to 300 index of reactivity [IR]). Patients were followed up daily for safety and tolerability over the first 30 treatment days. Adverse events (AEs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were analyzed descriptively.

RESULTS

Three hundred seven children (mean age, 7.1 years) were enrolled. Fifty-eight percent were confirmed as polysensitized, and 36% had mild-to-moderate asthma. Of 307 patients, 233 (76%) reported AEs, and 173/307 (56%) reported ADRs, most frequently mild application-site reactions (throat irritation, oral pruritus, oral paresthesia). Sixteen of 307 (5.2%) patients withdrew because of ADRs. In 143 of 173 (83%) patients, ADRs first occurred within 1 week of starting treatment. More than half of the ADRs lasted less than 2 days, and ADRs resolved spontaneously in 161 of 173 (93%) patients. Recurrences of ADRs were reported in 45 of 173 (26%) patients and were also mainly application-site reactions. No notable differences were found in ADRs related to whether patients had asthma at inclusion. Neither epinephrine use nor admission to intensive care unit was reported.

CONCLUSION

The safety profile of 5-grass tablet in pediatric ARC patients aged 5 to 9 years was consistent with safety findings in older patients, most ADRs being at the application site and mild to moderate. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02295969; EUPAS registration number: 8104.

Sublingual allergen immunotherapy for respiratory allergy: a systematic review

The objective of the systematic review is to provide complete and updated information on efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) formulations for the treatment of allergic respiratory diseases (ARDs). The literature search was conducted on PubMed database, involving double-blind, randomized clinical trials published between January 1992 and 2018, written in English, and performed in humans. The number of articles finally selected for review was 112. Data from the majority of properly controlled clinical trials demonstrate that SLIT is effective not only with short-term use (first year) but also with long-term use (up to the third year of active therapy), for treating ARDs in children and adults. Both continuous and discontinuous schemes of administration showed significant reductions in symptom and medication scores. Moreover, a SLIT-induced disease-modifying effect has been documented mainly with grass pollen extracts, since improvement is maintained during at least 2 years of follow-up after a 3-year treatment period. Additionally, allergen immunotherapy should also be considered a preventive strategy, especially for decreasing bronchial asthma incidence in children and adolescents with allergic rhinitis treated with SLIT. This therapy is also safe, producing only a few mainly local and mild-to-moderate adverse events, and usually self-limited in time. The registration and authorization of allergen SLIT preparations (grasses and house-dust mite tablets) as drugs by regulatory agencies, such as the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA), has represented a landmark in allergy immunotherapy research. Further long-term studies, specially designed with allergens other than grass pollen or house-dust mites, not only in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis but also on asthmatic subjects, as well as studies comparing different administration schedules and/or routes, are required in order to continue the progress in the modern development of this particularly promising therapy.

EAACI Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy: Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (AR) is an allergic disorder of the nose and eyes affecting about a fifth of the general population. Symptoms of AR can be controlled with allergen avoidance measures and pharmacotherapy. However, many patients continue to have ongoing symptoms and an impaired quality of life; pharmacotherapy may also induce some side-effects. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) represents the only currently available treatment that targets the underlying pathophysiology, and it may have a disease-modifying effect. Either the subcutaneous (SCIT) or sublingual (SLIT) routes may be used. This Guideline has been prepared by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology's (EAACI) Taskforce on AIT for AR and is part of the EAACI presidential project "EAACI Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy." It aims to provide evidence-based clinical recommendations and has been informed by a formal systematic review and meta-analysis. Its generation has followed the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) approach. The process included involvement of the full range of stakeholders. In general, broad evidence for the clinical efficacy of AIT for AR exists but a product-specific evaluation of evidence is recommended. In general, SCIT and SLIT are recommended for both seasonal and perennial AR for its short-term benefit. The strongest evidence for long-term benefit is documented for grass AIT (especially for the grass tablets) where long-term benefit is seen. To achieve long-term efficacy, it is recommended that a minimum of 3 years of therapy is used. Many gaps in the evidence base exist, particularly around long-term benefit and use in children.

Allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is in the process of developing Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) for Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis. To inform the development of clinical recommendations, we undertook a systematic review to assess the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and safety of AIT in the management of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.

METHODS

We searched nine international biomedical databases for published, in-progress, and unpublished evidence. Studies were independently screened by two reviewers against predefined eligibility criteria and critically appraised using established instruments. Our primary outcomes of interest were symptom, medication, and combined symptom and medication scores. Secondary outcomes of interest included cost-effectiveness and safety. Data were descriptively summarized and then quantitatively synthesized using random-effects meta-analyses.

