House dust mite sublingual immunotherapy is safe and appears to be effective in moderate, persistent asthma

Impact of liquid sublingual immunotherapy on asthma onset and progression in patients with allergic rhinitis: a nationwide population-based study (EfficAPSI study)

Background

The only disease-modifying treatment currently available for allergic rhinitis (AR) is allergen immunotherapy (AIT). The main objective of the EfficAPSI real-world study (RWS) was to evaluate the impact of liquid sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT-liquid) on asthma onset and evolution in AR patients.

Methods

An analysis with propensity score weighting was performed using the EfficAPSI cohort, comparing patients dispensed SLIT-liquid with patients dispensed AR symptomatic medication with no history of AIT (controls). Index date corresponded to the first dispensation of either treatment. The sensitive definition of asthma event considered the first asthma drug dispensation, hospitalisation or long-term disease (LTD) for asthma, the specific one omitted drug dispensation and the combined one considered omalizumab or three ICS ± LABA dispensation, hospitalisation or LTD. In patients with pre-existing asthma, the GINA treatment step-up evolution was analysed.

Findings

In this cohort including 112,492 SLIT-liquid and 333,082 controls, SLIT-liquid exposure was associated with a significant lower risk of asthma onset vs. control, according to all definitions (combined: HR [95% CI] = 0.62 [0.60-0.63], sensitive: 0.77 [0.76-0.78], and specific: 0.67 [0.61-0.72]). Exposure to SLIT was associated with a one-third reduction in GINA step-up regardless baseline steps.

Interpretation

In this national RWS with the largest number of person-years of follow-up to date in the field of AIT, SLIT-liquid was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of asthma onset or worsening. The use of three definitions (sensitive or specific) and GINA step-up reinforced the rigorous methodology, substantiating SLIT-liquid evidence as a causal treatment option for patients with respiratory allergies.

Funding

Stallergenes Greer.

Long-term efficacy of house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy on clinical and pulmonary function in patients with asthma and allergic rhinitis

Background

A previous study reported that house dust mite (HDM) sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for 48 weeks was effective as add-on treatment for allergic asthma; however, data regarding its long-term efficacy are scarce.

Objective

We sought to evaluate the effect of HDM SLIT on asthma control, pulmonary function, and airway inflammation and remodeling throughout the 5-year treatment period.

Methods

A total of 140 patients with asthma and allergic rhinitis sensitized to HDM were randomized to receive either drugs alone or drugs plus SLIT for 5 years. The 5-item Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-5), Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ), Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ), spirometry, quantitative computed tomography, and type 2 biomarkers were assessed.

Results

An improvement in the ACQ-5, AQLQ, and RQLQ scores was observed in the SLIT group compared with the control group. HDM SLIT increased lung function and reduced the percentage of airway wall area. The levels of fractional exhaled nitric oxide (Feno), blood eosinophil, serum specific IgE for HDM, and total IgE decreased and were sustained during the 5 years. The change in type 2 biomarkers correlated with change in the AQLQ score. On the basis of receiver-operating characteristic analysis for predicting responders, the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve in FEV1% predicted, airway wall area, Feno, and specific IgE was high. Multivariate regression analysis showed that the strongest predictor of responders was Feno.

Conclusions

HDM SLIT continued to provide sustained efficacy, improve lung function, and prevent progression of airway inflammation and remodeling in asthma throughout the 5-year treatment period.

House dust mite SCIT reduces asthma risk and significantly improves long-term rhinitis and asthma control-A RWE study

BACKGROUND

The German Therapy Allergen Ordinance (TAO) triggered an ongoing upheaval in the market for house dust mite (HDM) allergen immunotherapy (AIT) products. Three HDM subcutaneous AIT (SCIT) products hold approval in Germany and therefore will be available after the scheduled completion of the TAO procedure in 2026. In general, data from clinical trials on the long-term effectiveness of HDM AIT are rare. We evaluated real-world data (RWD) in a retrospective, observational cohort study based on a longitudinal claims database including 60% of all German statutory healthcare prescriptions to show the long-term effectiveness of one of these products in daily life. Aim of this analysis was to provide a per product analysis on effectiveness of mite AIT as it is demanded by international guidelines on AIT.

METHODS

Subjects between 5 and 70 years receiving their first (index) prescription of SCIT with a native HDM product (SCIT group) between 2009 and 2013 were included. The exactly 3:1 matched control group received prescriptions for only symptomatic AR medication (non-AIT group); the evaluation period for up to 6 years of follow-up ended in February 2017. Study endpoints were the progression of allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma, asthma occurrence and time to the onset of asthma after at least 2 treatment years.

RESULTS

In total, 892 subjects (608 adults and 284 children/adolescents) were included in the SCIT group and 2676 subjects (1824 adults and 852 children/adolescents) in the non-AIT group. During the follow-up period after at least 2 years of SCIT, the number of prescriptions in the SCIT group was reduced by 62.8% (p < .0001) for AR medication and by 42.4% for asthma medication (p = .0003). New-onset asthma risk was significantly reduced in the SCIT vs non-AIT group by 27.0% (p = .0212). The asthma-preventive effect of SCIT occurred 15 months after start of the treatment. In the SCIT group, the time to onset of asthma was prolonged compared to the non-AIT group (p = .0010).

CONCLUSION

In this first product based RWD analysis on SCIT with a native HDM product, patients aged 5 to 70 years benefited from AIT in the long term in terms of reduced progression of AR and asthma after at least 2 years of treatment. The effects seemed to last for up to 6 years after treatment termination. A significantly reduced risk of asthma onset was observed, starting after 15 months of treatment.

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.

Allergen immunotherapy in China

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is an etiological treatment strategy that involves administering escalating doses of clinically relevant allergens to desensitize the immune system. It has shown encouraging results in reducing allergy symptoms and enhancing patients' quality of life. In this review, we offer a thorough overview of AIT in China, examining its efficacy, safety, current practices, and prospects. We further underscore the progress made in AIT research and clinical applications, as well as the distinct challenges and opportunities that China faces in this area.

Standardization of clinical outcomes used in allergen immunotherapy in allergic asthma: An EAACI position paper

INTRODUCTION

In allergic asthma patients, one of the more common phenotypes might benefit from allergen immunotherapy (AIT) as add-on intervention to pharmacological treatment. AIT is a treatment with disease-modifying modalities, the evidence for efficacy is based on controlled clinical trials following standardized endpoint measures. However, so far there is a lack of a consensus for asthma endpoints in AIT trials. The aim of a task force (TF) of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is evaluating several outcome measures for AIT in allergic asthma.

METHODS

The following domains of outcome measures in asthmatic patients have been evaluated for this position paper (PP): (i) exacerbation rate, (ii) lung function, (iii) ICS withdrawal, (iv) symptoms and rescue medication use, (v) questionnaires (PROMS), (vi) bronchial/nasal provocation, (vii) allergen exposure chambers (AEC) and (viii) biomarkers.

RESULTS

Exacerbation rate can be used as a reliable objective primary outcome; however, there is limited evidence due to different definitions of exacerbation. The time after ICS withdrawal to first exacerbation is considered a primary outcome measure. Besides, the advantages and disadvantages and clinical implications of further domains of asthma endpoints in AIT trials are elaborated in this PP.

CONCLUSION

This EAACI-PP aims to highlight important aspects of current asthma measures by critically evaluating their applicability for controlled trials of AIT.

