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.     

Efficacy and safety of specific immunotherapy with SQ allergen extract in treatment-resistant seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

BACKGROUND: Specific immunotherapy is widely used to treat allergic rhinitis, but few large-scale clinical trials have been performed. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the efficacy and safety of specific immunotherapy with 2 doses of Alutard grass pollen in patients with moderately severe seasonal allergic rhinitis inadequately controlled with standard drug therapy. METHODS: We performed a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of 410 subjects (203 randomized to 100,000 standardized quality units [SQ-U] maintenance, 104 to 10,000 SQ-U, and 103 to placebo). Three hundred forty-seven (85%) completed treatment. Groups were well matched for demographics and symptoms. RESULTS: Across the whole pollen season, mean symptom and medication scores were 29% and 32% lower, respectively, in the 100,000-SQ-U group compared with those in the placebo group (both P < .001). Over the peak pollen season, mean symptom and medication scores were 32% and 41% lower, respectively, than those in the placebo group. The 10,000-SQ-U group had 22% less symptoms than the placebo group over the whole season (P < .01), but medication scores reduced by only 16% (P = .16). Quality-of-life measures confirmed the superiority of both doses to placebo. Local and delayed side effects were common but generally mild. Clinically significant early and delayed systemic side effects were confined to the 100,000-SQ-U group, but no life-threatening reactions occurred. CONCLUSIONS: One season of immunotherapy with Alutard grass pollen reduced symptoms and medication use and improved the quality of life of subjects with moderately severe hay fever. The 100,000-SQ-U regimen was more effective, but the 10,000-SQ-U regimen caused fewer side effects.     

Efficacy and safety of 5-grass pollen sublingual immunotherapy tablets in patients with different clinical profiles of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

Background The optimal dose of grass pollen tablets for sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis patients was previously established in a multinational, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study in 628 adults. Patients were randomized to receive once‐daily 5‐grass pollen sublingual tablets of 100 IR (index of reactivity), 300 IR or 500 IR, or placebo starting 4 months before the pollen season. Objective The aim of this complementary analysis was to determine whether 300 IR 5‐grass pollen SLIT‐tablets is effective in different subtypes of patients who are allergic to grass pollen. Methods Different subgroups could be identified regarding comorbidities (with or without asthma during the grass‐pollen season), sensitization (mono/polysensitization) and symptom severity. An additional exploratory analysis was performed within four subgroups based on pre‐treatment assessment: Group 1=high specific IgE; Group 2=high symptom scores; Group 3=high skin sensitivity; Group 4=any of Group 1, 2 or 3. Results Asthma and sensitization status were not significant covariates as the average Rhinoconjunctivitis Total Symptom Score (RTSS) was identical for patients with and without grass‐pollen asthma, as well as for mono‐ and polysensitized patients. Across the four subgroups, average RTSSs (± SD) for the optimal dosage (300 IR) were 3.91 ± 3.16, 3.83 ± 3.14, 2.55 ± 2.13 and 3.61 ± 2.97, for subgroups 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. ancova showed that in Group 1 average RTSS did not differ significantly with different doses of SLIT. In Groups 2, 3 and 4, doses of 300 IR and 500 IR were significantly more effective than 100 IR and placebo (P0.035). All doses of SLIT administered in this study can be considered safe in the patients investigated. Conclusions The risk–benefit ratio validates the use of 300 IR tablets in clinical practice in all of these patient subgroups, regardless of severity profile, sensitization status and presence of asthma.     

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.     

Lack of detectable alterations in immune responses during sublingual immunotherapy in children with seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis to grass pollen

BACKGROUND: Recent work indicates that subcutaneous specific immunotherapy induces specific T-cell anergy, a shift in the TH1/TH2 ratio, and antibody production in favor of IgG4. There are few data on sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), especially in children. METHODS: We assessed the proliferation of peripheral blood mononuclear cells ((3)H-thymidine incorporation) and secretion of interleukin (IL)-4, interferon (IFN)gamma and IL-5 (ELISA) after in vitro stimulation with allergen or phytohemagglutinin (PHA) in 29 children with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis receiving SLIT with grass pollen before, and after 1 and 2 years of treatment in a multicenter placebo-controlled study on the efficacy of the treatment. Further, non-specific intracellular production of IL-4, IL-13, IFNgamma, IL-2, IL-10 and IL-5 (FACS) and serum total and specific IgE and IgG4 (ELISA) were analyzed. RESULTS: Proliferation and IL-4 and IL-5 secretion after stimulation with allergen or PHA did not differ between the groups. In addition, we observed no effect of SLIT on intracellular cytokine production. IFNgamma secretion after allergen coculture was comparable between the groups. Following PHA stimulation, IFNgamma secretion was significantly higher in the SLIT group after 1 year, and a trend was observable already before and after 2 years of treatment, probably due to the inhomogeneity in the groups despite randomization (for age and asthma). No significant changes were observed for sIgE/sIgG4 ratios over time either in or between the groups. CONCLUSION: During 2 years of SLIT in children with a positive effect on rescue medication use, we observed no significant effects on in vitro T-cell immune responses or immunoglobulins. So far, pediatric studies demonstrating stable effects of SLIT on such reactions are missing, probably due to limited effects of SLIT on systemic immunologic reactions.     

