[A MULTICENTER CLINICAL SURVEY ABOUT THE PREVALENCE OF JAPANESE CYPRESS POLLINOSIS AND THE EFFICACY OF SUBLINGUAL IMMUNOTHERAPY WITH JAPANESE CEDAR POLLEN EXTRACT DURING JAPANESE CYPRESS POLLEN DISPERSAL PERIOD].

BACKGROUND: Little is known whether sublingual immunotherapy using Japanese cedar pollen extract (cedar SLIT) is effective for not only Japanese cedar pollinosis but also Japanese cypress pollinosis. We investigated the prevalence rate of Japanese cypress pollinosis, efficacy of cedar SLIT on cypress pollinosis and patients' wish to receive cypress SLIT. METHODS: We investigated a multi-center (31 institutions), cross-sectional survey using a self-administrated questionnaire with four questions for patients received cedar SLIT aged from 5 to 69 years old. RESULTS: 2523 subjects were enrolled for analysis. 83.4% of them had pollinosis symptoms during cypress season before cedar SLIT. In such patients, 37.4% experienced lessened efficacy of cedar SLIT during cypress season. Both the prevalence of cypress pollinosis and the lessened efficacy of cedar SLIT on cypress pollinosis were significantly seen in western Japan as compared to eastern Japan. 76.1% of the subject having cypress pollinosis before SLIT wished to receive cypress SLIT if it is available. CONCLUSION: A lessened efficacy of cedar SLIT during cypress season was broadly seen in Japan, and further showed a regional difference. Together with the finding of high wish by patients, these results suggest a development of cypress SLIT is desirable.

[Increased throat symptoms in Japanese cypress pollinosis].

BACKGROUND: Seasonal allergic rhinitis caused by Japanese cypress pollen is highly associated with that by Japanese cedar pollen, due to the similar antigen of the two pollens. Clinically, patients with cypress pollinosis complain of strong throat symptoms. METHOD: Weekly nasal and throat symptoms during the pollen season in patients with Japanese cedar-cypress pollinosis were measured using a visual analog scale (VAS). Symptoms other than rhinoconjuctivitis by Japanese rhinitis quality of life questionnaire No2 were compared in two different pollen scattering-seasons. RESULT: VAS showed that nasal symptoms appeared parallel with pollen scattering, and that they were severe in the cedar season more than in the cypress season. On the other hand, throat disco,fort and cough were worse in the cypress season, even though this study took place of during a year when there was only a small amount of cypress-pollen scattering. The severity of symptoms other than rhinoconjunctivitis in cedar pollinosis depended on the total amount of pollen, however, cypress pollinosis showed severe throat symptoms in both a small and a mass scattering year. CONCLUSION: Although cypress and cedar pollinosis is considered as the same disease, cypress pollinosis showed more severe symptoms other than rhinoconjunctivitis. Throat symptoms in particular are more severe in cypress pollinosis, even in the year of a small amount of scattering.

[Clinical usefulness of smell identification test card: Open Essence].

Since the Odor Stick Identification Test for Japanese (OSIT-J) has proved clinically useful in Japan, the Open Essence (OE) smell identification test card has been developed to amend OSIT-J deficits. To determine its clinical effectiveness, we administered the OE to 93 Japanese subjects reporting olfactory dysfunction. They scored their olfactory dysfunction on levels one to five, i.e., normal to anosmic, using the Japan Rhinologic Society Self-Administered Odor Questionnaire (SAOQ) and the visual analog scale (VAS). They also took the Japanese standard olfactory test (T & T olfactometry) and intravenous olfactometry (Alinamin test). Opinions on the OE and OSIT-J were recorded from those previously administered the OSIT-J and testers familiar with OSIT-J administration. The OE took 5.1+/- 1.6 minutes to administer. Scores correlated significantly for the OE, self-reported olfactory function, SAOQ, VAS, T & T olfactometry recognition threshold, and Alinamin latency and duration time. Subjects and testers reported the OE to be easier, shorter, more interesting, and more convenient, indicating its utility in clinical olfactory dysfunction evaluation and its convenience for both subjects and testers.