Efficacy of combination treatment with anti-IgE plus specific immunotherapy in polysensitized children and adolescents with seasonal allergic rhinitis

Evolving Paradigms Of Treatment Of Allergic And Non-Allergic Rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a prevalent disease affecting approximately 15% of the US population which is about 50 million individuals. More broadly, it is estimated that 400-500 million people suffer with AR worldwide. Not surprisingly, AR has a significant impact on quality of life (QOL) due to increased fatigue, cognitive impairment, sleep disturbances, presenteeism or absenteeism, impairment of performance leading which all contributed to an increased cost burden to the medical system. Recent studies have identified social determinants of health including income level, age of migration from rural to urban areas or to high-income countries, and access to healthcare as important factors associated with the prevalence of allergic disease. However, up to 25% of individuals suffer from non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) triggered by mechanical, osmotic and chemical irritants and 50% suffer from mixed rhinitis (MR) characterized by allergic and non-allergic triggers. Uncontrolled chronic rhinitis subtypes have all been associated with asthma, eczema, chronic or recurrent sinusitis, cough, and both tension and migraine headaches. This review will address AR and NAR with a focus on evolving treatments in adults.

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.

Therapeutic monoclonal antibodies in allergy: Targeting IgE, cytokine, and alarmin pathways

The etiology of allergy is closely linked to type 2 inflammatory responses ultimately leading to the production of allergen-specific immunoglobulin E (IgE), a key driver of many allergic conditions. At a high level, initial allergen exposure disrupts epithelial integrity, triggering local inflammation via alarmins including IL-25, IL-33, and TSLP, which activate type 2 innate lymphoid cells as well as other immune cells to secrete type 2 cytokines IL-4, IL-5 and IL-13, promoting Th2 cell development and eosinophil recruitment. Th2 cell dependent B cell activation promotes the production of allergen-specific IgE, which stably binds to basophils and mast cells. Rapid degranulation of these cells upon allergen re-exposure leads to allergic symptoms. Recent advances in our understanding of the molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying allergic pathophysiology have significantly shaped the development of therapeutic intervention strategies. In this review, we highlight key therapeutic targets within the allergic cascade with a particular focus on past, current and future treatment approaches using monoclonal antibodies. Specific targeting of alarmins, type 2 cytokines and IgE has shown varying degrees of clinical benefit in different allergic indications including asthma, chronic spontaneous urticaria, atopic dermatitis, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, food allergies and eosinophilic esophagitis. While multiple therapeutic antibodies have been approved for clinical use, scientists are still working on ways to improve on current treatment approaches. Here, we provide context to understand therapeutic targeting strategies and their limitations, discussing both knowledge gaps and promising future directions to enhancing clinical efficacy in allergic disease management.

[Efficacy of biologics for severe asthma on allergic comorbidities]

Identification of therapeutic targets other than asthma can guide the choice of biologics in cases of severe asthma. Some of the allergic diseases (atopic dermatitis, food allergies, allergic rhinoconjunctivitis) that may be associated with asthma can be treated with biologics. In this review, we aim to assess the effectiveness of these biologic therapies on the allergic comorbidities of asthma. In the treatment of atopic dermatitis, only Dupilumab, an anti-IL4Rα, has proven its effectiveness and has received reimbursement authorization for this indication. In patients presenting with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, Omalizumab has shown effectiveness, but has not been approved for this indication. Data from post-hoc analyses of studies on severe asthma likewise suggest the effectiveness of Dupilumab regarding allergic rhinitis. While these two biologic therapies have shown positive signals, inducing oral food tolerance, the relevant data are not robust. Biologic therapies targeting IL-5 or its receptor (Mepolizumab, Benralizumab) have seldom been evaluated in allergic comorbidities, excepting atopic dermatitis, for which their effectiveness has not been proven. Lastly, there are interesting data on the combination of biologic therapy and allergen immunotherapy in cases of allergic rhinitis and food allergies, but they need to be confirmed by randomized studies.

Evaluating the Efficacy of Omalizumab in Severe Cedar Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis in Japan

BACKGROUND

Traditional treatments for cedar seasonal allergic rhinitis include second-generation antihistamines, nasal corticosteroids, and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Omalizumab (Xolair®), an anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) monoclonal antibody, is an additional option for severe cases unresponsive to existing therapies. Numerous studies have demonstrated the therapeutic effectiveness of omalizumab for cedar seasonal allergic rhinitis; however, most reported results after only up to four weeks of follow-up. Therefore, this study evaluates the clinical efficacy of omalizumab throughout one whole cedar pollen season.   Subjects and methods: This study included patients from our department and the Otorhinolaryngology Department of Minami Osaka Hospital between 2021 and 2023 who were ≥ 12 years old and had serum total IgE levels of 30-1,500 IU/mL, a baseline weight of 30-150 kg, and persistent severe nasal symptoms despite conventional treatments. Patients taking oral steroids at the time of enrollment or had fewer than two omalizumab doses were excluded. Forty-six patients (26 males, 20 females; mean age, 19.1 ± 11.2 years) met these criteria and received subcutaneous omalizumab every 2 or 4 weeks based on their IgE levels and weight. Symptoms were assessed at baseline and 4, 8, and 12 weeks post-administration using the Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS) and the Japanese Standard Quality of Life Questionnaire (JRQLQ No. 1) for allergic rhinitis.   Results: Thirty-six patients were followed up for 8 weeks and 13 for 12 weeks. TNSS significantly improved from 6.6 to 4.5 at 4 weeks, 4.2 at 8 weeks, and 4.1 at 12 weeks (p<0.05). Nasal discharge, sneezing, nasal obstruction, itchy eyes, and tearfulness showed significant improvements (p<0.05). Quality of life scores improved in daily activities, sleep, and physical health from week 4 to week 12.   Discussion: Consistent with previous findings, omalizumab significantly improved nasal and ocular symptoms and quality of life in patients with severe cedar seasonal allergic rhinitis. Despite many patients discontinuing the drug after eight weeks due to high costs, the drug's effectiveness in preventing symptom recurrence suggests potential long-term benefits. Combining omalizumab with SLIT showed no significant differences in outcomes; however, further pharmacoeconomic studies are warranted to evaluate cost-effectiveness.   Conclusion: Omalizumab proved to be an effective treatment for severe cedar seasonal allergic rhinitis, providing significant symptom relief and quality of life improvements. Further studies should investigate its long-term efficacy and safety, including potential adverse effects and the development of anti-omalizumab antibodies.

Omalizumab in combination with subcutaneous immunotherapy for the treatment of multiple allergies associated with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a case report and a literature review

We describe the case of a 10-year-old boy with asthma (AS), accompanied by allergic rhinitis (AR), food allergy (FA), and combined attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), who was treated at Shanghai Renji Hospital on 11 July 2020. The efficiency of the previous treatment with salmeterol/ticlosone was poor. Treatment with montelukast sodium resulted in development of neurological symptoms. Treatment with omalizumab in combination with subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) was then initiated in our department based on anti-asthmatic therapy. Symptoms of asthma were completely controlled, and FA and AR symptoms improved. The treatment regimen led to a significant improvement in ADHD symptoms and the overall quality of life of the patient. The literature search was done in the PubMed database using "attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder/ADHD" and "asthma" as keywords, and we identified 47 relevant articles. In conclusion, our results show that treating asthma with omalizumab in combination with salmeterol/ticlosone and SCIT is efficient in controlling symptoms of multiple allergies and may lead to the improvement in ADHD symptoms and the overall quality of life of pediatric patients with ADHD. While current studies suggest that allergic diseases are closely related to ADHD, there is still a lack of studies or case reports of complete treatment protocols to provide clinical clues for management of the disease.

Progressive clinical effects of the combination omalizumab and HDM - allergen immunotherapy in asthma

OBJECTIVE

The combination of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) and omalizumab is used to treat patients at risk of anaphylaxis. There is currently a very little evidence that this combination increases the effectiveness of AIT in patients with inhalant allergies. The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of HDM-SCIT therapy (injection immunotherapy for house dust mites) in combination with omalizumab in treating HDM-induced asthma.

METHODS

This study was a placebo-controlled, randomized, multicenter trial including 82 patients with HDM-driven mild to moderate asthma. Omalizumab alone (A), HDM SCIT + omalizumab (B), SCIT alone (C), or placebo (D) for 24 months were applied. All patients received asthma treatment in accordance with GINA recommendations. The treatment efficacy was defined by a reduction in the daily dose of inhaled steroids (ICS) and a reduction in the number of asthma exacerbations (AX).

RESULTS

After 24 months of therapy, a statistically significant reduction in the daily doses of ICS in groups A and B was observed (p = 0.021 and p = 0.008). Daily ICS reduction was considerably more significant in group B (p = 0.01). During 24 months of observation, the AX was significantly reduced in all study groups, with the greatest significant difference observed between groups A and B and groups C and D (placebo) as follows: 0.42 patient/per year vs. 0.39 vs. 0.84 vs. 0.91 (p = 0.023).

CONCLUSION

The combination of HDM SCIT and omalizumab is significantly and progressively reducing ICS use and AX in a 24-month study. The combination is significantly more effective than the single treatments or placebo.

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.

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.

Novel, computational IgE-clustering in a population-based cross-sectional study: Mapping the allergy burden

BACKGROUND

Even though the prevalence of allergies is increasing, population-based data are still scarce. As a read-out for chronic inflammatory information, new methods are needed to integrate individual biological measurements and lifestyle parameters to mitigate the consequences and costs of allergic burden for society.

METHODS

More than 480.000 data points were collected from 1462 Luxembourg adults during the representative, cross-sectional European Health Examination Survey, spanning health and lifestyle reports. Deep IgE-profiles based on unsupervised clustering were correlated with data of the health survey.

FINDINGS

42.6% of the participants reported a physician-diagnosed allergy and 44% were found to be IgE-positive to at least one allergen or extract. The main sensitization sources were tree pollens followed by grass pollens and mites (52.4%, 51.8% and 40.3% of sensitized participants respectively), suggesting seasonal as well as perennial burden. The youngest group of participants (25-34 years old) showed the highest burden of sensitization, with 18.2% of them having IgE to 10 or more allergen groups. Unsupervised clustering revealed that the biggest cluster of 24.4% of participants was also the one with the highest medical need, marked by their multi-sensitization to respiratory sources.

INTERPRETATION

Our novel approach to analyzing large biosample datasets together with health information allows the measurement of the chronic inflammatory disease burden in the general population and led to the identification of the most vulnerable groups in need of better medical care.

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.

Knowledge mapping of immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: a bibliometric study (2002-2021)

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC) is a common chronic inflammatory disease. Numerous studies on the treatment of ARC have been published. By contrast, there are few bibliometric studies on immunotherapy for ARC. The purpose of this article is to describe the current treatments for ARC and to identify the trends in immunotherapy for ARC.

METHODS

Publications were searched from the Web of Science (WOS) Core Collection on April 25, 2022. CiteSpace and Microsoft Excel software were used for further bibliometric analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 969 publications on immunotherapy for ARC in English were retrieved. The number of relevant publications has been continuously increasing over the past 20 years, with many of the publications coming from Germany and the United States of America. In terms of institutions, the ALK Company in Denmark, Imperial College London in United Kingdom, and Charite-Universitatsmedizin Berlin in Germany published the most articles on immunotherapy for ARC. Meanwhile, Allergy and Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology published the most number of studies, and Oliver Pfaar from Germany authored the most number of articles. "Subcutaneous immunotherapy," "international consensus," "allergen immunotherapy," and "recommendation" were the most popular subjects. Thus, directions in research can be predicted as studies regarding mechanisms of ARC, clinical trials, and extracts have reported high-quality results.

CONCLUSION

Over the past 20 years, the overall quality of research on immunotherapy for ARC has gradually improved, allowing the introduction of specific and targeted treatment. Currently, the main focus of ARC research is the novel routes of drug delivery and combined treatment with biological agents.

Uncontrolled severe T2 asthma: Which biological to choose? A biomarker-based approach

In recent years, advances in knowledge of molecular mechanisms involved in asthma have changed uncontrolled severe asthma (USA) treatment, with the appearance of biological treatment. USA is a heterogeneous entity with different endotypes and phenotypes. Nowadays, the biological drugs approved with asthma indication are omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab and dupilumab. Tezepelumab is approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States and, recently, by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). All these biological drugs have shown their efficacy in clinical trials, especially in reducing exacerbations, improving asthma control, quality of life, pulmonary function, and withdrawing systemic corticosteroids or at least reducing their daily dose, with some differences between them. Except for mepolizumab and reslizumab, biological drugs have different targets and thus different therapeutic indications should be expected; however, in some patients, more than one drug could be indicated, making the election more difficult. Because there are no direct comparisons between biological drugs, some biomarkers are used to choose between them, but they are not unbeatable. In this article, an algorithm to choose the first biological drug in a specific patient is proposed based on different study results and patient' characteristics.

