Search

Purpose of Review: To update and assess the quality of the evidence concerning the efficacy of allergen immunotherapy for atopic eczema. Desensitization for eczema as a clinical manifestation of food allergy was not a target of this review., Recent Findings: In the past 5 years, from the last comprehensive systematic review of Bussmann et al., four controlled trials have been published on this topic, two using injection and two sublingual immunotherapy. The active treatment was compared with placebo, pharmacotherapy or different schedules of immunotherapy. The studies variably involved adults and children and showed an improvement of atopic dermatitis severity. Severe eczema seems less responsive to hyposensitization, and a minimal treatment duration of 9-12 months appears necessary., Summary: The efficacy of immunotherapy in patients with atopic eczema has been poorly investigated in the past 5 years. The available trials have small dimension and some methodological shortcomings, in addition to incomplete reporting. Clinical and methodological interstudy heterogeneity is apparent. Only one study adopted a placebo control. The evidence of efficacy has not critically changed from previous systematic observations. No long-term studies have been conducted to determine the disease-modifying potential of specific immunotherapy in the context of the 'allergy march'.

Importance of the Field: There is epidemiological evidence that respiratory allergy has reached epidemic proportions; owing to the related socio-economic impact, this topic deserves particular attention. An integrated approach involving pharmacotherapy and the immunomodulatory effect of immunotherapy is expected to optimize the management of respiratory allergy, reducing its clinical and economic burdens. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has gained increasing interest for its efficacy comparable to traditional subcutaneous immunotherapy and its good safety profile., Areas Covered in This Review: A review of the up-to-date state of the art concerning the key aspects of SLIT is provided; the critical issues are discussed in the light of the comprehensive revision of the recent World Allergy Organization position paper and the subsequent literature, paying particular attention to efficacy, safety, additional effects, adherence and clinical developments., What the Reader Will Gain: The overview of current certainties and concerns, related to the use of SLIT, allows the reader's insight into the future directions of research and clinical applications of SLIT, aimed at covering current unmet needs., Take Home Message: A large amount of experimental evidence sustains the use of SLIT, though some aspects still need to be clarified to provide clear, evidence-based recommendations. Unmet needs represent the basis for future research, while clinical hypotheses would open the search for new indications and modalities.

Background: Grass pollen is a worldwide cause of respiratory allergy. Identifying the causative species is essential, for example for choosing the appropriate immunotherapy, because not all grass allergens are totally cross-reacting, and the pollen calendars provide only a gross estimate. Phenologic analyses allow identification of the pollen release for each individual grass., Objectives: To assess, using phenologic analyses, the true flowering periods of grasses and to compare the data with the standard pollen calendar., Methods: Phenologic analyses were performed of the following grasses: black grass, sweet vernal grass, common wild oat, barren brome, cocksfoot, tall fescue, Yorkshire fog, ryegrass, Timothy grass, bulbous meadow-grass, Kentucky bluegrass, and Bermuda grass. Sampling was performed every 10 days, starting in April 2009, at 50 stations distributed across Italy. The flowering phase was assessed using a stereomicroscopy-based method for the detection of spreading stamens. The official pollen calendar was used for comparison., Results: Relevant differences were found between grass pollen count and effective flowering of the grass species. Only some species contributed to the pollen peak, and a relevant pollen load for other species was also present out of the peak. Important Pooideae, such as Timothy grass, were not present during the pollen peak in northern and central Italy, and the same occurred with Bermuda grass., Conclusions: The various species of grasses release their pollen grains at different times during the pollen season, and this information is missing with pollen calendars. This may have a relevant effect on the choice of an appropriate immunotherapy., (Copyright © 2010 American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Sublingual immunotherapy is gaining widespread attention as a viable alternative to subcutaneous immunotherapy for the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. In addition, sublingual immunotherapy has been studied in other allergic disorders including asthma. However, a review of published studies indicates that there are deficiencies and considerable heterogeneity in both design and data interpretation of sublingual immunotherapy studies. These deficiencies have made it somewhat difficult to assess the appropriate place of sublingual immunotherapy in guidelines for the therapy of allergic diseases. Moreover, several unpublished oral and sublingual immunotherapy studies in the United States failed to meet primary endpoints. This article reviews data from sublingual immunotherapy trials and makes recommendations about appropriate designs of future sublingual immunotherapy studies. It is hoped that these recommendations will result in more adequately designed sublingual immunotherapy trials to facilitate the appropriate placement of this therapy to treat patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and other allergic diseases.

Background: Recent studies have documented the efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in patients with rhinitis, but the value of this treatment in those with asthma is still debated. We evaluated the efficacy of SLIT in the treatment of allergic asthma in children by a metaanalysis of randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled (DBPC) clinical trials., Methods: Electronic databases were searched up to May 31, 2006, for randomized DBPC trials assessing SLIT in pediatric cases of asthma. Effects on primary outcomes (ie, symptom scores and concomitant use of rescue medication) were calculated with standardized mean differences (SMDs) using the random-effects model. We performed the metaanalysis using a statistical software package (RevMan, 4.2.8; The Cochrane Collaboration; Oxford, UK), and we followed the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration and the Quality of Reporting of Metaanalyses guidelines., Results: Seventy-three articles were identified and reviewed. Nine studies, all published after 1990, fulfilled the selection criteria. A total of 441 patients had a final assessment and were included in the analysis. Two hundred thirty-two patients received SLIT, and 209 patients received placebo. The results of the present analysis demonstrated a relevant heterogeneity due to widely differing scoring systems. Overall, there was a significant reduction in both symptoms (SMD - 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], - 2.10 to - 0.18; p = 0.02) and medication use (SMD, - 1.63; 95% CI, - 2.83 to - 0.44; p = 0.007) following SLIT., Conclusion: SLIT with standardized extracts reduces both symptom scores and rescue medication use in children with allergic asthma compared with placebo.

