Omalizumab pretreatment decreases acute reactions after rush immunotherapy for ragweed-induced seasonal allergic rhinitis

The combination of allergen immunotherapy and biologics for inhalant allergies: Exploring the synergy

The development of monoclonal antibodies that selectively target IgE and type 2 immunity has opened new possibilities in the treatment of allergies. Although they have been used mainly as single therapies found to have efficacy in the management of asthma and other T2-mediated diseases, there is a growing interest in using these monoclonal antibodies in combination with allergen immunotherapy (AIT). AIT has transformed the treatment of allergic diseases by aiming to modify the underlying immune response to allergens rather than just providing temporary symptom relief. Despite the proven efficacy and safety of AIT, unmet needs call for further research and innovation. Combination strategies involving biologics and AIT exhibit potential in improving short-term efficacy, reducing adverse events, and increasing immunologic tolerance. Anti-IgE emerges as the most promising therapeutic strategy, not only enhancing AIT's safety and tolerability but also providing additional evidence of efficacy compared with AIT alone. Anti-interleukin-4 receptor offers a reduction in adverse effects and an improved immunologic profile when combined with AIT; however, its impact on short-term efficacy seems limited. The combination of cat dander subcutaneous immunotherapy with anti-thymic stromal lymphopoietin was synergistic with enhanced efficacy and altered immune responses that persisted for 1 year after discontinuation compared with AIT alone. Long-term studies are needed to evaluate the sustained benefits and safety profiles of combination strategies.

Combination of omalizumab with allergen immunotherapy versus immunotherapy alone for allergic diseases: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT)-associated adverse events (AEs) limit its usage in the management of allergic diseases. The monoclonal anti-IgE antibody (omalizumab) and AIT have complementary actions. However, no consensus has been reached on whether their combination could exert superior efficacy and safety.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether the combination of AIT with omalizumab is superior to AIT alone in treating allergic diseases.

METHODS

The MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane Library databases were searched to identify randomized control trials (RCTs) reporting the outcomes of omalizumab combined with AIT (omalizumab + AIT) versus AIT alone. A random-effect model was established to estimate outcomes with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

A total of 11 eligible RCTs (involving 901 patients) were screened out for the meta-analysis. According to a pooled analysis, omalizumab + AIT significantly increased the number of patients achieving the target maintenance dose (TMD) and sustained unresponsiveness (SU) to allergens (odds ratio [OR] = 2.43; 95% CI: 1.33-4.44; p = 0.004; I2 = 35%, and OR = 6.77; 95% CI: 2.10-21.80; p = 0.001; I2 = 36%, respectively). Similarly, individuals receiving the combination therapy reported significantly fewer episodes of severe systemic AEs than AIT alone (OR = 0.32; 95% CI: 0.18-0.59; p = 0.0003; I2 = 0%). Meanwhile, the improvements in symptom severity score (mean difference [MD] = -0.26), rescue medication daily means score (MD = -0.14), and number of patients consuming epinephrine in AIT (OR = 0.20) were all more evident than those in AIT alone.

CONCLUSION

Omalizumab + AIT can significantly enhance the efficacy and safety of AIT by increasing TMD and SU to allergens, while decreasing severe systemic AEs.

Allergen immunotherapy combined with Notch pathway inhibitors improves HDM-induced allergic airway inflammation and inhibits ILC2 activation

Introduction

Group 2 innate lymphoid cells (ILC2s) play a crucial role in house dust mite (HDM)-induced allergic inflammation, and allergen immunotherapy (AIT) holds promise for treating the disease by reducing the frequency of ILC2s. Despite significant progress in AIT for allergic diseases, there remains a need to improve the control of allergic symptoms.

Methods

We investigated the synergistic effect of the Notch signaling pathway and subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) in treating allergic airway inflammation in mice and their impact on the ratio of ILC2s in lung tissues. This was achieved by establishing the HDM-induced airway allergic disorders (HAAD) model and SCIT model. Additionally, we conducted in vitro investigations into the effect of the Notch signaling pathway on the secretory function of activated ILC2s using fluorescence-activated cell sorting. Furthermore, we explored the coactivation of the Notch signaling pathway with SCIT in vitro by sorting ILC2s from the lung tissues of mice after SCIT modeling.

Results

Previously, our group demonstrated that Notch signaling pathway inhibitors can reduce allergic airway inflammation in mice. Notch signaling induces lineage plasticity of mature ILC2s. In this study, we showed that AIT alleviates allergic airway inflammation and suppresses the frequency of ILC2s induced by HDM. Interestingly, AIT combined with a γ-secretase inhibitor (GSI), an inhibitor of the Notch signaling pathway, significantly inhibited the frequency of ILC2s, reduced airway inflammation, and suppressed Th2-type responses in a mouse model. Furthermore, lung ILC2s from HDM-challenged mice with or without AIT were treated with GSI in vitro, and we found that GSI dramatically reduced the secretion of type 2 inflammatory factors in ILC2s.

Discussion

These findings suggest that Notch signaling pathway inhibitors can be used as adjuvant therapy for AIT and may hold potential treatment value in the cooperative control of allergic airway inflammation during early AIT.

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.

The early-phase transcriptome and the clinical efficacy analysis in three modes of subcutaneous immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis

Background

Allergen immunotherapy is the only etiological treatment for allergic rhinitis.

Objective

To analyze the efficacy, safety, and mechanism of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT).

