Search

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT), including SCIT and SLIT, is a treatment that involves the administration of allergens to which patients with allergic diseases have been sensitized. HDM-SCIT for asthma is indicated in cases of HDM-sensitized allergic asthma with normal lung function. HDM-SCIT improves asthma symptoms and AHR, and decreases the medication dose. Importantly, AIT can improve other allergic diseases complicated by asthma, such as allergic rhinitis, which can also contribute to the improvement of asthma symptoms. Several studies have suggested that HDM-SLIT also attenuates the risk of asthma exacerbations, and improves lung function in asthma cases with allergic rhinitis. Furthermore, AIT can modify the natural course of allergic diseases, including asthma. For example, the effects of AIT are maintained for at least several years after treatment discontinuation. AIT can prevent the onset of asthma when introduced in allergic rhinitis, and can also inhibit or reduce new allergen sensitizations. Recent data have suggested that AIT may suppress non-targeted allergen-induced immune responses in addition to targeted allergen-induced responses, and suppress infections of the lower respiratory tract by enhancing IFN responses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Up to now, there is no generally accepted biomarker to indicate the clinical response of immunotherapy. This study mainly analyzed the correlation between eosinophil cationic protein-myeloperoxidase (ECP-MPO) test papers and other immunotherapy indices in subcutaneous immunotherapy of dust mites and to explore whether the test paper can be used as an auxiliary index to quickly evaluate the efficacy of immunotherapy. Patients and methods: This study included 53 participants who received subcutaneous immunotherapy at the allergy clinic of Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University and 28 control participants. Six visits were conducted during a prospective study over one year. The results of the ECP-MPO test paper, nasal secretion eosinophil smear and count, nasal secretion ECP concentration, and clinical symptom scores were collected during five follow-up visits after the start of subcutaneous immunotherapy. Th1/Th2/Th17 cytokines, chemokines, IgE, IgG4 against dust mite components, and ECP concentrations were detected in the serum of participants at baseline, six months, and one year after subcutaneous immunotherapy. Results: The ECP test paper is not only easy to operate, but also can effectively and quickly detect the concentrations of ECP in the nasal secretion and diagnose allergic rhinitis. Symptom score is an important index for evaluating clinical immune efficacy, during subcutaneous immunotherapy, the ECP test paper showed a positive correlation with the symptom score. Simultaneously, during immunotherapy, the changes in the chromogenic grading of the test paper were synchronized with the changes in inflammatory cytokines and eosinophilic chemokines in Th2 cells of serum dust mite IgE. The sIgG4 against dust mites weakly negatively correlated with the concentration of ECP in nasal secretions and the color classification of the ECP test paper. Conclusion: The ECP-MPO test paper has a certain correlation with subcutaneous immunotherapy markers of allergic rhinitis, indicating that the ECP test paper may become an auxiliary biomarker to replace other complex laboratory tests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractObjectiveMethodsResultsConclusionsAsthma is a common chronic condition in children globally. Allergen-specific immunotherapy, such as subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual (SLIT) therapies, are promising by increasing allergen tolerance. This meta-analysis compares the efficacy and safety of SLIT and SCIT in pediatric asthma.We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase for randomized controlled trials and case–control studies comparing SLIT and SCIT in asthmatic children. Meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects models with calculations via R software version 4.3.2 and RevMan version 5.4. Study quality and bias risk were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.The literature search yielded a total of 1787 records, with 7 studies meeting the inclusion criteria after screening and assessments. There was no significant difference in the Total Asthma Symptoms Score between SLIT and SCIT (mean difference −0.05 [95% CI: −0.21; 0.10]). However, asthma improvement rates were higher in the SLIT group (risk ratio 0.77 [95% CI: 0.64; 0.93]). FEV1 improvement showed no significant difference (mean difference −1.60 [95% CI: −6.27; 3.08]). Adverse events were similar between the treatments (risk ratio 0.56 [95% CI: 0.11; 2.82]).SLIT and SCIT were generally similarly effective and safe for treating pediatric asthma. SLIT may be preferred due to its noninvasive administration. More research is needed on long-term effects and tailored treatment approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is defined by chronic nasal symptoms, absence of atopy, positive nasal allergen challenge (NAC) and a good response to subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT). We sought to investigate SCIT capacity to induce local and systemic blocking antibodies in LAR patients. Methods: A RDBPC study of grass SCIT was performed, with participants receiving either SCIT (Group A; n = 10) or placebo (Group B; n = 14) in the first 6 months. Both groups subsequently received SCIT for 12 months at Year 2. Nasal and serum antibodies (IgG4, IgA1 and IgA2) and their inhibitory capacity were measured at multiple timepoints. Results: The allergen concentration tolerated increased significantly at 6 months (Group A; p =.047) and 24 months (Group B; p =.049) compared with baseline and persisted until the end of the study. Induction of serum sIgA1 to Phl p was seen in Groups A and B, albeit the former being induced earlier (1.71‐fold, p =.027). A significant induction in sIgG4 to Phl p 1 and 5 was observed in serum of Group A (p =.047 and p =.0039) and sIgA2 to Phl p in Group B (p =.032 and p =.0098) at 18 and 24 months, respectively. Both local and systemic blocking antibodies can inhibit allergen–IgE complexes binding to CD23 on B cells, and this correlated with level of allergen tolerated intra‐nasally in Group A (serum; 휌 = −.47, p =.0006, nasal; 휌 = −.38, p =.0294). Conclusions: Grass pollen SCIT induced functional systemic blocking antibodies that correlate with the concentration of allergen tolerated following NAC, highlighting their potential as a biomarker of SCIT in LAR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) can induce systemic reactions (SRs) in certain patients, but the underlying mechanisms remain to be fully elucidated. Methods: AR patients who were undergoing standardized HDM SCIT (Alutard, ALK) between 2018 and 2022 were screened. Those who experienced two consecutive SRs were included in the study group. A control group was established, matched 1:1 by gender, age, and disease duration with the study group, who did not experience SRs during SCIT. Clinical and immunological parameters were recorded and analyzed both before SCIT and after 1 year of treatment. Results: A total of 161 patients were included, with 79 (49.07%) in the study group. The study group had a higher proportion of AR combined asthma (26.8% vs. 51.8%, p < 0.001) and higher levels of sIgE to HDM and HDM components (all p <.001). Serum IL‐4 and IL‐13 levels in the study group were higher than those in the control group (p <.05). The study group received a lower maintenance dosage of HDM extracts injections than control group due to SRs (50000SQ vs. 100000SQ, p <.05). After 1 year of SCIT, the VAS score, the lung function parameters of asthmatic patients over 14 years old significantly improved in both groups (all p <.05). After a 7‐day exposure to 20 μg/mL HDM extracts, the percentages of Th1, Th17, Tfh10, and Th17.1 in PBMCs decreased, while the Tfh13 cells significantly increased in the study group (p <.05). Conclusion: The type 2 inflammatory response is augmented in HDM‐induced AR patients who experienced SRs during SCIT. Despite this, SCIT remains effective in these patients when administered with low‐dosage allergen extracts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT), including SCIT and SLIT, is a treatment that involves the administration of allergens to which patients with allergic diseases have been sensitized. HDM-SCIT for asthma is indicated in cases of HDM-sensitized allergic asthma with normal lung function. HDM-SCIT improves asthma symptoms and AHR, and decreases the medication dose. Importantly, AIT can improve other allergic diseases complicated by asthma, such as allergic rhinitis, which can also contribute to the improvement of asthma symptoms. Several studies have suggested that HDM-SLIT also attenuates the risk of asthma exacerbations, and improves lung function in asthma cases with allergic rhinitis. Furthermore, AIT can modify the natural course of allergic diseases, including asthma. For example, the effects of AIT are maintained for at least several years after treatment discontinuation. AIT can prevent the onset of asthma when introduced in allergic rhinitis, and can also inhibit or reduce new allergen sensitizations. Recent data have suggested that AIT may suppress non-targeted allergen-induced immune responses in addition to targeted allergen-induced responses, and suppress infections of the lower respiratory tract by enhancing IFN responses.

Allergic conjunctivitis is the most common type of allergic eye disease, and the incidence in children and adolescents is increasing year by year. Drug therapy can only relieve some symptoms and only in a short period, while allergen immunotherapy is currently a therapy that can significantly improve the symptoms of chronic allergy and the course of the disease. This method has been used abroad for many years but has yet to be reported in China. The author reviews the effective mechanism and clinical efficiency of allergen immunotherapy and provides a reference for the further clinical application in China.

Objective To observe the systemic reactions （SRs） associated with subcutaneous immunotherapy （SCIT） using dust mite allergen and to analyze potential risk factors. Methods The occurrence of SRs among 230 patients with allergic rhinitis （AR） who received house dust mite SCIT from December 2019 to December 2022 was retrospectively analyzed， and related risk factors were identified. Results A total of 5 422 injections were given to 230 patients， with an SRs incidence rate of 2.4% per injection and 20.0% per patient. Most SRs were grade I （51.9%）， and no fatal SRs occurred. Symptoms primarily affected the respiratory system for 111 times （84.7%）. Elevated peripheral blood eosinophil count （OR （95% CI）=6.02 （1.76， 20.60）， P = 0.004） and high levels of house dust mite-specific IgE （OR （95% CI）=1.01 （1.00， 1.01）， P = 0.016） were identified as risk factors for SRs， respectively. Conclusions Children with AR allergic to dust mites may experience SRs during SCIT with standardized dust mite allergen preparations， whereas the overall safety of SCIT is good. High eosinophil count and high levels of house dust mite-specific IgE are risk factors for SRs during SCIT.

Lars-Olaf Cardell,1,2,&ast; Thomas Sterner,3,&ast; Waqas Ahmed,4 Andreas Kallsoy Slættanes,5 Mikael Svärd,6 Richard F Pollock4 1Division of ENT Diseases, Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden; 2Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden; 3Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden; 4Covalence Research Ltd, Harpenden, UK; 5ALK, Hørsholm, Denmark; 6ALK Nordic, Kungsbacka, Sweden&ast;These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Richard F Pollock, Email pollock@covalence-research.comAim: In Sweden, allergy immunotherapy (AIT) is available as either subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) injections or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets and is used to treat moderate-severe allergic rhinitis (AR). This study sought to determine direct and indirect annual costs stemming from treatment-related travel, appointments, waiting times and medication costs, before exploring likely CO2 emission-related cost-savings for 20,330 patients receiving SCIT or SLIT-tablets in Sweden.Methods: A model was developed in Python to capture each category of costs in the target patient population. Absenteeism costs arising from treatment-related travel were determined by obtaining average hourly pay data from Swedish Government sources. Absenteeism costs were also calculated for 30-minute post-dose observation times, which occurred during one clinical appointment for SLIT patients, and all clinical appointments for SCIT patients. Clinical appointment costs were obtained from healthcare price lists for Sweden. Medication costs were retrieved from the Pharmaceutical Specialities in Sweden (Fass) website, and treatment doses required for SCIT and SLIT-tablets were determined based on product labels and previously-calculated dosage regimes. High-cost protection and reimbursement scheme payment caps were applied when determining patient appointment and medication costs, respectively, and when identifying financial burdens for individual payers.Results: Mean total annual costs for SCIT were Swedish Krona (SEK) 604.1 million (m), with clinical appointments contributing the largest share of these costs (52.7%), followed by medication (34.4%), travel-related absenteeism (8.9%), waiting time-related absenteeism (2.7%) and private transportation (1.3%). Mean total annual costs for SLIT-tablets were SEK 336.2m. Medication contributed the most to these costs (72.3%), followed by clinical appointments (22.7%), travel-related absenteeism (3.8%), waiting time-related absenteeism (0.6%) and private transportation (0.6%).Conclusion: For patients with moderate-severe AR receiving AIT in Sweden, SLIT-tablets displayed large potential cost savings to patients, the healthcare system, and the government, whilst possessing reduced societal costs of carbon emissions relative to SCIT.Keywords: allergic rhinitis, costs, subcutaneous immunotherapy, sublingual immunotherapy

Objective To observe the systemic reactions (SRs) associated with subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) using dust mite allergen and to analyze potential risk factors. Methods The occurrence of SRs among 230 patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) who received house dust mite SCIT from December 2019 to December 2022 was retrospectively analyzed, and related risk factors were identified. Results A total of 5 422 injections were given to 230 patients, with an SRs incidence rate of 2.4% per injection and 20.0% per patient. Most SRs were grade I (51.9%), and no fatal SRs occurred. Symptoms primarily affected the respiratory system for 111 times (84.7%). Elevated peripheral blood eosinophil count (OR (95% CI)=6.02 (1.76, 20.60), P = 0.004) and high levels of house dust mite-specific IgE (OR (95% CI)=1.01 (1.00, 1.01), P = 0.016) were identified as risk factors for SRs, respectively. Conclusions Children with AR allergic to dust mites may experience SRs during SCIT with standardized dust mite allergen preparations, whereas the overall safety of SCIT is good. High eosinophil count and high levels of house dust mite-specific IgE are risk factors for SRs during SCIT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this review is to investigate the possible role of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) for house dust mites in the treatment of atopic dermatitis in adult patients (AD). AIT is a commonly accepted treatment for selected allergic diseases such as allergic rhinitis, bronchial asthma, allergy to venom, and sometimes food allergy. There have been a few original reports on improving AD symptoms due to subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy with selected allergens, mainly house dust mites. However, the precise role of immunotherapy in treating atopic dermatitis (AD) is still not clearly defined despite some studies that have been conducted. The review discusses available studies that provide evidence of the efficacy of AIT in patients with AD who are allergic to house dust mites. The authors focused on those studies in which the indication for AIT was mainly AD and only in patients with clinically confirmed allergy to house dust mites. Despite extensive evidence of the effectiveness of such treatment, studies on large patient populations are needed to determine the exact indications for AIT in AD patients with house dust mite allergy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is the oldest and an efficient immunotherapy method that has been used for the treatment of allergic diseases. Systemic adverse effects (SAEs) may occur during the SCIT. For this reason, there may be problems in the continuing treatment. In this study, we primarily aimed to determine the frequency of SAEs, the risk factors that may be associated with SAEs, and clinical and laboratory parameters that can predict systemic reactions in the patients who underwent SCIT. Second, we aimed to evaluate the reasons for discontinuing SCIT and the conditions special to Turkey. Methods: The files of 295 patients who had received SCIT were evaluated retrospectively. Results: SCIT was administered against house dust mites (HDM) in almost all patients (n: 291, 98.6%). A total of 14,357 injections were administered to 295 patients included in the study, and 47.8% (n: 141) of the patients discontinued treatment. The most common reason for discontinuing treatment was the supply problem in Turkey for immunotherapy preparations (n: 70, 49.6%). The second reason was that the injection visits were not continued regularly, even though there were no adverse effects related to the treatment (n: 44, 31.2%). SAEs were observed in 16.6% of the patients and 0.66% of the injections. SAEs were more frequent in girls, in asthmatic patients, and in moderate asthmatic patients (p = 0.005, p = 0.016, p = 0.043, respectively). Treatment was terminated in 13 patients (4.4%) due to SAEs. The most common SAE was bronchoconstriction (n: 40, 85.1%). None of our patients developed hypotension or loss of consciousness. Median blood eosinophil count and basophil count and the skin prick test diameter for Dermatophagoides farinae were observed to be significantly higher in the group with SAE (p = 0.024, p = 0.034, p = 0.045, respectively). Conclusion: Although SAE may develop in pediatric patients undergoing HDM-specific SCIT, severe reactions are rare. Girls, asthmatic patients, especially moderate asthmatic patients, and patients with high blood eosinophil and basophil levels should be monitored more carefully for the development of SAE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We describe the case of a 10-year-old boy with asthma (AS), accompanied by allergic rhinitis (AR), food allergy (FA), and combined attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), who was treated at Shanghai Renji Hospital on 11 July 2020. The efficiency of the previous treatment with salmeterol/ticlosone was poor. Treatment with montelukast sodium resulted in development of neurological symptoms. Treatment with omalizumab in combination with subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) was then initiated in our department based on anti-asthmatic therapy. Symptoms of asthma were completely controlled, and FA and AR symptoms improved. The treatment regimen led to a significant improvement in ADHD symptoms and the overall quality of life of the patient. The literature search was done in the PubMed database using "attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder/ADHD" and "asthma" as keywords, and we identified 47 relevant articles. In conclusion, our results show that treating asthma with omalizumab in combination with salmeterol/ticlosone and SCIT is efficient in controlling symptoms of multiple allergies and may lead to the improvement in ADHD symptoms and the overall quality of life of pediatric patients with ADHD. While current studies suggest that allergic diseases are closely related to ADHD, there is still a lack of studies or case reports of complete treatment protocols to provide clinical clues for management of the disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To investigate the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) using dust mites in children with allergic asthma. Methods In a prospective randomized controlled study, 98 children with dust mite-induced allergic asthma were randomly divided into a control group (n=49) and an SCIT group (n=49). The control group received inhaled corticosteroid treatment, while the SCIT group additionally received a standardized three-year SCIT regimen. The two groups were compared based on peripheral blood eosinophil percentage, visual analogue score (VAS), total medication score, Asthma Control Test/Childhood Asthma Control Test scores, fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), and lung function before treatment, and at 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years after treatment. Adverse reactions were recorded post-injection to evaluate the safety of SCIT. Results Compared with pre-treatment levels, the SCIT group showed a significant reduction in the percentage of peripheral blood eosinophils, VAS, total medication score, and FeNO, while lung function significantly improved, and asthma control levels were better 3 years after treatment (P<0.05). Compared with the control group, the SCIT group showed more significant improvement in all evaluated indicators 3 years after treatment (P<0.05). A total of 2 744 injections were administered, resulting in 157 cases (5.72%) of local adverse reactions and 4 cases (0.15%) of systemic adverse reactions, with no severe systemic adverse events. Conclusions SCIT is an effective and safe treatment for allergic asthma in children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Specific immunotherapy represents the only potentially curative treatment for allergic asthma. Allergens can be administered subcutaneously (SCIT) or sublingually (SLIT). The aim of the current study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy of SCIT and SLIT for the treatment of allergic asthma in children. Our study included 69 children with allergic asthma who underwent immunotherapy for house dust mites or pollen for at least 3 consecutive years. After 3 years of SCIT and SLIT, the median number of asthma exacerbations in the last three months decreased from 2 to 0 (p < 0.01) and from 1 to 0 (p < 0.01), respectively. When comparing the efficacy of SCIT and SLIT, our study revealed a significantly better efficacy of SCIT only in terms of increasing lung function. The median increase in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) after 3 years was 8% with SCIT and −1% with SLIT (p < 0.01). Daily controller therapy could be withdrawn or reduced in 9 out of 16 (56.3%) children who received it before SCIT (p < 0.01) and in 19 of 29 (65.6%) children who received it before SLIT (p < 0.01), but the difference in efficacy was not significant (p = 0.88). Both SCIT and SLIT are effective treatments for allergic asthma in children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and allergic rhinitis (AR) usually represent the latest manifestations of the atopic march, sharing a common type 2 inflammation response. A relevant prevalence of AR in EoE cohorts has been widely confirmed. An increasing literature assessed the involvement of aeroantigens in EoE pathogenesis, focusing foremost on the seasonality of new diagnoses, symptoms, and response to therapy. Unfortunately, no diriment direction has been achieved, probably due to the retrospective design of the studies so far available, which chose surrogate markers of EoE activity (mostly the date of new diagnosis) which may be affected by geographical, logistic and personal factors, probably not dependent by the disease itself. EoE exacerbations reported in the context of the pollen levels (preferably pollen counts) may represent a more reliable marker. AR might promote the onset and the re-exacerbation of EoE through mechanisms that are both local (ie, massive exposure to airborne antigens mediated by post-nasal drip) and systemic (type 2 inflammation). Furthermore, AR may facilitate EoE onset by predisposing to pollen food allergic syndrome (PFAS), and EoE patients with PFAS reported higher rate of AR, thus suggesting a bond among these 3 conditions whose causative relationship have still to be ascertained. In addition, because of its shifting activity from Th2 to Th1 inflammation, several case reports focused on the effect of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) employed to treat AR in EoE patients. Also in this instance, no certainties could be guaranteed, although sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is more frequently reported to exacerbate EoE, while SCIT is mostly described as a remission adjuvant. The real life experience reported from our allergy service appears to confirm such hypothesis. Finally, a watchful eye should be reserved to monoclonal antibodies as a potential future option for concomitant EoE and AR. In light of all this, an attentive evaluation of allergic history of EoE patients should be relevant. Future perspectives should be addressed on prospective studies targeted to shed light on causative relations among airborne antigens, AR and EoE, and to viable comprehensive treatments.

