Dataset Information

Allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: a systematic overview of systematic reviews.

ABSTRACT: The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is developing Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) for Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC). To inform the development of recommendations, we sought to critically assess the systematic review evidence on the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of AIT for ARC.We undertook a systematic overview, which involved searching nine international biomedical databases from inception to October 31, 2015. Studies were independently screened by two reviewers against pre-defined eligibility criteria and critically appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) Systematic Review Checklist for systematic reviews. Data were descriptively synthesized.Our searches yielded a total of 5932 potentially eligible studies, from which 17 systematic reviews met our inclusion criteria. Eight of these were judged to be of high, five moderate and three low quality. These reviews suggested that, in carefully selected patients, subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual (SLIT) immunotherapy resulted in significant reductions in symptom scores and medication requirements. Serious adverse outcomes were rare for both SCIT and SLIT. Two systematic reviews reported some evidence of potential cost savings associated with use of SCIT and SLIT.We found moderate-to-strong evidence that SCIT and SLIT can, in appropriately selected patients, reduce symptoms and medication requirements in patients with ARC with reassuring safety data. This evidence does however need to be interpreted with caution, particularly given the heterogeneity in the populations, allergens and protocols studied. There is a lack of data on the relative effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of SCIT and SLIT. We are now systematically reviewing all the primary studies, including recent evidence that has not been incorporated into the published systematic reviews.

SUBMITTER: Nurmatov U

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5547534 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: a systematic overview of systematic reviews.

Nurmatov Ulugbek U Dhami Sangeeta S Arasi Stefania S Roberts Graham G Pfaar Oliver O Muraro Antonella A Ansotegui Ignacio J IJ Calderon Moises M Cingi Cemal C Durham Stephen S van Wijk Roy Gerth RG Halken Susanne S Hamelmann Eckard E Hellings Peter P Jacobsen Lars L Knol Edward E Larenas-Linnemann Desiree D Lin Sandra Y SY Maggina Vivian V Oude-Elberink Hanneke H Pajno Giovanni G Panwankar Ruby R Pastorello Elideanna E Pitsios Constantinos C Rotiroti Giuseppina G Timmermans Frans F Tsilochristou Olympia O Varga Eva-Maria EM Wilkinson Jamie J Williams Andrew A Worm Margitta M Zhang Luo L Sheikh Aziz A

Clinical and translational allergy 20170808

<h4>Background</h4>The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is developing Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) for Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC). To inform the development of recommendations, we sought to critically assess the systematic review evidence on the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of AIT for ARC.<h4>Methods</h4>We undertook a systematic overview, which involved searching nine international biomedical databases from inception to October 31 ...[more]

PMID: 28794855

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:BackgroundThe World Allergy Organization and the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology recommend to perform product-specific meta-analyses for allergen-specific immunotherapies because of the high degree of heterogeneity between individual products. This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy and safety of Glutaraldehyde-modified and MCT® (MicroCrystalline Tyrosine)-adsorbed allergoids (MATA).MethodsThe databases MEDLINE, LILACS, embase, LIVIVO, Web of Science and Google (Scholar) were searched for publications on MATA up to June 2019. Primary endpoint was the combined symptom and medication score (CSMS). Secondary endpoints were single scores, immunogenicity and improvement of allergic condition. Secondary safety endpoints were the occurrence of side effects. A random effects model was applied with (standardized) mean differences ([S]MDs) including confidence intervals (CI). Heterogeneity was analyzed using the I2 index and publication bias using Egger's test and Funnel plots. Subgroups were analyzed regarding age and asthma status.ResultsEight randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trials were selected for efficacy and 43 publications for safety analysis. In total, 4531 patients were included in this analysis including eight studies containing data on children and adolescents. AIT with MATA significantly reduced allergic symptoms and medication use with a SMD for CSMS of -0.8 (CI: -1.24, -0.36) in comparison to placebo. Heterogeneity was moderate between the studies. The total symptom score (-1.2 [CI: -2.11, -0.29]) and the total medication score (-2.2 [CI: -3.65, -0.74]) were also significantly reduced after MATA treatment. Patient's condition improved significantly after treatment with MATA, with an odds ratio of 3.05 (CI: 1.90, 4.90) when compared to placebo. The proportion of patients, who developed side effects was 38% (CI: 19%, 57%). No serious side effects occurred. Safety in the subgroups of asthmatic patients, children and adolescents did not differ from the overall patient population.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis reveals a large body of evidence from publications investigating MATA. MATA significantly improved allergic symptoms and reduced the use of anti-allergic medication in comparison to placebo, with an excellent safety profile. Especially for children and asthmatic patients, the use of MATAs can be considered as safe, because the safety profiles in these groups did not differ from the total patient population.

Project description:BackgroundAtopic dermatitis (AD), a chronic inflammatory disorder, is often accompanied by allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC) as a co-morbidity. The use of a monoclonal anti-IL-4Rα antibody has been effective in controlling moderate to severe AD symptoms. Allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is widely used for the treatment of ARC and asthma. The effects of AIT on basophil reactivity/effector functions have already been examined and used as indicators of the treatment efficacy. However, it is unclear, how an anti-IL-4Rα antibody can influence allergen-specific immune responses of basophils and T cells of AD patients with comorbid ARC.ObjectiveTo investigate the effect of a monoclonal anti-IL-4Rα antibody on the in vitro allergic responses of basophils and T cells deriving from AD patients with comorbid ARC.MethodsBlood samples of 32 AD patients were obtained before, after 4 and 16 weeks of an anti-IL-4Rα antibody therapy (300 mg subcutaneously/2 weeks; n = 21) or AIT (daily sublingual application; n = 11). Patients treated with an anti-IL-4Rα antibody were grouped according to their serum specific immunoglobulin E levels and ARC symptoms, while patients receiving an AIT were additionally grouped according to the allergen specificity of their AIT. Basophil activation test and T cell proliferation assays were undertaken after an in vitro allergen stimulation.ResultsA significant reduction of the immunoglobulin E levels and the allergen-specific T cell proliferation was observed in AD patients treated with an anti-IL-4Rα -antibody, while the allergen-specific basophil activation/sensitivity were found to be significantly increased. In patients receiving an AIT, the in vitro allergen-specific basophil activation and the T cell proliferation were found to be significantly decreased in response to seasonal allergens.ConclusionsAn IL-4Rα blockade induced by a monoclonal anti-IL-4Rα antibody leads to an increased activity/sensitivity of early effector cells (such as basophils), in contrast to a decreasing reactivity observed under an AIT. The late-phase T cell reaction to allergens did not differ between the herein assessed treatments.

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.

Dataset Information

Allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: a systematic overview of systematic reviews.

Publications

Allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: a systematic overview of systematic reviews.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets