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.     

Grass allergen tablet immunotherapy relieves individual seasonal eye and nasal symptoms, including nasal blockage

BACKGROUND: Symptoms of allergic rhinitis have a considerable impact on the quality of life of the sufferer. Sneezing, runny nose, blocked nose and headache are some of the most common symptoms of allergic rhinitis, which affects work, home and social life for many patients. Sublingual immunotherapy has shown to induce a protective immune response and provide sustained symptom prevention for allergic patients. AIMS OF THE TRIAL: The overall aims were to investigate the efficacy and safety of a sublingual grass allergen tablet (Grazax) 75 000 SQ-T; ALK-Abelló A/S, Denmark). Reported here are the effects of Grazax on individual eye and nasal symptoms. METHODS: The trial was a double-blind placebo-controlled trial including 634 participants with significant rhinoconjunctivitis because of grass pollen. Participants were randomized 1 : 1 to Grazax (a fast dissolving, once daily immunotherapy tablet for home administration) or placebo and received treatment for at least 16 weeks prior to and continuing during the grass pollen season of 2005. Four nasal symptoms and two eye symptoms were scored on a scale from 0 (no symptoms) to 3 (severe symptoms) every day during the entire grass pollen season. Nasal symptoms included runny nose, blocked nose, sneezing and itchy nose; eye symptoms included gritty feeling/red/itchy eyes and watery eyes. RESULTS: Consistent and highly significant reductions in individual eye and nasal symptoms (from 22 to 44%) were observed following treatment with Grazax as compared with placebo (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Grazax has effects on multiple allergic symptoms, including nasal blockage, and is an effective treatment of rhinoconjunctivitis, thereby reducing the need for topical anti-allergic drugs.     

Safety of a SQ-standardised grass allergen tablet for sublingual immunotherapy: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Sublingual treatment of grass pollen induced rhinoconjunctivitis might provide easier access to specific immunotherapy (SIT) and minimize the risk of serious adverse events (AEs) compared to subcutaneous SIT. AIM OF THE STUDY: To identify a safe dose range for once-daily administration of a grass allergen tablet in participants with grass pollen induced seasonal rhinoconjunctivitis. METHODS: A randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled Phase I trial was conducted outside the grass pollen season. Seven dosage groups [25,000, 75,000, 150,000, 300,000, 500,000, 750,000, or 1,000,000 standardized quality tablet (SQ-T)], consisting of 12 participants randomized either to active treatment or placebo (3 : 1) daily for 28 days, commenced treatment in a staggered manner at intervals of approximately 1 week to allow for intermittent safety reviews. RESULTS: The grass allergen tablet did not cause any serious, systemic or significant (leading to withdrawal) AEs. The overall incidence of AEs was 74% (1,013 events); all of mild or moderate intensity and most considered treatment-related. The most frequently reported treatment-related AEs, including irritation of the throat, and itching sensations in the mouth and ears, increased with dose. These were primarily mild in intensity, started shortly after medication intake and lasted for minutes to a few hours maximum. Objective oral findings were also dose-dependent. No clinically significant observations were found in safety laboratory, vital signs and 12-lead ECG. CONCLUSIONS: A sublingual grass allergen tablet in doses up to 1,000,000 SQ-T daily caused no serious or systemic AEs displaying a safety profile that allows further investigation as once-daily self-medication.     