In Latin America, allergic diseases have a very high prevalence, comparable to that of many other countries of the world, and that prevalence is constantly increasing. Within the region, the number of allergy specialists is quite high, although allergy is not recognized as a full specialty in all countries. Specific immunotherapy is the only available allergen-oriented immunomodulator, capable of improving symptoms and modifying the natural course of the disease, and therefore it represents a powerful therapeutic tool for specialists. During the last 20 years, the practice of immunotherapy in Latin America has much improved, especially because of the intensive educational effort, the widespread divulgation of the international guidelines and the adoption of the paradigm of the evidence-based medicine. In this regard, indications, contraindications, and limits of immunotherapy, are currently well acknowledged. In Latin America, immunotherapy is properly prescribed for inhalant allergens and hymenoptera venom by allergy specialists, although some non-evidence based forms of immunotherapy (e.g. bacterial extracts, treatment of atopic dermatitis) are still occasionally practiced. Sublingual immunotherapy is now accepted as a viable alternative to the traditional subcutaneous administration, and it begins to be proposed and studied also in some Latin American countries. Some debate remains on the use of immunotherapy for one or few versus multiple allergens, and also the availability of standardized extracts is not uniform. Finally, this therapeutic modality is not always given for free to low income patients such is the case in some countries and the different modalities of reimbursement among countries often represent a limit to the use of this treatment. Much has been done in improving the use of immunotherapy in Latin America. The main challenges and objectives for the near future are greater diffusion of the evidence-based medicine, a better standardization of extracts and procedures, and the achievement of the availability of immunotherapy for a greater number of subjects.

Purpose of Review: The methodology of randomized clinical trials is essential to assess and register treatment interventions. Although specific immunotherapy was introduced a century ago, very few trials meet the criteria for pivotal studies. The paper reviews the methods which should be used to investigate specific immunotherapy., Recent Findings: Large pivotal trials on specific immunotherapy were published within the last year and made sublingual immunotherapy an accepted treatment in Europe. Moreover, a study proposed the guidelines for conducting trials on immunotherapy. Phase I studies were also published on sublingual immunotherapy. A large trial on subcutaneous immunotherapy confirmed its efficacy, but showed that this form of treatment is associated with side effects., Summary: The clinical efficacy of subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy with pollen and mites is well established for both rhinitis and asthma, but the methodology of many specific immunotherapy trials was found to be insufficient until recent large pivotal studies. The present paper reviews the requirements for conducting trials in allergen-specific immunotherapy including allergen standardization, patient inclusion and exclusion criteria, phase I trials to assess safety, dose-ranging studies, and pivotal trials. These need to be randomized, parallel group, placebo-controlled designs. The number of patients should be sufficient. Primary and secondary outcome measures are listed. Trials for asthma need specific requirements. In all trials, safety should be carefully monitored. Studies in children are required.

Purpose of Review: Sublingual immunotherapy is currently accepted as a viable therapeutic option, and is widely used in many European countries. In the past 2 years, new data concerning clinical, immunological and practical aspects of sublingual immunotherapy have been published, and many critical points have been addressed., Recent Findings: In addition to the new data on clinical efficacy, the most recent studies have shown that, similar to the injection route, sublingual immunotherapy can also prevent the onset of new sensitizations and the onset of asthma. Moreover, several postmarketing surveys have confirmed the satisfactory safety profile, even in very young children, and compliance has been measured. The good safety profile has also suggested the possibility of using sublingual immunotherapy without the updosing phase. Finally, the mechanisms of action have been systematically investigated and the biodistribution of sublingual allergens has been further clarified., Summary: More new data on sublingual immunotherapy are rapidly appearing in the international literature. These data consistently confirm the value of this treatment and show that sublingual immunotherapy is a viable and useful form of immunotherapy.

Background: Few data are available on the pharmacoeconomic aspects of immunotherapy., Objective: To evaluate, from the health care system and societal perspectives, the costs and consequences of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) added to pharmacotherapy compared with drugs alone for respiratory allergy., Methods: This study compared costs, clinical outcomes, and cost-effectiveness ratios of 2 strategies in the management of allergic rhinitis and asthma, namely, SLIT associated with pharmacotherapy and pharmacotherapy alone (no SLIT). A decision tree was developed and populated with epidemiologic and resource utilization data concerning approximately 2,200 patients. Direct costs included visits, tests, pharmacotherapy, immunotherapy, and hospitalizations. Indirect costs and out-of-pocket drugs were also included. Outcome was calculated as the number of improved patients and asthma cases avoided at 6 years. Sensitivity analysis was performed by varying costs and epidemiologic data., Results: SLIT improved the symptoms of 399 of 1,000 patients and prevented asthma in 229 of 1,000 patients compared with drugs alone. For SLIT added to pharmacotherapy and pharmacotherapy alone, the direct cost per patient at more than 6 years was Euro2,400 and Euro3,026, whereas the indirect cost was Euro1,913 and Euro3,400., Conclusion: From both perspectives and for both effectiveness end points, SLIT is less expensive and more effective than pharmacotherapy alone.