Retrospective Analysis of Biologic Agent Utilization in Severe Asthma: Impact on Exacerbation Rates, Forced Expiratory Volume in the First Second (FEV1), Eosinophils, and IgE Levels

Introduction Severe uncontrolled asthma is challenging to manage and impacts lung function and symptoms. Biologic agents targeting inflammatory pathways have transformed asthma management. This retrospective chart review aimed to assess biologic therapy in severe uncontrolled asthma patients and evaluate outcomes. Methods The study analyzed medical records of 30 patients receiving biologic therapy for severe asthma at a tertiary care center in Peshawar, Pakistan, from December 2022 to Jun 2023. Ethical approval was obtained, and patient demographics, biologic agent usage, and clinical parameters were collected. Clinical outcomes were evaluated after six months, including forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1), eosinophil count, IgE levels, and exacerbation rates. Results After six months, biologic treatment significantly improved FEV1 (48.7% to 62.4%), reduced eosinophils (540 cells/μL to 290 cells/μL) and IgE levels (410 IU/mL to 280 IU/mL), and decreased exacerbations (4.6 to 1.9). Subgroup analysis based on age and sex showed consistent lung function improvements. Conclusion Biologic agents effectively targeted inflammatory pathways, improving asthma control in severe uncontrolled asthma patients. This study provides valuable insights into biologic therapy for severe asthma, offering new possibilities for patient outcomes. Larger studies are needed to validate findings and optimize personalized treatment strategies.

Nondaily dosing schedule of allergen-specific sublingual immunotherapy: efficacy and safety

Purpose

Sublingual immunotherapy is currently promoted by various companies, with administration schedules variable in the different products even though almost all are standardized immunologically. So, this study was planned to examine the efficacy of simple nondaily dosing of sublingual immunotherapy instead of the widely used daily schedule.

Materials and Methods

Fifty-two patients with allergic rhinitis and bronchial asthma were enrolled. Sublingual immunotherapy (manufactured at the allergen immunotherapy preparation unit at Mansoura University) was given in suitable bottles with a dropper mechanism that permits comfortable dosing under the tongue. The physician recommended that the patient put the drops under his/her tongue and leave the drops beneath the tongue for 2 minutes before swallowing. This was repeated every 3 days, with the drop number and concentration gradually rising.

Results

After 2 months of follow-up, 65.8% responded partially to the symptom score and 26.3% responded completely to the medication score. There was a significant decline in the symptom and medication scores from the baseline scores (p<0.0001). After 4 months of follow-up, 95.8% responded partially to symptom scores and no one has not responded; 54.2% responded completely to medication scores; and 81% of studied patients had no side effects. However, the most frequent side effect was a sore throat.

Conclusion

Our nondaily schedule of sublingual immunotherapy is tolerable, safe, and effective in patients with allergic rhinitis and bronchial asthma.

Approaches to Management of Asthma: Guidelines for Stepped Care and Self-Monitoring

While the twentieth century brought rapid changes to the diagnosis and management of asthma, consensus guidelines did not exist until the mid-1980s. Over the subsequent four decades, guidelines evolved from expert-based recommendations to comprehensive, evidenced-based references. The main two guidelines to be discussed in this chapter are the expert panel reports (EPR) published by the United States National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) and the Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention Report (GINA) published by the NHLBI and World Health Organization (WHO). While these guidelines both focus on evidence-based approaches to the diagnosis and management of asthma, there are significant differences in both organization and recommendations. Just as the introduction of evidence-based guidelines was revolutionary to asthma management over the last 20 years, we anticipate further development of recommendations specific to precision medicine based on ongoing cutting-edge clinical research.

The MaDo real-life study of dose adjustment of allergen immunotherapy liquid formulations in an indication of respiratory allergic disease: Reasons, practices, and outcomes

Sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT) is a safe, effective, disease-modifying treatment for moderate-to-severe respiratory allergies. The function and responsiveness of the immune system components underlying the effects of allergen immunotherapy may vary from one patient to another. Furthermore, the severity of the symptoms of allergic disease can fluctuate over time, due to changes in environmental allergen exposure, effector cell responsiveness, and cell signaling. Hence, the allergen dose provided through SLIT can be fine-tuned to establish an optimal balance between effectiveness and tolerability. The objective of the MaDo study was to describe and understand dose adjustments of SLIT liquid formulations in France. We performed a retrospective, observational, cross-sectional, real-life study of allergists and other specialist physicians. Physicians described their patients via an anonymous case report form (CRF). The main patient inclusion criteria were age 5 years or over, at least one physician-confirmed IgE-driven respiratory allergy, and treatment for at least 2 years with one or more SLIT liquid preparations. A nationally representative sample of 33 specialist physicians participated in the study. The physicians' main stated reasons for dose adjustment were adverse events (according to 90.9% of the physicians), treatment effectiveness (60.6%), sensitivity to the allergen (42.4%) and other characteristics (30.3%: mainly symptom severity, type of allergen, and asthma). 392 CRFs (mean ± standard deviation patient age: 27.8 ± 17.5; under-18s: 42.1%; polyallergy: 30.9%) were analyzed. Respectively 53.6%, 25.8%, 15.3%, and 8.7% of the patients received house dust mite, grass pollen, birch pollen and cypress pollen SLIT. Dose adjustments were noted in 258 (65.8%) patients (at the start of the maintenance phase for 101 patients (39.2%) and later for 247 (95.7%)). Dose adjustment was not linked to sex, age, or the number of allergens administered. All measures of disease severity (including symptom severity noted on a 0-to-10 visual analogue scale by the physician) decreased significantly during SLIT. Notably, the mean AR symptom severity score decreased to a clinically relevant extent from 7.6 at SLIT initiation to 2.4 at last follow-up, and the mean asthma symptom severity score decreased from 5.0 to 1.3. The few differences in effectiveness between patients with vs. without dose adjustment were not major. For about one patient in five, a specialist physician decided to reduce or increase the SLIT liquid dose at the start of maintenance treatment and/or during maintenance treatment. This decision was influenced by a broad range of patient and treatment factors, mainly to improve tolerability to treatment and/or enhance effectiveness. In France, dose adjustment of SLIT liquid preparations as a function of the patient profile and/or treatment response is anchored in clinical practice. Precision dosing might optimize the overall benefit-risk profile of AIT for individual patients throughout their entire treatment course, enabling them to achieve both short- and long-term treatment goals, whilst maximizing the safety and tolerability.

Understanding the Updates in the Asthma Guidelines

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory lung disease that affects millions of Americans, with variable symptoms of bronchospasm and obstruction among individuals over time. The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) published the 2020 Focused Updates to the Asthma Management Guidelines based on the latest research since the 2007 Expert Panel Report-3 (EPR-3). The following article reviews the 21 new recommendations on the six core topics in asthma: use of intermittent inhaled corticosteroids, long-acting muscarinic antagonist therapy, use of the fractional exhaled nitric oxide test in asthma diagnosis and monitoring, indoor allergen mitigation, immunotherapy, and bronchial thermoplasty. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate recommendations as strong or conditional based on the evidence. The recommendations were based on systematic reviews of the literature and focused on patient-centered critical outcomes of asthma exacerbations, asthma control, and asthma-related quality of life. Understanding the recommendations with consideration of individual values through shared decision-making may improve asthma outcomes.

