Dataset Information

Distinct modulation of allergic T cell responses by subcutaneous vs. sublingual allergen-specific immunotherapy.

ABSTRACT: Allergen-specific immunotherapy is the only curative treatment for type I allergy. It can be administered subcutaneously (SCIT) or sublingually (SLIT). The clinical efficacy of these two treatment modalities appears to be similar, but potential differences in the immunological mechanisms involved have not been fully explored.To compare changes in the allergen-specific T cell response induced by subcutaneous vs. sublingual administration of allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT).Grass pollen-allergic patients were randomized into groups receiving either SCIT injections or SLIT tablets or neither. PBMCs were tested for Timothy grass (TG)-specific cytokine production by ELISPOT after in vitro expansion with TG-peptide pools. Phenotypic characterization of cytokine-producing cells was performed by FACS.In the SCIT group, decreased IL-5 production was observed starting 10 months after treatment commenced. At 24 months, T cell responses showed IL-5 levels significantly below the before-treatment baseline. No significant reduction of IL-5 was observed in the SLIT or untreated group. However, a significant transient increase in IL-10 production after 10 months of treatment compared to baseline was detected in both treatment groups. FACS analysis revealed that IL-10 production was associated with CD4(+) T cells that also produced IFN? and therefore may be associated with an IL-10-secreting type 1 cell phenotype.The most dominant immunological changes on a cellular level were a decrease in IL-5 in the SCIT group and a significant, transient increase of IL-10 observed after 10 months of treatment in both treated groups. The distinct routes of AIT administration may induce different immunomodulatory mechanisms at the cellular level.

SUBMITTER: Schulten V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4767546 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Distinct modulation of allergic T cell responses by subcutaneous vs. sublingual allergen-specific immunotherapy.

Schulten V V Tripple V V Aasbjerg K K Backer V V Lund G G Würtzen P A PA Sette A A Peters B B

Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology 20160301 3

<h4>Background</h4>Allergen-specific immunotherapy is the only curative treatment for type I allergy. It can be administered subcutaneously (SCIT) or sublingually (SLIT). The clinical efficacy of these two treatment modalities appears to be similar, but potential differences in the immunological mechanisms involved have not been fully explored.<h4>Objective</h4>To compare changes in the allergen-specific T cell response induced by subcutaneous vs. sublingual administration of allergen-specific i ...[more]

PMID: 26436865

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe capacity of sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT) to provide effective symptom relief in pollen-induced seasonal allergic rhinitis is often questioned, despite evidence of clinical efficacy from meta-analyses and well-powered, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials. In the absence of direct, head-to-head, comparative trials of SLIT and symptomatic medication, only indirect comparisons are possible.MethodsWe performed a meta-analysis of classes of products (second-generation H1-antihistamines, nasal corticosteroids and grass pollen SLIT tablet formulations) and single products (the azelastine-fluticasone combination MP29-02, and the leukotriene receptor antagonist montelukast) for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis in adults, adolescents and/or children. We searched the literature for large (n >100 in the smallest treatment arm) double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials. For each drug or drug class, we performed a meta-analysis of the effect on symptom scores. For each selected trial, we calculated the relative clinical impact (according to a previously published method) on the basis of the reported post-treatment or season-long nasal or total symptom scores: 100 × (scorePlacebo - scoreActive)/scorePlacebo.ResultsTwenty-eight publications on symptomatic medication trials and ten on SLIT trials met our selection criteria (total number of patients: n = 21,223). The Hedges' g values from the meta-analyses confirmed the presence of a treatment effect for all drug classes. In an indirect comparison, the weighted mean (range) relative clinical impacts were -29.6% (-23% to -37%) for five-grass pollen SLIT tablets, -19.2% (-6% to -29%) for timothy pollen SLIT tablets, -23.5% (-7% to -54%) for nasal corticosteroids, -17.1% (-15% to -20%) for MP29-02, -15.0% (-3% to -26%) for H1-antihistamines and -6.5% (-3% to -10%) for montelukast.ConclusionsIn an indirect comparison, grass pollen SLIT tablets had a greater mean relative clinical impact than second-generation antihistamines and montelukast and much the same mean relative clinical impact as nasal corticosteroids. This result was obtained despite the presence of methodological factors that mask the clinical efficacy of SLIT for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis.

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.

Dataset Information

Distinct modulation of allergic T cell responses by subcutaneous vs. sublingual allergen-specific immunotherapy.

Publications

Distinct modulation of allergic T cell responses by subcutaneous vs. sublingual allergen-specific immunotherapy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets