Short-Term Subcutaneous Allergy Immunotherapy and Dupilumab are Well Tolerated in Allergic Rhinitis: A Randomized Trial

Promising New Diagnostic and Treatment Modalities for Allergic Rhinitis: What's Coming Next?

Novel diagnostic tests may help diagnose patients with local allergic rhinitis (AR) when systemic testing is negative or inconclusive. Surgical approaches including septoplasty, inferior turbinate reduction, nasal swell body reduction, and posterior nasal nerve ablation may improve symptoms in patients whose symptoms are refractory to medical therapy, though high-quality evidence is lacking in the AR population. Intralymphatic and epicutaneous immunotherapy have the potential to improve adherence to allergen immunotherapy, though comparisons with current gold standard treatments are lacking and studies reporting long-term outcomes are needed. Immunomodulatory agents in combination with subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) may improve tolerance of SCIT but reports to date do not demonstrate a clear benefit in symptom alleviation. Future work in these areas may support these options as beneficial for testing and treatment of AR.

Differential modulation of allergic rhinitis nasal transcriptome by dupilumab and allergy immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Nasal epithelial cells are important regulators of barrier function and immune signaling; however, in allergic rhinitis (AR) these functions can be disrupted by inflammatory mediators. We aimed to better discern AR disease mechanisms using transcriptome data from nasal brushing samples from individuals with and without AR.

METHODS

Data were drawn from a feasibility study of individuals with and without AR to Timothy grass and from a clinical trial evaluating 16 weeks of treatment with the following: dupilumab, a monoclonal antibody that binds interleukin (IL)-4Rα and inhibits type 2 inflammation by blocking signaling of both IL-4/IL-13; subcutaneous immunotherapy with Timothy grass (SCIT), which inhibits allergic responses through pleiotropic effects; SCIT + dupilumab; or placebo. Using nasal brushing samples from these studies, we defined distinct gene signatures in nasal tissue of AR disease and after nasal allergen challenge (NAC) and assessed how these signatures were modulated by study drug(s).

RESULTS

Treatment with dupilumab (normalized enrichment score [NES] = -1.73, p = .002) or SCIT + dupilumab (NES = -2.55, p < .001), but not SCIT alone (NES = +1.16, p = .107), significantly repressed the AR disease signature. Dupilumab (NES = -2.55, p < .001), SCIT (NES = -2.99, p < .001), and SCIT + dupilumab (NES = -3.15, p < .001) all repressed the NAC gene signature.

CONCLUSION

These results demonstrate type 2 inflammation is an important contributor to the pathophysiology of AR disease and that inhibition of the type 2 pathway with dupilumab may normalize nasal tissue gene expression.

Hot topics in allergen immunotherapy, 2023: Current status and future perspective

The importance of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is multifaceted, encompassing both clinical and quality-of-life improvements and cost-effectiveness in the long term. Key mechanisms of allergen tolerance induced by AIT include changes in memory type allergen-specific T- and B-cell responses towards a regulatory phenotype with decreased Type 2 responses, suppression of allergen-specific IgE and increased IgG1 and IgG4, decreased mast cell and eosinophil numbers in allergic tissues and increased activation thresholds. The potential of novel patient enrolment strategies for AIT is taking into account recent advances in biomarkers discoveries, molecular allergy diagnostics and mobile health applications contributing to a personalized approach enhancement that can increase AIT efficacy and compliance. Artificial intelligence can help manage and interpret complex and heterogeneous data, including big data from omics and non-omics research, potentially predict disease subtypes, identify biomarkers and monitor patient responses to AIT. Novel AIT preparations, such as synthetic compounds, innovative carrier systems and adjuvants, are also of great promise. Advances in clinical trial models, including adaptive, complex and hybrid designs as well as real-world evidence, allow more flexibility and cost reduction. The analyses of AIT cost-effectiveness show a clear long-term advantage compared to pharmacotherapy. Important research questions, such as defining clinical endpoints, biomarkers of patient selection and efficacy, mechanisms and the modulation of the placebo effect and alternatives to conventional field trials, including allergen exposure chamber studies are still to be elucidated. This review demonstrates that AIT is still in its growth phase and shows immense development prospects.

Suppressed IgG4 class switching in dupilumab- and TNF inhibitor-treated patients after mRNA vaccination

BACKGROUND

The noninflammatory immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4) is linked to tolerance and is unique to humans. Although poorly understood, prolonged antigenic stimulation and IL-4-signaling along the T helper 2-axis may be instrumental in IgG4 class switching. Recently, repeated SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination has been linked to IgG4 skewing. Although widely used immunosuppressive drugs have been shown to only moderately affect humoral responses to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination, the effect on IgG4 switching has not been investigated.

