Clinical considerations in the use of sublingual immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis

The effect of the standard length of the first prescription on the adherence to sublingual immunotherapy for patients with allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Poor adherence to sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has become a major cause of unsatisfactory clinical efficacy for patients with allergic rhinitis (AR). This study was designed to identify the effect of different first prescription lengths on the adherence to SLIT.

METHODS

The clinical data of 306 patients with AR who started SLIT between January 2017 and June 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to the length of their first prescription (group A: less than 3 months, group B: 3 to 6 months, group C: more than 6 months). The numbers of adherent or nonadherent patients in each group and the main reasons of nonadherence were analyzed.

RESULTS

Groups A, B, and C included 102, 161, and 43 patients, respectively. The average lengths of the first prescription for group A, B, and C were 62.52 ± 17.63, 102.21 ± 9.22, and 189.07 ± 17.97 days. There were significance differences among the 3 groups (p < 0.05). There were 42 (41.18%), 112 (69.57%), and 37 (86.05%) adherent patients in group A, B, and C. There were 60 (58.82%), 49 (30.43%), and 6 (13.95%) nonadherent patients in group A, B, and C. There were significant differences in the proportions of adherent and nonadherent patients among the 3 groups (p < 0.05). The following reasons were cited for nonadherence to SLIT: the long course of SLIT; inconvenience of getting the prescription; ineffectiveness; side effects; and other reasons.

CONCLUSION

Under certain conditions, 6 months is recommended as the standard length for the first prescription, which can significantly improve adherence to SLIT in patients with AR.

Comparison of Sublingual Immunotherapy in Patients With Allergic Rhinitis Sensitive to House Dust Mites in Korea

The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical outcomes of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) using 2 kinds of SLIT medications (LAIS and Staloral) in patients with allergic rhinitis for Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus and Dermatophagoides farinae. We have evaluated the patient's characteristics, safety, and compliance in 293 patients and also analyzed the symptom score, medication score, satisfaction rate, and immunologic measurement in 84 patients who have continued the treatment over 1 year. The symptom scores were significantly improved in both treatment groups, 51% versus 44% (LAIS vs Starloral) at 1 year (P < .05). The medication score was also significantly decreased in both treatment groups (P < .05), 50.8% versus 60%. The subjective improvement score was 44.4% versus 46.1%, and satisfaction rate was 29% versus 40% (P < .05). The serum immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4) level was significantly increased in Staloral group (P < .05). The adverse events were 6.2% versus 33.3% and the compliance was 37.7% versus 25.1%. In conclusion, the improvements in symptom score and medication scores were not significant different between 2 SLIT medications at 1 year. LAIS was more compliant, less side effects and Staloral has shown increased satisfaction rate and IgG4 level.

The SQ tree SLIT-tablet is highly effective and well tolerated: Results from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial

BACKGROUND

The SQ tree sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablet (ALK-Abelló, Hørsholm, Denmark) is developed for treatment of tree pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this pivotal phase III trial was to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of the SQ tree SLIT-tablet.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with 634 subjects (12-65 years) with moderate-to-severe ARC despite use of symptom-relieving medication. Eligible subjects were randomized 1:1 to active or placebo treatment. The primary end point was the average daily ARC total combined score (TCS) during the birch pollen season (BPS) analyzed for subjects with diary data during the BPS. Secondary end points included average daily symptom scores (DSS) during the BPS, average TCS and DSS during the tree pollen season (TPS), and average daily medication scores (DMS) in the BPS and TPS.

RESULTS

The primary and key secondary end points demonstrated statistically significant and clinically relevant effects of the SQ tree SLIT-tablet compared with placebo. For the BPS, absolute (relative) differences from placebo were 3.02 (40%) for TCS, 1.32 (37%) for DSS, and 1.58 (49%) for DMS (all P < .0001). For the TPS, absolute (relative) differences from placebo were 2.27 (37%) for TCS, 0.99 (33%) for DSS, and 1.20 (47%) for DMS (all P < .0001). Treatment was well tolerated. The most frequently reported treatment-related adverse events were mild or moderate local reactions related to sublingual administration.

CONCLUSION

The trial demonstrated the efficacy and safety of the SQ tree SLIT-tablet compared with placebo during the BPS and TPS in adolescents and adults with birch pollen-induced ARC (EudraCT 2015-004821-15).

A randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trial of sublingual immunotherapy with house-dust mite extract for allergic rhinitis

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) with house-dust mite (HDM) extract in Chinese patients with HDM-induced allergic rhinitis (AR).