Methods

The efficacy, safety, and serum immunological changes of 3 modes of subcutaneous immunotherapy were compared. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) transcriptome changes were obtained on the Illumina sequencing platforms. We confirmed differentially expressed genes (DEGs) by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The DEGs were analyzed by gene ontology (GO), Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG), and protein-protein interaction (PPI) networks. The correlation between the common DEGs and clinical indicators was analyzed by Origin 2022.

Results

The 3 SCITs were all effective after 1 year. The Combined Symptom and Medication Score (CSMS) and Visual Analog Score (VAS) in rush immunotherapy (RIT) are lowest after 24 and 48 weeks of treatment among the 3 groups. After treatment, the levels of sIgE, sIgE/tIgE, Th2 cytokines, Th17 cytokines, and percentage of peripheral eosinophils (EOS%) decreased significantly (P＜0.05), while the levels of Th1 type cytokines did not change significantly. Transcriptome analysis identified 24, 24, and 91 DEGs at W3 and 42, 52, 175 DEGs at W7 in conventional immunotherapy (CIT), cluster immunotherapy (CLIT), and RIT groups, respectively. The pathways and functions involved in SCIT include secretion of Th1/2 cytokines, immune cell differentiation. Unlike CIT and CLIT, DEGs are also involved in T cell tolerance induction, T cell anergy, and lymphocyte anergy in RIT. CXCR1, CXCR2, and IER3 had a specific effect on reflecting the improvement of symptoms in allergic rhinitis patients with SCIT.

Conclusion

The clinical efficacy of RIT appeared earlier than CIT and CLIT. Clinicians can use the highly conserved gene expression profile to evaluate responses to immunotherapy.

Allergen immunotherapy: progress and future outlook

INTRODUCTION

Allergy, the immunological hypersensitivity to innocuous environmental compounds, is a global health problem. The disease triggers, allergens, are mostly proteins contained in various natural sources such as plant pollen, animal dander, dust mites, foods, fungi and insect venoms. Allergies can manifest with a wide range of symptoms in various organs, and be anything from just tedious to life-threatening. A majority of all allergy patients are self-treated with symptom-relieving medicines, while allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only causative treatment option.

AREAS COVERED

This review will aim to give an overview of the state-of-the-art allergy management, including the use of new biologics and the application of biomarkers, and a special emphasis and discussion on current research trends in the field of AIT.

EXPERT OPINION

Conventional AIT has proven effective, but the years-long treatment compromises patient compliance. Moreover, AIT is typically not offered in food allergy. Hence, there is a need for new, effective and safe AIT methods. Novel routes of administration (e.g. oral and intralymphatic), hypoallergenic AIT products and more effective adjuvants holds great promise. Most recently, the development of allergen-specific monoclonal antibodies for passive immunotherapy may also allow treatment of patients currently not treated or treatable.

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.

Successful treatment with Omalizumab of a child affected by Systemic Mastocytosis: clinical and biological implications

BACKGROUND

Pediatric Mastocytosis is a rare and heterogeneous disease, characterized by accumulation of mast cells in the skin (Cutaneous Mastocytosis) and/or, less frequently, in other organs, mainly liver, spleen, bone marrow, lymph nodes and gastrointestinal tract (Systemic Mastocytosis). Patients affected by Systemic Mastocytosis show symptoms caused by  a massive release of mast cell mediators: itching, flushing, abdominal pain, generalized weakness, fatigue and neuropsychiatric disorders. Moreover, children with Systemic Mastocytosis are at greater risk of anaphylactic/anaphylactoid reactions, often poorly controlled by the conventional therapy with antihistamines, mast cells stabilizers and steroids. As a result, children affected by Systemic Mastocytosis have a poor quality of life and suffer the consequence of prolonged steroidal treatment.

CASE PRESENTATION

A child with Systemic Mastocytosis and severe symptoms, refractory to symptomatic and steroidal therapy, has been successfully treated with Omalizumab, an anti-IgE monoclonal antibody usually employed in allergic patients with severe asthma and orticaria. The onset of clinical benefit of Omalizumab therapy was extraordinarily rapid, but proved to be strictly dependent on drug administration. The child has become completely and steadily asymptomatic. No other anaphylactic episodes have been reported. Steroid treatment could be definitively withdrawn after the second dose of Omalizumab, and all the other medications were later reduced. Twenty months after beginning, Omalizumab therapy is still ongoing with good symptomatology control; no side effects have been observed so far.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, Omalizumab is an effective treatment for children affected by Systemic Mastocytosis not responding to conventional medical treatments. The main strengths of this therapy are its rapid and extraordinary efficacy to control the severe mast cells mediator-related symptoms, the lack of side effects and its steroid-sparing effect. However, more extensive and controlled studies in pediatric patients affected by Systemic Mastocytosis are needed to substantiate these promising findings.

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.

Omalizumab and allergen immunotherapy for respiratory allergies: A mini-review from the Allergen-Immunotherapy Committee of the Italian Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology (SIAIP)

Although currently approved to treat severe asthma and chronic spontaneous urticaria, omalizumab has also been an effective and safe add-on treatment for other allergic diseases. Namely, omalizumab has been proposed to be used as add-on therapy in patients with allergic rhinitis and asthma and undergoing specific allergen immunotherapy (AIT). AIT is the only treatment that modifies the natural history of IgE-mediated diseases. This brief review summarizes the available evidence and controversies on the efficacy and safety of omalizumab combined with specific AIT.

