Clinically relevant outcome measures for new pharmacotherapy, allergen avoidance and immunotherapy trials in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

Real-World Study of Ragweed Sublingual Immunotherapy in Hungary

BACKGROUND

Ragweed (Ambrosia elatior) has become invasive in Europe, causing significant respiratory issues. Subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT) has long been used to manage pollen allergies, but sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has gained interest.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the clinical benefits of ragweed SLIT under real-world in a cohort of Hungarian patients allergic to ragweed pollen.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of 57 patients during the 2015 and 2016 ragweed pollen seasons. Patients were divided into two groups: Group 1 (n = 29), who had not received immunotherapy, and Group 2 (n = 28), who had previously undergone immunotherapy with another sublingual preparation. All patients were treated with Oraltek® ragweed for 4-6 months, initiating 2-4 months before the pollen season and rest of the period was 2 months of the 2016 pollen season. Symptom score (SS), medication score (MS), and combined symptom and medication score (CSMS) were evaluated intra- and intergroup.

RESULTS

Pollen counts were consistent between 2015 and 2016. All patients showed significant improvement in SS, MS, and CSMS, with a large effect size (>0.8). Group 2 had significantly lower SS and CSMS in 2015 because of prior immunotherapy. By 2016, both groups exhibited marked improvements, with Group 1 showing a 75% improvement in CSMS. No local or systemic reactions were recorded, indicating a high safety profile.

CONCLUSIONS

Ragweed SLIT significantly improved symptoms and reduced use of medication in patients allergic to ragweed pollen. The treatment was effective even in patients with previous immunotherapy, with a high benefit-risk ratio demonstrated by the absence of adverse reactions. These findings support the use of Oraltek SLIT for managing ragweed pollen allergy.

A high-dose, depigmented polymerized birch pollen extract for subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy has a favourable efficacy/safety ratio

BACKGROUND

Subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT) with depigmented, polymerized (DPP) birch pollen extract has been marketed at doses of up to 1000 DPP units/mL since 2001. We sought to determine the dose-dependent efficacy of a DPP birch pollen extract formulation in patients suffering from birch-pollen-induced allergic rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis with or without intermittent asthma.

METHODS

A titrated conjunctival provocation test (CPT) was applied as a surrogate marker. This Phase II randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, dose-ranging clinical trial was performed at 39 centres in Germany, Lithuania and Poland. After randomization to four dose-level groups (100, 1000, 5000 and 10,000 DPP units/mL) and up-dosing, participants received maintenance SCIT with five monthly subcutaneous injections. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients in whom a higher concentration of birch pollen (vs. baseline) was needed to elicit a positive CPT.

RESULTS

Three hundred forty-three patients were included (mean (range) age: 42.6 (19-70)). The highest CPT responder rates were seen in the higher dose-level groups. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the difference between the 100 and 10,000 groups was statistically significant (p = 0.0118). Although the proportion of patients with ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse events increased with the dose, almost all these events were mild (65.6%) or moderate (18.5%).

CONCLUSION

Judging by the results of a CPT, the efficacy/safety ratio in SCIT appears to be favourable for a high-dose-level preparation of a DPP birch pollen extract.

Visual analogue scales (VAS): Measuring instruments for the documentation of symptoms and therapy monitoring in cases of allergic rhinitis in everyday health care: Position Paper of the German Society of Allergology (AeDA) and the German Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI), ENT Section, in collaboration with the working group on Clinical Immunology, Allergology and Environmental Medicine of the German Society of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery (DGHNOKHC)

BACKROUND

Visual analogue scales (VAS) are psychometric measuring instruments designed to document the characteristics of disease-related symptom severity in individual patients and use this to achieve a rapid (statistically measurable and reproducible) classification of symptom severity and disease control. VAS can also be used in routine patient history taking and to monitor the course of a chronic disease such as allergic rhinitis (AR). More specifically, the VAS has been used to assess effectiveness of AR therapy in real life, both in intermittent and persistent disease.

METHODS

This position paper takes a detailed look at the historical development of VAS and its method-specific principles. Particular focus is put on aspects of practical application in daily routine and on a critical discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of the individual methods.

RESULTS

VAS are well validated for the measurement of AR symptoms and correlate well with the ARIA (allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma) severity classification and also correlated well with rTNSS and RQLQ. Moreover, several treatment studies on AR have used VAS as an evaluation parameter. Thanks to the use of new (real-life and real-time) communication technologies, such as smartphone apps, Discussion: VAS can be used relatively simply and highly effectively to assess disease control. The VAS lends itself very well to digitization and has now been incorporated into a smartphone app (called Allergy Diary) to assess AR control and direct treatment decisions as part of an AR clinical decision support system (CDSS). MASK Rhinitis has developed this app, which is currently available in 15 different languages.

Comparison of six disease severity scores for allergic rhinitis against pollen counts a prospective analysis at population and individual level

BACKGROUND

Many different symptom (medication) scores are nowadays used as measures of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis severity in individual patients and in clinical trials. Their differences contribute to the heterogeneity of the primary end-point in meta-analyses, so that calls for symptom (medication) score harmonization have been launched.

OBJECTIVE

To prospectively compare six different severity scores for allergic rhinitis (AR) against pollen counts at both population and individual levels.

METHODS

Two groups of children with seasonal AR and grass pollen sensitization were recruited in Ascoli, Italy (n = 76) and Berlin, Germany (n = 29). Symptoms and drug intake were monitored daily for 40 and 30 days of the grass pollen season in 2011 (Ascoli) and 2013 (Berlin), respectively, through an Internet-based platform (AllergyMonitor(™) , TPS Production srl, Rome, Italy). From the gathered data, the informatics platform automatically generated one symptom score (RTSS) and five symptom-medication scores (RC-ACS(©) , ACS, RTSS[LOCF], RTSS[WC] and AdSS). Values were then statistically normalized for reciprocal comparison and matched against the daily variations of local grass pollen counts (Spearman's rank correlation).

RESULTS

The grass pollen counts were higher in Ascoli than in Berlin (peak values 194 vs. 59 grains/m(3) ). At population level, the trajectories of the normalized average values of the six scores differed only slightly in both studies and correlated well with the pollen counts (ranges r(2) : 0.38-0.50 in Ascoli, 0.41-0.56 in Berlin). By contrast, in individual patients, trajectories of different scores were often quite heterogeneous. The RTSS[WC] had a very low discriminatory power and generated in many patients long, flat horizontal segments.

CONCLUSIONS

Disease severity scores for seasonal AR, as evaluated via an Internet-based platform, tend to provide similar results at population level but can often produce heterogeneous slopes in individual patients. The choice of the disease severity score might have only a low impact on the outcome of a very large clinical trial, but it may be crucial in the management of individual patients.