Treatment Of Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis Research Articles

Intranasal administration of a synthetic TLR4 agonist INI-2004 significantly reduces allergy symptoms following therapeutic administration in a murine model of allergic sensitization.

Atopic diseases have been steadily increasing over the past decades and effective disease-modifying treatment options are urgently needed. These studies introduce a novel synthetic Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) agonist, INI-2004, with remarkable efficacy as a therapeutic intranasal treatment for seasonal allergic rhinitis. Using a murine airway allergic sensitization model, the impact of INI-2004 on allergic responses was assessed. One or two intranasal doses of INI-2004 significantly reduced airway resistance, eosinophil influx, and Th2 cytokine production - providing strong evidence of allergic desensitization. Further investigations revealed that a liposomal formulation of INI-2004 exhibited better safety and efficacy profiles compared to aqueous formulations. Importantly, the liposomal formulation demonstrated a 1000-fold increase in the maximum tolerated intravenous dose in pigs. Pre-clinical GLP toxicology studies in rats and pigs confirmed the safety of liposomal INI-2004, supporting its selection for human clinical trials. These findings lay the groundwork for the ongoing clinical evaluation of INI-2004 in allergic rhinitis as a stand-alone therapy for individuals poly-sensitized to multiple seasonal allergens. The study underscores the significance of innovative immunotherapy approaches in reshaping the landscape of allergic rhinitis management.

Immunothérapie allergénique aux pollens de graminées : profil de sécurité et d’efficacité

IntroductionRespiratory allergies to grass pollens are very widespread in the general population and the treatment is generally symptomatic which sometimes remains insufficient. Grass pollen allergen immunotherapy is currently the only etiological treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis apart from allergenic eviction. AimThe aim was to study the effectiveness of sublingual ITA tablets with 5-grasses on allergic disease and describe the adverse effects after one year of treatment. MethodsWe conducted a prospective, descriptive and evaluative study including 40 patients suffering from grass pollen allergic rhinitis. A grass pollen sublingual allergen immunotherapy was received and patients were followed during a one-year treatment to study the efficacy and the safety profile. ResultsThe mean age was 30.9±12.25 years. The sex ratio (M/F) was 0.48. Allergic conjunctivitis was associated in 70% and allergic asthma was associated in 48% of cases. Allergen immunotherapy side effects were mild, consisting of local side effects. No severe side effects were observed. A decrease in allergic rhinitis symptoms was observed in 83% with improvement in medication score in 65%. All patients noted a decrease in conjunctivitis symptoms with a total regression in 54% of cases. A better asthma control was noted in 33%. Among the 19 patients suffering from asthma, we could decrease the drug use in 63% of cases during the first year of treatment. An improvement of the quality of life was observed in 78% of cases. Allergen immunotherapy was significantly more efficient in allergic rhinitis and conjunctivitis with patients under 30years old. ConclusionGrass pollen allergen immunotherapy leads safely to the regression of allergy symptoms and improves the therapeutic load and the quality of life.

Limited beneficial effects of systemic steroids when added to standard of care treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis

Intramuscular injections with methylprednisolone treating allergic rhinitis (AR) have a long history. Modern guidelines are designed to dissuade this treatment, but it´s frequently used, especially in primary care. This despite of concern for side effects and lack of modern placebo-controlled studies. This study was designed to evaluate if methylprednisolone, could significantly improve symptoms of birch pollen induced AR and reduce the concomitant use of standard of care medication. Forty-two patients with birch pollen induced AR were randomized to treatment with methylprednisolone (80 mg) or placebo (NaCl 0.9%). Daily symptom- and medication scores was registered for 3 weeks. Quality of life questionnaires Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22) and Juniper Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionaire (Juniper RQLQ) were registered at trial start and at the end of the 3 weeks period. The combined symptom- and medication scores indicate that the methylprednisolone treated group [mean Area Under the Curve (AUC) 37.1 (SD 16.2 (95% CI 29.9–44.6))] was significantly better off than the placebo group [mean AUC 49.1 (SD 10.1 (95% CI 44.5–53.7))], p = 0.008. No significant difference between the groups were found in the SNOT-22 and Juniper RQLQ analysis. Registered side effects were few and mild. The limited beneficial effects of systemic steroids when added to standard of care in combination of its potential risk for side effects, speaks against its use for treatment of severe seasonal allergic rhinitis. The lack of difference in quality-of-life further underscores this result.

Modulation of Pro-Allergic T Cell Responses by PQ Grass 27600 SU as a Treatment for Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis: A RDBPC Pilot Study

PQ Grass, a grass pollen allergoid using MicroCrystalline Tyrosine and Monophosphoryl Lipid A as an adjuvant system, is a well-tolerated subcutaneous immunotherapy for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). We investigated the efficacy and cellular mechanisms underlying PQ Grass 27600 SU in subjects with SAR.

