Effective treatment of house dust mite-induced allergic rhinitis with 2 doses of the SQ HDM SLIT-tablet: Results from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial

Efficacy of Adjuvant Sublingual Immunotherapy After Septomeatoplasty

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of adjuvant sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in correcting structural problems in patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) caused by mite who have undergone septomeatoplasty (SMP) has not been studied.

METHODS

This non-randomized controlled study recruited patients with AR (caused by mite) and concurrent septal deviation and inferior turbinate hypertrophy, at a tertiary hospital in Taiwan. SMP was performed on all patients as a surgical intervention. The patients were then divided into two groups: the control group, which underwent surgery only, and the experimental group, which received SLIT as an adjuvant treatment. Demographic data and rhinitis control assessment test (RCAT) results were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 96 patients were enrolled in the study (SMP + SLIT group, n = 52; SMP only group, n = 44). No significant differences were observed in any of the variables between the two groups before and one month after surgery. However, during evaluations at the third and sixth month, the SMP + SLIT group showed significant improvement in the total RCAT scores compared to the SMP only group (28.6 ± 1.56 vs. 24.5 ± 3.66, p < 0.001; 27.1 ± 2.87 vs. 19.9 ± 5.56, p < 0.001). In addition, significantly better control of all RCAT sub-categories was observed in the SMP + SLIT group at the third and sixth month evaluations.

CONCLUSIONS

SLIT may serve as an ideal adjuvant therapy after SMP in patients with AR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 Laryngoscope, 134:3073-3079, 2024.

Sublingual Tablet Immunotherapy Improves Quality of Life in Adults With Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis with or without conjunctivitis can negatively impact many aspects of quality of life (QoL). The efficacy and safety of standardized quality (SQ) sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets have been confirmed across large clinical trials in adults with grass, tree, ragweed, and house dust mite (HDM) allergic rhinitis with or without conjunctivitis.

OBJECTIVE

This pooled analysis investigates whether the reduction in symptom burden found across the clinical trials is supported by improvements in QoL.

METHODS

A total of 11 phase II/III randomized placebo-controlled trials across the SQ grass, tree, ragweed, and HDM SLIT tablets (grass: N = 3179; ragweed: N = 767; tree: N = 634; HDM: N = 2221) were included. QoL was assessed using the standardized Rhinitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ), with the exception of 3 grass trials, which used the nonstandardized version. The overall RQLQ scores were expressed as a mean of 7 domains. In the pooled analysis, treatment was used as fixed effect; and the trial, and the interaction between region/country and trial as random effects.

RESULTS

The pooled analysis showed consistent and statistically significant improvements in overall RQLQ scores across all 4 SQ SLIT tablets versus placebo (pooled estimate [95% CI], P value-grass: -0.20 [-0.28 to -0.12], P < .001; tree: -0.42 [-0.58 to -0.26], P < .001; ragweed: -0.36 [-0.55 to -0.17], P < .001; HDM: -0.28 [-0.39 to -0.17], P < .001). Furthermore, significant improvements versus placebo for all 4 SQ SLIT tablets were seen across the 7 individual domains.

CONCLUSIONS

The proven efficacy of SQ SLIT tablets to reduce symptoms across 4 of the most common respiratory allergens is supported by concurrent significant improvements in RQLQ scores overall and for all 7 domains.

Sublingual allergen immunotherapy prevents house dust mite inhalant type 2 immunity through dendritic cell-mediated induction of Foxp3+ regulatory T cells

Sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT) is an emerging treatment option for allergic asthma and a potential disease-modifying strategy for asthma prevention. The key cellular events leading to such long-term tolerance remain to be fully elucidated. We administered prophylactic SLIT in a mouse model of house dust mite (HDM)-driven allergic asthma. HDM extract was sublingually administered over 3 weeks followed by intratracheal sensitization and intranasal challenges with HDM. Prophylactic SLIT prevented allergic airway inflammation and hyperreactivity with a low lab-to-lab variation. The HDM-specific T helper (Th)2 (cluster of differentiation 4 Th) response was shifted by SLIT toward a regulatory and Th17 response in the lung and mediastinal lymph node. By using Derp1-specific cluster of differentiation 4+ T cells (1-DER), we found that SLIT blocked 1-DER T cell recruitment to the mediastinal lymph node and dampened IL-4 secretion following intratracheal HDM sensitization. Sublingually administered Derp1 protein activated 1-DER T cells in the cervical lymph node via chemokine receptor7+ migratory dendritic cells (DC). DCs migrating from the oral submucosa to the cervical lymph node after SLIT-induced Foxp3+ regulatory T cells. When mice were sensitized with HDM, prior prophylactic SLIT increased Derp1 specific regulatory T cells (Tregs) and lowered Th2 recruitment in the lung. By using Foxp3-diphtheria toxin receptor mice, Tregs were found to contribute to the immunoregulatory prophylactic effect of SLIT on type 2 immunity. These findings in a mouse model suggest that DC-mediated functional Treg induction in oral mucosa draining lymph nodes is one of the driving mechanisms behind the disease-modifying effect of prophylactic SLIT.

Genetic and T2 biomarkers linked to the efficacy of HDM sublingual immunotherapy in asthma

BACKGROUND

Hypersensitivity to house dust mite (HDM) allergens is a common cause of allergic asthma symptoms and can be effectively treated with allergy immunotherapy (AIT).

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether genetic and type 2 (T2) inflammatory biomarkers correlate with disease severity in subjects with allergic asthma, and whether this can be modified by AIT.

METHODS

MITRA (NCT01433523) was a phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of HDM sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablets in adults with HDM allergic asthma. Post hoc analyses of the study population (N=742) evaluated associations between T2 inflammatory (blood eosinophils, eosinophil cationic protein (ECP), total IgE and tryptase) and genetic (single-nucleotide polymorphisms, SNP) biomarkers (n=582) for the primary study endpoint (time to first moderate/severe asthma exacerbation). SNP associations were verified in HDM-positive subgroup from an independent 3-year Severe Asthma Research Programme (SARP3) subject cohort.

RESULTS

An increased asthma exacerbation risk in subjects homozygous for SNP rs7216389 (chromosomal locus 17q12-21) was reduced (p=0.037) by treatment with HDM SLIT (HR=0.37 (95% CI 0.22 to 0.64), p<0.001). The associations between exacerbation risk and 17q12-21 SNPs were replicated in the SARP3 HDM-positive subgroup. High levels of T2 biomarkers were associated with increased risk of asthma exacerbations in the placebo group. HDM SLIT-tablet treatment reduced this risk (blood eosinophils: HR=0.50 (95% CI 0.30 to 0.85); ECP: HR=0.45 (95% CI 0.29 to 0.87); tryptase: HR=0.45 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.80)). The treatment effect was higher (p=0.006) for subjects with a higher number of elevated T2 biomarkers.

CONCLUSIONS

HDM SLIT-tablet AIT is efficacious in HDM-sensitised asthma subjects with a genetic asthma predisposition and/or an underlying T2 endotype.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01433523.

House dust mite sublingual allergen immunotherapy tablet is safe and well-tolerated in Dutch clinical practice

Background

Half (49%) of clinically diagnosed allergic rhinitis (AR) patients are sensitized to house dust mite (HDM). If allergen avoidance and symptomatic medication fail, allergen immunotherapy may be indicated.

Objective

We investigated safety and tolerability of HDM-sublingual immunotherapy by HDM-SLIT tablets in Dutch daily clinical practice.

Methods

Daily intake of 12 SQ-HDM SLIT-tablet was investigated in a prospective, multicenter, observational study (EUPAS43753). It comprised 4 consultations in 1 year. Data on safety, tolerability, treatment satisfaction, symptomatic medication, compliance, and clinical effectiveness (Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test; CARAT) were collected. Descriptive and longitudinal regression data analysis were performed.

