Webs internacionales
Consulte su vacuna

BBI

< Volver
Selección de artículos Febrero 2024
1

La combinación de biomarcadores predice mejor la respuesta a ITA.

Immune signatures predict response to house dust mite subcutaneous immunotherapy in patients with allergic rhinitis.
Nan Wang, Jia Song, Shi-Ran, Ke-Zhang Z, Jing-Xian Li, Zhi-Chao Wang, Cui-Lian Guo et al.
Allergy . 2024 Feb 25.doi: 10.1111/all.16068.

BACKGROUND

Identifying predictive biomarkers for allergen immunotherapy response is crucial for enhancing clinical efficacy. This study aims to identify such biomarkers in patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) undergoing subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) for house dust mite allergy.

METHODS

The Tongji (discovery) cohort comprised 72 AR patients who completed 1-year SCIT follow-up. Circulating T and B cell subsets were characterized using multiplexed flow cytometry before SCIT. Serum immunoglobulin levels and combined symptom and medication score (CSMS) were assessed before and after 12-month SCIT. Responders, exhibiting ≥30% CSMS improvement, were identified. The random forest algorithm and logistic regression analysis were used to select biomarkers and establish predictive models for SCIT efficacy in the Tongji cohort, which was validated in another Wisco cohort with 43 AR patients.

RESULTS

Positive SCIT response correlated with higher baseline CSMS, allergen-specific IgE (sIgE)/total IgE (tIgE) ratio, and frequencies of Type 2 helper T cells, Type 2 follicular helper T (TFH 2) cells, and CD23+ nonswitched memory B (BNSM ) and switched memory B (BSM ) cells, as well as lower follicular regulatory T (TFR ) cell frequency and TFR /TFH 2 cell ratio. The random forest algorithm identified sIgE/tIgE ratio, TFR /TFH 2 cell ratio, and BNSM frequency as the key biomarkers discriminating responders from nonresponders in the Tongji cohort. Logistic regression analysis confirmed the predictive value of a combination model, including sIgE/tIgE ratio, TFR /TFH 2 cell ratio, and CD23+ BSM frequency (AUC = 0.899 in Tongji; validated AUC = 0.893 in Wisco).

CONCLUSIONS

A T- and B-cell signature combination efficiently identified SCIT responders before treatment, enabling personalized approaches for AR patients.
2

IT con plásmidos de DNA en alergia a cacahuete.

Safety and immunopharmacology of ASP0892 in adults or adolescents with peanut allergy: two randomized trials.
Brian C Ferslew, Ronald Smulders, Tong Zhu, Mary B Blauwet, Tomohiro Kusawake, Anna Spence et al.
Allergy. 2024 Feb;79(2):456-470.doi: 10.1111/all.15931.

BACKGROUND

New treatment options with improved safety and novel mechanisms of actions are needed for patients with peanut allergy.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of ASP0892, a peanut DNA vaccine, after intradermal (id) or intramuscular (im) administration in adult or adolescent patients with peanut allergy in two phase 1 studies.

METHODS

ASP0892 or placebo was administered every 2 weeks for a total of 4 doses. The doses were 1 mg or 4 mg id or 4 mg im for adults, and 1 mg or 4 mg id for adolescents. Immunologic parameters were assessed longitudinally.

RESULTS

Thirty-one adults (mean age 24.3 years, 17 males) received ASP0892 (9, 8, 8 patients for 1 mg id, 4 mg id or 4 mg im, respectively) or placebo (2 patients/group). Twenty adolescents (mean age 14.2 years, 11 males) received ASP0892 (8 patients/group) or placebo (2 patients/group). In both studies, the most common treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) was injection site pruritus. No deaths or treatment withdrawal were related to TEAEs. No serious TEAEs related to treatment were observed in adult or adolescent patients. ASP0892 treatment led to modest increases in allergen-specific IgG and/or IgG4 in adults (1 mg id, 4 mg im) and adolescents (1 mg id, 4 mg id). No improvements in clinical outcomes, including double blind placebo-controlled food challenge, were found after ASP0892 treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

In two phase 1 studies, ASP0892 was well tolerated with modest but not clinically relevant changes in immune responses.
3

La alergia a alimentos con omalizumab es menos alergia.

Omalizumab for the Treatment of Multiple Food Allergies.
Robert A Wood, Alkis Togias, Scott H Sicherer, Wayne G Shreffler, Edwin H Kim, Stacie M Jones et al.
N Engl J Med . 2024 Mar 7;390(10):889-899. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2312382.

