Safety and efficacy of Juniperus ashei sublingual-swallow ultra-rush pollen immunotherapy in cypress rhinoconjunctivitis. A double-blind, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of high-dose sublingual-swallow immunotherapy (SLIT) has been established in pollen rhinoconjunctivitis. This treatment has now been evaluated using an ultra-rush incremental dose regimen with a Juniperus ashei allergen extract in patients allergic to Cupressus sempervirens and Cupressus arizonica. METHODS: Patients received either placebo or SLIT. Evaluation of safety was based on the frequency of adverse events during the incremental dose period (half a day) and during maintenance therapy (4 months). Evaluation of efficacy was based on symptom and medication scores at the pollen peak. RESULTS: Seventy of the 76 patients included completed the study. There were no drop-outs during the rush procedure. One patient in the active group dropped out during the maintenance therapy due to adverse events: gastric pain and vomiting. There was also 1 drop-out in the placebo group due to pregnancy. Adverse events were infrequent, local and mild. Symptom scores for rhinitis and conjunctivitis were not statistically different between groups, but there was a marked and significant (p < 0.03) decrease of the medication score (about 50%) and nasal steroid consumption (about 75%) in the active treatment group. An increase from baseline of serum IgE and IgG4 J. ashei-specific antibodies was only observed in actively treated patients (p < 0.04 and p < 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The tolerability and safety of high-dose ultra-rush SLIT were comparable to those reported in previous SLIT studies. SLIT with J. ashei extract, due to its high Jun a 1 content, significantly reduced nasal steroid consumption in patients allergic to European cypress.     

A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial by the sublingual route of immunotherapy with a standardized grass pollen extract

Fifty-eight patients with well-documented history of seasonal rhinoconjunctivitis caused by grass pollens were allocated randomly on a double-blind basis to receive either sublingual therapy with a solution of purified, standardized allergen preparation (Stallergenes) or a matched placebo for 17 weeks. The assessment of the effect of oral immunotherapy, done with drops of five-grass allergen extract, was on the clinical symptoms and on the medication score of the authorized rescue treatments. The actively treated patients had significantly (P<0.05 to P<0.01) fewer symptoms of rhinitis (sneezing and rhinorrhea) and of conjunctivitis (redness and tears) during the pollen season than the placebo group. Consumption of nasal solution of sodium cromoglycate and of betamethasone and dexchlorpheniramine was significantly less in the desensitized group (P<0.01). Side-effects were negligible. This study concludes that perlingual immunotherapy with grass pollen extract in grass-pollen-sensitive seasonal hay fever and conjunctivitis patients is effective, easy to perform, inexpensive, and safe.     

Sublingual-swallow immunotherapy with standardized 3-grass pollen extract: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is accepted as a safe and effective route for the treatment of grass pollen allergy, but clarification of its clinical and biological efficacy requires more study. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and compliance of SLIT with a standardized 3-grass pollen extract in patients with grass pollen seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, with or without mild asthma. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind study included 127 patients (aged 12-41 years; mean age, 24.9 years) with grass pollen seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, with or without mild asthma. They received either SLIT with a high-dose, standardized, 3-grass pollen extract or placebo for 10 months before and during the grass pollen season. The efficacy evaluation compared weekly clinical scores (defined as the sum of the symptom score and rescue medication score) to measure rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma for the first 8 weeks of the pollen season. We also evaluated safety and compliance and measured changes in anti-Dactylis specific IgG4 antibody levels. RESULTS: There was a trend in favor of the study group in the mean adjusted clinical score. The groups were not comparable on inclusion (P = .02): the SLIT group included more subjects with asthma and had a higher mean IgG4 serum level. Additional exploration according to subgroups with and without asthma found that among the patients without asthma, the SLIT group had a significantly better clinical score (P = .045). Anti-Dactylis specific IgG4 levels increased significantly in the SLIT group. CONCLUSION: SLIT with a standardized, high-dose, 3-grass pollen extract is safe and significantly improves the clinical score in patients with hay fever and without asthma during the pollen season.     