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.

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.

A real-world retrospective study of safety, efficacy, compliance and cost of combination treatment with rush immunotherapy plus one dose of pretreatment anti-IgE in Chinese children with respiratory allergies

Background

The efficacy of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) in treating pediatric allergy has been clearly demonstrated, however, many patients hesitate to initiate AIT due to weekly hospital visits during the 3-4 months up-dosing phase. Meanwhile, rush immunotherapy (RIT) shortens the duration of the up-dosing phase to 7 days. However, considering that patients receiving RIT are exposed to the allergens during a much shorter period of time and thus may be at a greater risk of systemic reactions, RIT is currently underused, especially in children. This study investigated the utility of combination treatment with RIT plus 1 dose of pretreatment anti-IgE in children with respiratory allergies.

Methods

In this retrospective study, we reviewed records of children with allergic rhinitis (AR) and/or allergic asthma (AA) sensitized to dust mite allergens receiving RIT+1 dose of pretreatment anti-IgE (the RIT group) or conventional immunotherapy (the CIT group) at our hospital from January 2020 to March 2021. Data such as visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, comprehensive symptom and medication score (CSMS), allergy blood test results, adverse reactions, compliance and cost were collected and analyzed.

Results

40 patients in the RIT group and 81 patients in the CIT group were included in this study. Both treatments were well tolerated and patients in the 2 treatment groups had comparable local and systemic reactions. Compared to CIT, RIT + anti-IgE combination led to significantly faster symptomatic improvement as demonstrated by significantly decreased VAS and CSMS starting as early as 1 month after AIT initiation (P<0.05). Nobody dropped out in the RIT group during the 1 year follow-up, while 11 out of 81 patients in the CIT group dropped out (loss rate 13.5%). Thus, the RIT group had a significantly higher compliance rate than the CIT group (P<0.05). Finally, the 2 treatment regimens had comparable cost per patient per injection (P> 0.05).

Conclusions

RIT + 1 dose of pretreatment anti-IgE combination has practical advantages over CIT, including comparable safety, better compliance, and probably a faster onset of clinical efficacy at no additional cost, so it can be an useful regimen for the treatment of Chinese children with respiratory allergies.

Pharmacological Management of Allergic Rhinitis: A Consensus Statement from the Malaysian Society of Allergy and Immunology

The goal of allergic rhinitis (AR) management is to achieve satisfactory symptom control to ensure good quality of life. Most patients with AR are currently treated with pharmacotherapy. However, knowledge gaps on the use of pharmacotherapy still exist among physicians, particularly in the primary care setting, despite the availability of guideline recommendations. Furthermore, it is common for physicians in the secondary care setting to express uncertainty regarding the use of new combination therapies like intranasal corticosteroid plus antihistamine combinations. Inadequate treatment leads to significant reduction of quality of life that affects daily activities at home, work, and school. With these concerns in mind, a practical consensus statement was developed to complement existing guidelines on the rational use of pharmacotherapy in both the primary and secondary care settings.

Accelerated/rush allergen immunotherapy

Accelerated allergy shot schedules for inhalant and venom allergens provide individuals with allergy symptom relief but in a shorter time frame than conventional therapy. Accelerated immunotherapy (IT) protocols allow patients to reach therapeutic doses in a shorter time frame while improving adherence and reducing direct costs (e.g., fewer office visits and medications) and indirect costs (e.g., less travel time, missed work or school). Rush IT and cluster IT are believed to work through mechanisms similar to conventional subcutaneous IT (SCIT). The risk for severe systemic reactions during accelerated IT is low when appropriately administered; however, life-threatening and fatal reactions do occur. To reduce the incidence of systemic allergic reactions during cluster and rush IT protocols, premedication is recommended. It is important to exclude individuals at high risk such as those with poorly controlled asthma or those who are on β-blockers to mitigate the risk for developing systemic allergic reactions. However, accelerated SCIT regimens offer increased convenience, faster improvement in allergy symptoms, and the potential to reduce health-care costs while providing equivalent safety outcomes compared with conventional IT protocols.

Future directions in allergen immunotherapy

Both subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) are effective clinically against allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma, and modify the underlying immunologic abnormalities. Despite this, many patients who could benefit from receiving SCIT and SLIT do not because of concerns about safety and the inconvenience in receiving SCIT, and the long duration of treatment with both, 3-4 years being required for lasting benefit. Attempts to improve the efficacy and safety, and to shorten the course of allergen immunotherapy have taken many approaches. Some approaches have generated great enthusiasm, only to fail in larger trials and be discarded. Other approaches show some promise but perhaps not enough to achieve regulatory approval. Those approaches that seem to have the best chance of becoming available in the next few years include the following: intralymphatic and epicutaneous immunotherapy, vitamin D in patients with insufficient serum 25 hydroxy vitamin D, probiotics, and allergoids, but all require further studies before being ready for nonexperimental use or, where necessary, for regulatory approval.

Use of biologics for the treatment of moderate-to-severe asthma: the age of personalized medicine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There are multiple FDA-approved biologics to treat poorly controlled moderate-to-severe asthma. Given the heterogeneity of asthma and the lack of head-to-head data between biologics, selecting the best biologic for a patient can be difficult. This review summarizes the key literature to date, in hopes of facilitating an evidence-based approach to selecting the most appropriate biologic for patients with asthma.