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.

Biologics as novel therapeutics for the treatment of allergy: Challenges and opportunities

Over the last 4 decades there has been a significant global increase in the incidence and prevalence of IgE-mediated allergy. Although much progress has been made in the management of allergy via patient education, pharmacotherapy and immunomodulatory treatment regimens, significant unmet need remains. Advancements in our knowledge base surrounding the type 2 immune response, production of IgE and maintenance of immunological memory has led the field to explore targeted intervention of allergic pathways using monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). Intervention at various stages of the allergic cascade offers the opportunity to prevent initiation and/or maintenance of the type 2 immune response and effectively provide therapeutic benefit to patients. Furthermore, a better understanding of the protective mechanisms involved in allergen specific immunotherapy (AIT) has led us to appreciate the interplay of immunoglobulins in the allergic response, specifically the benefit in shifting the IgG:IgE ratio in favor of functionally relevant blocking IgG. Thus, treatments that lower IgE or boost IgG with the ability to outcompete IgE binding to allergen also present a favorable approach in the treatment of allergy. In this short review we discuss and highlight recent advances in the use of biologics to treat severe allergy, highlighting the key challenges but also the significant opportunities and advances to date.

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.

Comparing available treatments for pollen-induced allergic rhinitis in children

INTRODUCTION

Pollen-induced allergic rhinitis (PIAR) is a widespread disease in children, and its prevalence is rapidly evolving. In addition, it may be associated with other atopic diseases, in particular asthma. In most cases, PIAR can be treated effectively by avoiding exposure to responsible allergens and using symptomatic treatments, including intranasal/oral antihistamines or/and nasal corticosteroids, according to ARIA guidelines. In recent decades, new medicines have been studied and developed: allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT), anti-IgE antibodies, and probiotics. In addition, nutraceuticals have also been used as add-on treatments. This review aims to discuss and compare the old and new therapeutic strategies for PIAR in children.

AREAS COVERED

Allergic rhinitis is a type 2 inflammatory disease. The management of patients with PIAR entails medications, AIT, and ancillary therapies. In addition, children with PIAR and associated severe asthma may be inclusively treated with biologics. Namely, subjects with allergic comorbidities could benefit from biological agents. However, AIT presently remains the unique causal treatment for PIAR.

EXPERT OPINION

New strategies may include combined treatments, mainly concerning fixed associations with antihistamines and corticosteroids, nutraceutical products, and new AIT formulations.

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.

Allergic Rhinitis in Childhood and the New EUFOREA Algorithm

Allergic rhinitis in childhood has been often missed, mistreated and misunderstood. It has significant comorbidities, adverse effects upon quality of life and educational performance and can progress to asthma or worsen control of existing asthma. Accurate diagnosis and effective treatment are important. The new EUFOREA algorithm provides a succinct but wide- ranging guide to management at all levels, based on previous guidelines with updated evidence and has been adjusted and approved by experts worldwide.

Omalizumab for the Treatment of Bullous Pemphigoid: A Systematic Review of Efficacy and Safety

Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is an autoimmune blistering skin disease. Current treatment strategies are limited by their efficacy and/or side effect profile and the need for safer and effective alternatives is undeniable. We aimed to conduct a systematic review focusing on the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in BP patients. Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched for English and French articles published from inception to July 1, 2021, using search terms "omalizumab" OR "Xolair" OR "IGE025" OR "olizumab" AND "bullous pemphigoid." Screening and data extraction was performed by two raters independently. The primary outcome was complete response (CR), and secondary outcomes were partial response (PR), flare-ups, adverse events/vital status. In total, 22 articles were included, with a total of 56 patients. All patients had a refractory BP with mean disease duration of 13.5 ± 20.2 months (Standard Deviation (SD)) and failed 3.1 ± 1.6 therapies and many remained corticosteroids dependent. Overall, 87.5% of patients responded to treatment (55.4% CR and 32.1% PR), 7.1% discontinued the protocol and only 5.4% were non responders. A third of patients were able to discontinue all other therapies and most others were able to discontinue or taper systemic corticosteroids to <10 mg daily. Flare-ups occurred in 57.7% of patients upon discontinuation of omalizumab and/or steroid tapering, most patients recaptured response thereafter. Omalizumab was well tolerated by most patients. Omalizumab appears to be a promising treatment for BP with a good response rate and safety profile. However, several limitations were identified in current literature, and highlight the need for randomized controlled trials of omalizumab in BP.

Early priming of asthma and respiratory allergies: Future aspects of prevention: A statement by the European Forum for Education and Research in Allergy and Airway Disease (EUFOREA) and the EAACI-Clemens von Pirquet Foundation

In order to summarize recent research on the prevention of allergies-particularly asthma-and stimulate new activities for future initiatives, a virtual workshop sponsored by the EAACI Clemens von Pirquet foundation and EUFOREA was held in October 2021. The determinants of the "allergic march" as well as the key messages from intervention studies were reviewed by an international faculty of experts. Several unmet needs were identified, and a number of priorities for future studies were proposed.

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.

Visual analysis of allergic rhinitis in children based on web of science and CiteSpace software

BACKGROUND

In recent years, Allergic Rhinitis (AR) in children has caused widespread public concern. However, there are few studies concerning the overall trends in AR research in children based on bibliometric analysis.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to explore hotspots and emerging trends in AR in children.

METHODS

The relevant publications were searched for in the Web of Science (WOS) Core Collection on December 31, 2021. The searched studies were exported to CiteSpace and Microsoft Excel for further visualized analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 649 articles were included. The number of publications related to AR in children has increased steadily in the last 20 years. Giorgio Ciprandi from Italy has the most articles and the leading countries were China and the USA. Guangzhou Medical University in China and Hallym University in Korea were the institutions with the most articles. The high-frequency keywords included AR, asthma, children, prevalence, and symptoms. Pathogenesis, comorbidity, epidemiology, symptoms, and therapy of AR in children are research hotspots.

CONCLUSION

Over the past 20 years, research on AR in children has gradually improved. Visualization analysis indicates that pathogenesis, comorbidity, epidemiology, symptoms, and therapy are research hotspots, and immunotherapy and severity are probably the main research directions.

Efficacy and Safety of Omalizumab for the Treatment of Severe or Poorly Controlled Allergic Diseases in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in the treatment of severe or uncontrolled allergic diseases in children.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of the PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and clinicaltrials.gov databases up to 23rd July 2021, with no language limitations. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing omalizumab with other treatments or placebo in children with severe or inadequately controlled allergic diseases were considered. The primary outcomes of interest were asthma exacerbation rate, allergic symptom score, desensitisation achievement for food allergy (FA), and incidence of serious adverse events (SAEs). The study selection and data extraction were conducted independently by two researchers. Quality assessments were conducted using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool, and data were pooled using a random-effects model if I ² was 50% or greater in the Cochrane Review Manager.

RESULTS

Overall, 10 RCTs [six on severe asthma, one on atopic dermatitis (AD), one on seasonal allergic rhinitis [SAR], and one on FA] consisting of 2,376 participants met the inclusion criteria. For severe asthma, omalizumab may reduce exacerbations at 12 weeks [risk ratio (RR), 0.52; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.31-0.89], 24 weeks (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.55-0.85; GRADE: moderate-quality evidence), and 52 weeks (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.40-0.94; GRADE: moderate-quality evidence) and reduce the dose of inhalation corticosteroid compared with placebo. For severe AD, the association between omalizumab and allergic symptom improvement [i.e., SCORing Atopic Dermatitis or Paediatric Allergic Disease Quality of Life Questionnaire (PADQLQ)] was not confirmed. For severe SAR, omalizumab showed greater improvement in symptom load scores and saved rescue medication days. For FA, omalizumab demonstrated superiority in desensitisation compared with placebo. To date, no clinically significant drug-related SAEs have been reported.

CONCLUSION

For severe or uncontrolled asthma, AD, SAR, and FA, omalizumab may be associated with improved allergic symptoms and safety in children. Future studies should focus on the benefits and pharmacoeconomic evaluation of omalizumab in multiple allergic diseases compared with other treatments.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO], identifier [CRD42021271863].