Diagnosis of cypress pollen allergy: in vivo and in vitro standardization of a Juniperus ashei pollen extract

BACKGROUND: Cypress pollen allergy is a major cause of rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma in the Mediterranean area. The nonstandardized cypress allergen extracts currently available for the diagnosis of cypress allergy have a low level of activity. The search for an active material has led to the selection of Juniperus ashei (Ja) pollen because of its very high cross-reactivity with cypress extracts and its superior allergenic activity. The aim of this study was to characterize in vitro and calibrate in vivo an in-house reference extract (IHRS) of J. ashei pollen and determine the specificity and sensitivity of a standardized Ja extract for the prick test diagnosis of cypress allergy. METHODS: Juniperus ashei pollen extract was analysed by 2-D electrophoresis. The IHRS Ja extract was calibrated by skin prick testing in 28 cypress-allergic patients. The sensitivity and specificity of cypress allergy diagnosis using a standardized Ja extract was studied by skin prick test in 42 cypress-allergic patients and 53 nonallergic patients. Jun a 1 content of the IHRS was determined by a monoclonal antibody-based electrophoretic technique. RESULTS: The Jun a 1 content of the 100 IR/ml Ja IHRS extract was 180 microg/ml. For in vivo diagnosis of cypress allergy, Ja pollen extract demonstrated a sensitivity of 95%, a specificity of 100%, a negative predictive value of 96%, and a positive predictive value of 100%. CONCLUSION: Standardized Ja pollen extract is therefore a very appropriate tool for the in vivo diagnosis of cypress pollen allergy and good candidate for specific immunotherapy.     

Canadian trial of sublingual swallow immunotherapy for ragweed rhinoconjunctivitis.

BACKGROUND: Sublingual swallow immunotherapy has been increasingly recognized as a safe and efficacious alternative to parenteral specific immunotherapy. OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety and efficacy of sublingual swallow immunotherapy ragweed allergen extract for rhinoconjunctivitis treatment starting just before and continuing through the ragweed pollen season. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was performed in children and adults with a documented history of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis during ragweed season at 9 Canadian allergy centers. Active treatment was standardized extract of ragweed allergen administered as sublingual swallow drops at increasing doses starting shortly before the pollen season and maintenance doses continued daily during the season. Primary efficacy variables were symptom and medication scores, and secondary variables included global evaluation of efficacy and immunologic measurements. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients were included in the safety analysis; 76 patients were included in the intent-to-treat analysis. Nine placebo recipients and 1 treatment recipient withdrew for lack of efficacy (P = .004). Nine patients in the treatment group withdrew because of adverse events, none serious (P = .003). Investigator evaluation of efficacy showed that significantly more patients improved and fewer deteriorated in the treatment group vs the placebo group (P = .047). Ragweed IgE and IgG4 levels increased significantly in treatment recipients vs placebo users (P < .001). Sneezing and nasal pruritus approached significant improvement in the treatment group vs the placebo group (P = .09 and .06, respectively). Quebec City experienced low pollen counts. Excluding Quebec City, significant improvement was seen for these 2 symptoms (P = .04). CONCLUSION: Sublingual swallow immunotherapy seems to be safe and efficacious for ragweed rhinoconjunctivitis even when started immediately before the ragweed pollen season.     

Clinical efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy with tree pollen extract in children

BACKGROUND: Subcutaneous immunotherapy has been the principal approach of immunotherapy in the treatment of allergic diseases. Several clinical studies with birch, alder or hazel pollen extract conducted as subcutaneous immunotherapy have been published suggesting a well-tolerated and clinically effective treatment. Only a few clinical studies of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) with these allergens have been published. This study investigated the clinical efficacy, safety and dose-response relationship of SLIT in children suffering from rhinoconjunctivitis with/without asthma. METHODS: Eighty-eight children (5-15 years) with a history of tree pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis with/without seasonal asthma for >or=2 years were included. Allergy to tree pollen was confirmed by positive skin-prick test, positive specific IgE and positive conjunctival provocation test. The extract used was a glycerinated mixture of Betula verrucosa, Corylus avellana and Alnus glutinosa 100,000 SQ-U/ml. Children were randomized into three groups receiving SLIT 5 days a week for up to 18 months; dose group 1: accumulated weekly dose of 24,000 SQ-U; dose group 2: accumulated weekly dose of 200,000 SQ-U; and placebo. RESULTS: In the birch pollen season, dose group 2 showed a significant reduction of symptom (P = 0.01) and medication scores (P = 0.04) compared with placebo. Dose group 1 showed a significant reduction of symptom scores (P = 0.03). There were no statistical differences between dose groups 1 and 2. All children tolerated the treatment well. CONCLUSION: SLIT with tree pollen extract provided dose-dependent benefits in tree pollen-allergic children in terms of significantly reduced symptoms and medication use. The treatment was well tolerated.     

