Sublingual immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis and conjunctivitis

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).

Circulating exosomal has-miR-24-3p and has-miR-128-3p reflect early efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy in allergic rhinitis

OBJECTIVE

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) can improve the symptoms of allergic rhinitis (AR) and modify its natural course, but its effectiveness varies among individuals. This study aims to analyze miRNAs from serum exosomes and evaluate their predictive values for the early response of SLIT in AR.

METHODS

RNA sequencing was performed to investigate the differential expressions of serum exosomal miRNAs between ineffective and effective AR patients who treated with SLIT. The identified candidate miRNAs were validated in two independent cohorts, and the predictive capabilities of these miRNAs and alterations of their expression levels between pre- and 1 year post-SLIT were evaluated.

RESULTS

The serum exosome-derived miRNA profiles were significantly different between the effective and ineffective groups. The five most up-regulated and down-regulated miRNAs were verified in the first validation cohort, and the results demonstrated that serum exosomal has-miR-24-3p and has-miR-206 were reduced, while has-miR-128-3p was increased in the effective group compared to the ineffective group (P < 0.05). Additionally, the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves revealed that serum levels of has-miR-24-3p and has-miR-128-3p displayed potential values for predicting the early efficacy of SLIT (P < 0.05). In the second validation cohort, it was observed that the baseline levels of serum exosomal has-miR-24-3p were significantly lower, while has-miR-128-3p levels were significantly higher in the effective group compared to the ineffective group (P < 0.05). After 1 year of SLIT, there was a significant decrease in serum exosomal levels of has-miR-24-3p compared to baseline. On the other hand, effective patients showed a notable increase in serum exosomal levels of has-miR-128-3p (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Serum exosome-derived miRNAs have the potential to impact the efficacy of SLIT in AR patients. Among them, serum exosomal has-miR-24-3p and has-miR-128-3p show promise as biomarkers for predicting the early effectiveness of SLIT and monitoring therapeutic outcomes.

Sublingual Immunotherapy: How Sublingual Allergen Administration Heals Allergic Diseases; Current Perspective about the Mode of Action

Owing to the successful application of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), allergen immunotherapy (AIT) has become one of the leading treatments for allergic diseases. Similar to the case with other AITs, such as subcutaneous and oral immunotherapies, not only the alleviation of allergic symptoms, but also the curing of the diseases can be expected in patients undergoing SLIT. However, how and why such strong efficacy is obtained by SLIT, in which allergens are simply administered under the tongue, is not clearly known. Various potential mechanisms, including the induction of blocking antibodies, T cell tolerance, regulatory B and T cells, CD103^-CD11b⁺ classical dendritic cells, and CD206⁺ macrophages, and the reduction of innate lymphoid cells, mast cells, and basophils, have been suggested. Recently, through a comparative analysis between high- and non-responder patients of SLIT, we have successfully proposed several novel mechanisms. Here, we introduce our recent findings and summarize the current understanding of the mechanisms underlying the strong efficacy of SLIT.

ARIA pharmacy 2018 "Allergic rhinitis care pathways for community pharmacy": AIRWAYS ICPs initiative (European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing, DG CONNECT and DG Santé) POLLAR (Impact of Air POLLution on Asthma and Rhinitis) GARD Demonstration project

Pharmacists are trusted health care professionals. Many patients use over-the-counter (OTC) medications and are seen by pharmacists who are the initial point of contact for allergic rhinitis management in most countries. The role of pharmacists in integrated care pathways (ICPs) for allergic diseases is important. This paper builds on existing studies and provides tools intended to help pharmacists provide optimal advice/interventions/strategies to patients with rhinitis. The Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA)-pharmacy ICP includes a diagnostic questionnaire specifically focusing attention on key symptoms and markers of the disease, a systematic Diagnosis Guide (including differential diagnoses), and a simple flowchart with proposed treatment for rhinitis and asthma multimorbidity. Key prompts for referral within the ICP are included. The use of technology is critical to enhance the management of allergic rhinitis. However, the ARIA-pharmacy ICP should be adapted to local healthcare environments/situations as regional (national) differences exist in pharmacy care.