Allergen specific immunotherapy, together with drugs and allergen avoidance, is a cornerstone in the management of respiratory allergy. The non-injection or local routes were developed with the main goal of improving the safety and minimizing the risk of those side effects, which can accompany the injection route. The pure oral route and the bronchial route showed, in the clinical trials, only a marginal efficacy with not negligible side effects. Therefore, these routes are no longer recommended for clinical use. The nasal route proved effective and safe, but its efficacy is strictly limited to the nose. Moreover, the practical problems with administration have made the use of nasal immunotherapy progressively declining. The efficacy of the sublingual route is confirmed by numerous controlled trials, and a meta analysis (in allergic rhinitis). The safety profile, as derived from clinical trials and post marketing surveillance studies, is satisfactory, with mild gastrointestinal complaints being the more frequent side effect reported. Recent studies have also demonstrated that SLIT has a long-lasting effect and a preventive effect on the onset of new skin sensitizations, and interesting data on adherence and mechanisms of action have become recently available. Based on these experimental data, SLIT is now officially accepted as a viable alternative to the subcutaneous route in adults and children. Several points still need to be elucidated, including: mechanisms of action, optimal dosages, and indications in pediatric patients.

Purpose of Review: Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is widely used in several European countries. Many clinical trials and a meta-analysis presently support its efficacy, but limits and indications in pediatric age still need to be clarified. We review here the most recent literature on SLIT, with particular attention paid to the safety of children and to the additional clinical effects., Recent Findings: In addition to clinical trials, post-marketing surveillance studies have confirmed the optimal safety profile of SLIT in adults and children, including those below the age of 5 years. The most recent studies have shown that SLIT, identically to the subcutaneous route, has the potential to affect the immunological response to allergens. This is testified to by the facts that SLIT can prevent the onset of new sensitizations and maintain its beneficial effect for years after discontinuation. Moreover, it has been shown that SLIT can prevent the onset of asthma in children with rhinitis., Summary: Due to its excellent safety, SLIT would be an optimal candidate for use in pediatric age groups, where the natural history of allergy can be to some extent modified. Nonetheless, formal and rigorous studies are needed to define its exact indication and dosage.

Purpose of Review: Sublingual immunotherapy is now officially accepted as a viable alternative to the traditional subcutaneous route, and it is widely used especially in European countries. Despite the large amount of experimental evidence on the safety and efficacy of the method, some concerns still exist, and several aspects need to be clarified: magnitude of the efficacy, adherence, long-lasting effect and others. Recently published studies have provided answers to some of these points., Recent Findings: The most recent studies have shown that sublingual immunotherapy exerts a long-lasting effect up to 5 years after discontinuation and that it is able to prevent the onset of new sensitizations. Moreover, when systematically assessed, the adherence to treatment is quite satisfactory, despite the treatment being self-administered. In addition, evidence has been provided that sublingual immunotherapy is effective in treating allergic conjunctivitis, and a metaanalysis has confirmed its efficacy in rhinitis. Moreover, some studies have addressed the possibility of simplifying the schedule of administration by shortening the build-up phase., Summary: More and more new data on sublingual immunotherapy are rapidly appearing in the international literature. These data confirm the clinical value of this treatment and show that it is comparable to subcutaneous immunotherapy from several points of view.

Allergen-specific immunotherapy, together with drug therapy and allergen avoidance, is a cornerstone in the management of respiratory allergy in both adults and children. Since the introduction of sublingual administration of immunotherapy (SLIT), it was regarded as the most promising approach, especially because of its optimal safety profile. After 15 years of clinical trials, the WHO officially accepted SLIT as a routine clinical option in both adults and children. This paper reviews the up-to-date aspects about clinical efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of sublingual immunotherapy.

Allergen specific immunotherapy, together with drugs and allergen avoidance, is a cornerstone in the management of respiratory allergy. The traditional subcutaneous route is burdened with the risk of severe adverse events; therefore, safer routes of administration (noninjection or local routes) have been investigated and developed. Controlled trials failed to demonstrate the clinical efficacy and the safety of oral and bronchial administration, and these routes have been abandoned. Local nasal immunotherapy proved effective and safe in 17 of 18 controlled trials; thus it is considered a viable route of immunotherapy. Nevertheless, nasal immunotherapy is effective in rhinitis only and requires a particular administration technique; therefore its use is slowly declining. The sublingual route is supported by numerous controlled trials showing its efficacy in asthma and rhinitis in adults and children. The safety profile, assessed in clinical trials and postmarketing surveillance studies, is satisfactory; the most frequent side effects are gastrointestinal complaints, which can be easily managed by proper dose adjusting. Sublingual immunotherapy is now accepted by the World Health Organization as a valid alternative to the subcutaneous route also in children. Although the long-lasting efficacy has been recently documented for the sublingual route, several points still need to be elucidated, including mechanisms of action, optimal dosage, cost-effectiveness, and adherence.

Background: With respect to allergy, the possibility of cross-reactivity between snail and mite is well recognized, and anecdotal reports suggesting that allergen immunotherapy with mite extract can worsen snail-induced allergy exist., Objective: We describe the effect of immunotherapy in 4 children with snail-mite allergy., Methods: Four children (1 boy and 3 girls; 9-13 years of age) had consistent clinical histories (mild immediate respiratory symptoms after ingestion) and positive skin reactions for allergy to snail. They also had mite-induced asthma and were therefore prescribed subcutaneous specific immunotherapy and subsequently followed., Results: Several months (8-25) after starting immunotherapy, all children experienced life-threatening reactions, anaphylaxis, and respiratory failure after inadvertent ingestion of snail. Skin reactivity to the fresh food increased in all patients., Conclusions: This observation confirms that in patients with combined mite-snail allergy, immunotherapy should be avoided.

