Safety and efficacy of immunotherapy with the recombinant B-cell epitope-based grass pollen vaccine BM32.

BACKGROUND: BM32 is a grass pollen allergy vaccine based on recombinant fusion proteins consisting of nonallergenic peptides from the IgE-binding sites of the 4 major grass pollen allergens and the hepatitis B preS protein. OBJECTIVE: We sought to study the safety and clinical efficacy of immunotherapy (allergen immunotherapy) with BM32 in patients with grass pollen-induced rhinitis and controlled asthma. METHODS: A double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter allergen immunotherapy field study was conducted for 2 grass pollen seasons. After a baseline season, subjects (n = 181) were randomized and received 3 preseasonal injections of either placebo (n = 58) or a low dose (80 µg, n = 60) or high dose (160 µg, n = 63) of BM32 in year 1, respectively, followed by a booster injection in autumn. In the second year, all actively treated subjects received 3 preseasonal injections of the BM32 low dose, and placebo-treated subjects continued with placebo. Clinical efficacy was assessed by using combined symptom medication scores, visual analog scales, Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaires, and asthma symptom scores. Adverse events were graded according to the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. Allergen-specific antibodies were determined by using ELISA, ImmunoCAP, and ImmunoCAP ISAC. RESULTS: Although statistical significance regarding the primary end point was not reached, BM32-treated subjects, when compared with placebo-treated subjects, showed an improvement regarding symptom medication, visual analog scale, Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire, and asthma symptom scores in both treatment years. This was accompanied by an induction of allergen-specific IgG without induction of allergen-specific IgE and a reduction in the seasonally induced increase in allergen-specific IgE levels in year 2. In the first year, more grade 2 reactions were observed in the active (n = 6) versus placebo (n = 1) groups, whereas there was almost no difference in the second year. CONCLUSIONS: Injections of BM32 induced allergen-specific IgG, improved clinical symptoms of seasonal grass pollen allergy, and were well tolerated.

Sustained 3-year efficacy of pre- and coseasonal 5-grass-pollen sublingual immunotherapy tablets in patients with grass pollen-induced rhinoconjunctivitis.

BACKGROUND: Seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis affects millions of persons. The efficacy of allergen sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) was demonstrated in previous short-term studies. OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the sustained efficacy of 2 dosing regimens of a pre- and coseasonal treatment with 300 IR (index of reactivity) 5-grass-pollen SLIT tablets (Oralair) compared with placebo assessed by using the average adjusted symptom score (AAdSS) at season 3 in adults with grass pollen-induced rhinoconjunctivitis. METHODS: Six hundred thirty-three patients were treated for either 2 or 4 months before and then during the grass pollen season with active or placebo treatment for 3 consecutive seasons. The primary outcome was the AAdSS, a symptom score adjusted for rescue medication use, after 3 consecutive treatment seasons. Secondary outcomes were symptoms and rescue medication score, quality-of-life, and safety assessments. RESULTS: The mean AAdSS was reduced by 36.0% and 34.5% at season 3 in the 2- and 4-month pre- and coseasonal active treatment groups, respectively, compared with that in the placebo group (P < .0001 for both). Reductions were observed in total symptom scores and ISSs and the medication score, with a marked improvement in quality of life for both active groups compared with the placebo group at season 3. Most treatment-emergent adverse events were local reactions expected with SLIT, decreasing in number and intensity in each treatment season. CONCLUSIONS: Sustained efficacy of 2- and 4-month pre- and coseasonal treatment with the 300 IR tablet over 3 pollen seasons was demonstrated, with reduction in symptoms and rescue medication use. The treatment was well tolerated. Adverse events decreased in number and intensity over the 3 seasons.

Sensitization to cereals and peanut evidenced by skin prick test and specific IgE in food-tolerant, grass pollen allergic patients.

BACKGROUND: The botanical relation between grass and cereal grains may be relevant when diagnosing food allergy to cereals. The aim was to investigate the diagnostic specificity of skin prick test (SPT) and specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) tests to cereals and peanut in grass pollen allergic subjects without history of, and clinically reactions to foods botanically related to grass. METHODS: 70 subjects (41 females; mean age 32 years) and 20 healthy controls (13 females; mean age 24 years) were tested by open food challenge (OFC) with cereals and peanut. SPT and sIgE both with Immulite® (Siemens) and ImmunoCAP® (Phadia) to grass and birch pollen, cereals, peanut and bromelain were performed. RESULTS: Of the 65 OFC-negative subjects 29-46% (SPT, depending on cut-off), 20% (Immulite) and 38% (ImmunoCAP) had positive results to one or more of the foods tested. Controls were negative in all tests. Cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants (CCD) as evidenced by reaction to bromelain could explain only a minority of the measured IgE-sensitizations. CONCLUSION: Grass pollen allergic patients with documented food tolerance to cereals and peanut may express significant sensitization. False-positive cereal or peanut allergy diagnoses may be a quantitatively important problem both in routine clinical work and epidemiological studies.

Efficacy of recombinant birch pollen vaccine for the treatment of birch-allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.

BACKGROUND: Recombinant DNA technology has the potential to produce allergen-specific immunotherapy vaccines with defined composition. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a new recombinant birch pollen allergen vaccine in patients with birch pollen allergy. METHODS: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was undertaken to compare the following 3 vaccines in 134 adults with birch pollen allergy: recombinant birch pollen allergen vaccine (rBet v 1a), licensed birch pollen extract, natural purified birch pollen allergen (nBet v 1), and placebo. Patients received 12 weekly injections followed by monthly injections of the maintenance dose containing 15 microg Bet v 1 for 2 years. RESULTS: Significant reductions (about 50%) in rhinoconjunctivitis symptoms (rBet v 1, P = .0002; nBet v 1, P = .0006; birch extract, P = .0024), rescue medication (rBet v 1, P = .0011; nBet v 1, P = .0025; birch extract, P = .0063), and skin sensitivities (P < .0001) were observed in the 3 actively treated groups compared with placebo during 2 consecutive pollen seasons. Clinical improvement was accompanied by marked increases in Bet v 1-specific IgG levels, which were higher in the rBet v 1-treated group than in the birch and nBet v 1-treated groups. New IgE specificities were induced in 3 of 29 patients treated with birch pollen extract, but in none of the 32 rBet v 1-treated or 29 nBet v 1-treated patients. No severe systemic adverse events were observed in the rBet v 1-treated group. CONCLUSION: The rBet v 1-based vaccine was safe and effective in treating birch pollen allergy, and induced a highly specific immune response.

Optimal dose, efficacy, and safety of once-daily sublingual immunotherapy with a 5-grass pollen tablet for seasonal allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Sublingual immunotherapy is well tolerated and data suggest its effectiveness for the treatment of allergic rhinitis in adults, but it lacks optimum dose definition. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy, safety, and optimal dose of grass pollen tablets for immunotherapy of patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. METHODS: In this multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 628 adults with grass pollen rhinoconjunctivitis (confirmed by positive skin prick test and serum-specific IgE) received 1 of 3 doses of a standardized 5-grass pollen extract, or placebo, administered sublingually using a once-daily tablet formulation. The treatment was initiated 4 months before the estimated pollen season and continued throughout the season. The primary outcome was Rhinoconjunctivitis Total Symptom Score; secondary outcomes included 6 individual symptom scores, rescue medication use, quality of life, and safety assessments. RESULTS: Both the 300-index of reactivity (IR) and 500-IR doses significantly reduced mean Rhinoconjunctivitis Total Symptom Score (3.58 +/- 3.0, P = .0001; and 3.74 +/- 3.1, P = .0006, respectively) compared with placebo (4.93 +/- 3.2) in the intent-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. The 100-IR group (4.70 +/- 3.1) score was not significantly different from placebo. Analysis of all secondary efficacy variables (sneezing, runny nose, itchy nose, nasal congestion, watery eyes, itchy eyes, rescue medication usage, and quality of life) confirmed the efficacy of the 300-IR and 500-IR doses. No serious side effects were reported. CONCLUSION: In the first pollen season, the efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy with grass tablets was confirmed. The 300-IR and 500-IR doses both demonstrated significant efficacy compared with placebo. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The risk-benefit ratio favors the use of 300-IR tablets for clinical practice.

Food allergy to apple and specific immunotherapy with birch pollen.

Conflicting results concerning the effect of specific pollen immunotherapy (SIT) on allergy to plant foods have been reported. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of SIT using a birch pollen extract on food allergy with focus on allergy to apple. Seventy-four birch pollen-allergic patients were included in a double-blind, double-dummy, and placebo-controlled comparison of sublingual-swallow (SLIT) and subcutaneous (SCIT) administration of a birch pollen extract. Sixty-nine percent of these patients reported allergy to apple. The clinical reactivity to apple was evaluated by open oral challenges with fresh apple and a questionnaire. The immunoglobulin E (IgE)-reactivity was assessed by skin prick test (SPT), specific IgE, and leukocyte histamine release (HR). Forty patients were included in the final evaluation of the effect of SIT. The challenges were positive in 9 (SCIT), 6 (SLIT), and 8 (placebo) patients after treatment compared to 10, 4, and 10 patients, respectively, before SIT. The symptom scores to apple during challenges decreased in all groups, but only significantly in the placebo group (p = 0.03). As evaluated by the questionnaire, the severity of food allergy in general did not change and there were no differences between the groups. In spite of a significant effect on seasonal hay fever symptoms and use of medication and decrease in IgE-reactivity, SIT was not accompanied by a significant decrease in the severity of allergy to apple compared to placebo. Therefore, oral allergy syndrome (OAS) to apple should not be considered as a main criterion for selecting patients for birch pollen immunotherapy at present.