It has always been controversial whether a single allergen performs better than multiple allergens in polysensitized patients during the allergen-specific immunotherapy. This study aimed to examine the clinical effica...It has always been controversial whether a single allergen performs better than multiple allergens in polysensitized patients during the allergen-specific immunotherapy. This study aimed to examine the clinical efficacy of single-allergen sublingual immunotherapy(SLIT) versus multi-allergen subcutaneous immunotherapy(SCIT) and to discover the change of the biomarker IL-4 after 1-year immunotherapy in polysensitized children aged 6–13 years with allergic rhinitis(AR) induced by house dust mites(HDMs). The AR polysensitized children(n=78) were randomly divided into two groups: SLIT group and SCIT group. Patients in the SLIT group sublingually received a single HDM extract and those in the SCIT group were subcutaneously given multiple-allergen extracts(HDM in combination with other clinically relevant allergen extracts). Before and 1 year after the allergen-specific immunotherapy(ASIT), the total nasal symptom scores(TNSS), total medication scores(TMS) and IL-4 levels in peripheral blood mononuclear cells(PBMCs) were compared respectively between the two groups. The results showed that the TNSS were greatly improved, and the TMS and IL-4 levels were significantly decreased after 1-year ASIT in both groups(SLIT group: P<0.001; SCIT group: P<0.001). There were no significant differences in any outcome measures between the two groups(for TNSS: P>0.05; for TMS: P>0.05; for IL-4 levels: P>0.05). It was concluded that the clinical efficacy of single-allergen SLIT is comparable with that of multi-allergen SCIT in 6–13-year-old children with HDM-induced AR.展开更多
<strong>Purpose:</strong> Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) while usually safe, is not without risk. Both sublingual (SLIT) and subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) have the potential for systemic reactions includ...<strong>Purpose:</strong> Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) while usually safe, is not without risk. Both sublingual (SLIT) and subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) have the potential for systemic reactions including anaphylaxis. <strong>Materials and Methods:</strong> A short survey was distributed to fellows of the American Academy of Otolaryngic Allergy (AAOA) (n = 553) in July of 2019 to determine current prescribing practices. <strong>Results:</strong> A total of 103/553 surveys were completed, giving a response rate of 18.6%. Prescribing patterns for SCIT showed 79.6% prescribed auto-injectable epinephrine (AIE) to all patients, 11.7% prescribed only to high risk patients, while 1.9% did not prescribe AIE at all. SLIT showed similar patterns with 71.8% prescribing AIE to all, 11.7% to high risk or letting patient choose, and 6.8% did not prescribe to anyone. Just under half of the physicians responded affirmatively to giving a written anaphylaxis plan to patients on immunotherapy. 48.5% physicians reported treating in-office anaphylaxis due to SCIT or skin testing in the past year, while 6% reported anaphylaxis due to SLIT. <strong>Conclusions:</strong> A majority of otolaryngic allergists are still prescribing AIE for both SCIT and SLIT. With the recent higher costs attributed to AIE as well as drug shortages, some physicians are risk-stratifying patients. While SCIT has a higher risk for treatment related systemic reactions, anaphylaxis does occur with SLIT, thus making it imperative to counsel patients on a clear anaphylaxis protocol in all forms of AIT.展开更多
文摘It has always been controversial whether a single allergen performs better than multiple allergens in polysensitized patients during the allergen-specific immunotherapy. This study aimed to examine the clinical efficacy of single-allergen sublingual immunotherapy(SLIT) versus multi-allergen subcutaneous immunotherapy(SCIT) and to discover the change of the biomarker IL-4 after 1-year immunotherapy in polysensitized children aged 6–13 years with allergic rhinitis(AR) induced by house dust mites(HDMs). The AR polysensitized children(n=78) were randomly divided into two groups: SLIT group and SCIT group. Patients in the SLIT group sublingually received a single HDM extract and those in the SCIT group were subcutaneously given multiple-allergen extracts(HDM in combination with other clinically relevant allergen extracts). Before and 1 year after the allergen-specific immunotherapy(ASIT), the total nasal symptom scores(TNSS), total medication scores(TMS) and IL-4 levels in peripheral blood mononuclear cells(PBMCs) were compared respectively between the two groups. The results showed that the TNSS were greatly improved, and the TMS and IL-4 levels were significantly decreased after 1-year ASIT in both groups(SLIT group: P<0.001; SCIT group: P<0.001). There were no significant differences in any outcome measures between the two groups(for TNSS: P>0.05; for TMS: P>0.05; for IL-4 levels: P>0.05). It was concluded that the clinical efficacy of single-allergen SLIT is comparable with that of multi-allergen SCIT in 6–13-year-old children with HDM-induced AR.
文摘<strong>Purpose:</strong> Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) while usually safe, is not without risk. Both sublingual (SLIT) and subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) have the potential for systemic reactions including anaphylaxis. <strong>Materials and Methods:</strong> A short survey was distributed to fellows of the American Academy of Otolaryngic Allergy (AAOA) (n = 553) in July of 2019 to determine current prescribing practices. <strong>Results:</strong> A total of 103/553 surveys were completed, giving a response rate of 18.6%. Prescribing patterns for SCIT showed 79.6% prescribed auto-injectable epinephrine (AIE) to all patients, 11.7% prescribed only to high risk patients, while 1.9% did not prescribe AIE at all. SLIT showed similar patterns with 71.8% prescribing AIE to all, 11.7% to high risk or letting patient choose, and 6.8% did not prescribe to anyone. Just under half of the physicians responded affirmatively to giving a written anaphylaxis plan to patients on immunotherapy. 48.5% physicians reported treating in-office anaphylaxis due to SCIT or skin testing in the past year, while 6% reported anaphylaxis due to SLIT. <strong>Conclusions:</strong> A majority of otolaryngic allergists are still prescribing AIE for both SCIT and SLIT. With the recent higher costs attributed to AIE as well as drug shortages, some physicians are risk-stratifying patients. While SCIT has a higher risk for treatment related systemic reactions, anaphylaxis does occur with SLIT, thus making it imperative to counsel patients on a clear anaphylaxis protocol in all forms of AIT.