RECENT FINDINGS

In addition to unique mechanisms of action, there is increasing literature on predictors of response to each biologic, such as sensitizations to aeroallergens, peripheral eosinophil count, total serum IgE, and exhaled nitric oxide. Biologics available for asthma are also being increasingly studied in comorbid conditions with asthma, and this may facilitate selecting the most appropriate biologic for a patient. In the absence of head-to-head studies, there is literature of switching between biologics whenever necessary.

SUMMARY

The authors outline an approach to selecting a biologic based on various considerations, and hope this suggested approach facilitates selecting the biologic most suitable for each individual with poorly controlled moderate-to-severe asthma.

Optimizing drug inhibition of IgE-mediated anaphylaxis in mice

BACKGROUND

Administering allergens in increasing doses can temporarily suppress IgE-mediated allergy and anaphylaxis by desensitizing mast cells and basophils; however, allergen administration during desensitization therapy can itself induce allergic responses. Several small molecule drugs and nutraceuticals have been used clinically and experimentally to suppress these allergic responses.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to optimize drug inhibition of IgE-mediated anaphylaxis.

METHODS

Several agents were tested individually and in combination for ability to suppress IgE-mediated anaphylaxis in conventional mice, FcεRIα-humanized mice, and reconstituted immunodeficient mice that have human mast cells and basophils. Hypothermia was the readout for anaphylaxis; therapeutic efficacy was measured by degree of inhibition of hypothermia. Serum mouse mast cell protease 1 level was used to measure extent of mast cell degranulation.

RESULTS

Histamine receptor 1 (HR1) antagonists, β-adrenergic agonists, and a spleen tyrosine kinase (Syk) inhibitor were best at individually inhibiting IgE-mediated anaphylaxis. A Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor, administered alone, only inhibited hypothermia when FcεRI signaling was suboptimal. Combinations of these agents could completely or nearly completely inhibit IgE-mediated hypothermia in these models. Both Syk and BTK inhibition decreased mast cell degranulation, but only Syk inhibition also blocked desensitization. Many other agents that are used clinically and experimentally had little or no beneficial effect.

CONCLUSIONS

Combinations of an HR1 antagonist, a β-adrenergic agonist, and a Syk or a BTK inhibitor protect best against IgE-mediated anaphylaxis, while an HR1 antagonist plus a β-adrenergic agonist ± a BTK antagonist is optimal for inhibiting IgE-mediated anaphylaxis without suppressing desensitization.

Allergen Immunotherapy: Current and Future Trends

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the sole disease-modifying treatment for allergic rhinitis; it prevents rhinitis from progressing to asthma and lowers medication use. AIT against mites, insect venom, and certain kinds of pollen is effective. The mechanism of action of AIT is based on inducing immunological tolerance characterized by increased IL-10, TGF-β, and IgG4 levels and Treg cell counts. However, AIT requires prolonged schemes of administration and is sometimes associated with adverse reactions. Over the last decade, novel forms of AIT have been developed, focused on better allergen identification, structural modifications to preserve epitopes for B or T cells, post-traductional alteration through chemical processes, and the addition of adjuvants. These modified allergens induce clinical-immunological effects similar to those mentioned above, increasing the tolerance to other related allergens but with fewer side effects. Clinical studies have shown that molecular AIT is efficient in treating grass and birch allergies. This article reviews the possibility of a new AIT to improve the treatment of allergic illness.

Omalizumab for the treatment of allergic rhinitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis (AR), an IgE mediated inflammatory disease, significantly impacts quality of life of a considerable proportion of the general population. Omalizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody against IgE, has been evaluated for both seasonal and perennial AR. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in inadequately controlled AR.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search of RCTs evaluating the safety and efficacy of omalizumab in AR. We synthesized evidence for clinical improvement of AR symptoms, quality of life, reduction of the use of rescue medication, and adverse events.

RESULTS

The systematic search returned 289 articles, of which 12 RCTs were eligible for data extraction and meta-analysis. Omalizumab reduced the Daily Nasal Symptom Severity Score (DNSSS) by a summary standardized mean difference of -0.41 points with large heterogeneity; omalizumab significantly reduced the DNSSS both in the 3 cedar pollen-induced AR trials by -0.97 points and to a lower extent in the remaining five non-cedar trials by -0.19 points. Omalizumab also improved the Daily Ocular Symptom Severity Score (DOSSS) by a summary standardized mean difference of -0.30 points with large heterogeneity; the Rhino-conjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire by a summary standardized mean difference of -0.45 points with no heterogeneity and the mean daily consumption of rescue antihistamines by a summary standardized mean difference of -0.21 with large heterogeneity. No statistically significant difference in the occurrence of adverse events was observed between omalizumab and placebo.

CONCLUSION

Our findings further support the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in the management of patients with allergic rhinitis inadequately controlled with a conventional treatment.

Update on omalizumab in allergen immunotherapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the most relevant studies in the advancing field of omalizumab in allergen immunotherapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Omalizumab has been used in combination with inhalant, venom, and food allergen immunotherapy. These studies suggest that omalizumab can decrease the time required to reach maintenance dosing and adverse events. However, severe adverse events do still occur. Limited long-term data suggests that there is a risk for increased reactivity after stopping omalizumab.