House dust mite (HDM) allergen immunotherapy (AIT) has an established role in the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis (AR) and allergic asthma (AA) triggered by HDM sensitization. We aimed to identify all double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials of HDM AIT for the treatment of AR and AA in humans and to summarize the evidence for AIT products that are currently manufactured and available for clinical use.A total of 56 eligible double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials of HDM AIT for the treatment of AA and/or AR in humans fit the inclusion criteria and investigated a total of 14 commercial AIT products; together, the 56 studies enrolled a total of 14,619 patients. Of the 56 studies, 39 studies investigated the current manufacturer-recommended maintenance dose (MRMD) of the product, and 17 investigated other doses. We identified 39 studies (12,539 patients randomized) for 8 sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) products and 17 studies (2,080 patients randomized) for subcutaneous immunotherapy products. For AR, 3 products, the ALK 12 standardized-quality (SQ-HDM) SLIT tablet, the ALK 6 SQ-HDM tablet, and the SG 300 index of reactivity SLIT tablet, had both dose-finding studies (DFSs) and phase III definitive studies (DSs) to demonstrate efficacy of the MRMD of the product. For AA, 2 products, the ALK 12 SQ-HDM SLIT tablet and the ALK 6 SQ-HDM tablet, had both DFSs and DSs for the MRMD. No subcutaneous immunotherapy product had a paired DFS and DS supporting the MRMD. A total of 30 studies of products no longer commercially manufactured were excluded. This study will help to inform clinical care and product selection for the treatment of HDM-induced AR and AA.

