Antiallergika

Pollen immunotherapy is effective in selected patients with IgE-mediated seasonal allergic rhinitis, although it is questionable whether there is long-term benefit after the discontinuation of treatment. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the discontinuation of immunotherapy for grass-pollen allergy in patients in whom three to four years of this treatment had previously been shown to be effective. During the three years of this trial, primary outcome measures were scores for seasonal symptoms and the use of rescue medication. Objective measures included the immediate conjunctival response and the immediate and late skin responses to allergen challenge. Cutaneous-biopsy specimens obtained 24 hours after intradermal allergen challenge were examined for T-cell infiltration and the presence of cytokine-producing T helper cells (TH2 cells) (as evidenced by the presence of interleukin-4 messenger RNA). A matched group of patients with hay fever who had not received immunotherapy was followed as a control for the natural course of the disease. Scores for seasonal symptoms and the use of rescue antiallergic medication, which included short courses of prednisolone, remained low after the discontinuation of immunotherapy, and there was no significant difference between patients who continued immunotherapy and those who discontinued it. Symptom scores in both treatment groups (median areas under the curve in 1995, 921 for continuation of immunotherapy and 504 for discontinuation of immunotherapy; P=0.60) were markedly lower than those in the group that had not received immunotherapy (median value in 1995, 2863). Although there was a tendency for immediate sensitivity to allergen to return late after discontinuation, there was a sustained reduction in the late skin response and associated CD3+ T-cell infiltration and interleukin-4 messenger RNA expression. Immunotherapy for grass-pollen allergy for three to four years induces prolonged clinical remission accompanied by a persistent alteration in immunologic reactivity.

Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (AR) is an allergic disorder of the nose and eyes affecting about a fifth of the general population. Symptoms of AR can be controlled with allergen avoidance measures and pharmacotherapy. However, many patients continue to have ongoing symptoms and an impaired quality of life; pharmacotherapy may also induce some side-effects. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) represents the only currently available treatment that targets the underlying pathophysiology, and it may have a disease-modifying effect. Either the subcutaneous (SCIT) or sublingual (SLIT) routes may be used. This Guideline has been prepared by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology's (EAACI) Taskforce on AIT for AR and is part of the EAACI presidential project "EAACI Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy." It aims to provide evidence-based clinical recommendations and has been informed by a formal systematic review and meta-analysis. Its generation has followed the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) approach. The process included involvement of the full range of stakeholders. In general, broad evidence for the clinical efficacy of AIT for AR exists but a product-specific evaluation of evidence is recommended. In general, SCIT and SLIT are recommended for both seasonal and perennial AR for its short-term benefit. The strongest evidence for long-term benefit is documented for grass AIT (especially for the grass tablets) where long-term benefit is seen. To achieve long-term efficacy, it is recommended that a minimum of 3 years of therapy is used. Many gaps in the evidence base exist, particularly around long-term benefit and use in children.