Gene expression profiling of patients with latex and/or vegetable food allergy.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of individuals allergic to latex, exhibiting cross-hypersensitivity with plant-derived food has been frequently reported as the so-called latex-fruit syndrome. Nonetheless, molecular mechanisms underlying allergy to latex and/or fruit are poorly understood. AIM: The aims of this study were to identify candidate genes that may be associated with the pathogenesis of allergy to latex and/or vegetable food, and to assess if similar molecular pathways are involved in both types of hypersensitivity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: DNA microarray analysis was performed to screen the molecular profiles of peripheral blood mononuclear cells isolated from patients with allergy to latex, to fruit, or with latex-fruit syndrome, and from control healthy subjects. RESULTS: Molecular profiling identified an overlapping dataset of genes commonly regulated in all the atopic patients enrolled in this study, suggesting that similar molecular mechanisms are involved in the pathogenesis of allergy to the fruit and/or latex. Several regulators of the innate and acquired immunity reported to polarize the immunological response towards a Th2-mediated immune response were overexpressed in the patients. Evidences suggested that the expression of T-regulatory cells might be defective in allergic patients, as a consequence of a dysregulation of some inflammatory cytokines. Finally, several transcription factors that may be responsible for the Th1/Th2 imbalance were modulated in allergic patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified relevant genes that may help to elucidate the molecular mechanisms underlying allergic disease. Knowledges of critical targets, along with transcription factors regulating gene activity may facilitate the development of new therapeutic options.

The clinical meaning of positive latex sIgE in patients with food/pollen adverse reactions.

Natural rubber latex allergy (NRL-A) is an international problem of public health. About 50-60% of NRL-A patients may present adverse reactions after ingestion of cross-reacting vegetable foods. This condition, called "Latex-fruit Syndrome", is a matter of research. The aim of our study is to distinguish between clinical/subclinical latex-fruit syndrome and cross-sensitization to latex and food/pollen allergens on the basis of latex recombinant allergens. We studied 51 patients with food hypersensitivity and serological evidence of NRL sensitization. The subjects underwent an accurate allergological evaluation (skin prick test with latex, food and pollen extracts, specific IgE to latex and recombinant allergens, challenge provocation tests). The patients were divided in two groups: group A) 34 patients with clinical and serological latex and fruit/vegetable allergies; group B) 17 patients allergic to fruits/vegetables and/or pollens, with serological, but not clinical NRL-A. All the latex challenge tests resulted positive in group A patients and only two patients of group B presented positive cutaneous challenge tests. Moreover, specific IgE-antibodies were detected to rHev b 5, to rHev b 6.01, to rHev b 6.02 and to rHev b 8 (and other profilins) of group A patients, while in group B we observed a monosensitization to Hev b8, probably linked to a cross-sensitization to pollens and foods. At the present state of knowledge, we need a multi-parametric approach based on a combination of clinical history, diagnostic tests (CRD) and latex challenge tests to make diagnosis of latex-fruit syndrome.

Tolerability of aztreonam in patients with cell-mediated allergy to ß-lactams.

BACKGROUND: Cross-reactivity between aztreonam and ß-lactams is poor, but tolerability of aztreonam has been assessed in a few groups of patients suffering from IgE-mediated allergy to ß-lactams. The aim of this study was to assess the cross-reactivity of aztreonam with other ß-lactams and its tolerability in patients with cell-mediated allergy to these drugs. METHODS: We studied 78 patients with cell-mediated allergy to ß-lactams who underwent skin prick, immediate and delayed-reading intradermal tests as well as patch tests with penicilloyl-polylysine, minor determinant mixture, semi-synthetic penicillins, cephalosporins, aztreonam and imipenem. Patients with negative allergy testing with aztreonam underwent an intramuscular test dosing and were observed for 3 h. RESULTS: Our patients experienced 94 non-immediate reactions; delayed-onset urticaria (34 cases), maculopapular exanthema (13 cases), urticaria/angioedema (15 cases) and itching erythema (13 cases) were the most reported symptoms. Amoxicillin (35 cases), ampicillin (28 cases) and bacampicillin (18 cases) were the most involved drugs. All patients had a positive patch test and/or a positive delayed-reading intradermal test to at least 1 ß-lactam antibiotic and none had a positive patch or delayed-reading intradermal test to aztreonam. Then, 65 patients underwent intramuscular test dosing with aztroenam, and none of them had a clinical reaction. CONCLUSIONS: Our data confirm the lack of cross-reactivity between ß-lactams and aztreonam in patients with cell-mediated allergy to these drugs. Delayed-reading intradermal tests and patch tests with aztreonam represent a simple and rapid diagnostic tool to establish tolerability in ß-lactam-allergic patients.