Immunotherapy for Asthma

Asthma represents one of the biggest global health concerns with increasing prevalence and influence on global health. Several distinct asthma phenotypes have been identified with one of the most common, earliest recognized, and described being the allergic asthma phenotype, in which allergens trigger asthma through mechanisms involving allergen-specific immunoglobulin E (IgE). Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT), in the forms of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), has been used for many decades as a tool for reducing IgE-mediated sensitization and controlling symptoms of allergic disease, most commonly for allergic rhinitis, and it remains the only currently available disease modifying therapy in atopic patients. AIT has been studied for use in mild to moderate allergic asthma. While the data are often inconsistent, and utilize a multitude of different methods, antigens, and outcome measures, in general, AIT may have several beneficial effects on asthma disease control, quality of life, and requirement for medication. These benefits are notable when immunotherapy is used as an adjunct to pharmacologic treatment in carefully selected and monitored patients with mild to moderate persistent asthma. Patients with severe asthma are excluded from these trials. Importantly, patients with asthma, and in particular severe asthma, may have a higher rate of systemic adverse reactions to SCIT, including anaphylaxis, however, these events are overall rare. Future research in the area is needed to definitively assess the benefit of SCIT and SLIT for patients with asthma, comparing outcomes with different methods, addressing the role of AIT in severe asthma, significance of multiallergen AIT in allergic asthma, and safety concerns in asthma.

Efficacy of a house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy tablet as add-on dupilumab in asthma with rhinitis

BACKGROUND

HDM SLIT is one of the disease-modifying treatment for allergic asthma, and has demonstrated efficacy in clinical trials. Dupilumab, blocks IL-4 and IL-13 signaling, key drivers of type 2 inflammation, and is approved for patients with uncontrolled, moderate-to-severe asthma. The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes after HDM SLIT initiation in asthma with rhinitis not optimally controlled with dupilumab in a real-world setting.

METHODS

At baseline and 48 weeks after treatment, asthma control questionnaire (ACQ)-5, asthma quality of life questionnaire (AQLQ) and rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire (RQLQ) were assessed. Spirometry, type 2 inflammatory biomarkers and quantitative computed tomographic parameters of airway remodeling were also collected.

RESULTS

Of 47 patients received HDM SLIT and 41 completed the study. Combined HDM SLIT and dupilumab improved ACQ-5 (p < 0.05), AQLQ (p < 0.05), RQLQ (p < 0.05), and increased lung function and reduced FeNO (p < 0.05) and airway percentage wall area, and wall thickness (each, p < 0.05). The change in ACQ-5 and AQLQ score correlated with both changes in FeNO and FEV₁ percent predicted. Multiple regression analysis showed that the change in FEV₁ percent predicted was independent factor for improvement of AQLQ (r² = 0.510, p = 0.012). Based on ROC analysis for predicting SLIT responders, the baseline area under the curves in serum HDM specific-IgE, total IgE and FEV₁ percent predicted were high (>0.8).

CONCLUSIONS

These results support the benefits of adding HDM SLIT to pharmacotherapy plus dupilumab in uncontrolled asthma with rhinitis.

2020 NAEPP Guidelines Update and GINA 2021-Asthma Care Differences, Overlap, and Challenges

The 2020 National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee Expert Panel Working Group (NAEPP [2020 Focused Asthma Update]) guidelines and the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2021 strategy report are compared in this Rostrum article. The methodologies of each publication are described. Subsequently, 4 different selected pharmacological recommendations are compared in the 2 documents: step 1 for children 0 to 4 years of age with viral-induced wheezing, step 2 in ages 12 years and older with the intermittent use of inhaled corticosteroid, steps 3 and 4 with single-inhaler maintenance and reliever therapy with inhaled corticosteroids-formoterol (SMART), and steps 3, 4, and 5 with add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonist therapy. Nonpharmacological recommendations are also considered and contrasted, including for exhaled nitric oxide, environmental control, immunotherapy, and bronchial thermoplasty. Similarities and differences in these 2 documents are highlighted, and recommendations are made about harmonizing the approaches where possible.

Benefit Effect of Sublingual Dust Mite Drops on the Control of Asthma in Children

AIM

To evaluate the effect of sublingual dust mite drops on inhaled corticosteroid replacement and its effect on asthma control level.

METHODS

Two hundred children with asthma who had received regular treatment for one year or more were divided into the observation group (71 cases) and control group (89 cases) according to whether sublingual dust mite drops were added on the basis of conventional treatment drugs. After treatment, C-ACT score, VAS score, drug score, lung function, exhaled nitric oxide level, and "ICS avoidance" were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Before treatment, FVC and PEF25 scores in the observation group were lower than those in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant. There was no significant difference in other indicators between the two groups. There was no statistical significance in each index between the single allergic group and the multiple allergic group. Both the observation group and the control group showed statistically significant differences in each index before and after treatment. C-ACT score, FVC, FEV1, PEF, PEF75, PEF50, PEF25, MMEF75/MMEF25 after treatment were all higher than before treatment in both groups; VAS score, drug score and FeNO after treatment were all lower than before treatment. Except PEF, the difference between the observation group and the control group before and after treatment was statistically significant. Among them, after treatment, the increased values of C-ACT, FVC, FEV1, PEF75, PEF50, PEF25, MMEF75/MMEF25 in the observation group were higher than those in the control group, while the decreased values of VAS score, drug score and FeNO were higher than those in the control group. The differences were statistically significant. After treatment, the increased value of FEV1 in the single allergic group was higher than that in the multiple allergic group, and the difference was statistically significant. There was no statistical significance in the changes in other indexes between the two groups before and after treatment. The ICS avoidance rate in the observation group was 57.4% (58/100), higher than that in the control group (17.0%, 17/100), and the difference was statistically significant (χ2=35.108, P < 0.01). The ICS avoidance rate was 55.6% (15/27) in the single allergic group and 58.1% (43/74) in the multiple allergic group, and there was no significant difference between the two groups (χ2=0.053, P=0.818).

CONCLUSION

Sublingual dust mite drops can significantly improve the asthma control levels in children with asthma and have the effect of inhaled corticosteroid replacement.

Controversies in Allergy: A Pro/Con Review of Sublingual Allergen Immunotherapy and Allergic Asthma

Sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT) is a therapeutic intervention used in the treatment of respiratory allergies, including asthma. Multiple randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled clinical trials have evaluated the efficacy and safety of SLIT for asthma. These data provide a good platform to appraise the evidence critically to evaluate the effect of SLIT in the management of asthma for the administration of SLIT by both SLIT drops and SLIT tablets, from a clinical perspective. In this clinical review, presented in a pro and con format, we examined (1) evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses; (2) clinical efficacy on asthma symptoms, asthma exacerbations, and quality of life; (3) clinical efficacy on reduction of asthma controller medication; (4) asthma severity; (5) safety profile; (6) long-term effect and prevention; (7) international guidelines, and (8) real-world evidence. Identified inconsistency in the data results from wide variations and differences in outcome measures, specific allergens, delivery approaches, schedules, and age groups. The house dust mite SLIT tablet demonstrated efficacy when it was used in the add-on management of house dust mite-associated allergic asthma in adults. Sublingual allergen immunotherapy for asthma may represent an important advance in incorporating a personalized medicine approach for patients with allergic asthma.

Recent Advances in Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy as Treatment for Allergic Asthma: A Practical Overview

The Global Initiative for Asthma Report updated in 2019 stated that potential benefits of allergen immunotherapy (AIT), compared to pharmacological and avoidance options, must be weighed against the risk of adverse effects and the inconvenience and cost of the prolonged course of therapy in asthma. Thus, with the aim of clarifying some aspects with regard to the possible use of AIT in allergic asthma treatment armamentarium, a group of expert allergists from the Spanish Allergy and Clinical Immunology Scientific Society (SEAIC), particularly from the Immunotherapy and Asthma Interest Groups developed a frequently asked questions in clinical practice. This document updates relevant topics on the use of AIT in asthma and could facilitate physician clinical decisions and improve health outcomes for individual patients.