SUMMARY

Omalizumab in conjunction with immunotherapy has shown promising results for the treatment of allergic rhinitis, venom hypersensitivity, and food allergy, especially in the reduction of adverse events. Larger randomized, placebo-controlled trials are needed to better understand optimal dosing and duration, cost--benefit analysis, ideal patients, and long-term benefits. This combination therapy has the potential to improve treatment, particularly for high-risk patients.

Systemic Allergic Reactions and Anaphylaxis Associated with Allergen Immunotherapy

Subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT) is a proven treatment of allergic rhinitis, asthma, atopic dermatitis, and prevention of Hymenoptera venom anaphylaxis. The known benefit of SCIT, however, must be considered in each patient relative to the potential risks of systemic allergic reactions (SRs). A mean of 1 SR per 1000 injection visits (0.1%) was estimated to occur between 2008 and 2018. Life-threatening anaphylactic events are estimated to occur in 1/160,000 injection visits. The factors that contribute to SRs and fatal reactions (FRs) are reviewed. Risk management strategies are proposed to prevent and decrease future SCIT associated with SRs, anaphylaxis, and FR.

Allergic Rhinitis: What Do We Know About Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy?

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is an IgE-mediated disease that is characterized by Th2 joint inflammation. Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is indicated for AR when symptoms remain uncontrolled despite medication and allergen avoidance. AIT is considered to have been effective if it alleviated allergic symptoms, decreased medication use, improved the quality of life even after treatment cessation, and prevented the progression of AR to asthma and the onset of new sensitization. AIT can be administered subcutaneously or sublingually, and novel routes are still being developed, such as intra-lymphatically and epicutaneously. AIT aims at inducing allergen tolerance through modification of innate and adaptive immunologic responses. The main mechanism of AIT is control of type 2 inflammatory cells through induction of various functional regulatory cells such as regulatory T cells (Tregs), follicular T cells (Tfr), B cells (Bregs), dendritic cells (DCregs), innate lymphoid cells (IL-10⁺ ILCs), and natural killer cells (NKregs). However, AIT has a number of disadvantages: the long treatment period required to achieve greater efficacy, high cost, systemic allergic reactions, and the absence of a biomarker for predicting treatment responders. Currently, adjunctive therapies, vaccine adjuvants, and novel vaccine technologies are being studied to overcome the problems associated with AIT. This review presents an updated overview of AIT, with a special focus on AR.

Recent update on the management of anaphylaxis

Anaphylaxis is a life-threatening systemic allergic reaction presenting various clinical manifestations. Its prevalence has increased in almost all age groups and both sexes. Food, venom, and drugs are major causes in both children and adults; a higher prevalence of food-induced anaphylaxis is noted in children, while a higher prevalence of drug-induced anaphylaxis is noted in adults. The pathogenic mechanism is mediated by immunologic and nonimmunologic mechanisms, where mast cells and basophils are key cells that release mediators. A diagnosis of anaphylaxis is mainly based on clinical symptoms and physical findings; however, an increased serum tryptase level is a useful biomarker. Epinephrine is the first-line drug to treat acute symptoms, and an epinephrine auto-injector should be prescribed for each patient. Antihistamines and systemic corticosteroids are used to relieve symptoms. This review updates current issues in the management of anaphylaxis as well as the new guidelines for proper diagnosis and treatment.

Novel Approaches in the Inhibition of IgE-Induced Mast Cell Reactivity in Food Allergy

Allergy is an IgE-dependent type-I hypersensitivity reaction that can lead to life-threatening systemic symptoms such as anaphylaxis. In the pathogenesis of the allergic response, the common upstream event is the binding of allergens to specific IgE, inducing cross-linking of the high-affinity FcεRI on mast cells, triggering cellular degranulation and the release of histamine, proteases, lipids mediators, cytokines and chemokines with inflammatory activity. A number of novel therapeutic options to curb mast cell activation are in the pipeline for the treatment of severe allergies. In addition to anti-IgE therapy and allergen-specific immunotherapy, monoclonal antibodies targeted against several key Th2/alarmin cytokines (i.e. IL-4Rα, IL-33, TSLP), active modification of allergen-specific IgE (i.e. inhibitory compounds, monoclonal antibodies, de-sialylation), engagement of inhibitory receptors on mast cells and allergen-specific adjuvant vaccines, are new promising options to inhibit the uncontrolled release of mast cell mediators upon allergen exposure. In this review, we critically discuss the novel approaches targeting mast cells limiting allergic responses and the immunological mechanisms involved, with special interest on food allergy treatment.

Mechanisms and Practical Use of Biologic Therapies for Allergy and Asthma Indications

This article presents a concise overview of the important aspects of the immunologic mechanisms targeted by T-helper 2-directed monoclonal antibodies, as well as their practical applications in the treatment of allergic disorders (specifically allergic rhinitis) and asthma. Several of these novel agents treat multiple diseases, so understanding their targets and the underlying disease process can aid patient selection. In addition, the particular targets of the therapeutics seem to be shifting to include not only agents that intervene against inflammatory cytokines or their receptors but also specific molecular epitopes and cellular surface proteins.

Biologicals for the prevention of anaphylaxis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the use of biological agents (BA) in the treatment of anaphylaxis in the view of the new knowledge in the field to support the quality of care and prevention.

RECENT FINDINGS

Some BA, as a single medication or as combined therapy to food or venom immunotherapy, are effectively able to reduce most of the severe anaphylactic reactions.