Allergic and non-allergic drug hypersensitivity reactions in children.

Adverse drug reactions (ADR) are an important medical problem. The aim of this study is to investigate the clinical characteristics of children with ADR and to assess the tolerability of alternative drugs in children (under 16 yrs of age) with a history of ADR. We studied 278 children (132 males and 146 females). Patients were studied by recording personal history and performing in vivo skin testing, in vitro laboratory tests and challenge tests. Patients who had experienced mild adverse reactions underwent challenge tests without any premedication; patients with a clinical history of moderate reactions, received a premedication with sodium chromolyn 30 min before the oral challenge; patients with a clinical history of severe reactions or undergoing parenteral challenges, were given an antihistamine 30 minutes before. A total of 660 adverse events were reported with 126 different drugs involved. Antimicrobial agents were the most involved drugs (51.7%). Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were involved in 22.7% of episodes. The most reported symptoms were cutaneous. Allergy testing was negative in 272 patients. A diagnosis of drug allergy was reported for 6 patients. A total of 669 challenge tests were performed. 639 were negative at first attempt while 22 were positive. Eight were repeated using a different premedication and resulted negative. Hypersensitivity drug reactions in children are mainly non-allergic. A premedication with sodium cromolyn or with oral H1-antihistamines may be useful in preventing ADR.

Challenge tests in the diagnosis of latex allergy.

The aim of this study is to evaluate the sensitivity, specificity and safety of challenge tests and their usefulness in the diagnosis of latex allergy. Forty adult subjects (F/M = 34/6, aged 18-66 yrs) with a history of adverse reactions after latex exposure and positive prick test and/or specific IgE to latex were enrolled. They were compared with 20 control subjects. They underwent provocative (cutaneous, mucous-oral, sublingual, conjunctival, nasal, bronchial, vaginal) tests. Symptoms and drug scores were recorded for each patient during challenges. All patients reacted to at least one of the following: cutaneous, nasal and conjunctival tests. No systemic reactions requiring epinephrine occurred. Of the challenges, the vaginal test resulted as the safest, but it had low sensitivity and many limits related to the procedure. According to our data, bronchial and nasal tests had the highest sensitivity (76% and 82% respectively), and were more precise than other tests in determining latex exposure and symptoms, but the bronchial test also presented the highest rate of risk. Mucous and cutaneous tests resulted as the most reliable. For all the tests, specificity and positive predictive value were 100%. All control subjects resulted negative to all challenges. There were no statistically significant changes in skin and serologic tests between the first and second visits. Correlations between MIS and skin tests and between MIS and serum tests were not found. Challenges can be considered safe diagnostic procedures. Tests that most faithfully reproduce natural exposure, on the basis of a patient's history, are preferable.

Cross-reactivity and tolerability of imipenem in patients with delayed-type, cell-mediated hypersensitivity to beta-lactams.

BACKGROUND: Administration of imipenem-cilastatin to patients with IgE-mediated hypersensitivity to beta-lactams has always been considered potentially harmful. Recent studies have demonstrated the tolerability of carbapenems (imipenem-cilastatin and meropenem) in patients with IgE-mediated hypersensitivity to beta-lactams; there are no studies on this topic regarding patients with cell-mediated allergy to beta-lactams. The aim of this study is to assess cross-reactivity and tolerability of imipenem in patients with cell-mediated allergy to beta-lactams. METHODS: From our database we selected 73 patients with cell-mediated allergy to beta-lactams, diagnosed by means of immediate-type skin tests, delayed reading intradermal tests, patch tests and detection of specific IgE. Patients with negative patch tests with imipenem-cilastatin underwent an intramuscular test dosing. RESULTS: Our patients had a total of 94 nonimmediate reactions to penicillins. All patients had positive patch tests and/or delayed reading intradermal tests for at least one of the penicillin reagent tested and negative immediate-type skin tests and specific IgE. Four patients out of 73 had a positive patch tests to at least one penicillin reagent and imipenem-cilastatin showing cross-reactivity. Sixty-four patients underwent the imipenem-cilastatin intramuscular test dosing and none of them had a clinical reaction. CONCLUSIONS: Our rate of cross-reactivity between imipenem-cilastatin and other beta-lactams was 5.5%. This result is different from previous findings and this may be explained by the fact that we investigated patients with cell-mediated allergy to beta-lactams. Patients with cell-mediated allergy to beta-lactams should undergo patch tests and a tolerance challenge test before treatment with imipenem-cilastatin.

