Pollen season is reflected on symptom load for grass and birch pollen-induced allergic rhinitis in different geographic areas-An EAACI Task Force Report.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) in seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis (AR) depends on the definition of pollen exposure intensity or time period. We recently evaluated pollen and symptom data from Germany to examine the new definitions of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) on pollen season and peak pollen period start and end. Now, we aim to confirm the feasibility of these definitions to properly mirror symptom loads for grass and birch pollen-induced allergic rhinitis in other European geographical areas such as Austria, Finland and France, and therefore their suitability for AIT and clinical practice support. METHODS: Data from twenty-three pollen monitoring stations from three countries in Europe and for 3 years (2014-2016) were used to investigate the correlation between birch and grass pollen concentrations during the birch and grass pollen season defined via the EAACI criteria, and total nasal symptom and medication scores as reported with the aid of the patient's hay-fever diary (PHD). In addition, we conducted a statistical analysis, together with a graphical investigation, to reveal correlations and dependencies between the studied parameters. RESULTS: The analysis demonstrated that the definitions of pollen season as well as peak pollen period start and end as proposed by the EAACI are correlated to pollen-induced symptom loads reported by PHD users during birch and grass pollen season. A statistically significant correlation (slightly higher for birch) has been found between the Total Nasal Symptom and Medication Score (TNSMS) and the pollen concentration levels. Moreover, the maximum symptom levels occurred mostly within the peak pollen periods (PPP) following the EAACI criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our analyses, we confirm the validity of the EAACI definitions on pollen season for both birch and grass and for a variety of geographical locations for the four European countries (including Germany from a previous publication) analyzed so far. On this basis, the use of the EAACI definitions is supported in future clinical trials on AIT as well as in daily routine for optimal patient care. Further evaluation of the EAACI criteria in other European regions is recommended.

State-of-the-art in marketed adjuvants and formulations in Allergen Immunotherapy: A position paper of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI).

Since the introduction of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) over 100 years ago, focus has been on standardization of allergen extracts, with reliable molecular composition of allergens receiving the highest attention. While adjuvants play a major role in European AIT, they have been less well studied. In this Position Paper, we summarize current unmet needs of adjuvants in AIT citing current evidence. Four adjuvants are used in products marketed in Europe: aluminium hydroxide (Al(OH)3 ) is the most frequently used adjuvant, with microcrystalline tyrosine (MCT), monophosphoryl lipid A (MPLA) and calcium phosphate (CaP) used less frequently. Recent studies on humans, and using mouse models, have characterized in part the mechanisms of action of adjuvants on pre-existing immune responses. AIT differs from prophylactic vaccines that provoke immunity to infectious agents, as in allergy the patient is presensitized to the antigen. The intended mode of action of adjuvants is to simultaneously enhance the immunogenicity of the allergen, while precipitating the allergen at the injection site to reduce the risk of anaphylaxis. Contrasting immune effects are seen with different adjuvants. Aluminium hydroxide initially boosts Th2 responses, while the other adjuvants utilized in AIT redirect the Th2 immune response towards Th1 immunity. After varying lengths of time, each of the adjuvants supports tolerance. Further studies of the mechanisms of action of adjuvants may advise shorter treatment periods than the current three-to-five-year regimens, enhancing patient adherence. Improved lead compounds from the adjuvant pipeline are under development and are explored for their capacity to fill this unmet need.

Pollen immunotherapy reduces the development of asthma in children with seasonal rhinoconjunctivitis (the PAT-study).

BACKGROUND: Children with allergic rhinitis are likely to develop asthma. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether specific immunotherapy can prevent the development of asthma and reduce bronchial hyperresponsiveness in children with seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. METHODS: From 6 pediatric allergy centers, 205 children aged 6 to 14 years (mean age, 10.7 years) with grass and/or birch pollen allergy but without any other clinically important allergy were randomized either to receive specific immunotherapy for 3 years or to an open control group. All subjects had moderate to severe hay fever symptoms, but at inclusion none reported asthma with need of daily treatment. Symptomatic treatment was limited to loratadine, levocabastine, sodium cromoglycate, and nasal budesonide. Asthma was evaluated clinically and by peak flow. Methacholine bronchial provocation tests were carried out during the season(s) and during the winter. RESULTS: Before the start of immunotherapy, 20% of the children had mild asthma symptoms during the pollen season(s). Among those without asthma, the actively treated children had significantly fewer asthma symptoms after 3 years as evaluated by clinical diagnosis (odds ratio, 2.52; P <.05). Methacholine bronchial provocation test results improved significant in the active group (P <.05). CONCLUSION: Immunotherapy can reduce the development of asthma in children with seasonal rhinoconjunctivitis.