Oral Immunotherapy for Allergic Conjunctivitis Using Transgenic Rice Expressing Hypoallergenic Antigens

Pollinosis, or allergic conjunctivitis and rhinitis induced by pollen, is one of the most common diseases worldwide. In Japan, Japanese cedar (Cryptomeria japonica) pollinosis is a predominant allergic condition that affects more than one-third of all Japanese individuals. Pharmacological treatments of allergic conjunctivitis include administration of antiallergic eye drops containing an antihistamine or mast cell stabilizer. However, these topical treatments provide transient relief from symptoms. The only available curative treatment for allergic diseases is allergen-specific immunotherapy. Sublingual immunotherapy for pollinosis has been found to be effective for suppression of ocular and nasal symptoms, but patient compliance is low. Oral administration of staple foods engineered to express allergens is a possible means of delivering antigens for immunotherapy, and its convenience would be expected to improve compliance. With the aim of developing more convenient, effective, and safe immunotherapies for allergic diseases, we have generated rice-based edible vaccines expressing antigens derived from dust mites or pollen from Japanese cedar, birch, or ragweed. In this study, we summarize the results of our immunotherapy studies using transgenic rice. Oral immunotherapy with transgenic rice seeds containing hypoallergenic modified forms of Japanese cedar pollen antigens was effective for both preventing allergic conjunctivitis and suppressing established disease in mice. Oral administration of transgenic rice seeds is thus a promising approach to immunotherapy for conjunctivitis and rhinitis induced by Japanese cedar pollen.

Identification of biomarker sets for predicting the efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy against pollen-induced allergic rhinitis

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is effective against allergic rhinitis, although a substantial proportion of individuals is refractory. Herein, we describe a predictive modality to reliably identify SLIT non-responders (NRs). We conducted a 2-year clinical study in 193 adult patients with Japanese cedar pollinosis, with biweekly administration of 2000 Japanese allergy units of cedar pollen extract as the maintenance dose. After identifying high-responder (HR) patients with improved severity scores and NR patients with unchanged or exacerbated symptoms, differences in 33 HR and 34 NR patients were evaluated in terms of peripheral blood cellular profiles by flow cytometry and serum factors by ELISA and cytokine bead array, both pre- and post-SLIT. Improved clinical responses were seen in 72% of the treated patients. Pre-therapy IL-12p70 and post-therapy IgG1 serum levels were significantly different between HR and NR patients, although these parameters alone failed to distinguish NR from HR patients. However, the analysis of serum parameters in the pre-therapy samples with the Adaptive Boosting (AdaBoost) algorithm distinguished NR patients with high probability within the training data set. Cluster analysis revealed a positive correlation between serum Th1/Th2 cytokines and other cytokines/chemokines in HR patients after SLIT. Thus, processing of pre-therapy serum parameters with AdaBoost and cluster analysis can be reliably used to develop a prediction method for HR/NR patients.

Sublingual immunotherapy in patients with latex allergy: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Latex allergy (LA) is a commonly observed entity for which sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has been shown to be effective in many small randomized clinical trials. The present study was conducted with an aim of systematically reviewing the existing literature on the efficacy and safety of SLIT in patients with LA and to apply the principles of meta-analysis. A search for randomized controlled trials with appropriate search strategy in PubMed and CENTRAL was conducted. Studies with documented clinical history of LA and SLIT administered in any dose, duration and regimen compared with placebo were included. Outcome measures were symptom scores, glove provocation test score, serum IgE levels, induration following latex skin prick test, medication scores and adverse effects. Random effects model was used when moderate to severe heterogeneity was observed and fixed effects model when there was mild heterogeneity. Forest plots for standardized mean difference (95% confidence interval) for all the continuous outcome measures were created. A total of 152 records were identified from the electronic databases and four studies were finally included in the meta-analysis. A statistically significant reduction for induration following glove provocation test (pooled results from two studies) was observed in the SLIT group with SMD of -0.9 [-1.71, -0.08]. No significant differences were observed in any other outcome measures between the interventions. We did not identify significant reduction in most of the outcome measures with SLIT in patients with LA except for glove provocation test score wherein only two studies were included. Large and more randomized controlled trials are required to ascertain and confirm the utility of SLIT in such patients.

