A birch sublingual allergy immunotherapy tablet reduces rhinoconjunctivitis symptoms when exposed to birch and oak and induces IgG4 to allergens from all trees in the birch homologous group

Cross-protection of allergen immunotherapy-induced antibodies to related allergens requires a high degree of structural identity

BACKGROUND

In contrast to sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) with recombinant Mal d 1 (rMal d 1-SLIT), SLIT with rBet v 1 (rBet v 1-SLIT) induced Mal d 1-cross-reactive antibodies without IgE-blocking activity. To elucidate whether the development of cross-protective IgG responses depends on the degree of molecular identity of allergens we compared the cross-reactivity, cross-blocking activity, and affinity of SLIT-induced antibodies with allergens of varying amino acid sequence identities to Bet v 1 and Mal d 1, namely Cor a 1.04 (hazelnut), Pru av 1 (cherry), and Dau c 1 (carrot).

METHODS

Allergen-specific antibodies were quantified by ELISA. IgE blocking was analyzed by inhibition of allergen-induced basophil activation and IgE-facilitated allergen-presentation to T cells. The affinity of SLIT-induced antibodies was studied by acidic dissociation ELISA and competition ELISA. Identical surface areas on allergens were predicted using an in-house designed script based on structural alignments.

RESULTS

rBet v 1-SLIT-induced IgG antibodies cross-reacted with all allergens except Dau c 1. rMal d 1-SLIT-induced antibodies predominantly cross-reacted with Pru av 1 and displayed significantly higher IgE blocking to Pru av 1 than rBet v 1-SLIT-induced antibodies. rMal d 1-SLIT-induced IgG1 showed higher affinity to Mal d 1 and Pru av 1. Surface analysis revealed 84% identical area on Mal d 1 and Pru av 1. Furthermore, we identified two surface areas potentially containing epitopes present on these allergens and absent on Bet v 1.

CONCLUSION

In summary, our findings suggest that a relatively high threshold of similarity is required to establish effective cross-blocking antibodies to related allergens. Apparently, the structural identity between Bet v 1 and Mal d 1 is below this threshold. Therefore, this study may explain why immunotherapy with birch pollen allergen often fails to reduce birch pollen-related apple allergy.

The SQ tree sublingual immunotherapy tablet is effective and well tolerated in children-A pivotal phase III trial

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis and/or conjunctivitis (AR/C) induced by tree pollen is common and negatively impacts quality of life in children and adolescents. This phase III trial investigated the efficacy and safety of the SQ tree SLIT-tablet in a paediatric population (5-17 years) with moderate-to-severe AR/C induced by pollen from birch and trees in the birch homologous group.

METHODS

Nine hundred and fifty-two subjects were randomized (1:1) to daily treatment with SQ tree SLIT-tablet or placebo for up to 52 weeks and had free access to AR/C symptom-relieving medications. The primary endpoint was the average total combined score (TCS); sum of average daily symptom score (DSS) and average daily medication score (DMS) during the birch pollen season (BPS). Key secondary endpoints included average DSS and DMS during BPS and average TCS, DSS and DMS during tree pollen season (TPS).

RESULTS

SQ tree SLIT-tablet demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically relevant treatment effect compared with placebo for the TCS during BPS with an absolute treatment difference of 1.29 (95% CI: 0.58, 2.00; p = .0004) and a relative reduction of 21.9% (95% CI: 10.6, 31.9). Results were substantiated by reductions in both DSS and DMS versus placebo during the BPS and in DSS, DMS and TCS during the TPS. Treatment was generally well tolerated. Most treatment-related adverse events were mild or moderate local administration site reactions.

CONCLUSION

This is the first paediatric trial to provide robust evidence of efficacy and safety of the SQ tree SLIT-tablet in tree pollen-induced AR/C in a paediatric population (5-17 years).

A Modern Approach to Clinical Outcome Assessment in Allergy Management: Advantages of Allergen Exposure Chambers

Allergic diseases triggered by airborne allergens such as allergic rhinitis and conjunctivitis are increasingly prevalent, posing significant challenges for both patients and healthcare systems. Assessing the efficacy of allergen immunotherapy and other anti-allergic treatments requires precise and reproducible methods. Allergen exposure chambers (AECs) have emerged as advanced tools for evaluating clinical outcomes, offering controlled conditions that address many limitations of traditional field-based studies. This review explores the advantages of AECs in allergy management, emphasizing their role in providing standardized allergen exposure for both clinical research and routine assessments. AECs deliver consistent and reproducible data comparable to the nasal allergen challenge and natural allergen exposure, making them a valuable addition to the diagnosis and treatment effectiveness of allergic diseases. Although they are well suited to early-stage clinical trials, further standardization and validation are needed to gain broader acceptance in pivotal phase III studies. Future research should focus on refining AEC protocols and integrating them into regulatory frameworks, ensuring their role in the advancement of therapeutic approaches for allergic diseases.

Focused allergic rhinitis practice parameter for Canada

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a prevalent disease in Canada that affects both children and adults. Several guidelines for the management of AR have been published by professional allergy societies worldwide. However, there are regional differences in the clinical management of AR, and regulatory approval of some AR pharmacotherapies varies among countries. Thus, six research questions specific to the treatment of AR in Canada were identified for this focused practice parameter. Reviews of the literature published since 2016 were conducted to obtain evidence-based support for the responses of the Work Group to each research question. In response to research question 1 "In patients with symptoms indicative of AR, is serum-specific IgE sufficient to identify candidates for immunotherapy or is a skin prick test mandatory?" the Work Group concluded that either sIgE testing or skin prick test are acceptable for diagnosing AR and guiding immunotherapy. In response to research question 2 "When taking into account the preferences of the patient and the prescriber (stakeholder engagement) should second-generation oral antihistamine (OAH) or intranasal corticosteroid (INCS) be first line?" the Work Group concluded that existing guidelines generally agree on the use of INCS as a first-line therapy used for AR, however, patient and provider preferences and considerations can easily shift the first choice to a second-generation OAH. In response to research question 3 "Is a combination intranasal antihistamine (INAH)/INCS formulation superior to INCS plus OAH? Do they become equivalent after prolonged use?" the Work Group concluded that that the combination INAH/INCS is superior to an INCS plus OAH. However, there was insufficient evidence to answer the second question. In response to research question 4 "Do leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA) have a greater benefit than OAH in AR for some symptoms to justify a therapeutic trial in those who cannot tolerate INCS?" the Work Group concluded that LTRAs have inferior, or at best equivalent, daytime or overall symptom control compared with OAH, but LTRAs may improve nighttime symptom control and provide benefits in patients with AR and concomitant asthma. In response to research question 5 "Should sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets be considered first-line immunotherapeutic options over subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) based on the evidence of efficacy?" the Work Group concluded that the choice of SLIT or SCIT cannot be made on efficacy alone, and differences in other factors outweigh any differences in efficacy. In response to research question 6 "Based on efficacy data, should ALL patients seen by an allergist be offered SLIT or SCIT as a treatment option?" the Work Group concluded that the efficacy data suggests that SLIT or SCIT should be used broadly in patients with AR, but other clinical concerns also need to be taken into consideration.

Treatment with the SQ tree sublingual immunotherapy tablet is safe and well tolerated in real-life

BACKGROUND

The SQ tree sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablet is authorised for treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis with or without asthma in trees of the birch homologous group in 21 European countries. The primary objective of this study was to explore the safety in real-life.

