covid
Buscar en
Allergologia et Immunopathologia
Toda la web
Inicio Allergologia et Immunopathologia Randomized open comparison of the safety of SLIT in a no-updosing and traditiona...
Información de la revista
Vol. 34. Núm. 2.
Páginas 82-83 (marzo 2006)
Compartir
Compartir
Descargar PDF
Más opciones de artículo
Vol. 34. Núm. 2.
Páginas 82-83 (marzo 2006)
Acceso a texto completo
Randomized open comparison of the safety of SLIT in a no-updosing and traditional updosing schedule in patients with Parietaria allergy
Estudio comparativo abierto y aleatorio de la seguridad de la inmunoterapia sublingual con una pauta no progresiva y otra progresiva tradicional en pacientes alérgicos a parietaria
Visitas
3665
Laura Guerraa, Enrico Compalatia, Anthi Rogkakoua, Silvia Pecorab, Giovanni Passalacquaa, Giorgio Walter Canonicaa
a Allergy and Respiratory Diseases. University of Genoa.
b ALK-Abellò. Lainate. Milan. Italy.
Este artículo ha recibido
Información del artículo
Resumen
Texto completo
Bibliografía
Descargar PDF
Estadísticas
Background: Due to optimal safety of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), it was suggested that a slow up-dosing phase maybe not necessary, and therefore the treatment will be more patient-friendly, avoiding dosing mistakes. Patients: Twenty adult patients suffering allergic rhinitis due to Parietaria, were enrolled. Half of them received the traditional schedule and the other half immediately started with 200 STU. Results: No difference was observed between the traditional up-dosing treatment schedule and no-updosing treatment schedule in terms of side effects, even mild local side effects was grater with traditional regimen.
Keywords:
Sublingual immunotherapy
Steady-dose
Safety
Antecedentes: Debido a la óptima seguridad de la inmunoterapia sublingual, se sugirió que la fase de aumento progresivo de la dosis podría no ser necesaria, y por lo tanto el tratamiento sería más fácil para los pacientes, evitándose los errores de dosificación. Pacientes: Se seleccionaron 20 pacientes adultos con rinitis alérgica por sensibilización a Parietaria. La mitad de ellos recibió la pauta tradicional y la otra mitad empezó con la dosis de 200 STU. Resultados: No ser observó diferencia entre la pauta tradicional y la que se inició con la dosis de mantenimiento, en relación con efectos colaterales, incluso hubo efectos locales más frecuentes con el régimen tradicional.
Palabras clave:
Inmunoterapia sublingual
Seguridad
Pauta progresiva
Pauta rápida
Texto completo

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is now recognized as a viable alternative to the injection route 1. Due to the optimal safety, and the absence of systemic severe side effects, it was suggested that a slow up-dosing phase maybe not necessary, and recent trials showed that starting the SLIT course with the maintenance dose does not lead to remarkable increase in side effects 2. Omitting the updosing phase, which requires the use of different vials of the product, is expected to make the treatment more patient-friendly and to avoid dosing mistakes. Based on this background we performed an exploratory study to compare the safety of the traditional and no-updosing schedules in allergic patients.

Consecutive adult outpatients suffering from intermittent or persistent allergic rhinitis (with/without mild asthma) due to Parietaria, and fulfilling the criteria for prescribing immunotherapy 3, were enrolled. Sensitization to Parietaria was confirmed by skin prick test and/or RAST assay, and the symptoms had to have been present for at least two years. Patients were randomized, according to a computer-generated list, to receive either the traditional build-up or a steady dosage schedule (starting with the maintenance dose). SLITone® (ALK-Abelló, Lainate, Milan) was started about two months before the pollen season. The traditional schedule involved an updosing phase where the maintenance dose of 200 Standard Therapeutic Units (STU) was reached in about 15 days. In the no-updosing group, patients immediately started with 200 STU. SLITone® was given once daily for three months, cumulating a dosage of 85-90 mcg Par j 1. All patients were required to report on a structured diary card any adverse event occurring at each dose. Adverse events were subdivided into local (oral itching/ swelling) and systemic (urticaria, asthma, rhinitis, gastrointestinal complaints, anaphylaxis) and graded as mild (no need for treatment or dose adjusting), moderate (need for drugs/medical advice or dose adjusting or SLITone® discontinuation), and severe (life-threatening or hospitalization or emergency care needed) 4. Skin tests, CAP-RAST and methacholine challenge were evaluated before starting SLITone® and after 3 months (in pollen season). Patients also had to rate the tolerability of SLITone® on a visual analog scale (0 worst to 10 best) at the end of the treatment course.

Twenty patients were enrolled (11 men, 9 women, age range 18-45 years). We observed mild oral itching in one patient in the no-updosing group and in 8 patients in the traditional updosing group. In no case was SLITone® discontinued or dose adjusted. In the patient on no-updosing schedule, side effects disappeared within the first week, whereas in the traditional build-up group they persisted for about 15 days. The tolerability on the VAS was rated by patients 9.6/10 and 9.1/10 respectively. No change in the CAP-RAST and skin test positivity at the end of SLIT was found in the two groups versus baseline values. The methacholine PD20 provocation dose at the beginning (out-season) and end (in-season) of treatment was 670.2 vs 685 mcg in the updosing group and 741.2 VS 836.5 in the no-updosing (non-significant), respectively.

This exploratory observational study performed in an open way showed that no difference exists between the traditional up-dosing treatment schedule and no-updosing treatment schedule in terms of side effects. This is in accordance with a recent review 5. Noticeably, the occurrence of mild local side effects was even greater with the traditional regimen. SLIT seemed also to prevent the usually observed increase in bronchial reactivity during the pollen season. Based on this result, we speculate that future double blind placebo controlled trials could be conducted with no-updosing schedule, which is easier to manage.


Correspondence.
Giovanni Passalacqua, MD
Allergy & Respiratory Diseases
Department of Internal Medicine
Padiglione Maragliano
L.go R. Benzi 10, 16132 Genoa. Italy
E-mail: passalacqua@unige.it

Bibliography
[1]
Passalacqua G, Guerra L, Pasquali M, Lombardi C, Canonica GW..
Efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy..
Ann Allergy asthma Immunol, 93 (2004), pp. 3-12
[2]
Andrè C, Perrin-Fayolle M, Grosclaude M, Couturier P, Basset D, Comillon J, et al..
A double blind placebo controlled evaluation of SLIT with a standardized ragweed extract in patients with seasonal rhinitis..
Int Arch Allergy Immunol, 131 (2003), pp. 111-8
[3]
In: Bousquet J, et al, editors. Allergy. 1998;57 Suppl 54:5-15.
[4]
Lombardi C, Gargioni S, Melchiorre A, Tiri A, Falagiani P, Canonica GW, et al..
Safety of sublingual immunotherapy in adults: a post marketing surveillance study..
Allergy, 56 (2001), pp. 989-92
[5]
Gidaro GB, Marcucci F, Sensi L, Incorvaia C, Frati F, Ciprandi G..
The safety of sublingual-swallow immunotherapy: An analysis of published studies..
Clin Exp Allergy, 35 (2005), pp. 565-71
Descargar PDF
Opciones de artículo
es en pt

¿Es usted profesional sanitario apto para prescribir o dispensar medicamentos?

Are you a health professional able to prescribe or dispense drugs?

Você é um profissional de saúde habilitado a prescrever ou dispensar medicamentos