Research Article

Department of Otolaryngology, Affiliated Eye Ear Nose & Throat Hospital, Fudan University, No. 83, Fenyang Road, Shanghai, 200031, PR China

*Author for correspondence: Tel.: +86 021 6437 2788;

E-mail Address: juanzi861018@126.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8609-9720

Department of Otolaryngology, Affiliated Eye Ear Nose & Throat Hospital, Fudan University, No. 83, Fenyang Road, Shanghai, 200031, PR China

Search for more papers by this author

Published Online:10 Aug 2023https://doi.org/10.2217/imt-2023-0051

View article

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to develop a novel dose strategy for subcutaneous immunotherapy to reduce medical waste and financial burdens for patients who are required to restart subcutaneous immunotherapy. Patients & methods: A prospective, nonrandomized concurrent controlled trial was performed to assess the safety and advantages of the novel dose-adjustment protocol compared with the conventional one. 76 subjects were grouped to receive novel or conventional dose-adjustment protocols. Results: The injections, visits and time needed to reach the pre-established dose with the novel regimen were decreased. Furthermore, there were no differences in side reactions between the two groups. Conclusion: The novel protocol seemed safe and well tolerated, offering the advantages of time efficiency and reduced healthcare costs.

Plain language summary

A common sickness people can acquire from house dust mites is called allergic rhinitis. One way to treat it is with regular shots of a special medicine made from dust mite allergens. This is termed subcutaneous immunotherapy. Patients need to take these shots in their arm for about 3–5 years. Initially, the shot is given once a week for at least 15 weeks; then the frequency can be reduced to every 4–8 weeks. However, if a patient misses their scheduled shot, they may have to start getting weekly shots again. This can lead to a lot of medical waste and can be expensive for patients. Therefore we developed a new way to give these shots. In this study, patients who needed to start weekly shots again were administered this new treatment plan. The new plan significantly reduced the number of doctor’s visits and shots. This new and improved treatment regimen is convenient and saves patients time and money. The side effects of this new treatment method were not higher compared with the traditional treatment. Therefore this new treatment method is safe, cost-effective and patient-friendly. It also saves time and reduces both medical waste and financial costs.

Keywords:

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest; •• of considerable interest