A review of clinical efficacy, safety, new developments and adherence to allergen-specific immunotherapy in patients with allergic rhinitis caused by allergy to ragweed pollen (Ambrosia artemisiifolia)

Allergic rhinitis is a common health problem in both children and adults. The number of patients allergic to ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia) is on the rise throughout Europe, having a significant negative impact on the patients' and their family's quality of life. Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) has disease-modifying effects and can induce immune tolerance to allergens. Both subcutaneous immunotherapy and sublingual immunotherapy with ragweed extracts/preparations have clear positive clinical efficacy, especially over pharmacological treatment, even years after the treatment has ended. AIT also has very good safety profiles with extremely rare side effects, and the extracts/preparations used in AIT are commonly well tolerated by patients. However, patient adherence to treatment with AIT seems to be quite low, mostly due to the fact that treatment with AIT is relatively time-demanding and, moreover, due to patients not receiving adequate information and education about the treatment before it starts. AIT is undergoing innovations and improvements in clinical efficacy, safety and patient adherence, especially with new approaches using new adjuvants, recombinant or modified allergens, synthetic peptides, novel routes of administration (epidermal or intralymphatic), and new protocols, which might make AIT more acceptable for a wider range of patients and novel indications. Patient education and support (eg, recall systems) is one of the most important goals for AIT in the future, to further enhance treatment success.

Potential Involvement of Type I Interferon Signaling in Immunotherapy in Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis

Specific immunotherapy (SIT) reverses the symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) in most patients. Recent studies report type I interferons shifting the balance between type I T helper cell (Th1) and type II T helper cells (Th2) towards Th2 dominance by inhibiting the differentiation of naive T cells into Th1 cells. As SIT is thought to cause a shift towards Th1 dominance, we hypothesized that SIT would alter interferon type I signaling. To test this, allergen and diluent challenged CD4⁺ T cells from healthy controls and patients from different time points were analyzed. The initial experiments focused on signature genes of the pathway and found complex changes following immunotherapy, which were consistent with our hypothesis. As interferon signaling involves multiple genes, expression profiling studies were performed, showing altered expression of the pathway. These findings require validation in a larger group of patients in further studies.

Optimum treatment strategies for polyallergic patients - analysis of a large observational trial

OBJECTIVES

To document the effectiveness and safety of sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT) with a five-grass pollen tablet (Oralair ) and compare different treatment options in a broad, non-selected population of patients in a real-world clinical setting.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a 2 year, open, prospective, multicenter, single-arm, non-interventional study. Patients with a history of clinically relevant allergic symptoms caused by grass pollen, confirmed by skin prick testing, received treatment with the five-grass pollen tablet. Concomitant treatment with symptomatic medication and/or additional SLIT or subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) was permitted. Twelve-month data are presented here. Effectiveness was assessed comparing a combined rhinoconjunctivitis (RC) score derived from the severity of rhinitis and conjunctivitis symptoms under treatment with retrospective data of the previous year.

RESULTS

A total of 1408 patients participated in the study, of whom 434 were children/adolescents and 962 polyallergic. Compared with the grass pollen season preceding five-grass pollen tablet treatment, a statistically significant reduction of 49.9% was achieved in RC score for the total population (p < 0.001), and an improvement in overall health was perceived by 90.9% of patients. The overall population of polyallergic patients derived similar benefits from treatment with the five-grass pollen tablet as monoallergic patients. The percentage reduction in RC score was larger in polyallergic patients taking no additional therapy (60.2%) than in those taking concomitant symptomatic medication (38.1%) or allergen immunotherapy (AIT) (50.8%). Within the last of these groups, RC score improved by 47.6% among patients receiving additional SCIT, versus 54.8% with additional SLIT. Adverse drug reactions, reported in 15.3% of study participants, were mostly local in nature and mild or moderate in intensity.

CONCLUSIONS

After 1 year of treatment, polyallergic patients responded similarly to the five-grass pollen tablet as monoallergic patients. For polyallergic patients in whom additional treatment was needed, a second SLIT may be more beneficial than a SCIT or symptomatic co-medication.

The Future of Sublingual Immunotherapy in the United States

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is a safe and effective treatment for allergic rhinitis (AR) and allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC). The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the USA has approved three SLIT tablets for the treatment of AR and ARC in relation to pollen. Specifically, Grastek® and Oralair® are two formulations approved to treat patients suffering with AR/ARC to grass pollen, and Ragwitek™ is a formulation approved to treat patients suffering with AR/ARC to ragweed pollen. Although these approvals provide support for physicians to prescribe SLIT, barriers to prescribing SLIT still remain such as FDA approval for additional formulations, a standard dose and dosing schedule, and cost/insurance coverage. In order to further support the use of SLIT, research is currently being conducted to expand the indication for SLIT to other common comorbidities to AR/ARC. For example, allergic asthma, food allergies, and atopic dermatitis are other diseases which are being explored. The future of SLIT in the USA is unknown; however, education will be necessary for both providers and patients.

