Cargando…

A meta-analysis of sublingual allergen immunotherapy and pharmacotherapy in pollen-induced seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

BACKGROUND: The 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 t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Devillier, Philippe, Dreyfus, Jean-François, Demoly, Pascal, Calderón, Moisés A
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4101870/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24885894
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-12-71
_version_ 1782480971254202368
author Devillier, Philippe
Dreyfus, Jean-François
Demoly, Pascal
Calderón, Moisés A
author_facet Devillier, Philippe
Dreyfus, Jean-François
Demoly, Pascal
Calderón, Moisés A
author_sort Devillier, Philippe
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The 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. METHODS: We 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 × (score(Placebo) - score(Active))/score(Placebo). RESULTS: Twenty-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. CONCLUSIONS: In 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4101870
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41018702014-07-18 A meta-analysis of sublingual allergen immunotherapy and pharmacotherapy in pollen-induced seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis Devillier, Philippe Dreyfus, Jean-François Demoly, Pascal Calderón, Moisés A BMC Med Research Article BACKGROUND: The 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. METHODS: We 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 × (score(Placebo) - score(Active))/score(Placebo). RESULTS: Twenty-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. CONCLUSIONS: In 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. BioMed Central 2014-05-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4101870/ /pubmed/24885894 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-12-71 Text en Copyright © 2014 Devillier et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Devillier, Philippe
Dreyfus, Jean-François
Demoly, Pascal
Calderón, Moisés A
A meta-analysis of sublingual allergen immunotherapy and pharmacotherapy in pollen-induced seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis
title A meta-analysis of sublingual allergen immunotherapy and pharmacotherapy in pollen-induced seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis
title_full A meta-analysis of sublingual allergen immunotherapy and pharmacotherapy in pollen-induced seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis
title_fullStr A meta-analysis of sublingual allergen immunotherapy and pharmacotherapy in pollen-induced seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis
title_full_unstemmed A meta-analysis of sublingual allergen immunotherapy and pharmacotherapy in pollen-induced seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis
title_short A meta-analysis of sublingual allergen immunotherapy and pharmacotherapy in pollen-induced seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis
title_sort meta-analysis of sublingual allergen immunotherapy and pharmacotherapy in pollen-induced seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4101870/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24885894
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-12-71
work_keys_str_mv AT devillierphilippe ametaanalysisofsublingualallergenimmunotherapyandpharmacotherapyinpolleninducedseasonalallergicrhinoconjunctivitis
AT dreyfusjeanfrancois ametaanalysisofsublingualallergenimmunotherapyandpharmacotherapyinpolleninducedseasonalallergicrhinoconjunctivitis
AT demolypascal ametaanalysisofsublingualallergenimmunotherapyandpharmacotherapyinpolleninducedseasonalallergicrhinoconjunctivitis
AT calderonmoisesa ametaanalysisofsublingualallergenimmunotherapyandpharmacotherapyinpolleninducedseasonalallergicrhinoconjunctivitis
AT devillierphilippe metaanalysisofsublingualallergenimmunotherapyandpharmacotherapyinpolleninducedseasonalallergicrhinoconjunctivitis
AT dreyfusjeanfrancois metaanalysisofsublingualallergenimmunotherapyandpharmacotherapyinpolleninducedseasonalallergicrhinoconjunctivitis
AT demolypascal metaanalysisofsublingualallergenimmunotherapyandpharmacotherapyinpolleninducedseasonalallergicrhinoconjunctivitis
AT calderonmoisesa metaanalysisofsublingualallergenimmunotherapyandpharmacotherapyinpolleninducedseasonalallergicrhinoconjunctivitis