METHODS

In a prospective, non-interventional post-authorisation safety study (EUPAS31470), adverse events (AEs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) at first administration and follow-up visits, symptoms, medication use, and pollen food syndrome were recorded by physicians in 6 European countries during the first 4-6 months of treatment.

RESULTS

ADRs with the SQ tree SLIT-tablet were reported in 57.7% of 1069 total patients (median age 36.0 years, 53.7% female) during the entire observation period (severity, mild-to-moderate: 70.1%, severe: 4.7%, serious: 0.7%) and in 45.9% after first administration. ADRs were not increased with pollen exposure at first administration. With coadministration of the SQ tree and grass SLIT-tablet AEs were reported in 73.8% of patients and in 52.8% with the SQ tree SLIT-tablet alone. Nasal and eye symptoms improved in 86.9% and 80.9% of patients and use of symptomatic medication in 76.0%. PFS with symptoms was reported in 43.0% of patients at baseline and in 4.3% at the individual last visit.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this non-interventional safety study with the SQ tree SLIT-tablet confirm the safety profile from placebo-controlled clinical trials and support effectiveness in real-life according to the published efficacy data. Safety was not impaired by pollen exposure at first administration or co-administration with other SLIT-tablets.

Local nasal immunotherapy with birch pollen-galactomannan conjugate-containing ointment in mice and humans

BACKGROUND

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease-modifying treatment for immunoglobulin (Ig) E-mediated allergy. Owing to the high prevalence and early onset of hay fever and pollen-food allergy syndrome (PFAS), a safer and simpler treatment method than conventional AIT is needed. To develop a local nasal immunotherapy using an ointment containing hypoallergenic pollen and assess its efficacy in mice and healthy humans.

METHODS

Hypoallergenicity was achieved by combining pollen and galactomannan through the Maillard reaction to create birch pollen-galactomannan conjugate (BP-GMC). The binding of galactomannan to Bet v 1 was confirmed using electrophoresis and Western blotting (WB). Binding of specific IgE antibodies to BP-GMC was verified using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and basophil activation test (BAT). The localization of BP-GMC absorption was confirmed using a BALB/c mouse model. BP-GMC mixed with white petrolatum was intranasally administered to 10 healthy individuals (active drugs, 8; placebo, 2) for 14 days.

RESULTS

In electrophoresis and WB, no 17-kDa band was observed. In ELISA and BAT, BP-GMC did not react to specific IgE but was bound to IgA and IgG. In the mouse model, BP-GMC was detected in nasopharyngeal-associated lymphoid tissues. In the active drug group, the salivary-specific IgA level significantly increased on day 15 (p = 0.0299), while the serum-specific IgG level significantly increased on day 85 (p = 0.0006).

CONCLUSIONS

The BP-GMC ointment rapidly produced antagonistic antibodies against IgE; it is safe and easy to use and might serve as a therapeutic antigen for hay fever and PFAS.

[Allergen-specific immunotherapy : A brief overview in association with allergic conjunctivitis]

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is the only causal and disease-modifying treatment for immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated type I allergies. Regular exposure to the causative allergen results in an immunomodulatory effect by which the predominant T‑helper (Th) 2 lymphocyte response is shifted to a Th1 lymphocyte response and more allergen-specific blocking immunoglobulins are produced. The approval of substances for AIT is regulated by the Therapy Allergens Ordinance (TAV). There are subcutaneous and/or sublingual AITs for the following indications: allergic rhinitis, allergic conjunctivitis, allergic asthma and insect venom allergy. In this article the indications for allergic conjunctivitis are discussed in particular. Clinical symptoms and a relevant type 1 sensitization are the prerequisites for the indications for AIT. The assessment of the indications and carrying out an AIT should only be carried out by physicians who have been trained in allergology.

T cells specific to multiple Bet v 1 peptides are highly cross-reactive toward the corresponding peptides from the homologous group of tree pollens

Background

Allergens from Fagales trees frequently cause spring allergy in Europe, North America, and some parts of Asia. The definition of the birch homologous group, which includes birch (Bet v), oak (Que a), alder (Aln g), hazel (Cor a), hornbeam (Car b), beech (Fag s), and chestnut (Cas s), is based on high allergen sequence identity and extensive IgE cross-reactivity. Clinical effect was seen during the alder/hazel, birch, and oak pollen seasons after treatment with tree SLIT-tablets containing only birch allergen extract. Here, we characterize T-cell reactivity with respect to epitope specificities and cross-reactivity toward various Bet v 1 family members, (PR-10/group 1 major allergens). This cross-reactivity may be part of the immunological basis of clinical effect or cross-protection when exposed to birch homologous tree species.

Method

T-cell lines were generated from 29 birch-allergic individuals through stimulation of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) with birch/Bet v or oak/Que a allergen extracts. T-cell responses to allergen extracts, purified group 1 allergens, and overlapping 20-mer peptides (Bet v 1, Aln g 1, Cor a 1, and Que a 1) were investigated by T-cell proliferation and cytokine production. Cross-reactivity was evaluated based on Pearson's correlations of response strength and further investigated by flow cytometry using tetramer staining for homologous peptide pairs.

Results

T-cell reactivity toward extracts and group 1 allergens from across the birch homologous group was observed for birch/Bet v as well as oak/Que a T-cell lines. T-cell lines responded to multiple Bet v 1 homologous peptides from Aln g 1 and Cor a 1 and a subset of Que a 1 peptides. Significant Pearson's correlations between frequently recognized peptides derived from Bet v 1 and the corresponding peptides derived from alder, hazel, and oak strongly supported the T-cell cross-reactivity toward these allergens. Cross-reactivity between birch and birch homologous peptides was confirmed by pMHCII tetramer staining.

Conclusion

T cells from birch tree pollen allergic individuals respond to multiple trees within the birch homologous group in accordance with the level of sequence homology between Bet v 1 family members, (PR-10 allergens) from these allergen sources, confirming the basis for clinical cross-protection.

KAAACI Guidelines for Allergen Immunotherapy

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a causative treatment for various allergic diseases such as allergic rhinitis, allergic asthma, and bee venom allergy that induces tolerance to offending allergens. The need for uniform practice guidelines in AIT is continuously growing because of the increasing discovery of potential candidates for AIT and evolving interest in new therapeutic approaches. This guideline is an updated version of the Korean Academy of Asthma Allergy and Clinical Immunology recommendations for AIT published in 2010. This updated guideline proposes an expert opinion by allergy, pediatrics, and otorhinolaryngology specialists with an extensive literature review. The guideline deals with basic knowledge and methodological aspects of AIT, including mechanisms, clinical efficacy, patient selection, allergens extract selection, schedule and doses, management of adverse reactions, efficacy measurements, and special consideration in pediatrics. The guidelines for sublingual immunotherapy will be covered in detail in a separate article.