Induction of Local and Systemic Blocking Antibodies by PQ Grass 27600 SU for the Treatment of Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis: A RDBPC Pilot Study

PQ Grass, a grass pollen allergoid using MicroCrystalline Tyrosine and Monophosphoryl Lipid A as an adjuvant system, is a well-tolerated subcutaneous immunotherapy for seasonal allergic rhinitis. We hypothesised that PQ Grass 27600 SU is effective in inducing functional allergen-specific blocking antibodies.

The condition of the vegetative nervous system and methods of correction of its changes in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis

Allergic diseases represent a major public health problem worldwide. The frequency of allergic rhinitis in the general population is 10-20%, 68% of which is seasonal allergic rhinitis. In 57.14% of patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis, initial vagotonia combined with predominantly over-provisioning activity of the hyperdiastolic type was found. According to the severity of the course of exacerbation of seasonal allergic rhinitis 18,25% had mild course, 57,94% - medium severity of course and 23,81% - severe course of the disease. Application of corrective vegetotropic therapy allows to increase the effectiveness of treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis exacerbation in vagotonics (57,14% ) in 1,21 times in terms of total clinical effectiveness and in 1,64 times in terms of clinical recovery of patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. The average increase in the effectiveness of complex treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis including vagotonia correction is 1.42 times.

Intranasal Olopatadine-Mometasone in the Treatment of Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis.

To review the pharmacology, efficacy, and safety of intranasal olopatadine hydrochloride-mometasone furoate (OM) combination in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). The PubMed database and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched using the following terms: mometasone + olopatadine, GSP301, mometasone furoate, and olopatadine hydrochloride. Articles published in English between January 1987 and August 2022 related to pharmacology, safety, and clinical trials were assessed. In 2 phase II clinical trials, twice-daily (BID) and once-daily (QDay) intranasal OM demonstrated significant improvements in reflective total nasal symptom score (rTNSS) (BID P < 0.001 and QDay P < 0.001) and instantaneous total nasal symptom score (iTNSS) (BID P < 0.001 and P < 0.0001; QDay P < 0.001 and P < 0.0001). In 2 phase III clinical trials, BID OM showed significant improvements in rTNSS vs. placebo (P < 0.001), olopatadine monotherapy (P = 0.03 and P = 0.003), and mometasone monotherapy (P = 0.02 and P = 0.059). OM is indicated for treatment of SAR symptoms. Caution with use must be considered for certain high-risk patients, existing tuberculosis; fungal, bacterial, viral, or parasitic infections; or ocular herpes simplex. Due to its quick and sustained onset of action, OM may be an ideal agent for initial treatment of moderate-severe SAR for patients 12 years and older. OM significantly improves SAR symptoms and is a viable treatment option in short-term SAR.

Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy In Combination With Vitamin D In Patients With Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis

Introduction — Currently, over 500 million people suffer from allergic rhinitis worldwide. For many decades, allergen-specific immunotherapy (ASIT) was the only effective treatment for seasonal allergic rhinitis. The development of molecular allergy diagnostics via ISAC technology allows identifying true and cross-reactive allergens, thereby increasing the information content in selecting an appropriate ASIT. For many years, studies have been conducted on the immunomodulatory effect of vitamin D. These studies revealed the presence of a link between allergic rhinitis and vitamin D deficiency. In this regard, there is a strong need to assess the status of the population in terms of vitamin D for further examination of the effect of the vitamin D inclusion in the treatment regimen on the efficacy of ASIT. Objective — To evaluate the efficacy of ASIT in combination with vitamin D in polysensitized patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis in Karaganda Oblast, Kazakhstan. Material and Methods — Randomized controlled open-label study was conducted during July 2019 – September 2020 at Divera Allergy Center in Karaganda. Patients received sublingual ASIT: the experimental group received ASIT in combination with vitamin D, while comparison group received ASIT in accordance with the standard scheme. Clinical efficacy was monitored by assessing the severity of symptoms and the content of allergen-specific immunoglobulin E. ISAC test was employed to determine the allergen-specific immunoglobulin E. The significance of intergroup differences was determined by statistical methods: the nonparametric Mann-Whitney test for comparing independent groups and the Wilcoxon test for comparing dependent groups. Results — Vitamin D deficiency was revealed in the blood serum of patients in both groups (median value of 16.32 ng/ml and 15.65 ng/ml, respectively). An overall symptom severity score after treatment demonstrated statistically significant changes between the two groups (p=0.777; Mann-Whitney criterion). In the experimental group, the median of overall symptom severity score declined by 46% (from 11 points to 6 points), and in the comparison group by 22% (from 11.5 points to 9 points). Conclusion — As a result of our study, it was established that the adapted scheme of ASIT in combination with vitamin D in polysensitized patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis in Karaganda Oblast (Kazakhstan) was more effective, compared with the conventional scheme of ASIT. Hence, in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis in the regions with known vitamin D deficiency, it is necessary to determine the vitamin D content with the purpose of its subsequent inclusion in the complex ASIT-based therapy.

