Pooled efficacy and safety data for house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy tablets in adolescents

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PubMed searches were conducted and unpublished data were included if necessary.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

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.

Quantifying the benefits of early sublingual allergen immunotherapy tablet initiation in children

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a chronic inflammatory disease of the upper airway, which progresses into allergic asthma (AA) in up to 45% of children. This analysis aimed to investigate clinical and economic benefits of sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT tablets) initiated early in childhood for the treatment of AR by quantifying the long-term reduction in new cases of AA.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to estimate the long-term effects of SLIT tablets on the risk of developing asthma. Key parameters were primarily based on data from the GRAZAX® Asthma Prevention trial and included the age- and treatment-dependent risk of developing AA as well as annual probabilities of progression/remission in AR severity. Healthcare costs were estimated using data from the REACT study.

RESULTS

In a modelled cohort of children with moderate-to-severe seasonal AR initiated on SLIT tablets at ages 7 and 12, 24% and 29%, respectively, develop AA during a 20-year period. In comparison, when initiated at age 5, 19% develop AA. Additionally, initiation of SLIT tablets at age 5 is associated with a total healthcare cost of EUR 20,429 per patient, whereas initiation at ages 7 and 12 is associated with, respectively, EUR 21,050 and EUR 22,379 per patient 20 years after AR diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Initiation of SLIT tablets in early childhood is associated with a clinically meaningful and permanent reduction in new cases of AA and lower healthcare costs among children with AR. This finding supports the clinical relevance of initiating SLIT tablets early for children with AR to obtain long-term clinical benefits.

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

Aim

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO (CRD42023460693).

High baseline prevalence of atopic comorbidities and medication use in children treated with allergy immunotherapy in the REAl-world effeCtiveness in allergy immunoTherapy (REACT) study

Background

Respiratory allergy, commonly manifesting as allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma, is a chronic progressive disease that frequently starts in childhood. Allergy immunotherapy (AIT) is the only causal treatment for respiratory allergy with the potential to modify the underlying cause of allergy and, ultimately, prevent disease progression. This analysis aimed to determine if AIT is received sufficiently early to halt the progression of allergic disease, by characterizing the burden and progression of disease in children prior to AIT initiation in real-life clinical practice.

Methods

The REAl-world effeCtiveness in allergy immunoTherapy (REACT) study was a large retrospective cohort study using German claims data between 2007 and 2017. Characteristics of two pre-defined AIT age cohorts from the REACT study - children (aged <18 years) and adults (aged ≥18 years) - were evaluated during the 1-year period before the first AIT prescription. For comparison, a control group of all subjects with a confirmed diagnosis of AR and without prescriptions for AIT was included. Burden of disease was assessed using diagnostic codes for atopic comorbidities [e.g., atopic dermatitis (AD), asthma, and acute allergic conjunctivitis] and non-atopic comorbidities (e.g., migraine, headache); medication use, recorded as prescriptions for symptom-relieving AR medication and reliever/controller medication for asthma, was also assessed. Data were analyzed descriptively, using summary statistics.

Results

Both children (n = 11,036) and adults (n = 30,037) showed a higher prevalence of atopic comorbidities and a greater drug burden prior to AIT initiation compared to AR patients not treated with AIT (n = 1,003,332). In the two age-specific AIT cohorts, children consistently showed the highest prevalence of atopic comorbidities compared to adults (AIT children, AIT adults - asthma: 41.4%, 34.5%; AD: 19.9%, 10.2%; acute allergic conjunctivitis: 13.6%, 10.2%). Generally, prescriptions per year for symptom-relieving AR and asthma treatments were also higher for children initiating AIT vs. adults (AIT children, AIT adults - AR prescriptions per subject: 1.72, 0.73; asthma prescriptions per subject: 1.42, 0.79).

Conclusions

Children with AR who are offered AIT in real-life show considerable disease burden prior to initiation. As AIT may alleviate the burden and halt the progression of allergic disease, considering AIT earlier in the disease course may be warranted.

Safety of allergen-specific immunotherapy in children

Allergic respiratory diseases, such as asthma and allergic rhinitis, are global health issues and have had an increasing prevalence in the last decades. Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is the only curative treatment for allergic rhinitis and asthma, as it has a disease-modifying effect. AIT is generally administered by two routes: subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Local side effects are common, but usually well-tolerated and self-limited. However, systemic side effects are rare, and associated with uncontrolled asthma and bronchial obstruction, or related to errors in administration. Physicians should constantly assess potential risk factors for not only reporting systemic reactions and fatalities but also implementing other therapies to improve AIT safety. This paper highlights recent evidence on local and systemic reactions related to SCIT and SLIT in children.

The safety of sublingual immunotherapy, can the rare systemic reactions be prevented?

