Cargando…

Efficacy and safety of 5-grass pollen sublingual immunotherapy tablets in patients with different clinical profiles of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

SUMMARY: BACKGROUND: The optimal dose of grass pollen tablets for sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis patients was previously established in a multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in 628 adults. Patients were randomized to receive once-daily 5...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Malling, H-J, Montagut, A, Melac, M, Patriarca, G, Panzner, P, Seberova, E, Didier, A
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4233960/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19134019
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2222.2008.03152.x
_version_ 1782344781480853504
author Malling, H-J
Montagut, A
Melac, M
Patriarca, G
Panzner, P
Seberova, E
Didier, A
author_facet Malling, H-J
Montagut, A
Melac, M
Patriarca, G
Panzner, P
Seberova, E
Didier, A
author_sort Malling, H-J
collection PubMed
description SUMMARY: BACKGROUND: The optimal dose of grass pollen tablets for sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis patients was previously established in a multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in 628 adults. Patients were randomized to receive once-daily 5-grass pollen sublingual tablets of 100 IR (index of reactivity), 300 IR or 500 IR, or placebo starting 4 months before the pollen season. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this complementary analysis was to determine whether 300 IR 5-grass pollen SLIT-tablets is effective in different subtypes of patients who are allergic to grass pollen. METHODS: Different subgroups could be identified regarding comorbidities (with or without asthma during the grass-pollen season), sensitization (mono/polysensitization) and symptom severity. An additional exploratory analysis was performed within four subgroups based on pre-treatment assessment: Group 1=high specific IgE; Group 2=high symptom scores; Group 3=high skin sensitivity; Group 4=any of Group 1, 2 or 3. RESULTS: Asthma and sensitization status were not significant covariates as the average Rhinoconjunctivitis Total Symptom Score (RTSS) was identical for patients with and without grass-pollen asthma, as well as for mono- and polysensitized patients. Across the four subgroups, average RTSSs (± SD) for the optimal dosage (300 IR) were 3.91 ± 3.16, 3.83 ± 3.14, 2.55 ± 2.13 and 3.61 ± 2.97, for subgroups 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. ancova showed that in Group 1 average RTSS did not differ significantly with different doses of SLIT. In Groups 2, 3 and 4, doses of 300 IR and 500 IR were significantly more effective than 100 IR and placebo (P0.035). All doses of SLIT administered in this study can be considered safe in the patients investigated. CONCLUSIONS: The risk-benefit ratio validates the use of 300 IR tablets in clinical practice in all of these patient subgroups, regardless of severity profile, sensitization status and presence of asthma.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4233960
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher Blackwell Publishing Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42339602014-12-03 Efficacy and safety of 5-grass pollen sublingual immunotherapy tablets in patients with different clinical profiles of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis Malling, H-J Montagut, A Melac, M Patriarca, G Panzner, P Seberova, E Didier, A Clin Exp Allergy Original Articles: Editor's Choice: Clinical Allergy SUMMARY: BACKGROUND: The optimal dose of grass pollen tablets for sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis patients was previously established in a multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in 628 adults. Patients were randomized to receive once-daily 5-grass pollen sublingual tablets of 100 IR (index of reactivity), 300 IR or 500 IR, or placebo starting 4 months before the pollen season. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this complementary analysis was to determine whether 300 IR 5-grass pollen SLIT-tablets is effective in different subtypes of patients who are allergic to grass pollen. METHODS: Different subgroups could be identified regarding comorbidities (with or without asthma during the grass-pollen season), sensitization (mono/polysensitization) and symptom severity. An additional exploratory analysis was performed within four subgroups based on pre-treatment assessment: Group 1=high specific IgE; Group 2=high symptom scores; Group 3=high skin sensitivity; Group 4=any of Group 1, 2 or 3. RESULTS: Asthma and sensitization status were not significant covariates as the average Rhinoconjunctivitis Total Symptom Score (RTSS) was identical for patients with and without grass-pollen asthma, as well as for mono- and polysensitized patients. Across the four subgroups, average RTSSs (± SD) for the optimal dosage (300 IR) were 3.91 ± 3.16, 3.83 ± 3.14, 2.55 ± 2.13 and 3.61 ± 2.97, for subgroups 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. ancova showed that in Group 1 average RTSS did not differ significantly with different doses of SLIT. In Groups 2, 3 and 4, doses of 300 IR and 500 IR were significantly more effective than 100 IR and placebo (P0.035). All doses of SLIT administered in this study can be considered safe in the patients investigated. CONCLUSIONS: The risk-benefit ratio validates the use of 300 IR tablets in clinical practice in all of these patient subgroups, regardless of severity profile, sensitization status and presence of asthma. Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2009-03 /pmc/articles/PMC4233960/ /pubmed/19134019 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2222.2008.03152.x Text en © 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles: Editor's Choice: Clinical Allergy
Malling, H-J
Montagut, A
Melac, M
Patriarca, G
Panzner, P
Seberova, E
Didier, A
Efficacy and safety of 5-grass pollen sublingual immunotherapy tablets in patients with different clinical profiles of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis
title Efficacy and safety of 5-grass pollen sublingual immunotherapy tablets in patients with different clinical profiles of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis
title_full Efficacy and safety of 5-grass pollen sublingual immunotherapy tablets in patients with different clinical profiles of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis
title_fullStr Efficacy and safety of 5-grass pollen sublingual immunotherapy tablets in patients with different clinical profiles of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy and safety of 5-grass pollen sublingual immunotherapy tablets in patients with different clinical profiles of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis
title_short Efficacy and safety of 5-grass pollen sublingual immunotherapy tablets in patients with different clinical profiles of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis
title_sort efficacy and safety of 5-grass pollen sublingual immunotherapy tablets in patients with different clinical profiles of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis
topic Original Articles: Editor's Choice: Clinical Allergy
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4233960/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19134019
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2222.2008.03152.x
work_keys_str_mv AT mallinghj efficacyandsafetyof5grasspollensublingualimmunotherapytabletsinpatientswithdifferentclinicalprofilesofallergicrhinoconjunctivitis
AT montaguta efficacyandsafetyof5grasspollensublingualimmunotherapytabletsinpatientswithdifferentclinicalprofilesofallergicrhinoconjunctivitis
AT melacm efficacyandsafetyof5grasspollensublingualimmunotherapytabletsinpatientswithdifferentclinicalprofilesofallergicrhinoconjunctivitis
AT patriarcag efficacyandsafetyof5grasspollensublingualimmunotherapytabletsinpatientswithdifferentclinicalprofilesofallergicrhinoconjunctivitis
AT panznerp efficacyandsafetyof5grasspollensublingualimmunotherapytabletsinpatientswithdifferentclinicalprofilesofallergicrhinoconjunctivitis
AT seberovae efficacyandsafetyof5grasspollensublingualimmunotherapytabletsinpatientswithdifferentclinicalprofilesofallergicrhinoconjunctivitis
AT didiera efficacyandsafetyof5grasspollensublingualimmunotherapytabletsinpatientswithdifferentclinicalprofilesofallergicrhinoconjunctivitis