Efficacy and safety of high-doses sublingual immunotherapy in ultra-rush scheme in children allergic to grass pollen

Background Although sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has been used with increasing frequency, the data on the efficacy of SLIT in pediatric asthma are limited.
Aim The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy and the safety of high-dose SLIT given pre-seasonally and co-seasonally in an ultra-rush scheme in children with bronchial asthma allergic to grass pollen.
Methods Fifty children with asthma, aged 6–17, sensitive to grass pollen, participated in the 2-year prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, to investigate the efficacy and safety of SLIT (Staloral 300 IR, Stallergenes SA, 25 μg major allergens) as a standardized extract of five grass pollen with ultra-rush induction.
Results SLIT significantly improved asthma symptom scores (41% vs. placebo group), reduced nasal symptoms (25% vs. placebo group) and the use of rescue medications (10% vs. placebo group), improved forced expiratory volume in 1 s, but had no effect on ocular symptoms, nasal hyper-reactivity, peak expiratory flow and forced expiratory volume between 25% and 75% of vital capacity. Serum levels of immunoglobulin E and IgG4 did not change after SLIT. After the second season of SLIT, an improvement in bronchial hyperresponsiveness was observed; however, compared with placebo, this effect was not significant. Among all subjects in SLIT group, predominantly local reactions have been recorded in 59% of subjects in the first year of treatment and in 35% in the second.
Conclusions Our study indicated that high-dose ultra-rush, co-seasonal SLIT given for 2 years, was safe and reduced a multiple symptom–medication score.     

Effect of grass pollen immunotherapy with Alutard SQ on quality of life in seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

BACKGROUND: Treatment of allergic rhinitis with subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy is effective in terms of reductions in symptoms and seasonal use of reliever medication. Its effect on quality of life (QoL), reflecting the impact of symptoms on work/school performance and leisure activities is, however, important and often overlooked. AIMS OF THE STUDY: To assess effect on QoL of specific immunotherapy with two doses of Alutard SQ Phleum pratense in patients with moderately to severe seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis inadequately controlled by standard drug therapy. METHODS: Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of 410 patients with seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. Participants were randomized (2 : 1 : 1) to receive Alutard SQ P. pratense (ALK-Abelló) at maintenance doses of 100,000 SQ-U (203 subjects), 10,000 SQ-U (104 subjects) or placebo (103 subjects) given by subcutaneous injections. The groups were well matched for demographics and baseline symptoms. Quality of life was assessed using the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire which covers seven domains of health before and in the peak of the pollen season. RESULTS: While all domain scores were significantly improved when comparing 100,000 SQ-U with placebo, two domain scores were significantly improved when comparing 10,000 SQ-U with placebo. When comparing 100,000 SQ-U with 10,000 SQ-U, four domain scores were significantly improved. CONCLUSION: Treatment with Alutard SQ significantly improved the seasonal QoL of patients suffering from allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. The improvement was more pronounced and wider ranging in patients who received the higher 100,000 SQ-U maintenance dose.     

A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multi-centre study on the efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in children with seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis to grass pollen