Randomized controlled trials have demonstrated responses to clinical parameters, but a significant proportion of allergy patients in real-life settings would have been excluded from such studies. Therefore, real-world research is needed, and there is a growing body of information on allergen immunotherapy's long-term effectiveness and safety. Real-world evidence can be a valuable instrument to better understand the patient's journey and the effectiveness and safety of therapies. For this purpose, a registry will be used for the first time in Italy to evaluate the impact of allergen immunotherapy on several outcomes, including quality of life and disease-related effects in the pediatric and adult allergic population with a socio-economic assessment and respect to real-world health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Allergy today is a public health concern of pandemic proportions, affecting more than 150 million people in Europe alone. In view of epidemiological trends, the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) predicts that within the next few decades, more than half of the European population may at some point in their lives experience some type of allergy. Not only do allergic patients suffer from a debilitating disease, with the potential for major impact on their quality of life, career progression, personal development and lifestyle choices, but they also constitute a significant burden on health economics and macroeconomics due to the days of lost productivity and underperformance. Given that allergy triggers, including urbanization, industrialization, pollution and climate change, are not expected to change in the foreseeable future, it is imperative that steps are taken to develop, strengthen and optimize preventive and treatment strategies. Allergen specific immunotherapy is the only currently available medical intervention that has the potential to affect the natural course of the disease. Years of basic science research, clinical trials, and systematic reviews and meta-analyses have convincingly shown that allergen specific immunotherapy can achieve substantial results for patients, improving the allergic individuals’ quality of life, reducing the long-term costs and burden of allergies, and changing the course of the disease. Allergen specific immunotherapy not only effectively alleviates allergy symptoms, but it has a long-term effect after conclusion of the treatment and can prevent the progression of allergic diseases. Unfortunately, allergen specific immunotherapy has not yet received adequate attention from European institutions, including research funding bodies, even though this could be a most rewarding field in terms of return on investments, translational value and European integration and, a field in which Europe is recognized as a worldwide leader. Evaluation and surveillance of the full cost of allergic diseases is still lacking and further progress is being stifled by the variety of health systems across Europe. This means that the general population remains unaware of the potential use of allergen specific immunotherapy and its potential benefits. We call upon Europe’s policy-makers to coordinate actions and improve individual and public health in allergy by: Promoting awareness of the effectiveness of allergen specific immunotherapy Updating national healthcare policies to support allergen specific immunotherapy Prioritising funding for allergen specific immunotherapy research Monitoring the macroeconomic and health economic parameters of allergy Reinforcing allergy teaching in medical disciplines and specialties The effective implementation of the above policies has the potential for a major positive impact on European health and well-being in the next decade.

