反应性指标-液体舌下免疫治疗变应性鼻结膜炎的疗效:随机研究的系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 3.3 Q2 ALLERGY
Frontiers in allergy Pub Date : 2025-06-05 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/falgy.2025.1597003
Danilo Di Bona, Andrea Di Biase, Giovanni Paoletti, Rosanna Villani, Gaetano Serviddio, Josiane Cognet-Sicé, Silvia Scurati, Giorgio Walter Canonica
{"title":"反应性指标-液体舌下免疫治疗变应性鼻结膜炎的疗效:随机研究的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Danilo Di Bona, Andrea Di Biase, Giovanni Paoletti, Rosanna Villani, Gaetano Serviddio, Josiane Cognet-Sicé, Silvia Scurati, Giorgio Walter Canonica","doi":"10.3389/falgy.2025.1597003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a well-established treatment with demonstrated efficacy and safety. However, variability in study outcomes remains a challenge, driven by differences in patient characteristics, study designs, and treatment durations. Moreover, disparities in allergen composition and quality of AIT products across manufacturers contribute to significant heterogeneity, complicating the interpretation of efficacy and safety data. This meta-analysis focuses on assessing the efficacy and safety of a single manufacturer's liquid sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC). By narrowing the scope to one specific product, this study seeks to reduce variability linked to product differences, aligning with recommendations from the World Allergy Organization to improve the reliability of meta-analytic findings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on index of reactivity (IR) SLIT liquid formulations of various allergens were identified through comprehensive searches in electronic databases (MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrial.gov) up to December 2024, complemented by manual searches. Data on populations, treatments, and outcomes were extracted. Efficacy was evaluated by calculating the standardized mean difference (SMD) for symptoms and medication use. Subgroup analyses were performed by age, allergen type and sensitization status. Asthma comorbidity, dose and duration of SLIT were evaluated using meta-regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 25 RCTs (1,830 patients) provided data on symptom scores (SS), and 19 RCTs (1,555 patients) reported on medication scores (MS). Analysis revealed that IR-SLIT-liquid was significantly more effective than placebo in reducing both SS (SMD: -0.30; 95% CI: -0.41 to -0.18; <i>P</i> < 0.0001) and MS (SMD: -0.51; 95% CI: -0.72 to -0.29; <i>P</i> < 0.0001). Efficacy outcomes were consistent regardless of factors such as age, allergen type (grass, house dust mites, trees, weeds), sensitization status, asthma presence, or cumulative dose, while longer treatment durations were associated with improved efficacy. No significant adverse events were reported.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This meta-analysis underscores the clinical effectiveness and safety of IR-SLIT-liquid, confirming its role as a reliable etiologic treatment for patients with ARC, for all allergens and age groups. The effect size is comparable to other immunotherapy options. The low rates of adverse events and treatment withdrawals highlight favorable tolerability and high level of patient adherence.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>https://inplasy.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/INPLASY-Protocol-7305.pdf, INPLASY 202510049.</p>","PeriodicalId":73062,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in allergy","volume":"6 ","pages":"1597003"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12176734/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of index of reactivity-liquid sublingual immunotherapy in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized studies.\",\"authors\":\"Danilo Di Bona, Andrea Di Biase, Giovanni Paoletti, Rosanna Villani, Gaetano Serviddio, Josiane Cognet-Sicé, Silvia Scurati, Giorgio Walter Canonica\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/falgy.2025.1597003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a well-established treatment with demonstrated efficacy and safety. However, variability in study outcomes remains a challenge, driven by differences in patient characteristics, study designs, and treatment durations. Moreover, disparities in allergen composition and quality of AIT products across manufacturers contribute to significant heterogeneity, complicating the interpretation of efficacy and safety data. This meta-analysis focuses on assessing the efficacy and safety of a single manufacturer's liquid sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC). By narrowing the scope to one specific product, this study seeks to reduce variability linked to product differences, aligning with recommendations from the World Allergy Organization to improve the reliability of meta-analytic findings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on index of reactivity (IR) SLIT liquid formulations of various allergens were identified through comprehensive searches in electronic databases (MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrial.gov) up to December 2024, complemented by manual searches. Data on populations, treatments, and outcomes were extracted. Efficacy was evaluated by calculating the standardized mean difference (SMD) for symptoms and medication use. Subgroup analyses were performed by age, allergen type and sensitization status. Asthma comorbidity, dose and duration of SLIT were evaluated using meta-regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 25 RCTs (1,830 patients) provided data on symptom scores (SS), and 19 RCTs (1,555 patients) reported on medication scores (MS). Analysis revealed that IR-SLIT-liquid was significantly more effective than placebo in reducing both SS (SMD: -0.30; 95% CI: -0.41 to -0.18; <i>P</i> < 0.0001) and MS (SMD: -0.51; 95% CI: -0.72 to -0.29; <i>P</i> < 0.0001). Efficacy outcomes were consistent regardless of factors such as age, allergen type (grass, house dust mites, trees, weeds), sensitization status, asthma presence, or cumulative dose, while longer treatment durations were associated with improved efficacy. No significant adverse events were reported.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This meta-analysis underscores the clinical effectiveness and safety of IR-SLIT-liquid, confirming its role as a reliable etiologic treatment for patients with ARC, for all allergens and age groups. The effect size is comparable to other immunotherapy options. The low rates of adverse events and treatment withdrawals highlight favorable tolerability and high level of patient adherence.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>https://inplasy.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/INPLASY-Protocol-7305.pdf, INPLASY 202510049.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73062,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in allergy\",\"volume\":\"6 \",\"pages\":\"1597003\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12176734/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in allergy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/falgy.2025.1597003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ALLERGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in allergy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/falgy.2025.1597003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