References

1. Zhang Y, Lan F, Zhang L. Advances and highlights in allergic rhinitis. Allergy 76(11), 3383–3389 (2021). •• Describes recent major discoveries related to allergic rhinitis (AR), including risk factors, diagnostic strategies and precise underlying immunological mechanisms, as well as efficient therapies for AR during the global COVID-19 pandemic.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
2. Wang XD, Zheng M, Lou HF et al. An increased prevalence of self-reported allergic rhinitis in major Chinese cities from 2005 to 2011. Allergy 71(8), 1170–1180 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
3. Ozdoganoglu T, Songu M, Inancli HM. Quality of life in allergic rhinitis. Ther. Adv. Respir. Dis. 6(1), 25–39 (2012).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
4. Song Y, Wang M, Xie J et al. Prevalence of allergic rhinitis among elementary and middle school students in Changsha city and its impact on quality of life. J. Laryngol. Otol. 129(11), 1108–1114 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
5. Wheatley LM, Togias A. Clinical practice. Allergic rhinitis. N. Engl. J. Med. 372(5), 456–463 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
6. Avdeeva KS, Reitsma S, Fokkens WJ. Direct and indirect costs of allergic and non-allergic rhinitis in The Netherlands. Allergy 75(11), 2993–2996 (2020).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
7. Niggemann B, Jacobsen L, Dreborg S et al. Five-year follow-up on the PAT study: specific immunotherapy and long-term prevention of asthma in children. Allergy 61(7), 855–859 (2006).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
8. Eng PA, Borer-Reinhold M, Heijnen IA, Gnehm HP. Twelve-year follow-up after discontinuation of preseasonal grass pollen immunotherapy in childhood. Allergy 61(2), 198–201 (2006).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
9. Cheng L, Chen J, Fu Q et al. Chinese Society of Allergy guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of allergic rhinitis. Allergy Asthma Immunol. Res. 10(4), 300 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
10. Acevedo N, Zakzuk J, Caraballo L. House dust mite allergy under changing environments. Allergy Asthma Immunol. Res. 11(4), 450–469 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
11. Tabar AI, Echechipia S, Garcia BE et al. Double-blind comparative study of cluster and conventional immunotherapy schedules with Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 116(1), 109–118 (2005).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
12. Wang CS, Zhang W, Wang XD et al. Comparative study on cluster and conventional immunotherapy with Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus in patients with allergic rhinitis. Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi 46(12), 981–985 (2011).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
13. Tabar AI, Gonzalez DP, Sanchez HC, Basagana TM, Moreno BF, Arina M. Phase II/III clinical trial to assess the tolerability and immunological effect of a new updosing phase of Dermatophagoides mix-based immunotherapy. J. Investig. Allergol. Clin. Immunol. 25(1), 40–46 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
14. Soyyigit S, Guloglu D, Ikinciogullari A et al. Immunologic alterations and efficacy of subcutaneous immunotherapy with Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus in monosensitized and polysensitized patients. Ann. Allergy Asthma Immunol. 116(3), 244–251 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
15. Zhang P, Jia Y, Jing Z, Huang J, Wu H, Sun X. Efficacy and safety of house dust mite subcutaneous immunotherapy in polysensitized children with allergic asthma. Pulm. Pharmacol. Ther. 78, 102187 (2023).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
16. Sahin E, Dizdar D, Dinc ME, Cirik AA. Long-term effects of allergen-specific subcutaneous immunotherapy for house dust mite induced allergic rhinitis. J. Laryngol. Otol. 131(11), 997–1001 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
17. Karthikeyan P, Pulimoottil DT, Sankar R. Long-term effects of allergen-specific subcutaneous immunotherapy for house dust mite induced allergic rhinitis. J. Laryngol. Otol. 132(7), 665 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
18. Feng M, Su Q, Lai X et al. Functional and immunoreactive levels of IgG4 correlate with clinical responses during the maintenance phase of house dust mite immunotherapy. J. Immunol. 200(12), 3897–3904 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
19. Klimek L, Fox GC, Thum-Oltmer S. SCIT with a high-dose house dust mite allergoid is well tolerated: safety data from pooled clinical trials and more than 10 years of daily practice analyzed in different subgroups. Allergo J. Int. 27(5), 131–139 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
20. Huang Y, Wang C, Cao F, Zhao Y, Lou H, Zhang L. Comparison of long-term efficacy of subcutaneous immunotherapy in pediatric and adult patients with allergic rhinitis. Allergy Asthma Immunol. Res. 11(1), 68–78 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
21. Rodriguez-Dominguez A, Berings M, Rohrbach A et al. Molecular profiling of allergen-specific antibody responses may enhance success of specific immunotherapy. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 146(5), 1097–1108 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
