A preseason booster prolongs the increase of allergen specific IgG4 levels, after basic allergen intralymphatic immunotherapy, against grass pollen seasonal allergy

How to hit the allergy target: A critical appraisal of intralymphatic immunotherapy with practical recommendations on ultrasound-guided injections

BACKGROUND

Intralymphatic immunotherapy (ILIT) represents a promising novel approach treating allergic diseases. However, no standardized procedures or recommendations have been established or reported, despite the recognized fact that treatment efficacy relies on the ability to inject the allergen intranodally.

OBJECTIVE

We aim to provide a critical appraisal of ILIT as a method of allergen immunotherapy and to deliver practical recommendations for accurate ILIT.

METHODS

One hundred and seventy-three ILIT injections were performed in 28 (47%) women and 32 (53%) men with median age of 29 years (21-59). The injections were ultrasound-guided and recorded for retrospective analysis with respect to injection location, needle visibility, medication release, and patient characteristics.

RESULTS

The results show that the correct positioning of the needle within the lymph node (LN) was most critical. If the whole length of the needle bevel was not inserted into the LN, substance backflush into the interstitium was observed. Selecting a more superficial LN and inserting the needle at a smaller angle towards the LN significantly improved needle visibility in the ultrasound. Longitudinal results showed that continuous practice significantly correlated with improved needle visibility and more accurate ILIT injections.

CONCLUSION

Based on our results and practical experience, we propose several recommendations for LN selection and the correct handling of ultrasound probe and needle. We are confident that ILIT standardization and training will be important as to meet the goals of good safety and efficacy of ILIT.

The long-term efficacy of intra-cervical lymphatic immunotherapy on adults with allergic rhinitis: A randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of the novel immunotherapy method, intra-cervical lymphatic immunotherapy (ICLIT), need to be investigated. Comparing it with subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT), we clarified the long-term efficacy and safety of intra-cervical lymphatic immunotherapy on allergic rhinitis (AR), and investigated the improvement of clinical efficacy of the booster injection at 1 year after ICLIT treatment.

METHODS

Ninety adult patients with dust mite allergy were randomly divided into 3 groups: 30 in the SCIT group, 30 in the ILCLIT group, and 30 in ICLIT booster group. Changes in total symptom score (TSS), nasal symptom score (TNSS), ocular symptom score (TOSS) and total medication score (TMS) were evaluated in the three groups. Adverse reactions were recorded, and serum dust mite specific IgE (sIgE) and specific IgG4 were assessed in the ICLIT group and ICLIT booster group.

RESULTS

TSS, TNSS, TOSS, and TMS scores were significantly lower in the three groups at 36 months after treatment (p < 0. 05). And at 36 months the ICLIT-booster group showed results similar to SCIT and superior to ICLIT (p < 0. 05). Serum specific IgE decreased in all three groups at 12 and 36 months after treatment, p < 0.01. The ICLIT group and the ICLIT booster group showed a significant increase in sIgG4, p < 0.01. None of the patients in the three groups had any serious systemic adverse effects during the 3-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The ICLIT treatment is effective and safe on AR. One booster injection of allergens at 1 year can greatly improve its long-term efficacy.

TRIAL REGISTRY

Clinical trial registration number: ChiCTR1800017130.

Intralymphatic immunotherapy with birch and grass pollen extracts. A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

There is a need to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intralymphatic immunotherapy (ILIT) for inducing tolerance in patients with allergic rhinitis.

METHODS

Thirty-seven patients with seasonal allergic symptoms to birch and grass pollen and skin prick test >3 mm and/or IgE to birch and timothy >0.35 kU/L were randomized to either ILIT, with three doses of 0.1 mL of birch pollen and 5-grass pollen allergen extracts on aluminium hydroxide (10,000 SQ-U/ml; ALK-Abelló) or placebo using ultrasound-guided intralymphatic injections at monthly intervals. Daily combined symptom medical score and rhinoconjunctivitis total symptom score were recorded during the peak pollen seasons the year before and after treatment. Rhinoconjunctivitis total symptom score, medication score and rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire were recorded annually starting 2 years after treatment. Circulating proportions of T helper cell subsets and allergen-induced cytokine and chemokine production were analysed using flow cytometry and ELISA.