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.

2020 Focused Updates to the Asthma Management Guidelines: A Report from the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee Expert Panel Working Group

The 2020 Focused Updates to the Asthma Management Guidelines: A Report from the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee Expert Panel Working Group was coordinated and supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) of the National Institutes of Health. It is designed to improve patient care and support informed decision making about asthma management in the clinical setting. This update addresses six priority topic areas as determined by the state of the science at the time of a needs assessment, and input from multiple stakeholders:A rigorous process was undertaken to develop these evidence-based guidelines. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's (AHRQ) Evidence-Based Practice Centers conducted systematic reviews on these topics, which were used by the Expert Panel Working Group as a basis for developing recommendations and guidance. The Expert Panel used GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation), an internationally accepted framework, in consultation with an experienced methodology team for determining the certainty of evidence and the direction and strength of recommendations based on the evidence. Practical implementation guidance for each recommendation incorporates findings from NHLBI-led patient, caregiver, and clinician focus groups. To assist clincians in implementing these recommendations into patient care, the new recommendations have been integrated into the existing Expert Panel Report-3 (EPR-3) asthma management step diagram format.

Use of Sublingual Immunotherapy for Aeroallergens in Children with Asthma

Asthma is a heterogeneous disease that in children is often allergen-driven with a type 2 inflammation. Sublingual immunotherapy represents an important progress in the use of personalized medicine in children with allergic asthma. It is a viable option for house dust mite-driven asthma and in subjects with the asthma associated with allergic rhinitis. The use and indications for isolated asthma caused by other allergens are still controversial owing to heterogeneity of commercially available products and methodological limitations of studies in children. Nevertheless, most studies and meta-analyses found the efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy. Sublingual immunotherapy is safe but cannot be recommended in children with uncontrolled asthma.

Sublingual immunotherapy for asthma

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a common long-term respiratory disease affecting approximately 300 million people worldwide. Approximately half of people with asthma have an important allergic component to their disease, which may provide an opportunity for targeted treatment. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) aims to reduce asthma symptoms by delivering increasing doses of an allergen (e.g. house dust mite, pollen extract) under the tongue to induce immune tolerance. Fifty-two studies were identified and synthesised in the original Cochrane Review in 2015, but questions remained about the safety and efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy for people with asthma.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy compared with placebo or standard care for adults and children with asthma.

SEARCH METHODS

The original searches for trials from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register (CAGR), ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, and reference lists of all primary studies and review articles found trials up to 25 March 2015. The most recent search for trials for the current update was conducted on 29 October 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel randomised controlled trials, irrespective of blinding or duration, that evaluated sublingual immunotherapy versus placebo or as an add-on to standard asthma management. We included both adults and children with asthma of any severity and with any allergen-sensitisation pattern. We included studies that recruited participants with asthma, rhinitis, or both, providing at least 80% of trial participants had a diagnosis of asthma. We selected outcomes to reflect recommended outcomes for asthma clinical trials and those most important to people with asthma. Primary outcomes were asthma exacerbations requiring a visit to the emergency department (ED) or admission to hospital, validated measures of quality of life, and all-cause serious adverse events (SAEs). Secondary outcomes were asthma symptom scores, exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids, response to provocation tests, and dose of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the search results for included trials, extracted numerical data, and assessed risk of bias, all of which were cross-checked for accuracy. Any disagreements were resolved by discussion. We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (ORs) or risk differences (RDs) using study participants as the unit of analysis; we analysed continuous data as mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) using random-effects models. We considered the strength of evidence for all primary and secondary outcomes using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty-six studies met the inclusion criteria for this update, including 52 studies from the original review. Most studies were double-blind and placebo-controlled, varied in duration from one day to three years, and recruited participants with mild or intermittent asthma, often with comorbid allergic rhinitis. Twenty-three studies recruited adults and teenagers; 31 recruited only children; three recruited both; and nine did not specify. The pattern of reporting and results remained largely unchanged from the original review despite 14 further studies and a 50% increase in participants studied (5077 to 7944). Reporting of primary efficacy outcomes to measure the impact of SLIT on asthma exacerbations and quality of life was infrequent, and selective reporting may have had a serious effect on the completeness of the evidence; 16 studies did not contribute any data, and a further six studies could only be included in a post hoc analysis of all adverse events. Allocation procedures were generally not well described; about a quarter of the studies were at high risk of performance or detection bias (or both); and participant attrition was high or unknown in around half of the studies. The primary outcome in most studies did not align with those of interest to the review (mostly asthma or rhinitis symptoms), and only two small studies reported our primary outcome of exacerbations requiring an ED or hospital visit; the pooled estimate from these studies suggests SLIT may reduce exacerbations compared with placebo or usual care, but the evidence is very uncertain (OR 0.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 1.20; n = 108; very low-certainty evidence). Nine studies reporting quality of life could not be combined in a meta-analysis and, whilst the direction of effect mostly favoured SLIT, the effects were often uncertain and small. SLIT likely does not increase SAEs compared with placebo or usual care, and analysis by risk difference suggests no more than 1 in 100 people taking SLIT will have a serious adverse event (RD -0.0004, 95% CI -0.0072 to 0.0064; participants = 4810; studies = 29; moderate-certainty evidence). Regarding secondary outcomes, asthma symptom and medication scores were mostly measured with non-validated scales, which precluded meaningful meta-analysis or interpretation, but there was a general trend of SLIT benefit over placebo. Changes in ICS use (MD -17.13 µg/d, 95% CI -61.19 to 26.93; low-certainty evidence), exacerbations requiring oral steroids (studies = 2; no events), and bronchial provocation (SMD 0.99, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.82; low-certainty evidence) were not often reported. Results were imprecise and included the possibility of important benefit or little effect and, in some cases, potential harm from SLIT. More people taking SLIT had adverse events of any kind compared with control (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.49 to 2.67; high-certainty evidence; participants = 4251; studies = 27), but events were usually reported to be transient and mild. Lack of data prevented most of the planned subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite continued study in the field, the evidence for important outcomes such as exacerbations and quality of life remains too limited to draw clinically useful conclusions about the efficacy of SLIT for people with asthma. Trials mostly recruited mixed populations with mild and intermittent asthma and/or rhinitis and focused on non-validated symptom and medication scores. The review findings suggest that SLIT may be a safe option for people with well-controlled mild-to-moderate asthma and rhinitis who are likely to be at low risk of serious harm, but the role of SLIT for people with uncontrolled asthma requires further evaluation.

Association between biomarkers and house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy in allergic asthma

BACKGROUND

House dust mite (HDM) sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has demonstrated efficacy in clinical trials of patients with asthma. Airway inflammation is a characteristic of respiratory allergy, but its relationship to SLIT remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluate the association between clinical outcomes with pulmonary function and biomarkers in before and after HDM SLIT (UMIN Number 000022390).

METHODS

One hundred twelve patients with asthma sensitized to HDM were randomized to add-on 6 standardized quality (SQ)-HDM SLIT to pharmacotherapy or pharmacotherapy alone for 48 weeks. At baseline and end of study, biomarkers, blood eosinophils, serum IgE, serum periostin, fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), and spirometry and clinical symptoms were measured. Association between biomarkers and an increase in FEV₁ of 120 mL or greater were analysed.

RESULTS

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) demonstrated a significant reduction of serum periostin (P < .001), FeNO (P < .01), and increase in HDM-specific IgE (P < .05), FEV₁ (P < .001) and improvement of clinical symptom scores, when compared to pharmacotherapy. The change in FEV₁ correlated with the changes in serum periostin (r = .696, P < .001) and the changes in FeNO (r = .682, P < .001). The independent predictor of improvement in airflow limitation was changed in serum periostin (r²  = .753, P = .013) and FeNO (P = .038). Based on cut-off values derived by receiver operating characteristic analysis (periostin 30.9 ng/mL, FeNO 28.0 ppb), patients were distinguished responders from non-responders, but with no predictive value for blood eosinophils or total IgE. The proportion of patients with both high periostin and FeNO levels was significantly higher in responder than in non-responder (P = .026).

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Adding HDM SLIT to pharmacotherapy resulted in reduced serum periostin and FeNO, and improved pulmonary function. Serum periostin and FeNO may be useful biomarkers for prediction of SLIT.

30 years of sublingual immunotherapy

Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) was introduced in clinical practice on an empirical basis more than 100 years ago. Since the first attempts, AIT was administered subcutaneously. Indeed, other routes of administration were proposed and studied, in particular to improve the safety, but only the sublingual route (SLIT) achieved a credibility based on evidence and was then accepted as a viable "alternative" option to the subcutaneous route. SLIT was largely used in clinical trials and clinical practice in this last 30 years. Thus, a large amount of data is available, coming from either controlled trials and postmarketing surveillance studies. It is clear that SLIT is overall effective, but it is also clear that the efficacy is not "class-related," as derived from meta-analyses, but restricted to each specific product. The 30-year lasting use of SLIT allowed to clarify many clinical aspects, such as efficacy, safety, use in asthma, regimens of administration, and optimal doses. In parallel, the mechanisms of action of AIT were elucidated, and new indications were proposed (eg food allergy, atopic dermatitis). In addition, the introduction of molecular-based diagnosis, allowed to better refine the prescription of SLIT, based on specific sensitization profiles. The present article will describe the origin and evolution of SLIT for respiratory allergy, taking into account the clinical context that suggested this form of treatment, the recently developed aspects, the future perspectives and unmet needs, This is not, therefore, a systematic review, rather a narrative historical description of the past history, and a look forward to the future opportunities.

Principles of Allergen Immunotherapy and Its Clinical Application in China: Contrasts and Comparisons with the USA

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) for allergic rhinitis (AR), asthma, and other allergic diseases has developed quickly. House dust mite (HDM), Artemisia (wormwood), Humulus japonicus (Japanese hop), Alternaria alternata, and Cladosporium herbarum are the five most common inhalant allergens in China. AIT has been performed in China for over 60 years. With the support of the Chinese Medical Association (CMA) and the Chinese Medical Doctors Association (CMDA), the Chinese College of Allergy and Asthma (CCAA) was established in 2016 as a specialized branch of CDMA and is the main certification authority for AIT. Chinese allergists and scientists have made tremendous progress in the development of AIT. There have been many publications by Chinese allergists and scientists worldwide encompassing original research studies, systematic reviews, case studies, and clinical trials. Currently, conventional subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is the preferred AIT in China, but sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is beginning to gain recognition. An increasing number of clinical trials have been conducted to investigate the clinical efficacy and side effects of SLIT and SCIT. In China, HDM is the only commercial standardized allergen extracts in clinical use, whereas the others are crude allergen extracts. Besides standardized allergen extracts, other forms of hypoallergenic extracts are still being investigated and developed in China. Immunotherapy in China is similar to that in the USA in which allergen extracts can be mixed for SCIT. However, allergen extracts cannot be mixed for SCIT in Europe.

Allergen immunotherapy in asthma: current evidence

Background: Allergic asthma is the predominant phenotype in clinical practice. Allergen immunotherapy is the only curative and specific approach for the treatment of allergies with clinical benefits for several years after its discontinuation. Despite advances, the use of allergen immunotherapy in allergic asthma is still suboptimal and controversial.Objective: The purpose of this article is to review the published data about the impact of allergen immunotherapy with the most commonly used allergen extracts on allergic asthma outcomes, including both clinical parameters and patients' subjective experience (quality of life).Methods: As data sources several databases were used, including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science (2002-2019) and search in English and Spanish languages was performed using the following terms: "allergen immunotherapy" and "asthma" in combination with "house dust mite", "birch pollen", "grass pollen", "olive tree pollen", "molds", "pets" and "asthma quality of life". Randomised control trials and meta-analysis from reviewed publications were selected.Results: Emerging data relating to the positive impact on asthma outcomes of allergen immunotherapy allows the addition of this treatment as a therapeutic option in mild to moderate asthmatics sensitized to house dust mite and pollens. Limited data are available for patients sensitized to molds and pets, as well in severe allergic asthma population.Conclusion: Allergen immunotherapy remains a potential therapeutic option for some patients with allergic asthma. Further research is needed to define the optimal period of treatment, the possible therapeutic role in the treatment of severe allergic asthma, and the cost-effectiveness of allergen immunotherapy in asthmatic patients.

EAACI Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy: House dust mite-driven allergic asthma

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) has been in use for the treatment of allergic disease for more than 100 years. Asthma treatment relies mainly on corticosteroids and other controllers recommended to achieve and maintain asthma control, prevent exacerbations, and improve quality of life. AIT is underused in asthma, both in children and in adults. Notably, patients with allergic asthma not adequately controlled on pharmacotherapy (including biologics) represent an unmet health need. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology has developed a clinical practice guideline providing evidence-based recommendations for the use of house dust mites (HDM) AIT as add-on treatment for HDM-driven allergic asthma. This guideline was developed by a multi-disciplinary working group using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. HDM AIT was separately evaluated by route of administration and children and adults: subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual AIT (SLIT), drops, and tablets. Recommendations were formulated for each. The important prerequisites for successful treatment with HDM AIT are (a) selection of patients most likely to respond to AIT and (b) use of allergen extracts and desensitization protocols of proven efficacy. To date, only AIT with HDM SLIT-tablet has demonstrated a robust effect in adults for critical end points (exacerbations, asthma control, and safety). Thus, it is recommended as an add-on to regular asthma therapy for adults with controlled or partially controlled HDM-driven allergic asthma (conditional recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). HDM SCIT is recommended for adults and children, and SLIT drops are recommended for children with controlled HDM-driven allergic asthma as the add-on to regular asthma therapy to decrease symptoms and medication needs (conditional recommendation, low-quality evidence).

Sublingual allergen immunotherapy for respiratory allergy: a systematic review

The objective of the systematic review is to provide complete and updated information on efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) formulations for the treatment of allergic respiratory diseases (ARDs). The literature search was conducted on PubMed database, involving double-blind, randomized clinical trials published between January 1992 and 2018, written in English, and performed in humans. The number of articles finally selected for review was 112. Data from the majority of properly controlled clinical trials demonstrate that SLIT is effective not only with short-term use (first year) but also with long-term use (up to the third year of active therapy), for treating ARDs in children and adults. Both continuous and discontinuous schemes of administration showed significant reductions in symptom and medication scores. Moreover, a SLIT-induced disease-modifying effect has been documented mainly with grass pollen extracts, since improvement is maintained during at least 2 years of follow-up after a 3-year treatment period. Additionally, allergen immunotherapy should also be considered a preventive strategy, especially for decreasing bronchial asthma incidence in children and adolescents with allergic rhinitis treated with SLIT. This therapy is also safe, producing only a few mainly local and mild-to-moderate adverse events, and usually self-limited in time. The registration and authorization of allergen SLIT preparations (grasses and house-dust mite tablets) as drugs by regulatory agencies, such as the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA), has represented a landmark in allergy immunotherapy research. Further long-term studies, specially designed with allergens other than grass pollen or house-dust mites, not only in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis but also on asthmatic subjects, as well as studies comparing different administration schedules and/or routes, are required in order to continue the progress in the modern development of this particularly promising therapy.