BACKGROUND

Food allergies are common and are associated with substantial morbidity; the only approved treatment is oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy.

METHODS

In this trial, we assessed whether omalizumab, a monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, would be effective and safe as monotherapy in patients with multiple food allergies. Persons 1 to 55 years of age who were allergic to peanuts and at least two other trial-specified foods (cashew, milk, egg, walnut, wheat, and hazelnut) were screened. Inclusion required a reaction to a food challenge of 100 mg or less of peanut protein and 300 mg or less of the two other foods. Participants were randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive omalizumab or placebo administered subcutaneously (with the dose based on weight and IgE levels) every 2 to 4 weeks for 16 to 20 weeks, after which the challenges were repeated. The primary end point was ingestion of peanut protein in a single dose of 600 mg or more without dose-limiting symptoms. The three key secondary end points were the consumption of cashew, of milk, and of egg in single doses of at least 1000 mg each without dose-limiting symptoms. The first 60 participants (59 of whom were children or adolescents) who completed this first stage were enrolled in a 24-week open-label extension.

RESULTS

Of the 462 persons who were screened, 180 underwent randomization. The analysis population consisted of the 177 children and adolescents (1 to 17 years of age). A total of 79 of the 118 participants (67%) receiving omalizumab met the primary end-point criteria, as compared with 4 of the 59 participants (7%) receiving placebo (P<0.001). Results for the key secondary end points were consistent with those of the primary end point (cashew, 41% vs. 3%; milk, 66% vs. 10%; egg, 67% vs. 0%; P<0.001 for all comparisons). Safety end points did not differ between the groups, aside from more injection-site reactions in the omalizumab group.

CONCLUSIONS

In persons as young as 1 year of age with multiple food allergies, omalizumab treatment for 16 weeks was superior to placebo in increasing the reaction threshold for peanut and other common food allergens. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03881696.).
4

4=52: la efectividad a largo plazo de ITA intralinfática es comparable a ITSC.

The long-term efficacy of intra-cervical lymphatic immunotherapy on adults with allergic rhinitis: A randomized controlled study.
Yang Qin, Weijun Huang, Rui Zheng, Qixing Wang, Qingqing Yu, Yin Li et al.
Clin Transl Allergy. 2024 Feb;14(2):e12341.doi: 10.1002/clt2.12341.

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of the novel immunotherapy method, intra-cervical lymphatic immunotherapy (ICLIT), need to be investigated. Comparing it with subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT), we clarified the long-term efficacy and safety of intra-cervical lymphatic immunotherapy on allergic rhinitis (AR) and investigated the improvement of clinical efficacy of the booster injection at 1 year after ICLIT treatment.

METHODS

Ninety adult patients with dust mite allergy were randomly divided into 3 groups: 30 in the SCIT group, 30 in the ICLIT group, and 30 in ICLIT booster group. Changes in total symptom score (TSS), nasal symptom score (TNSS), ocular symptom score (TOSS) and total medication score (TMS) were evaluated in the three groups. Adverse reactions were recorded, and serum dust mite specific IgE (sIgE) and specific IgG4 were assessed in the ICLIT group and ICLIT booster group.

RESULTS

TSS, TNSS, TOSS, and TMS scores were significantly lower in the three groups at 36 months after treatment (p < 0. 05). And at 36 months the ICLITbooster group showed results similar to SCIT and superior to ICLIT (p < 0. 05). Serum specific IgE decreased in all three groups at 12 and 36 months after treatment, p < 0.01. The ICLIT group and the ICLIT booster group showed a significant increase in sIgG4, p < 0.01. None of the patients in the three groups had any serious systemic adverse effects during the 3-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The ICLIT treatment is effective and safe on AR. One booster injection of allergens at 1 year can greatly improve its long-term efficacy.
5

10 años de seguimiento confirman que la ITA es coste-efectiva.

Long-term health care resource and cost savings with allergy immunotherapy: REACT study results.
Benedikt Fritzsching, Celeste Porsbjerg, Marco Contoli, Sarah Buchs, Julie Rask Larsen, Nick Freemantle
J Allergy Clin Immunol Glob. 2023 Nov 23;3(1):100197. doi: 10.1016/j.jacig.2023.100197. eCollection 2024 Feb.

BACKGROUND

Allergy immunotherapy (AIT) can be administered as subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) injections in the clinic or as sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets at home after initiation under medical supervision. To achieve long-term, sustained effects, a 3-year treatment duration is recommended.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to assess the association of AIT (SCIT and SLIT tablets) with long-term health care resource use (HRU) and costs in subjects with allergic rhinitis.