METHODS

Here we study the impact of such immunosuppressive drugs, including the IL-4 receptor-blocking antibody dupilumab, on IgG4 skewing upon repeated SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination. Receptor-binding domain (RBD) specific antibody responses were longitudinally measured in 600 individuals, including patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases treated with a TNF inhibitor (TNFi) and/or methotrexate (MTX), dupilumab, and healthy/untreated controls, after repeated mRNA vaccination.

RESULTS

We observed a substantial increase in the proportion of RBD-specific IgG4 antibodies (median 21%) in healthy/untreated controls after third vaccination. This IgG4 skewing was profoundly reduced in dupilumab-treated patients (<1%). Unexpectedly, an equally strong suppression of IgG4 skewing was observed in TNFi-treated patients (<1%), whereas MTX caused a modest reduction (7%). RBD-specific total IgG levels were hardly affected by these immunosuppressive drugs. Minimal skewing was observed, when primary vaccination was adenoviral vector-based.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results imply a critical role for IL-4/IL-13 as well as TNF in vivo IgG4 class switching. These novel findings advance our understanding of IgG4 class switch dynamics, and may benefit humoral tolerance induction strategies, treatment of IgG4 pathologies and mRNA vaccine optimization.

Efficacy and safety of stapokibart (CM310) in uncontrolled seasonal allergic rhinitis (MERAK): an investigator-initiated, placebo-controlled, randomised, double-blind, phase 2 trial

Background

There is no trial to assess the benefits of periodically using biologics during the pollen season in patients with uncontrolled seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR), who have moderate-to-severe symptoms even after standard-of-care. This trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the add-on administration of stapokibart, a humanised monoclonal antibody that targets interleukin-4 receptor alpha, in patients with uncontrolled SAR.

Methods

In this investigator-initiated, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, eligible patients received either stapokibart 600-300 mg weekly (QW), every 2 weeks (Q2W), or placebo QW for 4 weeks. All patients were given mometasone furoate nasal spray and loratadine throughout the trial. The primary endpoint was the mean change from baseline in daily reflective total nasal symptom score (rTNSS) during 2-week treatment. Secondary efficacy outcomes included: the mean change from baseline in daily rTNSS during 4-week treatment; the mean changes and the mean percentage changes from baseline during 2-week and 4-week treatment in 1) daily rTNSS and reflective total ocular symptom score (rTOSS), 2) morning (AM)/evening (PM) rTNSS and rTOSS, 3) AM instantaneous total nasal symptom score (iTNSS) and instantaneous total ocular symptom score (iTOSS), 4) individual nasal and ocular symptoms; the change from baseline in Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of-Life Questionnaire score during 4-week treatment. Exploratory endpoints included the change of prespecified markers related to type 2 inflammation pre- and post-treatment. Safety, immunogenicity, and pharmacokinetics were also evaluated. This study is registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05470647).

Findings

Between August 17, 2022, and December 28, 2022, 92 patients with uncontrolled SAR were enrolled from 4 centres in China and randomly assigned to receive stapokibart 600-300 mg QW (n = 31), stapokibart 600-300 mg Q2W (n = 30), or placebo QW (n = 31), of whom 86 (93%) completed the study. Both stapokibart Q2W and QW did not significantly improve mean change from baseline in daily rTNSS compared with placebo in 2 weeks. The least-squares (LS) mean differences (97.5% confidence interval [CI]) compared with placebo were -1.0 (-2.3, 0.2) in stapokibart Q2W group (p = 0.065) and -0.2 (-1.5, 1.0) in stapokibart QW group (p = 0.67). For the secondary outcomes, compared with placebo, stapokibart Q2W presented significant improvements in the mean percentage change from baseline in daily rTNSS in 2 weeks (LS mean difference -12.9%, 95% CI -25.3%, -0.4%, p = 0.043), as well as AM iTNSS over 2 weeks (LS mean difference -17.4%, 95% CI -31.0%, -3.8%, p = 0.013) and 4 weeks (LS mean difference -15.4%, 95% CI -29.0%, -1.9%, p = 0.026). Additionally, the nasal congestion score was significantly lower in stapokibart Q2W than placebo during 2-week (LS mean difference -0.4, 95% CI -0.7, -0.1, p = 0.014) and 4-week (LS mean difference -0.4, 95% CI -0.7, -0.04, p = 0.028) treatment. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 48% (15/31), 33% (10/30), and 61% (19/31) of patients receiving stapokibart QW, Q2W, and placebo, respectively. Most reported TEAEs were sinus bradycardia, hyperlipidaemia, and blood uric acid increased.

