Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is a unique therapy for allergic disease because it provides symptomatic relief while modifying the allergic disease by targeting the underlying immunological mechanism. Its efficacy and safety have been established in the treatment of asthma, allergic rhinitis/rhinoconjunctivitis and stinging insect hypersensitivity in numerous controlled clinical trials. This review evaluates a spectrum of clinical factors, ranging from efficacy to cost-effectiveness, which should be considered in evaluating SCIT. The evidence for SCIT safety and efficacy for these conditions is reviewed in an evaluation of the systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The evidence for the persistent and preventive effects of SCIT is also examined. An overview of the SCIT outcomes measures utilized in clinical trials is presented. The cost-effectiveness of SCIT compared with conventional medication treatment, novel indications and formulations for SCIT are also explored in this review.
"These results suggest that long-term SCIT may alleviate asthma symptoms and reduce the required dose of ICS. Previous studies have demonstrated that subcutaneous injection immunotherapy is effective in the treatment of allergic rhinitis and asthma, which may improve the symptom scores by >40% (11–15). A previous study indicated that SCIT treatment may alleviate the clinical symptoms of allergic rhinitis as early as 6 weeks following the initiation of treatment (16). "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of three-year subcutaneous SQ-standardized specific immunotherapy (SCIT) in house dust mite (HDM)-allergic children with asthma. Ninety children with allergic asthma to HDMs, with or without allergic rhinitis, were randomly divided into two groups, the treatment group and the control group. The treatment group received SCIT combined with standardized glucocorticoid management and the control group received standardized glucocorticoid management alone for a period of three years. The mean daily dose of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs), a four-week diary recording the symptom scores of asthma, peak expiratory flow (PEF) measurements, skin prick test results and serum immunoglobulin E (IgE) levels were assessed prior to treatment and following one, two and three years of treatment. The median dose of ICS was reduced in the treatment group after two and three years of treatment compared with that of the control group. After three years of treatment, the discontinuation percentage of ICS in the treatment group was higher than that in the control group. The treatment group demonstrated significantly reduced daytime and night-time asthmatic symptom scores, increased PEF values and reduced serum IgE levels after two and three years of treatment compared with those in the control group (P<0.05). In conclusion, three-year SCIT treatment combined with ICS is an effective immunotherapy for children with allergic asthma and resulted in a reduction of the required ICS dose.
Experimental and therapeutic medicine 03/2014; 7(3):630-634. DOI:10.3892/etm.2014.1469 · 1.27 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The safety of shared specific vaccines (SSVs) has been questioned by some experts. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety of SSVs. Details of systemic allergic reactions after subcutaneous immunotherapy injections were captured on a standardized form from July 2005 to July 2010. Patient records were evaluated for factors that might be associated with increased rate of systemic reactions and, in addition, were examined for any errors. Systemic reaction rates (SRRs) using a combination of shared and patient-specific vaccines (PSVs) were similar to previously reported studies (0.23 reactions per 100 shots). There were no systemic reactions resulting from errors where the incorrect shared allergen was administered, but we did note one reaction after an erroneously administered PSV. There were two dosage errors associated with both shared and patient-specific immunotherapy. Most reactions were mild to moderate (World Allergy Organization grade, 1 or 2). Severe reactions with 911 activations were noted in six patients. Thirty percent of reactions occurred out of the office and the average time to reaction was 48 minutes. Epinephrine was administered in only 60% of patients. Epicutaneous reactivity to mites, cats, dogs, and pollen but not mold occurred significantly more in reactors. Differences in SRRs were encountered between satellite offices. Using a combination of SSV and PSV, SRRs were similar to previously reported studies; moreover, no systemic reactions occurred where a SSV was erroneously administered. SRR surveillance is a useful safety tool.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Allergy immunotherapy (AIT) is an effective treatment for allergic asthma and rhinitis, as well as venom-induced anaphylaxis. In addition to reducing symptoms, AIT can change the course of allergic disease and induce allergen-specific immune tolerance. In current clinical practice immunotherapy is delivered either subcutaneously or sublingually; some allergens, such as grass pollen, can be delivered through either route, whereas others, such as venoms, are only delivered subcutaneously. Both subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy appear to have a duration of efficacy of up to 12 years, and both can prevent the development of asthma and new allergen sensitivities. In spite of the advances with AIT, safer and more effective AIT strategies are needed, especially for patients with asthma, atopic dermatitis, or food allergy. Novel approaches to improve AIT include use of adjuvants or recombinant allergens and alternate routes of administration. As part of the PRACTALL initiatives, the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology nominated an expert team to develop a comprehensive consensus report on the mechanisms of AIT and its use in clinical practice, as well as unmet needs and ongoing developments in AIT. This resulting report is endorsed by both academies.
Revue Française d'Allergologie 01/2013; DOI:10.1016/j.reval.2013.10.001 · 0.25 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.