Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
1.
Clin Exp Allergy ; 48(11): 1391-1401, 2018 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30079619

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) with mould extracts has been performed for many years but the final demonstration of its clinical efficacy is still missing, due to the small number of studies and their inconsistent results. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review efficacy and safety of AIT for the treatment of respiratory allergies to moulds. DESIGN: The primary outcomes were safety and reduction of symptoms (Symptom Score, SS) and medication use (Medication Score, MS) in patients treated with AIT compared to controls. The strength of the evidence was graded based on the risk of bias, consistency and magnitude of effect, according to the GRADE Working Group's guide. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library (through September 2017) supplemented with manual searches of reference lists. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomized studies of intervention comparing AIT to placebo/pharmacotherapy. Studies not reporting on our outcome of interest or without a control population were excluded. RESULTS: Nine studies (168 children, 99 adults; median sample size, 27) met the inclusion criteria. The risk of bias was moderate-to-high in all but one study. Low strength evidence supports the assumption that AIT is effective in reducing symptoms and medication use, with only four of nine studies reporting higher benefit of AIT vs. comparators. The highest benefit of AIT compared to pharmacotherapy/placebo was reported in studies with a longer follow-up (SMD for MS from -3.96 to -3.97 in favour of AIT) and low risk of bias (VAS for SS: 66.3 ± 13 in AIT group; 186.6 ± 39 in comparators; P < 0.05). No difference was reported with respect to study sample size, route of administration, age of participants. Generalised adverse reactions were reported in 12.5% of participants treated with sublingual immunotherapy, and 37.2% of participants treated with subcutaneous immunotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Low strength evidence suggests that mould AIT is efficacious for the treatment of respiratory allergies. High-quality studies with an adequate sample size are needed.


Assuntos
Alérgenos/imunologia , Antígenos de Fungos/imunologia , Dessensibilização Imunológica , Fungos/imunologia , Hipersensibilidade/etiologia , Hipersensibilidade/terapia , Antiasmáticos/farmacologia , Antiasmáticos/uso terapêutico , Ensaios Clínicos como Assunto , Dessensibilização Imunológica/efeitos adversos , Dessensibilização Imunológica/métodos , Humanos , Hipersensibilidade/diagnóstico , Fenótipo , Resultado do Tratamento
3.
Respir Med ; 130: 55-60, 2017 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29206634

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Randomized Controlled Trials showed that omalizumab exhibited a good safety and tolerability profile in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma. However, safety data of long-term treatment with omalizumab are scarce. Our aim was to assess the safety of omalizumab in patients under long-term treatment in a real-life setting. METHODS: Difficult-to-control asthmatic patients treated with omalizumab up to 9 years were retrospectively evaluated. Mild to severe adverse events any and reasons for discontinuation were recorded. RESULTS: Ninety-one patients (26.4% males, mean age 49.9 ± 14.9 years) were included: mean treatment length, 3.8 ± 2.6 years; mean individual monthly dose, 514.5 ± 345.7 mg (range, 150-1200 mg). A total of 10,472 single injections were given cumulatively to the 91 patients (115 single injections per patients, on average, over a treatment period up to 9 years). Fifty-nine patients (64.8%) were treated for a period of time from 3 to 9 years, 14 of whom from 6 to 9 years. A high proportion of patients who discontinued treatment dropped out within the first year (18, 39.1%), mainly for reasons unrelated to treatment. Six patients (6.6%) discontinued omalizumab for treatment-related adverse events: arthralgia/myalgia (3 patients); urticaria, angioedema (1 patients); metrorrhagia (1 patient); relapsing herpes labialis (1 patient). Four other patients complained of mild adverse events (rhinitis/conjunctivitis, injection site reaction, fatigue, thrombosis) but continued the treatment. Anaphylaxis was not reported. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term treatment with omalizumab appears remarkably safe and well tolerated in real-life setting. Prolonged omalizumab treatment for many consecutive years did not increase the risk of side effects, particularly anaphylaxis.


Assuntos
Antiasmáticos/uso terapêutico , Asma/tratamento farmacológico , Omalizumab/efeitos adversos , Omalizumab/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Antiasmáticos/administração & dosagem , Antiasmáticos/efeitos adversos , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/uso terapêutico , Asma/fisiopatologia , Peso Corporal , Feminino , Volume Expiratório Forçado/efeitos dos fármacos , Humanos , Imunoglobulina E/sangue , Injeções Subcutâneas , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Omalizumab/administração & dosagem , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Estudos Retrospectivos , Índice de Gravidade de Doença
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
Detalhe da pesquisa