Acupressure in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis: a randomized controlled exploratory trial

BACKGROUND

Acupuncture has shown beneficial effects for seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR); however, it is time and cost intensive. We investigated feasibility and effects of self-administered body acupressure as a self-care technique that stimulates acupuncture points with manual pressure in SAR patients.

METHODS

We conducted a two-armed randomized controlled exploratory trial to compare effects of self-administered acupressure over 4 weeks at five acupuncture points plus rescue medication (RM) with cetirizine compared to RM alone in SAR patients. Among other outcome parameters, we assessed disease-related quality of life (Rhinitis Quality of Life Questionnaire [RQLQ]), overall SAR symptoms by a visual analogue scale (VAS) and a rescue medication score (RMS) after 4 and 8 weeks.

RESULTS

Forty-one SAR patients (mean age 38.5 ± 10.0 years, n = 21, 51.2% women) were randomized. Compared to RM alone (n = 21), acupressure plus RM (n = 20) was associated with relevant improvements after 4 weeks, shown by the difference between groups in adjusted means of RQLQ: - 0.9 points (95% CI - 1.6 to - 0.2; p = 0.011) and VAS overall SAR symptoms: - 21.6 mm (95% CI - 36.3 to - 6.8; p = 0.005). The RMS was lower in the acupressure group than in the control group: 1.9 points (95% CI - 3.8 to - 0.1; p = 0.120). Group differences decreased slightly until week 8. The acupressure was feasible and safe.

CONCLUSION

Results of this exploratory study indicate that self-applied acupressure is feasible, may improve disease-specific quality of life and reduce disease-related symptoms as well as anti-allergic medication intake in SAR patients. High-quality confirmatory studies including a sham-control group are needed in the future. Trial registration DRKS-ID: DRKS00014310. Date of registration in DRKS: 2018/04/24. Investigator sponsored/initiated trial (IST/IIT): yes. Ethics approval/approval of the ethics committee: Approved (leading) Ethics Committee No. EA1/033/18, Ethik-Kommission der Charité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin. URL: https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00014310.

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.

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.

Biologics in Otolaryngology: Past, Present, and Future

Biologics have been widely adopted in multiple subspecialties of otolaryngology. This article provides an overview of past, present, and future uses of biologics in otolaryngology with emphasis on allergic rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis with polyposis, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, salivary and skull base tumors, hearing loss, and other otologic disorders.

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.

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.

Effectiveness and Response Predictors of Omalizumab in Treating Patients with Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis: A Real-World Study

Background

Omalizumab has been proven effective and safety in treating seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) by several randomized clinical trials in many countries. However, there is lack of clinical reports of Chinese patients with SAR treated by omalizumab.

Objective

In the present real-world-designed study, we aimed to investigate the effectiveness of omalizumab in treating patients with SAR.

Methods

SAR patients administered omalizumab in various dosages were recruited, and follow-up was done. Their quality of life (QOL) and symptoms were assessed by the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ), Total Nasal Symptoms Score (TNSS), Asthma Control Test (ACT), and clinical outcomes were compared between post- and pre-treatment conditions.

Results

Sixty SAR patients received omalizumab therapy in the study (mean age 35.47±17.02 years, 35 females). Omalizumab treatment significantly improved the quality of life (change in RQLQ overall score: -2.08±1.01, paired t-test p<0.001) and nasal symptoms (change in TNSS: -7.33±2.50, paired t-test p<0.001) of SAR patients. In 21 patients with co-existing asthma, the ACT score significantly increased from 16.10 to 22.57 on average (paired t-test p<0.001), indicating better-controlled asthma. Using a threshold of ≥1 point improvement in RQLQ overall score, 83.3% of patients responded to omalizumab. The responder group had a higher baseline RQLQ score and TNSS (p<0.05), but both responders and non-responders had comparable scores after treatment. Multiple linear regression analysis identified the baseline RQLQ overall score as a predictor of change in the RQLQ score in omalizumab-treated SAR.

Conclusion

Omalizumab is effective and safe in SAR treatment in a real-world setting.

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.