BACKGROUND: Especially in childhood, sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) could offer advantages over subcutaneous therapy. However, limited data on its efficacy is available. METHODS: In four German centres 97 children (age 3-14 years) with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis to grass pollen were enrolled in a prospective, double-blind trial comparing SLIT (Pangramin SLIT; ALK-SCHERAX, 0.5 microg major allergens, three times per week, 32 months) with placebo. Primary endpoint was a multiple symptom-medication score for changes in seasonal diary entries between the first and third year of the study (SLIT n=39; placebo n=38). RESULTS: The multiple symptom-medication score was significantly reduced by SLIT to 77.3% of the placebo group (P=0.0498). The subsequent analysis of the single endpoints did not reveal significant differences for symptom scores in favour of SLIT (85.1% of placebo group; P=0.22). However, the medication score improved significantly (67.1% of placebo group; P=0.0025). Furthermore, secondary endpoints assessing in vivo immune responses did not differ significantly between the groups. However, retrospective analysis showed some inhomogeneity for clinical and in vitro parameters at the beginning of the study. Allergic side effects with possible relation to the study drug were reported in both groups (SLIT 49%, placebo 27%, P=0.026). CONCLUSION: Our study indicates that SLIT had a positive effect on the reduction of a multiple symptom-medication score, mainly by significantly reducing rescue medication use, but had no significant effect on symptoms alone in children with rhinoconjunctivitis to grass pollen compared with a placebo.     

Grass pollen sublingual immunotherapy for seasonal rhinoconjunctivitis: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggest that sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) represents a safer alternative to injection immunotherapy but equivalent efficacy is yet to be confirmed. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of SLIT in grass pollen-induced seasonal rhinoconjunctivitis. METHODS: A randomized, placebo-controlled trial in 56 adults over 18 months. Outcome measures included diary scores of seasonal symptoms and medication use, overall assessments, conjunctival and intradermal provocation tests and serum antibody measurements. To investigate possible mechanisms, sublingual biopsies were taken for measurement of local T cells, antigen-presenting cells and IL-12 mRNA expression. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the immunotherapy (IT) and placebo groups for diary symptom scores (P = 0.48) or rescue medication (P = 0.19). The patients' overall assessment of hayfever severity compared with previous years showed a highly significant improvement in favour of the IT group (P < 0.02). After treatment the late skin response was smaller (P = 0.003) and the ratio of serum allergen-specific IgG4/IgE was higher (P = 0.05) in the IT group. Both of these variables correlated with the clinical response to SLIT. There were no differences between groups in either the sublingual epithelium or lamina propria for numbers of CD3+ cells (epithelium: P = 0.9, lamina propria: P = 0.2), CD1a+ cells (P = 0.3, P = 0.25), CD68+ cells (P = 0.9, P = 1.0) or IL-12 mRNA+ cells (P = 0.6, P = 0.4). Local side-effects were minor and there were no serious treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSION: Grass pollen sublingual immunotherapy was well tolerated. Although there was no significant change in diary scores, the improvement in overall assessments, which correlated with inhibition of the late skin response and increases in serum IgG4 : IgE ratio, indicates the need for larger, dose-ranging studies.     

Combination of omalizumab and specific immunotherapy is superior to immunotherapy in patients with seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and co-morbid seasonal allergic asthma

Background The treatment of allergic asthma by specific immunotherapy (SIT) is hampered by potential side-effects.
Objective The aim of this study was to study the effect of omalizumab, a monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, in combination with SIT in patients with seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (SAR) and co-morbid seasonal allergic asthma (SAA) incompletely controlled by conventional pharmacotherapy.
Methods A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-centre trial was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of omalizumab (Xolair^®) vs. placebo in combination with depigmented SIT (Depigoid^®) during the grass pollen season. Omalizumab or placebo was started 2 weeks before SIT; the whole treatment lasted 18 weeks. Primary endpoint was daily 'symptom load', the sum of daily scores for symptom severity and rescue medication use.
Results A total of 140 patients (age 11–46 years) were randomized; and a total of 130 finished the study. Combination therapy reduced the symptom load by 39% ( P =0.0464, Wilcoxon test) over SIT monotherapy. This difference was mainly due to reduced symptom severity ( P =0.0044), while rescue medication use did not change significantly. Combination therapy also improved asthma control (Asthma Control Questionnaire, P =0.0295) and quality of life in the case of asthma (Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire, P =0.0293) and rhinoconjunctivitis (Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire, P =0.0537). Numbers of patients with 'excellent or good' treatment efficacy according to ratings of investigators (75.0% vs. 36.9%) or patients (78.5% vs. 46.1%) were markedly higher in the combination group than under SIT alone.
Conclusion Combination of omalizumab with SIT for treatment of patients with SAR and co-morbid SAA was safe and reduced the symptom load in a statistically significant and clinically meaningful manner.     

Multiple daily administrations of low-dose sublingual immunotherapy in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.