Results

Adult patients (n = 415), mean (SD) age 36.6 (12.2) years, 61.4% female and 36% asthmatic were included. The preponderance (65.1%) experienced adverse events (AEs). These, mostly mild (67%), AEs comprised: oral allergic reactions (58.6%), respiratory (12.4%) and gastrointestinal symptoms (9.4%). Sixty (14.5%) patients stopped due to AEs and 76 (18.3%) for non-AE reasons. CARAT scores improved clinically significant by 6 points and symptomatic medication use decreased from 96.1% to 77.4%. Most patients (74.5%) tolerated the treatment and were compliant (>86.5%). The majority of patients (62.4%) and investigators (69.4%) were satisfied with treatment.

Conclusions

HDM SLIT-tablet is a safe and well-tolerated AR treatment. AEs occur often but are mostly mild and decreasing during the first year. CARAT scores improved and symptomatic medication use decreased suggesting better control of AR with treatment. Compliance, tolerability, and treatment satisfaction are good. However, patient follow-up and compliance remain important points of attention when initiating treatment.

Comparison of Allergen Immunotherapy Alone and in Conjunction With Turbinate Surgery for Nasal Obstruction in Perennial Allergic Rhinitis Patients

BACKGROUND

Nasal obstruction, triggered by allergic rhinitis, often does not resolve with allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) alone, thus inferior turbinate reduction surgery (ITR) may be required. This study aims to investigate the impact of combined treatment on nasal obstruction, as evidence is currently limited.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

A retrospective cohort study of perennial allergic rhinitis patients experiencing nasal obstruction and undergoing ≥12 months AIT was conducted. Two groups were derived, those undergoing AIT-with or without an ITR. Patient reported nasal obstruction (evaluated with questionnaires) and nasal airway function (Nasal Peak Inspiratory Flow [NPIF] and Nasal Airflow Resistance [NAR]) were monitored. The change from baseline to 12 months post-treatment in each group were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 118 patients (33.71 ± 14.43 years, 41.5% female) were recruited, 72% had AIT and 28% AIT&ITR. At baseline, the AIT&ITR group had a higher level of nasal obstruction (>moderate%; 63.6% vs 52.9%, P = .048). Post treatment, AIT&ITR group reported greater reduction in nasal obstruction (>1 category change: 75.8% vs 48.2%, P = .002). Similarly, the AIT&ITR group had greater improvement in nasal function by NPIF (-13.9 ± 110.3 L/minute vs -3.4 ± 78.1 L/minute, P = .049) and NAR (-0.120 ± 0.342 Pa/cm³/second vs -0.093 ± 0.224 Pa/cm³/second, P = .050).

CONCLUSIONS

Allergic rhinitis patients, with moderate to severe nasal obstruction, who undergo combined AIT&ITR have greater relief of nasal obstruction and improved airflow analysis compared to AIT alone.

Tolerability of sublingual versus vestibular allergy immunotherapy tablet administration: A randomized pilot study

BACKGROUND

Local application site reactions are common with sublingual allergy immunotherapy (AIT)-tablets for the treatment of allergic rhinitis/conjunctivitis (AR/C) and occasionally lead to treatment discontinuation. Because of the lower mast cell density in the vestibular mucosa than the sublingual area, vestibular AIT-tablet administration may result in fewer adverse events (AEs). This pilot study evaluated the tolerability of the vestibular administration route of AIT-tablets compared with the sublingual route in adult subjects with AR/C.

METHODS

Adults (n = 164) aged 18-65 years with AR/C treated with daily birch pollen, grass pollen, ragweed pollen or house dust mite AIT in tablet form were randomized 1:1 to vestibular or sublingual administration for 28 days, followed by 28 days of sublingual administration only. The primary endpoint was the severity (mild, moderate, severe) of local treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) during the first 28 days of treatment.

RESULTS

During the first 28 days, the percentage of subjects in the vestibular and sublingual groups reporting mild TRAEs were 55.6% versus 50.6%, respectively; moderate TRAEs were 27.2% versus 30.1%; and severe TRAEs were 12.3% versus 6.0% (p = .16). In the vestibular group, 95.1% of the subjects experienced at least one TRAE during the first period versus 81.9% in the sublingual group (p = .01) and discontinuation rates due to AEs were higher (12.3% vs. 3.6%).

CONCLUSION

The frequencies of subjects experiencing severe TRAEs, at least one TRAE, and discontinuations due to AEs at the initiation of AIT-tablets were numerically higher with vestibular administration than sublingual administration. Sublingual administration should remain the standard of care for subjects treated with AIT-tablets for AR/C.

Clinical benefits with 300 IR HDM SLIT tablet in Europeans with house dust mite allergic rhinitis: Post hoc analysis of a large phase 3 trial

Background

House dust mite (HDM)-induced allergic rhinitis (AR) is a major cause of allergic respiratory disease. The efficacy and safety of the 300 IR HDM sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablet in patients with moderate-to-severe HDM-AR was confirmed in a large, international, phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Here, we analyzed the results in the European population.

Methods

Data from 91 European centers that participated in the international, double-blind, RCT (EudraCT 2014-004223-46, NCT02443805) with the 300 IR HDM SLIT tablet versus placebo over 12 months were analyzed post hoc. The treatment effect in European adults and adolescents was notably assessed through the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI)-recommended combined symptom and medication score (CSMS0-6, pre-defined endpoint) and the total combined rhinitis score (TCRS0-24, post hoc endpoint, also balanced) during the primary evaluation period (4 weeks at the end of treatment period) using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA).

Results

There were 818 patients who comprised the modified full analysis set in Europe. Over the primary period, the differences in CSMS0-6 and TCRS0-24 between the 300 IR and placebo groups were statistically significant (p < 0.0001): -0.32 (95%CI [-0.46; -0.17]) and -1.28 (95%CI [-1.63; -0.94]), respectively, with relative differences of -20.9% and -21.2%. All post hoc and the rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life endpoints were significantly improved with 300 IR versus placebo. The 300 IR HDM tablet was generally well tolerated.

Conclusion

This RCT sub-analysis confirmed the 300 IR HDM SLIT tablet is an effective and safe treatment for European adults and adolescents with HDM-AR with clinically meaningful benefits from the patients' perspective.

Trial registration

NCT02443805. Registered on April 29, 2015./EudraCT 2014-004223-46. Registered on September 16, 2015.

Sublingual immunotherapy tablets in monosensitized and polysensitized adults with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

Background: Most patients with allergic rhinitis/conjunctivitis (AR/C) are sensitized to more than one allergen. An ongoing question is the efficacy of single-allergen immunotherapy in patients who are polysensitized. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of grass, ragweed, tree, and house-dust mite (HDM) sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets in adults with AR/C who are mono- or polysensitized. Methods: Data from adults (ages ≥ 18 years) with AR/C who participated in phase III double-blind, placebo controlled field trials (four grass, two ragweed, two HDM, one tree) were included in the post hoc analyses. Efficacy was assessed by the total combined score (TCS) (sum of AR/C daily symptom and medication scores) during the entire pollen season for grass and tree trials, and peak pollen season for ragweed trials versus placebo. Efficacy for the HDM SLIT-tablet was assessed by the total combined rhinitis score (TCRS) (sum of rhinitis daily symptom and medication scores) during the last 8 weeks of treatment versus placebo. Results: For the grass SLIT-tablet, TCS improved by 20% (mean difference 1.33 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.44-2.22]) in the subjects who were monosensitized (n = 442) and 20% (mean difference 1.28 [95% CI, 0.90-1.67]) in the subjects who were polysensitized (n = 1857). For the ragweed SLIT-tablet, TCS improved by 19% (mean difference 1.72 [95% CI, -0.20 to 3.63]) in the subjects who were monosensitized (n = 115) and 27% (mean difference 2.27 [95% CI, 1.28-3.27]) in the subjects who were polysensitized (n = 528). For the tree SLIT-tablet, TCS improved by 54% (mean difference 4.65 [95% CI, 2.48-6.82]) in the subjects who were monosensitized (n = 138) and 34% (mean difference 2.51 [95% CI, 1.34-3.69]) in the subjects who were polysensitized (n = 437). For the HDM SLIT-tablet, TCRS improved by 20% (mean difference 1.24 [95% CI, 0.48-1.99]) in the subjects who were monosensitized (n = 468) and 17% (mean difference 0.85 [95% CI, 0.43-1.28]) in the subjects who were polysensitized (n = 1294). The overall safety profile was not qualitatively different between the subjects who were monosensitized and the subjects who were polysensitized. Conclusion: Grass, ragweed, tree, or HDM SLIT-tablet treatment is effective for the specific allergen in question in adults with AR/C and who are monosensitized or polysensitized. Targeting one relevant allergen with SLIT-tablets induces a clinical effect for that allergen in patients who were polysensitized.

