Complementary and alternative medicine for allergic rhinitis in Japan.

BACKGROUND: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is extensively used in patients with allergic diseases worldwide. The purpose of this study was to investigate the actual situation of CAM practice in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. METHODS: We distributed questionnaires to otolaryngologists at 114 facilities in Japan. The subjects who participated in this study included children <16 years of age and adults ≥16 years of age diagnosed with allergic rhinitis by otolaryngologists. The survey was performed in the period from September 2007 to August 2009. Furthermore, we performed the same investigation out of the hospital setting, such as during general health examinations. All questionnaires were returned to Chiba University and analyzed. RESULTS: The proportions of patients who had ever experimented with CAM in the hospital survey were 7.1% (225/3170) and 19.2% (1416/7363) of children and adults, respectively. Approximately 36.2% of the adult patients thought that the treatments were effective. The main reasons for CAM use were safety, convenience and low price. However, the group who spent more than $1000 on CAM felt more dissatisfaction and anxiety related to treatment at the hospital. The situation of CAM practice was not consistent and was instead influenced by the backgrounds of the subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients who receive CAM report feeling that the effects of treatment provided by hospitals are insufficient and have concerns about the side effects of such treatments. Information regarding standard treatments, as described in the guidelines, should become widely known and diffused, and strong communication with patients should be considered.

A randomized controlled trial of sublingual immunotherapy for Japanese cedar pollinosis.

BACKGROUND: Japanese cedar pollen represents an important and unique allergen. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has been suggested to be a highly effective route of desensitization against a variety of allergens. However, little information is available about its use in cedar pollen allergy. METHODS: A blinded randomized, placebo-controlled trial employing SLIT for cedar pollinosis was conducted over a period of 6 months. Sixty-seven subjects were enrolled and the symptom scores during the pollen season were evaluated by a symptom diary, measurement of cedar-specific IgE and IgG4, and determination of Cry j-specific Th2 clones before SLIT and before and after the pollen season. RESULTS: No major adverse effects were observed in either group. The serum-specific IgG4 activity increased significantly after SLIT in the active group. The active group also exhibited significantly lower symptom scores compared to the placebo. The specific Th2 clone sizes were not significantly different between the groups before the pollen season. However, an increase in the clone size was observed after the pollen season in the placebo group, but not in the active group. CONCLUSION: Use of SLIT for Japanese cedar pollinosis was found to be safe and associated with an increase in cedar-specific IgG4 levels. Such therapy inhibited the increase in Cry j-specific Th2 clone size induced by pollen exposure. Finally, use of SLIT resulted in significant improvement of the clinical symptoms of cedar pollinosis in this patient population. These observations suggest that SLIT may offer another safe approach to the management of cedar pollinosis.