McMasterLogo_New-2017-300x165
Back
Clinician Article

Sublingual immunotherapy for the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma: a systematic review.



  • Lin SY
  • Erekosima N
  • Kim JM
  • Ramanathan M
  • Suarez-Cuervo C
  • Chelladurai Y, et al.
JAMA. 2013 Mar 27;309(12):1278-88. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.2049. (Review)
PMID: 23532243
Read abstract Read evidence summary Read full text
Disciplines
  • Allergy and Immunology
    Relevance - 7/7
    Newsworthiness - 6/7
  • Respirology/Pulmonology
    Relevance - 6/7
    Newsworthiness - 6/7
  • Family Medicine (FM)/General Practice (GP)
    Relevance - 5/7
    Newsworthiness - 5/7
  • General Internal Medicine-Primary Care(US)
    Relevance - 5/7
    Newsworthiness - 5/7
  • Pediatrics (General)
    Relevance - 5/7
    Newsworthiness - 5/7

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Allergic rhinitis affects up to 40% of the US population. To desensitize allergic individuals, subcutaneous injection immunotherapy or sublingual immunotherapy may be administered. In the United States, sublingual immunotherapy is not approved by the Food and Drug Administration. However, some US physicians use aqueous allergens, off-label, for sublingual desensitization.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the effectiveness and safety of aqueous sublingual immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched through December 22, 2012. English-language randomized controlled trials were included if they compared sublingual immunotherapy with placebo, pharmacotherapy, or other sublingual immunotherapy regimens and reported clinical outcomes. Studies of sublingual immunotherapy that are unavailable in the United States and for which a related immunotherapy is unavailable in the United States were excluded. Paired reviewers selected articles and extracted the data. The strength of the evidence for each comparison and outcome was graded based on the risk of bias (scored on allocation, concealment of intervention, incomplete data, sponsor company involvement, and other bias), consistency, magnitude of effect, and the directness of the evidence.

RESULTS: Sixty-three studies with 5131 participants met the inclusion criteria. Participants' ages ranged from 4 to 74 years. Twenty studies (n = 1814 patients) enrolled only children. The risk of bias was medium in 43 studies (68%). Strong evidence supports that sublingual immunotherapy improves asthma symptoms, with 8 of 13 studies reporting greater than 40% improvement vs the comparator. Moderate evidence supports that sublingual immunotherapy use decreases rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis symptoms, with 9 of 36 studies demonstrating greater than 40% improvement vs the comparator. Medication use for asthma and allergies decreased by more than 40% in 16 of 41 studies of sublingual immunotherapy with moderate grade evidence. Moderate evidence supports that sublingual immunotherapy improves conjunctivitis symptoms (13 studies), combined symptom and medication scores (20 studies), and disease-specific quality of life (8 studies). Local reactions were frequent, but anaphylaxis was not reported.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The overall evidence provides a moderate grade level of evidence to support the effectiveness of sublingual immunotherapy for the treatment of allergic rhinitis and asthma, but high-quality studies are still needed to answer questions regarding optimal dosing strategies. There were limitations in the standardization of adverse events reporting, but no life-threatening adverse events were noted in this review.


Clinical Comments

Allergy and Immunology

The paper insufficiently addresses the issue of sub-lingual immunotherapy vs. the multiple allergen SQ injection IT practiced in the USA. As the authors appropriately evaluate only well--controlled studies of ethical products, there remains the issue of rampant practice of low-dose, poorly controlled sub-lingual "therapy" by a variety of physicians, which include formaldehyde and ethanol (sic).

Allergy and Immunology

This is a comprehensive meta-analysis of the efficacy of sublingual therapy (SLIT) for AR and Asthma. Somewhat surprisingly, SLIT may be less efficacious for AR than asthma.

Family Medicine (FM)/General Practice (GP)

Is this cost effective? Is it safe if it were to be used more widely?

Pediatrics (General)

Would be of most interest to allergy/immunology specialists.

Respirology/Pulmonology

Good systematic review to support the role of sublingual immunotherapy in allergic rhinitis and asthma.

Register for free access to all Professional content

Register