Sublingual immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis: where are we now?

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) was introduced in the 1980s as a safer option to subcutaneous immunotherapy and in the latest decade achieved significant advances. Its efficacy in allergic rhinitis is supported by a number of meta-analyses. The development of SLIT preparations in tablets to fulfill the requirements of regulatory agencies for quality of allergen extracts made available optimal products for grass-pollen-induced allergic rhinitis. Preparations of other allergens based on the same production methods are currently in progress. A notable outcome of SLIT, that is shared with subcutaneous immunotherapy, is the evident cost–effectiveness, showing significant cost savings as early as 3 months from starting the treatment, that become as high as 80% compared with drug treatment in the ensuing years.

Sublingual Immunotherapy with a Five-Grass Pollen Tablet in Adult Patients with Allergic Rhinitis: An Open, Prospective, Noninterventional, Multicenter Study

Background. Although the safety and efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) with a five-grass pollen tablet have been demonstrated in randomized clinical trials (RCTs), these outcomes must always be evaluated in real-life medical practice. Methods. In a prospective, open-label, noninterventional, “real-life” study in Germany, we evaluated the safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of SLIT with a five-grass pollen tablet in adults with grass-pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. Results. 808 adults were enrolled between September 2008 and December 2009. 35.3% of the participants experienced at least one adverse drug reaction (ADR), the most common of which were mild-to-moderate gastrointestinal and respiratory disorders. Serious ADRs considered causally related to SLIT treatment occurred in four patients. Overall, the five-grass pollen tablet was considered to have good or very good tolerability by most investigators and patients. Treatment was associated with the relief of nasal, ocular, and bronchial symptoms and decreased symptomatic medication use. However, interpretation of clinical improvements was limited by lower atmospheric grass pollen levels during the study season (relative to the preceding season). Conclusions. In a large population of patients treated in real-life medical practice, SLIT with a five-grass pollen tablet was safe and well tolerated. The patient-reported symptom relief suggests that SLIT was associated with clinical benefits.

Sublingual immunotherapy in children: the recent experiences

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is indicated for the use in pediatric patients suffering from allergic rhinitis or allergic rhinoconjunctivitis caused by environmental allergens, such as ragweed pollen, grass pollen, and dust mite. This review focuses on recent and relevant studies associated with the use of SLIT for these allergens in children by examining efficacy, safety, and immunological data in comparison to subcutaneous immunotherapy, therapeutic treatments, and placebo.

RECENT FINDINGS

In several of the case studies examined in this article, involving mainly grass and dust mite allergic patients, SLIT has been shown to have similar efficacy to subcutaneous immunotherapy. SLIT has been proven as a safer therapy. In comparing the adverse events related to both therapies, SLIT has fewer cases of anaphylaxis and fewer incidents of local reactions of mild-to-moderate severity. In comparison to therapeutic treatments and placebo, SLIT significantly improved symptom and medication scores. In addition to allergic rhinitis and allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, additional uses for SLIT in pediatric patients, such as asthma, atopic dermatitis, and food allergies, are under development.

SUMMARY

SLIT treatment is a well tolerated and effective approach to treat allergic rhinitis and allergic rhinoconjunctivitis in pediatric patients. Three SLIT tablets are currently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration to treat grass and ragweed allergies. The research discussed in this review will further the knowledge of physicians searching for an alternative treatment for their pediatric patients.

Systematic review of immunotherapy for chronic rhinosinusitis

BACKGROUND

Immunotherapy (IT) has been well established as an effective treatment for allergic rhinitis (AR), but little is known about the benefits of IT on clinical outcomes of comorbid chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). The goal of this publication is to systematically review the literature regarding outcomes of IT in patients with atopic CRS.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was conducted including studies that assessed the efficacy of IT on clinical outcome measures in CRS including without polyp, with polyp, and allergic fungal rhinosinusitis subgroups. Excluded articles were those only reporting outcomes specific to asthma or AR.

RESULTS

Seven studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria for this review, none of which were randomized controlled trials. Generally, symptom scores improved in patients treated with IT when compared with baseline data and control patients. Objective endoscopic exam measures improved with IT treatment in short-term studies. Significant improvements were observed in radiographic assessments, and there was a decreased necessity for revision surgery, interventional office visits, and intranasal and oral steroid use.