Infectious Complications of Biological and Small Molecule Targeted Immunomodulatory Therapies

The past 2 decades have seen a revolution in our approach to therapeutic immunosuppression. We have moved from relying on broadly active traditional medications, such as prednisolone or methotrexate, toward more specific agents that often target a single receptor, cytokine, or cell type, using monoclonal antibodies, fusion proteins, or targeted small molecules. This change has transformed the treatment of many conditions, including rheumatoid arthritis, cancers, asthma, and inflammatory bowel disease, but along with the benefits have come risks. Contrary to the hope that these more specific agents would have minimal and predictable infectious sequelae, infectious complications have emerged as a major stumbling block for many of these agents. Furthermore, the growing number and complexity of available biologic agents makes it difficult for clinicians to maintain current knowledge, and most review articles focus on a particular target disease or class of agent. In this article, we review the current state of knowledge about infectious complications of biologic and small molecule immunomodulatory agents, aiming to create a single resource relevant to a broad range of clinicians and researchers. For each of 19 classes of agent, we discuss the mechanism of action, the risk and types of infectious complications, and recommendations for prevention of infection.

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.

Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Omalizumab in the Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Background

Patients with moderate to severe allergic rhinitis (AR) who are treated according to the current rhinitis management guidelines may be inadequately controlled. These patients are at risk of serious comorbidities, such as asthma and chronic sinusitis. These symptoms, sneezing and an itchy, runny, stuffy nose, may have a negative impact on patients’ daily functioning. Omalizumab is being developed as a new choice for the treatment of AR. We therefore undertook a meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in the treatment of AR.

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and MEDLINE databases for randomized controlled studies on the treatment of AR with omalizumab. Our evaluation outcomes were symptom scores, medication efficacy, combined symptom and medication scores, and adverse events. We descriptively summarized and quantitatively synthesized original data to evaluate the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in the treatment of AR by using Stata12.0 software for meta-analyses.

Results

The results of our meta-analysis showed that there were statistically significant differences between the omalizumab group and the control group in the following aspects: daily nasal symptom score (standardized mean difference [SMD] = –0.443, 95% confidence interval [CI]: –0.538 to –0.347, P < .001); daily ocular symptom score (SMD = –0.385, 95% CI: –0.5 to –0.269, P < .001); daily nasal medication symptom scores (SMD = –0.421, 95% CI: –0.591 to –0.251, P < .001); proportion of days of emergency drug use (risk ratio [RR] = 0.488, 95% CI: 0.307 to 0.788, P < .005); rhinoconjunctivitis-specific quality of life questionnaire (SMD = –0.286, 95% CI: –0.418 to –0.154, P < .001); and overall evaluation (RR = 1.435, 95% CI: 1.303–1.582, P < .001). There was no statistically significant difference in safety indicator: adverse events (RR = 1.026, 95% CI: 0.916–1.150, P = .655).

Conclusion

Omalizumab is effective and relatively safe in patients with AR; omalizumab used in conjunction with special immunotherapy has shown promising results, especially in reducing adverse events.

The use of biologics in children with allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis: Current updates

The therapeutic goals of the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) are symptom relief, avoiding complications, and improving quality of life. In the treatment of AR and CRS, several limitations of currently prescribed medicines have been identified. Antihistamine administration (both oral and topical) together with intranasal corticosteroids bring relief to the majority of patients, but their dependency on the medications and a necessity to maintain strict compliance with regular medication regimes pose a challenge. Immunotherapeutic agents are an option in some patients, but polysensitized patients, the risk of anaphylaxis, and the need for daily administration for years are limiting it from becoming the main therapy modality. Immunotherapy in any form requires commitment by the patient, which renders adherence and compliance issues particularly relevant. The procedure involved are generally time-consuming and entail an associated risk of severe adverse reactions. The use of biologics could overcome the limitations of other therapeutic modalities. They could be used as a monotherapy or combined with pre-existing medications. The benefits of targeted therapy include less adverse effects and optimal efficacy. The aim of the present review was to investigate the collective literature to date pertaining to the role of biologics in managing children with AR and CRS.

Allergen immunotherapy as add-on to biologic agents

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this review, we sought to outline many of the recent evidences about the available clinical trials in which biologic agents [i.e. omalizumab (OMA)] were associated as add-on to allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT).

RECENT FINDINGS

The available literature shows that OMA may be a valuable option as add-on to AIT for respiratory allergy, or food desensitization, especially in the escalation or build-up phases, in which adverse events are more commonly expected. The encouraging data for hymenoptera venom allergy remain limited to case reports, and no structured clinical trial is available.

