Dataset Information

A prospective study comparing the efficacy and safety of two sublingual birch allergen preparations.

ABSTRACT:

Background

SUBLIVAC FIX Birch (SUB-B) is a liquid oral preparation of Betula verrucosa pollen extract for the treatment of allergic rhinitis/rhinoconjuctivitis induced by birch pollen. The major allergen content of SUB-B and Staloral Birch (Stal-B) have been shown to be comparable. In order to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of both products, the present study was designed to investigate efficacy of treatment with SUB-B compared to Stal-B by means of reduction in allergy symptoms assessed by a titrated nasal provocation test (TNPT) in subjects suffering from IgE mediated allergy complaints triggered by birch pollen.

Methods

A prospective, randomized, open, blinded endpoint (PROBE), controlled, single-centre study in 74 birch allergic adults was performed. Treatment consisted of either SUB-B (10,000 AUN/ml) or Stal-B (initial phase 10 I.R./ml and maintenance phase 300 I.R./ml) for 16-20 weeks at maintenance dose. The primary efficacy outcome was defined by the difference in change of the TNPT-threshold dose between the two treatment groups at baseline and after completion of treatment. Secondary outcomes included determination of birch pollen specific IgE and IgG levels, safety lab and ECG. During the first 30 days of treatment, subjects were requested to fill out a diary concerning compliance with study medication, occurrence of AEs and the use of concomitant medication.

Results

Analysis of the primary efficacy parameter showed that the percentage of subjects showing a beneficial treatment effect was similar in both treatment groups, 33.3% for SUB-B vs. 31.4% for Stal-B in the intention to treat population. Evaluation of the immunologic response, showed that treatment with SUB-B and Stal-B induced similar increases (approximately 2 times) in IgE, IgG and IgG4 specific for Bet v 1. In total, 143 related adverse events (AEs) were reported. The majority of the AEs was of mild intensity. The same pattern of AEs was observed for both products. No clinically relevant changes in other safety parameters, such as safety laboratory parameters, vital signs, physical examination and ECGs were observed.

Conclusion

Taken together, treatment with both products was effective by means of reduction in allergic symptoms during a TNPT. In addition, safety analysis revealed a good tolerability of both SLIT extracts.

SUBMITTER: Klimek L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4122029 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Application of allergens onto the sublingual epithelium is used to desensitize allergic individuals, a treatment known as sublingual immunotherapy. However, the response of sublingual epithelial cells to house dust mite allergen and potential tolerance-promoting adjuvants such as Toll-like receptor (TLR) ligands and calcitriol has not been investigated. In order to study this, primary sublingual epithelial cells were isolated from dogs and cultured in vitro. After 24-h incubation with a Dermatophagoides farinae extract, a Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus extract, TLR2 ligands (FSL-1, heat-killed Listeria monocytogenes, Pam3CSK4), a TLR3 ligand (poly I:C), a TLR4 ligand [lipopolysaccharide (LPS)], and calcitriol (1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3), viability of the cells was analyzed using an MTT test, and their secretion of interleukin 6 (IL-6), IL-10, CXCL8, and transforming growth factor β1 (TGF-β1) was measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Additionally, to evaluate its potential effect as an adjuvant, sublingual epithelial cells were incubated with calcitriol in combination with a D. farinae extract followed by measurement of CXCL8 secretion. Furthermore, the effect of D. farinae and calcitriol on the transcriptome was assessed by RNA sequencing. The viability of the sublingual epithelial cells was significantly decreased by poly I:C, but not by the other stimuli. CXCL8 secretion was significantly increased by D. farinae extract and all TLR ligands apart from LPS. Calcitriol significantly decreased CXCL8 secretion, and coadministration with D. farinae extract reduced CXCL8 concentrations to levels seen in unstimulated sublingual epithelial cells. Although detectable, TGF-β1 secretion could not be modulated by any of the stimuli. Interleukin 6 and IL-10 could not be detected at the protein or at the mRNA level. It can be concluded that a D. farinae extract and TLR ligands augment the secretion of the proinflammatory chemokine CXCL8, which might interfere with sublingual desensitization. On the other hand, CXCL8 secretion was reduced by coapplication of calcitriol and a D. farinae extract. Calcitriol therefore seems to be a suitable candidate to be used as adjuvant during sublingual immunotherapy.