Efficacy and tolerability of a house dust mite allergoid in allergic bronchial asthma: a randomized dose-ranging trial

AIM

This multicenter randomized placebo-controlled double-blind clinical trial investigated which maintenance dose shows the optimal benefit-risk ratio for subcutaneous immunotherapy with a Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus allergoid preparation.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate four maintenance doses of the allergoid preparation versus placebo.

METHODS

The late-phase reaction of the intracutaneous test was chosen as efficacy parameter and minimal dose of fluticasone required for asthma control.

RESULTS

A total of 146 adults with bronchial asthma were randomized. After subcutaneous immunotherapy, reductions in swelling size were greatest with 10,000 therapeutic units (TU). The 18,000 TU group showed the highest percentage of patients with fluticasone dose reduced to 0 μg/day.

CONCLUSION

The optimal dose of allergoid for the investigation in a confirmatory trial with inhaled corticosteroid reduction is 18,000 TU.

The efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy for allergic diseases in Asia

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has been proven to be safe and effective from an abundance of Western literature, but data from Asia is less complete. This review aims to examine the basic science, safety and efficacy of SLIT in Asian patients, and to determine future research needs in Asia. We performed a literature search on PUBMED, Scopus, and Cochrane Library database for articles on SLIT originating from Asian countries through Nov 2017. There were 18 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, of which 9 involved solely paediatric subjects. Overall, sublingual immunotherapy is safe and is efficacious in Asian populations in allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma. House dust-mite SLIT is effective in both mono- and polysensitized AR patients. Efficacy of SLIT is comparable to subcutaneous immunotherapy. Data on long term efficacy is lacking. A disproportionate majority of research originates from China and Japan, reflecting an asymmetry of access to SLIT within Asia. Significant disparities exist in the development of the allergy speciality, prescription patterns of SLIT, and pharmacological potencies of different SLIT products within and between Asian nations. We conclude that current available evidence suggests SLIT is efficacious in Asians but data quality of evidence is hampered by non-placebo controlled studies with methodological limitations. More data is needed in South and Southeast Asian populations. Future efforts may be directed towards improving access to SLIT in developing countries, standardization of SLIT dosage, and evaluating long term clinical outcomes.

Role of sublingual immunotherapy in the treatment of asthma: An updated systematic review

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for the treatment of allergic asthma.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL databases were searched, updating an earlier review (January 1, 2005 through May 8, 2017). Randomized, controlled studies (RCTs) were included, which reported one of the prespecified outcomes: asthma symptoms measured by control composite scores; quality of life; medication use; pulmonary physiology; and health-care utilization. For safety outcomes, RCTs and observational studies were included. Two independent reviewers extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and graded strength of evidence (SOE) for each outcome.

RESULTS

Fourteen RCTs (n = 2585) assessed the efficacy of SLIT for asthma. The RCTs utilized house dust mite (HDM), birch, or grass allergen. SLIT improved asthma symptoms (high SOE), decreased use of long-term control medication, and improved forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁ ) (moderate SOE). SLIT may decrease quick-relief medication use, and improve disease-specific quality of life (low SOE). For safety, 20 RCTs and 10 observational studies (n = 3621) were identified. Local (risk differences ranged from -0.03 to +0.765) and systemic allergic reactions (risk differences ranged from -0.03 to +0.06) were a common occurrence in SLIT and control groups. Life-threatening reactions were uncommon, with 3 cases of anaphylaxis and no deaths reported.

CONCLUSION

There is moderate-to-high strength evidence that SLIT improves allergic asthma symptoms, reduces long-term control medication use, and improves FEV₁ based on studies of HDM, birch, and grass. SLIT rarely is associated with life-threatening adverse events.

Efficacy of add-on sublingual immunotherapy for adults with asthma: A meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) reduces symptom scores and the use of rescue medication in children with allergic asthma, but the effect of SLIT therapy in adult patients has not been reported.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the efficacy and adverse effects of SLIT add-on vs conventional medication in adult patients with mild to moderate asthma.

METHODS

We systematically searched the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Central databases. Eligible studies included adult patients with allergic asthma who received either SLIT or standard care. Standard mean differences were used as measures of efficacy in a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Twenty trials that included 2,288 patients in the SLIT add-on group and 1,268 patients in the traditional therapy group were identified as eligible for final analysis. Compared with traditional therapy, SLIT add-on therapy was associated with significant improvements in lower and upper airway scores, a higher forced expiratory volume in 1 second, and maximal expiratory flow at 25% of forced vital capacity, and improved bronchial reactivity. Drug consumptions were significantly decreased as well. Airway inflammatory parameters, such as nasal eosinophil infiltration, were markedly improved.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study suggested that long-term SLIT add-on therapy is a complementary treatment for adults with asthma in addition to conventional medicine. It not only reduces symptom scores but also improves lung function and airway inflammation.

Impact of allergen immunotherapy in allergic asthma

Although traditional pharmacological approaches improve outcomes in disease management for allergic asthma, these fail to modify the underlying immune responses. Allergen immunotherapy remains the only etiological therapy for the treatment of respiratory allergies for which clinical efficacy has been demonstrated through several well-controlled studies. In this review, we examine evidence from the past 5 years regarding the impact of allergen immunotherapy on allergic asthma to inform practitioners and stimulate further discussion and research.

The role of allergy immunotherapy in the treatment of asthma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Asthma and allergic rhinitis are two of the most widespread chronic medical conditions. Asthma, a condition which encompasses chronic inflammation of the lower airway resulting in expiratory obstruction, may represent an end phase along the allergic disease spectrum ultimately stemming initially from nasal allergic rhinitis and bronchial hyper-reactivity. The purpose of this review was to evaluate the available published literature over the past 12 months regarding the role of allergy immunotherapy in the treatment of asthma.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent clinical trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses have demonstrated that allergen-specific immunotherapy (ASI), especially sublingual immunotherapy for as short as 12 months, may help improve asthma symptoms and reduce medication usage. However, studies have not demonstrated overall improvement in pulmonary function tests despite improvement in symptoms. Barriers to asthmatic patients initiating and maintaining ASI include lack of payment by health insurer, inconvenience, and potentially worsening asthma exacerbations/symptoms for patients with severe disease.

SUMMARY

ASI may change the natural course of allergic asthma by reducing the risk of acute respiratory exacerbations and symptoms. Additional studies are necessary to examine whether early treatment of allergy sensitivities with ASI may ultimately prevent the progression to asthma.

Allergen immunotherapy for allergic asthma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To inform the development of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology's (EAACI) Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) for allergic asthma, we assessed the evidence on the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of AIT.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review, which involved searching nine databases. Studies were screened against predefined eligibility criteria and critically appraised using established instruments. Data were synthesized using random-effects meta-analyses.

