Efficacy and Safety of HDM SLIT Tablet in Japanese Adults with Allergic 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.

Allergen immunotherapy combined with Notch pathway inhibitors improves HDM-induced allergic airway inflammation and inhibits ILC2 activation

Introduction

Group 2 innate lymphoid cells (ILC2s) play a crucial role in house dust mite (HDM)-induced allergic inflammation, and allergen immunotherapy (AIT) holds promise for treating the disease by reducing the frequency of ILC2s. Despite significant progress in AIT for allergic diseases, there remains a need to improve the control of allergic symptoms.

Methods

We investigated the synergistic effect of the Notch signaling pathway and subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) in treating allergic airway inflammation in mice and their impact on the ratio of ILC2s in lung tissues. This was achieved by establishing the HDM-induced airway allergic disorders (HAAD) model and SCIT model. Additionally, we conducted in vitro investigations into the effect of the Notch signaling pathway on the secretory function of activated ILC2s using fluorescence-activated cell sorting. Furthermore, we explored the coactivation of the Notch signaling pathway with SCIT in vitro by sorting ILC2s from the lung tissues of mice after SCIT modeling.

Results

Previously, our group demonstrated that Notch signaling pathway inhibitors can reduce allergic airway inflammation in mice. Notch signaling induces lineage plasticity of mature ILC2s. In this study, we showed that AIT alleviates allergic airway inflammation and suppresses the frequency of ILC2s induced by HDM. Interestingly, AIT combined with a γ-secretase inhibitor (GSI), an inhibitor of the Notch signaling pathway, significantly inhibited the frequency of ILC2s, reduced airway inflammation, and suppressed Th2-type responses in a mouse model. Furthermore, lung ILC2s from HDM-challenged mice with or without AIT were treated with GSI in vitro, and we found that GSI dramatically reduced the secretion of type 2 inflammatory factors in ILC2s.

Discussion

These findings suggest that Notch signaling pathway inhibitors can be used as adjuvant therapy for AIT and may hold potential treatment value in the cooperative control of allergic airway inflammation during early AIT.

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.

Efficacy and Safety of House Dust Mite Sublingual Immunotherapy Tablet in Allergic Asthma: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

House dust mite sublingual immunotherapy (HDM SLIT) effectively treats allergic rhinitis (AR). However, the evidence of HDM SLIT for allergic asthma remained limited.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the efficacy and safety of HDM SLIT tablets in patients with allergic asthma.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search through PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Center of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that addressed the efficacy and safety of HDM SLIT tablets compared with placebo or no intervention in allergic asthma from their inception date until September 2021. The primary outcome was the reduction in inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) dose. Additional outcomes were asthma control, exacerbation, lung function, quality-of-life, and adverse events.

RESULTS

There were 7 RCTs, 5 studies in allergic asthma (4 in adults and 1 in children), and 2 in AR with or without asthma. The 6 standardized quality (SQ) HDM effectively reduced ICS dose in well- to partly controlled mild-to-moderate asthma in 1 RCT. Two RCTs evaluated the efficacy of 6 SQ and 12 SQ HDM in reducing asthma exacerbation in partly controlled moderate-to-severe asthma, and their results were inconsistent. One study in children with mild-to-moderate asthma found no benefit of HDM SLIT. Two RCTs in AR with or without mild-to-moderate asthma showed improvement of asthma symptoms. Adverse events were primarily local, and anaphylaxis treated with epinephrine was reported in 3 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The HDM SLIT tablets tend to effectively reduce ICS use in adults and adolescents with well- to partly controlled mild-to-moderate allergic asthma with a favorable safety profile.

Allergen Immunotherapy in Asthma

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a specific treatment involving the administration of relevant allergens to allergic patients, with subtypes including subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). In asthma, AIT using the house dust mite (HDM) alleviates clinical symptoms and decreases airway hyper responsiveness and medication dose. In addition, AIT can improve the natural course of asthma. For example, the effects of AIT can be preserved for at least a few years, even after ending treatment. AIT may increase the remission rate of asthma in children and suppress sensitization to new allergens. If AIT is introduced in pollinosis, AIT may prevent the development of asthma. Moreover, AIT can control other allergic diseases complicated by asthma, such as allergic rhinitis, which also improves the control of asthma. The indication of HDM-SCIT for asthma is mild-to-moderate HDM-sensitized allergic asthma in a patient with normal respiratory function. To date, HDM-SLIT is applicable in Japan for allergic rhinitis, not for asthma. However, the effect of SLIT on asthma has been confirmed internationally, and SLIT is available for asthma in Japan if allergic rhinitis is present as a complication.

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.

Role of Allergen Immunotherapy in Asthma Treatment and Asthma Development

Allergen immunotherapy may modify the natural course of allergic diseases and induce remission. It includes subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). For asthma, allergen immunotherapy using house dust mite (HDM) improves clinical symptoms and airway hyperresponsiveness and decreases drug requirements. Furthermore, it has been suggested that allergen immunotherapy also has the following effects: (1) the effect can be maintained for more than a year even if the treatment is terminated, (2) the remission rate of childhood asthma can be increased, (3) new allergen sensitization can be suppressed, and (4) asthma development can be prevented if allergen immunotherapy was performed in the case of pollinosis. Allergen immunotherapy differs from conventional drug therapy, in particular the effect of modifying the natural course of allergic diseases and the effect of controlling complicated allergic diseases such as rhinoconjunctivitis. The general indication for HDM-SCIT in asthma is HDM-sensitized atopic asthma with mild-to-moderate disease and normal respiratory function. HDM allergens should be involved in the pathogenesis of asthma, and a duration of illness of less than 10 years is desirable. HDM-SLIT is available for allergic rhinitis but not for asthma in Japan. However, as the efficacy of SLIT for asthma has been fully proven internationally, SLIT is also applied in asthmatics with complicated allergic rhinitis in Japan.

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.

The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice 2019 Highlights

This article provides highlights of the clinically impactful original studies and reviews published in The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice in 2019 on the subjects of anaphylaxis, asthma, dermatitis, drug allergy, food allergy, immunodeficiency, immunotherapy, rhinitis/sinusitis, and urticaria/angioedema/mast cell disorders. Within each topic, practical aspects of diagnosis and management are emphasized. Treatments discussed include lifestyle modifications, allergen avoidance therapy, positive and negative effects of pharmacologic therapy, and various forms of immunologic and desensitization management. We designed this review to help readers consolidate and use this extensive and practical knowledge for the benefit of their patients.

SQ house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy for the treatment of adults with house dust mite-induced allergic rhinitis

Introduction: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is one of the most common chronic conditions affecting both children and adults. The house dust mites (HDM) account for a substantial part of the overall sources of allergens. In patients where allergen avoidance and symptom-relieving pharmacotherapy do not provide adequate disease control, specific allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is indicated. While subcutaneous injection (SCIT) is considered as a time-consuming and invasive treatment regimen, sublingual allergy immunotherapy (SLIT) appears as more convenient treatment strategy.Areas covered: This Drug Profile reviews the clinical data behind the development of the SQ HDM SLIT-tablet, including both the early studies and the pivotal studies, which formed the basis for regulatory approval in Europe, Japan, and the U.S.Expert opinion: The clinical trials behind the development of the SQ HDM-SLIT have demonstrated that the tablet provides a safe, well-tolerated and robust efficacy in the treatment of HDM-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. Further, studies show that the SQ HDM SLIT-tablet is a cost-effective treatment option compared with SCIT.