Allergen-specific Immunotherapy for Inhalant Allergens in Children

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).

Real-world study: drug reduction in children with allergic rhinitis and asthma receiving immunotherapy

Background: The reduction of pharmacological treatment after allergen immunotherapy (AIT) for house dust mites (HDMs) has been little studied in children. Objective: To evaluate the reduction of pharmacological treatment comparing children that receive HDM immunotherapy (AIT group) versus only pharmacotherapy. Methods: A historic cohort of children with rhinitis or asthma was assessed. The main outcome was the frequency of complete drug discontinuation. Results: 100% drug reduction was higher for rhinitis (4-year cumulative incidence: 30 vs 10.7%) and asthma (24.1 vs 10.5%) in the AIT group (n = 987) than in the pharmacotherapy group (n = 2012). Conclusion: Immunotherapy is associated with a significant reduction of pharmacotherapy in children. This is a marker of clinical control and could be associated with positive economic impact.

Immunotherapy in the Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis in Children

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is an inflammation of the nasal membranes characterized by multiple allergic symptoms. It is a widespread health problem that affects patients' ability to engage in social and physical activity, which lowers their quality of life. The pathophysiology of AR is complex and requires sensitization and the development of a specific immune response to the allergen. Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is a therapeutic method that induces specific immune tolerance to allergens. The objectives of this review are to demonstrate the mechanism of action of immunotherapy, explain how it alleviates clinical symptoms of allergic rhinitis, list the indications and contraindications of immunotherapy in the treatment of allergic rhinitis, and identify different modalities of allergen immunotherapy, their disease-modifying effects, as well as their potential risks and benefits. The review of the literature highlights that T-cell and B-cell responses to inhaled allergens are altered by AIT, which decreases both early and late reactions to allergen exposure. To induce clinical and immunologic tolerance, especially in the pediatric age, escalating dosages of the causing allergen are administered subcutaneously or sublingually. AIT is indicated for severe persistent AR when avoidance measures and medications are inadequate to control the symptoms. To conclude, AIT is a disease-modifying therapy that is safe and effective for the treatment of allergic rhinitis. It is indicated when the symptoms are uncontrolled or when there are undesirable effects from pharmacotherapy.

Nasal Nitric Oxide and Nasal Cytology as Predictive Markers of Short-Term Sublingual Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy Efficacy in Children with Allergic Rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Few studies have been conducted on the short-term response to sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT).

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of our experimental trial was to evaluate if two markers such as nasal nitric oxide (nNO) and nasal cytology could be useful to identify a precocious clinical efficacy of SLIT treatment.

METHODS

We enrolled 34 children aged 6 to 14 years old with diagnosis of allergic rhinitis (AR) and documented sensitization towards house dust mites. We started allergoid-monomeric tablets immunotherapy along with any conventional therapy for AR and we evaluated at baseline (T0), after one (T1), two (T2), three (T3), and six months (T6) the effects of the treatment through the study of: i) a visual analogue scale (VAS 1-10); ii) measurement of nNO; iii) measurement of FeNO; iv) nasal cytology; v) spirometry; and vi) evaluation of any conventional therapy.

RESULTS

We observed an improvement in symptoms evaluated by global VAS (T0 vs. T6: 47.13 vs. 17.57; p < .05) and a statistically significant reduction of nNO (1035.2 ± 956.08 vs. 139.2 ± 59.01; p < .05). In this case, significance was reached when the patients completed the 6 months of treatment. Cytological evaluation revealed significant reduction in nasal eosinophils (T0 vs. T6: 87% vs. 16%; p < .01). Moreover, at T0, 56% of patients had also neutrophils that were reduced up to the 8% at T6 (p < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data confirm the effectiveness of SLIT treatment from a clinical perspective and identifies two biomarkers, such as nNO and nasal cytology, as predictive of treatment efficacy in the short term.

Controversies in Allergy: A Pro/Con Review of Sublingual Allergen Immunotherapy and Allergic Asthma

Sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT) is a therapeutic intervention used in the treatment of respiratory allergies, including asthma. Multiple randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled clinical trials have evaluated the efficacy and safety of SLIT for asthma. These data provide a good platform to appraise the evidence critically to evaluate the effect of SLIT in the management of asthma for the administration of SLIT by both SLIT drops and SLIT tablets, from a clinical perspective. In this clinical review, presented in a pro and con format, we examined (1) evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses; (2) clinical efficacy on asthma symptoms, asthma exacerbations, and quality of life; (3) clinical efficacy on reduction of asthma controller medication; (4) asthma severity; (5) safety profile; (6) long-term effect and prevention; (7) international guidelines, and (8) real-world evidence. Identified inconsistency in the data results from wide variations and differences in outcome measures, specific allergens, delivery approaches, schedules, and age groups. The house dust mite SLIT tablet demonstrated efficacy when it was used in the add-on management of house dust mite-associated allergic asthma in adults. Sublingual allergen immunotherapy for asthma may represent an important advance in incorporating a personalized medicine approach for patients with allergic asthma.

Safety, Efficacy, and Preventive Role of Subcutaneous and Sublingual Allergen Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Pediatric Asthma

Allergen-specific immunotherapy is currently the only treatment with the potential to modify and prevent progression of allergic asthma in children. In clinical practice, it is available in two forms: subcutaneous immunotherapy and sublingual immunotherapy. Trials and meta-analyses showed both the safety and the short- and long-term benefits of allergen-specific immunotherapy in asthmatic children. However, its use and role in asthma remains controversial, since studies are largely heterogeneous. This is mainly due to the lack of consensus on the optimal primary outcome to be considered for clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of allergen-specific immunotherapy in asthma. Therefore, well-conducted researchis needed using standardized and validated tools to evaluate key outcomes in asthmatic children.

Allergen Immunotherapy in Pediatric Asthma: A Pragmatic Point of View

To date, the only disease-modifying treatment strategy for allergic rhinitis and asthma is allergen immunotherapy (AIT). There is evidence that AIT improves allergic rhinitis and asthma, such as reducing symptom severity and medication use and improving of quality of life, with a long-lasting effect after the end of the course. The recent clinical trials evidenced AIT effectiveness and safety in allergic asthma. Consequently, the current version of the GINA (Global Initiative for Asthma) guidelines recommend AIT as an add-on therapy for asthma. There is also evidence that AIT may exert preventive activity on the possible progression from allergic rhinitis to asthma in children and the onset of new sensitizations. The present review provides a pragmatic summary of the clinical indications of AIT in pediatric asthma, including the immunological mechanisms, the predictive biomarkers, and the safety issues in clinical practice.