RESULTS

98 studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. Short-term symptom scores were reduced with a standardized mean difference (SMD) of -1.11 (95% CI -1.66, -0.56). This was robust to a prespecified sensitivity analyses, but there was evidence suggestive of publication bias. Short-term medication scores were reduced SMD -1.21 (95% CI -1.87, -0.54), again with evidence of potential publication bias. There was no reduction in short-term combined medication and symptom scores SMD 0.17 (95% CI -0.23, 0.58), but one study showed a beneficial long-term effect. For secondary outcomes, subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) improved quality of life and decreased allergen-specific airway hyperreactivity (AHR), but this was not the case for sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). There were no consistent effects on asthma control, exacerbations, lung function, and nonspecific AHR. AIT resulted in a modest increased risk of adverse events (AEs). Although relatively uncommon, systemic AEs were more frequent with SCIT; however no fatalities were reported. The limited evidence on cost-effectiveness was mainly available for sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) and this suggested that SLIT is likely to be cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

AIT can achieve substantial reductions in short-term symptom and medication scores in allergic asthma. It was however associated with a modest increased risk of systemic and local AEs. More data are needed in relation to secondary outcomes, longer-term effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

Grass pollen sublingual immunotherapy tablets provide long-term relief of grass pollen-associated allergic rhinitis and reduce the risk of asthma: findings from a retrospective, real-world database subanalysis

BACKGROUND

We assessed real-world, long-term effectiveness of two marketed sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets for allergic rhinitis (AR), and their impact on allergic asthma (AA) onset/progression.

METHODS

Retrospective, longitudinal German prescription database subanalysis of AR patients receiving 5- or 1-grass pollen SLIT tablets (n = 1,466/1,385), versus patients not using allergy immunotherapy (AIT) (n = 71,275). Primary endpoint: change over time in AR symptomatic medication prescriptions after treatment cessation; secondary endpoints: new asthma onset, and change over time in asthma medication prescriptions during treatment/follow-up periods.

RESULTS

Mean number of AR medication prescriptions was significantly decreased during follow-up (of up to 6 years) with both SLIT tablets versus the non-AIT group (p < 0.001). Over the full-analysis period, proportions of patients with new-onset asthma were 8.8% (odds ratio: 0.676, p = 0.011), 10.3% (odds ratio: 0.720, p = 0.060) and 11.6% in the 5- and 1-grass pollen SLIT tablet and non-AIT groups, respectively. For all treatment-analysis periods, both SLIT tablet groups were associated with fewer asthma medication prescriptions versus non-AIT controls.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings confirm the real-world benefits of 5- and 1-grass-pollen SLIT tablets in slower AR progression, reduced risk of new asthma onset in the non-asthmatic population, and slower asthma progression in the asthmatic population.

Chinese Guideline on allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis

The present document is based on a consensus reached by a panel of experts from Chinese Society of Allergy (CSA) and Chinese Allergic Rhinitis Collaborative Research Group (C2AR2G). Allergen immunotherapy (AIT), has increasingly been used as a treatment for allergic rhinitis (AR) globally, as it has been shown to provide a long-term effect in improving nasal and ocular symptoms, reducing medication need, and improving quality of life. AIT is currently the only curative intervention that can potentially modify the immune system in individuals suffering from AR and prevent the development of new sensitization and the progression of disease from AR to asthma. Although the use of AIT is becoming more acceptable in China, to date no AR immunotherapy guideline from China is available for use by the international community. This document has thus been produced and covers the main aspects of AIT undertaken in China; including selection of patients for AIT, the allergen extracts available on the Chinese market, schedules and doses of allergen employed in different routes of AIT, assessment of effect and safety, patients' administration and follow-up, and management of adverse reactions. The Chinese guideline for AR immunotherapy will thus serve as a reference point by doctors, healthcare professionals and organizations involved in the AIT of AR in China. Moreover, this guideline will serve as a source of information for the international community on AIT treatment strategies employed in China.

Clinical evaluation for sublingual immunotherapy with Dermatophagoides farinae drops in adult patients with allergic asthma

PURPOSE

The efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in house dust mite-induced allergic asthma (AA) have yet to be firmly established, especially in adult patients. Our objective is to evaluate the efficacy of SLIT with Dermatophagoides farinae drops in adult patients with AA.

METHODS

One hundred and thirty-four adult patient data with house dust mite (HDM)-induced AA who had been treated for 2 years were collected. These patient data that we collected were divided into the SLIT group (n = 85) and control group (n = 49). All patients were treated with low to moderate dose of inhaled glucocorticoid and long-acting β2 agonists. Patients in the SLIT group were further treated with D. farinae drops. Clinical scores including the total asthma symptom score (TASS), total asthma medicine score (TAMS), asthma control test (ACT), and peak flow percentage (PEF%) were assessed before treatment and at yearly visits. The presence of adverse events (AEs) were recorded once a month.

RESULTS

Before treatment, the PEF% in the SLIT group was significantly lower than that in the control group (p < 0.05). After 2 years, both treatments were effective in the clinical scores when compared with baseline values (all p < 0.001). Meanwhile, the SLIT group showed significantly lower TASS and TAMS (all p < 0.001) and higher ACT (p < 0.001) and PEF% (p < 0.05) when compared with the control group. No severe systemic AEs were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

SLIT with D. farinae drops plus pharmacotherapy is more effective than routine drug treatment in adult patients with AA.

Differences and similarities between sublingual immunotherapy of allergy and oral tolerance

Allergen immunotherapy is the only treatment altering the natural course of IgE-mediated allergies. Whereas the subcutaneous route for immunotherapy (SCIT) has been historically considered as a reference, we discuss herein the relative advantages of the sublingual and oral routes as alternatives to SCIT in order to elicit allergen-specific tolerance. The buccal and gut immune systems are similarly organized to favor immune tolerance to antigens/allergens, due to the presence of tolerogenic dendritic cells and macrophages promoting the differentiation of CD4⁺ regulatory T cells. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is now established as a valid treatment option, with clinical efficacy demonstrated in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (to either grass, tree, weed pollens or mite allergens) and encouraging results obtained in the management of mild/moderate allergic asthma. While still exploratory, oral immunotherapy (OIT) has shown promising results in the desensitization of patients with food allergies. We review at both biological and clinical levels the perspectives currently pursued for those two mucosal routes.

Genome-wide interaction study of dust mite allergen on lung function in children with asthma

BACKGROUND

Childhood asthma is likely the result of gene-by-environment (G × E) interactions. Dust mite is a known risk factor for asthma morbidity. Yet, there have been no genome-wide G × E studies of dust mite allergen on asthma-related phenotypes.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to identify genetic variants whose effects on lung function in children with asthma are modified by the level of dust mite allergen exposure.

METHODS

A genome-wide interaction analysis of dust mite allergen level and lung function was performed in a cohort of Puerto Rican children with asthma (Puerto Rico Genetics of Asthma and Lifestyle [PRGOAL]). Replication was attempted in 2 independent cohorts, the Childhood Asthma Management Program (CAMP) and the Genetics of Asthma in Costa Rica Study.

RESULTS

Single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs117902240 showed a significant interaction effect on FEV₁ with dust mite allergen level in PRGOAL (interaction P = 3.1 × 10^-8), and replicated in the same direction in CAMP white children and CAMP Hispanic children (combined interaction P = .0065 for replication cohorts and 7.4 × 10^-9 for all cohorts). Rs117902240 was positively associated with FEV₁ in children exposed to low dust mite allergen levels, but negatively associated with FEV₁ in children exposed to high levels. This SNP is on chromosome 8q24, adjacent to a binding site for CCAAT/enhancer-binding protein beta, a transcription factor that forms part of the IL-17 signaling pathway. None of the SNPs identified for FEV₁/forced vital capacity replicated in the independent cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Dust mite allergen exposure modifies the estimated effect of rs117902240 on FEV₁ in children with asthma. Analysis of existing data suggests that this SNP may have transcription factor regulatory functions.