Allergy immunotherapy tablet: Grazax® for the treatment of grass pollen allergy

Immunotherapy is the only treatment for allergy that alters the natural course of this disease. Sublingual immunotherapy has been developed to make immunotherapy more suitable for allergic patients. In the largest clinical program ever conducted with grass allergen-specific immunotherapy, over 2000 adults and more than 500 children have been exposed to Grazax(?) (ALK-Abello A/S, Hoersholm, Denmark). Grazax is an oral lyophilisate tablet (allergy immunotherapy tablet [AIT]) for sublingual administration, containing 75,000 standardized quality tablet units of allergen extract of grass pollen (Phleum pratense). Grazax is indicated for treatment of grass pollen-induced rhinitis and conjunctivitis in adult and pediatric patients. Results from the GT-08 trial (first, second and third treatment years) showed a reduction of 31, 36 and 29%, respectively, in symptom scores and a reduction of 38, 45 and 40% of medication scores, respectively, compared with placebo. Subjects treated with Grazax also had an increased number of well days and a relevant improvement in quality of life. More subjects experienced excellent and complete rhinoconjunctivitis control in comparison with patients treated with symptomatic medications only. Grazax treatment is also associated with a sustained and relevant increase of specific IgG4. This increase is also observed after stopping AIT treatment. The most common adverse events related to Grazax treatment are local reactions, such as oral itch, edema of the mouth, ear pruritus, throat irritation and sneezing. Clinical efficacy of Grazax is observed also after 1 and 2 years of follow-up after stopping the AIT treatment. Grazax is efficacious and safe for treatment of grass-pollen rhinoconjunctivitis in both adults and children. Grazax is the first AIT showing a disease-modifying effect on grass pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjuctivitis.     

Efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy with grass allergen tablets for seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

BACKGROUND: Allergen immunotherapy (desensitization) by injection is effective for seasonal allergic rhinitis and has been shown to induce long-term disease remission. The sublingual route also has potential, although definitive evidence from large randomized controlled trials has been lacking. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to confirm the efficacy of a rapidly dissolving grass allergen tablet (GRAZAX, ALK-Abelló, H?rsholm, Denmark) compared with placebo in patients with seasonal rhinoconjunctivitis. METHODS: A longitudinal, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study that included 51 centers from 8 countries. Subjects were randomized (1:1) to receive a grass allergen tablet or placebo once daily. A total of 634 subjects with a history of grass pollen-induced rhinoconjunctivitis for at least 2 years and confirmation of IgE sensitivity (positive skin prick test and serum-specific IgE) were included in the study. Subjects commenced treatment at least 16 weeks before the grass pollen season, and treatment was continued throughout the entire season. RESULTS: The primary efficacy analysis showed a reduction of 30% in rhinoconjunctivitis symptom score (P < .0001) and a reduction of 38% in rhinoconjunctivitis medication score (P < .0001) compared with placebo. Side effects mainly comprised mild itching and swelling in the mouth that was in general well tolerated and led to treatment withdrawal in less than 4% of participants. There were no serious local side effects and no severe systemic adverse events. CONCLUSION: Sublingual immunotherapy with grass allergen tablets was effective in grass pollen-induced rhinoconjunctivitis. The tablet was well tolerated with minor local side effects. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The grass allergen tablet represents a safe alternative to injection immunotherapy suitable for home use.     

Cost-effectiveness of grass allergen tablet (GRAZAX®) for the prevention of seasonal grass pollen induced rhinoconjunctivitis – a Northern European perspective

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis has increased dramatically. Seventeen million people in the United Kingdom, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Finland suffer from grass pollen induced allergic rhinitis. Symptomatic therapy with antihistamines and topical steroids is partially effective but allergen-specific immunotherapy by injection or sublingual routes is superior. The grass allergen tablet (GRAZAX) is a new allergen-specific immunotherapy for home administration. OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of the grass allergen tablet compared with symptomatic medication in seven Northern European countries. METHODS: A prospective pharmacoeconomic analysis was carried out alongside a multinational clinical trial. Pooled data on resource use and health outcomes were collected. A societal perspective was adopted, and the analysis had a 9-year time horizon. The outcome measure was Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). RESULTS: The grass allergen tablet was clinically superior to symptomatic treatment, producing statistically significant differences for all efficacy end-points, including the number of QALYs gained - 0.976 vs. 0.947 QALYs gained. There was a significantly higher usage of the rescue medications loratadine and budesonide, and more hours missed from work (production loss), in the symptomatic treatment group. The cost per QALY gained in the grass allergen tablet group was similar in the seven countries (euro 12,930 to euro 18,263 for an annual cost of the grass allergen tablet of euro 1500). The analysis showed that the grass allergen tablet was cost-effective for all countries for an annual treatment cost below euro 2200. CONCLUSION: The pharmacoeconomic analysis illustrated that allergen-specific immunotherapy with the grass allergen tablet is a cost-effective intervention for the prevention of grass pollen induced rhinoconjunctivitis in Northern European countries, for a tablet price below euro 6. In Germany for example the price of the tablet is euro 2.95 corresponding to a yearly treatment cost of euro 358 - based on a 9-year time horizon.     