METHODS

A randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trial was conducted with the outpatients of the Eye, Ear, Nose, and Throat Hospital, Fudan University. Forty-eight patients were eligible for randomization to SLIT with a mixture of Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus and Dermatophagoides farinae extract or placebo for 1 year. The primary outcome measures for efficacy were the total nasal symptom score (TNSS) and the individual nasal symptom score. Secondary end points were allergic conjunctivitis scores (ACS) and medication scores (MS). Adverse events (AE) also were monitored.

RESULTS

Intragroup analysis demonstrated a significant improvement in the active treatment group for individual nasal symptom score and TNSS (p < 0.05), although no improvement was observed in the placebo group of congestion, sneezing, and itching (p > 0.05). Furthermore, the ACS and MS in the active treatment group also statistically decreased (p < 0.05). In addition, the active treatment had significant effects on relieving nasal symptoms both in adults and children (p < 0.05), and no statistical difference was observed between these two subgroups (p > 0.05). AEs that occurred ranged from mild to moderate, and no severe systematic reactions were observed.

CONCLUSION

SLIT with a mixture of HDM extract significantly relieved allergy symptoms and reduced the need for antiallergic drugs, which indicated the superiority of active treatment over placebo for patients with HDM-induced AR. However, due to the limited sample size, the findings need to be further confirmed.

A Three-Year Course of House Dust Mite Sublingual Immunotherapy Appears Effective in Controlling the Symptoms of Allergic Rhinitis

Background Allergic rhinitis is the most common allergic disorder. Although the management of the disease is successful in many patients, based on guidelines, some of them remain with symptoms uncontrolled with pharmacotherapy. Presently, there is no substantiated information on the control of allergic rhinitis in patients who underwent sublingual immunotherapy. Objective The purpose of this prospective follow-up study was to assess the control of allergic rhinitis in adults after a three-year course of house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy. Methods This prospective real-life study was designed to include adults with moderate to severe allergic rhinitis sensitized to house dust mite who underwent a three-year course of sublingual immunotherapy. Control of symptoms was assessed by Rhinitis Control Assessment Test (RCAT) after three years of house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy. Additionally, patients assessed their symptoms by utilizing a visual analog scale. Results A total number of 86 consecutively enrolled patients (46 (53.49%) men; mean age 26.10 years (SD = 5.85)) with moderate to severe allergic rhinitis and clinically relevant sensitization to house dust mite were evaluated. When assessed by RCAT on the third year, 74 (86.05%) had well-controlled symptoms and 20 (27.03%) of them were completely controlled. A significant reduction in visual analog scale scores-from 7.52 cm at baseline to 2.31 cm-was established ( P < 0.0001). There was a strong negative correlation between RCAT scores and visual analog scale (r = -0.65; P < 0.01). Conclusion This study provided evidence that a three-year course of house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy appears effective in controlling the symptoms of allergic rhinitis.

Mechanism of action of allergen immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) leads to the production of antiallergen immunoglobulin (IgG) or "blocking antibody" in the serum and an increase in antiallergen IgG and IgA in nasal secretions. There is also a decrease in the usual rise in antiallergen IgE that occurs after the pollen season.

METHODS

In this paper, mechanisms of action of allergen immunotherapy is reviewed.

RESULTS

Regulatory T (Treg) cells and their cytokines, primarily interleukin (IL) 10 and transforming growth factor beta, suppress T-helper type 2 immune responses and control allergic diseases in many ways. AIT induces a shift in the proportion of IL-4-secreting T-helper type 2 cells in favor of IL-10-secreting inducible Treg cells specific for the same allergenic epitope that increases in number and function. Different types of inducible Treg control several facets of allergic inflammation. There are two main types of immunotherapy: subcutaneous immunotherapy and sublingual immunotherapy. Subcutaneous immunotherapy is efficacious and is indicated for the reduction of seasonal symptoms. Sublingual immunotherapy involves the regular self-administration and retention of allergen extract under the tongue for 1-2 minutes before the extract is swallowed. The allergens cross the mucosa in 15-30 minutes and are then captured by tolerogenic dendritic cells and processed as small peptides. Next, via the lymphatic system, a systemic immune response is created to produce an early decrease in mast cell and basophil degranulation.

CONCLUSION

AIT is indicated for the treatment of moderate-to-severe intermittent or persistent symptoms of allergic rhinitis. AIT can be administered to those >5 years of age and has been shown to be safe in children as young as 3 years of age. In this article, AIT and other types of immunotherapies were discussed as well as the indications for immunotherapy.

