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.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Allergoids are chemically modified allergen extracts administered to reduce allergenicity and to maintain immunogenicity. Oralair® (the 5-grass tablet) is a sublingual native grass allergen tablet for pre- and co-seasonal treatment. Based on a literature review, meta-analysis, and cost-effectiveness analysis the relative effects and costs of the 5-grass tablet versus a mix of subcutaneous allergoid compounds for grass pollen allergic rhinoconjunctivitis were assessed. A Markov model with a time horizon of nine years was used to assess the costs and effects of three-year immunotherapy treatment. Relative efficacy expressed as standardized mean differences was estimated using an indirect comparison on symptom scores extracted from available clinical trials. The Rhinitis Symptom Utility Index (RSUI) was applied as a proxy to estimate utility values for symptom scores. Drug acquisition and other medical costs were derived from published sources as well as estimates for resource use, immunotherapy persistence, and occurrence of asthma. The analysis was executed from the German payer's perspective, which includes payments of the Statutory Health Insurance (SHI) and additional payments by insurants. Comprehensive deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses and different scenarios were performed to test the uncertainty concerning the incremental model outcomes. The applied model predicted a cost-utility ratio of the 5-grass tablet versus a market mix of injectable allergoid products of € 12,593 per QALY in the base case analysis. Predicted incremental costs and QALYs were € 458 (95% confidence interval, CI: € 220; € 739) and 0.036 (95% CI: 0.002; 0.078), respectively. Compared to the allergoid mix the probability of the 5-grass tablet being the most cost-effective treatment option was predicted to be 76% at a willingness-to-pay threshold of € 20,000. The results were most sensitive to changes in efficacy estimates, duration of the pollen season, and immunotherapy persistence rates. This analysis suggests the sublingual native 5-grass tablet to be cost-effective relative to a mix of subcutaneous allergoid compounds. The robustness of these statements has been confirmed in extensive sensitivity and scenario analyses.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Allergen-specific immunotherapy (SIT) induces clinical and immunological tolerance as defined by persistence of clinical benefit and associated long-term immunological parameters after cessation of treatment. Although the efficacy of SIT has been shown in terms of reducing symptoms, medication consumption and ameliorating quality of life in both allergic rhinitis and asthma, there has long been some controversies about effectiveness of SIT in the treatment of allergic asthma. The type of allergen, the dose and protocol of immunotherapy, patient selection criteria, the severity and control of asthma, all are significant contributors to the power of efficacy in allergic asthma. The initiation of SIT in allergic asthma should be considered in case of coexisting of other allergic diseases such as allergic rhinitis, unacceptable adverse effects of medications, patient's preference to avoid long-term pharmacotherapy. Steroid sparing effect of SIT in allergic asthma is also an important benefit particularly in patients who have to use these drugs in high doses for a long-time. Symptomatic asthma is a risk factor for systemic reactions and asthma should be controlled at the time of administration of SIT. Both subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) have been found to be effective in patients with allergic asthma. Although the safety profile of SLIT seems to be better than SCIT, the results of some studies and meta-analyses suggest that the efficacy of SCIT may appear better and earlier than SLIT in children with allergic asthma.
    12/2014; 2(12):859-65. DOI:10.12998/wjcc.v2.i12.859


Available from