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.

Efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis: A network meta-analysis

Background

To systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis (AR) and provide evidence for clinical treatment.

Methods

A literature search was performed on the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang database, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase database. Data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of sublingual immunotherapy for AR were screened and extracted from the establishment of those databases to November 2022. Subsequently, a network meta-analysis was performed using a statistical software R 4.2.

Results

Totally 22 RCTs that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria and screened from 1,164 literature were included. A total of 4,941 AR patients were involved in the 22 trials, as well as five interventions including placebo, pharmacotherapy, subcutaneous immunotherapy_dust mite, sublingual immunotherapy_dust mite, and sublingual immunotherapy_ grass mix plus pollen extract. The results of network meta-analysis showed that, based on symptom scores after different interventions for AR, the most effective treatments for AR were in order as follows: sublingual immunotherapy_dust mite, subcutaneous immunotherapy_dust mite, sublingual immunotherapy_ grass mix plus pollen extract, placebo, and pharmacotherapy. Importantly, sublingual immunotherapy had fewer adverse reactions and higher safety.

Conclusion

Sublingual immunotherapy_dust mite for AR has the best efficacy, whereas traditional medicine has the worst. More high-quality studies with a large sample and multiple centers are needed to verify this conclusion in the future, so as to further provide more reliable evidence-based medical evidence for the clinical treatment options of AR patients.

Molecular Aspects of Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy in Patients with Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis

A systematic review and narrative synthesis of publications was undertaken to analyze the role of component-resolved diagnosis technology in identifying polysensitization for the provision of allergen-specific immunotherapy to patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. A search of publications was carried out in electronic databases in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The search helped to identify 568 publications, 12 of which were included in this review. Overall, 3302 patients were enrolled. The major finding was that component-resolved diagnostics change the choice of relevant allergens for allergen-specific immunotherapy in at least 50% of cases. Sensitization to allergen components differs with age, type of disease, and overall disease duration. Patients who had both bronchial asthma and allergic rhinitis were sensitized to a larger number of allergens than patients who had bronchial asthma alone.

Cross-sectional study to describe allergic rhinitis flare-ups and associated airways phenotype in house dust mite sensitization

OBJECTIVES

To quantify and describe flare-ups of house dust mite allergic rhinitis (HDM-AR) which had occurred during the last 12 months in a population of adults and children candidate for Allergen ImmunoTherapy (AIT). Next, to identify associated clinical features.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was an observational, multicenter, cross-sectional study that included patients aged ≥ 5 years with HDM-AR eligible for AIT and without prior AIT for at least 12 months. Flare-ups were all period with impairment of quality of life (QoL) and requiring a change in their usual treatment. Data were collected using medical records and patient questionnaires. Variables associated with the occurrence of ≥ 2 AR flare-ups were identified.

RESULTS

1,701 patients were included (average age: 23 years, 51.5% males, 30.4% children, 17.7% adolescents and 51.9% adults). Severe and persistent AR affected 70.9% of them and 53.7% showed polysensitization. Asthma was associated with AR in 34.4% and was well-controlled in 58.5%. The occurrence of at least one AR flare-up in the year was reported by 77.7%, with an annual rate in the whole population of 2.6 ± 3.9 and a duration of 14.1 ± 17.1 days. Deeply or moderately AR-related degraded QoL was experienced by 39.5% and 64.6%, respectively. The occurrence of ≥ 2 AR flare-ups was reported by 54.5% and was associated with polysensitization, AR intermittence and severity.

CONCLUSION

AR flare-ups are frequent and impair QoL in HDM-allergic patients, suggesting that it could be considered as therapeutic targets.

Allergen immunotherapy in treating allergic eosinophilic asthma

Currently, the approach to a patient with asthma is in accordance with personalized medicine wherein the decision on the treatment pathway is based on the type of asthmatic inflammation and other comorbidities that accompany asthma. For an allergic asthma patient, allergen immunotherapy (AIT), which has a disease-modifying effect and the potential to prevent further progression of allergic symptoms, is one of the treatment modalities. It is an effective treatment that, unlike pharmacotherapy, modifies the course of allergic respiratory diseases and induces allergen specific immune tolerance that persists for up to several years after treatment cessation. Therapeutic allergens of high quality, efficacy, and safety according to European regulatory authorities are an integral part of the treatment of respiratory allergies. It is a safe treatment option which still remains the only causal immuno¬modulatory therapy for allergic eosinophilic asthma.

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.

Cell-penetrating albumin enhances the sublingual delivery of antigens through macropinocytosis

Innovations in oral immunotherapy have greatly advanced the therapeutic control of allergies. However, these therapeutic effects suffer from the fact that the amount of antigen delivered to antigen-presenting cells is limited given the formulations that are currently available. We recently designed a cell-penetrating albumin and found that this modified albumin enters cells via the induction of macropinocytosis. Herein, we report on a novel system for delivering antigens based on cell-penetrating albumin-inducible macropinocytosis that allows larger amounts of antigens to be delivered to antigen-presenting cells. A treatment with cell-penetrating albumin significantly increased the permeability of ovalbumin (45 kDa) or dextran (2000 kDa) on monolayers derived from human oral squamous carcinoma cells. Flow cytometric analyses showed that the cell-penetrating albumin treatment resulted in a significant elevation in the amount of dextran that was delivered to two types of antigen-presenting cells. Finally, mice that had been sensitized by Japanese cedar pollen extract (JCPE) and cell-penetrating albumin showed a decline in the frequency of nose-rubbing against a subsequent intranasal administration of JCPE. These findings suggest that the sublingual administration of cell-penetrating albumin efficiently delivers antigens to antigen-presenting cells via the induction of macropinocytosis, resulting in an enhancement in the therapeutic effect of sublingual immunotherapy.

Efficacy and safety of house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy tablets in allergic rhinitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

House dust mite (HDM) sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets have been approved for the treatment of patients with allergic rhinitis (AR). However, the meta-analysis on the efficacy of HDM-SLIT tablets for HDM-induced AR patients remained limited.

Methods

Five databases were searched including: PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and CINAHL for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that addressed the efficacy and safetyof HDM-SLIT tablets compared with placebo until January 2022. The primary outcome was a combined symptom and medication score (CSMS) after treatment.

