https://www.worldallergy.org/UserFiles/file/SubImmuno-pkguide-2015-09-v1-4web.pdf

Sublingual immunotherapy: World Allergy Organization position paper 2013 update

Background
Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is an effective treatment for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (AR) with or without asthma. It is important to note that due to the complex interaction between patient, allergy triggers, symptomatology and vaccines used for AIT, some patients do not respond optimally to the treatment. Furthermore, there are no validated or generally accepted candidate biomarkers that are predictive of the clinical response to AIT. Clinical management of patients receiving AIT and efficacy in randomised controlled trials for drug development could be enhanced by predictive biomarkers.

Method
The EAACI taskforce reviewed all candidate biomarkers used in clinical trials of AR patients with/without asthma in a literature review. Biomarkers were grouped into seven domains: (i) IgE (total IgE, specific IgE and sIgE/Total IgE ratio), (ii) IgG-subclasses (sIgG1, sIgG4 including SIgE/IgG4 ratio), (iii) Serum inhibitory activity for IgE (IgE-FAB and IgE-BF), (iv) Basophil activation, (v) Cytokines and Chemokines, (vi) Cellular markers (T regulatory cells, B regulatory cells and dendritic cells) and (vii) In vivo biomarkers (including provocation tests?).

Results
All biomarkers were reviewed in the light of their potential advantages as well as their respective drawbacks. Unmet needs and specific recommendations on all seven domains were addressed.

Conclusions
It is recommended to explore the use of allergen-specific IgG4 as a biomarker for compliance. sIgE/tIgE and IgE-FAB are considered as potential surrogate candidate biomarkers. Cytokine/chemokines and cellular reponses provided insight into the mechanisms of AIT. More studies for confirmation and interpretation of the possible association with the clinical response to AIT are needed.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/all.13138

Biomarkers for monitoring clinical efficacy of allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and allergic asthma: an EAACI Position Paper

Background: The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is in the process of developing Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) for Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis. To inform the development of clinical recommendations, we undertook a systematic review to assess the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and safety of AIT in the management of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. Methods: We searched nine international biomedical databases for published, in-progress, and unpublished evidence. Studies were independently screened by two reviewers against predefined eligibility criteria and critically appraised using established instruments. Our primary outcomes of interest were symptom, medication, and combined symptom and medication scores. Secondary outcomes of interest included cost-effectiveness and safety. Data were descriptively summarized and then quantitatively synthesized using random-effects meta-analyses. Results: We identified 5960 studies of which 160 studies satisfied our eligibility criteria. There was a substantial body of evidence demonstrating significant reductions in standardized mean differences (SMD) of symptom (SMD −0.53, 95% CI −0.63, −0.42), medication (SMD −0.37, 95% CI −0.49, −0.26), and combined symptom and medication (SMD −0.49, 95% CI −0.69, −0.30) scores while on treatment that were robust to prespecified sensitivity analyses. There was in comparison a more modest body of evidence on effectiveness post-discontinuation of AIT, suggesting a benefit in relation to symptom scores. Conclusions: AIT is effective in improving symptom, medication, and combined symptom and medication scores in patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis while on treatment, and there is some evidence suggesting that these benefits are maintained in relation to symptom scores after discontinuation of therapy.

/pdf/allergen-immunotherapy-for-allergic-rhinoconjunctivitis-a-2egr01z8ch.pdf

Allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This is an updated guideline for the diagnosis and management of allergic and non-allergic rhinitis, first published in 2007. It was produced by the Standards of Care Committee of the British Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, using accredited methods. Allergic rhinitis is common and affects 10–15% of children and 26% of adults in the UK, it affects quality of life, school and work attendance, and is a risk factor for development of asthma. Allergic rhinitis is diagnosed by history and examination, supported by specific allergy tests. Topical nasal corticosteroids are the treatment of choice for moderate to severe disease. Combination therapy with intranasal corticosteroid plus intranasal antihistamine is more effective than either alone and provides second line treatment for those with rhinitis poorly controlled on monotherapy. Immunotherapy is highly effective when the specific allergen is the responsible driver for the symptoms. Treatment of rhinitis is associated with benefits for asthma. Non-allergic rhinitis also is a risk factor for the development of asthma and may be eosinophilic and steroid-responsive or neurogenic and non- inflammatory. Non-allergic rhinitis may be a presenting complaint for systemic disorders such as granulomatous or eosinophilic polyangiitis, and sarcoidoisis. Infective rhinitis can be caused by viruses, and less commonly by bacteria, fungi and protozoa.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/cea.12953

