Efficacy of N-acetyl aspartyl glutamic acid versus fluorometholone for treating allergic conjunctivitis in an environmental exposure chamber.

BACKGROUND: Topical mast cell stabilizers were previously shown to treat the signs and symptoms of seasonal and perennial allergic conjunctivitis safely and effectively in active and placebo-controlled trials. However, mast cell stabilizers have not been compared to topical corticosteroids for efficacy. We tested the non-inferiority of a topical mast cell stabilizer, N-acetyl aspartyl glutamic acid (4.9%, NAAGA), compared to fluorometholone (0.1%, FM) during controlled exposures to the airborne birch pollen allergen, Bet v 1, in an environmental exposure chamber (EEC). METHODS: This randomized, cross-over, investigator-blinded study included 24 patients with a history of birch pollen allergic conjunctivitis. Patients were randomized to 5 days of treatment with NAAGA, then FM (n = 12) or FM, then NAAGA (n = 12). After each treatment, patients were exposed to a fixed airborne concentration of Bet v 1 in ALYATEC EEC. The primary endpoint was the amount of allergen required to trigger a conjunctival response (Abelson score ≥5). Groups were compared with a linear model for cross-over studies. Non-inferiority was assumed, when the lower bound of the risk ratio confidence interval (CI) was >0.5. RESULTS: At screening, the mean time-to-conjunctival response was 72.5 ± 35.9 min. NAAGA and FM extended the response time to 114.8 ± 55.0 and 116.6 ± 51.5 min respectively. The mean amounts of allergen required to trigger a conjunctival response were 1.165 ng after NAAGA and 1.193 ng after FM treatment. The risk ratio for the conjunctival response was 0.977 (95% CI: 0.812; 1.174), which indicated non-inferiority. Adverse events occurred less frequently with NAAGA (29.2%) than with FM (58.3%). CONCLUSION: In patients with allergic conjunctivitis to birch pollen, NAAGA was non-inferior to FM in exposures to airborne Bet v 1. The EEC was a good model for simulating real-life airborne allergen exposure and for demonstrating the efficacy and safety of eye drops for treating allergic conjunctivitis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not registered.

Validation of Strasbourg environmental exposure chamber (EEC) ALYATEC® in mite allergic subjects with asthma.

Objective: Environmental Exposure Chamber (EEC) should have standardized and controlled allergenic and non-allergenic exposures to perform reproducible clinical studies. The aim was to demonstrate that mite exposure in the Alyatec® EEC could induce early (EAR) and/or late asthmatic reactions (LAR) in at least 60% of subjects allergic to mite.Methods: The EEC has a volume of 147-m3 with 20 seats. The nebulized particle number, airborne Der p1, endotoxins, and volatile organic compound (VOC) concentrations were measured. Twenty-four asthmatics allergic to mite were randomly exposed to 15, 25, and 46 ng/m3 Der p1. Specificity was assessed in not mite-sensitized asthmatics.Results: No significant endotoxin or VOC contamination was measured. The mean inter-assay CVs were 12.5% for the airborne particle number and 28.7% for airborne Der p1 concentrations. For the three Der p1 concentrations, at least 88% of the subjects developed EAR and/or LAR, and at least 46% developed a dual response. No reaction occurred with placebo or in the control group. No severe bronchial reaction occurred.Conclusions: The Alyatec® EEC demonstrated a tight control of allergenic and non-allergenic exposures. The EEC was clinically validated, with airborne Der p1 levels close to levels found in natural settings.