RESULTS

We identified 5960 studies of which 160 studies satisfied our eligibility criteria. There was a substantial body of evidence demonstrating significant reductions in standardized mean differences (SMD) of symptom (SMD -0.53, 95% CI -0.63, -0.42), medication (SMD -0.37, 95% CI -0.49, -0.26), and combined symptom and medication (SMD -0.49, 95% CI -0.69, -0.30) scores while on treatment that were robust to prespecified sensitivity analyses. There was in comparison a more modest body of evidence on effectiveness post-discontinuation of AIT, suggesting a benefit in relation to symptom scores.

CONCLUSIONS

AIT is effective in improving symptom, medication, and combined symptom and medication scores in patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis while on treatment, and there is some evidence suggesting that these benefits are maintained in relation to symptom scores after discontinuation of therapy.

Management of Grass Pollen Allergy with 5-Grass Pollen Tablet: Results of a 2-Year Real-Life Study

INTRODUCTION

Allergen immunotherapy is the only treatment option for allergic rhinitis with disease-altering potential. It was the objective of this study to assess the effectiveness and tolerability of a 5-grass pollen tablet in a large population of non-selected grass pollen allergic patients, i.e. patients with different clinical profiles in daily clinical practice.

METHODS

In a 2-year, prospective, open-label, multicenter, non-controlled, observational study patients were included from 327 centers across Germany. Rhinoconjunctivitis symptoms, symptomatic medication intake and adverse events were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 1482 patients aged 4-75 years were included. During the 2-year period of 5-grass pollen tablet therapy, mean rhinoconjunctivitis score decreased significantly in the overall study population by 65.5% (P < 0.001). The percentage of patients taking symptomatic medication decreased from 83.8% to 42.7%. Mean 2-year improvements in rhinoconjunctivitis scores and decreases in the percentage of patients taking symptomatic medication were broadly similar in adults, adolescents and children, in patients with polyallergy versus monoallergy, and in patients with/without asthma. Among polyallergic patients, concomitant application of another specific immunotherapy did not impair treatment outcomes. Adverse drug reactions, predominantly affecting the local application area, occurred in 15.4% of the overall patient population (n = 229). No cases of anaphylaxis or epinephrine use were documented.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that sublingual immunotherapy with the 5-grass pollen tablet is well tolerated and provides sustained effectiveness over 2 years in patients with different clinical profiles, producing a significant decrease in allergic symptoms and a reduction in the use of symptomatic medication.

FUNDING

Stallergenes GmbH.

How does the efficacy and safety of Oralair(®) compare to other products on the market?

Due to differences between allergen immunotherapy (AIT) trials in patient populations, trial design (including primary efficacy variables), the definition of a pollen season, data analysis, and comparisons between AIT products with existing data, is not possible nor valid. The efficacy of two grass pollen AIT tablets, Oralair^® and Grazax^®/Grastek^®, should not be compared by looking at the percentage of score improvement in their respective trials. However, the evidence available concerning the efficacy and safety in trials can be compared by paying close attention to the scientific quality of the trials, details in the administration schedules, and safety issues. It can be concluded due to the high level of evidence available, that Oralair^® is effective in a pre (2-months)-coseasonal schedule to reduce symptoms and medication use, and improve a patients’ quality of life during the treatment season. For the long-term, where the quality of efficacy evidence is moderate at 2-year posttreatment due to a high dropout rate, the pre (4-months)-coseasonal schedule should be used. No clinical efficacy data exists for starting treatment in-season, but the clinical onset of action of Oralair^® is detectable after only 1 month of treatment. In the pivotal trials in Europe and the USA, no tablet-related epinephrine was needed, though some rare severe local reactions have been reported. Research for Grazax^®/Grastek^® showed that the long-term efficacy needs a continuous 3-year administration (moderate-low quality evidence available), and in two patients, tablet-related epinephrine was given. Further details on the comparative efficacy of both tablets would only be possible if both were evaluated in the same, adequately powered trial.