RESULTS

There were no differences between the groups related to daily combined symptom medical score the year before and after treatment. Two years after ILIT (after unblinding), the actively treated group reported significantly fewer symptoms, lower medication use and improved quality of life than did the placebo group. After the pollen seasons the year after ILIT, T regulatory cell frequencies and grass-induced IFN-γ levels increased only in the actively treated group.

CONCLUSION

In this randomized controlled trial, ILIT with birch and grass pollen extract was safe and accompanied by immunological changes. Further studies are required to confirm or refute the efficacy of the treatment.

Intra-cervical lymphatic immunotherapy for dust mite-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis in children: a 3-year prospective randomized controlled trial

Background

Pediatric allergic rhinoconjunctivitis has become a public concern with an increasing incidence year by year. Conventional subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) has long treatment time, high cost and poor compliance. The novel immunotherapy significantly shortens the course of treatment by directly injecting allergens into cervical lymph nodes, which can perform faster clinical benefits to children.

Objective

By comparing with SCIT, this study aimed to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of intra-cervical lymphatic immunotherapy (ICLIT).

Methods

This is a prospective randomized controlled study. A total of 50 allergic rhinoconjunctivitis children with dust mite allergy was randomly divided into ICLIT group and SCIT group, receiving three cervical intralymphatic injections of dust mite allergen or three years of subcutaneous injection, separately. Primary outcomes included total nasal symptom scores (TNSS), total ocular symptom scores (TOSS), total symptom scores (TSS), total medication scores (TMS), and total quality of life score. Secondary outcomes included pain perception and adverse reactions during treatment. Other secondary outcome was change in Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (Derp) and Dermatophagoides farina (Derf) -specific IgE level.

Results

Both groups had significantly decreased TNSS, TOSS, TSS, TMS, and total quality of life score after 36 months of treatment (p<0.0001). Compared with SCIT, ICLIT could rapidly improve allergic symptoms (p<0.0001). The short-term efficacy was consistent between the two groups (p=0.07), while the long-term efficacy was better in SCIT group (p<0.0001). The pain perception in ICLIT group was lower than that in SCIT group (p<0.0001). ICLIT group was safer. Specifically, the children had only 3 mild local adverse reactions without systemic adverse reactions. The SCIT group had 14 systemic adverse reactions. At last, the serum Derp and Derf-specific IgE levels in ICLIT and SCIT groups decreased 3 years later (p<0.0001).

Conclusion

ICLIT could ameliorate significantly the allergic symptoms in pediatric patients with an advantage in effectiveness and safety, besides an improved life quality including shortened period of treatment, frequency of drug use and pain perception.

Clinical trial registration

https://www.chictr.org.cn/, identifier ChiCTR1800017130.

Evaluation of Intralymphatic Immunotherapy in Allergic Rhinitis Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

Intralymphatic immunotherapy (ILIT) is short-course administration of allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT). This study is aimed at assessing the clinical efficacy and safety of ILIT in patients with allergic rhinitis (AR).

Methods

MEDLINE, PUBMED, and Cochrane Library were used to conduct electronic searches for clinical trials comparing ILIT and placebo in patients with AR. The final search took place on August 24, 2022. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions was used to assess the risk of bias in the included studies. The outcomes included combined symptom and medication scores (CSMS), visual analog scale (VAS), allergic rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life (RQLQ), Skin-prick test (SPT), and adverse events (AEs). Data were synthesized as mean difference (MD)/standard mean difference (SMD) or risk difference (RD) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results

Thirteen studies (454 participants) were included in this study. The ILIT group had better clinical improvement on the CSMS (random effects model, SMD-0.85, 95% CI [-1.58, -0.11], P = 0.02) and RQLQ (fixed-effects model, MD-0.42, 95% CI [0.69, 0.15], P = 0.003) than the placebo group. The booster injection was beneficial for CSMS (P < 0.0001), and the 4-week injection interval was superior to the 2-week injection period for improving VAS (P < 0.0001). Local swelling or erythema was the main AE following injection (random effects model, RD 0.16, 95% CI [0.05, 0.27], P = 0.005). Discussion. For individuals with AR, ILIT is safe and effective. ILIT alleviates clinical symptoms and reduces pharmaceutical consumption without causing severe AEs. However, the validity of this study is compromised by the substantial heterogeneity and risk of bias in the included researches. RegistrationCRD42022355329.