Preseasonal local allergoid immunotherapy to grass pollen in children: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial

BACKGROUND: We assessed the efficacy of preseasonal local allergoid immunotherapy in a group of children with asthma and/or rhinitis and/or rhinoconjunctivitis due to grass pollen. METHODS: We randomly assigned 24 children allergic to grass pollen to receive local allergoid immunotherapy for 3 months before the pollen season and 24 such patients to receive identically appearing placebo. The immunotherapy consisted of tablets of monomeric allergoid grass pollen allergens held in the mouth until they dissolved and then swallowed. The study was double-blind. Symptoms and medications were scored on diary cards during the pollen season. Nasal eosinophil cationic protein levels were measured by the monoclonal antibodies EG1 and EG2 outside the pollen season and at low and at high pollen concentration during the pollen season. RESULTS: The active-treatment group had a statistically significant reduction of total symptoms (P<0.05), especially bronchial symptoms (P<0.05), in comparison with the placebo group. Immunotherapy was well tolerated and compliance was good. Nasal levels of EG2 and EG1 increased significantly during the pollen season, but there was no difference between groups. EG2/EG1 increased significantly only in the placebo group during natural allergen exposure (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that this immunotherapy is effective for the treatment of asthma due to grass pollen in children.     

The safety and efficacy of subcutaneous birch pollen immunotherapy - a one-year, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND: There is only very limited documentation of the efficacy and safety of high-dose subcutaneous birch pollen immunotherapy (IT) in double-blind, placebo-controlled (DBPC) studies. Birch pollen is a major cause of allergic morbidity in northern Europe and in eastern parts of North America. METHODS: Thirty-five patients with severe rhinoconjunctivitis (hay fever) to birch pollen were allocated to double-blinded clustered IT with a depot birch pollen extract (Betula verrucosa) or placebo injections. Seven patients in each group had concomitant self-reported seasonal asthma. Treatment was conducted as a clustered regimen and was performed in a specialist unit. Symptom scores from nose, eyes, and lungs, and use of oral and topical antihistamines, beta-2-agonists, and oral corticosteroids were recorded daily during the season of 2000. Sensitivity to allergen provocation in skin, conjunctiva, and nasal mucosa was measured before and after 10 months of treatment. Post-seasonal assessment of symptom severity was performed using a simple questionnaire. RESULTS: IT reduced the symptom score for both rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma (P-values < 0.05), total medication score (P < 0.02) and use of oral antihistamines (P < 0.01). IT reduced specific conjunctival sensitivity (P < 0.05), skin prick test, and especially cutaneous late-phase response diameters (P < 0.00001), and increased general well-being on post-seasonal evaluation (P < 0.01). IT was safe, with side-effects at the same level as placebo. CONCLUSIONS: High-dose, subcutaneous IT is efficacious and safe in patients with severe birch pollen rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma.     