Immunotherapy in allergic rhinitis and lower airway outcomes

Allergic rhinitis and asthma constitute two clinical expressions of a single-condition, respiratory allergy. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a form of treatment specifically aimed at modifying the response to sensitizing allergens. The inherent potential benefit of AIT is the simultaneous treatment of all clinical expressions of respiratory allergy. Current data support the effectiveness of subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy in rhinitis. Studies also provide proof for a beneficial effect in allergic asthma. Even more, substantial evidence points to the preventive effect on the progression from rhinitis to asthma. Despite the current knowledge on the basic mechanisms underlying the immunological effect of AIT is vast, the specific mechanisms for the preventive effect of primary sensitization or new sensitizations are poorly understood. This review aimed to provide a critical overview of the current knowledge on the effectiveness of AIT and its potential role in secondary prevention of respiratory allergy progression.

The Potential Role of Allergen Immunotherapy in Stepping Down Asthma Treatment

For patients whose asthma is controlled and who have a low risk for future exacerbations, current guidelines recommend gradually stepping down pharmacotherapy to identify the lowest dose needed to maintain control. This review article will discuss the benefits and risks of step down in asthma management and the different strategies of achieving step down with particular focus on allergen immunotherapy (AIT). A literature search was conducted to identify studies that assessed the effect of AIT on asthma step down and evaluated this and asthma control as one of the outcomes. Six studies were identified: 2 subcutaneous and 4 sublingual AIT studies. Five studies assessed house dust mite-induced asthma, whereas 1 study focused on birch-induced seasonal asthma. Regarding house dust mite-induced asthma, the AIT studies reviewed suggest that individuals with moderate rather than mild asthma are the patients who are more likely to benefit from the addition of AIT for their asthma condition. The potential value of AIT is likely to be in enabling successful step down of the inhaled corticosteroid dose in Global Initiative for Asthma step 3 or 4. It is important to further explore this effect so that affected individuals can benefit from this treatment.

IgE-associated allergic disorders: recent advances in etiology, diagnosis, and treatment

IgE-associated allergic diseases belong to the most common inflammatory conditions. Their clinical manifestation ranges from mild symptoms to life-threatening episodes. Often patients experience a reduction in physical and psychologic well-being and suffer from a decreased quality of life due to disease activity. The continuously rising number of people that are affected by an allergic condition indicates an urgent need for better diagnostics and more efficient treatment options. Recent progress in the understanding of pathophysiologic mechanisms underlying IgE-associated allergic disorders has led to the identification of novel therapeutic targets and the development of drug candidates that are currently under evaluation. In this review, we highlight studies and clinical trials, which have helped to gain further insight in the etiology of IgE-associated allergic conditions as well as advances in the development of diagnostic tools and therapeutic approaches recently published in Allergy (European Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology).

Therapeutic interventions in severe asthma

The present paper addresses severe asthma which is limited to 5-10% of the overall population of asthmatics. However, it accounts for 50% or more of socials costs of the disease, as it is responsible for hospitalizations and Emergency Department accesses as well as expensive treatments. The recent identification of different endotypes of asthma, based on the inflammatory pattern, has led to the development of tailored treatments that target different inflammatory mediators. These are major achievements in the perspective of Precision Medicine: a leading approach to the modern treatment strategy. Omalizumab, an anti-IgE antibody, has been the only biologic treatment available on the market for severe asthma during the last decade. It prevents the linkage of the IgE and the receptors, thereby inhibiting mast cell degranulation. In clinical practice omalizumab significantly reduced the asthma exacerbations as well as the concomitant use of oral glucocorticoids. In the "Th2-high asthma" phenotype, the hallmarks are increased levels of eosinophils and other markers (such as periostin). Because anti-IL-5 in this condition plays a crucial role in driving eosinophil inflammation, this cytokine or its receptors on the eosinophil surface has been studied as a potential target for therapy. Two different anti-IL-5 humanized monoclonal antibodies, mepolizumab and reslizumab, have been proven effective in this phenotype of asthma (recently they both came on the market in the United States), as well as an anti-IL-5 receptor alpha (IL5Rα), benralizumab. Other monoclonal antibodies, targeting different cytokines (IL-13, IL-4, IL-17 and TSLP) are still under evaluation, though the preliminary results are encouraging. Finally, AIT, Allergen Immunotherapy, a prototype of Precision Medicine, is considered, also in light of the recent evidences of Sublingual Immunotherapy (SLIT) tablet efficacy and safety in mite allergic asthma patients. Given the high costs of these therapies, however, there is an urgent need to identify biomarkers that can predict the clinical responders.

Allergen immunotherapy: an update on protocols of administration

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is still the only causal treatment for allergic rhinitis and asthma. However, conventional subcutaneous AIT administration schedules are time-consuming and safety issues still play a role; for sublingual AIT, the best efficacy is still investigated and for food allergy the best efficacy-safety balance is not yet completely discovered. Investigators have made progress in these fields lately. (Figure is included in full-text article.)

RECENT FINDINGS

Since January 2014, several (ultra) rush or cluster build-up phases with hypoallergic variants of extracts have been explored with success. Also, the efficacy of only preseasonal subcutaneous AIT was demonstrated for tree and grass pollen. Sublingual AIT was shown to be effective and well tolerated in allergic rhinitis and asthma with tablets and with highly concentrated liquid formulations (ragweed, house dust mite), but not cockroach. For food allergy, oral immunotherapy is promising, but close attention should be paid to the exact administration schedule, maintenance dose, and the definition of efficacy (desensitization or real tolerance, as defined by a negative challenge test at least 4 months off treatment).

SUMMARY

The practicing physician should be watchful for advances in the field of aeroallergen AIT and food oral immunotherapy, analyzing the presented information in detail and interpreting conclusions product specifically, without generalizing.

Local Side Effects of Sublingual and Oral Immunotherapy

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is increasingly used worldwide, and several products have been recently registered as drugs for respiratory allergy by the European Medicine Agency and the Food and Drug Administration. Concerning inhalant allergens, the safety of SLIT is overall superior to that of subcutaneous immunotherapy in terms of systemic adverse events. No fatality has been ever reported, and episodes of anaphylaxis were described only exceptionally. Looking at the historical and recent trials, most (>90%) adverse events are "local" and confined to the site of administration. For this reason, a specific grading system has been developed by the World Allergy Organization to classify and describe local adverse events. There is an increasing amount of literature concerning oral desensitization for food allergens, referred to as oral immunotherapy. Also, in this case, local side effects are predominant, although systemic adverse events are more frequent than with inhalant allergens. We review herein the description of local side effects due to SLIT, with a special focus on large trials having a declared sample size calculation. The use of the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities nomenclature for adverse events is mentioned in this context, as recommended by regulatory agencies. It is expected that a uniform classification/grading of local adverse events will improve and harmonize the surveillance and reporting on the safety of SLIT.

Novel, Alternative, and Controversial Therapies of Rhinitis

Rhinitis is a multifactorial disease characterized by sneezing, rhinorrhea, postnasal drip, and nasal congestion. This condition affects 10% to 40% of the population and is responsible for billions of spent health care dollars and impairment in quality of life for those affected. Currently available medical and vaccine therapies are effective for a large segment of this population; however, a subset of patients still has difficult-to-control rhinitis. This article reviews the current progress being made in novel drug and vaccine development and delves into alternative medical, surgical, and homeopathic strategies that may be promising adjunctive treatments for the difficult-to-treat rhinitis patient.