Allergen immunotherapy: progress and future outlook

INTRODUCTION

Allergy, the immunological hypersensitivity to innocuous environmental compounds, is a global health problem. The disease triggers, allergens, are mostly proteins contained in various natural sources such as plant pollen, animal dander, dust mites, foods, fungi and insect venoms. Allergies can manifest with a wide range of symptoms in various organs, and be anything from just tedious to life-threatening. A majority of all allergy patients are self-treated with symptom-relieving medicines, while allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only causative treatment option.

AREAS COVERED

This review will aim to give an overview of the state-of-the-art allergy management, including the use of new biologics and the application of biomarkers, and a special emphasis and discussion on current research trends in the field of AIT.

EXPERT OPINION

Conventional AIT has proven effective, but the years-long treatment compromises patient compliance. Moreover, AIT is typically not offered in food allergy. Hence, there is a need for new, effective and safe AIT methods. Novel routes of administration (e.g. oral and intralymphatic), hypoallergenic AIT products and more effective adjuvants holds great promise. Most recently, the development of allergen-specific monoclonal antibodies for passive immunotherapy may also allow treatment of patients currently not treated or treatable.

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.

Immunology of allergen immunotherapy

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease-modifying therapy for allergic disease. Through repeated inoculations of low doses of allergen-either as whole proteins or peptides-patients can achieve a homeostatic balance between inflammatory effectors induced and/or associated with allergen contact, and mediators of immunologic non-responsiveness, potentially leading to sustained clinical improvements. AIT for airborne/respiratory tract allergens and insect venoms have traditionally been supplied subcutaneously, but other routes and modalities of administration can also be effective. Despite differences of allergen administration, there are some similarities of immunologic responses across platforms, with a general theme involving the restructuring and polarization of adaptive and innate immune effector cells. Here we review the immunology of AIT across various delivery platforms, including subcutaneous, sublingual, epicutaneous, intradermal, and intralymphatic approaches, emphasizing shared mechanisms associated with achieving immunologic non-responsiveness to allergen.

Chinese Guideline on Allergen Immunotherapy for Allergic Rhinitis: The 2022 Update

In the last few decades, there has been a progressive increase in the prevalence of allergic rhinitis (AR) in China, where it now affects approximately 250 million people. AR prevention and treatment include allergen avoidance, pharmacotherapy, allergen immunotherapy (AIT), and patient education, among which AIT is the only curative intervention. AIT targets the disease etiology and may potentially modify the immune system as well as induce allergen-specific immune tolerance in patients with AR. In 2017, a team of experts from the Chinese Society of Allergy (CSA) and the Chinese Allergic Rhinitis Collaborative Research Group (C2AR2G) produced the first English version of Chinese AIT guidelines for AR. Since then, there has been considerable progress in basic research of and clinical practice for AIT, especially regarding the role of follicular regulatory T (TFR) cells in the pathogenesis of AR and the use of allergen-specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) in nasal secretions for the diagnosis of AR. Additionally, potential biomarkers, including TFR cells, sIgG4, and sIgE, have been used to monitor the incidence and progression of AR. Moreover, there has been a novel understanding of AIT during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Hence, there was an urgent need to update the AIT guideline for AR by a team of experts from CSA and C2AR2G. This document aims to serve as professional reference material on AIT for AR treatment in China, thus improving the development of AIT across the world.