Sublingual immunotherapy for pediatric allergic rhinitis: The clinical evidence

Allergic rhinitis is estimated to affect 10%-20% of pediatric population and it is caused by the IgE-sensitization to environmental allergens, most importantly grass pollens and house dust mites. Allergic rhinitis can influence patient’s daily activity severely and may precede the development of asthma, especially if it is not diagnosed and treated correctly. In addition to subcutaneous immunotherapy, sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) represents the only treatment being potentially able to cure allergic respiratory diseases, by modulating the immune system activity. This review clearly summarizes and analyzes the available randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trials, which aimed at evaluating the effectiveness and the safety of grass pollen and house dust mite SLIT for the specific treatment of pediatric allergic rhinitis. Our analysis demonstrates the good evidence supporting the efficacy of SLIT for allergic rhinitis to grass pollens in children, whereas trials regarding pediatric allergic rhinitis to house dust mites present lower quality, although several studies supported its usefulness.

Efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy in children

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is currently the only available disease-modifying and aetiological treatment of IgE-mediated diseases. Sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT) constitutes the preferred route of administration of AIT for respiratory allergies in Europe. Recently it has also been approved in the US. Further applications are currently under evaluation, such as IgE-mediated food allergy and IgE-mediated atopic dermatitis. The SLIT safety profile is overall favourable, although local adverse events, usually mild, are described. Most of the meta-analyses confirmed the efficacy of SLIT in reducing symptoms and medication intake in children with allergic diseases. AIT, as an immune-modulating treatment, can modify the natural history of the allergic diseases: reduction of the risk of development of asthma and bronchial hyperreactivity in patients with allergic rhinitis, and reduction of the onset of new sensitizations. A great interest is now devoted to the preventive effects of AIT and, consequently, to the optimal time of initiation.

Allergy immunotherapy: the future of allergy treatment

Allergic respiratory disease represents a significant and expanding health problem worldwide. Allergic symptoms, such as asthma and hay fever, cause sleep impairment and reduce school and work performance. The cost to society is substantial. Allergen avoidance and pharmacotherapy cannot control the disease. Only allergy immunotherapy has disease-modifying potential and should be included in optimal treatment strategies. Allergy immunotherapy was first administered as subcutaneous injections and has been practiced for the past 100 years or so. Recently, tablet-based sublingual allergy immunotherapy (SLIT) was introduced with comprehensive clinical documentation. SLIT tablets represent a more patient-friendly concept because they can be used for self-treatment at home.

Sublingual Immunotherapy with a Five-Grass Pollen Tablet in Adult Patients with Allergic Rhinitis: An Open, Prospective, Noninterventional, Multicenter Study

Background. Although the safety and efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) with a five-grass pollen tablet have been demonstrated in randomized clinical trials (RCTs), these outcomes must always be evaluated in real-life medical practice. Methods. In a prospective, open-label, noninterventional, “real-life” study in Germany, we evaluated the safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of SLIT with a five-grass pollen tablet in adults with grass-pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. Results. 808 adults were enrolled between September 2008 and December 2009. 35.3% of the participants experienced at least one adverse drug reaction (ADR), the most common of which were mild-to-moderate gastrointestinal and respiratory disorders. Serious ADRs considered causally related to SLIT treatment occurred in four patients. Overall, the five-grass pollen tablet was considered to have good or very good tolerability by most investigators and patients. Treatment was associated with the relief of nasal, ocular, and bronchial symptoms and decreased symptomatic medication use. However, interpretation of clinical improvements was limited by lower atmospheric grass pollen levels during the study season (relative to the preceding season). Conclusions. In a large population of patients treated in real-life medical practice, SLIT with a five-grass pollen tablet was safe and well tolerated. The patient-reported symptom relief suggests that SLIT was associated with clinical benefits.

Specific immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis in children

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Allergic rhinitis is a highly prevalent inflammatory disease affecting 20-40% of the children worldwide. Allergen-specific immunotherapy (SIT) is an effective treatment for allergic rhinitis. This article reviews the recent advances in SIT for children.

RECENT FINDINGS

In current clinical practice, immunotherapy is delivered as either subcutaneous immunotherapy or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Most meta-analyses and reviews concluded a trend that subcutaneous immunotherapy was better than SLIT in reducing symptoms of allergic rhinitis and rescue medication use, however, SLIT has a better safety profile than subcutaneous immunotherapy. Additionally, the absence of pain on administration of therapy is a character of SLIT, which is well suited for children. T regulatory cells, especially Tr1 cells that secrete interleukin-10 and induce production of immunoglobulin G4, play a role during SIT.

SUMMARY

Although there is substantial evidence for effectiveness of both subcutaneous immunotherapy and SLIT, safer and more effective SIT approaches are needed. New approaches to improve SIT include omalizumab pretreatment, use of recombinant allergens, and alternate routes of administration.

