Sublingual immunotherapy with grass pollen is not effective in symptomatic youngsters in primary care

Background Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is considered safer and more convenient than subcutaneous therapy and therefore has been proposed as especially suitable for children and in primary care. Most efficacy studies in children lack power to be conclusive, and all have been performed in referral...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of allergy and clinical immunology 2007-04, Vol.119 (4), p.892-898
Hauptverfasser: Röder, Esther, MD, Berger, Marjolein Y., MD, PhD, Hop, Wim C.J., PhD, Bernsen, Roos M.D., PhD, de Groot, Hans, MD, PhD, Gerth van Wijk, Roy, MD, PhD
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 898
container_issue 4
container_start_page 892
container_title Journal of allergy and clinical immunology
container_volume 119
creator Röder, Esther, MD
Berger, Marjolein Y., MD, PhD
Hop, Wim C.J., PhD
Bernsen, Roos M.D., PhD
de Groot, Hans, MD, PhD
Gerth van Wijk, Roy, MD, PhD
description Background Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is considered safer and more convenient than subcutaneous therapy and therefore has been proposed as especially suitable for children and in primary care. Most efficacy studies in children lack power to be conclusive, and all have been performed in referral centers. Objective To investigate the efficacy of SLIT with grass pollen allergen in children and adolescents with rhinoconjunctivitis in a primary care setting. Methods Youngsters aged 6-18 years with hay fever were enrolled from general practices and randomly assigned to receive placebo or grass pollen mix for 2 years. The primary outcome was the mean daily total symptom score (scale 0-15) comprising sneezing, itching nose, watery running nose, nasal blockage, and itching eyes during the months May-August of the second treatment year. Results Out of 204 youngsters randomized, 168 entered the intention-to-treat analysis (91 verum, 77 placebo). The mean daily total symptom score did not differ between participants allocated to verum and those allocated to placebo (difference for verum minus placebo: −0.08, 95%CI, −0.66-0.50; P = .78). No differences were found for rescue medication–free days, disease-specific quality of life, and overall evaluation of the treatment effect. Local side effects were more frequent in the verum group (39% vs 17% of participants; P = .001). Conclusion Sublingual immunotherapy with grass pollen in a primary care setting is not effective in children and adolescents. Clinical implications Currently, SLIT cannot be recommended for general practitioners as a therapeutic modality in youngsters with grass pollen allergy.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jaci.2006.12.651
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70362201</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0091674907000036</els_id><sourcerecordid>19542123</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c604t-581795660a0f4fd531edcce8c11a9964621fbd51c7b8a2650fc87401873bb5413</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkt-K1TAQxoso7nH1BbyQguhd60zaJC3Igiz-gwUvVq9Dmk7PpvbPMWlX-jY-i09myikc2AvPVQj5zeSb-b4oeomQIqB416atNjZlACJFlgqOj6IdQikTUTD-ONoBlJgImZcX0TPvWwj3rCifRhcoM4a8wF3U3M5VZ4f9rLvY9v08jNMdOX1Y4t92uov3TnsfH8auoyG2_u-f8B5T05CZ7D3Fdoj90h-msdeTNfEyzsPeT-T8-nJwttduiY129Dx60ujO04vtvIx-fPr4_fpLcvPt89frDzeJEZBPSZAkSy4EaGjypuYZUm0MFQZRl6XIBcOmqjkaWRWaCQ6NKWQOWMisqniO2WX09tj34MZfM_lJ9dYb6jo90Dh7JSETjMF5kCFkKGVxHoSSF5DzsyCWPGfIsgC-fgC24-yGsBaFHHIpgsRVIDtSxo3eO2rUtk-FoFb7VatW-9Vqv0Kmgv2h6NXWeq56qk8lm98BeLMB2hvdNU4PxvoTV8gwNxOBe3_kKJh1b8kpbywNhmrrgveqHu3_dVw9KDchZDb8-JMW8qd5lWcK1O0a1DWnIENGg0XZP3p_4sA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1504763621</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Sublingual immunotherapy with grass pollen is not effective in symptomatic youngsters in primary care</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Röder, Esther, MD ; Berger, Marjolein Y., MD, PhD ; Hop, Wim C.J., PhD ; Bernsen, Roos M.D., PhD ; de Groot, Hans, MD, PhD ; Gerth van Wijk, Roy, MD, PhD</creator><creatorcontrib>Röder, Esther, MD ; Berger, Marjolein Y., MD, PhD ; Hop, Wim C.J., PhD ; Bernsen, Roos M.D., PhD ; de Groot, Hans, MD, PhD ; Gerth van Wijk, Roy, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><description>Background Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is considered safer and more convenient than subcutaneous therapy and therefore has been proposed as especially suitable for children and in primary care. Most efficacy studies in children lack power to be conclusive, and all have been performed in referral centers. Objective To investigate the efficacy of SLIT with grass pollen allergen in children and adolescents with rhinoconjunctivitis in a primary care setting. Methods Youngsters aged 6-18 years with hay fever were enrolled from general practices and randomly assigned to receive placebo or grass pollen mix for 2 years. The primary outcome was the mean daily total symptom score (scale 0-15) comprising sneezing, itching nose, watery running nose, nasal blockage, and itching eyes during the months May-August of the second treatment year. Results Out of 204 youngsters randomized, 168 entered the intention-to-treat analysis (91 verum, 77 placebo). The mean daily total symptom score did not differ between participants allocated to verum and those allocated to placebo (difference for verum minus placebo: −0.08, 95%CI, −0.66-0.50; P = .78). No differences were found for rescue medication–free days, disease-specific quality of life, and overall evaluation of the treatment effect. Local side effects were more frequent in the verum group (39% vs 17% of participants; P = .001). Conclusion Sublingual immunotherapy with grass pollen in a primary care setting is not effective in children and adolescents. Clinical implications Currently, SLIT cannot be recommended for general practitioners as a therapeutic modality in youngsters with grass pollen allergy.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0091-6749</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-6825</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2006.12.651</identifier><identifier>PMID: 17321581</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JACIBY</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, NY: Mosby, Inc</publisher><subject>Administration, Sublingual ; Adolescent ; Allergens - administration &amp; dosage ; Allergens - immunology ; Allergens - therapeutic use ; allergic rhinitis ; Allergies ; Allergy and Immunology ; Biological and medical sciences ; Child ; Desensitization, Immunologic ; Double-Blind Method ; Female ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Fundamental immunology ; grass pollen ; Grasses ; Humans ; Immunopathology ; Immunotherapy ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Pediatrics ; Poaceae - immunology ; Pollen ; Pollen - immunology ; primary care ; Primary Health Care ; Quality of life ; Questionnaires ; Retrospective Studies ; Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal - immunology ; Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal - therapy ; Studies ; sublingual</subject><ispartof>Journal of allergy and clinical immunology, 2007-04, Vol.119 (4), p.892-898</ispartof><rights>American Academy of Allergy, Asthma &amp; Immunology</rights><rights>2007 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma &amp; Immunology</rights><rights>2007 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Limited Apr 2007</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c604t-581795660a0f4fd531edcce8c11a9964621fbd51c7b8a2650fc87401873bb5413</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c604t-581795660a0f4fd531edcce8c11a9964621fbd51c7b8a2650fc87401873bb5413</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2006.12.651$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,3551,27929,27930,46000</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=18710326$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17321581$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Röder, Esther, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berger, Marjolein Y., MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hop, Wim C.J., PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bernsen, Roos M.D., PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Groot, Hans, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gerth van Wijk, Roy, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><title>Sublingual immunotherapy with grass pollen is not effective in symptomatic youngsters in primary care</title><title>Journal of allergy and clinical immunology</title><addtitle>J Allergy Clin Immunol</addtitle><description>Background Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is considered safer and more convenient than subcutaneous therapy and therefore has been proposed as especially suitable for children and in primary care. Most efficacy studies in children lack power to be conclusive, and all have been performed in referral centers. Objective To investigate the efficacy of SLIT with grass pollen allergen in children and adolescents with rhinoconjunctivitis in a primary care setting. Methods Youngsters aged 6-18 years with hay fever were enrolled from general practices and randomly assigned to receive placebo or grass pollen mix for 2 years. The primary outcome was the mean daily total symptom score (scale 0-15) comprising sneezing, itching nose, watery running nose, nasal blockage, and itching eyes during the months May-August of the second treatment year. Results Out of 204 youngsters randomized, 168 entered the intention-to-treat analysis (91 verum, 77 placebo). The mean daily total symptom score did not differ between participants allocated to verum and those allocated to placebo (difference for verum minus placebo: −0.08, 95%CI, −0.66-0.50; P = .78). No differences were found for rescue medication–free days, disease-specific quality of life, and overall evaluation of the treatment effect. Local side effects were more frequent in the verum group (39% vs 17% of participants; P = .001). Conclusion Sublingual immunotherapy with grass pollen in a primary care setting is not effective in children and adolescents. Clinical implications Currently, SLIT cannot be recommended for general practitioners as a therapeutic modality in youngsters with grass pollen allergy.</description><subject>Administration, Sublingual</subject><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Allergens - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Allergens - immunology</subject><subject>Allergens - therapeutic use</subject><subject>allergic rhinitis</subject><subject>Allergies</subject><subject>Allergy and Immunology</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Child</subject><subject>Desensitization, Immunologic</subject><subject>Double-Blind Method</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Fundamental immunology</subject><subject>grass pollen</subject><subject>Grasses</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Immunopathology</subject><subject>Immunotherapy</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Pediatrics</subject><subject>Poaceae - immunology</subject><subject>Pollen</subject><subject>Pollen - immunology</subject><subject>primary care</subject><subject>Primary Health Care</subject><subject>Quality of life</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal - immunology</subject><subject>Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal - therapy</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>sublingual</subject><issn>0091-6749</issn><issn>1097-6825</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkt-K1TAQxoso7nH1BbyQguhd60zaJC3Igiz-gwUvVq9Dmk7PpvbPMWlX-jY-i09myikc2AvPVQj5zeSb-b4oeomQIqB416atNjZlACJFlgqOj6IdQikTUTD-ONoBlJgImZcX0TPvWwj3rCifRhcoM4a8wF3U3M5VZ4f9rLvY9v08jNMdOX1Y4t92uov3TnsfH8auoyG2_u-f8B5T05CZ7D3Fdoj90h-msdeTNfEyzsPeT-T8-nJwttduiY129Dx60ujO04vtvIx-fPr4_fpLcvPt89frDzeJEZBPSZAkSy4EaGjypuYZUm0MFQZRl6XIBcOmqjkaWRWaCQ6NKWQOWMisqniO2WX09tj34MZfM_lJ9dYb6jo90Dh7JSETjMF5kCFkKGVxHoSSF5DzsyCWPGfIsgC-fgC24-yGsBaFHHIpgsRVIDtSxo3eO2rUtk-FoFb7VatW-9Vqv0Kmgv2h6NXWeq56qk8lm98BeLMB2hvdNU4PxvoTV8gwNxOBe3_kKJh1b8kpbywNhmrrgveqHu3_dVw9KDchZDb8-JMW8qd5lWcK1O0a1DWnIENGg0XZP3p_4sA</recordid><startdate>20070401</startdate><enddate>20070401</enddate><creator>Röder, Esther, MD</creator><creator>Berger, Marjolein Y., MD, PhD</creator><creator>Hop, Wim C.J., PhD</creator><creator>Bernsen, Roos M.D., PhD</creator><creator>de Groot, Hans, MD, PhD</creator><creator>Gerth van Wijk, Roy, MD, PhD</creator><general>Mosby, Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20070401</creationdate><title>Sublingual immunotherapy with grass pollen is not effective in symptomatic youngsters in primary care</title><author>Röder, Esther, MD ; Berger, Marjolein Y., MD, PhD ; Hop, Wim C.J., PhD ; Bernsen, Roos M.D., PhD ; de Groot, Hans, MD, PhD ; Gerth van Wijk, Roy, MD, PhD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c604t-581795660a0f4fd531edcce8c11a9964621fbd51c7b8a2650fc87401873bb5413</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>Administration, Sublingual</topic><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Allergens - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Allergens - immunology</topic><topic>Allergens - therapeutic use</topic><topic>allergic rhinitis</topic><topic>Allergies</topic><topic>Allergy and Immunology</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Child</topic><topic>Desensitization, Immunologic</topic><topic>Double-Blind Method</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Fundamental immunology</topic><topic>grass pollen</topic><topic>Grasses</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Immunopathology</topic><topic>Immunotherapy</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Pediatrics</topic><topic>Poaceae - immunology</topic><topic>Pollen</topic><topic>Pollen - immunology</topic><topic>primary care</topic><topic>Primary Health Care</topic><topic>Quality of life</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal - immunology</topic><topic>Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal - therapy</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>sublingual</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Röder, Esther, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berger, Marjolein Y., MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hop, Wim C.J., PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bernsen, Roos M.D., PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Groot, Hans, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gerth van Wijk, Roy, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of allergy and clinical immunology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Röder, Esther, MD</au><au>Berger, Marjolein Y., MD, PhD</au><au>Hop, Wim C.J., PhD</au><au>Bernsen, Roos M.D., PhD</au><au>de Groot, Hans, MD, PhD</au><au>Gerth van Wijk, Roy, MD, PhD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Sublingual immunotherapy with grass pollen is not effective in symptomatic youngsters in primary care</atitle><jtitle>Journal of allergy and clinical immunology</jtitle><addtitle>J Allergy Clin Immunol</addtitle><date>2007-04-01</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>119</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>892</spage><epage>898</epage><pages>892-898</pages><issn>0091-6749</issn><eissn>1097-6825</eissn><coden>JACIBY</coden><abstract>Background Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is considered safer and more convenient than subcutaneous therapy and therefore has been proposed as especially suitable for children and in primary care. Most efficacy studies in children lack power to be conclusive, and all have been performed in referral centers. Objective To investigate the efficacy of SLIT with grass pollen allergen in children and adolescents with rhinoconjunctivitis in a primary care setting. Methods Youngsters aged 6-18 years with hay fever were enrolled from general practices and randomly assigned to receive placebo or grass pollen mix for 2 years. The primary outcome was the mean daily total symptom score (scale 0-15) comprising sneezing, itching nose, watery running nose, nasal blockage, and itching eyes during the months May-August of the second treatment year. Results Out of 204 youngsters randomized, 168 entered the intention-to-treat analysis (91 verum, 77 placebo). The mean daily total symptom score did not differ between participants allocated to verum and those allocated to placebo (difference for verum minus placebo: −0.08, 95%CI, −0.66-0.50; P = .78). No differences were found for rescue medication–free days, disease-specific quality of life, and overall evaluation of the treatment effect. Local side effects were more frequent in the verum group (39% vs 17% of participants; P = .001). Conclusion Sublingual immunotherapy with grass pollen in a primary care setting is not effective in children and adolescents. Clinical implications Currently, SLIT cannot be recommended for general practitioners as a therapeutic modality in youngsters with grass pollen allergy.</abstract><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Mosby, Inc</pub><pmid>17321581</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jaci.2006.12.651</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0091-6749
ispartof Journal of allergy and clinical immunology, 2007-04, Vol.119 (4), p.892-898
issn 0091-6749
1097-6825
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70362201
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects Administration, Sublingual
Adolescent
Allergens - administration & dosage
Allergens - immunology
Allergens - therapeutic use
allergic rhinitis
Allergies
Allergy and Immunology
Biological and medical sciences
Child
Desensitization, Immunologic
Double-Blind Method
Female
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
Fundamental immunology
grass pollen
Grasses
Humans
Immunopathology
Immunotherapy
Male
Medical sciences
Pediatrics
Poaceae - immunology
Pollen
Pollen - immunology
primary care
Primary Health Care
Quality of life
Questionnaires
Retrospective Studies
Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal - immunology
Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal - therapy
Studies
sublingual
title Sublingual immunotherapy with grass pollen is not effective in symptomatic youngsters in primary care
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-13T05%3A37%3A49IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Sublingual%20immunotherapy%20with%20grass%20pollen%20is%C2%A0not%20effective%20in%20symptomatic%20youngsters%20in%20primary%20care&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20allergy%20and%20clinical%20immunology&rft.au=R%C3%B6der,%20Esther,%20MD&rft.date=2007-04-01&rft.volume=119&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=892&rft.epage=898&rft.pages=892-898&rft.issn=0091-6749&rft.eissn=1097-6825&rft.coden=JACIBY&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jaci.2006.12.651&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E19542123%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1504763621&rft_id=info:pmid/17321581&rft_els_id=S0091674907000036&rfr_iscdi=true