22. Jutel M, Bruggenjurgen B, Richter H, Vogelberg C. Real-world evidence of subcutaneous allergoid immunotherapy in house dust mite-induced allergic rhinitis and asthma. Allergy 75(8), 2050–2058 (2020).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
23. Rank MA, Bernstein DI. Improving the safety of immunotherapy. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. Pract. 2(2), 131–135 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
24. Malling HJ. Immunotherapy as an effective tool in allergy treatment. Allergy 53(5), 461–472 (1998).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
25. Calabria CW, Cox L. Accelerated immunotherapy schedules and premedication. Immunol. Allergy Clin. North Am. 31(2), 251–263 (2011).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
26. Greiwe J, Bernstein JA. Accelerated/rush allergen immunotherapy. Allergy Asthma Proc. 43(4), 344–349 (2022). • Accelerated allergy shot schedules for inhalant and venom allergens provide individuals with allergy symptom relief but in a shorter time frame than conventional therapy.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
27. Morais-Almeida M, Arede C, Sampaio G, Borrego LM. Ultrarush schedule of subcutaneous immunotherapy with modified allergen extracts is safe in paediatric age. Asia Pac. Allergy 6(1), 35–42 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
28. Alvarez-Cuesta E, Bousquet J, Canonica GW, Durham SR, Malling HJ, Valovirta E. Standards for practical allergen-specific immunotherapy. Allergy 61 (Suppl. 82), 1–20 (2006).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
29. Morris AE, Marshall GJ. Safety of allergen immunotherapy: a review of premedication and dose adjustment. Immunotherapy 4(3), 315–322 (2012).
CASGoogle Scholar
30. Cox L, Nelson H, Lockey R et al. Allergen immunotherapy: a practice parameter third update. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 127(Suppl. 1), S1–S55 (2011).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
31. Coop CA, Tankersley MS. Dose adjustment practices among allergists for local reactions to immunotherapy. Ann. Allergy Asthma Immunol. 99(1), 77–81 (2007).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
32. Calabria CW, Coop CA, Tankersley MS. The GILL study: glycerin-induced local reactions in immunotherapy. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 121(1), 222–226 (2008).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
33. Cox LS, Sanchez-Borges M, Lockey RF. World Allergy Organization systemic allergic reaction grading system: is a modification needed? J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. Pract. 5(1), 58–62 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
34. Zieglmayer P, Focke-Tejkl M, Schmutz R et al. Mechanisms, safety and efficacy of a B cell epitope-based vaccine for immunotherapy of grass pollen allergy. EBioMedicine 11, 43–57 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
35. Mori F, Pucci N, Rossi ME, de Martino M, Azzari C, Novembre E. Oral desensitization to milk: how to choose the starting dose!. Pediatr. Allergy Immunol. 21(2 Pt 2), e450–e453 (2010).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
36. Xi L, Wang C, Gao Y, Zhang Y, Zhang L. Comparative study of novel dosing schedules for interrupted immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis. Clin. Transl. Allergy 12(4), e12147 (2022). •• An initial dose of 10,000 standard quality units was equally effective and safe for delayed subcutaneous immunotherapy of more than 16 weeks for AR, with the advantage of saving time and reduced dropout rate.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
37. Colas C, Monzon S, Venturini M, Lezaun A. Double-blind, placebo-controlled study with a modified therapeutic vaccine of Salsola kali (Russian thistle) administered through use of a cluster schedule. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 117(4), 810–816 (2006).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
38. Cox L, Calderon M, Pfaar O. Subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy for allergic disease: examining efficacy, safety and cost–effectiveness of current and novel formulations. Immunotherapy 4(6), 601–616 (2012).
CASGoogle Scholar
39. Zhang Y, Zhang L. Management practice of allergic rhinitis in China during the COVID-19 pandemic. Allergy Asthma Immunol. Res. 12(4), 738–742 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
40. Bousquet J, Lockey R, Malling HJ. Allergen immunotherapy: therapeutic vaccines for allergic diseases. A WHO position paper. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 102(4 Pt 1), 558–562 (1998).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
41. Cohn JR, Pizzi A. Determinants of patient compliance with allergen immunotherapy. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 91(3), 734–737 (1993).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
42. Montgomery JR. The need for standardizing the aeroallergen immunotherapy missed-dose adjustment protocol. Allergy Asthma Proc. 29(4), 425–426 (2008).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
43. Portnoy J, Bagstad K, Kanarek H, Pacheco F, Hall B, Barnes C. Premedication reduces the incidence of systemic reactions during inhalant rush immunotherapy with mixtures of allergenic extracts. Ann. Allergy 73(5), 409–418 (1994).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