Background: The German Therapy Allergen Ordinance (TAO) triggered an ongoing upheaval in the market for house dust mite (HDM) allergen immunotherapy (AIT) products. Three HDM subcutaneous AIT (SCIT) products hold approval in Germany and therefore will be available after the scheduled completion of the TAO procedure in 2026. In general, data from clinical trials on the long‐term effectiveness of HDM AIT are rare. We evaluated real‐world data (RWD) in a retrospective, observational cohort study based on a longitudinal claims database including 60% of all German statutory healthcare prescriptions to show the long‐term effectiveness of one of these products in daily life. Aim of this analysis was to provide a per product analysis on effectiveness of mite AIT as it is demanded by international guidelines on AIT. Methods: Subjects between 5 and 70 years receiving their first (index) prescription of SCIT with a native HDM product (SCIT group) between 2009 and 2013 were included. The exactly 3:1 matched control group received prescriptions for only symptomatic AR medication (non‐AIT group); the evaluation period for up to 6 years of follow‐up ended in February 2017. Study endpoints were the progression of allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma, asthma occurrence and time to the onset of asthma after at least 2 treatment years. Results: In total, 892 subjects (608 adults and 284 children/adolescents) were included in the SCIT group and 2676 subjects (1824 adults and 852 children/adolescents) in the non‐AIT group. During the follow‐up period after at least 2 years of SCIT, the number of prescriptions in the SCIT group was reduced by 62.8% (p <.0001) for AR medication and by 42.4% for asthma medication (p =.0003). New‐onset asthma risk was significantly reduced in the SCIT vs non‐AIT group by 27.0% (p =.0212). The asthma‐preventive effect of SCIT occurred 15 months after start of the treatment. In the SCIT group, the time to onset of asthma was prolonged compared to the non‐AIT group (p =.0010). Conclusion: In this first product based RWD analysis on SCIT with a native HDM product, patients aged 5 to 70 years benefited from AIT in the long term in terms of reduced progression of AR and asthma after at least 2 years of treatment. The effects seemed to last for up to 6 years after treatment termination. A significantly reduced risk of asthma onset was observed, starting after 15 months of treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a common condition that is frequently associated with atopic inferior turbinate hypertrophy (ITH) resulting in nasal obstruction. Current guidelines support the use of subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT) when patients fail pharmacologic management. However, there is a lack of consensus regarding the role of inferior turbinate reduction (ITR), a treatment that we hypothesize is cost‐effective compared with other available treatments. Methods: We conducted a cost‐effectiveness analysis comparing the following treatment combinations over a 5‐year time horizon for AR patients presenting with atopic nasal obstruction who fail initial pharmacotherapy: (1) continued pharmacotherapy alone, (2) allergy testing and SCIT, (3) allergy testing and SCIT and then ITR for SCIT nonresponders, and (4) ITR and then allergy testing and SCIT for ITR nonresponders. Results were reported as incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Results: For patients who fail initial pharmacotherapy, prioritizing ITR, either by microdebrider‐assisting submucous resection or radiofrequency ablation, before SCIT was the most cost‐effective strategy. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that prioritizing ITR before SCIT was the most cost‐effective option in 95.4% of scenarios. ITR remained cost‐effective even with the addition of concurrent septoplasty. Conclusion: For many AR patients who present with nasal obstruction secondary to atopic inferior turbinate hypertrophy that is persistent despite pharmacotherapy, ITR is a cost‐effective treatment that should be considered prior to immunotherapy. Level of Evidence: NA – Laryngoscope, 2023 Laryngoscope, 134:1572–1580, 2024 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hay fever, characterized by seasonal allergic reactions, poses a significant health challenge. Existing therapies encompass standard drug regimens, biological agents, and specific immunotherapy. This study aims to assess and compare the effectiveness of anti-IgE (omalizumab), medication therapy, and subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) for hay fever. Methods: Conducted as a retrospective cohort study, this research involved 98 outpatient hay fever patients who underwent routine medication, omalizumab treatment, or SCIT before the onset of the spring pollen season. A follow-up was performed one month after the start of the pollen season. The comprehensive symptoms and drug scores were used to evaluate patients with different intervention methods, facilitating a comparative analysis of therapeutic outcomes. Results: Compared with before treatment, the symptoms of patients treated with the three methods were all significantly relieved, and the medication score were significantly reduced. Patients treated with omalizumab demonstrated higher symptoms and medication scores than SCIT group before treatment, but similar scores after treatment, which were both lower than medicine treatment group. After treatment with omalizumab or SCIT, patients in both groups had significantly lower medication scores than the medication group and were close to no longer using medication for symptom relief. The mountain juniper-sIgE was significantly higher after treatment than before treatment in both medicine treatment group and omalizumab treatment group. Conclusion: Omalizumab and SCIT offer superior effects than medication therapy in hay fever patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the therapeutic exposure to an allergen or allergens selected by clinical assessment and allergy testing to decrease allergic symptoms and induce immunologic tolerance. Inhalant AIT is administered to millions of patients for allergic rhinitis (AR) and allergic asthma (AA) and is most commonly delivered as subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Despite its widespread use, there is variability in the initiation and delivery of safe and effective immunotherapy, and there are opportunities for evidence‐based recommendations for improved patient care. Purpose: The purpose of this clinical practice guideline (CPG) is to identify quality improvement opportunities and provide clinicians trustworthy, evidence‐based recommendations regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. Specific goals of the guideline are to optimize patient care, promote safe and effective therapy, reduce unjustified variations in care, and reduce the risk of harm. The target patients for the guideline are any individuals aged 5 years and older with AR, with or without AA, who are either candidates for immunotherapy or treated with immunotherapy for their inhalant allergies. The target audience is all clinicians involved in the administration of immunotherapy. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence‐based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the guideline development group (GDG). It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. The statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experience and assessment of individual patients. Action Statements: The GDG made a strong recommendation that (Key Action Statement [KAS] 10) the clinician performing allergy skin testing or administering AIT must be able to diagnose and manage anaphylaxis. The GDG made recommendations for the following KASs: (KAS 1) Clinicians should offer or refer to a clinician who can offer immunotherapy for patients with AR with or without AA if their patients' symptoms are inadequately controlled with medical therapy, allergen avoidance, or both, or have a preference for immunomodulation. (KAS 2A) Clinicians should not initiate AIT for patients who are pregnant, have uncontrolled asthma, or are unable to tolerate injectable epinephrine. (KAS 3) Clinicians should evaluate the patient or refer the patient to a clinician who can evaluate for signs and symptoms of asthma before initiating AIT and for signs and symptoms of uncontrolled asthma before administering subsequent AIT. (KAS 4) Clinicians should educate patients who are immunotherapy candidates regarding the differences between SCIT and SLIT (aqueous and tablet) including risks, benefits, convenience, and costs. (KAS 5) Clinicians should educate patients about the potential benefits of AIT in (1) preventing new allergen sensitizations, (2) reducing the risk of developing AA, and (3) altering the natural history of the disease with continued benefit after discontinuation of therapy. (KAS 6) Clinicians who administer SLIT to patients with seasonal AR should offer pre‐ and co‐seasonal immunotherapy. (KAS 7) Clinicians prescribing AIT should limit treatment to only those clinically relevant allergens that correlate with the patient's history and are confirmed by testing. (KAS 9) Clinicians administering AIT should continue escalation or maintenance dosing when patients have local reactions (LRs) to AIT. (KAS 11) Clinicians should avoid repeat allergy testing as an assessment of the efficacy of ongoing AIT unless there is a change in environmental exposures or a loss of control of symptoms. (KAS 12) For patients who are experiencing symptomatic control from AIT, clinicians should treat for a minimum duration of 3 years, with ongoing treatment duration based on patient response to treatment. The GDG offered the following KASs as options: (KAS 2B) Clinicians may choose not to initiate AIT for patients who use concomitant beta‐blockers, have a history of anaphylaxis, have systemic immunosuppression, or have eosinophilic esophagitis (SLIT only). (KAS 8) Clinicians may treat polysensitized patients with a limited number of allergens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the therapeutic exposure to an allergen or allergens selected by clinical assessment and allergy testing to decrease allergic symptoms and induce immunologic tolerance. Inhalant AIT is administered to millions of patients for allergic rhinitis (AR) and allergic asthma (AA) and is most commonly delivered as subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Despite its widespread use, there is variability in the initiation and delivery of safe and effective immunotherapy, and there are opportunities for evidence‐based recommendations for improved patient care. Purpose: The purpose of this clinical practice guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities and provide clinicians trustworthy, evidence‐based recommendations regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. Specific goals of the guideline are to optimize patient care, promote safe and effective therapy, reduce unjustified variations in care, and reduce risk of harm. The target patients for the guideline are any individuals aged 5 years and older with AR, with or without AA, who are either candidates for immunotherapy or treated with immunotherapy for their inhalant allergies. The target audience is all clinicians involved in the administration of immunotherapy. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence‐based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the guideline development group. It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. The statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experience and assessment of individual patients. Action Statements: The guideline development group made a strong recommendation that (Key Action Statement [KAS] 10) the clinician performing allergy skin testing or administering AIT must be able to diagnose and manage anaphylaxis. The guideline development group made recommendations for the following KASs: (KAS 1) Clinicians should offer or refer to a clinician who can offer immunotherapy for patients with AR with or without AA if their patients' symptoms are inadequately controlled with medical therapy, allergen avoidance, or both, or have a preference for immunomodulation. (KAS 2A) Clinicians should not initiate AIT for patients who are pregnant, have uncontrolled asthma, or are unable to tolerate injectable epinephrine. (KAS 3) Clinicians should evaluate the patient or refer the patient to a clinician who can evaluate for signs and symptoms of asthma before initiating AIT and for signs and symptoms of uncontrolled asthma before administering subsequent AIT. (KAS 4) Clinicians should educate patients who are immunotherapy candidates regarding the differences between SCIT and SLIT (aqueous and tablet) including risks, benefits, convenience, and costs. (KAS 5) Clinicians should educate patients about the potential benefits of AIT in (1) preventing new allergen sensitization, (2) reducing the risk of developing AA, and (3) altering the natural history of the disease with continued benefit after discontinuation of therapy. (KAS 6) Clinicians who administer SLIT to patients with seasonal AR should offer pre‐ and co‐seasonal immunotherapy. (KAS 7) Clinicians prescribing AIT should limit treatment to only those clinically relevant allergens that correlate with the patient's history and are confirmed by testing. (KAS 9) Clinicians administering AIT should continue escalation or maintenance dosing when patients have local reactions to AIT. (KAS 11) Clinicians should avoid repeat allergy testing as an assessment of the efficacy of ongoing AIT unless there is a change in environmental exposures or a loss of control of symptoms. (KAS 12) For patients who are experiencing symptomatic control from AIT, clinicians should treat for a minimum duration of 3 years, with ongoing treatment duration based on patient response to treatment. The guideline development group offered the following KASs as options: (KAS 2B) Clinicians may choose not to initiate AIT for patients who use concomitant beta‐blockers, have a history of anaphylaxis, have systemic immunosuppression, or have eosinophilic esophagitis (SLIT only). (KAS 8) Clinicians may treat polysensitized patients with a limited number of allergens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The plain language summary explains allergen immunotherapy to patients, families, and caregivers. The summary is for patients aged 5 years and older who are experiencing symptoms from inhalant allergies and are considering immunotherapy as a treatment option. It is based on the 2024 "Clinical Practice Guideline: Immunotherapy for Inhalant Allergy." This plain language summary is a companion publication to the full guideline, which provides greater detail for health care providers. Guidelines and their recommendations may not apply to every patient, but they can be used to find best practices and quality improvement opportunities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of dust mite subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) in monosensitized and polysensitized children with allergic rhinitis (AR). Study Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: Tertiary referral center. Methods: One hundred thirty children were enrolled and categorized into 2 groups: monosensitized to only dust mites and polysensitized to at least 1 additional allergen beyond dust mites. All patients received SCIT targeting dust mites for 3 years, followed by a 5‐year monitoring period. The Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS), Symptom and Medication Score (SMS), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) were assessed before SCIT (T0); at 1 (T1) and 2 (T2) years of SCIT; immediately after SCIT (T3); and 2 years post‐SCIT (T5). Safety was assessed based on adverse events (AEs). Results: Fifty‐one monosensitized and 50 polysensitized children completed the study. At T3, 47 monosensitized and 46 polysensitized children were effectively treated, with no significant between‐group difference in efficacy (P >.05). The TNSS, SMS, VAS scores, and RQLQ score were significantly lower at T1, T2, T3, and T5 than at T0 in both groups (P <.05). The differences in the TNSS, SMS, VAS score, and RQLQ score between the 2 groups were nonsignificant at T0, T1, T2, and T3 (P >.05), but significant at T5 (P <.05). No serious AEs were reported. Conclusion: Monosensitized and polysensitized children exhibited similar beneficial efficacy and safety after 3 years of dust mite SCIT. Monosensitized children derived more benefits 2 years after discontinuation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Die Ophthalmologie is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objectives: To investigate the effect of response intensity of allergen skin prick test (SPT) on symptom severity and long-term efficacy of dust mite subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) in allergic rhinitis (AR). Methods: AR Patients diagnosed with dust mite allergy and completed 3 years of SCIT were collected and classified into three groups: grade 2 (SPT of + +), grade 3 (SPT of + + +) and grade 4 (SPT of + + + +). Comparisons between groups were performed to examine the associations of SPT categories and symptom severity and the long-term efficacy of SCIT in AR. Results: 181 AR patients were included. There was no significant difference in the baseline TNSS, SMS, RQLQ and VAS, and particularly to symptom severity grading among three SPT grade groups (P > 0.05). The moderate–severe AR was more likely to be smoking and accompany with asthma and had higher prevalence of sensitization to cockroach, mixed grass and tree pollen than mild AR (P < 0.05). Prevalence of sensitization to cockroach, mixed grass, ragweed and animal dander was increased in AR patients with asthma and allergic conjunctivitis (P < 0.05). Furthermore, after 3 years of SCIT, no statistical differences in TNSS, SMS, RQLQ, VAS and long-term efficacy were observed among the three SPT grade groups (P > 0.05). Similarly, long-term outcomes of patients with different SPT grades did not differ among different clinical characteristics and different efficacy determination criteria (P > 0.05). Conclusions: The SPT response intensity cannot be used as an objective evaluation index for symptom severity and the long-term efficacy of SCIT in AR patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundOral immunotherapy (OIT) is a promising allergen-specific approach in the management of food allergy; however, studies on OIT for allergic rhinitis (AR) have rarely been reported. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of OIT using enteric-coated capsules for AR induced by house dust mites.MethodsA total of 49 patients with AR were enrolled, including 25 who received subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and 24 who received OIT. The clinical efficacy and safety in both groups were evaluated.ResultsAfter 1 year of treatment, both SCIT and OIT demonstrated significant therapeutic effects. OIT was found to be more effective than SCIT in reducing the total AR symptom score and improving the results of nasal provocation tests. Local and systemic adverse reactions were observed in the SCIT group, while none were reported in the OIT group.ConclusionOIT is an effective and safe treatment for mite-induced AR.