Asthma, allergic rhinitis (AR) and atopic dermatitis are very common in young people, but in the latest decades it was increasingly recognized that also individuals of higher ages, including the population over 65 years, are concerned. Actually, it is now acknowledged the aging does not considerably alter the immune response to allergens. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only treatment that works on the causes of allergy, but elderly people are commonly excluded from AIT, except the cases of insect sting allergy. A number of recent studies showed that aged individuals also successfully respond to AIT for respiratory allergy. Therefore, there is no reason to exclude elder patients from AIT. Anyhow, clinical conditions that are considered absolute or relative contraindications are quite frequent in this aged population, thus the risk/benefit ratio must be carefully evaluated for each patient, taking into account that the more frequent occurrence of co-morbidities and the consequent need of daily-based multidrug regimen can favor adverse effects. An important issue concern the ability of AIT, and particularly of sublingual immunotherapy, to significantly improve the quality of life, that often is particularly impaired in the elderly, reducing symptoms and drugs consumption. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) still remains the only causal treatment for IgE mediated respiratory diseases (rhinitis/asthma) In addition to the observed clinical decrease in symptoms, AIT can provide a long-lasting and preventive effect. In particular it can modify the progression from rhinitis to asthma. Methods: The study was observational, open, non randomized, controlled, prospective and performed in a real-life setting. Patients with pure mite-induced allergic rhinitis were followed-up, receiving adjuvanted SLIT (aSLIT), standard SLIT (sSLIT) or drug treatment alone, according to their preference starting between 2008 and 2009. The possible onset of asthma, changes in pulmonary function and bronchial hyperreactivity (BHR) were assessed over a 5-year horizon. Also the onset of new sensitizations and symptoms-medication score (SMS) were evaluated. Results: One hundred forty two patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria were assessed at baseline, and 124 had the 5-year evaluation (age range 8-57, 69 male). After 5 years of treatment, new sensitizations appeared differentially among treatments with 58.1% of new sensitizations in the drug treatment group, 13.2% in the sSLIT patients, and 8.1% in the aSLIT patients. At the end of 5 years, SMS significantly changed (P < 0.001) in all groups, with a negative trend for controls, as compared to the SLIT treatments. The SMS decreased in both SLIT groups at 5 years, with no change in patients on drug treatment alone. The use of salbutamol (absent at baseline), showed an overall increase only in the group receiving drugs alone with a significant difference at 5 years (P < 0.001). Considering the MCh challenge, there was a difference among treatments (P < 0.001) in PD20 after 5 years: the control group had a lower PD20 at 5 years. No significant difference in PD20 was detected between sSLIT and aSLIT. The FEV1 significantly decreased in controls, with no change in the sSLIT group and a significant increase in aSLIT as compared to sSLIT. Discussion: Despite the limitations inherent to a real-life setting study (absence of randomization and control, small sample size, lack of intermediate timepoint assessment) the results of this study evidenced that the investigated SLIT product, either adjuvanted or not, had a positive effect on the evolution of respiratory allergy due to house dust mite. Conclusion: In the real life setting, considering a 5-year period, aSLIT and sSLIT reduced the onset of new sensistizations and maintained intact the pulmonary function, as compared to patients receiving drug treatment alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Life expectancy and the number of elderly people are progressively increasing around the world. Together with other pathologies, allergic diseases also show an increasing incidence in geriatric age. This is partly due to the growing emphasis on a more accurate and careful diagnosis of the molecular mechanisms that do not allow to ignore the real pathogenesis of many symptoms until now unknown, and partly to the fact that the allergic people from 20 years ago represent the elderly population now. Moreover, environmental pollution predisposes to the onset of allergic asthma and dermatitis which are the result of internal pathologies more than the expression of allergic manifestations. At the same time the food contamination permits the onset of allergic diseases related to food allergy. In this review we provide the state of the art on the physiological changes in the elderly responsible for allergic diseases, their biological characteristics and the major immunological and extra immunological mechanisms. Much emphasis is given to the management of several diseases in the elderly, including anaphylactic reactions. Moreover, some new features are discussed, such as management of asthma with the support of physical activity and the use of the AIT as prevention of respiratory diseases and for the purpose of a real and long lasting benefit. The mechanisms of adverse reactions to drugs are also discussed, due to their frequency in this age, especially in polytherapy regimens. Study of the modifications of the immune system is also of great importance, as regards to the distribution of the lymphocytes and also the presence of a chronic inflammatory disease related to the production of cytokines, especially in prevision of all the possible therapies to be adopted to allow an active and healthy aging. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present paper addresses severe asthma which is limited to 5-10% of the overall population of asthmatics. However, it accounts for 50% or more of socials costs of the disease, as it is responsible for hospitalizations and Emergency Department accesses as well as expensive treatments. The recent identification of different endotypes of asthma, based on the inflammatory pattern, has led to the development of tailored treatments that target different inflammatory mediators. These are major achievements in the perspective of Precision Medicine: a leading approach to the modern treatment strategy. Omalizumab, an anti-IgE antibody, has been the only biologic treatment available on the market for severe asthma during the last decade. It prevents the linkage of the IgE and the receptors, thereby inhibiting mast cell degranulation. In clinical practice omalizumab significantly reduced the asthma exacerbations as well as the concomitant use of oral glucocorticoids. In the "Th2-high asthma" phenotype, the hallmarks are increased levels of eosinophils and other markers (such as periostin). Because anti-IL-5 in this condition plays a crucial role in driving eosinophil inflammation, this cytokine or its receptors on the eosinophil surface has been studied as a potential target for therapy. Two different anti-IL-5 humanized monoclonal antibodies, mepolizumab and reslizumab, have been proven effective in this phenotype of asthma (recently they both came on the market in the United States), as well as an anti-IL-5 receptor alpha (IL5Rα), benralizumab. Other monoclonal antibodies, targeting different cytokines (IL-13, IL-4, IL-17 and TSLP) are still under evaluation, though the preliminary results are encouraging. Finally, AIT, Allergen Immunotherapy, a prototype of Precision Medicine, is considered, also in light of the recent evidences of Sublingual Immunotherapy (SLIT) tablet efficacy and safety in mite allergic asthma patients. Given the high costs of these therapies, however, there is an urgent need to identify biomarkers that can predict the clinical responders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Precision medicine (PM) can be defined as a structural model aimed at customizing healthcare, with medical decisions/products tailored on an individual patient at a highly detailed level. In this sense, allergy diagnostics based on molecular allergen components allows to accurately define the patient's IgE repertoire. The availability of highly specialized singleplexed and multiplexed platforms support allergists with an advanced diagnostic armamentarium. The therapeutic intervention, driven by the standard diagnostic approach, but further supported by these innovative tools may result, for instance, in a more appropriate prescription of allergen immunotherapy (AIT). Also, the phenotyping of patients, which may have