44. Winslow AW, Turbyville JC, Sublett JW, Sublett JL, Pollard SJ. Comparison of systemic reactions in rush, cluster, and standard-build aeroallergen immunotherapy. Ann. Allergy Asthma Immunol. 117(5), 542–545 (2016). • Compared with previously published rates, Winslow et al. observed a decrease in the incidence of SR for standard, cluster and rush immunotherapy, with peak seasonality from May to October and a female predominance.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
45. Nanda A, O'Connor M, Anand M et al. Dose dependence and time course of the immunologic response to administration of standardized cat allergen extract. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 114(6), 1339–1344 (2004).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
46. Francis JN, James LK, Paraskevopoulos G et al. Grass pollen immunotherapy: IL-10 induction and suppression of late responses precedes IgG4 inhibitory antibody activity. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 121(5), 1120–1125 (2008).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
47. Serrano P, Justicia JL, Sanchez C et al. Systemic tolerability of specific subcutaneous immunotherapy with index-of-reactivity-standardized allergen extracts administered using clustered regimens: a retrospective, observational, multicenter study. Ann. Allergy Asthma Immunol. 102(3), 247–252 (2009).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
48. Zhang L, Wang C, Han D, Wang X, Zhao Y, Liu J. Comparative study of cluster and conventional immunotherapy schedules with Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus in the treatment of persistent allergic rhinitis. Int. Arch. Allergy Immunol. 148(2), 161–169 (2009).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
49. Nielsen L, Johnsen CR, Mosbech H, Poulsen LK, Malling HJ. Antihistamine premedication in specific cluster immunotherapy: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 97(6), 1207–1213 (1996).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
50. Uchida T, Nakagome K, Iemura H et al. Clinical evaluation of rush immunotherapy using house dust mite allergen in Japanese asthmatics. Asia Pac. Allergy 11(3), e32 (2021).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
51. Winther L, Malling HJ, Mosbech H. Allergen-specific immunotherapy in birch- and grass-pollen-allergic rhinitis. II. Side-effects. Allergy 55(9), 827–835 (2000).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
52. Mellerup MT, Hahn GW, Poulsen LK, Malling H. Safety of allergen-specific immunotherapy. Relation between dosage regimen, allergen extract, disease and systemic side-effects during induction treatment. Clin. Exp. Allergy 30(10), 1423–1429 (2000).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
53. Bukantz SC, Bagg AS, Lockey RF. Adverse effects and fatalities associated with subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy. Clin. Allergy Immunol. 21, 455–468 (2008).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
54. Epstein TG, Liss GM, Murphy-Berendts K, Bernstein DI. Risk factors for fatal and nonfatal reactions to subcutaneous immunotherapy: national surveillance study on allergen immunotherapy (2008–2013). Ann. Allergy Asthma Immunol. 116(4), 354–359 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
55. Malling HJ. Minimising the risks of allergen-specific injection immunotherapy. Drug Saf. 23(4), 323–332 (2000).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
56. Bousquet J. Allergen immunotherapy: therapeutic vaccines for allergic diseases. Allergy 53(Suppl. 44), 1–42 (1998).
Google Scholar
57. Hejjaoui A, Dhivert H, Michel FB, Bousquet J. Immunotherapy with a standardized Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus extract. IV. Systemic reactions according to the immunotherapy schedule. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 85(2), 473–479 (1990).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
58. Scranton SE, Gonzalez EG, Waibel KH. Incidence and characteristics of biphasic reactions after allergen immunotherapy. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 123(2), 493–498 (2009).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar

Vol. 15, No. 14

Metrics

Downloaded 39 times

History

Received 1 March 2023

Accepted 10 July 2023

Published online 10 August 2023

Published in print October 2023

Information

Keywords

Author contributions

Both authors participated in the writing and revision of the manuscript and approved the final draft. J Liu was responsible for the analysis and interpretation of data.

Financial & competing interests disclosure

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support by the following fund: Shanghai Municipal Health Commission (grant no. 20204Y0057). The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.

No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.

Ethical conduct of research

The authors state that they have obtained appropriate institutional review board approval or have followed the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki for all human or animal experimental investigations. In addition, for investigations involving human subjects, informed consent has been obtained from the participants involved.

PDF download

A novel dose-adjustment protocol for interrupted subcutaneous immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis

Abstract

Plain language summary

References