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.     

Grass pollen immunotherapy as an effective therapy for childhood seasonal allergic asthma

BACKGROUND: Few studies have investigated the use of specific immunotherapy (SIT) for childhood seasonal allergic asthma. OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine the efficacy and safety of SIT with Alutard SQ grass pollen (Phleum pratense Alutard SQ; ALK-Abelló, H?rsholm, Denmark) in children with seasonal allergic asthma. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study assessing the efficacy of grass pollen SIT over 2 pollen seasons was performed. Children (3-16 years) with a history of seasonal allergic asthma sensitized to grass pollen (P pratense) and requiring at least 200 microg of inhaled beclomethasone equivalent per day were enrolled. Subjects with symptomatic asthma or rhinoconjunctivitis outside the grass pollen season were excluded. The primary outcome measure was a combined asthma symptom-medication score during the second pollen season. Secondary outcome measures included end-point titration skin prick testing and conjunctival and bronchial provocation testing to allergen, sputum eosinophilia, exhaled nitric oxide, and adverse events. RESULTS: Thirty-nine subjects were enrolled. Thirty-five subjects provided data for analysis. The use of SIT was associated with a substantial reduction in asthma symptom-medication score compared with that after placebo (P = .04). There were also significant reductions in cutaneous (P = .002), conjunctival (P = .02), and bronchial (P = .01) reactivity to allergen after SIT compared with that after placebo. The 2 groups had similar levels of airway inflammation, despite a trend toward less inhaled steroid use in the active group. No serious adverse events were reported, and no subjects withdrew because of adverse events. CONCLUSION: The study has shown that SIT is effective and well tolerated in children with seasonal allergic asthma to grass pollen.     

Implementation of guidelines for seasonal allergic rhinitis: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis is a common disease altering quality of life. Its treatment is well established and guidelines have been proposed. However, their efficacy has never been tested. The aim of the study was to validate the guidelines of the International Consensus on Rhinitis in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. METHODS: A multicenter, multinational, open label, parallel, randomized study compared two therapeutic strategies in seasonal allergic rhinitis during a 3-week treatment. General practitioners were randomized into two groups. In the first group of 224 patients, doctors followed guidelines from the International Consensus on Rhinitis. Depending on the severity of nasal and ocular symptoms defined using visual analogue scales, patients received ebastine (an oral antihistamine), triamcinolone acetonide (a topical corticosteroid) and/or ophthalmic nedocromil sodium (a topical ocular cromone). In the second group of 241 patients, general practitioners had a free choice of treatment. The primary efficacy end points were quality of life measured using the standardized rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire (RQLQ) and the symptom-medication scores assessed daily with an electronic dairy system. RESULTS: Adjusted mean total symptom scores over 21 days were 4.93 in the guidelines strategy group compared with 7.48 in the free-choice treatment group (P = 0.0001). Mean total scores in the RQLQ decreased by 2.19 in the guidelines group compared with a decrease of 1.79 in the free-choice treatment group (P = 0.0001). At 21 days, the least square mean difference in improvement in overall scores for RQLQ in the guidelines group compared with the free-choice treatment group was 0.53, which was greater than the minimal important difference. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis often present severe symptoms which are not well recognized or controlled by physicians using their own criteria of severity and treatment. Using a simple method for the evaluation of the severity and a simple therapeutic scheme based on International Guidelines, patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis presented a significant improvement by comparison with those receiving a non-standardized treatment.     

Randomized controlled trial of high-dose sublingual immunotherapy to treat seasonal allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND: Seasonal allergic rhinitis is common and troublesome. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has been proposed as an alternative to injection immunotherapy and might offer some advantages if it were effective and practical in a community setting. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and side-effect profile of SLIT in patients with summer hay fever uncontrolled on current standard medication. To assess the feasibility of delivering SLIT in a United Kingdom general practice setting. METHODS: Double-blind, placebo-controlled study in 186 patients with severe summer hay fever identified from 16 United Kingdom general practices. After a baseline year to ensure balanced groups, subjects were randomized, and SLIT was given for 1 or 2 years and compared with placebo. The principal outcome measure was symptoms as recorded on diary cards. Secondary criteria were skin and conjunctival reactivity, allergen-specific IgE and IgG 4 , and the frequency and severity of adverse effects. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-six subjects completed the study. After 1 year, no significant differences were found between actively treated subjects and the placebo group. After the second year of therapy, subjects who had received 2 years treatment were 6.8 times more likely to show a reduction in nose running (P <.001) and 2.4 times more likely to have reduced sneezing (P <.05) compared with subjects in the placebo group. Benefits for nasal blockage were found at the peak pollen season and were similar in both actively treated groups. CONCLUSION: Sublingual immunotherapy can be given successfully and safely in the community. High-dose SLIT has beneficial effects on nasal symptoms during the peak pollen season in patients with severe seasonal allergic rhinitis. At least 2 years of treatment with SLIT is required to show a benefit.     