Interpretation

In this phase 2 trial, both stapokibart regimens had an acceptable safety and tolerability profile but did not significantly improve daily rTNSS in patients with uncontrolled SAR. The efficacy of stapokibart in patients with uncontrolled SAR is being further investigated in ongoing phase 3 trials (clinicaltrials.gov, NCT05908032).

Funding

Ministry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China; Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China; National Natural Science Foundation of China; Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences.

Dupilumab in patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (LIBERTY-CSU CUPID): Two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials

BACKGROUND

Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by recurrent pruritic wheals (hives) and/or angioedema. Patients with CSU could remain symptomatic despite standard-of-care H1 antihistamines (H1-AH) or anti-IgE (omalizumab) treatment. Dupilumab blocks IL-4/IL-13 signaling and is approved for multiple type 2/atopic indications.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted two phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trials comparing dupilumab with placebo in patients with symptomatic CSU despite H1-AH.

METHODS

In LIBERTY-CSU CUPID Study A, patients were omalizumab-naive (n = 138, aged ≥6 years). In Study B, patients were omalizumab-intolerant/incomplete responders (n = 108, aged ≥12 years). The primary end point was either change from baseline over 7 days in the Urticaria Activity Score (UAS7) or Itch Severity Score (ISS7) at week 24, with the other as a key secondary end point, depending on regional regulatory requirements. Studies were pooled for safety assessment.

RESULTS

In Study A, UAS7 and ISS7 improved with dupilumab versus placebo (difference -8.5 [95% CI, -13.2 to -3.9; P = .0003] and -4.2 [95% CI, -6.6 to -1.8; P = .0005]). In Study B, tested at α = 0.043 after interim analysis, UAS7 improved (difference -5.8 [95% CI, -11.4 to -0.3; P = .0390]), with a numerical trend in ISS7 (difference -2.9 [95% CI, -5.7 to -0.07; nominal P = .0449, not significant]). Pooled safety data were consistent between dupilumab and placebo and with the known dupilumab safety profile.

CONCLUSIONS

Dupilumab reduced urticaria activity by reducing itch and hives severity in omalizumab-naive patients with CSU uncontrolled with H1-AH. Although the primary end point for Study B was not met, dupilumab effects were small in patients who were omalizumab-intolerant/incomplete responders.

A Review on Novel Therapeutic Modalities and Evidence-based Drug Treatments against Allergic Rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is an IgE-mediated atopic disease that occurs due to inhaled antigens in the immediate phase. Misdiagnosis, insufficient treatment, or no treatment at all are frequent problems associated with the widespread condition known as chronic allergic rhinitis. AR symptoms include runny, itchy, stuffy, and sneezing noses. Asthma and nasal polyps, for example, sometimes occur simultaneously in patients. In order for people living with AR to be as comfortable and productive as possible, treatment should center on reducing their symptoms. The online sources and literature, such as Pubmed, ScienceDirect, and Medline, were reviewed to gather information regarding therapeutic modalities of AR and evidence-based treatments for the disease as the objectives of the present study. An increasing number of people are suffering from AR, resulting in a heavy financial and medical burden on healthcare systems around the world. Undertreating AR frequently results in a decline in quality of life. Treatment compliance is a critical challenge in the administration of AR. Innovative therapies are needed for RA to provide patients with symptom alleviation that is less expensive, more effective, and longer duration of action. Evidence-based guidelines are helpful for managing AR illness. Treating AR according to evidence-based standards can help in disease management. AR treatment includes allergen avoidance, drug therapy, immunotherapy, patient education, and follow-up. However, AR treatment with intranasal corticosteroids is more popular. Hence, in this review article, treatment options for AR are discussed in depth. We also discussed the incidence, causes, and new treatments for this clinical condition.

Future Directions of Allergen Immunotherapy for Allergic Rhinitis: Experts' Perspective

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is broadly used all over the world as the only available disease-modifying treatment option. The aim of this experts' perspective is to address 7 important unmet needs for the further direction of AIT and to provide the readership with the authors' positions on these topics. An international group of experts in the field of AIT have formulated 7 important aspects for the future position of AIT, performed a current literature review, and proposed a consented position on these topics. The aspects discussed and consented by the authors include: (1) alternative routes of allergen application in AIT, (2) potential of recombinant vaccines, (3) the role of allergy diagnosis based on component-resolved diagnosis for AIT composition, (4) the impact of COVID-19 vaccination for further innovations in AIT, (5) potential of combining biologics to AIT, (6) future innovations in high-risk children/adolescents, and (7) the future regulatory position on AIT. Important unmet needs and topics for AIT have been addressed in this expert review. The authors' views and personal position on these 7 aspects have also been elaborated.