SUMMARY

Anaphylaxis is a recognized clinical emergency, which requires prompt identification and treatment. Several biologic therapies and new devices are emerging as a potential preventive treatment for anaphylaxis. However, adrenaline (epinephrine) is still the first-line treatment for any type of anaphylaxis. Biological drugs, such as omalizumab, whereas not US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) nor European Medicines Agency (EMA) approved for anaphylaxis, have been used as therapeutic adjuvants in the preventive treatment of anaphylaxis, but cost-effectiveness should be considered individually.

Peptide allergen-specific immunotherapy for allergic airway diseases-State of the art

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is the only means of altering the natural immunological course of allergic diseases and achieving long-term remission. Pharmacological measures are able to suppress the immune response and/or ameliorate the symptoms but there is a risk of relapse soon after these measures are withdrawn. Current AIT approaches depend on the administration of intact allergens, often comprising crude extracts of the allergen. We propose that the challenges arising from current approaches, including the risk of serious side-effects, burdensome duration of treatment, poor compliance and high cost, are overcome by application of peptides based on CD4⁺ T cell epitopes rather than whole allergens. Here we describe evolving approaches, summarize clinical trials involving peptide AIT in allergic rhinitis and asthma, discuss the putative mechanisms involved in their action, address gaps in evidence and propose future directions for research and clinical development.

One Hundred Ten Years of Allergen Immunotherapy: A Broad Look Into the Future

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease-modifying treatment option for patients with type 1-mediated allergic diseases such as allergic rhinitis/rhinoconjunctivitis with/without allergic asthma. Although many innovations have been developed since the first clinical report of Noon et al in 1911, the improvement of clinical efficacy and tolerability of this treatment is still an important unmet need. Hence, much progress has been made in the characterization of the cell types, cytokines, and intracellular signaling events involved in the development, maintenance, and regulation of allergic reactions, and also in the understanding of the mechanisms of tolerance induction in AIT. This comprehensive review aims to summarize the current innovative approaches in AIT, but also gives an outlook on promising candidates of the future. On the basis of an extensive literature review, integrating a clinical point of view, this article focuses on recent and future innovations regarding biologicals, allergen-derived peptides, recombinant allergens, "Toll"-like receptor agonists and other adjuvants, and novel application routes being developed for future AIT.

Risk factors for fatal and nonfatal reactions to immunotherapy (2008-2018): postinjection monitoring and severe asthma

BACKGROUND

Subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT) is highly effective but risks exist.

OBJECTIVE

To identify practices that influence systemic allergic reactions (SRs) to SCIT and SCIT-associated infections.

METHODS

Members of the American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology and the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology completed an annual survey of SCIT-related SRs of varying severity (2008-2018). Injection-related infections were queried (2014-2018). Strategies to enforce postinjection waiting times and to reduce risks from asthma/severe asthma were queried (2016-2018).

RESULTS

Data were gathered on 64.5 million injection visits. Ten confirmed fatalities occurred since 2008, including 3 new fatalities since 2017. One fatal reaction occurred per 7.2 million injection visits (2008-2018). No infections occurred. Practices that tracked the time after injections, and required checking out with office personnel, had significantly lower total (P < .001), grade 3 (severe) (P < .001), and grade 4 (very severe) SRs (P < .001). Having more individuals with asthma on SCIT was associated with more grade 3 SRs (P < .02). Not prescribing SCIT in individuals with uncontrolled asthma was associated with fewer grade 3 SRs (P = .02). Having individuals with more severe asthma on SCIT was associated with more total, grade 1, and grade 2 SRs (P < .001); 50% of grade 3 and 4 SRs occurred in individuals with severe asthma.

CONCLUSION

SCIT-related fatalities have declined since 2008, with a slight increase in recent years. SCIT is not associated with an increased risk of infections. Tracking the time after injections and checking out with office staff confer significantly lower risks of severe SRs. Asthma, especially severe asthma, is a major risk factor for severe and fatal SRs. Strategies that reduce risks for individuals with asthma, such as not prescribing SCIT to patients with uncontrolled asthma, may lower the risks.

Adverse reactions to subcutaneous immunotherapy in patients with allergic rhinitis, a real-world study

PURPOSE

The efficacy of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) for allergic rhinitis (AR) have been proven but application is still limited by concerns about the safety. The aims of this study were to investigate the incidence of adverse reactions and to ascertain possible risk factors in patients treated with SCIT in central China.

METHODS

This study retrospectively analyzed the application of SCIT from 2016 to 2018, in 236 patients with AR. After each injection, allergen dosage and details about local reactions (LRs)/systemic reactions (SRs) were recorded.

RESULTS

Totaling 236 patients received 5844 injections. The rates of LR were 3.0% per injection and 34.7% per patient, while the rates of SR were 0.48% per injection and 10.6% per patient. 86.9 percent LRs were small. Most SRs were grade 1 (16/57.1%), followed by grade 2 (8/28.6%), grade 3 (4/14.3%). No fatal SRs was recorded. Children, high sensitization and absence of premedication were identified as risk factors for LRs. Recurrent LRs increased the risk of SRs. Premedication could reduce the number and severity of LRs, but not SRs. Dual therapy with antihistamine and montelukast did not provide additional benefit when compared with antihistamine alone.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of SRs was low while LRs were common in SCIT. Children may be prone to develop LRs, while pretreatments could reduce the number and severity of LRs. Recurrent LRs was a risk factor for SRs.

Anti-IgE: A treatment option in allergic rhinitis?