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.     

Oral/sublingual Phleum pretense grass tablet (Grazax/Grastek) to treat allergic rhinitis in the USA

With the approval of two grass tablets and one ragweed tablet for sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) by the US FDA in April 2014, the practice of allergy immunotherapy (AIT) in the USA has dramatically changed. Until this time, there were no approved allergen extracts for sublingual administration and physicians who prescribed SLIT for their patients did so without full knowledge of proper dosing or assurance of its safety. Now sublingual allergen tablets are available that have proven safe and effective doses. This article describes, in detail, the studies that have been conducted with a timothy grass SLIT tablet and draws some comparisons to the alternative 5-grass SLIT tablet. It also attempts to predict what will be the impact of the introduction of these tablets on the practice of AIT in the USA over the next few years.     

The co-seasonal application of anti-IgE after preseasonal specific immunotherapy decreases ocular and nasal symptom scores and rescue medication use in grass pollen allergic children

BACKGROUND: Specific immunotherapy (SIT) and treatment with anti-immunoglobulin (Ig)E antibody are complementary approaches to treat allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, which may be used for single or combined treatment. OBJECTIVE: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted to compare the efficacy of single and combined treatment with SIT and anti-IgE (Omalizumab) in reducing symptom severity and rescue medication use. METHODS: A total of 221 subjects with birch and grass pollen allergic rhinoconjunctivitis aged 6-17 years were analysed during the grass pollen season. Group A (SITbirch + placebo) served as a reference group obtaining no effective treatment for grass pollen allergy. Group B received anti-IgE monotherapy during grass pollen season, group C SIT grass pollen monotherapy, and group D the combined treatment of SIT and Omalizumab. RESULTS: Preseasonal treatment with grass pollen SIT alone compared with SIT with the nonrelated allergen did not reduce symptoms or rescue medication use. Anti-IgE monotherapy significantly diminished rescue medication use and number of symptomatic days. The combined treatment with SIT and anti-IgE showed superior efficacy on symptom severity compared with anti-IgE alone. CONCLUSIONS: Co-seasonal Omalizumab therapy showed considerable effects in children with seasonal allergic rhinitis. The combination of SIT plus Omalizumab was clinically superior to each treatment alone during the first year of observation.     

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.     

Pollen immunotherapy reduces the development of asthma in children with seasonal rhinoconjunctivitis (the PAT-study)

BACKGROUND: Children with allergic rhinitis are likely to develop asthma. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether specific immunotherapy can prevent the development of asthma and reduce bronchial hyperresponsiveness in children with seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. METHODS: From 6 pediatric allergy centers, 205 children aged 6 to 14 years (mean age, 10.7 years) with grass and/or birch pollen allergy but without any other clinically important allergy were randomized either to receive specific immunotherapy for 3 years or to an open control group. All subjects had moderate to severe hay fever symptoms, but at inclusion none reported asthma with need of daily treatment. Symptomatic treatment was limited to loratadine, levocabastine, sodium cromoglycate, and nasal budesonide. Asthma was evaluated clinically and by peak flow. Methacholine bronchial provocation tests were carried out during the season(s) and during the winter. RESULTS: Before the start of immunotherapy, 20% of the children had mild asthma symptoms during the pollen season(s). Among those without asthma, the actively treated children had significantly fewer asthma symptoms after 3 years as evaluated by clinical diagnosis (odds ratio, 2.52; P <.05). Methacholine bronchial provocation test results improved significant in the active group (P <.05). CONCLUSION: Immunotherapy can reduce the development of asthma in children with seasonal rhinoconjunctivitis.     