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a well-established disease-modifying therapy for allergic rhinitis, yet the fundamental mechanisms underlying its clinical effect remain inadequately understood. Gauging Response in Allergic Rhinitis to Sublingual and Subcutaneous Immunotherapy was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of individuals allergic to timothy grass who received 2 years of placebo (n = 30), subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) (n = 27), or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) (n = 27) and were then followed for 1 additional year. We used yearly biospecimens from the Gauging Response in Allergic Rhinitis to Sublingual and Subcutaneous Immunotherapy study to identify molecular mechanisms of response. We used longitudinal transcriptomic profiling of nasal brush and PBMC samples after allergen provocation to uncover airway and systemic expression pathways mediating responsiveness to AIT. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01335139, EudraCT Number: 2010-023536-16. SCIT and SLIT demonstrated similar changes in gene module expression over time. In nasal samples, alterations included downregulation of pathways of mucus hypersecretion, leukocyte migration/activation, and endoplasmic reticulum stress (log2 fold changes −0.133 to −0.640, false discovery rates [FDRs] <0.05). We observed upregulation of modules related to epithelial development, junction formation, and lipid metabolism (log2 fold changes 0.104 to 0.393, FDRs <0.05). In PBMCs, modules related to cellular stress response and type 2 cytokine signaling were reduced by immunotherapy (log2 fold changes −0.611 to −0.828, FDRs <0.05). Expression of these modules was also significantly associated with both Total Nasal Symptom Score and peak nasal inspiratory flow, indicating important links between treatment, module expression, and allergen response. Our results identify specific molecular responses of the nasal airway impacting barrier function, leukocyte migration activation, and mucus secretion that are affected by both SCIT and SLIT, offering potential targets to guide novel strategies for AIT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundLittle is known about the safety of mite extract product Novo-Helisen Depot (NHD) as subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) in the children with mite allergy especially immediate/late local reaction (LRs).MethodsWe conducted a retrospective study analyzing the adverse events of the children undergoing subcutaneous immunotherapy with NHD. Adverse events included local and systemic adverse reactions (SRs) at the very early and late stage. The correlation of the basic characteristics, laboratory analysis results, LRs and SRs were analyzed.ResultsTwo hundred and eighty-seven patients received at least 15 months of subcutaneous immunotherapy with NHD were included in the analysis. Skin-prick testing (SPT) results of D. pteronyssinus was associated with an increased risk of immediate LRs in build-up phase (OR = 1.53, 95% CI: 1.02, 2.37) and delayed LRs in maintenance phase (OR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.05, 2.46), while SPT results of D. farinae was associated with an increased risk of SRs (OR = 3.22, 95% CI: 1.17, 10.00) and severe SRs (OR = 7.68, 95% CI: 1.13, 109.50). Serum IgE level of D. pteronyssinus was associated with an increased risk of SRs (OR = 1.01, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.03). Patients with both asthma and allergic rhinitis was associated with an increased risk of SR, and severe SRs (P

Background: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is still the only treatment that may affect the natural cause of allergic disease. This study is to investigate whether an accelerated up-dosing scheme for subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT) using a native house dust mite (HDM) allergen extract is as safe as the standard 3-strengths dose-escalation scheme in children with moderate to severe allergic rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis with or without asthma in China. Methods: In this multicenter, open label, randomized controlled trial, the children aged 5–14 years were randomized 1:1 either to One Strength group or the Standard group. The dose escalation scheme for patients in the One Strength group included 6 injections of strength 3, whereas the Standard group comprised 14 injections using strength 1, 2, and 3. All treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were recorded and analyzed. The 5-point Likert scale was used to assess tolerability (ChiCTR2100050311). Results: Overall, 101 children were included in the Safety Set (One Strength group: 50 vs. Standard group: 51). A total of 26 TEAEs were reported for 15 children. TEAEs related to AIT occurred in 10 % of the children in the One Strength group and 11.8 % of the Standard group. The number of systemic adverse reactions was comparable in both groups (One Strength: 5 vs. Standard: 4). No serious TEAEs was recorded for either group. 90.0 % of patients in the One Strength group reached the maintenance dose without an interventional dose adjustment due to adverse events, compared to 78.4 % in the Standard group. All patients who completed the dose-escalation phase reached the recommended maintenance dose of 1.0 ml of strength 3.Investigators and patients rated the tolerability of the One Strength regimen slightly better than the Standard scheme. Conclusions: This exploratory study suggests that the accelerated One Strength dose-escalation scheme is comparable in safety and tolerability to the Standard regimen. However, due to the preliminary nature and small sample size, further research with larger sample sizes and robust study designs is necessary for confirmation.