Project description:BackgroundOral immunotherapy (OIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) are potential therapies for food allergy, but the optimal method of administration, mechanism of action, and duration of response remain unknown.ObjectiveWe sought to explore the safety and efficacy of OIT and SLIT for the treatment of cow's milk (CM) allergy.MethodsWe randomized children with CM allergy to SLIT alone or SLIT followed by OIT. After screening double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges and initial SLIT escalation, subjects either continued SLIT escalation to 7 mg daily or began OIT to either 1000 mg (the OITB group) or 2000 mg (the OITA group) of milk protein. They were challenged with 8 g of milk protein after 12 and 60 weeks of maintenance. If they passed the 60-week challenge, therapy was withdrawn, with challenges repeated 1 and 6 weeks later. Mechanistic correlates included end point titration skin prick testing and measurement of CM-specific IgE and IgG(4) levels, basophil histamine release, constitutive CD63 expression, CD203c expression, and intracellular spleen tyrosine kinase levels.ResultsThirty subjects with CM allergy aged 6 to 17 years were enrolled. After therapy, 1 of 10 subjects in the SLIT group, 6 of 10 subjects in the SLIT/OITB group, and 8 of 10 subjects in the OITA group passed the 8-g challenge (P = .002, SLIT vs OIT). After avoidance, 6 of 15 subjects (3 of 6 subjects in the OITB group and 3 of 8 subjects in the OITA group) regained reactivity, 2 after only 1 week. Although the overall reaction rate was similar, systemic reactions were more common during OIT than during SLIT. By the end of therapy, titrated CM skin prick test results and CD63 and CD203c expression decreased and CM-specific IgG(4) levels increased in all groups, whereas CM-specific IgE and spontaneous histamine release values decreased in only the OIT group.ConclusionOIT was more efficacious for desensitization to CM than SLIT alone but was accompanied by more systemic side effects. Clinical desensitization was lost in some cases within 1 week off therapy.

Project description:BackgroundCurrently accepted therapies for ragweed allergy in North America consist of pharmacotherapy and subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy injections to treat symptoms. Allergen immunotherapy not only reduces symptoms and the need for pharmacotherapy but has also been shown to have disease-modifying potential. Recently, ragweed immunotherapy administered via sublingual allergen tablet has been approved in North America for treatment of allergic rhinitis with and without conjunctivitis.MethodsThis was an analysis of pooled data for a prespecified subgroup of Canadian subjects from two multicentre, randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trials of ragweed sublingual tablet (SLIT-T; 6 and 12 Amb a 1-U of Ambrosia artemisiifolia) in patients aged ≥18y, with ragweed-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (AR/C) with or without asthma. Randomized subjects used once-daily ragweed SLIT-T or placebo for at least 12 weeks before the ragweed season and for up to 52 weeks post-randomization. The primary efficacy endpoint was the total combined score (TCS) based on the sum of AR/C daily symptom score (DSS) and daily medication score (DMS) averaged over the peak season. Treatment effects on TCS, DSS, and DMS in the entire season were also assessed. Adverse events (AEs) were monitored to assess safety.Results337 Canadian subjects were randomized in the two trials. During the peak season, ragweed SLIT-T 6 and 12 Amb a 1-U significantly reduced TCS by 26% (difference, -2.46 score point; p = .0009) and 40% (difference, -3.75 score point; p < .0001), respectively. In the overall population (N = 961), TCS reductions with 6 and 12 Amb a 1-U were 20% and 23%, respectively (both p < .001). Clinically meaningful reductions in entire-season TCS in Canadians were similar to those during peak ragweed season. Dose-dependent reduction of DSS and DMS was also observed for ragweed SLIT-T 6 and 12 Amb a 1-U during the peak season and the entire season. Ragweed SLIT-T was well tolerated in Canadian subjects and the overall population. Adverse events were generally mild to moderate and transient, occurring early in treatment; no systemic allergic reaction/anaphylaxis was noted.ConclusionRagweed SLIT-T is an effective form of immunotherapy that provides symptomatic efficacy of AR/C with a favorable risk profile in Canadian and overall populations.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov identifiers NCT00783198 and NCT00770315.