Dupilumab and subcutaneous immunotherapy for the treatment of refractory moderate to severe atopic dermatitis: A preliminary report

Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and dupilumab are important treatments for patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD). However, in clinical practice, poor response to allergen immunotherapy (AIT) or dupilumab has been observed in some patients. It is unknown whether combining dupilumab and SCIT can improve treatment responses in patients with moderate to severe AD that is resistant to dupilumab or SCIT monotherapy. This single-centre, retrospective, observational, real-world study evaluated the efficacy and safety of dupilumab and SCIT for refractory moderate to severe AD. The data of ten patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis who were treated with dupilumab and SCIT were retrospectively analysed. The scoring atopic dermatitis (SCORAD) score, numerical rating scale (NRS), and atopic dermatitis control test (ADCT) scores and eosinophil and total IgE levels before and after add-on therapy were compared and analysed. The SCORAD, NRS, and ADCT scores decreased significantly at four and 12 weeks after the initiation of add-on therapy and plateaued during maintenance treatment. The eosinophil and total IgE levels were not significantly different before and after add-on therapy. No serious adverse reactions were reported in any patient during add-on therapy. This study indicates that the combination of dupilumab and SCIT safely improves the treatment response of patients with moderate to severe AD who are resistant to dupilumab or SCIT monotherapy.

The origins and longevity of IgE responses as indicated by serological and cellular studies in mice and humans

The existence of long-lived IgE antibody-secreting cells (ASC) is contentious, with the maintenance of sensitization by the continuous differentiation of short-lived IgE+ ASC a possibility. Here, we review the epidemiological profile of IgE production, and give an overview of recent discoveries made on the mechanisms regulating IgE production from mouse models. Together, these data suggest that for most individuals, in most IgE-associated diseases, IgE+ ASC are largely short-lived cells. A subpopulation of IgE+ ASC in humans is likely to survive for tens of months, although due to autonomous IgE B cell receptor (BCR) signaling and antigen-driven IgE+ ASC apoptosis, in general IgE+ ASC probably do not persist for the decades that other ASC are inferred to do. We also report on recently identified memory B cell transcriptional subtypes that are the likely source of IgE in ongoing responses, highlighting the probable importance of IL-4Rα in their regulation. We suggest the field should look at dupilumab and other drugs that prohibit IgE+ ASC production as being effective treatments for IgE-mediated aspects of disease in most individuals.

Diagnosis and treatment of Hymenoptera venom allergy: S2k Guideline of the German Society of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI) in collaboration with the Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Berufs- und Umweltdermatologie e.V. (ABD), the Medical Association of German Allergologists (AeDA), the German Society of Dermatology (DDG), the German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery (DGHNOKC), the German Society of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (DGKJ), the Society for Pediatric Allergy and Environmental Medicine (GPA), German Respiratory Society (DGP), and the Austrian Society for Allergy and Immunology (ÖGAI)

Hymenoptera venom (HV) is injected into the skin during a sting by Hymenoptera such as bees or wasps. Some components of HV are potential allergens and can cause large local and/or systemic allergic reactions (SAR) in sensitized individuals. During their lifetime, ~ 3% of the general population will develop SAR following a Hymenoptera sting. This guideline presents the diagnostic and therapeutic approach to SAR following Hymenoptera stings. Symptomatic therapy is usually required after a severe local reaction, but specific diagnosis or allergen immunotherapy (AIT) with HV (VIT) is not necessary. When taking a patient's medical history after SAR, clinicians should discuss possible risk factors for more frequent stings and more severe anaphylactic reactions. The most important risk factors for more severe SAR are mast cell disease and, especially in children, uncontrolled asthma. Therefore, if the SAR extends beyond the skin (according to the Ring and Messmer classification: grade > I), the baseline serum tryptase concentration shall be measured and the skin shall be examined for possible mastocytosis. The medical history should also include questions specific to asthma symptoms. To demonstrate sensitization to HV, allergists shall determine concentrations of specific IgE antibodies (sIgE) to bee and/or vespid venoms, their constituents and other venoms as appropriate. If the results are negative less than 2 weeks after the sting, the tests shall be repeated (at least 4 - 6 weeks after the sting). If only sIgE to the total venom extracts have been determined, if there is double sensitization, or if the results are implausible, allergists shall determine sIgE to the different venom components. Skin testing may be omitted if in-vitro methods have provided a definitive diagnosis. If neither laboratory diagnosis nor skin testing has led to conclusive results, additional cellular testing can be performed. Therapy for HV allergy includes prophylaxis of reexposure, patient self treatment measures (including use of rescue medication) in the event of re-stings, and VIT. Following a grade I SAR and in the absence of other risk factors for repeated sting exposure or more severe anaphylaxis, it is not necessary to prescribe an adrenaline auto-injector (AAI) or to administer VIT. Under certain conditions, VIT can be administered even in the presence of previous grade I anaphylaxis, e.g., if there are additional risk factors or if quality of life would be reduced without VIT. Physicians should be aware of the contraindications to VIT, although they can be overridden in justified individual cases after weighing benefits and risks. The use of β-blockers and ACE inhibitors is not a contraindication to VIT. Patients should be informed about possible interactions. For VIT, the venom extract shall be used that, according to the patient's history and the results of the allergy diagnostics, was the trigger of the disease. If, in the case of double sensitization and an unclear history regarding the trigger, it is not possible to determine the culprit venom even with additional diagnostic procedures, VIT shall be performed with both venom extracts. The standard maintenance dose of VIT is 100 µg HV. In adult patients with bee venom allergy and an increased risk of sting exposure or particularly severe anaphylaxis, a maintenance dose of 200 µg can be considered from the start of VIT. Administration of a non-sedating H1-blocking antihistamine can be considered to reduce side effects. The maintenance dose should be given at 4-weekly intervals during the first year and, following the manufacturer's instructions, every 5 - 6 weeks from the second year, depending on the preparation used; if a depot preparation is used, the interval can be extended to 8 weeks from the third year onwards. If significant recurrent systemic reactions occur during VIT, clinicians shall identify and as possible eliminate co-factors that promote these reactions. If this is not possible or if there are no such co-factors, if prophylactic administration of an H1-blocking antihistamine is not effective, and if a higher dose of VIT has not led to tolerability of VIT, physicians should should consider additional treatment with an anti IgE antibody such as omalizumab as off lable use. For practical reasons, only a small number of patients are able to undergo sting challenge tests to check the success of the therapy, which requires in-hospital monitoring and emergency standby. To perform such a provocation test, patients must have tolerated VIT at the planned maintenance dose. In the event of treatment failure while on treatment with an ACE inhibitor, physicians should consider discontinuing the ACE inhibitor. In the absence of tolerance induction, physicians shall increase the maintenance dose (200 µg to a maximum of 400 µg in adults, maximum of 200 µg HV in children). If increasing the maintenance dose does not provide adequate protection and there are risk factors for a severe anaphylactic reaction, physicians should consider a co-medication based on an anti-IgE antibody (omalizumab; off-label use) during the insect flight season. In patients without specific risk factors, VIT can be discontinued after 3 - 5 years if maintenance therapy has been tolerated without recurrent anaphylactic events. Prolonged or permanent VIT can be considered in patients with mastocytosis, a history of cardiovascular or respiratory arrest due to Hymenoptera sting (severity grade IV), or other specific constellations associated with an increased individual risk of recurrent and/or severe SAR (e.g., hereditary α-tryptasemia). In cases of strongly increased, unavoidable insect exposure, adults may receive VIT until the end of intense contact. The prescription of an AAI can be omitted in patients with a history of SAR grade I and II when the maintenance dose of VIT has been reached and tolerated, provided that there are no additional risk factors. The same holds true once the VIT has been terminated after the regular treatment period. Patients with a history of SAR grade ≥ III reaction, or grade II reaction combined with additional factors that increase the risk of non response or repeated severe sting reactions, should carry an emergency kit, including an AAI, during VIT and after regular termination of the VIT.

T-cell subsets in allergy and tolerance induction

Antigen-specific T lymphocytes are the central regulators of tolerance versus immune pathology against otherwise innocuous antigens and key targets of antigen-specific immune therapy. Recent advances in the understanding of T cells in tolerance and allergy resulted from improved technologies to directly characterize allergen-specific T cells by multiparameter flow cytometry or single-cell sequencing. This unravelled phenotypically and functionally distinct populations, such as Type 2a T helper cells (Th2a), follicular Th cells (Tfh), regulatory T cells (Treg), Type 1 regulatory T cells (Tr1), and follicular T regulatory cells. Here we will discuss the role of the different Th-cell subsets in the healthy state, during sensitization and development of allergy, and in tolerance induction by allergen immunotherapy (AIT). To date, the mechanisms of AIT as the only causal treatment of allergy are not completely understood. The analyses of allergen-specific T cells directly ex vivo during AIT support the concept of specific-Th2(a) cell deletion rather than an expansion of allergen-specific Tr1 or Treg cells as underlying mechanism.

Advancing precision medicine in asthma: Evolution of treatment outcomes

The article discusses the historical evolution of asthma treatment and highlights recent advancements in personalized medicine, specifically the use of biologics in severe asthma therapy and its potential combination with allergen immunotherapy (AIT). One of the major breakthroughs of biologics is their potential effect on airway remodeling, a crucial aspect of asthma chronicity. The article introduces the concept of disease-modifying antiasthmatic drugs, which aim to modify the course of asthma and possibly modulate or prevent airway remodeling. Furthermore, the critical importance of patient-centered outcome measures to evaluate the efficacy and effectiveness of asthma treatments is emphasized, with the innovative concept of asthma remission introduced as a potential outcome. Recent studies suggest that AIT can be used as an additional therapy to biologic agents for the treatment of allergic asthma. The combination of these treatments has been shown to induce improved clinical outcomes. However, AIT is actually not recommended for use in patients with severe asthma, but encouraging results from studies investigating the combined use of AIT and biologics indicate a novel approach to exploring these treatment modalities. In conclusion, the introduction of biologics and AIT has changed the scenario of respiratory allergy treatment, from a "one size fits all" approach to embracing "individual treatments."

How can we improve our use of allergen immunotherapy as a treatment option for asthma and severe asthma?

INTRODUCTION

In patients suffering from allergic asthma, especially in the pediatric age-group, allergen immunotherapy (AIT) could be of benefit and has the potential of long-term disease modification.

AREAS COVERED

We reviewed the evidence for a beneficial effect of AIT in allergic asthma. A correct selection of the possible candidates for AIT is crucial. We define the comprehensive allergic asthma diagnosis: confirming asthma, confirming allergic sensitization and having symptoms on exposure to the relevant allergens.We analyze why the first trials on AIT for asthma were contradictory; we consider the results of systematic reviews and discuss the high degree of heterogeneity often found in meta-analysis. We assess recent, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials in sublingual AIT that provide robust evidence for a reduction in acute asthma exacerbations and a decrease in the use of inhaled corticosteroids. Further, we demonstrate how real-world trials and large pharmacy data-based analyses confirm these findings for SLIT and SCIT. Finally, we explore the option of AIT in severe asthma patients, once well-controlled on biologic therapy.

EXPERT OPINION

Clear indications for AIT in asthma guidelines would benefit allergic asthmatics. AIT is a therapeutic option in appropriately selected asthmatics. Three years treatment has the potential for long-term tolerance, with persisting benefits years after discontinuation.

Adverse Events for Monoclonal Antibodies in Patients with Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

(1) Background: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a common disease in otolaryngology and novel biological therapies are required for clinical needs. To assess the tolerability of monoclonal antibodies, justifying their clinical applications, we presented a comprehensive safety profile of biologics in AR; (2) Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted following PRISMA guidelines for randomized clinical trials comparing monoclonal antibodies and placebo in AR. PubMed, Web of Science, Medline, and Cochrane were searched up until 9 January 2023. Among 3590 records in total, 12 studies with more than 2600 patients were included. Quality was assessed for all studies using Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials, and subgrouped meta-analysis was performed; (3) Results: We accomplished an up-to-date literature overview and analysis on adverse events of monoclonal antibodies in AR. Total, common, severe, discontinuation-causing, and serious adverse events failed to reach statistical significance. Country was an essential factor for heterogeneity, and urticaria was the adverse event at highest risk (RR 2.81, 95% CI 0.79-9.95); (4) Conclusions: Monoclonal antibodies are considered well tolerated and relatively safe in patients with AR. The regions of patients and hypersensitive adverse reactions such as urticaria require a special caution in biological treatments in AR.

International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: Allergic rhinitis - 2023

BACKGROUND

In the 5 years that have passed since the publication of the 2018 International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2018), the literature has expanded substantially. The ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update presents 144 individual topics on allergic rhinitis (AR), expanded by over 40 topics from the 2018 document. Originally presented topics from 2018 have also been reviewed and updated. The executive summary highlights key evidence-based findings and recommendation from the full document.