BACKGROUND: Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is an efficacious treatment for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the number of daily administrations of SLIT can affect its efficacy. METHODS: In an open study, 64 patients with allergic seasonal rhinoconjunctivitis to grass or birch pollens were assigned to the following 2-year daily treatment schedules: "3-3" group, 1 drop 3 times daily for 2 years; "2-3" group, 1 drop twice daily in year 1 and 1 drop 3 times daily in year 2; "1-3" group, 1 drop once daily in year 1 and 1 drop 3 times daily in year 2; and control group, no treatment. One fifth of the allergen concentration recommended by the manufacturer as maintenance treatment was used throughout the study. Patients were monitored for skin reactivity to the allergen used for SLIT using an end point dilution technique and for drug use. RESULTS: No treatment-related adverse effects were observed. Skin reactivity to allergen decreased compared with controls in the first treatment year only in the "3-3" group and in all treated patients in year 2. Drug use decreased in the first treatment year in the "3-3" and "2-3" groups vs controls. This outcome extended to "1-3" patients in treatment year 2. Antihistamine use decreased significantly compared with baseline in year 1 in "3-3" and "2-3" patients and in all treated patients in year 2. No changes were observed in controls. CONCLUSION: The number of daily administrations seems to correlate with the efficacy of SLIT.     

Coseasonal sublingual immunotherapy reduces the development of asthma in children with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

BACKGROUND: We wondered whether short-term coseasonal sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) can reduce the development of asthma in children with hay fever in an open randomized study. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether SLIT is as effective as subcutaneous immunotherapy in reducing hay fever symptoms and the development of asthma in children with hay fever. METHODS: One hundred thirteen children aged 5 to 14 years (mean age, 7.7 years) with hay fever limited to grass pollen and no other clinically important allergies were randomized in an open study involving 6 Italian pediatric allergy centers to receive specific SLIT for 3 years or standard symptomatic therapy. All of the subjects had hay fever symptoms, but at the time of study entry, none reported seasonal asthma with more than 3 episodes per season. Symptomatic treatment was limited to cetirizine, loratadine, nasal budesonide, and salbutamol on demand. The hay fever and asthma symptoms were quantified clinically. RESULTS: The actively treated children used less medication in the second and third years of therapy, and their symptom scores tended to be lower. From the second year of immunotherapy, subjective evaluation of overall allergy symptoms was favorable in the actively treated children. Development of asthma after 3 years was 3.8 times more frequent (95% confidence limits, 1.5-10.0) in the control subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Three years of coseasonal SLIT improves seasonal allergic rhinitis symptoms and reduces the development of seasonal asthma in children with hay fever.     

Efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: To review the available published data concerning the use of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in respiratory allergy to primarily evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of the treatment and to secondarily consider the mechanisms of action and any unresolved questions. DATA SOURCES: Articles in the medical literature (starting from 1986 up to November 2003) derived from searching the MEDLINE database with the keywords sublingual immunotherapy, respiratory allergy, asthma, and rhinitis. Sources included review articles, randomized controlled clinical trials, postmarketing surveillance studies, and relevant reports from meeting proceedings. STUDY SELECTION: Articles concerning safety, efficacy, and mechanisms of SLIT published in English-language, peer-reviewed journals. RESULTS: SLIT proved effective and safe in adults and children. As with traditional subcutaneous immunotherapy, SLIT has long-lasting efficacy and a preventive effect on new sensitizations. CONCLUSION: SLIT is a viable alternative to subcutaneous immunotherapy. Its use in pediatric patients seems to be particularly promising.     

Efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy in children

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is currently the only available disease-modifying and aetiological treatment of IgE-mediated diseases. Sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT) constitutes the preferred route of administration of AIT for respiratory allergies in Europe. Recently it has also been approved in the US. Further applications are currently under evaluation, such as IgE-mediated food allergy and IgE-mediated atopic dermatitis. The SLIT safety profile is overall favourable, although local adverse events, usually mild, are described. Most of the meta-analyses confirmed the efficacy of SLIT in reducing symptoms and medication intake in children with allergic diseases. AIT, as an immune-modulating treatment, can modify the natural history of the allergic diseases: reduction of the risk of development of asthma and bronchial hyperreactivity in patients with allergic rhinitis, and reduction of the onset of new sensitizations. A great interest is now devoted to the preventive effects of AIT and, consequently, to the optimal time of initiation.     

Efficacy of cetirizine in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

The efficacy of cetirizine, 10 mg once daily, in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis was evaluated in a double-blind placebo-controlled trial. Sixteen patients monosensitized to olive pollen were treated simultaneously for 6 weeks, including one pollen season. Severity of symptoms and rescue drug consumption were significantly lower in the cetirizine group.