TFOS Lifestyle Report: Impact of environmental conditions on the ocular surface

Environmental risk factors that have an impact on the ocular surface were reviewed and associations with age and sex, race/ethnicity, geographical area, seasonality, prevalence and possible interactions between risk factors are reviewed. Environmental factors can be (a) climate-related: temperature, humidity, wind speed, altitude, dew point, ultraviolet light, and allergen or (b) outdoor and indoor pollution: gases, particulate matter, and other sources of airborne pollutants. Temperature affects ocular surface homeostasis directly and indirectly, precipitating ocular surface diseases and/or symptoms, including trachoma. Humidity is negatively associated with dry eye disease. There is little data on wind speed and dewpoint. High altitude and ultraviolet light exposure are associated with pterygium, ocular surface degenerations and neoplastic disease. Pollution is associated with dry eye disease and conjunctivitis. Primary Sjögren syndrome is associated with exposure to chemical solvents. Living within a potential zone of active volcanic eruption is associated with eye irritation. Indoor pollution, "sick" building or house can also be associated with eye irritation. Most ocular surface conditions are multifactorial, and several environmental factors may contribute to specific diseases. A systematic review was conducted to answer the following research question: "What are the associations between outdoor environment pollution and signs or symptoms of dry eye disease in humans?" Dry eye disease is associated with air pollution (from NO2) and soil pollution (from chromium), but not from air pollution from CO or PM10. Future research should adequately account for confounders, follow up over time, and report results separately for ocular surface findings, including signs and symptoms.

Efficacy of Japanese cedar pollen sublingual immunotherapy tablets for Japanese cypress pollinosis

Background

We previously demonstrated the efficacy of Japanese cedar (JC) pollen sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets for treating seasonal allergic rhinitis in a clinical trial (trial no. 206-2-1) that covered 5 pollen dispersal seasons from 2015 to 2019.

Objective

Our aim was to perform post hoc analysis of the 206-2-1 trial data to evaluate the efficacy of JC pollen SLIT tablets for patients with rhinitis induced by pollen from Japanese cypress (JCY), a related Cupressaceae species that has a pollen dispersal season overlapping with that of JC.

Methods

Data were analyzed for 240 patients who received placebo during the first pollen dispersal season in 2015, were then rerandomized to receive JC SLIT tablets (the PA group) or placebo (the PP group) for 18 months (the 2016 and 2017 dispersal seasons), and were observed untreated for 2 years (the 2018 and 2019 dispersal seasons). The PA and PP groups were assigned to "high" and "low" subgroups if their rhinitis symptoms were exacerbated/did not change or decreased, respectively, during the peak JCY pollen dispersal period in 2015. The mean total nasal symptom and medication scores and other outcomes were compared for the high-PP, high-PA, low-PP, and low-PA groups during the 2016 to 2019 peak JCY pollen dispersal periods.

Results

The mean total nasal symptom and medication scores were significantly lower for the high-PA and low-PA groups than for the corresponding PP groups over the 4 years of treatment and observation. JCY pollen-specific IgE levels increased in both PA groups.

Conclusion

JC pollen SLIT tablets effectively suppressed JCY pollinosis symptoms, supporting the clinical relevance of immunologic cross-reactivity between JC and JCY allergens.

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.

Application of Extracellular Vesicles in Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review

The pathophysiology of allergic rhinitis (AR), one of the most common diseases in the world, is still not sufficiently understood. Extracellular vesicles (EVs), which are secreted by host and bacteria cells and take part in near and distant intracellular communication, can provide information about AR. Recently, attention has been drawn to the potential use of EVs as biomarkers, vaccines, or transporters for drug delivery. In this review, we present an up-to-date literature overview on EVs in AR to reveal their potential clinical significance in this condition. A comprehensive and systematic literature search was conducted following PRISMA statement guidelines for original, completed articles, available in English concerning EVs and AR. For this purpose, PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane, were searched up until 10 Novenmber 2022. From 275 records, 18 articles were included for analysis. The risk of bias was assessed for all studies as low or moderate risk of overall bias using the Office and Health Assessment and Translation Risk of Bias Rating Tool for Human and Animal Studies. We presented the role of exosomes in the pathophysiology of AR and highlighted the possibility of using exosomes as biomarkers and treatment in this disease.

Japanese Cedar Pollen Allergens in Japan

Pollen from members of the Cupressaceae tree family is one of the most important causes of allergic disease in the world. Cryptomeria japonica (Japanese cedar) and Chamaecyparis obtusa (Japanese cypress) are Japan's most common tree species. The pollen dispersal season is mainly from February to May. The major allergens of Japanese cedar and Japanese cypress exhibit high amino acid sequence similarity due to the phylogenetic relationship between the two species. An epidemiological study has shown that the prevalence of Japanese cedar pollinosis is approximately 40%. Younger children (5 to 9 years old) showed a high prevalence of Japanese cedar pollinosis as 30% in 2019, indicating that season pollinosis is getting worse. Pharmacotherapy is the most common treatment for pollinosis induced by Japanese cedar and Japanese cypress. Patients' satisfaction with pharmacotherapy is low due to insufficient experienced effect and daytime somnolence. Unlike pharmacotherapy, allergy immunotherapy (AIT) addresses the basic immunological mechanisms of allergic disease and activates protective allergen-reactive pathways of the immune system. AIT is now recognized as the only treatment option with the potential to provide long-term post-treatment benefits and alter the natural course of the allergic disease, including Japanese cedar pollinosis.

Guideline on allergen immunotherapy in IgE-mediated allergic diseases: S2K Guideline of the German Society of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI), Society of Pediatric Allergology and Environmental Medicine (GPA), Medical Association of German Allergologists (AeDA), Austrian Society of Allergology and Immunology (ÖGAI), Swiss Society for Allergology and Immunology (SSAI), German Dermatological Society (DDG), German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery (DGHNO-KHC), German Society of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (DGKJ), Society of Pediatric Pulmonology (GPP), German Respiratory Society (DGP), German Professional Association of Otolaryngologists (BVHNO), German Association of Paediatric and Adolescent Care Specialists (BVKJ), Federal Association of Pneumologists, Sleep and Respiratory Physicians (BdP), Professional Association of German Dermatologists (BVDD)

Not available.

Subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy in the treatment of allergic respiratory disease

Subcutaneous immunotherapy is recognized as a cornerstone in the management of allergic respiratory disease in patients who are properly characterized with allergy and with allergic rhinoconjunctivis and/or well-controlled asthma, and who are willing to adhere to the rigorous treatment program. A key tenet is that it affords the opportunity to effect long-term clinical remission through its disease-modifying properties. Furthermore, it has the potential to prevent the progression of allergic rhinitis to asthma, prevent new allergen sensitivities, and improve a patient's quality of life.

Delivery options for sublingual immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: clinical considerations for North America

Background: Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) can be delivered via tablets (SLIT-T) or aqueous drops (SLIT-D). SLIT-D dosing recommendations using North American extracts were published in 2015. We review the 2015 recommendations in the context of recent research, and compare and contrast dosing, efficacy, safety, adherence, and cost of SLIT-T and SLIT-D for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC) in North America. Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCT) of SLIT-D and SLIT-T trials were identified by a systematic PubMed search through March 1, 2022. Results: Dose-finding studies have been conducted for all approved SLIT-T; efficacy in North American populations was demonstrated in 11 RCTs. Approved SLIT-T are uniform internationally. Few dose-finding studies for SLIT-D have been conducted using North American extracts; efficacy was demonstrated in 2 RCTs. Extrapolation of dosing from SLIT-D studies conducted with extracts from other geographic regions is unreliable. Since the 2015 SLIT-D dosing recommendations, no new RCTs of SLIT-D have been conducted with North American extracts, whereas 6 SLIT-T RCTs have since been conducted in North America. Local allergic reactions are the most common adverse events with SLIT-T and SLIT-D, but both can induce systemic allergic reactions. Adherence to SLIT-D and SLIT-T remains a challenge. Patients must pay for SLIT-D directly, whereas SLIT-T is usually covered by insurance. Conclusion: As part of shared decision-making, patients should be informed about the scientific evidence supporting the use of SLIT-T and SLIT-D for ARC.