METHODS

REACT was a retrospective propensity score matched cohort study using claims data from a German health insurance database (2007-2017), with up to 9 years of follow-up after AIT initiation. HRU and costswere evaluated for hospitalizations, ambulatory care visits, and prescriptions, in subjects who received AIT versus in matched controls with allergic rhinitis who had not received AIT, as well as for SCIT and SLIT tablets.

RESULTS

Across all 9 years, the subjects who received AIT had a significantly lower incidence of hospitalization than the controls did. Generally, proportions of subjects with ambulatory care visits and hospitalizations were lower, and length of hospitalization was shorter, for those receiving SLIT tablets than those who received SCIT. Total costs were significantly higher with AIT versus for the controls during the treatment period (years 1 to 3), driven by prescriptions and ambulatory care visits, but they were lower in years 4 to 9. During years 1 to 3, prescription costs were generally higher for SLIT tablets than for SCIT, whereas ambulatory care costs were numerically lower. In most years, hospitalization costs were numerically lower for SLIT tablets than for SCIT.

CONCLUSION

Initial higher HRU and costs of AIT during the expected treatment period are offset in the long term. At home administration of SLIT tablets may further reduce ambulatory care costs.
6

ITO con cacahuete, ¿mejor rápida y mucha dosis o lenta y poca?

High degree of desensitization after one year of early-life peanut oral immunotherapy - SmaChO Randomized Controlled Trial.
Carina Uhl, Susanna Klevebro, Eva Sverremark-Ekström, Sandra G Tedner, Josef Brandström, Chrystalleni Papageorgiou et al
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2024 Feb 28:S2213-2198(24)00204-6. doi: 0.1016/j.jaip.2024.02.030. Online ahead of print.

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of peanut allergy is about 2% and mostly lifelong. Studies of oral immunotherapy (OIT) with peanut - daily oral intake of an initially low and then increasing dose of peanut - often show problematic side effects but there are indications of better safety and effect in younger children compared with older children and adults.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the safety and effectiveness of peanut OIT with a slow up-dosing strategy and low maintenance dose, in peanut allergic children 1-3 years of age, a 1-year interim analysis.

METHODS

In a randomized controlled trial (2:1 ratio) 75 children with median age 31 months (IQR 23 - 40) were assigned to receive peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT) (n=50) or peanut avoidance (n=25).

RESULTS

In the OIT group and the avoidance group, 43/50 and 20/25 children, respectively, performed the 1-year open oral peanut challenge. A cumulative dose of 750 mg peanut protein after one year was tolerated by 72% (36/50) in the OIT-group compared to 4% (1/25) in the avoidance-group, p<0.001. Median tolerated cumulative dose was 2750 mg (IQR 275 - 5000) peanut protein in the OIT-group compared to 2.8 mg (IQR 0.3 - 27.8) in the avoidance-group, p<0.001. Of the doses administered at home during the first year of OIT, 1.4% resulted in adverse events, 79% were mild, and three doses of epinephrine were given at home to two individuals.

CONCLUSION

In children 1-3 years of age, peanut OIT with the combination of slow up-dosing and low maintenance dose seems safe and effective after one year.
7

IT epicutánea con leche, sí entre 2-11 años.

Varying Doses of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy With Viaskin Milk vs Placebo in Children With Cow's Milk Allergy : A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Daniel Petroni, Philippe Bégin, J Andrew Bird, Terri Brown-Whitehorn, Hey J Chong, David M Fleischer et al.
JAMA Pediatr. 2024 Feb 26:e236630. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2023.6630.

IMPORTANCE

No approved treatment exists for allergen specific immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated cow's milk allergy (CMA), a common childhood food allergy.

OBJECTIVE

To assess dose, efficacy, and safety of epicutaneous immunotherapy with Viaskin milk in children with IgE-mediated CMA.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A phase 1/2, 2-part, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled dose ranging clinical trial in children aged 2 to 17 years with IgE-mediated CMA was conducted between November 2014 through December 2017. It took place at 17 trial sites in the US and Canada. Current CMA was confirmed by double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge at study entry. Part A assessed the short-term safety of 150 μg, 300 μg, or 500 μg of Viaskin milk; part B evaluated the efficacy and safety of the 3 doses vs placebo over 12 months of treatment. Of the 308 screened participants with physician-diagnosed CMA, 198 met eligibility criteria (including an eliciting dose 300 mg or less) and were randomized.