Clinical efficacy of immunotherapy in allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Aeroallergen immunotherapy (AIT) should be considered for patients who exhibit symptoms of allergic rhinitis (AR), rhinoconjunctivitis, and/or asthma after natural exposure to allergens and who also demonstrate specific immunoglobulin E antibodies against relevant allergens.

METHODS

In this paper, clinical efficacy of immunotherapy in allergic rhinitis is reviewed.

RESULT

Subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT) is effective for seasonal and perennial AR. Sustained effectiveness requires several years of treatment. SCIT may prevent the development of allergic asthma in children with AR. Sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT) is currently considered an alternative treatment to the subcutaneous route. The use of SLIT has been included in international guidelines for the treatment of AR with or without conjunctivitis.

CONCLUSION

Patients treated with SCIT are at risk of both local and systemic adverse reactions; however, in most cases, symptoms are readily reversible if they are recognized early and treated promptly. The safety profile of SLIT is good; therefore, SLIT can be self-administered by patients in their homes. In this article, we reviewed the efficacy and safety of allergen immunotherapy.

Efficacy and Safety of Sublingual Immunotherapy for Allergic Rhinitis in Pediatric Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Allergic rhinitis (AR) has become a global health problem that constantly affects a large part of the general population, especially children.

Objective

Sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT) has been used extensively for pediatric AR, although its efficacy and safety are often questioned. In this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT), we evaluated the use of SLIT for pediatric AR.

Methods

A number of medical literature data bases were searched through January 2016 to identify RCTs that examined the use of SLIT for pediatric AR and that assessed clinical outcomes related to efficacy. Descriptive and quantitative information was abstracted. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated by using fixed- and random-effects models. Subgroup analyses were performed. Heterogeneity was assessed by using the I2 metric. A network meta-analysis was used to estimate SMDs between two SLIT protocols for pediatric seasonal AR. All data were extracted from publications or received from the authors.

Results

Twenty-six studies were eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis of rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis symptom scores, and 19 studies were eligible for the meta-analysis of medication scores. Descriptive and quantitative data were extracted. SLIT differed significantly from placebo in terms of symptom scores (SMD -0.55 [95% confidence interval {CI}, -0.86 to -0.25]; p = 0.0003, I2 = 90%) and medication scores (SMD -0.67 [95% CI, -0.96 to -0.38J; p < 0.00001, I2 = 83%). Oral pruritus was the adverse effect, which occurred most commonly in children who were receiving SLIT. Network meta-analysis revealed no significant difference between the pre-coseasonal and continuous SLIT protocols for seasonal AR in symptom scores (SMD -6.55 [95% CI, -25.38 to 12.29]; p = 0.496) and medication scores (SMD -8.83 [95% CI, -22.10 to 4.43]; p = 0.192).

Conclusions

Our meta-analysis results indicated that SLIT provided significant symptom relief and reduced the need for medication in pediatric patients Moreover, the safety of SLIT needs to be confirmed in RCTs with larger samples.

Sublingual versus subcutaneous immunotherapy: patient adherence at a large German allergy center

BACKGROUND

Many placebo-controlled studies have demonstrated that allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is an effective therapy for treating allergies. Both commonly used routes, subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), require high patient adherence to be successful. In the literature, numbers describing adherence vary widely; this investigation compares these two routes of therapy directly.

METHODS

All data were retrieved from the patient data management system of a center for dermatology, specific allergology, and environmental medicine in Germany. All 330 patients (aged 13-89 years) included in this study had commenced AIT between 2003 and 2011, thus allowing a full 3-year AIT cycle to be considered for each investigated patient.

RESULTS

In this specific center, SCIT was prescribed to 62.7% and SLIT to 37.3% of all included patients. The total dropout rate of the whole patient cohort was 34.8%. Overall, SLIT patients showed a higher dropout rate (39.0%) than did SCIT patients (32.4%); however, the difference between these groups was not significant. Also, no significant difference between the overall dropout rates for men and for women was observed. A Kaplan-Meier curve of the patient collective showed a remarkably high dropout rate for the first year of therapy.

CONCLUSION

The analysis presented in this single-center study shows that most patients who discontinue AIT do so during the first year of therapy. Patients seem likely to finish the 3-year therapy cycle if they manage to adhere to treatment throughout the first year. Strategies for preventing nonadherence in AIT, therefore, need to be developed and standardized in future investigations.