METHODS

ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 employed established evidence-based review with recommendation (EBRR) methodology to individually evaluate each topic. Stepwise iterative peer review and consensus was performed for each topic. The final document was then collated and includes the results of this work.

RESULTS

ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 includes 10 major content areas and 144 individual topics related to AR. For a substantial proportion of topics included, an aggregate grade of evidence is presented, which is determined by collating the levels of evidence for each available study identified in the literature. For topics in which a diagnostic or therapeutic intervention is considered, a recommendation summary is presented, which considers the aggregate grade of evidence, benefit, harm, and cost.

CONCLUSION

The ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update provides a comprehensive evaluation of AR and the currently available evidence. It is this evidence that contributes to our current knowledge base and recommendations for patient evaluation and treatment.

The link between allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) are common disorders affecting millions of people worldwide. Although allergic rhinitis and CRS are distinct clinical entities, certain CRS endotypes share similar pathological mechanisms as those seen in patients with allergic rhinitis. This review assesses the literature behind the similarities and differences seen in patients with CRS and allergic rhinitis, and the role atopy might play in the pathophysiology of CRS.

RECENT FINDINGS

In examining the associations between allergic rhinitis and CRS, most studies have focused primarily on CRS with nasal polyps and type 2 inflammation in CRS. Recent studies have demonstrated the similarities and differences in pathologic mechanisms behind allergic rhinitis and CRS, with an emphasis on patient endotypes, genetics, and the nasoepithelial immunologic barrier. Related immunopathology shared by allergic rhinitis and type 2 inflammation in CRS has allowed for therapeutic overlap with biologic treatments.

SUMMARY

Allergic rhinitis and CRS often present as comorbid conditions, and understanding the relationship between allergic rhinitis and CRS is important when considering treatment options. Advances in understanding the genetics and immunology, as well as biologic and immunotherapeutic treatments have improved outcomes in patients with CRS, especially in the setting of atopy.

Combined application of dupilumab and mite allergen-specific immunotherapy in children with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, relapsing inflammatory skin disease that manifests in skin dryness, severe itching, and eczema, and can significantly impact a patient's quality of life. Current treatment regimens do not prevent the recurrence of the disease and are associated with adverse effects. Here, we report two cases of moderate-to-severe AD in children that were treated with dupilumab, a dual inhibitor of IL-4 and IL-13 signaling, in combination with mite allergen-specific immunotherapy.

CASE SUMMARY

Both patients presented with the diagnosis of AD that was not adequately controlled by the conventional treatment regimen, including topical corticosteroids (TCS), topical calcineurin inhibitors, emollients, and the traditional Chinese medicine treatments. In both patients, AD-associated skin irritation impacted the quality of life, disturbed sleep patterns, and caused stress and anxiety.Patients received treatment with dupilumab and mite allergen-specific immunotherapy in addition to the baseline treatment regimen of external glucocorticoids (TCS) and oral antihistamines. Nine months after beginning of treatment, clinical symptoms, signs, medication scores, and evaluation scale scores of both children significantly improved, and the treatment was associated with an overall good tolerance.

CONCLUSION

A combination of dupilumab and mite allergen-specific immunotherapy in addition to the standard anti-AD treatment improves clinical symptoms and is not associated with increased incidence of adverse effects.

Is immunotherapy safe for treatment of severe asthma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The benefits of allergen immunotherapy (AIT), including subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT), for IgE-mediated asthma are well established, especially for dust mite. This review will explore whether the benefits of AIT outweigh the risks in severe asthmatic patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Studies have mostly included mild and moderate asthmatic patients, but at least a few studies do show improvements in asthma symptoms and medication use in severe asthmatic patients. Asthma, and especially uncontrolled asthma, is a major risk factor for severe and fatal systemic reactions from SCIT. Uncontrolled asthma is an absolute contraindication for SCIT. It is less clear whether the benefits of SCIT and SLIT may outweigh the risks in well controlled, severe asthmatic patients, and further study is needed in this area. Asthma biologics, especially Omalizumab, may improve outcomes in severe, controlled asthmatic patients on SCIT, but further data are needed regarding timing of initiation and duration of treatment.

SUMMARY

Although severe asthmatic patients may benefit from AIT, significant risks exist, especially in those with uncontrolled asthma. Further study is needed regarding optimal strategies to minimize risks.