BSACI guideline for the diagnosis and management of allergic and non‐allergic rhinitis (Revised Edition 2017; First edition 2007)

Rhinitis is an umbrella term that encompasses many different subtypes, several of which still elude complete characterization. The concept of phenotyping, being the definition of disease subtypes on the basis of clinical presentation, has been well established in the last decade. Classification of rhinitis entities on the basis of phenotypes has facilitated their characterization and has helped practicing clinicians to efficiently approach rhinitis patients. Recently, the concept of endotypes, that is, the definition of disease subtypes on the basis of underlying pathophysiology, has emerged. Phenotypes/endotypes are dynamic, overlapping, and may evolve into one another, thus rendering clear-cut definitions difficult. Nevertheless, a phenotype-/endotype-based classification approach could lead toward the application of stratified and personalized medicine in the rhinitis field. In this PRACTALL document, rhinitis phenotypes and endotypes are described, and rhinitis diagnosis and management approaches focusing on those phenotypes/endotypes are presented and discussed. We emphasize the concept of control-based management, which transcends all rhinitis subtypes.

/pdf/phenotypes-and-endotypes-of-rhinitis-and-their-impact-on-286doa3psf.pdf

Phenotypes and endotypes of rhinitis and their impact on management: a PRACTALL report.

Background Previous trials have demonstrated the efficacy, safety, and optimal dosage of the 5-grass pollen sublingual tablet for adults and children with grass pollen–induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. Objectives We sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 300 index of reactivity (IR) 5-grass pollen sublingual tablet in US adults. Methods Adults with grass pollen allergy and Rhinoconjunctivitis Total Symptom Scores of 12 or greater (scale, 0-18) during the previous grass pollen season were randomized in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study to receive 300IR 5-grass pollen sublingual tablet or placebo starting 4 months before and continuing through the pollen season. The primary efficacy end point was the daily Combined Score (CS; scale, 0-3), which integrates symptoms and rescue medication use. Results Four hundred seventy-three participants were randomized. The mean daily CS over the pollen period was significantly lower in the active treatment group versus the placebo group (least-squares mean difference: −0.13; 95% CI, −0.19 to −0.06; P  = .0003; relative reduction: 28.2%; 95% CI, 13.0% to 43.4%). In placebo-treated participants, the daily CS least-squares mean was 0.32 in the subgroup with baseline timothy grass–specific serum IgE of less than 0.1 kU/L (n = 23) and 0.46 in those with baseline timothy grass–specific serum IgE of 0.1 kU/L or greater (n = 204). The most frequent reported adverse events were oral pruritus, throat irritation, and nasopharyngitis. There were no reports of anaphylaxis, and no actively treated participant received epinephrine. Conclusion In US adults with grass pollen–induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, preseasonal and coseasonal treatment with 300IR 5-grass pollen sublingual tablet demonstrated clinically meaningful efficacy, especially in study subjects with measurable timothy grass–specific serum IgE. Use of 300IR 5-grass pollen sublingual tablet was safe and well tolerated. A requirement for a measurable level of allergen-specific serum IgE should be considered in future studies in this field.

https://www.jacionline.org/article/S0091-6749(12)01447-9/pdf

Laurence Ambroisine

Papers

Clinical efficacy of 300IR 5-grass pollen sublingual tablet in a US study: the importance of allergen-specific serum IgE.

161 Efficacy and Safety of 300IR 5-Grass Pollen Sublingual Allergen Immunotherapy Tablets in us Adults With Grass-Pollen Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis.