Response to sublingual immunotherapy with grass pollen extract: monotherapy versus combination in a multiallergen extract.

National Jewish Health, Denver, CO 80206, USA.
The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology (Impact Factor: 12.05). 07/2009; 124(1):150-156.e1-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2009.04.037
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To date, there have been no randomized, double-blind studies showing the effectiveness of sublingual immunotherapy with multiple allergens.
The purpose of this study was to examine whether the efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) with standardized timothy extract was reduced by combination with other allergen extracts.
A single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with SLIT was conducted. After an observational grass season, SLIT was administered for 10 months to 54 patients randomized to 1 of 3 treatment arms: placebo, timothy extract (19 microg Phl p 5 daily) as monotherapy, or the same dose of timothy extract plus 9 additional pollen extracts. Symptom and medication scores were collected and titrated nasal challenges, titrated skin prick tests, specific IgE, IgG4 and cytokines release by timothy-stimulated lymphocyte proliferation were performed.
Perhaps because of a very low grass pollen season in 2008, there were no significant differences in medication or symptom scores in either treatment group compared with placebo. Compared with placebo, in the timothy monotherapy group, thresholds for titrated nasal challenge and skin prick tests (P = .03 and P = .001, respectively), and serum-specific IgG4 levels (P = .005) significantly increased, and IFN- gamma levels decreased (P = .02), whereas in the multiallergen group, there was significant improvement only in the titrated skin prick tests (P = .04) which was less than in the monotherapy group. There were no significant differences between the 2 active groups in any outcome measure, and both active groups experienced more adverse events than placebo. There were no systemic reactions.
Improvement in multiple relevant outcomes strongly suggests that SLIT with timothy extract alone was effective; however, the results for symptom and medication scores were not significant. The differences between multiple allergen SLIT and placebo only in skin sensitivity to timothy suggest a reduction in SLIT efficacy in this group. However, further studies are required to confirm these observations.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Allergen immunotherapy is the sole treatment for IgE-mediated allergic diseases directed at the underlying mechanism. The two widely accepted administration routes are sublingual (SLIT) and subcutaneous (SCIT). We reviewed how patients should best be selected for immunotherapy and how the optimal administration route can be defined. Before deciding SCIT or SLIT, appropriate selection of patients for allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is mandatory. To be eligible for AIT, subjects must have a clear medical history of allergic disease, with exacerbation of symptoms on exposure to one or more allergens and a corresponding positive skin or in vitro test. Then the route of administration should be based on: published evidence of clinical and immunologic efficacy (which varies per allergic disease and per allergen); mono- or multi-allergen immunotherapy, for SLIT multi-allergen immunotherapy was not effective; safety: adverse events with SLIT are more frequent, but less severe; and, costs and patient preferences, closely related to adherence issues. All these are discussed in the article.
    Immunotherapy 07/2014; 6(7):871-884. · 2.44 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Skin prick/puncture testing (SPT) is widely accepted as a safe, dependable, convenient, and cost-effective procedure to detect allergen-specific IgE sensitivity. It is, however, prone to influence by a variety of factors that may significantly alter test outcomes, affect the accuracy of diagnosis, and the effectiveness of subsequent immunotherapy regimens. Proficiency in SPT administration is a key variable that can be routinely measured and documented to improve the predictive value of allergy skin testing.
    Allergy Asthma and Clinical Immunology 09/2014; 10(1):44.
    This article is viewable in ResearchGate's enriched format
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background High-dose pollen sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is indicated in patients with moderate to severe allergic rhinitis (AR), especially those who are unable to control their disease with pharmacotherapy. We explore the use of high-dose SLIT in patients with severe AR and sensitized to pollen, in real-life clinical practice. We also analyzed the effect on asthma.Methods This was a prospective observational study conducted at the Allergy outpatient clinic at Hotel Dieu de France Hospital (HDF), Beirut, Lebanon. The cohort, composed of 118 patients between 7 and 55 years old, was regularly evaluated at inclusion, at 12 months, and at 36 months. Fifty-five percent of AR patients had associated controlled asthma. Patients received a standardized pollen extract (Staloral 300IR). The pollen combination was 1 to 3 pollens, the most commonly used were Parietaria judaica, Cupressaceae, 5 grasses, and Oleaceae. In a previous study, those were the main allergenic pollens correlated to AR in the same population. Global assessment of the effect of SLIT was measured using a rhinitis total symptom score (RTSS), a rhinitis medication consumption score (RMCS), a global asthma score (ASS), and an asthma medication consumption score (AMCS).ResultsUsing a t test we found that the average scores at inclusion, 12 months, and 36 months, respectively, were as follows: RTSS: 31.32, 16.39 (p < 0.041), and 13.35 (p < 0.041); RMCS: 6.96, 1.96 (p < 0.0162), and 1.61 (p < 0.0162); ASS: 4.62, 1.96 (p < 0.0005), and 1.33 (p < 0.0005); and AMCS: 2.35, 0.78 (p < 0.0005), and 0.7 (p < 0.0005).Conclusion Our study showed favorable results of SLIT to aeroallergens in patients with uncontrolled AR. The effect is also applicable to the subgroup of patients suffering from concomitant, controlled asthma.
    International Forum of Allergy and Rhinology 09/2014; · 1.00 Impact Factor