INTERVENTIONS

Safety of Viaskin milk (150-μg, 300-μg, or 500-μg doses) was evaluated over a 3-week period (part A). In part B, 180 additional participants were randomized to receive Viaskin milk at doses of 150 μg, 300 μg, or 500 μg or placebo (1:1:1:1) for 12 months.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the proportion of treatment responders, defined as a 10 fold or more increase in the cumulative reactive dose of cow's milk protein (reaching at least 144 mg) or a cumulative reactive dose of cow's milk protein at 1444 mg or more at the month 12 double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge.

RESULTS

A total of 95.5% of the randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 8 [4.17] years; 124 of 198 were male [62.6%]) completed treatment. The highest response rate was observed in participants who received Viaskin milk at the 300-μg dose with 24 of 49 responders (49.0%) overall vs 16 of 53 responders (30.2%) in the placebo group (odds ratio, 2.19; 95% CI, 0.91-5.41; P = .09), highest in the 2 to 11 years age group (22 of 38 [57.9%] vs 13 of 40 [32.5%]; P = .04). Most treatment-emergent adverse events were mild or moderate application-site reactions. One participant in the 500-μg Viaskin milk dose group experienced treatment-related anaphylaxis.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this randomized clinical trial, 12 months of daily epicutaneous immunotherapy with a dose of Viaskin milk at 300 μg was associated with a statistically significant treatment response in 2- to 11-year-old children with IgE-mediated CMA. Treatment-related anaphylaxis and treatmentrelated discontinuation rates were low. Further research is needed to explore Viaskin milk as a viable treatment option for children with IgE-mediated CMA.
8

Alérgico a abeja pero … ¿a qué alérgeno? Conoce tu riesgo.

Molecular profiling in bee venom allergy: clinical and therapeutic characterization in a Portuguese cohort.
Cardoso Lopes, P Botelho Alves, H Pires Pereira F Cunha, I Farinha, A Maresch et al.
Eur Ann Allergy Clin Immunol. 2024 Feb 20. doi: 10.23822/EurAnnACI.1764-1489.332.

BACKGROUND

Bee venom allergy (BVA) can trigger local and systemic allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis. Recently, the molecular sensitization profile has gained importance in the reaction's stratification and venom immunotherapy (VIT).

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of patients with hypersensitivity to BVA, confirmed by specific sIgE to Apis mellifera ≥0.35 kU/L and/or positive skin tests to bee venom commercial extract, evaluated in specialized consultation. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data (including molecular Api m 1, 4, and 10) were analyzed, looking for risk factors associated with the severity of the index reaction and reactions during VIT.

RESULTS

93 patients were included (55.9% male; median age of 46 years), 57.3% with atopic comorbidities, and 23.4% with cardiovascular comorbidities. The median specific IgE to Apis mellifera was 6.7 kU/L (IQR 1.0-20.3) kU/L. Regarding the molecular profile, the median IgE to Api m 1 was 0.5 kU/L (57.5% positive out of all measurements); Api m 4 - 0.01 kU/L (11.9% positive), and Api m 10 - 0.3 kU/L (50.0% positive). No patient was monosensitized to Api m 4. The median age of the most severe sting reaction was 36 (IQR 26-48) years, with a median severity (Müeller scale) of 3 (IQR 2-3). Forty-seven patients (50.5%) underwent VIT, with 35.6% of reactions recorded. Allergic reactions during VIT were recorded in 35.6% of cases. The severity of the index reaction correlated positively with older ages (p=0.040; r=0.249), in contrast to monosensitization to Api m 1, which was an independent predictor of milder reactions (p=0.015). Sensitization to Api m 10 was associated with a higher likelihood of reactions during VIT (p=0.038) but potentially less systemic reactions at re-stings (p=0.097).

CONCLUSIONS

Molecular sensitization profile appears to be relevant not only to the severity of index reactions but also during VIT. Studies of a large cohort of patients with molecular profiles are essential to validate these results and improve the clinical and therapeutic approach to BVA.
9

¿Cuánto es suficiente en ITO con leche?

Low-dose oral immunotherapy in immunoglobulin E-mediated food allergies.
Dongxia Ma, Rongfei Zhu
Front Immunol. 2024 Feb 1:15:1321863. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1321863.