"The value of pre- and co-seasonal sublingual immunotherapy in pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis"

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a guidelines-approved, disease-modifying treatment option for respiratory allergies, including allergic rhinitis (AR) induced by pollen. The various AIT regimens employed to date in pollen-induced AR can be classified as continuous (i.e. year-round) or discontinuous (i.e. pre-seasonal alone, co-seasonal alone or pre- and co-seasonal). Pre-and co-seasonal regimens are typically used for sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT) and have economic and compliance advantages over perennial (year-round) regimens. However, these advantages must not come at the expensive of poor efficacy or safety. The results of recent double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials show that pre- and co-seasonal SLIT is safe and effective in patients with AR induced by grass pollen (treated with a tablet formulation) or by birch pollen (treated with a liquid formulation). Progress in SLIT has been made in defining the optimal dose of major allergen, the administration frequency (daily), the duration of pre-seasonal treatment (four months) and the number of treatment seasons (at least three). Post-marketing, "real-life" trials of pre- and co-seasonal birch or grass pollen SLIT regimens have confirmed the efficacy and safety observed in the clinical trials. In the treatment of pollen-induced AR, pre- and co-seasonal SLIT regimens appear to be at least as effective and safe as perennial SLIT regimens, and are associated with lower costs and good compliance. Good compliance may mean that pre- and co-seasonal SLIT regimens are inherently more effective and safer than perennial SLIT regimens. When considering the pre- and co-seasonal discontinuous regimen in particular, a 300 IR five-grass-pollen formulation is the only SLIT tablet with a clinical development programme having provided evidence of short-term, sustained and post-treatment efficacy.

[Specific immunotherapy]

SCIT (subcutaneous immunotherapy) and SLIT (sublingual immunotherapy) are the only routinely available therapies, which modify allergic diseases sustainably. The ongoing reduction of symptoms and the lower need of symptomatic medication are able to improve the quality of life over a long period of time. However, allergic patients are underprovided due to low use of SIT (specific immunotherapy). After thorough diagnostic workup, the indication has to be checked carefully especially in patients with allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma, to insure that SIT is standard therapy. Allergen extracts are manufacturer-specific preparations, therefore their effects cannot be compared directly, just as SCIT and SLIT efficacy cannot be compared directly. In general, preparations with proven efficacy and safety profile should be preferred. Allergens listed in the TAV (Therapeutic Allergen Regulation) fulfill these requirements. However, it is important to ensure adherence for 3 years of therapy, independent of the route of application. SIT has proven socioeconomic benefit already after a short time of therapy.

An observational, real-life safety study of a 5-grass pollen sublingual tablet in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of pre- and coseasonal sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT) with a 5-grass pollen sublingual tablet have been demonstrated in a randomized clinical trial (RCT) in children and adolescents. Observational, 'real-life' studies can usefully complement the results of RCTs.

METHODS

A prospective, open-label, observational, multicentre post-marketing study of children and adolescents (aged 5-17, with grass pollen-induced allergic rhinitis) treated with the 5-grass pollen sublingual tablet was performed between June 2009 and January 2011 in Germany. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded during consultations with the investigating physicians; AEs judged to have at least a possible causal link to the tablet were classified as adverse drug reactions (ADRs).

RESULTS

Eight hundred and forty-nine patients were enrolled (by 207 investigating physicians), 829 (mean ± s.d. age: 10.9 ± 3.3 yr) completed the study without major protocol deviations, and 796 were fully documented with respect to AEs. Ninety-four of the 796 patients (11.8%) experienced at least one ADR on the first day of SLIT and 218 (27.4%) experienced at least one ADR during the study. Four hundred and sixty-six of the 596 ADRs (78.2%) were mild or moderate. The most common ADRs were throat irritation (19.1% of the reactions), oral paresthesia (8.2%), oral pruritus (6.5%) and oedema mouth (6.2%). Serious ADRs occurred in five patients. No epinephrine use was reported. Seventy-six of the 829 patients (9.2%) discontinued SLIT due to AEs. Tolerability was judged to be good or very good by patients (84.7%), parents (87.0%) and investigators (89.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

In clinical practice, pre- and coseasonal treatment with a 5-grass pollen sublingual tablet is safe and well tolerated in children and adolescents.

300IR 5-Grass pollen sublingual tablet offers relief from nasal symptoms in patients with allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

300IR 5-grass pollen sublingual immunotherapy tablets have been approved for the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) with or without conjunctivitis in adults and children >5 years with grass pollen allergy. This study was designed to review data on nasal symptoms with 300IR 5-grass pollen sublingual tablets in adults and children.

