Dandan Fang, Jiajia Wang, Jingyun Li, Luo Zhang, Yuan Zhang
{"title":"Individual differences in response to dust-mite-allergen specific immunotherapy in allergic rhinitis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.","authors":"Dandan Fang, Jiajia Wang, Jingyun Li, Luo Zhang, Yuan Zhang","doi":"10.1080/1744666X.2025.2499596","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The variability in the efficacy of allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) for nasal symptom control can be attributed to individual differences, to explore the hypothesis of systematic variability in AR symptom alleviation with AIT and to determine whether this variability correlates with AR severity, route of administration, treatment duration, age, or study publication year.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of AIT for dust mite (DM)-induced AR, extracting data on baseline mean, endpoint mean, standard deviation (SD), and participant numbers. A random-slope mixed-effects model (RSMM) was employed to evaluate the differences in variability between the AIT and control groups, as well as to identify potential influencing factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant difference in response variability between the AIT and control groups. The response variability to AIT was not associated with AR severity, route of administration, age, or year of publication. The cohort that underwent 36 months of AIT exhibited a higher degree of response variability compared to the group treated for 6 months.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The present study did not identify systematic variability in individual response to AIT when measured by TNSS alone. More refined outcome measures and more associated factors are needed to explore personalized AIT in the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":12175,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Clinical Immunology","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Clinical Immunology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1744666X.2025.2499596","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: The variability in the efficacy of allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) for nasal symptom control can be attributed to individual differences, to explore the hypothesis of systematic variability in AR symptom alleviation with AIT and to determine whether this variability correlates with AR severity, route of administration, treatment duration, age, or study publication year.
Methods: We reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of AIT for dust mite (DM)-induced AR, extracting data on baseline mean, endpoint mean, standard deviation (SD), and participant numbers. A random-slope mixed-effects model (RSMM) was employed to evaluate the differences in variability between the AIT and control groups, as well as to identify potential influencing factors.
Results: There was no significant difference in response variability between the AIT and control groups. The response variability to AIT was not associated with AR severity, route of administration, age, or year of publication. The cohort that underwent 36 months of AIT exhibited a higher degree of response variability compared to the group treated for 6 months.
Conclusion: The present study did not identify systematic variability in individual response to AIT when measured by TNSS alone. More refined outcome measures and more associated factors are needed to explore personalized AIT in the future.
期刊介绍:
Expert Review of Clinical Immunology (ISSN 1744-666X) provides expert analysis and commentary regarding the performance of new therapeutic and diagnostic modalities in clinical immunology. Members of the International Editorial Advisory Panel of Expert Review of Clinical Immunology are the forefront of their area of expertise. This panel works with our dedicated editorial team to identify the most important and topical review themes and the corresponding expert(s) most appropriate to provide commentary and analysis. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review, and the finished reviews provide an essential contribution to decision-making in clinical immunology.
Articles focus on the following key areas:
• Therapeutic overviews of specific immunologic disorders highlighting optimal therapy and prospects for new medicines
• Performance and benefits of newly approved therapeutic agents
• New diagnostic approaches
• Screening and patient stratification
• Pharmacoeconomic studies
• New therapeutic indications for existing therapies
• Adverse effects, occurrence and reduction
• Prospects for medicines in late-stage trials approaching regulatory approval
• Novel treatment strategies
• Epidemiological studies
• Commentary and comparison of treatment guidelines
Topics include infection and immunity, inflammation, host defense mechanisms, congenital and acquired immunodeficiencies, anaphylaxis and allergy, systemic immune diseases, organ-specific inflammatory diseases, transplantation immunology, endocrinology and diabetes, cancer immunology, neuroimmunology and hematological diseases.