Therapeutical Targets in Allergic Inflammation

From the discovery of IgE to the in-depth characterization of Th2 cells and ILC2, allergic inflammation has been extensively addressed to find potential therapeutical targets. To date, omalizumab, an anti-IgE monoclonal antibody, and dupilumab, an anti-IL-4 receptor α monoclonal antibody, represent two pillars of biologic therapy of allergic inflammation. Their increasing indications and long-term follow-up studies are shaping the many different faces of allergy. At the same time, their limitations are showing the intricate pathogenesis of allergic diseases.

Update on pathomechanisms and treatments in allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a global health problem with increasing prevalence and association with an enormous medical and socioeconomic burden. New recognition of immune cells such as type 2 innate lymphocytes (ILC2s), T helper (Th2) 2 cells, follicular helper T cells, follicular regulatory T cells, regulatory T cells, B cells, dendritic cells, and epithelial cells in AR pathogenesis has been updated in this review paper. An in-depth understanding of the mechanisms underlying AR will aid the identification of biomarkers associated with disease and ultimately provide valuable parameters critical to guide personalized targeted therapy. As the only etiological treatment option for AR, allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) has attracted increasing attention, with evidence for effectiveness of AIT recently demonstrated in several randomized controlled trials and long-term real-life studies. The exploration of biologics as therapeutic options has only involved anti-IgE and anti-type 2 inflammatory agents; however, the cost-effectiveness of these agents remains to be elucidated precisely. In the midst of the currently on-going COVID-19 pandemic, a global life-threatening disease, although some studies have indicated that AR is not a risk factor for severity and mortality of COVID-19, this needs to be confirmed in multi-centre, real-life studies of AR patients from different parts of the world.

Biologics as novel therapeutics for the treatment of allergy: Challenges and opportunities

Over the last 4 decades there has been a significant global increase in the incidence and prevalence of IgE-mediated allergy. Although much progress has been made in the management of allergy via patient education, pharmacotherapy and immunomodulatory treatment regimens, significant unmet need remains. Advancements in our knowledge base surrounding the type 2 immune response, production of IgE and maintenance of immunological memory has led the field to explore targeted intervention of allergic pathways using monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). Intervention at various stages of the allergic cascade offers the opportunity to prevent initiation and/or maintenance of the type 2 immune response and effectively provide therapeutic benefit to patients. Furthermore, a better understanding of the protective mechanisms involved in allergen specific immunotherapy (AIT) has led us to appreciate the interplay of immunoglobulins in the allergic response, specifically the benefit in shifting the IgG:IgE ratio in favor of functionally relevant blocking IgG. Thus, treatments that lower IgE or boost IgG with the ability to outcompete IgE binding to allergen also present a favorable approach in the treatment of allergy. In this short review we discuss and highlight recent advances in the use of biologics to treat severe allergy, highlighting the key challenges but also the significant opportunities and advances to date.

Allergen immunotherapy: past, present and future

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

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

Epidemiology, Prevention and Clinical Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis: More Understanding, Better Patient Care

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a noninfectious inflammatory disease of the nasal mucosa mediated by IgE after atopic individuals are exposed to inhaled allergens and involving a variety of immune cells and cytokines [...].

Pharmacokinetics and Concentration-Response of Dupilumab in Patients with Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis

Patients with moderate to severe allergic rhinitis may benefit from subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT), despite the risk of systemic allergic reaction. Dupilumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin (IL)-4 and IL-13, key drivers of the type 2 inflammation seen in allergic rhinitis, thereby inhibiting their signaling. In the LIBERTY Grass AID trial (NCT03558997), 16 weeks of treatment with 300 mg dupilumab every 2 weeks plus Timothy grass (TG) SCIT did not reduce TG allergen challenge nasal symptom scores compared with SCIT only but did improve tolerability of SCIT up-titration in patients with a history of grass pollen-induced seasonal allergic rhinitis. Here we present the pharmacokinetics of functional serum dupilumab and concentration-response relationships in 52 patients enrolled in this trial. Functional dupilumab concentrations and concentrations of TG-specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) and IgG4 were assessed in blood samples collected from dupilumab-only and SCIT+dupilumab-treated groups. Mean functional dupilumab concentrations were similar in both groups and reached a steady state of approximately 70-80 mg/L at week 5. One week after the end of treatment, TG-specific IgG4 concentrations were increased in the SCIT+dupilumab group, but not in the dupilumab-only group, over the range of dupilumab concentrations evaluated, whereas no changes were seen for TG-specific IgE concentrations. This study demonstrates that SCIT does not alter functional concentrations of serum dupilumab, and the impact of SCIT on TG-specific immunoglobulins is not affected by functional dupilumab concentrations over the range studied, indicating that maximum response was achieved in all patients. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.