Efficacy of sublingual swallow immunotherapy in children with severe grass pollen allergic symptoms: a double-blind placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND: Local application of allergen extracts in specific immunotherapy is accompanied by increased compliance and significantly reduced side effects. However, efficacy of local immunotherapy in children has yet not been sufficiently demonstrated. This study was performed to determine clinical efficacy of high dose sublingual swallow immunotherapy (SLIT) by a double-blind placebo-controlled study in children with grass pollen allergy using high dose allergen extracts. METHODS: A total of 161 children with seasonal rhinoconjunctivitis of which, 68 had also asthma symptoms were enrolled in a multicenter double-blind placebo-controlled study for 1 year and treated on a daily basis with sublingually applied allergen drops. After 1 year all children were given treatment for another 2 years in an open-controlled setting. Symptom scores and medication were assessed during the pollen seasons with structured interviews. Applied allergen dosage, compliance, and side effects were documented by daily diary cards. Primary endpoint was a clinical index (CI) combining symptom scores with medication index. Titrated skin prick tests (SPT) and specific antibody measurements were performed each year. RESULTS: Combining symptom with medication scores to CI was highly reliable (reliability coefficient = 0.89, standard error = 9.6%). Allergen-specific IgE- and IgG-subclass antibodies increased significantly in patients treated with SLIT indicating an activation of the immune response induced by the locally applied grass pollen extract. SPT reactivity did not change during therapy. After 1 year of SLIT in the original design we observed no significant difference in the CI between treatment and placebo analyzing all patients included in the study per intention to treat and per protocol. However, subgroup analysis in a repeated measures model revealed that patients with SLIT and severe symptoms before the beginning of treatment (CI > mean/ > 1.51) showed a significant improvement of clinical symptoms after 3 years. CONCLUSION: In this study SLIT was accompanied by a significant placebo effect. Efficacy of treatment could only be seen in children with severe clinical symptoms and this became clinically marked after 3 years of therapy.     

Sublingual immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis: systematic review and meta-analysis

Allergic rhinitis is a common condition which, at its most severe, can significantly impair quality of life despite optimal treatment with antihistamines and topical nasal corticosteroids. Allergen injection immunotherapy significantly reduces symptoms and medication requirements in allergic rhinitis but its use is limited by the possibility of severe systemic reactions. There has therefore been considerable interest in alternative routes for delivery of allergen immunotherapy, particularly the sublingual route. The objective was to evaluate the efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), compared with placebo, for reductions in symptoms and medication requirements. The Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials Register, MEDLINE (1966-2002), EMBASE (1974-2002) and Scisearch were searched, up to September 2002, using the terms (Rhin* OR hay fever) AND (immunotherap* OR desensiti*ation) AND (sublingual). All studies identified by the searches were assessed by the reviewers to identify Randomized Controlled Trials involving participants with symptoms of allergic rhinitis and proven allergen sensitivity, treated with SLIT or corresponding placebo. Data from identified studies was abstracted onto a standard extraction sheet and subsequently entered into RevMan 4.1. Analysis was performed by the method of standardized mean differences (SMD) using a random effects model. P-values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Subgroup analyses were performed according to the type of allergen administered, the age of participants and the duration of treatment. Twenty-two trials involving 979 patients, were included. There were six trials of SLIT for house dust mite allergy, five for grass pollen, five for parietaria, two for olive and one each for, ragweed, cat, tree and cupressus. Five studies enrolled exclusively children. Seventeen studies administered the allergen by sublingual drops subsequently swallowed, three by drops subsequently spat out and two by sublingual tablets. Eight studies involved treatment for less than 6 months, 10 studies for 6-12 months and four studies for greater than 12 months. All included studies were double-blind placebo-controlled trials of parallell group design. Concealment of treatment allocation was considered adequate in all studies and the use of identical placebo preparations was almost universal. There was significant heterogeneity, most likely due to widely differing scoring systems between studies, for most comparisons. Overall there was a significant reduction in both symptoms (SMD -0.42, 95% confidence interval -0.69 to -0.15; P = 0.002) and medication requirements [SMD -0.43 (-0.63, -0.23); P = 0.00003] following immunotherapy. Subgroup analyses failed to identify a disproportionate benefit of treatment according to the allergen administered. There was no significant reduction in symptoms and medication scores in those studies involving only children but total numbers of participants was too small to make this a reliable conclusion. Increasing duration of treatment does not clearly increase efficacy. The total dose of allergen administered may be important but insufficient data was available to analyse this factor.     

