Efficacy and safety of sublingual allergen immunotherapy.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 ALLERGY
Lawrence DuBuske
{"title":"Efficacy and safety of sublingual allergen immunotherapy.","authors":"Lawrence DuBuske","doi":"10.2500/aap.2022.43.220036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablets represent a new allergen immunotherapy option for clinicians. In North America, there are five SLIT-tablets approved for the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC). No SLIT-drops products are currently approved in the United States or Canada. This work reviewed the efficacy of the timothy grass SLIT-tablet, five-grass SLIT-tablet, ragweed SLIT-tablet, house-dust mite SLIT-tablet, and tree SLIT-tablet in patients with ARC. All the SLIT-tablets showed consistent clinical efficacy for the treatment of ARC in large, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, including for both patients who were monosensitized and those who were polysensitized. Treatment with house-dust mite SLIT-tablet has shown efficacy in patients who are pollen sensitized during their respective pollen seasons. In contrast to SLIT-tablets, efficacy studies of SLIT-drops show high heterogeneity of treatment effect. Although data are scarce, data that compared the efficacy of SLIT-tablets versus ARC pharmacotherapy generally indicated that SLIT-tablets had a greater benefit than pharmacotherapy when compared with placebo, particularly for perennial ARC. When compared with subcutaneous immunotherapy, analysis of these data indicated that SLIT-tablets had a benefit over subcutaneous immunotherapy in regard to safety but somewhat less benefit in regard to efficacy. The safety of SLIT-tablets has been well documented, and a U.S. Food and Drug Administration class label with safety considerations is present in the prescribing information for all SLIT-tablets. No new safety signals have been observed after reinitiating SLIT-tablets after a short treatment interruption.</p>","PeriodicalId":7646,"journal":{"name":"Allergy and asthma proceedings","volume":"43 4","pages":"272-280"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Allergy and asthma proceedings","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2500/aap.2022.43.220036","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablets represent a new allergen immunotherapy option for clinicians. In North America, there are five SLIT-tablets approved for the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC). No SLIT-drops products are currently approved in the United States or Canada. This work reviewed the efficacy of the timothy grass SLIT-tablet, five-grass SLIT-tablet, ragweed SLIT-tablet, house-dust mite SLIT-tablet, and tree SLIT-tablet in patients with ARC. All the SLIT-tablets showed consistent clinical efficacy for the treatment of ARC in large, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, including for both patients who were monosensitized and those who were polysensitized. Treatment with house-dust mite SLIT-tablet has shown efficacy in patients who are pollen sensitized during their respective pollen seasons. In contrast to SLIT-tablets, efficacy studies of SLIT-drops show high heterogeneity of treatment effect. Although data are scarce, data that compared the efficacy of SLIT-tablets versus ARC pharmacotherapy generally indicated that SLIT-tablets had a greater benefit than pharmacotherapy when compared with placebo, particularly for perennial ARC. When compared with subcutaneous immunotherapy, analysis of these data indicated that SLIT-tablets had a benefit over subcutaneous immunotherapy in regard to safety but somewhat less benefit in regard to efficacy. The safety of SLIT-tablets has been well documented, and a U.S. Food and Drug Administration class label with safety considerations is present in the prescribing information for all SLIT-tablets. No new safety signals have been observed after reinitiating SLIT-tablets after a short treatment interruption.

舌下过敏原免疫治疗的疗效和安全性。
舌下免疫治疗(SLIT)片剂是临床医生的一种新的过敏原免疫治疗选择。在北美,有五种slit片被批准用于治疗过敏性鼻结膜炎(ARC)。目前在美国或加拿大还没有批准裂口滴剂产品。本文综述了土草片、五草片、豚草片、屋尘螨片和树片对ARC患者的疗效。在大型、双盲、安慰剂对照试验中,包括单致敏和多致敏的患者,所有的slit片都显示出一致的治疗ARC的临床疗效。屋尘螨裂片对花粉过敏的患者在各自的花粉季节均有疗效。与裂片相比,裂片滴剂的疗效研究显示出治疗效果的高度异质性。虽然数据很少,但比较slit片与ARC药物治疗疗效的数据通常表明,与安慰剂相比,slit片比药物治疗更有益处,特别是对于常年性ARC。与皮下免疫治疗相比,对这些数据的分析表明,slit片在安全性方面优于皮下免疫治疗,但在疗效方面略低于皮下免疫治疗。slitt片剂的安全性已被充分证明,美国食品和药物管理局在处方信息中列出了所有slitt片剂的安全注意事项。在短暂的治疗中断后重新使用裂片后,没有观察到新的安全性信号。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
35.70%
发文量
106
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Allergy & Asthma Proceedings is a peer reviewed publication dedicated to distributing timely scientific research regarding advancements in the knowledge and practice of allergy, asthma and immunology. Its primary readership consists of allergists and pulmonologists. The goal of the Proceedings is to publish articles with a predominantly clinical focus which directly impact quality of care for patients with allergic disease and asthma. Featured topics include asthma, rhinitis, sinusitis, food allergies, allergic skin diseases, diagnostic techniques, allergens, and treatment modalities. Published material includes peer-reviewed original research, clinical trials and review articles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信