Immune mechanisms induced by sublingual immunotherapy in allergic respiratory diseases

Allergic respiratory diseases (ARDs) are still a major burden on global public health. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is a mode of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) which involves administration of the allergen under the tongue, and benefits from tolerogenic properties of the oral mucosa. Studies revealed reduced levels of eosinophilia and eosinophil-dominated inflammation in airways of both animals and humans after SLIT. SLIT was also suggested to lower basophil responsiveness and innate lymphoid cell-2 function in blood samples collected from patients with ARD. Moreover, apart from shifting pathogenic type 2 (TH2) to a type 1 (TH1) and protective regulatory (Treg) polarization of helper T-cell immune response, antibody isotype switch from IgE to IgG1, IgG2, IgG4 and IgA was also reported in patients with ARD receiving SLIT. Today, the literature on SLIT-mediated activities is still scarce and more studies are required to further enlighten the mechanisms utilized by SLIT for the induction of tolerance. The aim of this review is to summarize the current knowledge about the immune-regulatory mechanisms induced by SLIT against ARDs.

Spatial delivery of immune cues to lymph nodes to define therapeutic outcomes in cancer vaccination

Recently approved cancer immunotherapies - including CAR-T cells and cancer vaccination, - show great promise. However, these technologies are hindered by the complexity and cost of isolating and engineering patient cells ex vivo. Lymph nodes (LNs) are key tissues that integrate immune signals to coordinate adaptive immunity. Directly controlling the signals and local environment in LNs could enable potent and safe immunotherapies without cell isolation, engineering, and reinfusion. Here we employ intra-LN (i.LN.) injection of immune signal-loaded biomaterial depots to directly control cancer vaccine deposition, revealing how the combination and geographic distribution of signals in and between LNs impact anti-tumor response. We show in healthy and diseased mice that relative proximity of antigen and adjuvant in LNs - and to tumors - defines unique local and systemic characteristics of innate and adaptive response. These factors ultimately control survival in mouse models of lymphoma and melanoma. Of note, with appropriate geographic signal distributions, a single i.LN. vaccine treatment confers near-complete survival to tumor challenge and re-challenge 100 days later, without additional treatments. These data inform design criteria for immunotherapies that leverage biomaterials for loco-regional LN therapy to generate responses that are systemic and specific, without systemically exposing patients to potent or immunotoxic drugs.

Intralymphatic Immunotherapy (ILIT) With Bee Venom Allergens: A Clinical Proof-of-Concept Study and the Very First ILIT in Humans

Background

Subcutaneous venom immunotherapy (VIT) represents an effective treatment against bee venom allergy. However, it involves long treatment times, high costs, and the risk of adverse events (AEs). Shorter, safer, and cheaper treatment options are therefore pursued.

Objective

To determine the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of bee venom intralymphatic immunotherapy (ILIT).

Methods

In an open pilot study, 12 patients received bee venom ILIT in three sessions with 14-day intervals: 0.1–5 μg/dose. Ultrasound imaging was applied to guide an injection and to document the lymph node structure. In a second study, 67 patients from 15 centers in Europe and Australia were randomized to receive four doses of either 10- or 20-μg bee venom ILIT with 28-day intervals. Clinical endpoints included specific IgE and IgG and protection after a bee sting challenge. These studies were performed in the years 2000–2003.

Results

In a proof-of-concept study, no serious AEs were observed. An increase in allergen-specific IgG1 but no IgG4 and IgE was observed. ILIT induced the protection against a bee sting challenge in 7 out of 8 challenged patients. In a multicenter study, an increase in allergen-specific IgG and IgE was observed, with the highest increase in patients receiving a higher ILIT dose. The study was terminated due to several serious AEs upon the sting challenge provocation after the completion of treatment. However, out of 45 patients challenged, 15 (65%) and 18 (82%) patients in the 10- and 20-μg group, respectively, showed an improvement of two grades or more. No correlation was observed between antibody levels and sting protection.

Conclusions

While a pilot study suggested the safety and efficacy of bee venom ILIT, a high number of AEs seen after the sting challenge following a randomized study indicate that the immunology protection offered by bee venom ILIT is insufficient. Of note, the bee venom allergen extract used in the two studies were from the two different providers. While the first study used a formulation approved for use in subcutaneous VIT, the second study used a nonapproved formulation never tested in humans. Further studies on approved formulations should be performed to generate conclusive results regarding the safety and efficacy of bee venom ILIT.