Immunotherapy with a calcium phosphate-adsorbed five-grass-pollen extract in seasonal rhinoconjunctivitis: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND: Calcium phosphate-adsorbed allergen extracts are used for subcutaneous immunotherapy to avoid the use of aluminium adjuvants. OBJECTIVES: A double-blind, placebo-controlled study was performed in order to confirm the safety and assess the efficacy of a standardized five-grass-pollen extract adsorbed onto calcium phosphate for specific immunotherapy (IT). METHODS: Twenty-nine patients with seasonal rhinoconjunctivitis were randomized to receive either the active preparation (16 patients) or placebo (13 patients), in a 1-year study. During the increasing dose phase, an extract ranging from 0.1 IR per ml to 50 IR per ml was administered at a rate of one subcutaneous injection per week until a maintenance dose was reached. The patients were assessed by symptom diary and rescue medications during seasonal exposure and specific nasal and skin reactivity before and after IT. Immunological parameters (specific IgE and IgG4 antibodies) were assessed before, during and after IT. RESULTS: The overall symptoms score (mean AUC) was not significantly different between the IT group and the placebo group during grass-pollen exposure (49.6 vs. 56, respectively). The total medication score (mean AUC) was significantly lower in the IT group than in the placebo group (11 vs. 41, P < 0.01, Mann-Whitney U-test). The cumulative symptom/medication score was significantly lower in the IT group than in the placebo group (64.5 vs. 102.3, P < 0.05, U-test). A significant increase in nasal reactivity threshold was observed after IT in the IT group (21. 4 IR/mL before IT vs. 63.4 IR/mL after IT, P < 0.01, Wilcoxon), whereas no significant changes were observed in the placebo group (31.0 IR/mL before IT vs. 37.7 IR/mL after IT). IT induced a significant reduction in grass pollen cutaneous reactivity in the actively treated group (P < 0.001). A significant increase in serum-specific IgG4 antibody response was observed in the IT group (3.1% before IT vs. 10.1% after IT, P < 0.001). Nine patients in the IT group developed moderate immediate systemic reactions vs. two patients in the placebo group. CONCLUSION: Specific immunotherapy with calcium phosphate-adsorbed standardized grass pollen extract was safe and effective for the treatment of patients with seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.     

Efficacy and safety of specific immunotherapy with a high-dose sublingual grass pollen preparation: a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is increasingly being used for the treatment of allergic rhinitis, but there are conflicting study results demonstrating clinically relevant efficacy. OBJECTIVE: To show clinical efficacy and safety of a new high-dose grass pollen preparation for SLIT. METHODS: In a 2-year, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 185 subjects with rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis, with or without asthma, were treated with a recently developed, high-dose, 6-grass pollen mixture for SLIT once daily. RESULTS: The primary end point, a combined symptom-medication score, showed almost no change in the placebo group during a 42-day evaluation period in the grass pollen season from 2003 to 2005, whereas active treatment was associated with a significant and clinically relevant improvement (full analysis set, P = .01; main data set, P = .002). The effect was irrespective of asthma diagnosis. Allergen-specific IgE showed no difference in both groups, and specific IgG4 and IgG1 increased with active treatment in the first and second study years compared with placebo, clearly indicating the immunogenic effect of the active treatment. The SLIT was well tolerated. No serious adverse drug reactions occurred. CONCLUSIONS: High-dose, sublingual, specific immunotherapy with an extract of a 6-grass pollen mixture showed a significant and clinically relevant improvement in subjects with grass pollen-associated rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis, with or without asthma. The treatment with the sublingual solution was well tolerated.     

Prolonged preseasonal treatment phase with Grazax sublingual immunotherapy increases clinical efficacy

BACKGROUND: Sublingual immunotherapy treatment with grass allergen tablets (Grazax) is initiated preseasonally without up-dosing and treatment is continued throughout the entire grass pollen season. Aims of the study: The influence of the duration of preseasonal treatment on clinical efficacy obtained within the grass pollen season was investigated. METHODS: Data from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-centre trials with varying preseasonal treatment periods were analysed. In the grass pollen season, symptom and medication score reductions relative to placebo were calculated and correlated with the duration of the preseasonal treatment period. RESULTS: The analysis was based on data from 934 patients. A significant reduction in seasonal daily rhinoconjunctivitis symptom and medication scores (17%, CI: 1-33% and 23%, CI: 1-47%, P < 0.05) was observed for patients treated with Grazax compared with placebo after approximately 8 weeks of pretreatment. The magnitude of the reductions in rhinoconjunctivitis symptom and medication scores increased with longer duration of preseasonal treatment (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Sublingual immunotherapy with Grazax) must be initiated at least 8 weeks prior to the grass pollen season to provide a significant clinical efficacy. A longer preseasonal treatment period (>8 weeks) improves the clinical efficacy (relative to placebo) during the grass pollen season.     