METHODS

We reviewed data from four double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials. Two groups of patients who received a daily dose of either placebo or 300IR 5-grass pollen sublingual tablets starting 4 months before the expected start of the pollen season and continuing through the season were compared (analysis of covariance) for scores of sneezing, rhinorrhea, nasal pruritus, nasal congestion, total nasal symptom score (TNSS), and adult Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) scores.

RESULTS

Data for 266 children (one pediatric trial) and 1036 adults (three trials) were analyzed. Compared with the placebo groups, mean TNSS in the 300IR groups was lower by 22% in children and 19-36% in adults. Among the four nasal symptoms, the lowest scores relative to placebo were for nasal congestion in children (31%) and adults (43%). Mean adult RQLQ scores were 21-31% lower in the 300IR group than in the placebo group.

CONCLUSION

Allergen immunotherapy with 300IR 5-grass pollen sublingual tablets was consistently associated with AR symptom relief in adults and children and provided a clinically meaningful improvement in quality of life.

Five-grass-pollen sublingual immunotherapy tablet for the treatment of grass-pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: 5 years of experience

Oralair(®) (OA) (Stallergenes, Antony, France) is a unique pre- and co-seasonal 5-grass-pollen sublingual immunotherapy tablet launched in 2008, and now approved in 31 countries worldwide for the treatment of grass-pollen allergic rhinitis and rhinoconjunctivitis. OA is the first oral treatment with a consistent, well-balanced allergen extract that mimics natural exposure and sensitization. A wealth of data exists from over 5 years of clinical and real-world experience demonstrating the efficacy and safety of OA for grass-pollen-allergy treatment. OA is highly effective from the first pollen season in all patient subgroups, including children and those with comorbid mild asthma, irrespective of sensitization status and symptom severity. OA also has sustained long-term benefits for symptom control and quality of life. This article provides an overview of the pharmacodynamics and pharmacology of OA; its efficacy, safety, tolerability and cost-effectiveness for the treatment of allergic rhinitis and rhinoconjunctivitis and its role in clinical practice.

Sublingual or subcutaneous immunotherapy for seasonal allergic rhinitis: an indirect analysis of efficacy, safety and cost

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The standard of preventive care for poorly controlled seasonal allergic rhinitis (AR) is subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) with allergen extracts, administered in a physician's office. As an alternative to SCIT, sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is now an option for patients with seasonal AR. Oralair, a SLIT tablet containing freeze-dried allergen extracts of five grasses [cocksfoot (Dactylis glomerata), meadow grass (Poa pratensis), rye grass (Lolium perenne), sweet vernal grass (Anthoxanthum odoratum) and timothy grass (Phleum pratense)], and Grazax, a SLIT tablet containing a standardized extract of grass pollen allergen from timothy grass (P pratenase), are two such agents currently available in many countries. However, head-to-head comparative data are not available. In this study, an indirect comparison on efficacy, safety and cost was undertaken between Oralair, Grazax and SCIT.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted for double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trials evaluating Oralair, Grazax or SCIT in patients with grass-induced seasonal AR. Using placebo as the common control, an indirect statistical comparison between treatments was performed using meta regression analysis with active drug as the primary independent variable. An economic analysis, which included both direct and indirect costs for the Canadian setting, was also undertaken.

RESULTS

Overall, 20 placebo-controlled trials met the study inclusion criteria. The indirect analysis suggested improved efficacy with Oralair over SCIT [standardized mean difference (SMD) in AR symptom control = -0.21; P = 0.007] and Grazax (SMD = -0.18; P = 0.018). In addition, there were no significant differences in the risk of discontinuation due to adverse events between therapies. Oralair was associated with cost savings against year-round SCIT ($2471), seasonal SCIT ($948) and Grazax ($1168) during the first year of therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Oralair has at least non-inferior efficacy and comparable safety against SCIT and Grazax at a lower annual cost.

Dropouts in sublingual allergen immunotherapy trials - a systematic review

Participant dropouts can reduce the power of allergen immunotherapy clinical trials. Evaluation of the dropout rate and reasons for dropout are important not only in the planning of clinical studies but are also relevant for adherence to immunotherapy in daily clinical practice. A systematic review was carried out in order to establish the overall dropout rate among published double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials of sublingual immunotherapy for respiratory allergic diseases. Dropouts were analysed in regards to allergen, formulation, treatment schedule, participant age, study size, number of centres and type of allergic disease. Relative dropout rates in placebo and active groups as well as reasons for dropout were also assessed. A total of 81 studies, comprising 9998 patients, were included. Dropout rates in sublingual immunotherapy controlled studies do not appear to be a major problem with a composite dropout percentage of 14% (95% CI:11.9-16). Furthermore, they are not different for active compared to placebo-treated participants. This lends support to the positive clinical outcomes seen in meta-analyses of these trials.