Efficacy and safety of 5-grass pollen sublingual immunotherapy tablets in patients with different clinical profiles of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.

BACKGROUND: The optimal dose of grass pollen tablets for sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis patients was previously established in a multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in 628 adults. Patients were randomized to receive once-daily 5-grass pollen sublingual tablets of 100 IR (index of reactivity), 300 IR or 500 IR, or placebo starting 4 months before the pollen season. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this complementary analysis was to determine whether 300 IR 5-grass pollen SLIT-tablets is effective in different subtypes of patients who are allergic to grass pollen. METHODS: Different subgroups could be identified regarding comorbidities (with or without asthma during the grass-pollen season), sensitization (mono/polysensitization) and symptom severity. An additional exploratory analysis was performed within four subgroups based on pre-treatment assessment: Group 1=high specific IgE; Group 2=high symptom scores; Group 3=high skin sensitivity; Group 4=any of Group 1, 2 or 3. RESULTS: Asthma and sensitization status were not significant covariates as the average Rhinoconjunctivitis Total Symptom Score (RTSS) was identical for patients with and without grass-pollen asthma, as well as for mono- and polysensitized patients. Across the four subgroups, average RTSSs (+/- SD) for the optimal dosage (300 IR) were 3.91 +/- 3.16, 3.83 +/- 3.14, 2.55 +/- 2.13 and 3.61 +/- 2.97, for subgroups 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. ANCOVA showed that in Group 1 average RTSS did not differ significantly with different doses of SLIT. In Groups 2, 3 and 4, doses of 300 IR and 500 IR were significantly more effective than 100 IR and placebo (P< or =0.035). All doses of SLIT administered in this study can be considered safe in the patients investigated. CONCLUSIONS: The risk-benefit ratio validates the use of 300 IR tablets in clinical practice in all of these patient subgroups, regardless of severity profile, sensitization status and presence of asthma.

Sublingual desensitization in patients with wasp venom allergy: preliminary results.

The aim of this paper is to assess in an open prospective pilot case-control study the tolerability, safety and efficacy of an ultra-rush sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) protocol with Vespula venom in wasp allergic patients compared to subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT). Forty-one wasp allergic patients were treated with sublingual (SLIT group) or subcutaneous (SCIT group) ultrarush immunotherapy with Vespula venom extract. All patients underwent skin tests and serum specific IgE and IgG4 detection before enrollment and after 6, 12 and 24 months of immunotherapy. The SLIT group consisted of 21 (6 females and 15 males) patients who received increasing doses of Vespula venom (Aquagen, ALK-Abellò) until the final dose of 30 drops of extract in 3 hours, containing 100,000 SQ-U/ml. The maintenance dose was of 10 drops of pure venom extract 3 times a week, for a total dose of 100,000 SQ-U weekly (corresponding to 100 microgram of venom extract). The SCIT group consisted of 20 patients (16 males and 4 females) who were treated with subcutaneous ultrarush immunotherapy with Vespula venom extract (Pharmalgen, Alk-Abellò). Patients received 101.1 microgram of Vespula venom in 3 hours and were treated with 100 microgram of wasp venom monthly. During the ultrarush sublingual treatment 2 patients (9.5%) experienced mild side-effects. Specific IgE and specific IgG to wasp venom did not show any significant modification. Four patients were field-stung by a wasp during the treatment (for a total of 6 stings). Two patients (3 stings), with a previous clinical history of a grade III and IV reaction, did not experience any reaction. One patient, with a previous grade II reaction, showed a large local reaction. The fourth patient, with a previous grade III reaction, was re-stung twice (after 12 and 24 months) with two systemic reactions (SR) (mild throat constriction). During the ultrarush SCIT phase, 3 (15%) patients experienced side-effects: 2 of them showed a large local reaction and 1 had headache and stomach ache. Specific IgE showed a significant (P = 0.001) increase after 6 months of treatment and then returned to baseline levels while specific IgG showed a significant (P = 0.001) increase after 6, 12 and 24 months in comparison with baseline. Nine patients were field-stung during the treatment: 8 of them experienced large local reactions; one patient (11%) experienced an SR (dizziness). Our results, even if in a small number of patients, suggest that in patients with Hymenoptera sting allergy SLIT could be efficacious with a good tolerability profile when compared to SCIT. Larger studies are needed to assess efficacy, safety and tolerability profile of wasp venom SLIT.

