Subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy for asthma: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study with a standardized Blomia tropicalis vaccine

Allergen Immunotherapy: The Evidence Supporting the Efficacy and Safety of Subcutaneous Immunotherapy and Sublingual Forms of Immunotherapy for Allergic Rhinitis/Conjunctivitis and Asthma

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a recognized key therapeutic modality for the treatment of allergic respiratory disease. Definitive studies have provided evidence-based data to demonstrate its effectiveness in allergic rhinitis and asthma due to the inhalation of proteinaceous allergic substances from specific seasonal pollens, dust mites, animal allergens, and certain mold spores. Over the ensuing decades, laboratory investigations have provided objective evidence to demonstrate immunologic changes, including production of protective IgG antibody, suppression of IgE antibody, upregulation of regulatory T cells, and induction of a state of immune tolerance to the offending allergen(s). Tangential to this work were carefully designed clinical studies that defined allergen dose and duration of treatment, established the importance of preparing extracts with standardized allergens (or well-defined extracts) based on major protein moieties, and used allergen provocation models to demonstrate efficacy superior to placebo. In the United States, the use of subcutaneous immunotherapy extracts for AIT was grandfathered in by the Food and Drug Administration based on expert literature review. In contrast, sublingual tablet immunotherapy underwent formal clinical development programs (phase I-III clinical trials) that provided the necessary clinical evidence for safety and efficacy that led to regulatory agency approvals for the treatment of allergic rhinitis in properly characterized patients with allergy. The allergy specialist's treatment options currently include traditional subcutaneous AIT and specific sublingual tablets approved for grass, ragweed, house dust mites, trees belonging to the birch-homologous group, and Japanese cedar. Tangential to this are sublingual drops that are increasingly being used off-label (albeit not approved by the Food and Drug Administration) in the United States. This article will review the evidence-based literature supporting the use of these forms of AIT, as well as focus on several current controversies and gaps in our knowledge base that have relevance for the appropriate selection of patients for treatment with specific AIT.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Immunotherapy for Inhalant Allergy

OBJECTIVE

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the therapeutic exposure to an allergen or allergens selected by clinical assessment and allergy testing to decrease allergic symptoms and induce immunologic tolerance. Inhalant AIT is administered to millions of patients for allergic rhinitis (AR) and allergic asthma (AA) and is most commonly delivered as subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Despite its widespread use, there is variability in the initiation and delivery of safe and effective immunotherapy, and there are opportunities for evidence-based recommendations for improved patient care.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this clinical practice guideline (CPG) is to identify quality improvement opportunities and provide clinicians trustworthy, evidence-based recommendations regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. Specific goals of the guideline are to optimize patient care, promote safe and effective therapy, reduce unjustified variations in care, and reduce the risk of harm. The target patients for the guideline are any individuals aged 5 years and older with AR, with or without AA, who are either candidates for immunotherapy or treated with immunotherapy for their inhalant allergies. The target audience is all clinicians involved in the administration of immunotherapy. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence-based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the guideline development group (GDG). It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. The statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experience and assessment of individual patients.

ACTION STATEMENTS

The GDG made a strong recommendation that (Key Action Statement [KAS] 10) the clinician performing allergy skin testing or administering AIT must be able to diagnose and manage anaphylaxis. The GDG made recommendations for the following KASs: (KAS 1) Clinicians should offer or refer to a clinician who can offer immunotherapy for patients with AR with or without AA if their patients' symptoms are inadequately controlled with medical therapy, allergen avoidance, or both, or have a preference for immunomodulation. (KAS 2A) Clinicians should not initiate AIT for patients who are pregnant, have uncontrolled asthma, or are unable to tolerate injectable epinephrine. (KAS 3) Clinicians should evaluate the patient or refer the patient to a clinician who can evaluate for signs and symptoms of asthma before initiating AIT and for signs and symptoms of uncontrolled asthma before administering subsequent AIT. (KAS 4) Clinicians should educate patients who are immunotherapy candidates regarding the differences between SCIT and SLIT (aqueous and tablet) including risks, benefits, convenience, and costs. (KAS 5) Clinicians should educate patients about the potential benefits of AIT in (1) preventing new allergen sensitizations, (2) reducing the risk of developing AA, and (3) altering the natural history of the disease with continued benefit after discontinuation of therapy. (KAS 6) Clinicians who administer SLIT to patients with seasonal AR should offer pre- and co-seasonal immunotherapy. (KAS 7) Clinicians prescribing AIT should limit treatment to only those clinically relevant allergens that correlate with the patient's history and are confirmed by testing. (KAS 9) Clinicians administering AIT should continue escalation or maintenance dosing when patients have local reactions (LRs) to AIT. (KAS 11) Clinicians should avoid repeat allergy testing as an assessment of the efficacy of ongoing AIT unless there is a change in environmental exposures or a loss of control of symptoms. (KAS 12) For patients who are experiencing symptomatic control from AIT, clinicians should treat for a minimum duration of 3 years, with ongoing treatment duration based on patient response to treatment. The GDG offered the following KASs as options: (KAS 2B) Clinicians may choose not to initiate AIT for patients who use concomitant beta-blockers, have a history of anaphylaxis, have systemic immunosuppression, or have eosinophilic esophagitis (SLIT only). (KAS 8) Clinicians may treat polysensitized patients with a limited number of allergens.