A bright future for sublingual immunotherapy--contra

Defining the role of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and allergic asthma is hampered for various reasons: Heterogeneity in study designs, different allergen extracts and dosages, imperfect assessment strategies and partially inconclusive results. A number of questions need to be addressed before replacing subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) by the sublingual route: Ideal dose, treatment duration, magnitude of improvement, modification of the immune response, long-term and preventive effects. At present, SLIT might be used in adults with pollen related rhinoconjunctivitis, particularly if SCIT is not suitable for the patient (i.e. systemic effects). Only few data support SLIT for house dust mite allergy or bronchial asthma. Due to a lack of convincing results SLIT for children should only be applied in controlled studies and not in the daily routine. A more substantiated and conclusive judgment of SLIT is possibly warranted in a few years, when more studies with larger patient groups have addressed open questions concerning SLIT.     

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.     

Sublingual immunotherapy: a double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial with Parietaria judaica extract standardized in mass units in patients with rhinoconjunctivitis, asthma, or both

BACKGROUND: New routes of administering immunotherapy in respiratory allergy are being studied as an alternative to conventional injective immunotherapy. We carried out a study to evaluate the clinical efficacy and effects of sublingual immunotherapy in patients with Parietaria judaica-induced respiratory allergy. METHODS: A double-blind, placebo-controlled design was followed. Thirty patients with P. judaica rhinoconjunctivitis, mild asthma, or both were randomly chosen for sublingual immunotherapy (14 patients) or placebo treatment (16 patients). The patients underwent preseasonal rush induction treatment followed by coseasonal maintenance treatment during the Parietaria pollen season. Symptom and drug scores, as well as specific IgE and specific IgG4, were recorded. RESULTS: Significantly lower symptom and drug scores were found (P=0.04), especially during the Parietaria pollination period, in the immunotherapy group. No significant difference in specific IgE and specific IgG4 was detected between the active and placebo groups; a statistically significant increase of specific IgE was detected in both groups (P=0.05). No patient undergoing active sublingual immunotherapy reported local or systemic side-effects. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that sublingual immunotherapy is both clinically effective and safe in treating patients with Parietaria-induced rhinoconjunctivitis and mild asthma.     

Allergen-specific immunotherapy with recombinant grass pollen allergens

BACKGROUND: Allergen-specific immunotherapy uses aqueous extracts of natural source materials as a basis for preparations to down regulate the allergic response. Recombinant DNA technology has enabled the cloning of many allergens, thus facilitating investigations aimed at improving efficacy and safety of immunotherapy. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of a mixture of 5 recombinant grass pollen allergens in reducing symptoms and need for symptomatic medication in patients allergic to grass pollen. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of subcutaneous injection immunotherapy was performed in subjects with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, with or without asthma. Primary endpoint was a symptom medication score compiled from separate symptom and medication scores. Secondary endpoints included a rhinitis quality of life questionnaire, conjunctival provocation, and specific antibody responses. RESULTS: The symptom medication score showed significant improvements in subjects receiving recombinant allergens as opposed to placebo, with reductions in both symptoms and medication usage. The rhinitis quality of life questionnaire revealed clinically relevant significant improvements in overall assessment and in 5 of 7 separate domains, and conjunctival provocation showed a clear trend in favor of active treatment. All treated subjects developed strong allergen-specific IgG(1) and IgG(4) antibody responses. Some patients were not sensitized to Ph l p 5 but nevertheless developed strong IgG antibody responses to that allergen. CONCLUSION: A recombinant allergen vaccine can be a effective and safe treatment to ameliorate symptoms of allergic rhinitis. The clinical benefit is associated with modification of the specific immune response with promotion of IgG(4) and reduction of IgE antibodies consistent with the induction of IL-10-producing regulatory T cells.     