Desensitization to co-trimoxazole in a patient with fixed drug eruption.

Although co-trimoxazole is a major cause of fixed drug eruption, there are no reports in the literature of desensitization protocols for co-trimoxazole in such patients. We present the case of an 85-year-old woman with a fixed drug eruption to co-trimoxazole. Since she needed co-trimoxazole therapy for treatment of infection of a prosthetic hip by Staphylococcus aureus, she underwent allergy testing with co-trimoxazole and its components sulfamethoxazole and trimethoprim. Allergy tests were all negative and a diagnosis of nonallergic hypersensitivity reaction to co-trimoxazole was made. Based on previous experience, we decided to attempt a desensitization protocol with co-trimoxazole. After 10 days, the patient could receive 800 mg of sulfamethoxazole and 160 mg of trimethoprim twice a day and no adverse reactions were observed. We suggest that desensitization protocols with co-trimoxazole be considered in patients with fixed drug eruption, especially when there are no alternative drugs.

Tolerability of aztreonam in patients with IgE-mediated hypersensitivity to beta-lactams.

Cross-reactivity between aztreonam and penicillins is poor, but clinical tolerance of aztreonam has been assessed, by means of tolerance challenge tests, only in a few groups of penicillin-allergic patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate the tolerability of aztreonam in a large group of beta-lactam-allergic patients. We studied all patients (greater than 14 years of age), with a clinical history of immediate reactions to any beta-lactam and with positive immediate-type skin tests and/or positive specific IgE to any of the studied beta-lactam; they were studied by means of: skin prick and intradermal tests with penicilloyl polylysine, minor determinant mixture, semisynthetic penicillins, cephalosporins, aztreonam and imipenem; detection of specific IgE to penicillin G, penicillin V, ampicillin, amoxicillin, cefaclor and ceftriaxone. Patients with negative immediate-type skin tests with aztreonam then underwent a graded intramuscular challenge. Forty-five patients (mean age 46.1 +/- 15.2 years), 27 females and 18 males, had positive skin tests and/or specific IgE to at least one of the studied beta-lactams. The most involved drugs were amoxicillin (23 cases), ampicillin (9 cases), penicillin G (8 cases) and other beta-lactams in the remaining cases. The most frequent reactions were anaphylaxis (27 cases) and urticaria (15 cases). All patients had negative intradermal tests with aztreonam and all patients tolerated the intramuscular graded challenge. Our data confirm the lack of cross-reactivity between beta-lactams and aztreonam. Immediate-type skin tests with aztreonam represent a simple and rapid diagnostic tool to establish tolerability in beta-lactam-allergic patients who urgently need this drug.

Sublingual-oral rush desensitization to mixed cow and sheep milk: a case report.

We attempted an oral rush desensitization with mixed cow and sheep milk in a 6-year-old boy who had had adverse reactions to cow and goat milks. Skin prick tests and specific immunoglobulin (Ig) E to cow, sheep and goat milks were positive. The double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge with cow milk was positive too. He underwent a 12-day sublingual-oral desensitization treatment with mixed cow and sheep milk. Specific IgE and IgG4 were measured. Open oral challenges with cow milk, sheep milk and sheep cheeses were also performed after the desensitization. At the end of the desensitizing treatment our patient could tolerate 120 mL of mixed milk. Specific IgE levels did not vary, whereas an increase of specific IgG4 concentrations was observed. Open oral challenges with cow and sheep milks and sheep cheeses were negative. Oral rush desensitization may represent an alternative approach to the treatment of food allergy in children.

Sublingual immunotherapy for latex allergy: tolerability and safety profile of rush build-up phase.