CONCLUSION

Conclusions are limited by the paucity of available data on the efficacy of IT for treating CRS-specific outcome measures. There is weak evidence to support the use of IT as an adjunctive treatment in CRS patients, particularly in the postoperative period.

Patient initiation and persistence with allergen immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is advised for patients with allergic rhinitis who remain symptomatic despite the use of pharmacotherapy and allergen avoidance. Several factors influence the decision to initiate and complete the AIT regimen.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate patient initiation and persistence with subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapies (SCIT and SLIT) according to physician recommendation.

METHODS

A retrospective review of electronic health records of patients with allergic rhinitis for whom AIT was recommended was conducted in a large private allergy practice in Pennsylvania.

RESULTS

Of 8,790 patients advised to consider AIT, 36.2% initiated AIT (57% adults, 43% children); 78% chose SCIT and 22% chose SLIT drops. Election of AIT was significantly associated with select comorbidities, specifically chronic sinusitis (8.1% for AIT vs 10% for no AIT), allergic conjunctivitis (12.5% for AIT vs 18.5% for no AIT), and asthma (33.8% for AIT vs 37.4% for no AIT; P < .05). Choice of SCIT vs SLIT drops was significantly associated with older age, female sex, select comorbidities, and more allergy medications at initiation (P < .05). Of adults, 30.2% completed at least 3 years of recommended treatment. Median time on treatment was longer for adults on SCIT vs SLIT drops (3 vs 1.6 years). Similarly, 35.4% of children completed treatment, with a longer median time on treatment for SCIT (4.7 years) vs SLIT drops (3.5 years).

CONCLUSION

A minority of patients initiated AIT according to allergist recommendation and a subset of these patients completed therapy. AIT might be an underused option that could benefit patients unable to manage allergic rhinitis symptoms by other means.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01549340.

Guideline on allergen-specific immunotherapy in IgE-mediated allergic diseases: S2k Guideline of the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI), the Society for Pediatric Allergy and Environmental Medicine (GPA), the Medical Association of German Allergologists (AeDA), the Austrian Society for Allergy and Immunology (ÖGAI), the Swiss Society for Allergy and Immunology (SGAI), the German Society of Dermatology (DDG), the German Society of Oto- Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery (DGHNO-KHC), the German Society of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (DGKJ), the Society for Pediatric Pneumology (GPP), the German Respiratory Society (DGP), the German Association of ENT Surgeons (BV-HNO), the Professional Federation of Paediatricians and Youth Doctors (BVKJ), the Federal Association of Pulmonologists (BDP) and the German Dermatologists Association (BVDD)