Five-grass-pollen sublingual immunotherapy tablet for the treatment of grass-pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: 5 years of experience

Oralair^® (OA) (Stallergenes, Antony, France) is a unique pre- and co-seasonal 5-grass-pollen sublingual immunotherapy tablet launched in 2008, and now approved in 31 countries worldwide for the treatment of grass-pollen allergic rhinitis and rhinoconjunctivitis. OA is the first oral treatment with a consistent, well-balanced allergen extract that mimics natural exposure and sensitization. A wealth of data exists from over 5 years of clinical and real-world experience demonstrating the efficacy and safety of OA for grass-pollen-allergy treatment. OA is highly effective from the first pollen season in all patient subgroups, including children and those with comorbid mild asthma, irrespective of sensitization status and symptom severity. OA also has sustained long-term benefits for symptom control and quality of life. This article provides an overview of the pharmacodynamics and pharmacology of OA; its efficacy, safety, tolerability and cost–effectiveness for the treatment of allergic rhinitis and rhinoconjunctivitis and its role in clinical practice.     

Advances in upper airway diseases and allergen immunotherapy

The purpose of this review is to highlight important articles on upper airway diseases and immunotherapy that appeared during 2006. Studies from Europe continue to examine the usefulness of the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma classification of allergic rhinitis as intermittent or persistent and its levels of severity as mild or moderate/severe. A number of physical agents were shown to effect nasal inflammation: sudden temperature changes in patients with allergic rhinitis increased eosinophilic inflammation; in children with allergic asthma, the personal exposure to particles <2.5 microm air pollution correlated with percent of nasal eosinophils and levels of markers of nasal exudation; and in patients who developed rhinorrhea on exposure to cold and windy weather, nasal challenge with cold dry air caused sloughing of nasal epithelial cells. A 3-month double-blind, placebo-controlled study of nasal washes with amphoteracin B showed no benefit in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. Studies of immunotherapy with grass and dog dander extracts confirmed the need for doses containing 15 to 20 microg of the major allergen for optimal effectiveness. The protective effect of immunotherapy on the development of asthma in children with allergic rhinitis was shown to still be present 2 years after completion of a 3-year course of treatment. Injection immunotherapy with a moderate dose of house dust mite extract in house dust-sensitive adults with atopic dermatitis reduced symptoms and use of corticosteroids and antihistamines compared with treatment with about 1/1000 of that dose of the same extract. Pretreatment for 9 weeks with the monoclonal anti-IgE antibody omalizumab reduced systemic reactions during rush immunotherapy 5-fold and allowed further build-up at weekly intervals without systemic reactions. A review of sublingual immunotherapy confirmed both efficacy and safety, but evidence for appropriate dosing and for the effectiveness of sublingual immunotherapy employing multiple allergen mixes was still lacking. Two studies with a sublingual grass pollen extract tablet showed a clear dose response and the ability to initiate sublingual immunotherapy without an up-dosing phase. A pilot study with cytosine phosphorothionate quanosine DNA conjugated to the major allergen of ragweed reported impressive improvement in symptoms the first pollen season that persisted during the second pollen season without any further administration of the conjugate. In conclusion, studies on rhinitis and sinusitis explored the pathophysiology of the disease more than offering new therapeutic approaches. Studies on immunotherapy addressed optimal dosing, but also a variety of safer and more convenient approaches such as reduction of IgE with omalizumab, conjugating allergen to immunostimulatory DNA sequences, or administration by the sublingual route.     

Oralair®: sublingual immunotherapy for the treatment of grass pollen allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

Oralair(?) is a sublingual grass pollen immunotherapy tablet that was authorized for use in Europe on 26 November 2009 and is currently in Phase III clinical trials in the USA. It is indicated for the management of grass pollen allergic rhinitis with or without conjunctivitis in adults, adolescents and children (above the age of 5) with clinically relevant symptoms, confirmed by a positive cutaneous test and/or a positive titer of the specific IgE to the grass pollen. Treatment is composed of an initiation phase (3-day dose escalation: 100 IR [index of reactivity] on day 1, 200 IR on day 2 and 300 IR on day 3) and a continuation phase at a dosage of 300 IR/day. Treatment is scheduled to start approximately 4 months before the actual start of the pollen season and should be continued throughout the season. The treatment should be prescribed and initiated by an experienced allergy specialist.