Recent Advances in Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy in Humans: A Systematic Review

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is presumed to modulate the natural course of allergic disease by inducing immune tolerance. However, conventional AITs, such as subcutaneous immunotherapy and sublingual immunotherapy, require long treatment durations and often provoke local or systemic hypersensitivity reactions. Therefore, only <5% of allergy patients receive AIT as second-line therapy. Novel administration routes, such as intralymphatic, intradermal and epicutaneous immunotherapies, and synthetic recombinant allergen preparations have been evaluated to overcome these limitations. We will review the updated views of diverse AIT methods, and discuss the limitations and opportunities of the AITs for the treatment of allergic diseases in humans.

Effects of a Cloth Panel Containing a Specific Ore Powder on Patients with Chamaecyparis obtusa (Cypress) Pollen Allergy

Pollen allergy to Japanese cedar and cypress is a serious illness that impairs daily life and sleep, especially during pollen season. We have reported that placing a cloth panel containing a specific natural ore powder (CCSNOP) in a room may alleviate the symptoms of hay fever and may also benefit the immune system. This ore is from the Aso mountain range, a volcano on Kyushu Island in the southwestern part of Japan. The purpose of this study was to verify the effect of CCSNOP on cypress pollen. Thirty-one double-blind tests, which investigated cedar pollen allergies, were conducted from February to March 2018 and have already been reported. After this, in early April, 10 of these cases were recruited and all had CCSNOP installed in their bedrooms. Before that, various symptoms and changes in medication were recorded in a “Symptom Diary” and included a mood survey by a questionnaire, stress test using saliva amylase, changes in cypress-specific immunoglobulins IgE and IgG4 by blood sampling, and eosinophil changes. In addition, changes in 29 types of cytokines were investigated. Exposure to CCSNOP relieved symptoms and subjects decreased their intake of medication. There was no change in mood or stress, but eosinophil levels tended to decrease. Although there were no statistical changes in cypress-specific IgE or IgG4, an increase in the former and a decrease in the latter were observed in some individuals during the period of pollen dispersal. Furthermore, levels of GM-CSF and IL8 decreased significantly after use of CCSNOP. The CCSNOP was shown to be effective against cypress pollen allergy, and future investigations will be necessary to observe the long-term effects of CCSNOP.

[The route is the destination-novel forms of application of allergen immunotherapy]

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only causal therapy of IgE-mediated allergies if allergen avoidance is not feasible. Already well established are subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual (SLIT) allergen application, and recently the first oral immunotherapy (OIT) for treating peanut allergy was approved. Interesting and promising new forms of allergen administration are intralymphatic (ILIT) and epicutaneous (EPIT) immunotherapy. Immunologic and clinical efficiency in terms of tolerance induction have been investigated in animal and clinical studies, including the first phase 3 studies. The findings as well as advantages and disadvantages, potential risks and challenges that still have to be addressed before routine clinical application can be envisioned will be comprehensively presented and discussed.

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.

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.

Intralymphatic immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Intralymphatic immunotherapy (ILIT) is a new route of allergen-specific immunotherapy. Data confirming its effect is restricted to a small number of studies.

METHODOLOGY

A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted. The short-term (less than 24 weeks), medium-term (24-52 weeks), and long-term (more than 52 weeks) effects of ILIT in patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC) were assessed. The outcomes were combined symptom and medication scores (CSMS), symptoms visual analog scale (VAS), disease-specific quality of life (QOL), specific IgG4 level, specific IgE level, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Eleven randomized controlled trials and 2 cohorts (483 participants) were included. Compared with placebo, short term benefits of ILIT for seasonal ARC improved CSMS, improved VAS and increased specific IgG4 level but did not change QOL or specific IgE level. Medium-term effect improved VAS. Data on the long-term benefit of ILIT remain unavailable and require longer term follow-up studies. There were no clinical benefits of ILIT for perennial ARC. ILIT was safe and well-tolerated.

CONCLUSION

ILIT showed short-term benefits for seasonal ARC. The sustained effects of ILIT were inconclusive. It was well tolerated.