Large-scale provocation studies identify maladaptive responses to ubiquitous aeroallergens as a correlate of severe allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma

BACKGROUND

Allergic asthma (AA) and allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC) are common comorbid environmentally triggered diseases. We hypothesized that severe AA/ARC reflects a maladaptive or unrestrained response to ubiquitous aeroallergens.

METHODS

We performed provocation studies wherein six separate cohorts of persons (total n = 217) with ARC, with or without AA, were challenged once or more with fixed concentrations of seasonal or perennial aeroallergens in an aeroallergen challenge chamber (ACC).

RESULTS

Aeroallergen challenges elicited fully or partially restrained vs. unrestrained evoked symptom responsiveness, corresponding to the resilient and adaptive vs. maladaptive AA/ARC phenotypes, respectively. The maladaptive phenotype was evoked more commonly during challenge with a non-endemic versus endemic seasonal aeroallergen. In an AA cohort, symptom responses evoked after house dust mite (HDM) challenges vs. recorded in the natural environment were more accurate and precise predictors of asthma severity and control, lung function (FEV1), and mechanistic correlates of maladaptation. Correlates included elevated levels of peripheral blood CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells, eosinophils, and T-cell activation, as well as gene expression proxies for ineffectual epithelial injury/repair responses. Evoked symptom severity after HDM challenge appeared to be more closely related to levels of CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells than eosinophils, neutrophils, or HDM-specific IgE.

CONCLUSIONS

Provocation studies support the concept that resilience, adaptation, and maladaptation to environmental disease triggers calibrate AA/ARC severity. Despite the ubiquity of aeroallergens, in response to these disease triggers in controlled settings (ie, ACC), most atopic persons manifest the resilient or adaptive phenotype. Thus, ARC/AA disease progression may reflect the failure to preserve the resilient or adaptive phenotype. The triangulation of CD8+ T-cell activation, airway epithelial injury/repair processes and maladaptation in mediating AA disease severity needs more investigation.

High-dose pollen intralymphatic immunotherapy: Two RDBPC trials question the benefit of dose increase

BACKGROUND

The same dosing schedule, 1000 SQ-U times three, with one-month intervals, have been evaluated in most trials of intralymphatic immunotherapy (ILIT) for the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR). The present studies evaluated if a dose escalation in ILIT can enhance the clinical and immunological effects, without compromising safety.

METHODS

Two randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trials of ILIT for grass pollen-induced AR were performed. The first included 29 patients that had recently ended 3 years of SCIT and the second contained 39 not previously vaccinated patients. An up-dosage of 1000-3000-10,000 (5000 + 5000 with 30 minutes apart) SQ-U with 1 month in between was evaluated.

RESULTS

Doses up to 10,000 SQ-U were safe after recent SCIT. The combined symptom-medication scores (CSMS) were reduced by 31% and the grass-specific IgG4 levels in blood were doubled. In ILIT de novo, the two first patients that received active treatment developed serious adverse reactions at 5000 SQ-U. A modified up-dosing schedule; 1000-3000-3000 SQ-U appeared to be safe but failed to improve the CSMS. Flow cytometry analyses showed increased activation of lymph node-derived dendritic but not T cells. Quality of life and nasal provocation response did not improve in any study.

CONCLUSION

Intralymphatic immunotherapy in high doses after SCIT appears to further reduce grass pollen-induced seasonal symptoms and may be considered as an add-on treatment for patients that do not reach full symptom control after SCIT. Up-dosing schedules de novo with three monthly injections that exceeds 3000 SQ-U should be avoided.

Birch-naive, oak-allergic subjects' response to birch pollen in an environmental chamber

Background: Oak and birch pollens are strongly cross-reactive. It is unknown how robust this cross-reactivity is in patients without natural exposure to pollen of both trees. We assessed the symptom response to birch pollen in subjects with skin-prick test (SPT) results positive to oak and birch but only naturally exposed to oak by using an allergen challenge chamber. Methods: The subjects with SPT results positive to oak and birch had their serum-specific immunoglobulin E (ssIgE) to oak and birch antigens measured. Residential historical data were obtained. The subjects were exposed to birch pollen (3500 ± 700 grains/m³) in two consecutive 3-hour challenges. Symptoms were recorded at baseline and 30-minute intervals. Results: Twenty-four subjects, 12 men; ages 20-58 years, completed the study. Sixteen subjects (66.7%) responded with high Total Symptom Scores (TSS) ≥10 of a maximum 21. Twelve subjects (50%) had ssIgE values ≥0.70 kU/L to oak, 10 of whom had ssIgE values ≥0.70 kU/L to birch. These 10 subjects had a significantly higher maximum TSS than the rest. Also, 15 subjects without a previous natural exposure to birch pollen responded with TSS equivalent to the 9 subjects with previous exposure. Conclusion: Virginia live oak ssIgE levels of patients allergic to oak and birch correlated with the symptom response to birch pollen exposure, even without previous natural exposure to birch. The subjects naive to birch pollen responded to birch pollen exposure with symptoms comparable with both those with previous sustained exposure and also those who resided in endemic areas, as reported by other researchers.

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.

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

Background

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

Objectives

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Safety of the standardized quality tree sublingual immunotherapy tablet: Pooled safety analysis of clinical trials

BACKGROUND

The standardized quality (SQ) tree sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablet has recently been approved for treatment of tree pollen allergy. Healthcare workers should be provided with detailed safety data for clinical use.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the tolerability and safety of the SQ tree SLIT-tablet (12 SQ-Bet) in adults and adolescents.

METHODS

Safety data were pooled from three double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trials (2 phase-II/1 phase-III) including adults and adolescents 12-65 years with allergic rhinitis and/or conjunctivitis treated before and during one pollen season once-daily with 12 SQ-Bet (n = 471) or placebo (n = 458): EudraCT no: 2012-000031-59; NCT02481856; EudraCT 2015-004821-15.

RESULTS

The most frequently reported investigational medicinal product (IMP)-related AEs with 12 SQ-Bet were oral pruritis (39% of subjects) and throat irritation (29%). IMP-related AEs were mainly mild or moderate in severity, and the majority resolved without treatment and did not lead to treatment interruption/discontinuation. With 12 SQ-Bet, oral pruritus was more frequent among subjects with pollen food syndrome (PFS) (45%) than without PFS (29%). The 12 SQ-Bet did not seem to induce an increased risk of asthma: 7 events were reported in 7 subjects with 12 SQ-Bet and 11 in 10 subjects with placebo. No differences were seen in the risk of moderate-to-severe IMP-related AEs regardless of age, PFS status and asthma medical history.

CONCLUSIONS

The 12 SQ tree SLIT-tablet was well tolerated in tree pollen allergic subjects with no major safety concerns detected. This safety profile supports daily at-home sublingual administration once the first dose is tolerated when administered under medical supervision.