OBJECTIVE: Sublingual immunotherapy represents an efficient therapeutic tool for the management of latex allergic patients. Local and systemic adverse reactions are reported, and risk factors for those reactions are poorly understood. The aim of this study is to compare two different rush induction protocols (2-day and 3-day) in terms of safety and tolerability and effectiveness in reaching the maintenance dose. METHODS: Twenty-three outpatients (F/M = 18:5; 5-64 years of age), with latex allergy were randomly assigned to: Group 1 (2-day) and Group 2 (3-day). Adverse reactions were classified by their type and severity. RESULTS: Twenty-one subjects, 10 from Group 1 and 11 from Group 2, reached the maintenance dose, 70% of them without side effects. Seven adverse events were reported in Group 1: three were local (oral itching) and spontaneously remitted; four were systemic (Grade-2: two reactions; Grade-3: two reactions) and were effectively controlled with drugs. The protocol was interrupted in two cases because of recurrent reactions. No reactions were reported in Group 2. Age, gender, atopy, specific IgE, skin prick tests and sublingual challenge did not seem to influence the risk of side effects significantly. No significant modification of skin tests and specific IgE levels were reported in both groups. The cutaneous test turned negative in 16 patients, eight from Group 1 (80%) and eight from Group 2 (73%). The remaining patients (two from Group 1 and three from Group 2) showed a reduction of latex reactivity, in terms of symptom score (MIS: 2 vs. 0.5 in Group 1, 3 vs. 1 in Group 2). CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the safety of rush induction. The 3-day protocol was better tolerated than the 2-day. Significant risk factors for the occurrence of adverse reactions were not identified. Only the type of protocol but not patient-related parameters seemed predictive of side-effects.

Multiple chemical sensitivity: current concepts.

Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MS) is characterized by a wide range of symptoms when affected patients come into contact with several chemical products. Very little is known of either the diagnosis or the suitable treatment. In this study we report the case of a 38-year-old woman, previously diagnosed as suffering from MCS, who was referred for an oral health evaluation. After removing all the existing restorations and extracting the diseased teeth, a removable partial denture without metal structure was made after testing her hypersensitivity to these materials. The one year follow-up of the patient did not show any remarkable reaction, confirming the reduction of a large number of MCS symptoms and the increase in her quality of life.

Prevalence of latex allergy in spina bifida: genetic and environmental risk factors.

AIM OF STUDY: To evaluate the prevalence of latex allergy in a population of children with spina bifida (SB) and to assess the role of early exposure to latex products and others risk factors. INTRODUCTION: SB is related with an higher incidence of latex allergic reactions. These patients received repeated surgical procedures, implant of latex-containing materials and catheterization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty consecutive subjects affected with SB besides answering a questionnaire, underwent a skin-prick test (SPT) to latex and the determination of the specific serum IgE (RAST CAP) to latex. 40% (32/80) of the patients showed a latex sensitization with specific IgE > 0.7 kU/I but only twelve of the 32 sensitized patients (40%) suffered from clinical reactions to latex (urticaria, conjunctivitis, angioedema, rhinitis, bronchial asthma). Number of surgical procedures, but particularly early exposure to latex and familiarity for allergy are correlated with latex allergy (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Latex allergy in SB children is multifactorial situation related with a disease-associated propensity for latex sensitization, early exposure and number of surgical procedures. Prophylactic measures to avoid the exposure, not only in the sanitary environment, through the institution of latex-safe routes and every day, prevent potentially serious allergic reactions.

Applicability of extracellular electrical impedance tomography in monitoring respiratory tract inflammation.

BACKGROUND: The presence of persistent mild inflammation is widely considered to provide the immunopathogenic basis for bronchial, nasal, or sinusal inflammation between critical phases and in asymptomatic periods. Exhaled nitric oxide (NO) is currently the most reliable marker of rhinobronchial inflammation, but its routine assessment is difficult as the test is available only in highly specialized centers. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the agreement between a new diagnostic method (extracellular electrical impedance tomography) and immunological and clinical symptom scores, anterior rhinomanometry, peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR), serum eosinophil cationic protein (ECP) level, and blood eosinophil count in the clinical monitoring of respiratory tract inflammation before and after treatment of asthma or rhinitis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighty-seven patients were studied; 73 had mild persistent asthma (PEFR > or = 20% below predicted) and 14 had rhinitis. At baseline (TO), the patients underwent a medical examination to record symptom scores, PEFR, anterior rhinomanometry, an extracellular electrolytic conductivity test (bioimpedance tomography), serum ECP level and blood eosinophil count. Appropriate treatment was prescribed, following the guidelines of the Global Initiative for Asthma and the Allergic Rhinitis and Its Impact on Asthma. After 21 days of therapy (T1), the patients were re-evaluated for the same parameters. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the good agreement (Cohen's kappa = 0.689) between the symptom scores of patients with rhinitis and the findings of extracellular tomography and very good agreement (kappa = 0.846) between symptom scores of asthma patients and extracellular tomography. These findings validate the use of this new technique for the real-time monitoring and adjustment of treatment in these clinical settings.