Results

Eight eligible RCTs were identified with a total of 3601 patients treated with HDM-SLIT tablets and 2783 patients who received a placebo. The CSMS was significantly lower in the HDM-SLIT tablet group compared with the placebo (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.28 [95% CI: -0.32 to -0.23]). There was a significant reduction in rhinitis symptom scores, rhinitis medication scores, total combined conjunctivitis scores, and rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire scores. The consistent efficacy compared to the placebo has been exhibited over the different kinds and doses of HDM tablets (6 SQ, 12 SQ, 300 IR, and 500 IR) and age groups (>5 years old, adolescents and adults) with low degrees of variability across the studies. There was no significant difference in proportions of participants who were injected with epinephrine between the treatment- and placebo groups.

Conclusions

HDM-SLIT tablet is an effective treatment in reducing rhinitis symptoms and medication use in AR patients with favorable safety. They also improve quality of life and conjunctivitis symptoms.

Long-term efficacy of the sublingual and subcutaneous routes in allergen immunotherapy

Allergen immunotherapy is highly effective in selected patients with allergic rhinitis, allergic asthma, and Hymenoptera venom allergy. Unlike anti-allergic drugs, both subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapies have been shown to modify the underlying cause of the disease, with proved long-term clinical benefits after treatment cessation. In this review, we analyzed 10 randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled clinical trials of allergen immunotherapy that included blinded follow-up for at least 1 year after treatment withdrawal. Three studies of pollen subcutaneous immunotherapy provided evidence that a sustained, tolerogenic effect of subcutaneous immunotherapy can be achieved after 3 years of treatment. Six trials of sublingual immunotherapy provided robust evidence for long-term clinical benefit and persistent immunologic changes after grass pollen, house-dust mite, or Japanese cedar immunotherapy, whereas a clinical trial of both sublingual and subcutaneous grass pollen immunotherapies showed that 2 years of immunotherapy were efficacious but insufficient to induce long-term tolerance. These studies strongly supported international guidelines that recommend at least 3 years of allergen immunotherapy of proven value to achieve disease modification and sustained clinical and immunologic tolerance.

Efficacy and safety of sublingual allergen immunotherapy

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablets represent a new allergen immunotherapy option for clinicians. In North America, there are five SLIT-tablets approved for the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC). No SLIT-drops products are currently approved in the United States or Canada. This work reviewed the efficacy of the timothy grass SLIT-tablet, five-grass SLIT-tablet, ragweed SLIT-tablet, house-dust mite SLIT-tablet, and tree SLIT-tablet in patients with ARC. All the SLIT-tablets showed consistent clinical efficacy for the treatment of ARC in large, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, including for both patients who were monosensitized and those who were polysensitized. Treatment with house-dust mite SLIT-tablet has shown efficacy in patients who are pollen sensitized during their respective pollen seasons. In contrast to SLIT-tablets, efficacy studies of SLIT-drops show high heterogeneity of treatment effect. Although data are scarce, data that compared the efficacy of SLIT-tablets versus ARC pharmacotherapy generally indicated that SLIT-tablets had a greater benefit than pharmacotherapy when compared with placebo, particularly for perennial ARC. When compared with subcutaneous immunotherapy, analysis of these data indicated that SLIT-tablets had a benefit over subcutaneous immunotherapy in regard to safety but somewhat less benefit in regard to efficacy. The safety of SLIT-tablets has been well documented, and a U.S. Food and Drug Administration class label with safety considerations is present in the prescribing information for all SLIT-tablets. No new safety signals have been observed after reinitiating SLIT-tablets after a short treatment interruption.

Efficacy and Safety of House Dust Mite Sublingual Immunotherapy Tablet in Allergic Asthma: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

House dust mite sublingual immunotherapy (HDM SLIT) effectively treats allergic rhinitis (AR). However, the evidence of HDM SLIT for allergic asthma remained limited.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the efficacy and safety of HDM SLIT tablets in patients with allergic asthma.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search through PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Center of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that addressed the efficacy and safety of HDM SLIT tablets compared with placebo or no intervention in allergic asthma from their inception date until September 2021. The primary outcome was the reduction in inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) dose. Additional outcomes were asthma control, exacerbation, lung function, quality-of-life, and adverse events.

RESULTS

There were 7 RCTs, 5 studies in allergic asthma (4 in adults and 1 in children), and 2 in AR with or without asthma. The 6 standardized quality (SQ) HDM effectively reduced ICS dose in well- to partly controlled mild-to-moderate asthma in 1 RCT. Two RCTs evaluated the efficacy of 6 SQ and 12 SQ HDM in reducing asthma exacerbation in partly controlled moderate-to-severe asthma, and their results were inconsistent. One study in children with mild-to-moderate asthma found no benefit of HDM SLIT. Two RCTs in AR with or without mild-to-moderate asthma showed improvement of asthma symptoms. Adverse events were primarily local, and anaphylaxis treated with epinephrine was reported in 3 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The HDM SLIT tablets tend to effectively reduce ICS use in adults and adolescents with well- to partly controlled mild-to-moderate allergic asthma with a favorable safety profile.

The SQ HDM SLIT-Tablet is safe and well tolerated in patients with House Dust Mite allergic rhinitis with or without asthma: A "real-life" French study

Background

The SQ House Dust Mite (HDM) SubLingual ImmunoTherapy (SLIT)‐Tablet (Acarizax) is the only allergen immunotherapy authorized by European regulatory authorities to treat HDM‐induced allergic asthma (AA) that is not well‐controlled by inhaled corticosteroids and associated with mild‐to‐severe HDM allergic rhinitis (AR). The aim of this study was to add evidence on the safety of the SQ HDM SLIT‐Tablet in patients with AR, alone or with AA, under real‐life conditions.

Methods

This was a French “real‐life”, multicenter, non‐comparative, longitudinal, prospective study. It included patients initiating the SQ HDM SLIT‐Tablet for either persistent moderate‐to‐severe HDM AR or AA not well‐controlled by inhaled corticosteroids and associated with mild‐to‐severe HDM AR. Adverse Events (AEs) were collected at the first intake and throughout the study. Logistic regression was used to compare safety according to asthma control before treatment initiation.

Results

Between May 09, 2018 and May 29, 2019, 1526 patients were enrolled at 185 sites and 1483 were included in the safety population (SAF). Of them, 33.6% had suspected clinical manifestations of AA. Asthma was uncontrolled for 18.2% of the patients, partially controlled for 27.9% and well‐controlled for 53.8%. Overall, 31.9% of the SAF patients experienced at least one AE. The percentage of patients with AEs was 29.9% among patients with AR alone and 35.9% among those with AA (p = 0.0193). No significant difference was observed in the rate of AE or SAE depending on asthma control at inclusion (2.2% of SAEs reported for patients with uncontrolled asthma, 1.4% for partly controlled and 1.1% for well‐controlled).

Conclusions

The overall results indicate a good SQ HDM SLIT‐Tablet safety profile consistent with that reported in previous studies, regardless of asthma control.

Alternatives to Subcutaneous Immunotherapy for Allergic Rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is an important public health issue worldwide due to its increasing prevalence and impact on quality of life, school performance, and work productivity. Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is used to treat AR and involves repeated injections of allergen extracts. SCIT is used for cases of severe AR with symptoms that are not adequately controlled by medication, when the side effects of medication limit treatment options, or where the aim is to cure rather than symptomatically treat. Although SCIT is effective, it is not necessarily curative. Furthermore, there is also a low but present risk of systemic allergic reactions, with systemic side effects occurring in less than 0–1% of treated patients. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has emerged as an effective and safe alternative to SCIT. SCIT and SLIT are the only immunotherapies currently available for AR. In addition to sublingual administration as an alternative to SCIT, other routes of antigen administration have been attempted with the goal of increasing safety while maintaining efficacy. This review discusses the efficacies of SCIT and SLIT, their mechanisms, the utility of intralymphatic immunotherapy (ILIT) as an alternative route of antigen administration, and the potential for immunotherapy using other routes of antigen administration.