Technical standards in allergen exposure chambers worldwide - an EAACI Task Force Report

Allergen exposure chambers (AECs) can be used for controlled exposure to allergenic and non-allergenic airborne particles in an enclosed environment, in order to (i) characterize the pathological features of respiratory diseases and (ii) contribute to and accelerate the clinical development of pharmacological treatments and allergen immunotherapy for allergic disease of the respiratory tract (such as allergic rhinitis, allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, and allergic asthma). In the guidelines of the European Medicines Agency for the clinical development of products for allergen immunotherapy (AIT), the role of AECs in determining primary endpoints in dose-finding Phase II trials is emphasized. Although methodologically insulated from the variability of natural pollen exposure, chamber models remain confined to supporting secondary, rather than primary, endpoints in Phase III registration trials. The need for further validation in comparison with field exposure is clearly mandated. On this basis, the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) initiated a Task Force in 2015 charged to gain a better understanding of how AECs can generate knowledge about respiratory allergies and can contribute to the clinical development of treatments. Researchers working with AECs worldwide were asked to provide technical information in eight sections: (i) dimensions and structure of the AEC, (ii) AEC staff, (iii) airflow, air processing, and operating conditions, (iv) particle dispersal, (v) pollen/particle counting, (vi) safety and non-contamination measures, (vii) procedures for symptom assessments, (viii) tested allergens/substances and validation procedures. On this basis, a minimal set of technical requirements for AECs applied to the field of allergology is proposed.

Molecular sensitization patterns in animal allergy: Relationship with clinical relevance and pet ownership

BACKGROUND

In vitro diagnosis using single molecules is increasingly complementing conventional extract-based diagnosis. We explored in routine patients with animal allergy to what extent molecules can explain polysensitization and identify primary sensitizers and how individual IgE patterns correlate with previous pet ownership and clinical relevance.

METHODS

Serum samples from 294 children and adults with suspect allergic rhino-conjunctivitis or asthma and a positive skin prick test to cat, dog and/or horse were tested by ImmunoCAP for IgE antibodies against eleven different allergens from cat (Fel d 1,2,4,7), dog (Can f 1,2,3,4,5,6) and horse (Equ c 1).

RESULTS

Patients monosensitized to cat (40.8%) or dog (6.1%) showed simple IgE patterns dominated by Fel d 1 (93%) and Can f 5 (67%), respectively. Double-sensitization to cat+dog (25.9%), cat+horse (5.4%) and polysensitization (20.7%) was associated with an increasing prevalence of the cross-reactive lipocalins Fel d 4/Can f 6/Equ c 1 and Fel d 7/Can f 1. While these lipocalins were not reliable markers for genuine sensitization per se, comparison of sIgE levels may give a clue on the primary sensitizer. Sensitizations to dog appeared to result from cross-reactivity with cat in 48%, with half of these sensitizations lacking clinical relevance. Individual sensitization patterns strongly mirrored current or previous pet ownership with the exception of Fel d 1 which regularly caused sensitization also in non-owners.

CONCLUSIONS

Allergen components can reasonably illuminate the molecular basis of animal (poly)sensitization in the majority of patients and are helpful in distinguishing between primary sensitization and sometimes less relevant cross-reactivity.

How important is proper dosing for subcutaneous and sublingual allergy immunotherapy?

Background: Results of surveys report that allergists use a wide range of doses for allergy immunotherapy; however, results of randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled studies suggest that the range of the optimum effective dosing is relatively narrow. Objective: To review studies that established effective or less than fully effective doses for allergy immunotherapy. Methods: Studies were reviewed that established effective and ineffective subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy doses. Only those studies that expressed dosing in terms of the content of a major allergen in the maintenance doses were included in defining effective and ineffective doses. Results: Studies were identified that showed effective doses for subcutaneous injection, established in randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trials, for short ragweed, timothy grass, house-dust mites, cat and dog dander, birch, and Alternaria. For short ragweed, timothy grass, Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, and cat and dog dander, less-effective doses were determined, along with effective doses; the less-effective doses were only one-fifth to one-tenth less in allergen content than were the effective doses. Effective doses of cockroach and all fungal extracts except Alternaria have not been established. Information is available on the mean major allergen content of U.S. standardized and a few nonstandardized extracts, which allows the information on effective and ineffective dosing to be used in prescribing subcutaneous allergy immunotherapy. With sublingual allergy immunotherapy, all the approved tablets had multidose studies that determined the optimal dose. For the U.S. liquid extracts, to my knowledge, there are no studies to define effective doses except for ragweed. Conclusions: Although a wide range of doses are prescribed by U.S. allergists, analysis of available data suggests that effective doses fall within a narrow range and that use of doses one-fifth or one-tenth of the effective doses may sacrifice most or all of the potential efficacy of the treatment.

IgE-cross-blocking antibodies to Fagales following sublingual immunotherapy with recombinant Bet v 1

BACKGROUND

Evidence has accumulated that birch pollen immunotherapy reduces rhinoconjunctivitis to pollen of birch homologous trees. Therapeutic efficacy has been associated with IgE-blocking IgG antibodies. We have recently shown that sera collected after 16 weeks of sublingual immunotherapy with recombinant Bet v 1 (rBet v 1-SLIT) display strong IgE-blocking bioactivity for Bet v 1. Here, we assessed whether rBet v 1-SLIT-induced IgG antibodies display cross-blocking activity to related allergens in Fagales pollen.

METHODS

IgE, IgG1 and IgG4 reactivity to recombinant Bet v 1, Aln g 1, Car b 1, Ost c 1, Cor a 1, Fag s 1, Cas s 1 and Que a 1 were assessed in pre- and post-SLIT samples of 17 individuals by ELISA. A basophil inhibition assay using stripped basophils re-sensitized with a serum pool containing high Bet v 1-specific IgE levels was established and used to assess CD63 expression in response to allergens after incubation with pre-SLIT or post-SLIT samples. IgG1 and IgG4 were depleted from post-SLIT samples to assess its contribution to IgE-cross-blocking.

RESULTS

Sublingual immunotherapy with recombinant Bet v 1 boosted cross-reactive IgE antibodies and induced IgG1 and IgG4 antibodies with inter- and intra-individually differing reactivity to the homologs. Highly variable cross-blocking activities of post-SLIT samples to the different allergens were found. IgG1 and IgG4 antibodies displayed cross-blocking activity with individual variance.

CONCLUSIONS

Our mechanistic approach suggested that immunotherapy with the reference allergen Bet v 1 induces individual repertoires of cross-reactive IgG1 and IgG4 antibodies. The cross-blocking bioactivity of these antibodies was also highly variable and neither predictable from protein homology nor IgE-cross-reactivity.

Shifts in allergy practice in a COVID-19 world: Implications of pre-COVID-19 national health care provider and patient surveys of treatments for nasal allergies

Background: Most U.S. patient and health care provider surveys with regard to nasal allergy treatments were conducted before sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablets and allergy immunotherapy (AIT) shared decision-making tools were available. Objective: Patient and health care provider surveys with regard to current perceptions of nasal allergy burden, symptoms, and treatments were conducted to compare with previous surveys and provide insight into the use of SLIT-tablets and AIT shared decision-making tools. Methods: From November-December 2019, adults (N = 510) diagnosed with nasal allergies and health care providers (N = 304) who treated nasal allergies in the United States completed surveys with regard to nasal allergy management. Results: Of the patient respondents, 42% reported that their symptoms were only somewhat controlled and 48% had avoided activities because of their nasal allergies. In all, 38% were using only over-the-counter (OTC) medications for treatment, and 42%, 7%, and 8% had ever received subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT), sublingual allergy drops, or SLIT-tablets, respectively; 56% and 85% reported that they had never discussed SCIT or SLIT, respectively, with their health care provider. Of the health care provider respondents, 45%, 58%, and 20% were very likely to discuss OTC medications, SCIT, or SLIT, respectively. Allergists were more inclined to discuss SCIT with their patients than other health care providers (82% versus 33%, respectively). Most allergists (67%) and other health care providers (62%) reported that they did not use an AIT shared decision-making tool, primarily because of unawareness. Conclusion: The patients with nasal allergies continued to report inadequate symptom control and activity impairment. SLIT-tablets and AIT shared decision-making tools were underused. In the coronavirus disease 2019 era, social distancing may limit office visits, which impacts SCIT administration and prompts increased use of telemedicine and a possible advantage for at-home-administered SLIT-tablets over SCIT.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

OBJECTIVE

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

DATA SOURCES

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

STUDY SELECTIONS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Emergence of pollen food allergy syndrome in asthmatic children in Paris

BACKGROUND

Over the last few decades, the level of pollen from birch and homologous trees has increased in parts of Europe. Sensitization to birch pollen allergens (principally Bet v 1) has been associated with food cross-reactivity called pollen food allergy syndrome (PFAS).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate changes in allergic diseases due to IgE sensitization over 25 years in asthmatic children.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional retrospective study conducted in Paris. We analyzed two cohorts of asthmatic children with similar characteristics explored between 1993-1999 (old cohort = OC) and 2012-2018 (recent cohort = RC).

