Sublingual allergen immunotherapy with a liquid birch pollen product in patients with seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis with or without asthma

Background: Sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT) has been demonstrated to be both clinically efficacious and safe. However, in line with the current regulatory guidance from the European Medicines Agency, allergen immunotherapy (AIT) products must demonstrate their efficacy and safety in pivotal phase III trials for registration. Objective: We sought to investigate the efficacy and safety of sublingual high-dose liquid birch pollen extract (40,000 allergy units native [AUN]/mL) in adults with birch pollen allergy. Methods: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group multicenter trial was conducted in 406 adult patients with moderate-to-severe birch pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis with or without mild-to-moderate controlled asthma. Treatment was started 3 to 6 months before the birch pollen season and continued during the season in 40 clinical study centers in 5 European countries. For primary end point assessment, the recommended combined symptom and medication score of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology was used. Secondary end points included quality-of-life assessments, immunologic parameters, and safety. Results: Primary efficacy results demonstrated a significant (P < .0001) and clinically relevant (32%) reduction in the combined symptom and medication score compared with placebo after 3 to 6 months of SLIT. Significantly better rhinoconjunctivitis quality-of-life scores (P < .0001) and the patient's own overall assessment of his or her health status, including the visual analog scale score (Euro Quality of Life Visual Analogue Scale; P = .0025), were also demonstrated. In total, a good safety profile of SLIT was observed. Conclusion: This study confirmed both the clinical efficacy and safety of a sublingual liquid birch pollen extract in adults with birch pollen allergy in a pivotal phase III trial (EudraCT: 2013-005550-30; ClinicalTrials. gov: NCT02231307)

Pharmacoeconomics of Cyclamen europaeum in the management of Acute Rhinosinusitis

Objective. To carry out a pharmacoeconomic analysis of Cyclamen europaeum (CE) in the management of acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) in Spain using data from the PROSINUS study. Study Design. This was a prospective observational study to compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness between therapies including CE vs. other therapies in the management of ARS. Methods. The study was carried out as a secondary analysis of the PROSINUS, combining healthcare resource use, productivity loses, and health outcomes from the observational study with costs representative of the Spanish Health System. Results. CE given as monotherapy appears to be more effective (cure rate) than other monotherapies (15.3% higher, p<0.05) and combination (10.3% higher, p<0.05) therapies. The addition of CE to other single-drug or combination therapies showed a statistically significant improvement in terms of cure rates when adding CE to 2-drug combinations (93.9% vs. 76.5%; p<0.05), and no significant effect when added to combinations of three or more drugs (81.1% vs. 79.8; NS). CE based therapies generally showed lower indirect costs, although only the comparison of CE alone vs. other monotherapies, with a net cost savings of 101 per patient, reached statistical significance (331 vs. 432 , p<0.05). In addition, CE-based therapies show lower cost per cured patient in all comparisons except when CE was used in combination with three or more other drugs. Conclusions. The use of Cyclamen europaeum may be associated to better clinical outcomes at no additional cost for the healthcare system, respect to treatments commonly used for ARS in clinical practice

A prospective study comparing the efficacy and safety of two sublingual birch allergen preparations

Background: SUBLIVAC FIX Birch (SUB-B) is a liquid oral preparation of Betula verrucosa pollen extract for the treatment of allergic rhinitis/rhinoconjuctivitis induced by birch pollen. The major allergen content of SUB-B and Staloral Birch (Stal-B) have been shown to be comparable. In order to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of both products, the present study was designed to investigate efficacy of treatment with SUB-B compared to Stal-B by means of reduction in allergy symptoms assessed by a titrated nasal provocation test (TNPT) in subjects suffering from IgE mediated allergy complaints triggered by birch pollen. Methods: A prospective, randomized, open, blinded endpoint (PROBE), controlled, single-centre study in 74 birch allergic adults was performed. Treatment consisted of either SUB-B (10,000 AUN/ml) or Stal-B (initial phase 10 I. R./ml and maintenance phase 300 I. R./ml) for 16-20 weeks at maintenance dose. The primary efficacy outcome was defined by the difference in change of the TNPT-threshold dose between the two treatment groups at baseline and after completion of treatment. Secondary outcomes included determination of birch pollen specific IgE and IgG levels, safety lab and ECG. During the first 30 days of treatment, subjects were requested to fill out a diary concerning compliance with study medication, occurrence of AEs and the use of concomitant medication. Results: Analysis of the primary efficacy parameter showed that the percentage of subjects showing a beneficial treatment effect was similar in both treatment groups, 33.3% for SUB-B vs. 31.4% for Stal-B in the intention to treat population. Evaluation of the immunologic response, showed that treatment with SUB-B and Stal-B induced similar increases (approximately 2 times) in IgE, IgG and IgG(4) specific for Bet v 1. In total, 143 related adverse events (AEs) were reported. The majority of the AEs was of mild intensity. The same pattern of AEs was observed for both products. No clinically relevant changes in other safety parameters, such as safety laboratory parameters, vital signs, physical examination and ECGs were observed. Conclusion: Taken together, treatment with both products was effective by means of reduction in allergic symptoms during a TNPT. In addition, safety analysis revealed a good tolerability of both SLIT extract

Allergologische Diagnostik von Überempfindlichkeitsreaktionen auf Arzneimittel

Drug hypersensitivity reactions have to be tested to identify the culprit substance. The history includes the general information and specific data concerning used drugs, the classification and circumstances of the reaction. Skin tests are performed in all hypersensitivity reactions with allergic symptoms. Tests should be done between four weeks and six months after clearance of the symptoms by performing skin prick test, intradermal test, patch test or photopatch test. Validated tests for the detection of specific IgE antibodies in the serum are available for only few drugs, especially betalactam antibiotics. Other laboratory tests, e.g., the basophil activation test are done only in special cases. Provocation tests are indicated, if the culprit drug cannot be identified by the above mentioned tests. If possible, the evaluation of provocation tests should rely on objective parameters. The concluding assessment will be discussed with the patient and will be documented in an allergy pass

Allergologische Diagnostik von Überempfindlichkeitsreaktionen auf Arzneimittel

Überempfindlichkeitsreaktionen auf Arzneimittel müssen ausreichend geklärt werden mit dem Ziel, den Auslöser zu identifizieren. Die Anamnese umfasst neben der allgemeinen Anamnese auch Informationen zu angewandten Arzneimitteln, zur Klassifikation und zu den Umständen der Reaktion. Hauttests erfolgen bei allen Reaktionen mit Symptomen allergischer Überempfindlichkeiten mit geeigneten Testkonzentrationen, möglichst zwischen 4 Wochen und 6 Monate nach Abheilung der Reaktion durch Pricktest, Intrakutantest, Epikutantest oder Photopatchtest. Validierte Tests zum Nachweis spezifischer IgE-Antikörper im Serum sind nur für wenige Arzneistoffe (vor allem Betalaktamantibiotika) verfügbar; andere immunologische Labormethoden, z.B. der Basophilen-Aktivierungstest, werden nur in ausgewählten Fällen angewendet. Provokationstests sind indiziert, wenn der Auslöser durch bisherige Untersuchungen nicht mit Sicherheit identifiziert werden kann. Die Bewertung der Ergebnisse von Provokationstests sollte möglichst anhand objektiver Parameter erfolgen. Das Ergebnis der abschließenden Gesamtbeurteilung wird mit dem Patienten ausführlich besprochen und in einem Allergiepass niedergeleg

The treatment of mild upper respiratory tract infections – a position paper with recommendations for best practice

Following the waning severity of COVID-19 due to vaccination and the development of immunity, the current variants of SARS-CoV-2 often lead to mild upper respiratory tract infections (MURTIs), suggesting it is an appropriate time to review the pathogenesis and treatment of such illnesses. The present article reviews the diverse causes of MURTIs and the mechanisms leading to symptomatic illness. Different symptoms of MURTIs develop in a staggered manner and require targeted symptomatic treatment. A wide variety of remedies for home treatment is available, including over-the-counter drugs and plant-derived substances. Recent pharmacological research has increased the understanding of molecular effects, and clinical studies have shown the efficacy of certain herbal remedies. However, the use of subjective endpoints in these clinical studies may suggest limited validity of the results. In this position paper, the importance of patient-centric outcomes, including a subjective perception of improved well-being, is emphasized. A best practice approach for the management of MURTIs, in which pharmacists and physicians create an improved multi-professional healthcare setting and provide healthcare education to patients, is proposed. Pharmacists act as first-line consultants and provide patients with remedies, considering the individual patient’s preferences towards chemical or plant-derived drugs and providing advice for self-monitoring. Physicians act as second-line consultants if symptoms worsen and subsequently initiate appropriate therapies. In conclusion, general awareness of MURTIs should be increased amongst medical professionals and patients, thus improving their management

Management of the polyallergic patient with allergy immunotherapy: A practice-based approach

Background: The great majority (60-80 %) of patients consulting specialist physicians for allergic respiratory disease are polysensitized and thus may be potentially clinically polyallergic. However, management approaches to allergen immunotherapy (AIT) in polysensitized and polyallergic patients are not standardized. Methods: An international group of clinicians with in-depth expertise in AIT product development, clinical trials and clinical practice met to generate up-to-date, unambiguous, pragmatic guidance on AIT in polysensitized and polyallergic patients. The guidance was developed after reviewing (1) the current stance of regulatory bodies and learned societies, (2) the literature data on single- and multi-AIT and (3) the members' confirmed clinical experience with polysensitized patients. Results: AIT is safe and effective in polysensitized and polyallergic patients, and should always be based on the identification of one or more clinically relevant allergens (based on the type and severity of symptoms, the duration of induced symptoms, the impact on quality of life and how difficult an allergen is to avoid). Single-AIT is recommended in polyallergic patients in whom one of the relevant allergens is nevertheless clearly responsible for the most intense and/or bothersome symptoms. Parallel 2-allergen immunotherapy or mixed 2-allergen immunotherapy is indicated in polyallergic patients in whom two causal relevant allergens have a marked clinical and QoL impact. In parallel 2-allergen immunotherapy (whether subcutaneous or sublingual), high-quality, standardized, single-allergen formulations must be administered with an interval of 30 min. Mixing of allergen extracts may be considered, as long as (1) the mixture is technically feasible, (2) the mixture is allowed from a regulatory standpoint, (3) the allergen doses are reduced in proportion to the number of components but are still at concentrations with demonstrated efficacy. Conclusions: Physicians can prescribe AIT (preferably with high-quality, standardized, single-allergen formulations) with confidence in polysensitized and polyallergic patients by focusing on clinical/QoL relevance and safety

Patient engagement and patient support programs in allergy immunotherapy: A call to action for improving long-term adherence

Allergy immunotherapy (AIT) is acknowledged to produce beneficial mid- and long-term clinical and immunologic effects and increased quality of life in patients with allergic respiratory diseases (such as allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and allergic asthma). However, poor adherence to AIT (due to intentional and/or non-intentional factors) is still a barrier to achieving these benefits. There is an urgent need for patient support programs (PSPs) that encompass communication, educational and motivational components. In the field of AIT, a PSP should be capable of (1) improving adherence, (2) boosting patient engagement, (3) explaining how AIT differs from pharmacological allergy treatments; (4) increasing health literacy about chronic, progressive, immunoglobulin-E-mediated immune diseases, (5) helping the patient to understand and manage local or systemic adverse events, and (6) providing and/or predicting local data on aeroallergen levels. We reviewed the literature in this field and have identified a number of practical issues to be addressed when implementing a PSP for AIT: the measurement of adherence, the choice of technologies, reminders, communication channels and content, the use of "push" messaging and social networks, interactivity, and the involvement of caregivers and patient leaders. A key issue is "hi-tech" (i.e. approaches based mainly on information technology) vs. "hi-touch" (based mainly on interaction with humans, i.e. family members, patient mentors and healthcare professionals). We conclude that multistakeholder PSPs (combining patient-, provider and society-based actions) must now be developed and tested with a view to increasing adherence, efficacy and safety in the field of AIT

Enzymatic Synthesis of β-D-Glucuronides in an Enzyme Membrane Reactor

The production of two O-glucuronides in an enzyme membrane reactor on a 100 to 200 mg scale was examined. The aglycons were conjugated with the co-substrate β-D-uridine diphosphoglucuronic acid (UDPGA) in the presence of a guinea-pig liver preparation. The continuous synthesis, which was run in an enzyme membrane reactor, was followed depending on the substrate up to 118 hours or 24 hours, respectively. The reaction was monitored by TLC or HPLC. The purification of the two glucuronides was carried out by ion-exchange chromatography and by reversed-phase HPLC