Article

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

University of Florence, Florens, Tuscany, Italy
Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (Impact Factor: 11.25). 11/2004; 114(4):851-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2004.07.012
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT 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.
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.
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.
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.
Three years of coseasonal SLIT improves seasonal allergic rhinitis symptoms and reduces the development of seasonal asthma in children with hay fever.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Elena Galli, May 27, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
107 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Allergen immunotherapy (IT) is an effective treatment of respiratory allergy, but requires strict rules of performance. This makes compliance particularly relevant, but thus far only a few studies have investigated this issue. We reviewed all the available articles on compliance and adherence with IT in its different forms of administration, ie, subcutaneous (SCIT), sublingual (SLIT), and local nasal (LNIT). Early studies, when only SCIT was available, reported a low compliance, ranging from 45% to 60%, but the demanding schedules used, with very frequent injections, accounted for this outcome, as shown by patients' recognition of inconvenience as the major cause of noncompliance. The most recent studies reported a good compliance, estimated in 75% to 90%, to both SCIT and SLIT, inconvenience remaining the major cause of noncompliance, followed by cost of the treatment. The only study addressing LNIT found a very poor compliance (27%), the major cause being the side effects, with repeated nasal reactions to the allergen extract. Adequate education of patients and optimization of administration schedules, with fine balancing between dose effectiveness and cost, are the factors most likely to achieve further improvement of compliance with IT.
    Patient Preference and Adherence 02/2008; 2:247-51. · 1.49 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Pollen immunotherapy can be delivered either by the traditional subcutaneous route (SIT) or by sublingual-swallow immunotherapy (SLIT). Whatever the route of administration, the treatment is administered before the pollen season (pre-seasonal treatment) and during the pollen season (co-seasonal treatment). SLIT is safer and easier to administer than SIT, and this may be of special relevance in children. SLIT tolerance during the maintenance phase is excellent, even during the pollen season.
    Revue Française d Allergologie et d Immunologie Clinique 11/2005; 45(7):555-560. DOI:10.1016/j.allerg.2005.07.010 · 0.24 Impact Factor
  • Source