HealthSWEDE: costs with sublingual immunotherapy-a Swedish questionnaire study

Modelling the Costs of Sublingual Immunotherapy versus Subcutaneous Immunotherapy Based on Clinical Appointments and Impacts of Patient Travel in Sweden

Aim

In Sweden, allergy immunotherapy (AIT) is available as either subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) injections or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets and is used to treat moderate-severe allergic rhinitis (AR). This study sought to determine direct and indirect annual costs stemming from treatment-related travel, appointments, waiting times and medication costs, before exploring likely CO2 emission-related cost-savings for 20,330 patients receiving SCIT or SLIT-tablets in Sweden.

Methods

A model was developed in Python to capture each category of costs in the target patient population. Absenteeism costs arising from treatment-related travel were determined by obtaining average hourly pay data from Swedish Government sources. Absenteeism costs were also calculated for 30-minute post-dose observation times, which occurred during one clinical appointment for SLIT patients, and all clinical appointments for SCIT patients. Clinical appointment costs were obtained from healthcare price lists for Sweden. Medication costs were retrieved from the Pharmaceutical Specialities in Sweden (Fass) website, and treatment doses required for SCIT and SLIT-tablets were determined based on product labels and previously-calculated dosage regimes. High-cost protection and reimbursement scheme payment caps were applied when determining patient appointment and medication costs, respectively, and when identifying financial burdens for individual payers.

Results

Mean total annual costs for SCIT were Swedish Krona (SEK) 604.1 million (m), with clinical appointments contributing the largest share of these costs (52.7%), followed by medication (34.4%), travel-related absenteeism (8.9%), waiting time-related absenteeism (2.7%) and private transportation (1.3%). Mean total annual costs for SLIT-tablets were SEK 336.2m. Medication contributed the most to these costs (72.3%), followed by clinical appointments (22.7%), travel-related absenteeism (3.8%), waiting time-related absenteeism (0.6%) and private transportation (0.6%).

Conclusion

For patients with moderate-severe AR receiving AIT in Sweden, SLIT-tablets displayed large potential cost savings to patients, the healthcare system, and the government, whilst possessing reduced societal costs of carbon emissions relative to SCIT.

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.

Update about Oralair® as a treatment for grass pollen allergic rhinitis

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is a well-tolerated, safe, and effective approach to treating allergic rhinitis (AR). Oralair® is a five-grass pollen SLIT tablet containing natural pollen allergens from five of the major grass species responsible for seasonal AR due to grass pollen allergy. Recommended use is in a pre-coseasonal regimen, starting daily treatment approximately 4 months before the start of the pollen season, with treatment then continued daily throughout the season; treatment should continue for 3–5 y. Clinical efficacy and safety of Oralair® in patients with grass pollen-induced AR has been demonstrated in a comprehensive clinical development program of randomized controlled trials. Effectiveness has been substantiated in subsequent observational studies with sustained efficacy following treatment cessation and a favorable level of adherence, quality of life, benefit, and satisfaction for the patients. Supportive evidence for a benefit in reducing the risk or delaying the development of allergic asthma is emerging.