Sublingual immunotherapy: World Allergy Organization position paper 2013 update

We have prepared this document, "Sublingual Immunotherapy: World Allergy Organization Position Paper 2013 Update", according to the evidence-based criteria, revising and updating chapters of the originally published paper, "Sublingual Immunotherapy: World Allergy Organization Position Paper 2009", available at http://www.waojournal.org. Namely, these comprise: "Mechanisms of sublingual immunotherapy;" "Clinical efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy" - reporting all the data of all controlled trials published after 2009; "Safety of sublingual immunotherapy" - with the recently published Grading System for adverse reactions; "Impact of sublingual immunotherapy on the natural history of respiratory allergy" - with the relevant evidences published since 2009; "Efficacy of SLIT in children" - with detailed analysis of all the studies; "Definition of SLIT patient selection" - reporting the criteria for eligibility to sublingual immunotherapy; "The future of immunotherapy in the community care setting"; "Methodology of clinical trials according to the current scientific and regulatory standards"; and "Guideline development: from evidence-based medicine to patients' views" - including the evolution of the methods to make clinical recommendations.Additionally, we have added new chapters to cover a few emerging crucial topics: "Practical aspects of schedules and dosages and counseling for adherence" - which is crucial in clinical practice for all treatments; "Perspectives and new approaches" - including recombinant allergens, adjuvants, modified allergens, and the concept of validity of the single products. Furthermore, "Raising public awareness about sublingual immunotherapy", as a need for our patients, and strategies to increase awareness of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) among patients, the medical community, all healthcare stakeholders, and public opinion, are also reported in detail.

Modulation of mucosal/systemic antibody response after sublingual immunotherapy in mite-allergic children

BACKGROUND

There have been no data on sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in Brazilian patients sensitized to house dust mites. This study aimed to evaluate the mucosal/systemic antibody response changes and clinical efficacy after SLIT using Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (Dpt) allergens with or without bacterial extracts in mite-allergic Brazilian children.

METHODS

Patients with allergic rhinitis and asthma were selected for a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial randomized to three groups: DPT (Dpt extract, n = 34), DPT+MRB (Dpt plus mixed respiratory bacterial extracts, n = 36), and Placebo (n = 32). Total symptom and medication scores for rhinitis/asthma, skin prick test (SPT) to Dpt, and measurements of Dpt-, Der p 1-, Der p 2-specific serum IgE, IgG4, IgG1, and specific salivary IgA were evaluated at baseline and after 12 and 18 months of treatment.

RESULTS

A significant long-term decline in total symptom/medication scores was observed only in active groups (DTP and DPT+MRB). There was no significant change in SPT results in all groups. SLIT using Dpt allergen alone induced increased levels of serum IgG4 to Dpt, Der p 1, and Der p 2, serum IgG1 and salivary IgA to Dpt and Der p 1. SLIT with Dpt plus bacterial extracts was able to decrease IgE levels, particularly to Der p 2, to increase salivary IgA levels to Der p 1, but had no changes on specific IgG4 and IgG1 levels.

CONCLUSIONS

All children undergoing SLIT showed clinical improvement, but a long-term reduction in symptom/medication scores with modulation of mucosal/systemic antibody responses were seen only in active groups (DPT and DPT+MRB).

Sublingual immunotherapy in children with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis mono-sensitized to house-dust-mites: a double-blind-placebo-controlled randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Although sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has been demonstrated to be a safe and efficient treatment in children with seasonal allergic rhinitis (AR), there is little evidence on the efficacy of SLIT with house-dust-mite (HDM) extract in children with isolated perennial AR.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of HDM-SLIT in children with isolated allergic rhinitis-conjunctivitis mono-sensitized to HDM without asthma symptoms.