Anaphylactic reactions during cesarean section.

Sensitization to latex seems to occur more frequently in women than in men. Obstetric and gynecological surgical procedures have recently been shown to be a common setting for latex anaphylaxis. We analyzed all the cases of anaphylactic reactions during 1240 cesarean sections in 2004; the patients were questioned for risk factors and underwent allergy testing for drugs and latex. Four patients had anaphylaxis under spinal anesthesia and in all cases it was due to latex allergy. Reported symptoms included facial edema, profuse sweating, itching, generalized erythematous rash and hypotension. Only one patient manifested a severe reaction which included bronchospasm, dyspnea, tachypnea and anaphylactic shock, requiring orotracheal intubation and epinephrine. Our data showed a high incidence (1:310) of intraoperative latex anaphylactic reactions in the one-year study period. This may be related to the very specific population (all women) in a very specific setting (obstetrics). To prevent anaphylactic reactions during obstetric surgery it is important to identify potential risk factors to include, for example atopy, adverse reactions to foods and latex items. If latex allergy is confirmed or strongly suspected, patients should be managed in a latex-safe environment. Premedication with antihistamines and steroids might be useful to further reduce the risk. After the delivery, specific desensitization may represent a good therapeutic option.

Pharmacoeconomics of subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy.

The current burden of allergic diseases, estimated by both direct and indirect costs, is very relevant. In fact the cost estimation for rhinitis amount globally to 4-10 billion dollars/year in the U.S. and to an average annual cost of 1089 euros per child/adolescent and 1543 euros per adult in Europe. The estimated annual costs in Northern America for asthma amounted to 14 billion dollars. Consequently, preventive strategies aimed at reducing the clinical severity of allergy are potentially able to reduce its costs. Among them, specific immunotherapy (SIT) joins to the preventive capacity the carryover effect once treatment is discontinued. A number of studies, mainly conducted in the US and Germany demonstrated a favourable cost-benefit balance. In the nineties, most surveys on patients with allergic rhinitis and asthma reported significant reductions of the direct and indirect costs in subjects treated with SIT compared to those treated with symptomatic drugs. This is fully confirmed in recent studies conducted in European countries: in Denmark the direct cost per patient/year of the standard care was more than halved following SIT; in Italy a study on Parietaria allergic patients demonstrated a significant difference in favor of SIT plus drug treatment for three years versus drug treatment alone, with a cost reduction starting from the 2nd year and increasing to 48% at the 3rd year, with a highly statistical significance which was maintained up to the 6th year, i.e. 3 years after stopping immunotherapy, corresponding to a net saving for each patient at the final evaluation of 623 euros per year; in France a cost/efficacy analysis comparing SIT and current symptomatic treatment in adults and children with dust mite and pollen allergy showed remarkable savings with SIT for both allergies in adults and children.

Economic evaluation of sublingual immunotherapy: an analysis of literature.

Allergic rhinitis and asthma constitute a global health problem because of their very high prevalence and the consequent burden of disease, concerning medical and economical issues. Among the treatments of allergy, specific immunotherapy has the capacity to favourably alter the natural history of the disease both during and after its performance and thus to reduce the direct and indirect costs of allergic rhinitis and asthma. A number of studies reported such cost reduction for traditional, subcutaneous immunotherapy and recent data demonstrate that also sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is associated to economic advantages and/or monetary savings, specifically in terms of reduction of disease economic burden. Only few formal economic assessments of SLIT have been carried out so far, this article will present and discuss the published studies addressed to this issue. The data obtained, although the number of studies is still limited, provide preliminary evidence supporting a SLIT effect on sparing costs for respiratory allergy.