Double-blind, placebo-controlled evaluation of sublingual immunotherapy with standardized olive pollen extract in pediatric patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and mild asthma due to olive pollen sensitization

For evaluation of the efficacy and the safety of specific sublingual immunotherapy with high allergen dose, 66 children with seasonal asthma, rhinitis, and conjunctivitis due to sensitization to olive pollen were enrolled in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study between October 1994 and October 1996 in Greece. Thirty-four patients were randomly allocated to the active group, and 32 received placebo. Immunotherapy consisted of olive-allergen extracts (Stallergenes SA) administered sublingually pre- and coseasonally from January to July for 2 consecutive years. Serial concentrations from 1 to 300 IR were used up to the maintenance dose of 20 drops of 300 IR daily. The cumulative dose for each patient was 300 times higher than in parenteral immunotherapy, and the cumulative dose of the major allergen Ole e 1 was 8.1 mg/2 years. The patients were assessed by clinical parameters (symptom and medication scores from patients' daily diaries) and immunologic measurements (specific IgE. lgG4. eosinophil cationic protein [ECP]) were performed. The actively treated patients had a significantly lower score for dyspnea (P<0.04 during the first season; P<0.03 during the second season). At the poUinic peak during the second year, a lower score of conjunctivitis was recorded (P<0.05) in the actively treated patients. The analysis of intragroup evolution showed that the total score of rhinitis increased significantly during the pollinic peak in the group under placebo, whereas there was no symptomatic peak for the same period in the group under active treatment. However, the difference between the groups was not significant. The medication score did not differ significantly between the groups. Oral steroids were the only variables with a P value near the significance level (P=0.06) in favor of the actively treated group. A significant decrease in skin reactivity was recorded in the active group after 2 years of treatment. No significant variation in specific IgE and IgG4 was detected. A significantly lower level of serum ECP was observed at the pollinic peak in the actively treated patients during the first pollen season (P=0.01), but this was not confirmed the second year when the ECP levels doubled in both groups without correlation to the clinical findings. Tolerance was excellent with only a few minor side-effects reported. In conclusion, high-dose specific sublingual immunotherapy appears to be safe and effective in improving mild seasonal asthma and conjunctivitis linked to olive-pollen sensitization.     

Agreement of efficacy assessments for five-grass pollen sublingual tablet immunotherapy

Background:  The optimal dose of five-grass pollen sublingual tablet immunotherapy (SLIT) was established recently by the primary criteria Rhinoconjunctivitis Total Symptom Score (RTSS) from the first treatment season. Secondary and exploratory criteria, such as RTSS at peak pollen season, exploratory combined symptom and rescue medication use score, quality of life and immunological markers are calculated and described in this analysis.
Methods:  Six hundred and twenty-eight patients with grass pollen rhinoconjunctivitis (≥2 years duration) were randomized in a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted in Europe. Patients received once-daily SLIT (Stallergenes, Antony, France) of 100IR, 300IR, 500IR or placebo, starting 4 months before grass pollen season and throughout the 2005 season. Patients were instructed to take rescue medication only if symptoms were severe and record symptom severity on using the RTSS.
Results:  Both 300IR and 500IR doses significantly reduced mean RTSS at pollen peak ( P  = 0.0005 and P  = 0.0014, respectively) and the exploratory combined score ( P  = 0.0001 and P  = 0.0026, respectively) compared with placebo. Compared with patients in the placebo group, those who were taking the 300IR and 500IR doses reported significantly improved quality of life using the mean Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire scores during the peak of the pollen season ( P  < 0.0001) and at the end of the pollen season ( P  = 0.0031 and P  ≤ 0.0001, respectively). Specific immunoglobulin G4 increased significantly depending on the SLIT dose ( P  < 0.0001).
Conclusions:  All secondary efficacy criteria, including efficacy at pollen peak, combined score, quality of life and immunological changes, indicate that 300IR tablets represent the optimal dose and suggest it is appropriate for use in clinical practice.     