SUMMARY

Over the past decade, studies of OMA used with AIT have shown promising results. Today, big randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials are needed to better select those patients who would benefit from the addition of OMA (or other biologic agents) to AIT, as well as optimal dosing schedules, optimal duration of treatments and, finally, adequate evaluation about pharmacoeconomic aspects.

Novel therapeutic targets for allergic airway disease in children

The aim of precision medicine is setting up targeted therapies for selected patients that would ideally have high effectiveness and few side effects. This is made possible by targeted therapy drugs that selectively act on a specific pathway. Precision medicine is spreading to many medical specialties, and there is increasing interest in the context of allergic airway diseases, such as allergic rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, and asthma. This review is an update of new targets in the treatment of childhood allergic upper airway diseases and asthma, including the most recent biologic drugs that have already been licensed or are in the pipeline to be tested with children.

An External CAM Therapy (Tian Jiu) versus Placebo in Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis: A Pilot Single-Blinded, Three-Arm, Randomized Controlled Study

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is one of the common allergic diseases in clinical practice and significantly impairs the quality of life (QoL) of patients. The conventional treatments are not satisfactory because of various reasons. Tian Jiu (TJ) therapy is a characteristic external intervention of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and has been widely utilized in the management of AR. However, the evidences resulted from current studies were generally poor due to high risk of bias. Therefore, we conducted this rigorous designed, single-blinded, three-arm, randomized controlled study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TJ therapy on AR. Totally 138 AR patients were enrolled. The TJ group and placebo group received 4-week treatment with either TJ or placebo patches for 2 hours each time applied to Dazhui (GV 14), bilateral Feishu (UB 13), and bilateral Shenshu (UB 23) one session per week and then underwent a 4-week follow-up. The waitlist group received no treatment during the corresponding treatment period, but would be given compensatory TJ treatment in the next 4 weeks. The primary outcome was the change of the Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS) after treatment. The secondary outcomes included the changes of Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) and rescue medication score (RMS). After treatment, the total TNSS in TJ group was significantly reduced compared with baseline, but showed no statistical meaning compared with placebo. Among the four domains of TNSS, the change of nasal obstruction exhibited statistical difference compared with placebo group. The total RQLQ score in TJ group was significantly reduced compared with both placebo and waitlist groups. The needs of rescue medications were no distinct difference between two groups. In summary, this study showed potential effectiveness of TJ therapy in improving nasal obstruction symptoms and QoL of AR patients.

Current Strategies to Inhibit High Affinity FcεRI-Mediated Signaling for the Treatment of Allergic Disease

Allergies and asthma are a major cause of chronic disease whose prevalence has been on the rise. Allergic disease including seasonal rhinitis, atopic dermatitis, urticaria, anaphylaxis, and asthma, are associated with activation of tissue-resident mast cells and circulating basophils. Although these cells can be activated in different ways, allergic reactions are normally associated with the crosslinking of the high affinity Fc receptor for Immunoglobulin E, FcεRI, with multivalent antigen. Inflammatory mediators released from cytoplasmic granules, or biosynthesized de novo, following FcεRI crosslinking induce immediate hypersensitivity reactions, including life-threatening anaphylaxis, and contribute to prolonged inflammation leading to chronic diseases like asthma. Thus, inappropriate or unregulated activation of mast cells and basophils through antigenic crosslinking of FcεRI can have deleterious, sometimes deadly, consequences. Accordingly, FcεRI has emerged as a viable target for the development of biologics that act to inhibit or attenuate the activation of mast cells and basophils. At the forefront of these strategies are (1) Anti-IgE monoclonal antibody, namely omalizumab, which has the secondary effect of reducing FcεRI surface expression, (2) Designed Ankyrin Repeat Proteins (DARPins), which take advantage of the most common structural motifs in nature involved in protein-protein interactions, to inhibit FcεRI-IgE interactions, and (3) Fusion proteins to co-aggregate FcεRI with the inhibitory FcγRIIb. This review presents the published research studies that support omalizumab, DARPins, and fusion proteins as, arguably, the three most currently viable strategies for inhibiting the expression and activation of the high affinity FcεRI on mast cells and basophils.