relevant effects on the treatment strategy, could be take advantage by the molecular allergy diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Oral immunotherapy (OIT) for food allergy is gaining interest due to the favorable clinical results reported with cow's milk, hen egg and peanut. The safety of the procedure remains a critical aspect that can limit the introduction of OIT in clinical practice. Objective: We described herein, in detail, the occurrence and characteristics of adverse events (AE) with OIT in children who participated in controlled trials at our unit. Methods: The clinical records of 68 children who received active treatment (40 for cow's milk and 28 for hen egg) were carefully reviewed. The inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the grading of AEs were the same across the trials. Of the 68 children involved, 6 (9%) had to discontinue the OIT procedure due to severe AEs. Fifty percent of the children underwent the buildup and maintenance phases without AEs. Mild-to-moderate AEs were documented in 28 patients, who could complete the desensitization. The majority of reactions were mild or moderate, occurred during an acute intercurrent illness and required only symptomatic treatment. Conclusion: A careful review of the patients who received food OIT in controlled trials confirmed that AEs were not rare but that ∼90% of children coidd achieve an effective desensitization. The procedure remains investigational and shoidd be performed only by trained physicians, especially in the pediatric setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Allergy immunotherapy (AIT) is acknowledged to produce beneficial mid- and long-term clinical and immunologic effects and increased quality of life in patients with allergic respiratory diseases (such as allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and allergic asthma). However, poor adherence to AIT (due to intentional and/or non-intentional factors) is still a barrier to achieving these benefits. There is an urgent need for patient support programs (PSPs) that encompass communication, educational and motivational components. In the field of AIT, a PSP should be capable of (1) improving adherence, (2) boosting patient engagement, (3) explaining how AIT differs from pharmacological allergy treatments; (4) increasing health literacy about chronic, progressive, immunoglobulin-E-mediated immune diseases, (5) helping the patient to understand and manage local or systemic adverse events, and (6) providing and/or predicting local data on aeroallergen levels. We reviewed the literature in this field and have identified a number of practical issues to be addressed when implementing a PSP for AIT: the measurement of adherence, the choice of technologies, reminders, communication channels and content, the use of "push" messaging and social networks, interactivity, and the involvement of caregivers and patient leaders. A key issue is "hi-tech" (i.e. approaches based mainly on information technology) vs. "hi-touch" (based mainly on interaction with humans, i.e. family members, patient mentors and healthcare professionals). We conclude that multistakeholder PSPs (combining patient-, provider and society-based actions) must now be developed and tested with a view to increasing adherence, efficacy and safety in the field of AIT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Allergy immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease-modifying intervention for the treatment of allergic diseases. The clinical effectiveness of AIT is clearly dose-dependent, so it is important that clinicians can assess and compare the potency of the various products available. However, this is not possible in practice, because manufacturers use different methods to determine potency. Therefore, a clear need exists for adoption of a ‘gold-standard’ measure of allergenicity. The bioequivalent allergy unit (BAU) is thus far the only allergen unit approved by a regulatory agency (the US Food and Drug Administration), with European regulatory authorities yet to adopt a common unit. Areas covered: Using PubMed, we performed a review of the literature on measures of allergen extract potency, use of the BAU, and BAU assessment for grass pollen tablets. Expert commentary: There is an obvious benefit to allergists and patients for having a single, comparable unit across products, and we strongly support the adoption of a single, ‘gold-standard’ unit of measurement for all products. Use of the BAU allows a clear comparison of the potency of allergen products from different manufacturers, and enables better understanding of the potential reasons for any differences in administration and dosing protocols between these products. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Sublingual allergen immunotherapy provides a new option for patients with allergic rhinitis in the United States. The efficacy of these sublingual immunotherapy tablets in the treatment of allergic rhinitis has been firmly established in large multicenter clinical trials. In addition, the clinical benefits of sublingual immunotherapy might persist after treatment is discontinued. Local reactions, such as gastrointestinal or oropharyngeal symptoms, are common. However, severe anaphylaxis is rare, and therefore the immunotherapy tablets can be administered at home. Sublingual immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis has been used successfully for years in Europe, and these products might be appropriate for patients who do not do well with standard drug therapy or for those who prefer a disease-modifying approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The great majority (60-80%) of patients consulting specialist physicians for allergic respiratory disease are polysensitized and thus may be potentially clinically polyallergic. However, management approaches to allergen immunotherapy (AIT) in polysensitized and polyallergic patients are not standardized. Methods: An international group of clinicians with in-depth expertise in AIT product development, clinical trials and clinical practice met to generate up-to-date, unambiguous, pragmatic guidance on AIT in polysensitized and polyallergic patients. The guidance was developed after reviewing (1) the current stance of regulatory bodies and learned societies, (2) the literature data on single- and multi-AIT and (3) the members' confirmed clinical experience with polysensitized patients. Results: AIT is safe and effective in polysensitized and polyallergic patients, and should always be based on the identification of one or more clinically relevant allergens (based on the type and severity of symptoms, the duration of induced symptoms, the impact on quality of life and how difficult an allergen is to avoid). Single-AIT is recommended in polyallergic patients in whom one of the relevant allergens is nevertheless clearly responsible for the most intense and/or bothersome symptoms. Parallel 2-allergen immunotherapy or mixed 2-allergen immunotherapy is indicated in polyallergic patients in whom two causal relevant allergens have a marked clinical and QoL impact. In parallel 2-allergen immunotherapy (whether subcutaneous or sublingual), high-quality, standardized, single-allergen formulations must be administered with an interval of 30 min. Mixing of allergen extracts may be considered, as long as (1) the mixture is technically feasible, (2) the mixture is allowed from a regulatory standpoint, (3) the allergen doses are reduced in proportion to the number of components but are still at concentrations with demonstrated efficacy. Conclusions: Physicians can prescribe AIT (preferably with high-quality, standardized, single-allergen formulations) with confidence in polysensitized and polyallergic patients by focusing on clinical/QoL relevance and safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is currently the only available disease-modifying and aetiological treatment of IgE-mediated diseases. Sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT) constitutes the preferred route of administration of AIT for respiratory allergies in Europe. Recently it has also been approved in the US. Further applications are currently under evaluation, such as IgE-mediated food allergy and IgE-mediated atopic dermatitis. The SLIT safety profile is overall favourable, although local adverse events, usually mild, are described. Most of the meta-analyses confirmed the efficacy of SLIT in reducing symptoms and medication intake in children with allergic diseases. AIT, as an immune-modulating treatment, can modify the natural history of the allergic diseases: reduction of the risk of development of asthma and bronchial hyperreactivity in patients with allergic rhinitis, and reduction of the onset of new sensitizations. A great interest is now devoted to the preventive effects of AIT and, consequently, to the optimal time of initiation. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is widely used in clinical practice for patients with moderate to severe allergic rhinitis due to inhalant allergens and may be delivered via subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual routes (SLIT). However, the quality of evidence for individual AIT products is very heterogeneous, and extensions of overall conclusions ("class effects") on the efficacy and disease-modifying effects to all AIT products are unjustified. In contrast, each product needs to be evaluated individually, based on available study results, to justify efficacy and specific claims on sustained and disease modifying effects per allergen and targeted patient group (children vs. adults, allergic rhinitis vs. asthma). WAO intends to support the current development to evidence-based AIT, which ultimately will lead to a more efficacious treatment of allergic patients and the appropriate recognition of AIT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Allergic respiratory diseases are constantly increasing in prevalence. Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) represent a valuable therapeutic tool as symptomatic and preventative approach, expecially in children. In Italy, primary care pediatricians (PCP) represent the first-line contact and interface for prescription, use and management of AIT. We attempted to evaluate the perception of AIT practice among PCP. Methods: A questionnaire was built-up, based on literature, guidelines and with the contribution of pediatricians. The questionnaire, including 12 items, was e-mailed to 180 PCP, randomly chosen from mailing lists. The questionnaire explored the personal perception of AIT, the comparison between subcutaneous and sublingual AIT and the overall awareness about the treatment. Results: 130 questionnaires were eligible for analysis. There was a satisfactory knowledge of the characteristics of AIT, its aims and limits, although the positioning of the treatment in guidelines was insufficiently known. Overall, the prescription of AIT made by other specialists was accepted and agreed (78 %). The majority of pediatricians felt that a more intense divulgation and information about AIT would be needed (90 %). Conclusion: AIT is in general well known and accepted among PCP, although a more intense divulgation effort is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent epidemiological studies estimated that more than 30% of European suffer from allergic rhinitis or conjunctivitis, while up to 20% suffer from asthma and 15% from allergic skin conditions, while for many other regions the prevalence is increasing. Allergen immunotherapy represents the only available treatment that can modify the allergic disease process, and thus is worth considering as a treatment in affected individuals. A beneficial effect of allergen immunotherapy has been shown in both adults and children affected by allergic rhinitis, allergic conjunctivitis, allergic asthma and hymenoptera venom allergy. The present study represents an overview on allergen immunotherapy, focusing on the principal aspects of the use of immunotherapy in the past, its recent clinical applications and future outlook. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The efficacy of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is well supported by evidence from trials and meta-analyses. However, its actual performance in daily practice may be diminished by several pitfalls, including inappropriate patient selection, and, especially, the use of allergen extracts of insufficient quality. We performed a survey, the Allergen Immunotherapy Decision Analysis, to evaluate which criteria specialists use to choose products for sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in adult patients suffering from allergic respiratory disease. We surveyed a total of 169 Italian allergists randomly chosen from a database belonging to a market research company (Lexis Ricerche, Milan, Italy). The survey was performed between October and November 2012 under the aegis of the European Center for Allergy Research Foundation and consisted of a questionnaire-based electronic survey prepared by a scientific board of 12 AIT experts. The questionnaire comprised two parts, the first of which contained 14 items to be ranked by each participant according to the importance assigned to each when choosing SLIT products. The physicians' rankings assigned major importance to the level of evidence-based validation of efficacy and safety, standardization of the product, efficacy based on personal experience, and defined content(s) of the major allergen(s) in micrograms. The results of this survey show that Italian allergists rank the quality-related characteristics of allergen extracts as highly important when choosing products for AIT. The allergists' preference for high-quality products should be addressed by regulatory agencies and by producers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Immunotherapy can be administered either sublingually (sublingual immunotherapy [SLIT]) or subcutaneously (subcutaneous immunotherapy [SCIT]). The rate of route switching, required by patients, can provide an indirect evaluation of patients' preferences and adherence. The authors retrospectively reviewed patients' files over an 18-year period to quantify the changes in the route of administration. The clinical records of children referred for respiratory allergy between 1994 and 2011 and prescribed with SLIT or SCIT were reviewed. The specific causes of the shift from SLIT to SCIT and vice versa were always assessed, with a special attention to adverse events. The records of 4933 children (2289 male patients, aged 4-18 years) were reviewed. Six hundred forty-eight patients received SCIT and 4285 patients received SLIT. Of the 4285 SLIT patients, 340 (7.9%) shifted to SCIT, mainly with Parietaria judaica and grasses. The 85.8% of the changes were caused by a perceived low efficacy. None of the parents required the route change for side effects. Of the 648 patients initially treated with SCIT, 54 (8.3%) shifted to SLIT, 85% of them for local or systemic side effects, but none for poor efficacy. The rate of SCIT/SLIT changes is, overall, low and because of poor efficacy for SLIT and side effects for SCIT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Cow's milk allergy is common in infancy, and total avoidance of this food is the only effective approach. In alternative, oral immunotherapy has been proposed to achieve tolerance. Once desensitization is achieved, daily intake of milk is recommended to maintain it, but this may be impractical for children/parents. We assessed whether a twice weekly maintenance regimen is effective. Methods Children who were successfully desensitized with oral immunotherapy were randomized to two maintenance regimens for 1 year: group A had to eat 150-200 ml milk daily, group B had to eat 150-200 ml milk twice weekly. Both regimens were associated to a totally free diet. Maintenance of tolerance and adverse events were recorded during 1 year. Specific IgE, IgG4 and prick-by-prick test to milk were carried out before immunotherapy (T0), before maintenance (T1), and after 1 year (T2). Results Recorded episodes included asthma, oral itching, urticaria, rhinitis, abdominal pain variously combined, usually associated with concomitant illness or exercise. The episodes were 8 in group A and 9 in group B, with no difference. None of the children discontinued the feeding maintenance. Specific IgG4 increased at T1 and remained high at T2. Specific IgE and skin reactivity significantly decreased at T2. There was no difference in those parameters between the groups. Conclusion After achieving desensitization to cow milk with oral immunotherapy, a maintenance regimen with milk given twice weekly is as effective as the daily maintenance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims of the Monaco Charter: (1) to present the current evidence on the efficacy and safety of allergen-specific immunotherapy (SIT) and to address the reasons for its underuse in clinical practice; (2) to develop strategies to increase the awareness about the benefits and the hazards of SIT in allergic patients, lay public and healthcare professionals not trained in allergy, and (3) to make SIT accessible and affordable to eligible patients. Copyright © 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