Sublingual immunotherapy with once-daily grass allergen tablets: a randomized controlled trial in seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

BACKGROUND: Specific immunotherapy is the only treatment modality that has the potential to alter the natural course of allergic diseases. Sublingual immunotherapy has been developed to facilitate access to this form of treatment and to minimize serious adverse events. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy and safety of sublingual grass allergen tablets in seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. METHODS: A multinational, multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trial conducted during 2002 and 2003. Fifty-five centers in 8 countries included 855 participants age 18 to 65 years who gave a history of grass pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and had a positive skin prick test and elevated serum allergen-specific IgE to Phleum pratense. Participants were randomized to 2500, 25,000, or 75,000 SQ-T grass allergen tablets (GRAZAX; ALK-Abelló, H?rsholm, Denmark) or placebo for sublingual administration once daily. Mean duration of treatment was 18 weeks. RESULTS: Average rhinoconjunctivitis scores during the season showed moderate reductions of symptoms (16%) and medication use (28%) for the grass allergen tablet 75,000 SQ-T (P = .0710; P = .0470) compared with placebo. Significantly better rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life scores (P = .006) and an increased number of well days (P = .041) were also observed. Efficacy was increased in the subgroup of patients who completed the recommended preseasonal treatment of at least 8 weeks before the grass pollen season (symptoms, 21%, P = .0020; and medication use, 29%, P = .0120). No safety concerns were observed. CONCLUSION: This study confirms dose-dependent efficacy of the grass allergen tablet. Although further studies are required, the greater tolerability of the tablet may permit immunotherapy to be available to a much broader group of patients with impaired quality of life caused by grass pollen allergy. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: For patients with grass pollen allergy, sublingual immunotherapy is well tolerated and can reduce symptoms and improve quality of life.     

Clinical pharmacology of H1-antihistamines in the skin

BACKGROUND: Birch pollen is a common allergen in northern, central, and eastern Europe. Earlier studies of specific immunotherapy using birch pollen extract were not placebo-controlled or were only preseasonal. Long-term, placebo-controlled studies with subcutaneously administered standardized birch pollen extract are lacking. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of immunotherapy with birch pollen extract on airway symptoms and use of medication in adult birch pollen-allergic patients in a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. METHODS: Forty-nine patients with histories of birch pollen allergy from the upper and lower airways, positive skin prick test and conjunctival provocation test results, and in vitro specific IgE to birch pollen (Betula verrucosa ) extract were included. Immunotherapy with birch pollen extract was given during 2 consecutive years in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study. Clinical symptom scores from the upper and lower airways and use of rescue medication were registered throughout the pollen season. RESULTS: Forty-six patients reached the maintenance dose and were maintained on that dose during the 2-year study. The median symptom scores during the 1997 and 1998 seasons were 1.3 and 2.6, respectively, in the specific immunotherapy group and 2.1 and 4.3, respectively, in the placebo group. The differences between the groups were significant (P =.05 in 1997 and P =.005 in 1998). The placebo group used significantly more rescue medication during both seasons than the specific immunotherapy group (P =.004 for 1997 and P =.004 for 1998). CONCLUSION: Specific immunotherapy with birch pollen extract is an effective and safe treatment for reducing clinical allergy symptoms and medication use in birch pollen-allergic patients during the pollen season.     

A controlled study of the effectiveness of the Rinkel method of immunotherapy for ragweed pollen hay fever