ABSTRACT

Nowadays, the management of food allergies has increasingly moved from conventional oral immunotherapy (OIT) to low-dose OIT or low-dose OIT utilizing hypoallergenic foods. This shift is largely because the latter appears to induce oral tolerance with fewer adverse effects than the former. However, the mechanisms underpinning such differences remain unclear. To better understand these mechanisms, we conducted a comparative study scrutinizing the mechanisms of OIT, especially those of low-dose desensitization. We also summarized articles on low-dose OIT and low-dose OIT using hypoallergenic foods. We examined the efficacy, safety, and immunological parameters of low dose OIT and those of low-dose OIT with hypoallergenic foods with the aim of shedding some light on lowdose OIT and its therapeutic application in inducing oral tolerance for individuals with food allergies.
10

Mejores ITAs frente a nuestras mascotas evitarán “expulsiones forzosas”.

Why is Pet (cat/dog) allergen immunotherapy (ait) such a controversial topic? current perspectives and future directions.
G Liccardi, M Martini, M B Bilò, L Cecchi, M Milanese, L Brussino et al.
Eur Ann Allergy Clin Immunol. 2024 Feb 13. doi: 10.23822/EurAnnACI.1764-1489.330.

ABSTRACT

Dogs and cats are the most common pets worldwide. In Italy, the prevalence of allergic sensitization to cats and dogs is 16% and 9% respectively. The limited standardization of allergenic extracts, especially for dogs, emphasizes the importance of Component Resolved Diagnosis (CRD) for accurate diagnosis and subsequent prescription of allergen immunotherapy (AIT). However, this low standardization is the main factor contributing to the unsatisfactory clinical efficacy of traditional AIT, AIT with modified allergens, and intralymphatic allergen-specific immunotherapy (ILAIT). Emerging immunological approaches, particularly for controlling the primary cat allergen, show promise but are hindered by high costs (e.g., use of anti-Fel d 1 monoclonal antibodies in humans) or by exclusively targeting Fel d 1 produced by one's own animal (e.g., immunizing cats to induce neutralizing antibodies against Fel d 1 or including an egg product with anti Fel d 1 IgY antibodies in feline diet). Further studies are imperative for standardizing pet allergens, enhancing the efficacy of various AIT modalities, and exploring other immunological approaches, to optimize the relationship between pets and their owners and prevent distressing "forced removals".

Registro y seguimiento de vacunas

Acceder
Nuestro sitio utiliza cookies para recopilar información sobre su dispositivo y su actividad de navegación. Utilizamos estos datos para mejorar el sitio, garantizar la seguridad y ofrecer contenido personalizado. Puede gestionar sus preferencias de cookies haciendo clic aquí.
Aceptar cookies Configurar Rechazar cookies
Información básica de las cookies
Este sitio web utiliza cookies y/o tecnologías similares que almacenan y recuperan información cuando navega. En general, estas tecnologías pueden tener finalidades muy diversas como, por ejemplo, reconocerte como usuario, obtener información sobre tus hábitos de navegación o personalizar la forma en la que se muestran los contenidos. Los usos específicos que hacemos de estas tecnologías se describen a continuación. Por defecto, todas las cookies están deshabilitadas, excepto las técnicas, que son necesarias para el funcionamiento del sitio web. Si desea obtener más información o ejercer sus derechos en materia de protección de datos, puede consultar nuestra Política de cookies".
Aceptar cookies Configurar
Cookies técnicas necesarias Siempre activas
Las cookies técnicas son estrictamente necesarias para que nuestro sitio web funcione y puedas navegar por él. Este tipo de cookies son aquellas que, por ejemplo, nos permiten identificarte, darte acceso a determinadas partes restringidas de la página si es necesario, o recordar diferentes opciones o servicios ya seleccionados por ti, como tus preferencias de privacidad. Por tanto, están activadas por defecto, no siendo necesaria su autorización. Mediante la configuración de su navegador puede bloquear o alertar de la presencia de este tipo de cookies, aunque dicho bloqueo afectará al correcto funcionamiento de las diferentes funcionalidades de nuestra página web.
Cookies de análisis
Las cookies de análisis son las utilizadas para llevar a cabo el análisis anónimo del comportamiento de los usuarios de la web y que permiten medir la actividad del usuario y elaborar perfiles de navegación con el fin objetivo de mejorar los sitios web.
Confirmar preferencias
Title
Popupcontent
Contacta con nosotros
ALLERGY THERAPEUTICS IBERICA, S.L.U., como responsable del tratamiento de sus datos, tratará los mismos con la finalidad de dar respuesta a la consulta y/o petición que nos realiza a través de este formulario de contacto. Puede ejercer losrnderechos de acceso, rectificación, supresión, así como otros derechos consultando la información adicional detallada sobre Protección de Datos en nuestra política de privacidad.
Aceptar
0