RESULTS

121 children were in the OC and 120 in the RC. An increase in sensitization to tree pollens was found especially for birch pollen, which was 11.6% in the OC and 31% in the RC (P = .0002). Allergic rhinitis prevalence was significantly higher in the RC than in the OC (96% vs 52%, respectively, P < .0001). IgE-mediated food allergy increased from 6% to 16% in the OC and RC, respectively, (P = .01) mainly due to PFAS. In the RC, a higher mean Bet v 1-specific IgE level was observed in children with PFAS compared to children without (105.7 KU/L ± 17.8 and 48.9 kU/L ± 15.7, respectively, P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Allergic rhinitis and food allergy with tree pollen sensitization have increased in Paris over 25 years mainly due to PFAS. Environmental factors could be responsible for these modifications as described in the literature.

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

The use of nasal allergen vs allergen exposure chambers to evaluate allergen immunotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease-modifying treatment option for allergic rhinitis (AR) patients with persistent moderate-severe AR for whom traditional pharmacotherapies are ineffective. The nasal allergen challenge (NAC) and allergen exposure chamber (AEC) are two translational models of AR that can be used to investigate the properties, safety, and efficacy of AIT.

AREAS COVERED

Peer-reviewed, human-centered articles utilizing AEC or NAC models to investigate AIT between 2010 and 2020 were curated from PubMed, EMBASE, and OVID Medline databases. AECs have been used to evaluate traditional subcutaneous and sublingual administrations of AIT, including cross-protective effects and different dosing regimens. More recently, the effectiveness of novel AIT formulations has been evaluated. NACs are another model used to study AIT, including using novel intralymphatic routes of administration. It is an especially powerful and versatile tool to determine if basic science and animal model findings are clinically translatable.

EXPERT OPINION

The AEC and NAC models both produce clinically relevant and reproducible results. AECs are more effective for studying many participants but are limited because they require a specialized facility. As more AIT therapies and new formulations are developed over time, the versatility of the NAC will be especially useful.

Changes in Immunologic Indicators During Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy for Allergic Rhinitis and Determinants of Variability: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

To date, there are no generally recognized biomarkers for allergen immunotherapy (AIT) and even the changes in immunological indicators during AIT are inconsistent in different publications.

OBJECTIVE

This study was conducted to quantify the immunological changes that occur during AIT and identify the determinants of heterogeneity.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials of AIT published in the past 10 years were searched in Medline, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL. Data on immunological indicators were extracted, and the characteristics of the included studies were collected. Meta-analysis and meta-regression were conducted for each indicator. The study was registered on the PROSPERO website (CRD42020176127).

RESULTS

We reviewed 1898 studies. Forty-six studies met the inclusion criteria, and 31 studies were included in the quantitative analyses. Subset analyses by time demonstrated that serum allergen-specific IgE (sIgE) of AIT patients increased in the first 12 months, then decreased and became slightly lower than that of control patients. Allergen-specific IgG4 (sIgG4) was elevated in the AIT group during and after treatment. IgE-blocking factor (IgE-BF) was increased and IgE-facilitated allergen binding (IgE-FAB) was reduced in AIT patients. Both of them of the 2 factors were associated with clinical efficacy in the multivariate regression analysis. sIgE/sIgG4 decreased in AIT patients, while there was no change in total IgE.

CONCLUSION

The levels of serum sIgE and sIgG4 during AIT showed a time-dependent pattern. IgE-BF and IgE-FAB should be further investigated as biomarkers for predicting and monitoring AIT efficacy.

Treatment Effect of the Tree Pollen SLIT-Tablet on Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis During Oak Pollen Season

BACKGROUND

Birch, alder, hazel, and oak are members of the birch homologous group based on cross-reactivity toward the birch pollen allergen Betula verrucosa 1. Theoretically, allergy to these tree pollens may be treated by immunotherapy with one representative allergen extract.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate post hoc whether treatment of birch pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis with a standardized tree sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablet containing birch pollen extract reduces symptoms and symptom-relieving medication use during the oak pollen season (OPS).

METHODS

In a randomized, multinational, double-blind trial (EudraCT-2015-004821-15), 634 participants (ages 12-65 years) received daily tree SLIT-tablet (12 SQ-Bet) or placebo before and during tree pollen season (alder/hazel plus birch pollen season [BPS]). Symptom-relieving medication was allowed. The primary end point was the average total combined score (sum of rhinoconjunctivitis daily symptom score and daily medication score) during BPS. Outcomes during the OPS (excluding overlapping BPS days) were analyzed post hoc.

RESULTS

Relative improvements in average total combined score, daily symptom score, and daily medication score with the tree SLIT-tablet versus placebo during the OPS were 25%, 22%, and 32%, respectively (all P < .001). Significant correlations were observed between birch and oak serum immunoglobulin E (sIgE) at baseline (r = 0.86) and between birch and oak IgG₄ after treatment (r = 0.72). Oak sIgE and IgG₄ kinetics in response to tree SLIT-tablet treatment were similar to birch.

CONCLUSIONS

The tree SLIT-tablet leads to significant improvement of rhinoconjunctivitis outcomes during the OPS, supporting the clinical relevance of immunological cross-reactivity toward birch and oak allergens.

Allergy to oak pollen in North America

Background: Oak pollen is an important allergen in North America. The genus Quercus (oak) belongs to the family Fagaceae under the order Fagales. Objective: The objective of this article was to narratively review the oak pollen season, clinical and epidemiologic aspects of allergy to oak pollen, oak taxonomy, and oak allergen cross-reactivity, with a focus on the North American perspective. Methods: A PubMed literature review (no limits) was conducted. Publications related to oak pollen, oak-related allergic rhinitis with or without conjunctivitis, and oak-related allergic asthma were selected for review. Results: Oak species are common throughout the United States and contribute up to 50% to overall atmospheric pollen loads. Mean peak oak pollen counts can reach >2000 grains/m³. The start of the oak pollen season generally corresponds to the seasonal shift from winter to spring based on latitude and elevation, and may begin as early as mid February. The duration of the season can last > 100 days and, in general, is longer at lower latitudes. In the United States, ∼30% of individuals with allergy are sensitized to oak. The oak pollen season correlates with increased allergic rhinitis symptom-relieving medication use and asthma-related emergency department visits or hospitalizations. Oak falls within the birch homologous group. Extensive immunologic cross-reactivity has been demonstrated between oak pollen and birch pollen allergens, and, more specifically, their major allergens Que a 1 and Bet v 1. The cross-reactivity between oak and birch has implications for allergy immunotherapy (AIT) because guidelines suggest selecting one representative allergen within a homologous group for AIT, a principle that would apply to oak. Conclusion: Allergy to oak pollen is common in North America and has a substantial clinical impact. Oak pollen allergens are cross-reactive with birch pollen allergens, which may have implications for AIT.