METHODS

Twenty-two children (aged 5-10 years) with perennial AR and conjunctivitis symptoms mono-sensitized to Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus and Dermatophagoides farinae were enrolled. During a 2 months run-in period, symptom and medication scores, lung functions, bronchial hyperreactivity, nasal provocation and skin prick tests were evaluated. Subjects were randomized to active or placebo using a double-blind method. A total of eighteen subjects were randomised to receive either active SLIT or placebo for 12 months. Daily symptom and medication scores, baseline lung functions, bronchial hyperreactivity, nasal provocation and skin prick tests were recorded and re-evaluated at the end of treatment.

RESULTS

After one year of treatment, no significant differences were detected in the between groups and within group comparisons based on total rhinitis symptom/medication scores (p > 0.05). Skin reactivity to Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus was significantly reduced in HDM-SLIT compared to placebo group (p = 0.018). A significant reduction in nasal sensitivity was observed in SLIT group after one year treatment when compared to baseline (p = 0.04). Total conjunctivitis symptoms were reduced significantly in both active and lacebo group at the end of treatment compared to baseline. The proportion of patients with non-specific bronchial hyperreactivity increased to almost 3-fold in placebo group compared to baseline.

CONCLUSION

HDM-SLIT was not superior to placebo in reducing isolated rhinoconjunctivitis symptoms within 12 months of treatment. However, HDM-SLIT has a modulating effect on allergen-specific nasal and skin reactivity in isolated perennial AR children.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered at Anzctr.org.au number, ACTRN12613000315718.

Oralair(®): a causal treatment for grass pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

Grass pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis is a common disease, comprising more than just the classic symptoms of nasal obstruction, sneezing, rhinorrhea and itchy, watery eyes. Sufferers deal with severe impairments in daily life. Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis is also considered an important risk factor in the development of asthma. Allergen avoidance, medication for symptomatic treatment and allergen-specific immunotherapy are cornerstones in therapeutic management, but immunotherapy is the only available treatment that is able to affect the natural course of allergy. In recent decades, clinical trials have investigated the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous immunotherapy. To date, efforts have been made to develop more convenient routes of administration. Substantial improvement may be achieved through the application of sublingual tablets. This article discusses the development process of immunotherapy and the clinical background of the Oralair(®) (Stallergènes, Hauts-de-Seine, France) five-grass pollen tablet. Furthermore, it outlines this tablet's efficacy and safety properties.

Grading local side effects of sublingual immunotherapy for respiratory allergy: speaking the same language

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is increasingly used worldwide. Despite its safety being well ascertained, there is no universally accepted system to grade and classify its adverse events (AEs). According to the literature, it seems reasonable to classify and grade systemic side effects by using the previously published World Allergy Organization recommendations. On the other hand, local side effects are the most frequent with SLIT, sometimes leading to its discontinuation. Therefore grading of the severity of local side effects was perceived as necessary for the purpose of uniform reporting, classification, and quantification of this aspect. A World Allergy Organization Taskforce, after examining the available literature and the postmarketing surveillance data, proposed a clinically based grading of the severity of local AEs caused by SLIT. The use of the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities nomenclature for AEs was also included in this context. The proposed grading system for SLIT-induced local reactions is expected to improve and harmonize surveillance and reporting of the safety of SLIT.

Pediatric sublingual immunotherapy efficacy: evidence analysis, 2009-2012

OBJECTIVE

To perform a structured analysis of the latest scientific evidence obtained for the clinical efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in children.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, reference lists from reviews, and personal databases were reviewed for original articles on clinical trials with SLIT in patients younger than 18 years published from January 1, 2009, through December 31, 2012, using broad search and medical subject heading terms.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Clinical trials, irrespective of their design, of SLIT in the treatment of respiratory and food allergy in patients 18 years or younger were selected. Clinical outcomes (symptom scores, medication use, provocation tests, pulmonary function tests, skin prick tests, and adverse events) and immunologic changes were tabulated. Quality of each trial and total quality of compounded evidence was analyzed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system.

RESULTS

Of 56 articles, 29 met the inclusion criteria. New evidence is robust for the precoseasonal tablet and drop grass pollen SLIT efficacy in allergic rhinitis and scarce for seasonal asthma. Some evidence for Alternaria SLIT efficacy is appearing. For house dust mite (HDM) SLIT in asthma, there is high-quality evidence for medication reduction while maintaining symptom control; evidence for HDM SLIT efficacy in allergic rhinitis is of moderate-low quality. There is moderate evidence for efficacy of dual grass pollen-HDM SLIT after 12 months of treatment and 1 year after discontinuation. Specific provocation test results (nasal, skin) improve with grass pollen and HDM SLIT but nonspecific bronchial provocation testing does not. Food oral immunotherapy is more promising than food SLIT. Possible new surrogate markers have been reported. No anaphylaxis was found among 2469 treated children.

