Safety of Sublingual-Swallow Immunotherapy in Children and AdultsAndré C. · Vatrinet C. · Galvain S. · Carat F. · Sicard H.
Scientific and Medical Department, Stallergènes SA, Antony, France
Do you have an account?
- Rent for 48h to view
- Buy Cloud Access for unlimited viewing via different devices
- Synchronizing in the ReadCube Cloud
- Printing and saving restrictions apply
Rental: USD 8.50
Cloud: USD 20.00
Background: Immunotherapy is an established treatment of allergic diseases. The safety of this treatment, particularly when administered without direct medical surveillance, as in the case of the sublingual-swallow route needs to be established. The aim of this paper is to review the safety of the sublingual-swallow immunotherapy as reported in eight double-blind, placebo-controlled trials carried out in France, Italy and Greece. Methods: Six hundred and ninety subjects, 472 adults and 218 children, took part in trials of specific immunotherapy (SIT) for the treatment of rhinoconjunctivitis and/or asthma. Three hundred and forty-seven patients received SIT and 343 patients received placebo. Treatment with specific immunotherapy with allergen extracts or placebo was administered using the sublingual-swallow technique. The allergens administered were grass, ambrosia, parietaria and olive pollens, and mites. The daily dose taken during maintenance therapy ranged from 100 to 300 IR (index of reactivity) and cumulative doses ranged from 4,500 to 104,000 IR. Treatment duration ranged from 4 months to 2 years. Adverse events reported either spontaneously by the patient or on direct questioning by the investigator were analysed. Results: One hundred and forty-five unusual events were reported in the subjects receiving active SIT and 79 in those receiving placebo (p < 0.001). Of these 85 were children aged 15 years or less (50 received active SIT, 35 placebo) and 139 were adults (95 received SIT, 44 placebo). Unusual events involving the buccal cavity (61 SIT, 13 placebo) and the gastro-intestinal tract (47 SIT, 15 placebo) were significantly more frequent in the SIT-treated patients (p < 0.001). Wheezing (9 SIT, 21 placebo) was more frequent in the placebo-treated patients (p < 0.05). There were no differences in the frequency of unusual events between adults and children and in the frequency of events involving other body systems. No event was reported as serious. Two events reported as laryngeal oedema were not considered to be accurate descriptions. Conclusions: No serious adverse event was reported in the studies monitored, confirming the good safety profile of the sublingual-swallow method both in children and adults with rhinitis or moderate asthma.
© 2000 S. Karger AG, Basel
- Malling H-J: Immunotherapy as an effective tool in allergy treatment. Allergy 1998;53:461–472.
Committee on Safety of Medicines Update: Desensitizing vaccines. Br Med J 1986;293:948.
Malling H-J, Weeke B: Position paper. Immunotherapy. Allergy 1993;48(suppl 14):9–35.
- Feliziani V, Lattuada S, Parmioni S, Dall’Aglio PP: Safety and efficacy of sublingual rush immunotherapy with grass allergen extracts. A double blind study. Allergol Immunopathol (Madr) 1995;23:224–230.
- Sabbah A, Hassoun S, Le Sellin J, André C, Sicard H: A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial by the sublingual route of immunotherapy with a standardized grass pollen extract. Allergy 1994;49:309–313.
- Tari MG, Mancino M, Monti G: Efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy in patients with rhinitis and asthma due to house dust mite. A double-blind study. Allergol Immunopathol (Madr) 1990;18:277–284.
- Troise C, Voltolini S, Canessa A, Pecora S, Negrini AC: Sublingual immunotherapy in Parietaria pollen-induced rhinitis: A double-blind study. J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol 1995;5:25–30.
Bousquet J, Lockey RF, Malling H-J: WHO position paper. Allergen immunotherapy: Therapeutic vaccines for allergic diseases. Allergy 1998;53(suppl 44):1–42.
- Clavel R, Bousquet J, André C: Clinical efficacy of sublingual-swallow immunotherapy: A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of a standardized five-grass-pollen extract in rhinitis. Allergy 1998;53:493–498.
- Vourdas D, Syrigou E, Potamianou P, Carat F, Batard T, André C, Papageorgiou PS: Double-blind, placebo-controlled evaluation of sublingual immunotherapy with standardized olive pollen extract in pediatric patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and mild asthma due to olive pollen sensitization. Allergy 1998;53:662–672.
- Bousquet J, Scheinmann P, Guinnepain M-T, Perrin-Fayolle M, Sauvaget J, Tonnel AB, Pauli G, Caillaud D, Dubost R, Leynadier F, Vervloet D, Herman D, Galvain S, André C: Sublingual-swallow immunotherapy in patients with asthma due to house dust mites: A double-blind placebo-controlled study. Allergy 1999;54:249–250.
- Pradalier A, Basset D, Claudel A, Couturier P, Wessel F, Galvain S, André C: Sublingual-swallow immunotherapy (SLIT) with a standardized five-grass-pollen extract (drops and sublingual tablets) versus placebo in seasonal rhinitis. Allergy 1999;54:819–828.
- La Rosa M, Ranno C, André C, Carat F, Tosca MA, Canonica GW: Double-blind placebo-controlled evaluation of sublingual-swallow immunotherapy with standardized Parietaria judaica extract in children with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1999;104:425–432.
Guez S, Vatrinet C, Fadel R, André C: House dust mite sublingual-swallow immunotherapy in perennial rhinitis. A double-blind placebo-controlled study. Allergy, in press.
André C, Perrin-Fayolle M, Grosclaude M, Couturier P, Basset D, Cornillon J, Piperno D, Girodet B, Sanchez R, Vallon C, Bellier P, Nasr M: Ragweed sublingual-swallow immunotherapy in rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma. In preparation.
Edwards AM, André C, Fadel R, Sicard H, Vatrinet C, Galvain S, Carat F: Efficacy of sublingual-swallow immunotherapy using standardised allergen extracts (Stallergènes) of inhaled allergens. Allergy 1998;53:169.
André C, Vatrinet C, Galvain S, Carat F, Sicard H: Safety of sublingual-swallow immunotherapy using Stallergènes extracts in children and adults. Allergy 1998;53:116–117.
White P, Smith H, Baker N, Davis W, Frew A: Symptom control in patients with hay fever in UK general practice: How well are we doing and is there a need for allergen immunotherapy? Clin Exp Allergy 1998;28:266–270.
Hirsch T, Sähn M, Leupold W: Double-blind placebo-controlled study of sublingual immunotherapy with house dust mite extract (D.pt.) in children. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 1997:8:21–27.
- Passalacqua G, Albano M, Fregonese L, Riccio A, Pronzato C, Mela G-S, Canonica G-W: Randomised controlled trial of local allergoid immunotherapy on allergic inflammation in mite-induced rhinoconjunctivitis. Lancet 1998;351:629–632.
- Hordijk GJ, Antvelink JB, Luwema RA: Sublingual immunotherapy with a standardised grass pollen extract; a double-blind placebo-controlled study. Allergol Immunopathol (Madr) 1998;26:234–240.
- Horak F, Stübner P, Berger UE, Marks B, Toth J, Jäger S: Immunotherapy with sublingual birch pollen extract. A short-term double-blind placebo study. J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol 1998;8:165–171.
- Di Rienzo V, Pagani A, Parmiani S, Passalacqua G, Canonica GW: Post-marketing surveillance study on the safety of sublingual immunotherapy in pediatric patients. Allergy 1999;54:1110–1113.
Article / Publication Details
Copyright / Drug Dosage / DisclaimerCopyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.