One hundred and ten years of Allergen Immunotherapy: A journey from empiric observation to evidence

One hundred and ten years after Noon's first clinical report of the subcutaneous application of allergen extracts, allergen immunotherapy (AIT) has evolved as the most important pillar of the treatment of allergic patients. It is the only disease-modifying treatment option available and the evidence for its clinical efficacy and safety is broad and undisputed. Throughout recent decades, more insights into the underlying mechanisms, in particular the modulation of innate and adaptive immune responses, have been described. AIT is acknowledged by worldwide regulatory authorities, and following the regulatory guidelines for product development, AIT products are subject to a rigorous evaluation before obtaining market authorization. Knowledge and practice are anchored in international guidelines, such as the recently published series of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI). Innovative approaches continue to be further developed with the focus on clinical improvement by, for example, the usage of adjuvants, peptides, recombinants, modification of allergens, new routes of administration, and the concomitant use of biologicals. In addition, real-life data provide complementary and valuable information on the effectiveness and tolerability of this treatment option in the clinical routine. New mobile health technologies and big-data approaches will improve daily treatment convenience, adherence, and efficacy of AIT. However, the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has also had some implications for the feasibility and practicability of AIT. Taken together, AIT as the only disease-modifying therapy in allergic diseases has been broadly investigated over the past 110 years laying the path for innovations and further improvement.

Allergen Release Profiles of Fast-Dissolving Freeze-Dried Orodispersible Sublingual Allergy Immunotherapy Tablets

Background

Sublingual allergy immunotherapy tablets (SLIT-tablets) provide a well-tolerated and clinically efficacious treatment for allergic disease such as allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma. In SLIT, uptake of allergen by immune-competent cells in the oral mucosa activates the immune system and leads to tolerance toward the sensitizing allergen. The ability to deliver the full allergen content into solution within the recommended sublingual holding time is therefore an essential quality of SLIT-tablets that must be supported by the tablet formulation for all relevant allergen sources. SLIT-tablets based on a fast-dissolving orodispersible freeze-dried formulation (Zydis) are currently available for 5 of the most prevalent allergens: tree (birch and related species from the birch-homologous group), grass, ragweed, Japanese cedar, and house dust mite.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to examine the allergen release properties of three freeze-dried SLIT-tablets containing tree, ragweed, and Japanese cedar extracts, respectively. The correlation between SLIT-tablet allergen release and the level of allergen-specific T-cell activation was examined for the tree SLIT-tablet.

Methods

Allergen release kinetics and tablet disintegration times for the 3 freeze-dried SLIT-tablets were examined. For all 3 tablets, the magnitude of solubilized major allergen relative to time in solution was compared to external controls to achieve a measure of the total allergen release. Additional assessments of allergen release occurring after the initial timepoint (15 or 30 seconds in solution) were done independently of external controls by linear regression analyses. For the tree SLIT-tablet, the immunological potency of the released major allergen was assessed at each experimental timepoint by a Bet v-specific T-cell activation assay.

Results

All 3 SLIT-tablets disintegrated within 1 second after contact with assay buffer without any detectible residue. Complete release of major allergens (Bet v 1, Amb a 1, and Cry j 1, respectively) was seen at the earliest experimental time points (15 or 30 seconds). For the tree SLIT-tablet, full T-cell activation was achieved at 30 seconds (earliest experimental time point).

Conclusions

The freeze-dried SLIT-tablet formulation consistently provides rapid and complete release of allergen from a wide range of species in a standardized in vitro assay. Full release of the SLIT-tablet allergen content within the sublingual holding time is a prerequisite for maximal exposure of allergens to the sublingual mucosa immune system. The freeze-dried SLIT-tablet formulation examined here supports short sublingual holding times and furthermore offers a convenient administration form of allergy immunotherapy.

Genetic variants in Hippo pathway genes are associated with house dust mite-induced allergic rhinitis in a Chinese population

Background

House dust mite (HDM)‐induced allergic rhinitis (AR) is a highly prevalent disease with bothersome symptoms. Genetic variants of the Hippo pathway genes play a critical role in the respiratory disease. However, no study has reported associations between variants of the Hippo pathway genes and HDM‐induced AR risk.

Methods

Forty‐three key genes in the Hippo pathway were selected from the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG), Reactome pathway database, and previous reported studies. A case‐control study of 222 cases and 237 controls was performed to assess the associations between 121 genetic variants in these genes and HDM‐induced AR risk. DNeasy Blood & Tissues Kits were used for extracting genomic DNA from the venous blood and Infinium Asian Screening Array BeadChips for performing genotyping. A logistic regression model was applied to evaluate the effects of variants on HDM‐induced AR risk. The false discovery rate (FDR) method was utilized to correct for multiple testing. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was plotted to obtain the cut‐off value of total IgE for the diagnosis of HDM‐induced AR. Histone modification and transcription factor binding sites were visualized by UCSC genome browser. Moreover, expression qualitative trait loci (eQTL) analysis was obtained from Genotype‐Tissue Expression (GTEx) database.

Results

We found that rs754466 in DLG5 was significantly associated with a decreased HDM‐induced AR risk after FDR correction (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 0.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.36–0.74, p = 3.25 × 10⁻⁴, P_FDR = 3.93 × 10⁻²). The rs754466 A allele reduced the risk of HDM‐induced AR in the subgroup of moderate/severe total nasal symptom score (TNSS). Furthermore, rs754466 was associated with a high mRNA expression of DLG5. Additionally, histone modification and transcription factor binding sites were rich in the region containing rs754466.

Conclusion

Our findings indicated that rs754466 in DLG5 decreased the susceptibility to HDM‐induced AR.

New insights in mite immunotherapy - sublingual tablets

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Sublingual tablet immunotherapy has been demonstrated to be effective for allergies induced by exposure to grass, ragweed, specific trees (Japanese Cedar; birch homologous tree mix), and house dust mites (HDM). This review provides both an overview of the evidence-based clinical studies that address the use of the HDM SLIT-tablet for the treatment of HDM-induced allergic rhinitis/conjunctivitis and its appropriate use in carefully selected asthmatic patients and provides the clinician with practical management considerations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Solid evidence-based clinical studies have shown that the HDM SLIT-tablet is both well tolerated in patients with mild-to-moderate asthma and has demonstrated a meaningful improvement in exacerbations, need for rescue medication, quality of life, and asthma control.

SUMMARY

The HDM SLIT-tablet provides the allergy specialist with a well-tolerated treatment that has established superior safety to subcutaneous injection therapy, which can be administered easily as a sublingual dissolvable tablet, and which provides the opportunity to address one of the more difficult aspects in the management of an inducer of perennial allergic disease - that of persistent airway inflammation and allergic asthma.

Dogmas, challenges, and promises in phase III allergen immunotherapy studies

The concept of treatment of an allergy with the offending allergen was introduced more than a century ago. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease modifying treatment of allergic diseases caused by inhalational allergens and insect venoms. Despite this, only few AIT products have reached licensure in the US or an official marketing authorization status in European countries. Moreover, most of these AIT products are provided on an individual patient basis as named patient products (NPP) in Europe, while individualized preparations of (mixed) allergenic extract vials for subcutaneous administration (compounding) is common practice in the US. AIT products are generally considered safe and well tolerated, but the major practical clinical development challenge is to define the optimal dose and prove the efficacy and safety of these products using state-of-the art Phase II and pivotal Phase III studies. In planning Phase II-III AIT studies, a thorough understanding of the study challenges is essential (e.g. variability and non-validated status of subjective primary endpoints, limitations of pollen season definitions) and dogmas of these products (e.g., for sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) trials double-blinding conditions cannot be maintained, resulting in stronger placebo responses in the active treatment group and inflated treatment effects in Phase III). There is future promise for more objective biomarker endpoints (e.g. basophil activation (CD63 and CD203c), subsets of regulatory dendritic, T and B cells, IL-10–producing group 2 innate lymphoid cells; alone or in combination) to overcome several of these dogmas and challenges; innovation in AIT clinical trials can only progress with integral biomarker research to complement the traditional endpoints in Phase II-III clinical development. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of these dogmas, challenges and recommendations based on published data, to facilitate the design of Phase III studies and improve the evidence basis of safe and effective AIT products.

Efficacy of Subcutaneous and Sublingual Immunotherapy for House Dust Mite Allergy: A Network Meta-Analysis-Based Comparison

BACKGROUND

Meta-analyses comparing the efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) and subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) for house dust mite allergy are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of SLIT drops, SLIT tablets, and SCIT in patients with perennial allergic rhinitis through network analysis.

METHODS

Frequentist network meta-analyses estimated the standardized mean difference (SMD) across the three immunotherapy modalities on allergic rhinitis symptom and medication score data from double-blind randomized clinical trials. Random effects models were investigated.

RESULTS

We included 26 double-blind randomized clinical trials in this meta-analysis for the symptom score and 18 for the medication score. In the direct pairwise meta-analysis, a significant reduction of the symptom score was observed for all immunotherapy modalities compared with the placebo: pooled SMDs of -0.461 (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.795 to -0.127) for SLIT drop, -0.329 (95% CI, -0.426 to -0.231) for SLIT tablet, and -1.669 (95% CI, -2.753 to -0.585) for SCIT. For the medication score, a significant reduction was observed for all modalities. In network meta-analysis, the clinical efficacy of SCIT based on the symptom score was greater than for SLIT drop or SLIT tablet (SMD: -0.697, 95% CI, -1.105 to -0.288; and SMD: -0.819, 95% CI, -1.242 to -0.397). However, there was no significant difference in the symptom score between SLIT drop and SLIT tablet.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated the clinical efficacy of all house dust mite immunotherapy modalities and suggests that SCIT may be more effective than SLIT drops or tablets in controlling symptoms of allergic rhinitis.

Sublingual immunotherapy tablet: a cost-minimizing alternative in the treatment of tree pollen-induced seasonal allergic rhinitis in Canada

BACKGROUND

A cost-minimization analysis (CMA) was performed to evaluate the economic implications of introducing the SQ Tree sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablets marketed as ITULATEK® (Health Canada regulatory approval in April 2020) for the treatment of pollen-induced (birch, alder and/or hazel) seasonal allergic rhinitis in Canada (Ontario and Quebec), where Tree Pollen subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is already an available treatment option.

METHODS

A CMA was deemed appropriate and was based on the assumption that the SQ Tree SLIT-tablets have comparable efficacy to Tree Pollen SCIT. A societal perspective was adopted in the model, including relevant costs of medications, costs of health care services, and productivity losses. The time horizon in the model was three years, which corresponds to a minimal treatment course of allergy immunotherapy. Resource use and costs were based on published sources, where available, and validated by Canadian specialist clinicians (allergists) in active practice in Ontario and in Quebec, where applicable. A discount rate of 1.5% was applied in accordance with the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) guidelines. To assess the robustness of the results, scenario analyses were performed by testing alternative assumptions for selected parameters (e.g., Tree Pollen SCIT resource use, discount rates, number of injections, annual SCIT dosing with maintenance injections, and nurse time support), to evaluate their impact on the results of the analysis.

RESULTS

The direct costs, including the drug costs, and physician services costs, for three years of treatment, were similar for both SQ Tree SLIT-tablets vs. Tree Pollen SCIT in both Ontario and Quebec ($2799.01 and $2838.70 vs. $2233.76 and $2266.05 respectively). However, when the indirect costs (including patient's travel expenses and lost working hours) are included in the model, total savings for the treatment with SQ Tree SLIT-tablets of $1111.79 for Ontario and $1199.87 for Quebec were observed. Scenario analyses were conducted and showed that changes in assumptions continue to result in the savings of SQ Tree SLIT- tablets over Tree Pollen SCIT.

CONCLUSIONS

The CMA indicates that SQ Tree SLIT-tablets are a cost-minimizing alternative to Tree Pollen SCIT when considered from a societal perspective in Ontario and Quebec.

Comparison of house dust mite sensitization profiles in allergic adults from Canada, Europe, South Africa and USA

BACKGROUND

Sensitization to house dust mite (HDM) is a leading cause of allergic rhinitis and asthma. Despite more than 30 HDM-derived allergens having been identified to date, specific therapeutic approaches do not yet take into account the local sensitization profiles of patients. This study aimed to identify patterns of HDM sensitization in HDM-allergic adults living in distinct geographic areas, to inform the development of targeted diagnostic and therapeutic tools.

METHODS

Serum samples from 685 HDM-allergic subjects from Canada, Europe, South Africa, and the USA were tested for levels of IgE specific for 17 micro-arrayed HDM allergens by ImmunoCAP Immuno Solid-phase Allergen Chip (ISAC) technology.

RESULTS

The results confirmed significant geographical variability in sensitization patterns and levels of IgE. In all areas, the major sensitizers were the group 1 and group 2 allergens and Der p 23. Der p 23 was a frequent sensitizer: 64% of the subjects had IgE specific for Der p 23, and 2.3% were monosensitized to it. In South Africa, Der p 23 was the dominant HDM allergen (86% prevalence) and Der p 7 achieved major allergen status (56%). IgE sensitization to HDM was influenced by asthmatic status, levels of allergen exposure, age, race-ethnicity and smoking status, but not by BMI.

CONCLUSION

Sensitization profiles to HDM allergens differ considerably among distinct geographic areas, with Der p 7 and Der p 23 being major sensitizers in South Africa. Such heterogeneity should be taken into account in the diagnosis and treatment of HDM-allergic patients.

Consensus on the treatment of allergic asthma with sublingual house dust mite immunotherapy in the field of Pneumology

INTRODUCTION

: Many patients sensitized to mites remain symptomatic and uncontrolled despite traditional treatment. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has demonstrated to reduce the symptoms of allergic rhinitis, the need for additional drug treatments, and to reduce the number of moderate and severe exacerbations in patients with allergic asthma caused by mites that had not been adequately controlled.

AREAS COVERED

: After reviewing the most recent literature, a scientific committee composed by 5 pneumologists experts in asthma proposed 41 items that addressed the diagnosis of allergic asthma caused by mites, the role of house dust mite (HDM) SLIT tablet in the therapeutic plan and in the control of the disease, and the profile of patients with asthma candidates for this therapy. Through a modified Delphi method, the items were send to 106 pneumologists involved in asthma to be agreed.

EXPERT OPINION

: The high degree of consensus reached by the panel of pneumologists shows the importance of HDM SLIT tablet in the treatment of allergic asthma caused by mites, particularly taking into account that they barely use this therapy because until now they did not have a registered treatment with solid evidence of efficacy and safety.

Recent development on the use of sublingual immunotherapy tablets for allergic rhinitis

OBJECTIVE

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is an immunoglobulin (Ig) E-mediated inflammatory condition that causes sneezing, nasal congestion, rhinorrhea, and nasal itch. Although subcutaneous immunotherapy for the treatment of AR has been in use and well established as a treatment modality, sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is increasingly considered to be the safer and more convenient alternative. Thus, the objective of this review is to describe recent findings pertaining to the use of SLIT tablets (SLIT-T) for AR.

DATA SOURCES

A database search (PubMed.gov) for articles published between January 1, 2017, and February 9, 2021, was conducted using the following key words: "allergic rhinitis," AND-ed "sublingual immunotherapy." Included were randomized placebo-controlled trials. Other experimental design studies were excluded.

STUDY SELECTIONS

A total of 11 randomized placebo-controlled trials were selected for full-text review and included in the analysis. All studies investigated the use of SLIT on patients with seasonal AR (4 tree pollen, 1 grass pollen, and 1 Japanese cedar) or perennial AR (3 house dust mite).

RESULTS

Our review of 7 recently published randomized placebo-controlled trials with 2348 subjects receiving SLIT reported increased efficacy, safety, supportive immunologic parameters (IgE and IgG4 pre- and posttreatment levels), and improved quality of life. All studies excluded subjects with overlapping seasonal or perennial allergens, a history of moderate-to-severe uncontrolled asthma, or reduced lung function.

CONCLUSION

Our review highlights that SLIT is a safe and effective treatment that considerably reduces symptoms and medication requirements in AR and improves quality of life.

Subcutaneous Versus Sublingual Immunotherapy for Adults with Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analyses

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) better improves patient outcomes and quality of life for adults with allergic rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis (AR/C) with or without mild to moderate asthma.

METHODS

Systematic review methodology was based on the Cochrane Collaboration handbook and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses. Four databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science) were queried from inception to July 30, 2020. Two independent reviewers screened potentially relevant studies and assessed risk of bias. Outcomes of interest were symptom score (SS), medication score (MS), combined symptom medication score (CSMS), and Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ). Meta-analyses with an adjusted indirect comparison were conducted in RevMan 5.4.1.

RESULTS

Seven SCIT versus SLIT randomized controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrated no significant differences for any outcomes, but insufficient data precluded direct meta-analysis. For the adjusted indirect comparison, 46 RCTs over 39 studies were included for SCIT versus placebo (n = 13) and SLIT versus placebo (n = 33). Statistically significant results favoring SCIT were found for SS (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.31-0.49), MS (SMD = 0.26; 95% CI = 0.14-0.39), CSMS (SMD = 0.42; 95% CI = 0.17-0.67), and RQLQ (MD = 0.24; 95% CI = 0.04-0.44). Statistically significant results favoring SLIT were found for SS (SMD = 0.42; 95% CI = 0.32-0.53), MS (SMD = 0.40; 95% CI = 0.28-0.53), CSMS (SMD = 0.37; 95% CI = 0.29-0.45), and RQLQ (MD = 0.32; 95% CI = 0.20-0.43). No significant differences were found between SCIT and SLIT for SS (SMD = -0.02; 95% CI = -0.15 to 0.11), MS (SMD = -0.14; 95% CI = -0.31 to 0.03), CSMS (SMD = 0.05; 95% CI = -0.21 to 0.31), or RQLQ (MD = -0.08; 95% CI = -0.31 to 0.15).

CONCLUSION

SCIT and SLIT are comparably effective treatments for adults with AR/C. More RCTs analyzing SCIT versus SLIT are needed to directly compare the two. Laryngoscope, 2021.

A Real-Life One-Year Non-Interventional Study Assessing Safety, Tolerability, and Treatment Outcome of the SQ HDM SLIT-Tablet (Acarizax®) in House Dust Mite Allergic Rhinitis With or Without Asthma

Introduction

The aim of this study was to investigate the safety profile, tolerability, and outcome of the SQ^® house dust mite (HDM) sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablet after 1 year of treatment in clinical practice among adults with HDM-related allergic rhinitis (AR) ± allergic asthma (AA).

Methods

In a non-interventional multicenter, observational study, patients were followed at 3 visits for 1 year. Adverse events (AE) were recorded at all visits. Patients graded their allergic symptoms as none, mild, moderate, or severe, and recorded AR and AA medication use. Asthma symptom control was assessed according to the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA).

Results

One hundred and ninety-eight patients were included; 115 (58%) had AR without asthma and 83 (42%) had both AR and AA. One hundred and sixty-six (84%) patients completed the study. Eighty percent of patients experienced an AE: 151 (75%) AEs were mild, 42 (21%) moderate, and 4 (2%) severe. Three patients (1.5%) reported four events that were considered serious (SAEs). One SAE was considered possibly treatment-related. No anaphylactic reactions occurred. The proportion of patients experiencing allergy symptom reductions by at least one step were 75% (nasal), 62% (eye), 16% (skin), and 13% (other symptoms); 75% of patients with AA experienced a decrease of at least one step in bronchial symptoms. AR medication and inhaled corticosteroids were statistically significant reduced.

Conclusion

The SQ HDM SLIT-tablet was safe and well tolerated; the type, frequency, and severity of AEs resembled what RCTs have previously demonstrated. As explorative endpoints, statistically significant reductions in AR and AA symptoms and medication use were seen along with improved asthma control after 1 year of treatment, implying that clinically meaningful changes were seen after 1 year of treatment with the SQ HDM SLIT-tablet.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41030-021-00150-z.

The role of house dust mite immunotherapy in Indonesian children with chronic rhinosinusitis allergy: A randomized control trial

Background

Chronic rhinosinusitis allergy (CRA) is a disease that is commonly found in children and is mostly caused by allergy to house dust mites (HDM). The use of HDM immunotherapy can be considered in children with allergies.

Objectives

Analyzing the impact of mite immunotherapy on disease burden in Indonesian children with CRA.

Methods

A randomized control trial study was conducted to participants in 2 groups, namely the immunotherapy group (n = 25) and the non-immunotherapy group (n = 25). Participants were given HDM immunotherapy for 14 weeks, which was given once per week. Participants during therapy were evaluated for rhinosinusitis symptoms and measured their immunity status (specific IgE), sleep quality (SDSC), quality of life (SN5), and family coping (F-COPES) pre-post therapy. Statistical analysis used in this study included paired t-test, Wilcoxon test, independent t-test, or Mann Whitney test with p < 0.05.

Results

The value of specific IgE in the immunotherapy group was 4.12 ± 7.75 kU/l (pre-test) and 1.52 ± 2.42 kU/l (post-test; p < 0.001), while in the non-immunotherapy group was 1.47 ± 3.28 kU/l (pre-test) and 1.18 ± 2.81 kU/l (post-test; p = 0.317). The SDSC value in the immunotherapy group was 42.16 ± 2.75 (pre-test) and 30.32 ± 3.22 (post-test; p < 0.001), while in the non-immunotherapy group was 41.92 ± 2.75 (pre-test) and 41.84 ± 2.87 (post-test; p = 0.987). The F-COPES value in the immunotherapy group was 101.56 ± 5.78 (pre-test) and 105.20 ± 4.31 (post-test; p = 0.015), while in the non-immunotherapy group was 100.36 ± 9.63 (pre-test) and 99.96 ± 9.98 (post-test; p = 0.224). The SN-5 value in the immunotherapy group was 30.04 ± 2.78 (pre-test) and 11.00 ± 2.33 (post-test; p < 0.001), while in the non-immunotherapy group was 30.04 ± 2.78 (pre-test) and 30.04 ± 2.78 (post-test; p = 0.767). There was a significant comparison between the immunotherapy group and the non-immunotherapy group on the specific IgE (p = 0.013), SDSC (p < 0.001), and SN-5 (p < 0.001) values. Meanwhile, there was no significant difference in the F-COPES value (p = 0.129).

Conclusions

The administration of HDM immunotherapy can improve the participant's immunity, quality of life, and sleep disorder.

House dust mites-driven allergic rhinitis: could its natural history be modified?

INTRODUCTION

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is the most common IgE-mediated disease. House dust mites (HDMs)-sensitization is the main cause of AR. HDM-driven AR is characterized by a typical natural history consisting of possible progression to asthma. Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) is, at present, a unique treatment to modify the natural history of allergic diseases. Tablets AIT (TAIT) represents a new era in AIT. There is evidence that TAIT could prevent asthma in AR patients.