Background: We aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) with standardized house dust mite (HDM) extract for allergic rhinitis. Methods: Participants with allergic rhinitis selected their treatment between HDM SCIT or HDM SLIT, according to their wishes. We prospectively followed symptoms of allergic rhinitis using the allergic rhinitis symptom medication score (ARSMS), along with adverse reactions, during the dose escalation and maintenance phases for two years. We compared the outcomes between propensity score-matched groups to adjust the confounding factors. Results: After propensity score matching, 88 patients in the HDM SCIT (n = 44) and HDM SLIT groups (n = 44) remained for analysis. The HDM SCIT group showed significantly earlier effectiveness than the HDM SLIT group (median time to decrease in ARSMS [≥2 points]: 5.5 vs. 18.0 months, p

Specific immunotherapy represents the only potentially curative treatment for allergic asthma. Allergens can be administered subcutaneously (SCIT) or sublingually (SLIT). The aim of the current study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy of SCIT and SLIT for the treatment of allergic asthma in children. Our study included 69 children with allergic asthma who underwent immunotherapy for house dust mites or pollen for at least 3 consecutive years. After 3 years of SCIT and SLIT, the median number of asthma exacerbations in the last three months decreased from 2 to 0 (p < 0.01) and from 1 to 0 (p < 0.01), respectively. When comparing the efficacy of SCIT and SLIT, our study revealed a significantly better efficacy of SCIT only in terms of increasing lung function. The median increase in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) after 3 years was 8% with SCIT and −1% with SLIT (p < 0.01). Daily controller therapy could be withdrawn or reduced in 9 out of 16 (56.3%) children who received it before SCIT (p < 0.01) and in 19 of 29 (65.6%) children who received it before SLIT (p < 0.01), but the difference in efficacy was not significant (p = 0.88). Both SCIT and SLIT are effective treatments for allergic asthma in children.

AimTo systematically compare the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in children with allergic rhinitis (AR).MethodsPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched from inception to March 2, 2023. Outcomes included symptom scores (SSs), medication scores (MSs), symptom and medication scores (SMSs), new sensitizations, development of asthma, improvement, and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). The quality of the included studies was assessed by the modified Jadad scale and Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). Meta-regression was carried out to explore the source of heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis was further conducted in terms of study design [randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies], allergen [house dust mites (HDMs), grass pollen], treatment duration (≥ 24, 12-23 or < 12 months), allergen immunotherapy (AIT) modality (drops or tablets), and AIT protocol [continuous, pre-seasonal, co-seasonal, or after the grass pollen season (GPS)]. Sensitivity analysis was conducted for all outcomes. A Bayesian framework and a Monte Carlo Markov Chain (MCMC) model were developed for indirect comparison.ResultsTotally 50 studies with 10813 AR children were included, with 4122 treated with SLIT, 1852 treated with SCIT, and 4839 treated with non-SLIT or non-SCIT therapy. For direct comparison, the SLIT group had a similar SS to the SCIT group [pooled standardized mean difference (SMD): 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.46, 1.28, P = 0.353]. Comparable MSs were observed in the SLIT and SCIT groups (pooled SMD: 0.82, 95%CI: -0.88, 2.53, P = 0.344). For indirect comparison, no significant differences were found in SSs (pooled SMD: 1.20, 95% credibility interval (CrI): -1.70, 4.10), MSs (pooled SMD: 0.57, 95%CrI: -1.20, 2.30), SMSs (pooled SMD: 1.80, 95%CrI: -0.005, 3.60), new sensitizations [pooled relative risk (RR): 0.34, 95%CrI: 0.03, 3.58], and development of asthma (pooled RR: 0.68, 95%CrI: 0.01, 26.33) between the SLIT and SCIT groups; the SLIT group illustrated a significantly lower incidence of TRAEs than the SCIT group (pooled RR: 0.17, 95%CrI: 0.11, 0.26).ConclusionConsidering both efficacy and safety, SLIT might be a more favorable AIT than SCIT in the treatment of pediatric AR, which may serve as a decision-making reference for clinicians.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO (CRD42023460693).

Background: A modified grass allergen subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) product with MicroCrystalline Tyrosine and monophosphoryl lipid‐A as an adjuvant system (Grass MATA MPL [PQ Grass]) is being developed as short‐course treatment of grass‐pollen allergic rhinitis (SAR) and/or rhinoconjunctivitis. We sought to evaluate the combined symptom and medication score (CSMS) of the optimized cumulative dose of 27,600 standardized units (SU) PQ Grass in a field setting prior to embarking on a pivotal Phase III trial. Methods: In this exploratory, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial subjects were enrolled across 14 sites (Germany and the United States of America). Six pre‐seasonal subcutaneous injections of PQ Grass (using conventional or extended regimens) or placebo were administered to 119 subjects (aged 18–65 years) with moderate‐to‐severe SAR with or without asthma that was well‐controlled. The primary efficacy endpoint was CSMS during peak grass pollen season (GPS). Secondary endpoints included Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire standardized (RQLQ‐S) and allergen‐specific IgG4 response. Results: The mean CSMS compared to placebo was 33.1% (p =.0325) and 39.5% (p =.0112) for the conventional and extended regimens, respectively. An increase in IgG4 was shown for both regimens (p <.01) as well as an improvement in total RQLQ‐S for the extended regimen (mean change −0.72, p =.02). Both regimens were well‐tolerated. Conclusions: This trial demonstrated a clinically relevant and statistically significant efficacy response to PQ Grass. Unprecedented effect sizes were reached for grass allergy of up to ≈40% compared to placebo for CSMS after only six PQ Grass injections. Both PQ Grass regimens were considered equally safe and well‐tolerated. Based on enhanced efficacy profile extended regime will be progressed to the pivotal Phase III trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) with standardized house dust mite (HDM) extract for allergic rhinitis. Participants with allergic rhinitis selected their treatment between HDM SCIT or HDM SLIT, according to their wishes. We prospectively followed symptoms of allergic rhinitis using the allergic rhinitis symptom medication score (ARSMS), along with adverse reactions, during the dose escalation and maintenance phases for two years. We compared the outcomes between propensity score-matched groups to adjust the confounding factors. After propensity score matching, 88 patients in the HDM SCIT (n = 44) and HDM SLIT groups (n = 44) remained for analysis. The HDM SCIT group showed significantly earlier effectiveness than the HDM SLIT group (median time to decrease in ARSMS [≥2 points]: 5.5 vs. 18.0 months, p < 0.001). The incidence of systemic reactions was not significantly different between the two groups in the dose escalation phase (68.2% vs. 56.8%, p = 0.379). In the maintenance phase, the incidence of systemic reactions was higher in the HDM SCIT group than in the HDM SLIT group (18.2% vs. 0%, p < 0.006). All 44 patients in the HDM SCIT group completed two years of treatment, while nine patients in the HDM SLIT group discontinued treatment. The HDM SCIT group showed an earlier onset of therapeutic effect and a lower discontinuation rate than the HDM SLIT group, although more severe systemic reactions were observed during the maintenance phase. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Maintenance doses for allergen immunotherapy (AIT) have been recommended for at least 3 years but little data on long‐term efficacy is available depending on AIT duration. To show sustained efficacy 10 years after completion of treatment with depigmented‐polymerized house dust mite (dpg‐pol HDM) allergen extract in adults with asthma and/or rhinoconjunctivitis. Methods: Patients included in a double‐blind placebo‐controlled AIT study with dpg‐pol HDM allergen extract were reviewed at completion of the perennial treatment and 10‐year follow‐up (10y‐FU). Change in symptom and rescue medication score was the primary objective. Visual analog scale (VAS), asthma control test (ACT), and degree of disease control were the secondary objectives. A comparative analysis between patients who underwent AIT treatment for <3 years and ≥3 years was performed. Results: Data from 31 patients (mean age 38 years) were available at 10y‐FU. All had asthma and 29 had rhinoconjunctivitis at baseline. Twenty‐three patients were treated ≥3 years and 8 for <3 years. Seventeen (55%) patients were asymptomatic at completion of AIT, with significant differences for nasal, conjunctival, and bronchial symptoms (p <.0001) compared with baseline only in those patients treated ≥3 years. Nine (52.9%) patients remained completely asymptomatic at 10y‐FU, all were treated for ≥3 years. Moreover, significant reduction in the number of patients with rhinitis (p =.0117), conjunctivitis (p <.0001), and bronchial (p =.0005) symptoms was observed at 10y‐FU compared with baseline only in the ≥3 years treated. Ten (32.3%) patients did not require any rescue medication at 10y‐FU, all had been treated for ≥3 years. ACT at 10y‐FU showed a good control of asthma (median 23.5; 95% IC[22.0, 25.0]). No significant differences were observed between VAS at end of treatment compared with VAS at 10y‐FU. Conclusions: Sustained clinical efficacy is achieved 10 years after completion of depigmented‐polymerized HDM, however, these findings were observed only if patients are treated for at least 3 years. Key Messages: A minimum of 3 years AIT treatment is required to obtain a sustained long‐term effectiveness.Dpg‐pol HDM is able to remove allergic rhinitis and asthma symptoms completely.Three‐year treatment with dpg‐pol HDM is able to maintain effectiveness 10 years after treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: Although it is accepted as an effective and safe treatment way, side effects can be observed as a result of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT). In our study, it was aimed to evaluate the local and systemic reactions in children after SCIT and the factors that may be associated with these reactions. METHODS: Our study included 138 house dust mite allergic patients with asthma and/or allergic rhinitis who underwent SCIT in the Pediatric Allergy and Immunology Outpatient Clinic between November 2013 and April 2022. Sociodemographic, clinical, laboratory features, and development of adverse reactions after SCIT were analyzed from patient files. RESULTS: The median age of 138 patients was 9.0 years. About 56.5% (n=78) were male, 43.5% (n=60) were female. Of the patients, 55.1% (n=76) had asthma and allergic rhinitis. A total of 7366 SCIT injections were administered to all patients in our clinic. The total number of observed adverse reaction was 118. 50.7% of the patients (n=70) experienced at least one adverse reaction after SCIT. The rate of development of adverse reactions per injection was 1.6% (local: 1.0%, large local: 0.1%, systemic: 0.5%). CONCLUSION: Although serious systemic reactions and death were not observed in our patients; care should be taken in terms of the development of adverse reactions during SCIT in children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pediatric allergic rhinoconjunctivitis has become a public concern with an increasing incidence year by year. Conventional subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) has long treatment time, high cost and poor compliance. The novel immunotherapy significantly shortens the course of treatment by directly injecting allergens into cervical lymph nodes, which can perform faster clinical benefits to children. Objective: By comparing with SCIT, this study aimed to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of intra-cervical lymphatic immunotherapy (ICLIT). Methods: This is a prospective randomized controlled study. A total of 50 allergic rhinoconjunctivitis children with dust mite allergy was randomly divided into ICLIT group and SCIT group, receiving three cervical intralymphatic injections of dust mite allergen or three years of subcutaneous injection, separately. Primary outcomes included total nasal symptom scores (TNSS), total ocular symptom scores (TOSS), total symptom scores (TSS), total medication scores (TMS), and total quality of life score. Secondary outcomes included pain perception and adverse reactions during treatment. Other secondary outcome was change in Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (Derp) and Dermatophagoides farina (Derf) -specific IgE level. Results: Both groups had significantly decreased TNSS, TOSS, TSS, TMS, and total quality of life score after 36 months of treatment (p<0.0001). Compared with SCIT, ICLIT could rapidly improve allergic symptoms (p<0.0001). The short-term efficacy was consistent between the two groups (p=0.07), while the long-term efficacy was better in SCIT group (p<0.0001). The pain perception in ICLIT group was lower than that in SCIT group (p<0.0001). ICLIT group was safer. Specifically, the children had only 3 mild local adverse reactions without systemic adverse reactions. The SCIT group had 14 systemic adverse reactions. At last, the serum Derp and Derf-specific IgE levels in ICLIT and SCIT groups decreased 3 years later (p<0.0001). Conclusion: ICLIT could ameliorate significantly the allergic symptoms in pediatric patients with an advantage in effectiveness and safety, besides an improved life quality including shortened period of treatment, frequency of drug use and pain perception. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: It was aimed to evaluate the post-treatment clinical findings and quality of life among patients treated with allergen-specific subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT). Materials and Methods: Our study included 39 pediatric patients who underwent SCIT in October 2022 in the department of pediatric allergy and immunology, who were allergic to house dust mites, diagnosed with allergic rhinitis or combined allergic rhinitis and asthma. Socio-demographic characteristics, laboratory and clinical features of the patients were evaluated. Visual analog scale (VAS) and Rhino Conjunctivits Scoring System (RCSS) were used to evaluate the disease symptoms quantitatively after allergen-specific immunotherapy. Disease-related quality of life was evaluated with the Pediatric Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (PRQLQ) questionnaire. Results: Of the 39 pediatric patients evaluated, 33 (84.6%) were diagnosed with allergic rhinitis; 6 (15.4%) were diagnosed with asthma and allergic rhinitis. Of the patients, 66.7% (n=26) were male. The median age was 10.0 years (6.0- 17.0). The relationship between the total number of SCIT injections administered to the patients and the patients' VAS, RCSS and PRQLQ scores was evaluated. A moderate to strong negative correlation was seen with all scores. Except for the RCSS ocular-redness subscore, all correlations were statistically significant (p<0.05). Conclusion: In patients in the further stages of SCIT treatment, the quality of life was higher and the severity of clinical findings was lower. It is presented that the severity of clinical findings related to allergic rhinitis decreased during SCIT treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease-modifying therapy for allergic conditions, resulting in a long-lasting tolerance beyond the duration of the treatment. Due to the strong relationship between the effectiveness, its optimal duration (at least three years) and the observation of the correct administration protocol, appropriate adherence to the plan of treatment represents a critical factor for the therapeutical success of AIT. Methods. Analysis of studies about the rate of adherence in subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy, which are the main routes of administration of AIT. Results. There are different causes leading to a premature interruption of the therapy or to it being incorrectly carried out; the most reported include erroneous expectations of the effectiveness and the adverse effects, economic issues, inconvenience and unrelated clinical conditions. Conclusions. An attentive analysis of the main causes of dropouts may be useful to improve the management of these patients and to develop new strategies for a personalized approach. These strategies should be dynamic, involving attentive communication between the physician and the patient about all the possible criticalities, especially in the initial phase of the therapy, and facilitating, as much as possible, access to healthcare providers over the course of the maintenance phase, including by exploiting technological tools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Intralymphatic immunotherapy (ILIT) is an emerging type of allergen immunotherapy with fewer injections and shorter course for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC). The efficacy and safety have not been confirmed by informative and powerful evidence yet. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted through electronic searching with PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI). The safety (incidence of adverse events [AEs]), compliance (percent of patients completing treatment), and clinical efficacy of ILIT were evaluated. Clinical efficacy could be assessed by improvement of subjective symptom and rescue medication use or the nasal tolerance to specific allergen. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022353562). Results: 12 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ILIT with placebo and 3 trials (2 RCTs and one case-control study) comparing ILIT and SCIT were included in this review. Totally, 582 patients diagnosed as AR or ARC were enrolled. Almost all the AEs were mild-to-moderate reactions except 2 patients developed anaphylactic reactions at the intralymphatic injection dose 5,000 SQ-U in one study. ILIT got higher incidence of local AEs than placebo, but their incidence of systemic AEs was similar. ILIT was safer than SCIT (p < 0.05). Almost all the patients could complete ILIT treatment, and the most common reason for discontinuation of ILIT was AEs. The compliance of patients receiving ILIT seemed higher than patients receiving SCIT. ILIT could significantly ameliorate subjective allergic symptoms, especially for seasonal ARC, and increase nasal tolerance, similar to SCIT. Conclusion: ILIT was a safe and effective treatment for ARC and could achieve comparable clinical improvement with SCIT with shorter duration and higher compliance. Moreover, ILIT was safer than SCIT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is a well-validated and effective disease modification treatment for house dust mites (HDM)-induced allergic rhinitis (AR). Long-term post-treatment comparisons in children and adults treated with SCIT have rarely been published. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term efficacy of HDM-SCIT administered under a cluster schedule in children compared to adults. Methods This was an open-design, observational, long-term clinical follow-up study on children and adults with perennial AR treated with HDM-SCIT. The follow-up consisted of a three-year treatment duration plus a post-treatment follow-up of over three years. Results Patients in the pediatric (n = 58) and adult (n = 103) groups completed a post-SCIT follow-up of over three years. The total nasal symptom score (TNSS), combined symptom medication score (CSMS), and rhinoconjunctivitis quality-of-life questionnaire (RQLQ) score decreased significantly at T1 (three-year SCIT completed) and T2 (follow-up completed) in the pediatric and adult groups. In both groups, the improvement rate of TNSS (T0-T1) was moderately correlated with the baseline TNSS (r = 0.681, p

Abstract Background Maintenance doses for allergen immunotherapy (AIT) have been recommended for at least 3 years but little data on long‐term efficacy is available depending on AIT duration. To show sustained efficacy 10 years after completion of treatment with depigmented‐polymerized house dust mite (dpg‐pol HDM) allergen extract in adults with asthma and/or rhinoconjunctivitis. Methods Patients included in a double‐blind placebo‐controlled AIT study with dpg‐pol HDM allergen extract were reviewed at completion of the perennial treatment and 10‐year follow‐up (10y‐FU). Change in symptom and rescue medication score was the primary objective. Visual analog scale (VAS), asthma control test (ACT), and degree of disease control were the secondary objectives. A comparative analysis between patients who underwent AIT treatment for

Background: Allergen immunotherapy is the only etiological treatment for allergic rhinitis. Objective: To analyze the efficacy, safety, and mechanism of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT). Methods: The efficacy, safety, and serum immunological changes of 3 modes of subcutaneous immunotherapy were compared. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) transcriptome changes were obtained on the Illumina sequencing platforms. We confirmed differentially expressed genes (DEGs) by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The DEGs were analyzed by gene ontology (GO), Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG), and protein-protein interaction (PPI) networks. The correlation between the common DEGs and clinical indicators was analyzed by Origin 2022. Results: The 3 SCITs were all effective after 1 year. The Combined Symptom and Medication Score (CSMS) and Visual Analog Score (VAS) in rush immunotherapy (RIT) are lowest after 24 and 48 weeks of treatment among the 3 groups. After treatment, the levels of sIgE, sIgE/tIgE, Th2 cytokines, Th17 cytokines, and percentage of peripheral eosinophils (EOS%) decreased significantly (P＜0.05), while the levels of Th1 type cytokines did not change significantly. Transcriptome analysis identified 24, 24, and 91 DEGs at W3 and 42, 52, 175 DEGs at W7 in conventional immunotherapy (CIT), cluster immunotherapy (CLIT), and RIT groups, respectively. The pathways and functions involved in SCIT include secretion of Th1/2 cytokines, immune cell differentiation. Unlike CIT and CLIT, DEGs are also involved in T cell tolerance induction, T cell anergy, and lymphocyte anergy in RIT. CXCR1, CXCR2, and IER3 had a specific effect on reflecting the improvement of symptoms in allergic rhinitis patients with SCIT. Conclusion: The clinical efficacy of RIT appeared earlier than CIT and CLIT. Clinicians can use the highly conserved gene expression profile to evaluate responses to immunotherapy.

Background: When it comes to treating children with respiratory allergies and allergic rhinitis, allergen-specific immunotherapy is a crucial choice. Objective: This study aimed to assess the impact of immunotherapy (AIT) on quality of life in children with allergic rhinitis. Subjects and methods: In a randomized-controlled trial we conducted this study at Pediatric Outpatient Clinic at Zagazig University Hospitals on 40 pediatrics with allergic rhinitis, randomly allocated into 2 equal groups: the Immunotherapy group received (AIT + pharmacotherapy) and pharmacotherapy group received pharmacotherapy only. Results: The quality of life score started to show significant improvement after five weeks of start of immunotherapy for immunotherapy group and this improvement continued till the end of six months therapy, Total Nasal Symptoms (TNS) score started to show significant improvement after six weeks of start of immunotherapy for immunotherapy group and this improvement continued till the end of six months therapy. Significant improvement occurred in quality of life questionnaire score and in Total Nasal symptoms score among the immunotherapy group with a percentage of 77.97% and 81.67% respectively. There was statistically significant relation between percentage of improvement in quality of life questionnaire score and seasonality (Perennial Allergic Rhinitis is associated with better improvement). Conclusion: Subcutaneous Immunotherapy was safe and effective in the treatment of the Allergic Rhinitis in children. It resulted in significant improvement in QoL and symptoms through the study period, and this improvement was higher than in the pharmacotherapy only group. Subcutaneous immunotherapy was associated with minor adverse events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a treatment in which clinically corresponding allergens are administered to patients with allergic diseases, either by subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), or by oral immunotherapy (OIT) in the case of food allergy. Since etiological allergens are administered to patients, AIT is presumed to modify mainly allergen-specific immune responses. In bronchial asthma, AIT with house dust mites (HDM) alleviates clinical symptoms, suppresses airway hyperresponsiveness, and reduces medication doses of HDM-sensitive asthmatics. Moreover, AIT can suppress the symptoms of other allergic diseases associated with asthma including allergic rhinitis. However, AIT sometimes reduces allergic symptoms not induced by the responsible allergens, such as non-targeted allergens, in clinical settings. Furthermore, AIT can suppress the spread of sensitization to new allergens that are not targeted allergens by AIT, suggesting the suppression of allergic immune responses in an allergen-nonspecific manner. In this review, the nonspecific suppression of allergic immune responses by AIT is discussed. AIT has been reported to increase regulatory T cells that produce IL-10, transforming growth factor-β, and IL-35, IL-10-producing regulatory B cells, and IL-10-producing innate lymphoid cells. These cells can suppress type-2 mediated immune responses mainly through the production of anti-inflammatory cytokines or a cell–cell contact mechanism, which may be involved in the nonspecific suppression of allergic immune responses by AIT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate the clinical efficacy of subcutaneous immunotherapy combined with salmetroticasone powder inhalant in the treatment of children with moderate bronchial asthma in remission stage and the effects on the expression of serum Th1/Th2-related cytokines. Methods: A total of 120 children with moderate bronchial asthma in remission stage were selected from Foshan Maternal and Child Health Hospital of Southern Medical University from January 2020 to December 2020, according to the principle of random grouping, they were divided into observation group and control group, 60 cases each. The control group was treated with salmetroticasone powder inhalant (seretide), with once in the morning and once in the evening. The observation group was given subcutaneous immunotherapy on the basis of the control group for 12-month course of treatment. The frequency of bronchial asthma attacks, clinical control rate and pulmonary function changes were compared in the two groups of children. The levels of serum Thl-related cytokines [(interleukin-2 (IL-2), γ interferon (INF-γ)] and Th2-related cytokines [interleukin-4 (IL-4), interleukin-6 (IL-6)] were measured in both groups of children. Results: Compared with before treatment, the number of asthma attacks in the two groups were significantly reduced after 6 months and 12 months of treatment (P<0.05), and the number of asthma attacks in the observation group were lower than those in the control group (P<0.01). 12 months after treatment, the clinical control rate of the observation group was 90%, which was significantly higher than that 66.67% of the control group (P<0.05). At 6 months and 12 months after treatment, the percentage of normal expected value of forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1%) and peak expiratory flow (PEF%) in the observation group were significantly higher than those in the control group (P<0.01), compared with 6 months after treatment, the above two indicators were significantly increased in the two groups after 12 months of treatment, and the observation group was significantly higher than the control group (P<0.01). At 12 months after treatment, serum levels of IL-2 and IFN-γ were significantly increased in both groups, and the observation group was significantly higher than the control group (P<0.01); serum levels of IL-4 and IL-6 in both groups were significantly decreased, and the observation group was significantly lower than the control group (P<0.01). Conclusion: The clinical efficacy of subcutaneous immunotherapy combined with salmeterol fluticasone powder (suletide) in treating children with moderate bronchial asthma in remission stage is definite. The number of bronchial asthma attacks in children is significantly reduced, and the pulmonary function is significantly improved. Its mechanism of action may be related to the regulation of Th 1/Th 2-related cytokines balance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Allergy immunotherapy (AIT), in the form of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) with alum-precipitated aqueous extracts, SCIT with a modified ragweed pollen allergen tyrosine adsorbate (MRPATA; Pollinex®-R), or a sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablet are options for the treatment of ragweed pollen allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC) in Canadian children. A cost minimization analysis evaluated the economic implications of the use of the ragweed SLIT-tablet vs SCIT in Canadian children with ragweed ARC. Methods A cost minimization analysis was conducted comparing the short ragweed SLIT-tablet, 12 Amb a 1-U, preseasonally with preseasonal ragweed SCIT, annual ragweed SCIT, or MRPATA. The analysis was conducted over a time horizon of 3 years from a public payer perspective in Ontario and Quebec. Resources and costs associated with medication and services of healthcare professionals were considered for each treatment. The resource and cost input values for the model were obtained from published literature and validated by Canadian clinical experts in active allergy practice. A discount rate of 1.5% was applied. Several scenario analyses were conducted to determine the impact of many of the key base case assumptions on the outcomes. Results Over the total 3-year time horizon, the ragweed SLIT-tablet had a potential cost savings of $900.14 in Ontario and $1023.14 in Quebec when compared with preseasonal ragweed SCIT, of $6613.22 in Ontario and $8750.64 in Quebec when compared with annual ragweed SCIT, and $79.62 in Ontario and $429.49 in Quebec when compared with MRPATA. The ragweed SLIT-tablet had higher drug costs compared with the other AIT options, but lower costs for healthcare professional services. The lower costs for healthcare professional services with the ragweed SLIT-tablet were driven by the need for fewer office visits than SCIT. Scenario analysis indicated that costs were most impacted by including societal costs (e.g., costs associated with patient/caregiver travel and time lost). The potential cost savings of the ragweed SLIT-tablet versus SCIT and MRPATA was maintained in most scenarios. Conclusions In this cost minimization analysis, the ragweed SLIT-tablet provided estimated cost savings from a public payer perspective for the treatment of ragweed ARC in Canadian children compared with SCIT or MRPATA.

Key message Treatment with pollen allergen specific-immunotherapy improved health-related quality of life in children. Higher symptom scores were associated with lower perceived health-related quality of life. The proportion of children with severe or very severe symptoms from eyes, Nose and/or lungs had significantly decreased after 1 year of pollen SCIT and was maintained during the treatment years