A controlled trial of oral hyposensitization in pollen asthma and rhinitis in children

This study describes the effect of an orally administered grass-pollen vaccine, taken pre-seasonally, on the clinical symptoms of fifty-four children with hay fever, asthma or both, during the 1982 grass-pollen season. Oral mixed grass-pollen vaccine and a matched placebo were randomly allocated to form two matched groups. Although small differences were observed in favour of the active group for both hay fever and asthma, no significant advantage was demonstrated over placebo in terms of symptom scores or additional medication required.     

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.     

Sublingual immunotherapy abrogates seasonal bronchial hyperresponsiveness in children with Parietaria-induced respiratory allergy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: The use of immunotherapy in asthmatic children is still controversial. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) may represent an advance, due to the good safety profile, but little is known about its effects on lung function and nonspecific bronchial responsiveness. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the effects of SLIT on these parameters, in children with Parietaria pollen-induced asthma. METHODS: Thirty children with asthma solely due to Parietaria who participated in a previous randomized, placebo-controlled trial with SLIT were studied: pulmonary function test and methacholine challenge were carried out at baseline in winter 1999 (out season), during the 1999 season (before randomization), and during the 2001 season. RESULTS: Before randomization, there was a significant fall in methacholine provocation concentration during the pollen season vs baseline in both groups (SLIT group 9.78 +/- 5.95 mg/ml vs 3.37 +/- 2.99 mg/ml; placebo 8.70 +/- 6.25 mg/ml vs 2.44 +/- 2.25 mg/ml; P =.005). In the second pollen season, the response to methacholine returned to baseline values in the active group (9.10 +/- 7.7 mg/ml; P = NS vs baseline), whereas in the placebo group a significant increase in reactivity was still present (2.46 +/- 2.26; P = 0.008 vs baseline). No significant difference in FEV(1) and FEF(25-75) between the two groups was observed at all times. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that SLIT abrogates the seasonal bronchial hyperreactivity in children with asthma due to Parietaria. This may be regarded as an indirect evidence of the effect on bronchial inflammation.     

Concomitant montelukast and loratadine as treatment for seasonal allergic rhinitis: a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND: Nasal challenge studies have suggested histamine and cysteinyl leukotrienes are important proinflammatory mediators in allergic rhinitis. This study was designed to determine the efficacy of montelukast, a cysteinyl leukotriene receptor antagonist, administered alone or concomitantly with loratadine, an H(1)-receptor antagonist, in seasonal allergic rhinitis. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of concomitant use of montelukast and loratadine in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. METHODS: In this multicenter (N = 12) double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled 2-week trial, 460 men and women, aged 15 to 75 years, with spring seasonal allergic rhinitis were randomly allocated to receive 1 of the following 5 treatments: montelukast 10 or 20 mg, loratadine 10 mg, montelukast 10 mg with loratadine 10 mg, or placebo, once daily in the evening. The primary end point was daytime nasal symptoms score (average of congestion, rhinorrhea, itching, and sneezing). Other end points were eye symptoms, nighttime symptoms, individual daytime nasal symptoms, global evaluations (patient's and physician's), and rhinoconjunctivitis quality-of-life scores. RESULTS: Concomitant montelukast with loratadine improved the primary end point significantly (P <.001) compared with placebo and each agent alone. Compared with placebo, montelukast with loratadine also significantly improved eye symptoms, nighttime symptoms, individual daytime nasal symptoms, global evaluations, and quality of life. Montelukast alone and loratadine alone caused modest improvements in rhinitis end points. All treatments were similarly well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant montelukast with loratadine provided effective treatment for seasonal allergic rhinitis and associated eye symptoms with a safety profile comparable with placebo.     

Montelukast for treating seasonal allergic rhinitis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial performed in the spring

BACKGROUND: Cysteinyl leukotrienes are important proinflammatory mediators believed to have a role in allergic rhinitis. OBJECTIVE: This multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled trial evaluated the effectiveness and tolerability of montelukast, a cysteinyl leukotriene receptor antagonist, for treating patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. METHODS: After a 3- to 5-day, single-blind placebo run-in period, 1302 male and female patients (aged 15-81 years) with active allergic rhinitis symptoms were randomly assigned to receive montelukast 10 mg (n = 348), loratadine 10 mg (n = 602), or placebo (n = 352) administered once daily at bedtime for 2 weeks during the spring allergy season. RESULTS: Mean patient characteristics and symptom scores at baseline were similar for the three treatment groups. The primary end-point, daytime nasal symptoms score (mean of nasal congestion, rhinorrhea, nasal pruritus, and sneezing scores; 0-3 scale), improved from baseline during treatment by (least squares mean, 95% confidence interval) - 0.37 (- 0.43, - 0.31), - 0.47 (- 0.52, - 0.43), and - 0.24 (- 0.29, - 0.18) in the montelukast, loratadine, and placebo groups, respectively (P < or = 0.001 comparing each active treatment with placebo). Mean changes from baseline in all other diary-based scores, including night-time and eye symptom scores, were significantly greater for each active treatment than for placebo. The rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life overall score improved significantly with montelukast and with loratadine as compared with placebo. Montelukast and loratadine showed a safety profile comparable to that of placebo. CONCLUSION: Montelukast is well tolerated and provides improvements in daytime and night-time symptoms, as well as quality of life parameters, for patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis.     

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.     

Allergen-antibody complexes can efficiently prevent seasonal rhinitis and asthma in grass pollen, hypersensitive patients

We have prepared antigen-antibody complexes from grass pollen allergens and autologous specific antibodies isolated by immunoadsorption from the serum of allergic patients. These complexes were inoculated into patients in a double-blind trial to evaluate their effect on grass pollen-related rhinitis and bronchial asthma. Thirty-eight grass pollen-hypersensitive patients were allocated to three groups; patients in the first two groups were treated with antigen-antibody complexes at different ratios and dosages and were compared with the third group who received the placebo carrier buffer alone. In addition, we treated a fourth group who had already received antigen-antibody complex inoculation during the previous pollen season. Injections were given every 2 weeks during the pollen season, starting 5 weeks prior to it. Tolerance was excellent with no signs of local or systemic side effects. The treatment prevented nasal symptoms while enabling the patients to reduce antihistamine intake. Bronchial asthma was virtually absent in the treated groups even though no bronchodilators or corticosteroids had to be taken. Specific IgE antibodies did not increase during the pollen season nor did IgG "blocking" antibodies. Inoculation of allergen-antibody complexes could provide a valuable alternative for the treatment of immediate hypersensitivity to airborne allergens as it appears to be safe and rapidly efficacious. This treatment offers several advantages compared to conventional hyposensitization and is characterized by the absence of an increase in specific IgG antibodies.     

Grass pollen immunotherapy inhibits seasonal increases in basophils and eosinophils in the nasal epithelium

BACKGROUND: Symptoms of allergic rhinitis are accompanied by infiltration of the nasal mucosa with inflammatory cells, predominantly eosinophils and metachromatic cells (basophils and mast cells). Specific immunotherapy (IT) reduces mucosal eosinophilia and numbers of metachromatic cells in the epithelium. A specific marker distinguishing basophils from mast cells was recently developed. OBJECTIVES: The basophil-specific monoclonal antibody 2D7 was used to determine the influence of subcutaneous IT on numbers of nasal mucosal basophils compared with the effects of IT on neutrophils, eosinophils and mast cells. METHOD: During a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of grass pollen IT in 44 adults with severe summer hay fever, nasal biopsies were taken at baseline, out of the pollen season, and at the peak of the pollen season following 2 years treatment. Biopsies were processed for immunohistochemistry for basophils (2D7+), mast cells (AA1+), eosinophils (MBP+) and neutrophils (neutrophil elastase+). RESULTS: In placebo-treated (PL) patients there were significant seasonal increases in basophils (P < 0.01), mast cells (P < 0.05) and eosinophils (P = 0.002) in the nasal submucosa. In IT-treated patients significant increases in 2D7+ cells (P < 0.01) and eosinophils (P = 0.01) but not AA1+ cells (P = 0.9) were observed. These differences were significant between groups for eosinophils (P < 0.05). In the epithelium there were seasonal increases in AA1+ cells and eosinophils in both groups (PL: P < 0.01, IT: P < 0.05 for both). The between-group difference was significant for eosinophils (P = 0.05). Basophils were observed in the epithelium of six out of 17 in the placebo group and one out of 20 in the IT group (P = 0.03). Neutrophil numbers remained constant in both epithelium and submucosa. CONCLUSION: Successful grass pollen immunotherapy was associated with inhibition of seasonal increases in basophils and eosinophils, but not mast cells or neutrophils within the nasal epithelium. Immunotherapy may act, at least in part, by reducing seasonal recruitment of basophils and eosinophils into the epithelium.     

IL-5 production by allergen-stimulated T cells following grass pollen immunotherapy for seasonal allergic rhinitis

We have previously identified the hevein preprotein as a common allergen for latex allergic healthcare workers. The B cell epitopes in the hevein protein that are recognized by IgE of latex-allergic individuals have not been identified. In this study, we examined the hevein preprotein using epitope mapping. Overlapping synthetic peptides of 10 amino acids (two aa overlap) were synthesized on a derivatized cellulose membrane using Fmoc chemistry. The peptide spots were probed with pooled sera from 10 latex-allergic patients, and the IgE-reactive peptides identified with anti-IgE MoAbs. We identified six B cell epitopes within the full length hevein preprotein which bound IgE from latex-allergic patients. Two were located in the N-terminal 5-kD hevein domain and four were observed in the 14-kD C-domain. A broad epitope was located between the N-terminal amino acids 13–24. This epitope had nearly complete homology to wheat germ agglutinin (WGA). Immunological cross-reactivity to WGA was confirmed by Western blot analysis with purified WGA, and this reactivity could be inhibited by latex proteins or WGA. Of the five remaining epitopes, four had homologies to other proteins in the pathogenesis-related family of plant proteins (PR-4). The data demonstrate that hevein has multiple IgE epitopes. The significant homology of these epitopes to a broad family of plant defence proteins further explains the increased prevalence of food allergies in latex-allergic individuals.