NK cells are a major component of innate immunity and exert a potent antitumor effect both in vitro and in vivo. However, NK cells infiltrating solid tumors have been shown to display severely impaired functional capabilities. In this study, we analyzed NK cells present in pleural effusions (PEs) of patients with primary or metastatic tumors of different origin, including mesothelioma and lung, breast, colon, gastric, bladder, and uterus carcinoma. In all instances, freshly isolated PE-NK cells displayed a CD56bright phenotype and expressed normal levels of both activating receptors and HLA class I-specific inhibitory receptors. In addition, they rapidly released large amounts of IFN-γ and TNF-α after stimulation. Upon culture in IL-2, they acquired a potent cytolytic activity against both allogeneic and autologous tumor cells. Tumor cell lysis was primarily mediated by NKG2D and NKp30 and partially by NKp46 and DNAM-1, in agreement with the expression of the corresponding ligands on tumor cells. The finding that PE-NK cells are not functionally impaired and that they can efficiently kill tumor cells upon short-term IL-2 activation may offer important clues for the development of novel approaches in tumor immunotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To cite this article: Pajno GB, Caminiti L, Crisafulli G, Vita D, Valenzise M, De Luca R, Passalacqua G. Direct comparison between continuous and coseasonal regimen for sublingual immunotherapy in children with grass allergy: A randomized controlled study. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 2011: 22: 803-807. Abstract Background: Pre-seasonal, pre-coseasonal and continuous regimens of immunotherapy have been proposed, but their efficacy was never compared. This phase IV open study was designed to compare the clinical efficacy of a continuous and a coseasonal sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for grass allergy over 3 years. Methods: Children with rhinitis/asthma because of grass were randomized to SLIT given continuously (all year long) or coseasonally. The treatment started in October 2005 in the continuous SLIT group and in March 2006 in the coseasonal group Diary cards for clinical symptoms (from 0 = none to 3 = severe), and drug intake were recorded form March to June in 2005 (baseline), 2006 2007, and 2008. Specific IgE and IgG4 were evaluated every year. Results: Eighty children (age range 8-16) were randomized and 72 completed the study. In the first year, the symptom + medication score improved by 44% in the continuous group and by 20% in the coseasonal group (p = 0.04). Symptoms, chest symptoms, and drug intake separately showed a greater decrease vs. baseline in the continuous group. In the second year, the global score decreased in both groups with no significant difference, whereas symptom score decreased more in the continuous group. In the 3rd year, there was no difference in clinical parameters between the two groups. Specific IgG4 were significantly higher vs. baseline since the 1st year in the continuous group and since the 2nd in the coseasonal group. Conclusion: In grass pollen allergy, the continuous regimen performs better than the coseasonal in the first season, whereas in the subsequent years, the two regimens are nearly equivalent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Data on the long-term effects of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) are sparse, and the optimal duration of treatment is a matter of debate. Objective: We sought to prospectively evaluate the long-term effect of SLIT given for 3, 4, or 5 years and to compare the effect of those different durations. Methods: In this prospective open controlled study we followed up patients with respiratory allergy who were monosensitized to mites for 15 years. The subjects were divided in 4 groups receiving drug therapy alone or SLIT for 3, 4, or 5 years. Clinical scores, skin sensitizations, methacholine reactivity, and nasal eosinophil counts were evaluated every year during the winter months. The clinical effect was considered to persist until clinical scores remained at less than 50% of the baseline value, and then patients underwent another course of SLIT. Results: Seventy-eight patients were enrolled, and 59 completed the study. In the 12 control subjects no relevant change in clinical scores was seen throughout the study. In the patients receiving SLIT for 3 years, the clinical benefit persisted for 7 years. In those receiving immunotherapy for 4 or 5 years, the clinical benefit persisted for 8 years. New sensitizations occurred in all the control subjects over 15 years and in less than a quarter of the patients receiving SLIT (21%, 12%, and 11%, respectively). The second course of vaccination induced a benefit more rapidly than the first course. The behavior of bronchial hyperreactivity and nasal eosinophils paralleled the clinical score. Conclusion: Under the present conditions, it can be suggested that a 4-year duration of SLIT is the optimal choice because it induces a long-lasting clinical improvement similar to that seen with a 5-year course and greater than that of a 3-year vaccination. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Some studies reported the possible induction of food allergy, caused by neo-sensitization to cross-reacting allergens, during immunotherapy with aeroallergens, while other studies ruled out such possibility. Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the development of neo-sensitization to Pen a 1 (tropomyosin) as well as the appearance of reactions after ingestion of foods containing tropomyosin as a consequence of sublingual mite immunization. Materials and methods: Specific IgE to Tropomyosin (rPen a 1) before and after mite sublingual immunotherapy in 134 subjects were measured. IgE-specific antibodies for mite extract and recombinant allergen Pen a 1 were evaluated using the immunoenzymatic CAP system (Phadia Diagnostics, Milan, Italy). Results: All patients had rPen a 1 IgE negative results before and after mite SLIT and did not show positive shrimp extract skin reactivity and serological rPen a 1 IgE conversion after treatment. More important, no patient showed systemic reactions to crustacean ingestion. Conclusions: Patients did not show neo-sensitization to tropomyosin, a component of the extract (namely mite group 10) administered. An assessment of a patient's possible pre-existing sensitisation to tropomyosin by skin test and/or specific IgE prior to start mite extract immunotherapy is recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]