CONCLUSION

Evidence for efficacy of SLIT in children with respiratory or food allergy is growing.

[Specific immunotherapy in asthma]

Specific immunotherapy (SIT) or allergenic desensitization would be the only treatment capable to change the natural history of the atopic march for children. SIT has shown numerous proofs of efficacy in allergic asthma particularly in improving clinical and medication scores. It could also have the capacity to prevent asthma and new allergenic sensitization.

Allergic rhinitis

Familiarity with the diagnosis and management of allergic rhinitis is important for physicians concerned with the nasal airway. Allergic rhinitis is a common and manageable condition that may cause persistent or intermittent symptoms that vary as to duration and severity. Allergic rhinitis impairs quality of life, sleep, school performance, and productivity on a scale that compares with other chronic diseases. Diagnosis is primarily clinical, but supported by allergy testing. Therapeutic options for allergic rhinitis include pharmacotherapy, environmental control, and immunotherapy. More recently, a role for sublingual immunotherapy and turbinate reduction has been reported.

Anti-inflammatory activity of sublingual immunoglobulin (SLIG) in a murine model of allergen-driven airway inflammation

AIM

Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) displays anti-inflammatory activities in many diseases. Subcutaneous administration of anti-IgE in humans provides benefit in severe persistent allergic asthma. Given the well established efficacy of sublingual allergen immunotherapy in respiratory type I allergies, we investigated the therapeutic potential of sublingual immunoglobulin (SLIG), most particularly anti-IgE SLIG, in a murine model of allergen-driven airway inflammation.

METHODS

BALB/c mice sensitized with ovalbumin (OVA) were treated sublingually with rat monoclonal IgG1 or IgG2a, either directed to mouse IgE or with no reported specificity. Airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) was assessed by whole body plethysmography, and eosinophil infiltrates were characterized in bronchial alveolar lavages (BAL). OVA-specific antibody and T cell responses were analyzed in sera and saliva or lung and draining lymph nodes, by ELISA or CBA measurement of cytokine production, respectively.

RESULTS

AHR and BAL eosinophil infiltrates were substantially decreased in mice treated sublingually with particulate OVA (positive control), as well as in animals receiving various rat IgG1, irrespective of their specificity for murine IgE. In contrast, no improvement was observed in mice treated with PBS (negative control) or various rat IgG2a. SLIG anti-inflammatory activity is not related to a downregulation of Th2, Th17 or an induction of Foxp3(+) CD4(+) regulatory T cell responses. Mass spectrometry analysis of glycan moieties, such as sialic acid, suggests that the differential efficacy of rat IgG1 and IgG2a is not related to their capacity to interact with lectins borne by oral immune cells.

CONCLUSIONS

In a murine model of allergen-driven airway inflammation, SLIG exhibits an anti-inflammatory activity irrespective of the immunoglobulin specificity, and in the absence of allergen. As a noninvasive approach, SLIG deserves to be further studied as a treatment for other inflammatory diseases beyond allergic asthma.

Specific IgE response to different grass pollen allergen components in children undergoing sublingual immunotherapy

Background

Grass pollen is a major cause of respiratory allergy worldwide and contain a number of allergens, some of theme (Phl p 1, Phl p 2, Phl p 5, and Phl 6 from Phleum pratense, and their homologous in other grasses) are known as major allergens. The administration of grass pollen extracts by immunotherapy generally induces an initial rise in specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) production followed by a progressive decline during the treatment. Some studies reported that immunotherapy is able to induce a de novo sensitisation to allergen component previously unrecognized.

Methods

We investigated in 30 children (19 males and 11 females, mean age 11.3 years), 19 treated with sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) by a 5-grass extract and 11 untreated, the sIgE and sIgG4 response to the different allergen components.

Results

Significant increases (p < 0.001) were detected for Phl p 1, Phl p 2, Phl p 5, and Phl p 6, while sIgE levels induced in response to Phl p 7 and Phl p 12 were low or absent at baseline and unchanged following SLIT treatment; no new sensitisation was detected. As to IgG4, significant increases were found for Phl p2 and Phl p 5, while the increase for Phl p 12 was not significant. In the control group, no significant increase in sIgE for any single allergen component was found.

Conclusions

These findings confirm that the initial phase of SLIT with a grass pollen extract enhances the sIgE synthesis and show that the sIgE response concerns the same allergen components which induce IgE reactivity during natural exposure.