In a double-blind study, we compared the effects of the Rinkel method of immunotherapy with ragweed pollen extract and placebo on symptoms of ragweed hay fever and immunologic parameters in 24 ragweed-sensitive patients. Each had a skin-test end point by Rinkel serial dilution titration to ragweed pollen extract at 1:312,500 w/v or greater dilution, a 2+ skin test to ragweed AgE at 0.1 μg/ml or greater dilution, and in vitro leukocyte histamine release by ragweed pollen extract. None had had immunotherapy for at least 7 yr. Patients matched on the basis of leukocyte histamine release by ragweed were assigned to two treatment groups (12 patients in each group). One group received ragweed pollen extract, and the other, placebo, both administered by the Rinkel method between June and October, 1978. Treatment doses were derived from skin-test end points. The median maintenance (“optimal dose”) for patients receiving ragweed pollen extract was 0.53 ml of 1:312,500 w/v and the mean cumulative dose of ragweed pollen extract given during the study contained 0.094 μg of ragweed AgE. Symptom-medication scores of all patients rose and fell with ragweed pollen counts. No significant differences were observed in mean daily symptom-medication scores, antiragweed IgG or IgE levels, leukocyte histamine release by ragweed, total IgE levels, or skin-test end-point dilutions with ragweed pollen extract between the group receiving ragweed pollen extract and the group receiving placebo. Despite the absence of specific effect on symptom-medication scores and measured immunologic variates, 10 of the 12 ragweed-treated patients and 10 of the 12 placebo-treated patients were of the opinion that their hay fever symptoms during the ragweed pollen season were less severe in 1978 than in 1977 and that they had been helped by Rinkel method immunotherapy. Under the conditions of the study, Rinkel method immunotherapy with ragweed pollen extract was no more effective than placebo given in an imitation of the Rinkel method.     

Specific immunotherapy with SQ standardized grass allergen tablets in asthmatics with rhinoconjunctivitis

BACKGROUND: The best way to prevent allergy symptoms is to treat the allergic condition. Specific immunotherapy with grass allergen tablets 75,000 SQ-T (Grazax, Phleum pratense, ALK-Abelló) is safe and efficacious in rhinoconjunctivitis patients. As rhinoconjunctivitis often co-exists with asthma, we aimed to confirm safety and efficacy in grass allergic subjects with asthma and rhinoconjunctivitis. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial was performed 10-14 weeks prior to and during the grass pollen season 2004. About 114 subjects were randomized 2 : 1 to grass allergen tablets or placebo. The primary end points were average asthma medication and symptom scores during the grass pollen season, and secondary variables were average rhinoconjunctivitis symptom and medication scores during the grass pollen season. Additionally, number of well days was defined post hoc. RESULTS: Differences in asthma medication and symptom scores between the treatment groups were negligible. The mean difference in asthma medication score was below 0.1 and 0.3 for asthma symptom score [a single inhalation of salbutamol (200 microg) was scored 2]. No serious adverse events were reported. A reduction in rhinoconjunctivitis symptom score of 37% (P = 0.004) and a 41% (P = 0.036) reduction in medication score was found in the grass pollen season for subjects treated with the grass allergen tablet compared with placebo. Well days increased by 54% (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Self-administration of the grass allergen tablet was safe. The treatment did not impair asthma control and confirmed considerable symptom prevention and reduced medication use. It addresses the allergic condition and represents a baseline treatment for grass pollen allergy.     

Efficacy and safety of subcutaneous immunotherapy with a biologically standardized extract of Ambrosia artemisiifolia pollen: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND: The allergological relevance of Ambrosia in Europe is growing but the efficacy of the injective immunotherapy for this allergen has been documented only in Northern America. OBJECTIVE: We sought to study the safety and efficacy of injective immunotherapy in European patients sensitized to Ambrosia artemisiifolia. METHODS: Thirty-two patients (18 M/14 F, mean age 36.78, range 23-60 years) suffering from rhinoconjunctivitis and/or asthma and sensitized to Ambrosia were enrolled and randomized in a double-blind, placebo-controlled (DBPC) study lasting 1 year. A maintenance dose corresponding to 7.2 microg of Amb a 1 was administered at 4-week intervals after the build-up. During the second and the third year, all patients were under active therapy in an open fashion. Symptom and medication scores, skin reactivity to Ambrosia (parallel line biological assay), and pollen counts were assessed throughout the trial. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients completed the trial. No severe adverse event was observed. During the DBPC phase, actively treated patients showed an improvement in asthmatic symptoms (P=0.02) and drug (P=0.0068) scores days with asthmatic symptoms (P=0.003), days with rhinitis symptoms (P=0.05), and days with intake of drugs (P=0.0058), as compared to before therapy. No improvement for any of these parameters was detected in the placebo group. Moreover, the number of days with rhinitis and asthma was significantly higher in the placebo as compared to the active group (P=0.048 and P<0.0001, respectively). Patients who switched from placebo to active therapy improved in rhinoconjunctivitis, asthma, and drug intake. The skin reactivity decreased significantly (12.2-fold, P=0.0001) in the active group whereas a slight increase (1.07-fold, P=0.87) was observed in the placebo group after the DBPC phase. After switching to active therapy, patients previously under placebo showed a significant decrease of this parameter (4.78-fold, P=0.002). CONCLUSION: Injective immunotherapy is safe and clinically effective in European patients sensitized to Ambrosia.     