过敏原免疫疗法(AIT)是一种成熟的治疗方法,具有良好的疗效和安全性。然而,由于患者特征、研究设计和治疗持续时间的差异,研究结果的可变性仍然是一个挑战。此外,不同制造商的AIT产品的过敏原组成和质量差异导致了显著的异质性,使疗效和安全性数据的解释复杂化。本荟萃分析的重点是评估单一制造商的液体舌下免疫疗法(SLIT)治疗变应性鼻结膜炎(ARC)的疗效和安全性。通过将范围缩小到一种特定产品,本研究旨在减少与产品差异相关的可变性,与世界过敏组织的建议一致,以提高荟萃分析结果的可靠性。方法:通过综合检索截至2024年12月的电子数据库(MEDLINE、ISI Web of Science、Cochrane Library和ClinicalTrial.gov),结合人工检索,确定各种过敏原反应性指数(IR) SLIT液体配方的随机对照试验(rct)。提取有关人群、治疗和结果的数据。通过计算症状和药物使用的标准化平均差(SMD)来评估疗效。按年龄、过敏原类型和致敏状态进行亚组分析。采用meta-regression评估哮喘合并症、SLIT的剂量和持续时间。结果:共有25项rct(1830例患者)提供了症状评分(SS)的数据,19项rct(1555例患者)报告了药物评分(MS)的数据。分析显示IR-SLIT-liquid在降低SS方面明显优于安慰剂(SMD: -0.30;95% CI: -0.41 ~ -0.18;讨论:该荟萃分析强调了ir - slit -液体的临床有效性和安全性,证实了其作为ARC患者可靠的病因治疗方法的作用,适用于所有过敏原和年龄组。效果大小与其他免疫治疗方案相当。低发生率的不良事件和治疗退出突出了良好的耐受性和高水平的患者依从性。系统评审注册:https://inplasy.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/INPLASY-Protocol-7305.pdf, INPLASY 202510049。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Efficacy of index of reactivity-liquid sublingual immunotherapy in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized studies.

Introduction: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a well-established treatment with demonstrated efficacy and safety. However, variability in study outcomes remains a challenge, driven by differences in patient characteristics, study designs, and treatment durations. Moreover, disparities in allergen composition and quality of AIT products across manufacturers contribute to significant heterogeneity, complicating the interpretation of efficacy and safety data. This meta-analysis focuses on assessing the efficacy and safety of a single manufacturer's liquid sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC). By narrowing the scope to one specific product, this study seeks to reduce variability linked to product differences, aligning with recommendations from the World Allergy Organization to improve the reliability of meta-analytic findings.

Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on index of reactivity (IR) SLIT liquid formulations of various allergens were identified through comprehensive searches in electronic databases (MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrial.gov) up to December 2024, complemented by manual searches. Data on populations, treatments, and outcomes were extracted. Efficacy was evaluated by calculating the standardized mean difference (SMD) for symptoms and medication use. Subgroup analyses were performed by age, allergen type and sensitization status. Asthma comorbidity, dose and duration of SLIT were evaluated using meta-regression.

Results: A total of 25 RCTs (1,830 patients) provided data on symptom scores (SS), and 19 RCTs (1,555 patients) reported on medication scores (MS). Analysis revealed that IR-SLIT-liquid was significantly more effective than placebo in reducing both SS (SMD: -0.30; 95% CI: -0.41 to -0.18; P < 0.0001) and MS (SMD: -0.51; 95% CI: -0.72 to -0.29; P < 0.0001). Efficacy outcomes were consistent regardless of factors such as age, allergen type (grass, house dust mites, trees, weeds), sensitization status, asthma presence, or cumulative dose, while longer treatment durations were associated with improved efficacy. No significant adverse events were reported.

Discussion: This meta-analysis underscores the clinical effectiveness and safety of IR-SLIT-liquid, confirming its role as a reliable etiologic treatment for patients with ARC, for all allergens and age groups. The effect size is comparable to other immunotherapy options. The low rates of adverse events and treatment withdrawals highlight favorable tolerability and high level of patient adherence.

Systematic review registration: https://inplasy.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/INPLASY-Protocol-7305.pdf, INPLASY 202510049.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信