AREAS COVERED

The literature search methodology was based on the articles cited by PubMed from 1980 to 2020. AIT's rationale is to restore an immunological and, consequently, clinical tolerance toward the causal allergen. The progression from rhinitis to asthma may be influenced by a relevant risk factor, such as the persistent type 2 inflammation of airways. HDMs are perennial allergens and allergen exposure is the condicio sine qua non to maintain inflammation. AIT could modify the progression toward asthma restoring physiologic immune response to the causal allergen and consequently dampening type 2 inflammation.

EXPERT OPINION

Patients with HDM-driven AR are susceptible to develop asthma over time. Many studies explored this topic. Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies identified some markers which predict the risk of developing asthma. They include bronchial airflow limitation, bronchial hyperresponsiveness, type 2 inflammation, and rhinitis duration. TAIT could block this progression by acting on this vicious circle. Future studies should explore this issue using adequate methodology.

Efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy tablets in dust mite and pollen allergy

The latest evidence on the mechanisms, efficacy, and safety of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) was reviewed. Interleukin (IL) 35 and IL-35-producing regulatory T cells were assessed as new biomarkers for SLIT responsiveness. A detailed analysis of clinical studies, including timothy grass pollen, 5-grass pollen, ragweed, and house-dust mite SLIT tablets, was provided, including a comparative analysis of efficacy and safety of SLIT versus subcutaneous immunotherapy.

Serum Periostin as a Biomarker for Predicting Clinical Response to House Dust Mite Sublingual Immunotherapy in Allergic Rhinitis

BACKGROUND

House dust mite (HDM) sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has proven to be effective for allergic rhinitis (AR), but its efficacy varies among patients. No candidate biomarkers for prediction of response to SLIT are available. Periostin, a matricellular protein, is involved in pathophysiology of AR, and its serum levels reflect airway allergic inflammation.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the relationship between serum periostin levels and current rhinitis control before and after standardized quality (SQ)-HDM SLIT, and to investigate the role of periostin in predicting clinical response.

METHODS

One hundred eleven subjects with HDM-induced AR were randomized to receive either SLIT plus pharmacotherapy or pharmacotherapy alone, for 48 weeks. At enrollment and the end of study, clinical characteristics and biomarkers that included serum periostin, serum HDM-specific IgE (s-IgE), total IgE, blood eosinophil counts, and Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) were measured. The association between clinical indices or biomarkers and clinical response to SLIT was analyzed.

RESULTS

A response to SLIT was recorded in 64% (32 of 50) patients. High serum periostin levels (>30.2 ng/mL) were associated with an effective response to SLIT, and the magnitude of RQLQ improvement was correlated with the level of serum periostin. The sensitivity and specificity based on receiver operating characteristic analysis for periostin were higher than those of s-IgE. Multivariate regression analysis showed that serum periostin was an independent factor for SLIT responders.

CONCLUSIONS

Serum periostin appears to be a useful biomarker for predicting the response to SQ-HDM SLIT in patients with AR.

Presentation, diagnosis, and the role of subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy in the management of ocular allergy

Allergic eye disease or ocular allergy is a debilitating condition with a significant impact on quality of life and productivity. As atopy continues to be on the rise, primary care providers are likely to encounter increasing numbers of patients with allergic eye disease. This review outlines the classification and pathophysiology of allergic eye disease and its clinical presentation. This paper does not detail traditional first-line therapies of allergic eye disease but describes the interdisciplinary management between the eye-care provider and allergist. It is recommended that patients with ongoing signs and symptoms of ocular allergy despite first-line therapies be referred for allergen immunotherapy, as it is highly effective for treatment of allergic eye disease. Through induction of immune tolerance, allergen immunotherapy is a disease-modifying therapy that can result in long-term improvement of ocular allergy. A thorough literature review was conducted on the efficacy and safety of allergen immunotherapy, including subcutaneous immunotherapy and sublingual immunotherapy, and its role in allergic eye disease.

A 300 IR sublingual tablet is an effective, safe treatment for house dust mite-induced allergic rhinitis: An international, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized phase III clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis induced by house dust mites (HDMs) is a highly prevalent but often underdiagnosed and undertreated/untreated chronic disease. It often has a negative impact on sleep, work, leisure activities, and health-related quality of life. Allergen immunotherapy is a proven, safe treatment for respiratory allergies.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess the efficacy and safety of a 300 index of reactivity (IR) sublingual tablet formulation of Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus:Dermatophagoides farinae 1:1 extract in adolescents (aged ≥12) and adults with moderate to severe HDM-induced allergic rhinitis.

METHODS

In a phase III, international, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial, participants received approximately 12 months of treatment with placebo or the 300 IR tablet. The primary end point was the average total combined score during 4 weeks at the end of the treatment period.

RESULTS

A total of 1607 participants were randomized, and 1476 (including 555 [37.6%] with concomitant mild controlled asthma at inclusion) comprised the full analysis set. Over the primary evaluation period, the least squares mean average total combined score in the 300 IR group (3.62) was significantly lower (P < .0001) than in the placebo group (4.35), with a relative least squares mean difference of -16.9% (95% CI, -24.0% to -9.2%). All prespecified secondary end points were consistently improved in the 300 IR group, relative to placebo. The 300 IR tablet was generally well tolerated. Treatment-related adverse events (mainly mild or moderate local reactions) were reported for 51.0% of the patients in the 300 IR group and 14.9% in the placebo group.

CONCLUSIONS

The 300 IR sublingual HDM tablet is an effective, safe treatment for HDM-induced allergic rhinitis.

Real-world evidence of subcutaneous allergoid immunotherapy in house dust mite-induced allergic rhinitis and asthma

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to analyze the effectiveness of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) with an allergoid in the treatment of house dust mites (HDM)-induced allergic rhinitis and/or asthma based on recent real-life data. The outcomes were measured using asthma incidence and consumption of corresponding medications as the indicator of persisting symptoms.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort analysis of a German longitudinal prescription database, patients who received at least two relevant mite AIT prescriptions in two different successive seasonal cycles were compared with non-AIT patients who received at least three symptomatic allergic rhinitis (AR) prescriptions in successive mite seasons. Study endpoints included AR progression, asthma progression, asthma occurrence, and therapy adherence. We used multivariate regression analyses to estimate the effects of AIT, adjusting for relevant variables.

RESULTS

This study included 2350 patients receiving a mite allergoid and 64 740 control patients. After up to 6 years of follow-up, patients treated with mite allergoid required significantly fewer AR and asthma prescriptions (59.7% vs 10.8%) than the control group, and the probability of asthma development was significantly lower. The adherence of patients receiving allergoid was 63.8% at the end of the second year and 38.6% at the end of the third year.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world evidence confirms the good efficacy of subcutaneous AIT with HDM mite allergoid in the treatment of allergic rhinitis and/or asthma. Up to 6 years of follow-up revealed significant effects in allergic rhinitis by measuring the number of AR medications and demonstrating significant reductions in asthma medications.

β-Blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors with sublingual immunotherapy: are risks related to individual product safety profile?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The objective of this article is to review the available literature regarding the risks associated with sublingual immunotherapy and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or β-blocker use. It also evaluates for any differences in these risks among the available sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets.

RECENT FINDINGS

A literature search was conducted in PubMed to identify peer-reviewed articles using the following keywords: anaphylaxis, ACE inhibitor, β-blocker, and sublingual immunotherapy. Minimal data exist regarding their safety of SLIT in patients concomitantly taking ACE inhibitors or β-blockers. The adverse reaction rates seem similar between SLIT products.

SUMMARY

A risk-versus-benefit discussion should be communicated with the patient taking a β-blocker before beginning SLIT but automatic denial of SLIT to these patients is not warranted.