The present guideline (S2k) on allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) was established by the German, Austrian and Swiss professional associations for allergy in consensus with the scientific specialist societies and professional associations in the fields of otolaryngology, dermatology and venereology, pediatric and adolescent medicine, pneumology as well as a German patient organization (German Allergy and Asthma Association; Deutscher Allergie- und Asthmabund, DAAB) according to the criteria of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften, AWMF). AIT is a therapy with disease-modifying effects. By administering allergen extracts, specific blocking antibodies, toler-ance-inducing cells and mediators are activated. These prevent further exacerbation of the allergen-triggered immune response, block the specific immune response and attenuate the inflammatory response in tissue. Products for SCIT or SLIT cannot be compared at present due to their heterogeneous composition, nor can allergen concentrations given by different manufacturers be compared meaningfully due to the varying methods used to measure their active ingredients. Non-modified allergens are used for SCIT in the form of aqueous or physically adsorbed (depot) extracts, as well as chemically modified allergens (allergoids) as depot extracts. Allergen extracts for SLIT are used in the form of aqueous solutions or tablets. The clinical efficacy of AIT is measured using various scores as primary and secondary study endpoints. The EMA stipulates combined symptom and medication scores as primary endpoint. A harmonization of clinical endpoints, e. g., by using the combined symptom and medication scores (CSMS) recommended by the EAACI, is desirable in the future in order to permit the comparison of results from different studies. The current CONSORT recommendations from the ARIA/GA2LEN group specify standards for the evaluation, presentation and publication of study results. According to the Therapy allergen ordinance (TAV), preparations containing common allergen sources (pollen from grasses, birch, alder, hazel, house dust mites, as well as bee and wasp venom) need a marketing authorization in Germany. During the marketing authorization process, these preparations are examined regarding quality, safety and efficacy. In the opinion of the authors, authorized allergen preparations with documented efficacy and safety, or preparations tradeable under the TAV for which efficacy and safety have already been documented in clinical trials meeting WAO or EMA standards, should be preferentially used. Individual formulations (NPP) enable the prescription of rare allergen sources (e.g., pollen from ash, mugwort or ambrosia, mold Alternaria, animal allergens) for specific immunotherapy. Mixing these allergens with TAV allergens is not permitted. Allergic rhinitis and its associated co-morbidities (e. g., bronchial asthma) generate substantial direct and indirect costs. Treatment options, in particular AIT, are therefore evaluated using cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analyses. From a long-term perspective, AIT is considered to be significantly more cost effective in allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma than pharmacotherapy, but is heavily dependent on patient compliance. Meta-analyses provide unequivocal evidence of the efficacy of SCIT and SLIT for certain allergen sources and age groups. Data from controlled studies differ in terms of scope, quality and dosing regimens and require product-specific evaluation. Therefore, evaluating individual preparations according to clearly defined criteria is recommended. A broad transfer of the efficacy of certain preparations to all preparations administered in the same way is not endorsed. The website of the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (www.dgaki.de/leitlinien/s2k-leitlinie-sit; DGAKI: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Allergologie und klinische Immunologie) provides tables with specific information on available products for AIT in Germany, Switzerland and Austria. The tables contain the number of clinical studies per product in adults and children, the year of market authorization, underlying scoring systems, number of randomized and analyzed subjects and the method of evaluation (ITT, FAS, PP), separately given for grass pollen, birch pollen and house dust mite allergens, and the status of approval for the conduct of clinical studies with these products. Strong evidence of the efficacy of SCIT in pollen allergy-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis in adulthood is well-documented in numerous trials and, in childhood and adolescence, in a few trials. Efficacy in house dust mite allergy is documented by a number of controlled trials in adults and few controlled trials in children. Only a few controlled trials, independent of age, are available for mold allergy (in particular Alternaria). With regard to animal dander allergies (primarily to cat allergens), only small studies, some with methodological deficiencies are available. Only a moderate and inconsistent therapeutic effect in atopic dermatitis has been observed in the quite heterogeneous studies conducted to date. SCIT has been well investigated for individual preparations in controlled bronchial asthma as defined by the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2007 and intermittent and mild persistent asthma (GINA 2005) and it is recommended as a treatment option, in addition to allergen avoidance and pharmacotherapy, provided there is a clear causal link between respiratory symptoms and the relevant allergen. The efficacy of SLIT in grass pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis is extensively documented in adults and children, whilst its efficacy in tree pollen allergy has only been shown in adults. New controlled trials (some with high patient numbers) on house dust mite allergy provide evidence of efficacy of SLIT in adults. Compared with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, there are only few studies on the efficacy of SLIT in allergic asthma. In this context, newer studies show an efficacy for SLIT on asthma symptoms in the subgroup of grass pollen allergic children, adolescents and adults with asthma and efficacy in primary house dust mite allergy-induced asthma in adolescents aged from 14 years and in adults. Aspects of secondary prevention, in particular the reduction of new sensitizations and reduced asthma risk, are important rationales for choosing to initiate treatment early in childhood and adolescence. In this context, those products for which the appropriate effects have been demonstrated should be considered. SCIT or SLIT with pollen or mite allergens can be performed in patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis using allergen extracts that have been proven to be effective in at least one double-blind placebo-controlled (DBPC) study. At present, clinical trials are underway for the indication in asthma due to house dust mite allergy, some of the results of which have already been published, whilst others are still awaited (see the DGAKI table "Approved/potentially completed studies" via www.dgaki.de/Leitlinien/s2k-Leitlinie-sit (according to www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu)). When establishing the indication for AIT, factors that favour clinical efficacy should be taken into consideration. Differences between SCIT and SLIT are to be considered primarily in terms of contraindications. In individual cases, AIT may be justifiably indicated despite the presence of contraindications. SCIT injections and the initiation of SLIT are performed by a physician experienced in this type of treatment and who is able to administer emergency treatment in the case of an allergic reaction. Patients must be fully informed about the procedure and risks of possible adverse events, and the details of this process must be documented (see "Treatment information sheet"; available as a handout via www.dgaki.de/Leitlinien/s2k-Leitlinie-sit). Treatment should be performed according to the manufacturer's product information leaflet. In cases where AIT is to be performed or continued by a different physician to the one who established the indication, close cooperation is required in order to ensure that treatment is implemented consistently and at low risk. In general, it is recommended that SCIT and SLIT should only be performed using preparations for which adequate proof of efficacy is available from clinical trials. Treatment adherence among AIT patients is lower than assumed by physicians, irrespective of the form of administration. Clearly, adherence is of vital importance for treatment success. Improving AIT adherence is one of the most important future goals, in order to ensure efficacy of the therapy. Severe, potentially life-threatening systemic reactions during SCIT are possible, but - providing all safety measures are adhered to - these events are very rare. Most adverse events are mild to moderate and can be treated well. Dose-dependent adverse local reactions occur frequently in the mouth and throat in SLIT. Systemic reactions have been described in SLIT, but are seen far less often than with SCIT. In terms of anaphylaxis and other severe systemic reactions, SLIT has a better safety profile than SCIT. The risk and effects of adverse systemic reactions in the setting of AIT can be effectively reduced by training of personnel, adhering to safety standards and prompt use of emergency measures, including early administration of i. m. epinephrine. Details on the acute management of anaphylactic reactions can be found in the current S2 guideline on anaphylaxis issued by the AWMF (S2-AWMF-LL Registry Number 061-025). AIT is undergoing some innovative developments in many areas (e. g., allergen characterization, new administration routes, adjuvants, faster and safer dose escalation protocols), some of which are already being investigated in clinical trials. Cite this as Pfaar O, Bachert C, Bufe A, Buhl R, Ebner C, Eng P, Friedrichs F, Fuchs T, Hamelmann E, Hartwig-Bade D, Hering T, Huttegger I, Jung K, Klimek L, Kopp MV, Merk H, Rabe U, Saloga J, Schmid-Grendelmeier P, Schuster A, Schwerk N, Sitter H, Umpfenbach U, Wedi B, Wöhrl S, Worm M, Kleine-Tebbe J. Guideline on allergen-specific immunotherapy in IgE-mediated allergic diseases - S2k Guideline of the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI), the Society for Pediatric Allergy and Environmental Medicine (GPA), the Medical Association of German Allergologists (AeDA), the Austrian Society for Allergy and Immunology (ÖGAI), the Swiss Society for Allergy and Immunology (SGAI), the German Society of Dermatology (DDG), the German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery (DGHNO-KHC), the German Society of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (DGKJ), the Society for Pediatric Pneumology (GPP), the German Respiratory Society (DGP), the German Association of ENT Surgeons (BV-HNO), the Professional Federation of Paediatricians and Youth Doctors (BVKJ), the Federal Association of Pulmonologists (BDP) and the German Dermatologists Association (BVDD). Allergo J Int 2014;23:282-319.