Background: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is the most common IgE-mediated allergic disease. Multiple clinical trials have demonstrated promising results on the AR treatment with biologics, in particular with the use of omalizumab – an anti-IgE antibody. Omalizumab has also been established in the routine management of allergic asthma and chronic idiopathic urticaria. However, currently there is no approved license for the use of biologics in AR in Germany. Materials and methods: A systematic literature review has been completed including randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and reviews on the treatment of AR with omalizumab. Results: The systematic review demonstrates strong evidence supporting the use of omalizumab in the treatment of AR with regard to symptom control, safety profile, and management of comorbidities. Conclusion: Omalizumab is a good and safe option in the treatment of AR in terms of symptom control and the management of pre-existing comorbidities. Further clinical trials with other biologics in the management of AR are needed and are expected to follow soon.

Use of biologics in allergen immunotherapy

Biologics are drugs that are derived or synthesized from biological sources. A particular class are recombinant monoclonal antibodies. Their targeted application against distinct molecules of intercellular communication is of significant relevance in the treatment of tumor, inflammatory, or allergic diseases. But also in the context of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) they can be of special value. This is exemplified by the anti-IgE antibody omalizumab, which allows to achieve allergen tolerance in patients suffering from severe allergic reactions and increased risk of AIT-induced anaphylaxis. Furthermore, omalizumab administration during AIT effectively lowers the rsik of allergic side effects. This is demonstrated by a variety of studies and case reports of patients suffering either form respiratory, food, or insect venom allergy. Besides a direct blocking of IgE-mediated effects, T-cellular immune mechanisms might also be involved. Another interesting option is the applcation of recombinant IgG antibodes directed against specific epitopes of an allergen. Similar to AIT-induced IgG antibodies they can prevent the binding of allergens to IgE-antibodes as well as the hereby elicited allergic reactions.

Safety and Utility of Rush Immunotherapy with Aqueous Allergen Extracts for Treatment of Respiratory Allergies

BACKGROUND

Generally, allergen immunotherapy must be administered for three to five years. Meanwhile, rush immunotherapy (RIT) shortens the required duration for the build-up phase, thereby improving the therapy's convenience compared with conventional immunotherapy (CIT). However, RIT is often performed with modified allergens. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the safety and utility of RIT with aqueous allergens.

METHODS

Medical records of 98 patients sensitized with at least one inhalant allergen who had received subcutaneous immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis with or without asthma were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were classified into three groups: depot-RIT (n = 25), receiving RIT with depot allergen; aqueous-RIT (n = 48), receiving RIT with aqueous allergen; and aqueous-CIT (n = 25), receiving CIT with aqueous allergen. Patients who had received immunotherapy targeting only house dust mites were excluded.

RESULTS

The proportions of patients presenting with a systemic reaction to depot-RIT, aqueous-RIT, or aqueous-CIT were 80.0%, 85.4%, and 48.0%, respectively (P = 0.002). The proportions of patients experiencing severe systemic reaction were 4.0%, 16.7%, and 8.0% in depot-RIT, aqueous-RIT and aqueous-CIT, respectively (P = 0.223). The proportions of depot-RIT and aqueous-RIT patients presenting with systemic reaction or severe systemic reaction did not differ significantly (P = 0.553 and P = 0.118, respectively). Significantly fewer depot-RIT (1.0 ± 0.2) and aqueous-RIT patients (2.0 ± 1.3) required outpatient clinical visits during the build-up phase, compared to those administered aqueous-CIT (13.6 ± 1.9; P < 0.001). Moreover, the build-up phase decreased to 17.4 ± 1.8 days in depot-RIT and 23.7 ± 10.9 days in aqueous-RIT, compared to 92.0 ± 12.5 days in aqueous-CIT (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

RIT with aqueous allergen reduced the build-up phase duration and frequency of hospital visits, with acceptable safety levels. RIT with aqueous allergen may, therefore, be suitable for broad application to patients with respiratory allergies.

Allergen immunotherapy and biologics in respiratory allergy: friends or foes?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Allergen-specific immunotherapy has established as an indispensable disease-modifying treatment in allergy practice but its safety and efficacy might be furtherly improved by combining it with other drugs or therapeutic intervention that co-modulate immune type 2 immune networks.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the past two decades, clinical research focused on AIT and omalizumab co-treatment to improve both safety and long-term efficacy of allergic disease treatment. Recently, combination of AIT with other biologicals targeting different mediators of type 2 inflammation has been set up with interesting preliminary results. Moreover, AIT current contraindication might be overcome by contemporarily controlling underlying type 2 inflammation in severe atopic patients.

SUMMARY

AIT--biological combination treatment can realize a complex multitargeted treatment strategy allowing for consistently improving disease control and sparing steroid administration.

Biologics and Allergy Immunotherapy in the Treatment of Allergic Diseases

Allergic diseases represent some of the most chronic and costly chronic conditions. Medical management may require long-term pharmacotherapy, which is often associated with poor adherence. Although medications provide symptomatic control, they do not modify the allergic disease. Patients may prefer disease-modifying treatments that provide lasting benefits after discontinuation. To date, allergy immunotherapy is the only proved disease modification therapy associated with lasting benefits after discontinuation. However, allergy immunotherapy safety and efficacy has only been established in allergic rhinitis, mild to moderate asthma, and some patients with atopic dermatitis.