Exploratory immunogenicity outcomes of peanut oral immunotherapy: Findings from the PALISADE trial

BACKGROUND

Immunoglobulin E (IgE) and immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4) to peanut and its components may influence the clinical reactivity to peanut. Allergen-specific immunotherapy is known for modifying both IgE and IgG4. Peanut oral immunotherapy may influence these serological parameters.

METHODS

Exploratory analyses of serological data from participants receiving peanut (Arachis hypogaea) allergen powder-dnfp (PTAH) and placebo in the double-blind, randomized, phase 3 PALISADE trial were conducted to evaluate potential relationships between peanut-specific and peanut component-specific (Ara h 1, Ara h 2, Ara h 3, Ara h 6, Ara h 8, and Ara h 9) IgE and IgG4 levels and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 269 participants (PTAH, n = 202; placebo, n = 67) were analyzed. No relationship was observed between specific IgE and IgG4 levels at screening and maximum tolerated peanut protein dose during screening or response status during exit double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC). In PTAH-treated participants, no relationship was observed between IgE and IgG4 levels at screening and maximum symptom severity during exit DBPCFC. Postscreening ratios (ie, postscreening/screening) in the PTAH group were significant at the end of updosing and exit visit for most components. Postscreening changes in specific IgE levels were more pronounced with PTAH versus placebo for most components.

CONCLUSIONS

Specific IgE and IgG4 levels at screening are not correlated with screening or exit DBPCFC results, and are not predictive of clinical response to PTAH. Peanut (Arachis hypogaea) allergen powder-dnfp contains the relevant and immunodominant allergens, inducing immunological changes with the treatment.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02635776.

House dust mite allergy in Malaysia: review of research gaps in the current scenario and the way forward

The prevalence of house dust mite (HDM) allergy, especially in Asian countries with rapid urbanization, has been increasing. House dust mites thrive in places with relatively high humidity. With the combination of climate change, naturally high humidity, and urbanization, tropical countries like Malaysia are becoming a hotspot for HDM allergy fast. With a previously reported sensitization rate of between 60 and 80%, it is a worrying trend for Malaysia. However, due to incomplete and out-of-date data, as seen by the limited study coverage in the past, these numbers do not paint a complete picture of the true HDM allergy scene in Malaysia. This review briefly discusses the HDM fauna, the HDM sensitization rate, the common diagnosis and therapeutic tools for HDM allergy in Malaysia, and makes suggestions for possible improvements in the future. This review also highlights the need of more comprehensive population-based prevalence studies to be done in Malaysia, encompassing the three main HDMs-Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, Dermatophagoides farinae, and Blomia tropicalis-as the lack of up-to-date studies failed to give a clearer picture on the current scenario of HDM allergy in Malaysia. Future studies will be beneficial to the nation in preparing a better blueprint for the management and treatment of HDM allergy.

Frequent IgE recognition of Blomia tropicalis allergen molecules in asthmatic children and young adults in equatorial Africa

Background

Asthma is not well investigated in equatorial Africa and little is known about the disease-associated allergen molecules recognized by IgE from patients in this area. The aim was to study the molecular IgE sensitization profile of asthmatic children and young adults in a semi-rural area (Lambaréné) of an equatorial African country (Gabon), to identify the most important allergen molecules associated with allergic asthma in equatorial Africa.

Methods

Fifty-nine asthmatic patients, mainly children and few young adults, were studied by skin prick testing to Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (Der p), D. farinae (Der f), cat, dog, cockroach, grass, Alternaria and peanut. Sera were obtained from a subset of 35 patients, 32 with positive and 3 with negative skin reaction to Der p and tested for IgE reactivity to 176 allergen molecules from different allergen sources by ImmunoCAP ISAC microarray technology and to seven recombinant Blomia tropicalis (Blo t) allergens by IgE dot blot assay.

Results

Thirty-three of the 59 patients (56%) were sensitized to Der p and 23 of them (39%) were also sensitized to other allergen sources, whereas 9 patients (15%) were only sensitized to allergen sources other than Der p. IgE serology analyses (n=35) showed high IgE-binding frequencies to the Blo t allergens Blo t 5 (43%), Blo t 21 (43%) and Blo t 2 (40%), whereas the Der p allergens rDer p 2, rDer p 21 and rDer p 5 (34%, 29% and 26%) were less frequently recognized. Only few patients showed IgE reactivity to allergens from other allergen sources, except to allergens containing carbohydrate determinants (CCDs) or to wasp venom allergens (i.e., antigen 5).

Conclusion

Our results thus demonstrate that IgE sensitization to mite allergens is very prevalent in asthmatics in Equatorial Africa with B. tropicalis allergen molecules representing the most important ones associated with allergic asthma.