Simplified AIT for allergy to several tree pollens-Arguments from the immune outcome analyses following treatment with SQ tree SLIT-tablet

BACKGROUND

The SQ tree SLIT-tablet (containing birch extract) proved clinically significant effects during the pollen season for birch as well as alder/hazel. Immune outcomes of this treatment for allergens from multiple birch homologous trees need further investigation. We hypothesize that birch pollen extract AIT modulates a highly cross-reactive immune response and that this may be the basis for the observed clinical cross-protection.

METHODS

Blood samples were collected from 397 birch allergic patients during SQ tree SLIT-tablet or placebo treatment (1:1) for up to 40 weeks. Serum IgE and IgG₄ specific to birch, and birch homologous tree pollens from alder, hazel, hornbeam, beech and chestnut were measured by ImmunoCAP. IgE-Blocking Factor (IgE-BF) for alder, birch and hazel during treatment was measured by Advia Centaur and blocking effects for birch and all these birch homologous tree pollens were further investigated by basophil activation (BAT). Antibody readouts were investigated in patient subsets. T-cell responses (proliferation) to allergen extracts and peptide pools (group 1 allergens) were investigated in T-cell lines from 29 untreated birch pollen-allergic individuals.

RESULTS

Significant Pearson correlations between serum IgE towards birch, alder, hazel, hornbeam and beech were observed (r-values > .86). T-cell reactivity was observed throughout the birch homologous group. Almost identical kinetics for changes in IgE towards birch, alder and hazel were observed during treatment and similar species-specific changes were seen for serum-IgG₄ . IgG₄ reactivity towards birch and alder, hazel, hornbeam and beech correlated significantly at end-of-treatment (r-values > .72). Treatment resulted in similar IgE-BF kinetics for alder, birch, and hazel and blocking of BAT for multiple trees in most actively treated patients investigated.

CONCLUSIONS

Systematic analyses of T-cell and antibody cross-reactivities before and during birch pollen extract AIT provide the immunological basis for the observed clinical effect of SQ tree SLIT-tablet treatment of tree pollen allergy induced by multiple trees in the birch homologous group.

Biomarkers for diagnosis and prediction of therapy responses in allergic diseases and asthma

Modern health care requires a proactive and individualized response to diseases, combining precision diagnosis and personalized treatment. Accordingly, the approach to patients with allergic diseases encompasses novel developments in the area of personalized medicine, disease phenotyping and endotyping, and the development and application of reliable biomarkers. A detailed clinical history and physical examination followed by the detection of IgE immunoreactivity against specific allergens still represents the state of the art. However, nowadays, further emphasis focuses on the optimization of diagnostic and therapeutic standards and a large number of studies have been investigating the biomarkers of allergic diseases, including asthma, atopic dermatitis, allergic rhinitis, food allergy, urticaria and anaphylaxis. Various biomarkers have been developed by omics technologies, some of which lead to a better classification of distinct phenotypes or endotypes. The introduction of biologicals to clinical practice increases the need for biomarkers for patient selection, prediction of outcomes and monitoring, to allow for an adequate choice of the duration of these costly and long‐lasting therapies. Escalating healthcare costs together with questions about the efficacy of the current management of allergic diseases require further development of a biomarker‐driven approach. Here, we review biomarkers in diagnosis and treatment of asthma, atopic dermatitis, allergic rhinitis, viral infections, chronic rhinosinusitis, food allergy, drug hypersensitivity and allergen immunotherapy with a special emphasis on specific IgE, the microbiome and the epithelial barrier. In addition, EAACI guidelines on biologicals are discussed within the perspective of biomarkers.

Advances and novel developments in allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is an upper airway disease with high prevalence in the world, and therefore needs to be thoroughly investigated and treated accordingly. Although the mechanisms underlying the pathology and treatment of AR have been widely studied, many aspects of AR are still unclear and warrant further investigations. The purpose of the present review was therefore to report recently published papers, which highlight the novel mechanisms and treatments of AR. These include role of environment, important proteins and cells, and some other factors in the pathogenesis of AR; as well as the role of immunotherapy and biologics in the treatment of AR.

State of the Art: Development of a Sublingual Allergy Immunotherapy Tablet for Allergic Rhinitis in Japan

Allergic rhinitis (AR) caused by house dust mite (HDM) and Japanese cedar pollen (JCP) represents a significant, expanding health problem in Japan. Allergic symptoms often have a severe impact on the QOL such as sleep disturbance and reduced school and work performance. In addition to the classical symptoms, AR is known to be a risk factor for the development of allergic asthma, a potentially life-threatening condition. Allergy immunotherapy (AIT) is a well-documented, safe, effective treatment option for respiratory allergic disease. It has been demonstrated that AIT can provide relief from clinical symptoms and that AIT has the potential to provide long-term post-treatment effect. Although the mechanism of AIT is not fully understood, it can actively modulate protective allergen-reactive pathways of the immune system and alter the natural course of disease. Unlike pharmacotherapy, AIT addresses the basic immunological mechanisms that are responsible for the development and persistence of allergic conditions. Currently two main routes of AIT administration are commonly available, subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Both SCIT and SLIT are clinically effective, and SLIT is particularly well tolerated, with a lower risk of systemic allergic reactions compared with SCIT. To date, SLIT tablets have been developed for a range of different allergies including HDM and JCP and are the best-documented AIT treatment form. Here we introduce the current status of development of a SLIT tablet in Japan for AR, examine the clinical aspects and mechanism of action of AIT, and discuss the future directions of SLIT.

Mechanisms of allergen-specific immunotherapy and allergen tolerance

Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is the mainstay treatment for the cure of allergic disorders, with depicted efficacy and safety by several trials and meta-analysis. AIT impressively contributes to the management of allergic rhinitis, asthma and venom allergies. Food allergy is a new arena for AIT with promising results, especially via novel administration routes. Cell subsets with regulatory capacities are induced during AIT. IL-10 and transforming growth factor (TGF)-β are the main suppressor cytokines, in addition to surface molecules such as cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4) and programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) within the micro milieu. Modified T- and B-cell responses and antibody isotypes, increased activity thresholds for eosinophils, basophils and mast cells and consequent limitation of inflammatory cascades altogether induce and maintain a state of sustained allergen-specific unresponsiveness. Established tolerance is reflected into the clinical perspectives as improvement of allergy symptoms together with reduced medication requirements and evolved disease severity. Long treatment durations, costs, reduced patient compliance and risk of severe, even life-threatening adverse reactions during treatment stand as major limiting factors for AIT. By development of purified non-allergenic, highly-immunogenic modified allergen extracts, and combinational usage of them with novel adjuvant molecules via new routes may shorten treatment durations and possibly reduce these drawbacks. AIT is the best model for custom-tailored therapy of allergic disorders. Better characterization of disease endotypes, definition of specific biomarkers for diagnosis and therapy follow-up, as well as precision medicine approaches may further contribute to success of AIT in management of allergic disorders.

Tolerance mechanisms in allergen immunotherapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Allergen immunotherapy is the only treatment modality which alters the natural course of allergic diseases by restoring immune tolerance against allergens. Deeper understanding of tolerance mechanisms will lead to the development of new vaccines, which target immune responses and promote tolerance.