Biologics for the Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis, Chronic Rhinosinusitis, and Nasal Polyposis

Allergic rhinitis (AR), most presentations of nasal polyposis (NP), and many presentations of chronic rhinosinusitis are type 2^high disorders characterized by expression of interleukin (IL)-4, IL-5, and IL-13. Neutralization of IgE with anti-IgE (omalizumab) has proven efficacy in AR. Similarly, in addition to anti-IgE, blockade of IL-5/IL-5 (mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab) and dual blockade of IL-4 and IL-13 with anti-IL-4R (dupilumab) have demonstrated efficacy in NP. However, these agents are expensive and future studies are essential to evaluate cost effectiveness in comparison with current medical and surgical therapies. This article reviews biologics as potential interventions in AR, chronic rhinosinusitis, and NP.

Allergen Immunotherapy in children with respiratory allergic diseases

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a well-established treatment for allergic respiratory diseases. It represents a cornerstone in the clinical management of allergic children since it is the only curative option to date able to modify the natural history of Ig-E mediated allergic diseases. Through a well-defined immunologic mechanism, AIT promotes regulatory T cells and cuts down the immune response induced by allergens. According to current guidelines based on up-to-date evidence, AIT should be offered to children with moderate-severe allergic rhinitis and/or controlled asthma starting from 5 years of age, further to an adequate risk-benefit assessment which includes patient's adherence to the treatment and a proper selection of the right product. Younger age and mild disease could be considered based on an individual evaluation. Both subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual (SLIT) routes of administration have a good efficacy and safety profile with safer outcomes for SLIT compared to SCIT. Only standardized products with documented evidence of clinical efficacy should be used. Although AIT is used worldwide, there are still gaps and limitations, including the lack of reliable biomarkers predictive of the clinical outcome. Novel adjuvants are currently under investigations to boost the strength and efficiency of the immune response, as well as new formulations with better efficacy and better patient's adherence to the treatment. Herein, we aim to provide an overview of current key evidence with major regard to clinical practice as well as knowledge gaps and future research needs in the context of AIT in children with respiratory allergic diseases.

Clinical Practice of Allergen Immunotherapy for Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis and Asthma: An Expert Panel Report

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) reduces symptoms and medication use associated with allergic rhinitis with or without conjunctivitis and allergic asthma. Although several AIT guidelines exist, there remain unanswered questions about AIT that are relevant to everyday practice. Our objective was to prepare an evidence-based overview addressing the practical aspects of AIT in clinical practice based on published evidence and the experience of international experts in the field. Topics covered include interpretation and translation of clinical trial data into everyday clinical practice (eg, allergen doses and treatment duration), assessment of risk and treatment of local and systemic allergic reactions, recommendations for improvement of AIT guidelines, and identification of appropriate data for seeking regulatory approval, to name a few. Many informational gaps in AIT practice need further evaluation as products and practices evolve.

Add-On Omalizumab for Inadequately Controlled Severe Pollinosis Despite Standard-of-Care: A Randomized Study

BACKGROUND

Cedar pollinosis (CP), a common form of seasonal allergic rhinitis (AR), is a substantial medical problem in Japan due to its high prevalence and severe symptoms. Omalizumab (anti-IgE therapy) has previously proven to be effective in CP/AR, but no studies for inadequately controlled severe CP/AR despite standard-of-care (SoC) have been conducted.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy of omalizumab added to SoC in patients with inadequately controlled severe CP in a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase III study.

METHODS

Adult/adolescent patients with severe CP whose symptoms were inadequately controlled despite nasal corticosteroids plus 1 or more oral medications in the previous 2 seasons were randomized to receive omalizumab (n = 162) or placebo (n = 175). All patients received concomitant antihistamines and nasal corticosteroids as SoC. The primary endpoint was the mean nasal symptom score during the severe symptom period. Secondary endpoints included mean ocular symptom score, quality of life (QoL), and safety.

RESULTS

The SoC + omalizumab treatment had statistically significantly and clinically important lower nasal (least squares mean difference, -1.03, P < .001) and ocular (-0.87, P < .001) symptom scores compared with SoC + placebo, respectively. Differences in scores for individual components of nasal and ocular symptoms were also statistically and clinically significant. SoC + omalizumab also improved QoL scores as overall and in all domains. No unexpected safety signals were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with severe CP, omalizumab added to SoC demonstrated consistent efficacy in improving symptoms and QoL, and was well tolerated. These results indicate that omalizumab could be a promising therapeutic option for severe CP/AR.

Current and emerging biologic therapies for allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis

Introduction: Allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis, with and without nasal polyps, are the most common chronic inflammatory diseases of the upper airways. They both cause relevant respiratory symptoms and a substantial detriment to patients' quality of life, mainly in uncontrolled and severe patients.Areas covered: This review aims to present the most recent evidence on current and emerging biologic therapies for allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis and discuss their potential implementation in clinical practice. To select relevant literature for inclusion in this review, we conducted a literature search using the PubMed database, using terms 'biologics OR biological agents', 'allergic rhinitis' and 'chronic rhinosinusitis'. The literature review was performed for publication years 2009-2019, restricting the articles to humans and English language publications.Expert opinion: Biological therapies represent a potential step forward in providing individualized care for all patients with uncontrolled severe upper airway diseases. Biologics recently showed promising results for the treatment of severe uncontrolled allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps with or without associated asthma. Endotyping inflammatory pathways and identifying related biomarkers remain the major challenge for positioning biologics in the care pathway of chronic respiratory diseases.