Current Evidence on Safety and Practical Considerations for Administration of Sublingual Allergen Immunotherapy (SLIT) in the United States

Liquid sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT) has been used off-label for decades, and Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved grass and ragweed SLIT tablets have been available in the United States since 2014. Potentially life-threatening events from SLIT do occur, although they appear to be very rare, especially for FDA-approved products. Practice guidelines that incorporate safety precautions regarding the use of SLIT in the United States are needed. This clinical commentary attempts to address unresolved issues including controversy regarding the FDA mandate for the prescription of epinephrine autoinjectors for patients on SLIT; how to approach polysensitized patients; optimal timing and duration of SLIT administration; how to address gaps in therapy; whether antihistamines can prevent local reactions, if certain patient populations (such as persistent asthmatics) should not receive SLIT; and when to instruct patients to self-administer epinephrine. Key points are that physicians should focus on educating patients regarding: (1) when not to administer SLIT; (2) how to recognize a potentially serious allergic reaction to SLIT; and (3) when to administer epinephrine and seek emergency care.

Comprehensive Study of Patients' Compliance with Sublingual Immunotherapy in House Dust Mite Perennial Allergic Rhinitis

INTRODUCTION

Allergen immunotherapy is a long-term treatment that has been associated with patient adherence issues. The aim of the study was to increase the knowledge on compliance of patients allergic to house dust mites, receiving sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT).

METHODS

A retrospective observational study was performed in 53 Spanish allergy units. We enrolled patients undergoing the SLIT treatment for house dust mites including a scheduled control visit 12 months after initiating the therapy. We conducted a comprehensive assessment of compliance using three methods. In the first step, an allergist evaluated the patients according to the results of an interview and the existing medical records. The subjects taking more than 80% of the overall prescription were defined as compliant. The remaining noncompliant patients were divided into groups taking less than 25%, 25-50%, and 50-80% of the prescribed SLIT. In the second stage, we conducted the Morisky-Green test. Finally, the noncompliant patients were asked to fill a self-report assessment form. Data were stratified into age groups. The potential factors affecting compliance were also investigated.

RESULTS

Overall, 380 subjects participated in the study. The compliance rate was 79.7%, and the treatment discontinuation rate was 22.5%, while 66.8% of patients were adherent (both compliant and continuing with the treatment). The results showed that children were the most compliant and adolescents the least compliant (86.6% and 60.9%, respectively). The main reason for noncompliance was "forgetting some doses" in 31.0% of the children, 48.0% of the adolescents, and 53.2% of the adults. Compliance was associated with the following factors: age, number of annual control visits, and reduction in symptomatic medication.

CONCLUSION

Our results showed that two out of three patients with house dust mite-induced allergic rhinitis adhered to the SLIT treatment. Multidisciplinary and integral solutions are needed to improve the compliance, with special attention paid to adolescents.

FUNDING

Stallergenes Greer Spain.

Oral mucosal immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis: A pilot study

BACKGROUND

The sublingual mucosa has been used for many years to apply allergenic extracts for the purpose of specific immunotherapy (IT). Although sublingual IT (SLIT) is both safe and efficacious, the density of antigen-presenting cells is higher in other regions of the oral cavity and vestibule, which make them a potentially desirable target for IT.

OBJECTIVE

To present the concept of oral mucosal IT (OMIT) and to provide pilot data for this extended application of SLIT.

METHODS

An open-label, 12-month, prospective study was undertaken as a preliminary step before a full-scale clinical investigation. Twenty-four individuals with allergic rhinitis received IT by applying allergenic extracts daily to either the oral vestibule plus oral cavity mucosa by using a glycerin-based toothpaste or to the sublingual mucosa by using 50% glycerin liquid drops. Adverse events, adherence rates, total combined scores, rhinoconjunctivitis quality-of-life questionnaire scores, changes in skin reactivity, and changes in serum antibody levels were measured for each participant.

RESULTS

No severe adverse events occurred in either group. The adherence rate was 80% for the OMIT group and 62% for the SLIT group (p = 0.61). Decreased total combined scores were demonstrated for both the OMIT group (15.6%) and the SLIT group (22.3%), although this decrease did not reach statistical significance in either group. Both groups achieved a meaningful clinical improvement of at least 0.5 points on rhinoconjunctivitis quality-of-life questionnaire. A statistically significant rise in specific immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4) was seen in both groups over the first 6 months of treatment.

CONCLUSION

OMIT and SLIT demonstrated similar safety profiles and adherence rates. Measurements of clinical efficacy improved for both groups, but only changes in IgG4 achieved statistical significance. These pilot data provide enough evidence to proceed with a full-scale investigation to explore the role of OMIT in the long-term management of allergic rhinitis.