Double-blind, placebo-controlled study with a modified therapeutic vaccine of Salsola kali (Russian thistle) administered through use of a cluster schedule

BACKGROUND: The inhalation of Salsola kali pollen is a common cause of respiratory diseases in Europe and North America. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a depigmented and glutaraldehyde-polymerized therapeutic vaccine of S kali. METHODS: The trial was randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled using a rush protocol in the build-up phase. Sixty patients with rhinoconjunctivitis (19 also had mild asthma) were randomly allocated to receive either active treatment (polymerized extract) or placebo. The final distribution was 41 patients in the active and 19 in the placebo group. Side effects were registered. Symptom and medication scores and the number of days free of symptoms during the pollen season were assessed to evaluate the clinical efficacy. A Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire was completed in the previous pollen season (before treatment) and during the pollen season 1 year later (in the trial). Dose-response skin tests were performed at baseline and at the end of the trial. RESULTS: There was a significant difference (P < .05) in symptom and medication scores between both groups during the pollen season, with the active group the one that had fewer symptoms and lower intake of medication. The number of days without symptoms was higher in the active group (P < .05). This group also had a significant improvement in the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire and a reduction in skin sensitivity. No moderate or severe systemic reactions were registered. CONCLUSION: Immunotherapy with this modified vaccine of S kali pollen is safe and efficacious to treat patients clinically sensitive to this pollen. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Patients allergic to S kali (Russian thistle) can be successfully treated with immunotherapy to improve symptoms of allergic rhinitis and asthma, reduce medication use, and improve quality of life parameters.     

Grass pollen immunotherapy: symptomatic improvement correlates with reductions in eosinophils and IL-5 mRNA expression in the nasal mucosa during the pollen season

BACKGROUND: Tissue eosinophilia and infiltration by T(H)2-type T cells are characteristic features of allergic rhinitis both after allergen challenge and during natural allergen exposure. Specific immunotherapy inhibits allergen-induced nasal eosinophilia. OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess, in the context of a randomized trial, the relationships between symptomatic improvement after immunotherapy and eosinophil numbers and IL-5 expression in the nasal mucosa during the pollen season. METHODS: Nasal biopsy specimens were taken from 37 adults with severe summer hay fever at baseline (out of season) and at peak season after 2 years of treatment with a depot grass pollen extract or placebo. Biopsy specimens were processed for immunohistochemistry by using mAbs against eosinophils (EG2), T cells (CD3), and IL-2 receptor-positive cells (CD25), as well as for in situ hybridization by using a sulfur 35-labeled antisense riboprobe directed against IL-5. RESULTS: Immunotherapy significantly reduced symptoms (49%, P =.01) and medication requirements (80%, P =.007) compared with placebo. There was a 400% increase (P =.004) in eosinophils during the pollen season in placebo-treated patients, which was inhibited in the immunotherapy group (20% increase, P =.04 between groups). Seasonal increases were also observed for CD25(+) cells (P =.002), CD3(+) cells (P =.02), and IL-5 mRNA-expressing cells (P =.03) in the placebo group but not in the immunotherapy group. A significant correlation was observed between eosinophils and IL-5 expression (r = 0.5, P <.05). Both eosinophils (r = 0.6, P <.02) and IL-5 (r = 0.6, P <.02) correlated with symptoms after immunotherapy. CONCLUSION: Improvement in symptoms after grass pollen immunotherapy may result, at least in part, from inhibition of IL-5-dependent tissue eosinophilia during the pollen season.