RECENT FINDINGS

Successful allergen immunotherapy (AIT) induces allergen-specific peripheral tolerance, characterized mainly by the generation of allergen-specific Treg cells and reduction of Th2 cells. At the early phase, AIT leads to a decrease in the activity and degranulation of mast cells and basophils and a decrease in inflammatory responses of eosinophils in inflamed tissues. Treg cells show their effects by secreting inhibitory cytokines including interleukin (IL)-10, transforming growth factor-β, interfering with cellular metabolisms, suppressing antigen presenting cells and innate lymphoid cells (ILCs) and by cytolysis. AIT induces the development of regulatory B cells producing IL-10 and B cells expressing allergen-specific IgG4. Recent investigations have demonstrated that AIT is also associated with the formation of ILC2reg and DCreg cells which contribute to tolerance induction.

SUMMARY

Research done so far, has shown that multiple molecular and cellular factors are dysregulated in allergic diseases and modified by AIT. Studies should now focus on finding the best target and ideal biomarkers to identify ideal candidates for AIT.

Does the principle of homologous groups allow a reduction of allergens in the skin prick test panel?

PURPOSE

Regulatory and economic conditions drive the application of the concept of homologous groups on therapeutic and diagnostic formulations. In this context, a possible reduction of allergens in the skin prick test panel in the clinical routine should be investigated for the grass, birch and Dermatophagoides homologous group.

METHODS

Grass and cultivated rye skin prick test results of 1101 patients, birch/hazel/alder skin prick test results of 1131 patients and 1068 Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus and farinae skin prick tests were retrospectively evaluated with regard to sensitivity and false-negative rate detecting sensitization against cultivated rye with grass skin prick test, sensitization against hazel and/or alder with birch skin prick test and sensitization towards Dermatophagoides farinae with Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus skin prick test.

RESULTS

Skin prick test results in all groups highly correlated in Spearman Rank Order correlation. Sensitivity of grass skin prick test detecting sensitization against cultivated rye was highest with 98.9%, sensitivity of birch skin prick test detecting sensitization toward hazel and alder was 95.6 and 90.0%, respectively. Sensitivity of skin prick test with Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus detecting sensitization towards Dermatophagoides farinae was 93.6%. Only 26 patients with positive rye, hazel, alder or Dermatophagoides farinae skin prick test that were overlooked by grass, birch or Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus skin prick test reported allergic symptoms.

CONCLUSION

In routine clinical practice, sensitization against cultivated rye can safely be detected by skin prick test with grass allergen. In addition, the sensitivity of birch skin prick test is high in terms of sensitization towards hazel, but lower for alder. Sensitivity of Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus skin prick test also is high to detect sensitization towards Dermatophagoides farinae. Further research will indicate if several skin prick test allergens will disappear and be completely replaced by a single skin prick test based on the principle of homologous groups.

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

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

SUMMARY

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

Is allergy immunotherapy with birch sufficient to treat patients allergic to pollen of tree species of the birch homologous group?

Pollen from various Fagales tree species prolongs the season and makes tree pollen allergy a major health problem. Despite involving the same causative allergens, allergy immunotherapy (AIT) treatment habits differ significantly across different geographical regions. Diagnosis and treatment with AIT in patients allergic to tree pollen were discussed by a group of German medical experts who give practical recommendations based on the available data. Regulatory perspective: According to current guidelines on allergen products, birch pollen are the representative allergen source of the birch homologous group including several Fagales trees based on sequence and structural similarity of their allergen proteins. Immunological perspective: A high level of IgE cross-reactivity towards allergens from the birch homologous group has been observed in basic research and clinical trials. Clinical perspective: Clinical trial data show that the efficacy of birch pollen AIT is not only related to birch pollen allergy but extends to pollen from other trees, especially alder, hazel and oak. In order to optimize diagnosis and treatment of tree pollen allergy, the experts recommend to focus diagnosis and respective treatment with AIT primarily to birch as the representative allergen of the Fagales tree homologous group, but further diagnostics may be needed for some patients to determine adequate treatment.

IgE-blocking antibodies following SLIT with recombinant Mal d 1 accord with improved apple allergy

BACKGROUND

We recently reported that 16 weeks of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) with recombinant (r) Mal d 1, but not rBet v 1, significantly improved birch pollen-related apple allergy. Allergen-specific IgE-blocking IgG antibodies have been associated with clinical efficacy.

OBJECTIVE

We compared the quantity, quality, and IgE-blocking bioactivity of SLIT-induced Mal d 1-specific IgG antibodies in both treatment groups.

METHODS

Pre- and post-SLIT sera were assessed for rMal d 1-specific IgG antibodies in ELISA and for their ability to inhibit apple allergen-induced upregulation of CD63 on basophils from nontreated individuals with birch pollen-related apple allergy. Post-SLIT sera depleted of IgG1 or IgG4 were compared for their IgE-blocking activity. IgG1 binding to rMal d 1 was competed with rMal d 1 and rBet v 1 in ELISA.

RESULTS

SLIT with rMal d 1 and rBet v 1 induced comparable levels of rMal d 1-specific IgG1, IgG2, IgG3, and IgG4 antibodies. Only post-rMal d 1 SLIT sera displayed IgE-blocking activity, which was significantly reduced by depletion of IgG1 and less so by IgG4 depletion. In competition ELISA, IgG1 binding to Mal d 1 in post-rMal d 1 SLIT sera was fully inhibited with rMal d 1 but not with rBet v 1. Correspondingly, Bet v 1 was the more potent competitor for IgG1 binding to Mal d 1 in post-rBet v 1 SLIT sera.

CONCLUSION

rMal d 1 SLIT for 16 weeks induced functional, primarily Mal d 1-specific IgE-blocking antibodies, whereas rBet v 1 SLIT induced Bet v 1-specific, Mal d 1-cross-reactive IgG antibodies with limited cross-blocking activity. These results provide a possible explanation for the limited effectiveness of birch pollen immunotherapy in birch pollen-related food allergy and indicate a dominant protective role of functional IgE-blocking IgG1 antibodies in the early phase of allergy treatment.

Clinical aspects of sublingual immunotherapy tablets and drops

BACKGROUND

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is administered via tablets (SLIT-T) or liquid drops (SLIT-D). In North America, currently 4 SLIT-T formulations are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for allergy immunotherapy, and SLIT-D is an off-label use of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) extracts.

OBJECTIVE

To compare and contrast aspects of SLIT-T and SLIT-D, including physical characteristics, mechanism of action, dosing, efficacy, safety, adherence, and cost.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed literature review (no limits), product prescribing information, and manufacturer websites.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Publications related to physical characteristics, mechanism of action, dosing, efficacy, safety, and adherence.

RESULTS

Published evidence indicates that tablet and drop formulations differ in regard to physical characteristics, dosing, and strength of evidence for efficacy. Whether there are any differences in absorption and mechanism of action between the 2 formulations is currently unknown. Optimal dosing, efficacy, and safety have been established for SLIT-T. In contrast, in North America there is little support for efficacy of SLIT-D from randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, and dose ranges have not been appropriately evaluated. SLIT-T treats a single allergen, whereas in the United States SLIT-D often contains multiple allergens to treat polysensitization. The safety profiles of SLIT-T and SLIT-D appear similar, and both formulations are considered safer than SCIT.

CONCLUSION

Professional guidelines should make a clear distinction between SLIT-T and SLIT-D in their recommendations to minimize confusion with the umbrella term SLIT.