Dendritic cells in the periphery control antigen-specific natural and induced regulatory T cells

Dendritic cells (DCs) are specialized antigen-presenting cells that regulate both immunity and tolerance. DCs in the periphery play a key role in expanding naturally occurring Foxp3⁺ CD25⁺ CD4⁺ regulatory T cells (Natural T-regs) and inducing Foxp3 expression (Induced T-regs) in Foxp3⁻ CD4⁺ T cells. DCs are phenotypically and functionally heterogeneous, and further classified into several subsets depending on distinct marker expression and their location. Recent findings indicate the presence of specialized DC subsets that act to expand Natural T-regs or induce Foxp3⁺ T-regs from Foxp3⁻ CD4⁺ T cells. For example, two major subsets of DCs in lymphoid organs act differentially in inducing Foxp3⁺ T-regs from Foxp3⁻ cells or expanding Natural T-regs with model-antigen delivery by anti-DC subset monoclonal antibodies in vivo. Furthermore, DCs expressing CD103 in the intestine induce Foxp3⁺ T-regs from Foxp3⁻ CD4⁺ T cells with endogenous TGF-β and retinoic acid. In addition, antigen-presenting DCs have a capacity to generate Foxp3⁺ T-regs in the oral cavity where many antigens and commensals exist, similar to intestine and skin. In skin and skin-draining lymph nodes, at least six DC subsets have been identified, suggesting a complex DC-T-reg network. Here, we will review the specific activity of DCs in expanding Natural T-regs and inducing Foxp3⁺ T-regs from Foxp3⁻ precursors, and further discuss the critical function of DCs in maintaining tolerance at various locations including skin and oral cavity.