Introduction: The safety of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT), and particularly the dramatic issue of fatal reactions, has been an obstacle that limited the implementation of a therapy with unique characteristics of action on the causes of allergy. The introduction of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) was aimed at solving safety problems while maintaining clinical efficacy.Areas covered: For more than 20 years, SLIT has been based on allergen extracts in drops at low average doses. As evidenced by meta-analyses, the typical adverse events (AE) have consisted of local reactions in the mouth and throat. Unlike the injection route, no correlation was observed between the administered dose and AEs. The development of SLIT products in tablets, based on higher doses than drops, has somewhat changed the concept of SLIT safety. Although large trials, performed to obtain regulatory agency approval, have shown overall high safety, rare anaphylactic reactions have been described.Expert opinion: SLIT is globally safe, and no fatal reactions have ever been reported, but with currently available high biological potency products it is necessary to follow prudential rules, such as the administration of the first dose under medical supervision and the thorough education of patients to avoid taking of higher doses than recommended.

Specific sublingual immunotherapy in children with perennial rhinitis: a systemic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a major public health problem and is increasing worldwide. AR affects children's learning efficiency, sleep quality, and other major aspects of life. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is effective and safe for children with seasonal AR, but for children with perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) caused by house dust mites (HDM), its effectiveness and safety is less convincing.

METHODS

Medical literature databases up to 2019 were searched for published and unpublished pieces of evidence. Studies were individually screened by 2 reviewers against the eligibility criteria. Primary outcomes were total nasal symptoms scores (TNSS) and total medication scores (TMS). The secondary outcomes were total ocular symptoms scores and adverse events (AEs). Random effect models and fixed-effect models were used to calculate the standard mean difference (SMD) and risk ratio (RR), respectively.

RESULTS

We identified 3772 abstracts, of which only 16 studies met our established criteria. SLIT significantly reduced TNSS (SMD -1.73; 95% CI, -2.62 to -0.84; p = 0.0001) and TMS (SMD -1.21; 95% CI, -1.75 to -0.67; p < 0.00001). Compared with children taking placebo, children taking SLIT were 1.08 (95% CI, 1 to 1.17; p = 0.05), 1.15 (95% CI, 0.87 to 1.51; p = 0.32), and 1.68 (95% CI, 0.68 to 4.11; p = 0.26) times more likely to develop mild, moderate, and severe AEs, respectively.

CONCLUSION

HDM SLIT can effectively alleviate TNSS and TMS in children with PAR, but care should be taken to avoid harm due to possible adverse drug reactions.

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.

Highlights of Novel Vaccination Strategies in Allergen Immunotherapy

Increasing safety while maintaining or even augmenting efficiency are the main goals of research for novel vaccine development and improvement of treatment schemes in allergen immunotherapy (AIT). To increase the efficacy of AIT, allergens have been coupled to innate immunostimulatory substances and new adjuvants have been introduced. Allergens have been modified to increase their uptake and presentation. Hypoallergenic molecules have been developed to improve the safety profile of the vaccines. Administration of recombinant IgG4 antibodies is a new, quick, passive immunization strategy with remarkable efficiency. Results of some current investigations aiming at further improvement of AIT vaccines have been summarized.

Highlights and recent developments in airway diseases in EAACI journals (2017)

The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) owns three journals: Allergy, Pediatric Allergy and Immunology and Clinical and Translational Allergy. One of the major goals of EAACI is to support health promotion in which prevention of allergy and asthma plays a critical role and to disseminate the knowledge of allergy to all stakeholders including the EAACI junior members. There was substantial progress in 2017 in the identification of basic mechanisms of allergic and respiratory disease and the translation of these mechanisms into clinics. Better understanding of molecular and cellular mechanisms, efforts for the development of biomarkers for disease prediction, novel prevention and intervention studies, elucidation of mechanisms of multimorbidies, entrance of new drugs in the clinics as well as recently completed phase three clinical studies and publication of a large number of allergen immunotherapy studies and metaanalyses have been the highlights of the last year.

House dust mite sublingual immunotherapy in allergic rhinitis

Allergen immunotherapy has been shown to be effective in treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR). Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is generally recommended for treating seasonal AR in adults and children; however, questions remain in regard to AR treatment in relation to house dust mite (HDM). Due to heterogeneous formulations, different outcome reporting systems, and the lack of a standardized dose, HDM SLITs have not been standardized in published studies. Nevertheless, studies continuously report positive effects of HDM SLIT in AR, and HDM SLIT remains a treatment option for patients with HDM-induced allergic asthma that frequently co-exists with AR. Therefore, it is likely that HDM SLIT usage will increase. This review will focus on HDM SLIT in AR exclusively.