Acupuncture and its effect on cytokine and chemokine profiles in seasonal allergic rhinitis: a preliminary three-armed, randomized, controlled trial

PurposeNumerous studies have demonstrated effectiveness for acupuncture in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). However, the underlying mechanism remains still unclear.Methods29 SAR patients were recruited from a large randomized, controlled trial investigating the efficacy of acupuncture in SAR. 16 patients were treated by acupuncture plus rescue medication (RM, cetirizine), 6 patients received sham acupuncture plus RM and 8 patients RM alone over 8 weeks. Patients were blinded to the allocation to real or sham acupuncture. At baseline and different time-points during intervention, plasma and nasal concentration of mediators of various biological functions were determined in addition to validated disease-specific questionnaires.ResultsThe concentration of biomarkers related to the Th1-, Th2-, and Treg-cluster was not changed in patients who received acupuncture, in neither plasma nor nasal fluid. However, with respect to eotaxin and some unspecific pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL-1b, IL-8, IP-10, MIP-1b, MCP-1), acupuncture led to a, partially significantly, lower nasal concentration than sham acupuncture or RM. Furthermore, the nasal symptom score was significantly reduced in patients only after real acupuncture.ConclusionIn SAR, acupuncture reduces the intranasal unspecific inflammation, but does not seem to act immunologically on the Th1–Th2-imbalance.

Omalizumab is effective in the preseasonal treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis.

BackgroundTo date no study has evaluated the efficacy of preseasonal omalizumab therapy with cost effective dose and at appropriate time point compared with standard medication in seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) patients.MethodsThis was a prospective randomized controlled open‐label single‐centre trial. 32 SAR patients were randomized to receive a single injection of omalizumab 300‐mg approximately two weeks before start of the pollen period (PP) or medication therapy. All patients completed daily questionnaires; recording symptoms, medication use and quality of life (QoL) throughout the observation period. The primary efficacy parameter was the mean daily Combined Symptom and Medication Score (CSMS).ResultsPreseasonal omalizumab significantly reduced the changes of mean daily CSMS of nose during the PP (p < 0.001), peak pollen period (PPP) and PP after PPP (PPP‐PP) (p = 0.002) and Post‐PP (p = 0.009) compared to standard medication. The proportion of allergy symptoms‐relieving medication‐free days during PPP‐PP was also significantly higher in preseasonal omalizumab‐treated group (76.2(16.7‐98.8))% than in medication‐treated group (19.0(0‐71.4))% (p = 0.030). Omalizumab could achieve the same nasal symptom control during the entire pollen season and better eye symptoms relieving results in PP (p = 0.046) and PPP‐PP (p = 0.004) than medication treatment. Significantly greater improvement in QoL was also obtained with omalizumab‐pretreatment during the PP (p = 0.037) and PPP‐PP (p = 0.004).ConclusionsAdministration of a single injection of 300 mg omalizumab two weeks before start of the pollen season achieves better overall control of symptoms and QoL, with significantly reduced allergy symptoms‐relieving medication usage, compared with standard pharmacotherapy in SAR patients.

The effect on patient life quality of prophylactic treatment to seasonal allergic rhinitis and related transcriptomics research

Objective: The preseason prophylactic treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis (AR) caused by pollens could alleviate AR symptoms during the pollen season. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of prophylaxis usage of suplatast tosilate on the life quality of AR patients in the pollen season, and investigate the potential mechanism of action through transcriptomic analysis. Methods: This is a randomized controlled study. AR patients allergic to weed pollens were recruited from Allergy Clinic of Peking Union Medical College Hospital from January 2020 to June 2020, and divided into prophylactic group who started to take suplatast tosilate as prophylaxis 2 weeks before the spread of weed pollens[n=10, 4 men and 6 women with age range of (34±6) years old] and control group who did not use any prophylactic treatment[n=24, 12 men and 12 women with age range of (33±9) years old]. The differences of age (t=0.381, P=0.706) and gender (χ²=0.595, P=0.715) distribution between the patients of two groups were not statistically significant. All the subjects filled in the rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire (RQLQ) while onset of AR symptoms, and peripheral blood was drawn for transcriptomic analysis 1 month before and during the pollen season. Differences between groups were statistically analyzed through chi-square test and t test. Results: There was no significant difference in visual analogue scale of rhinitis symptom in the last pollen season between prophylactic group and control group[ 8.0 (6.4, 9.3) vs 7.3 (6.1, 8.0), Z=1.180, P=0.254]. The RQLQ score of prophylactic group was superior to that of control group in the weed pollen season (2.9±0.9 vs 3.7±0.9, t=-2.438, P=0.026). 210 differentially expressed genes of fold change ≥2 were identified, with 147 genes upregulated and 63 genes downregulated in the prophylactic group compared to the control group. Gene Ontology annotation showed that IL-12 and IL-23 related pathways were downregulated in prophylactic group (P=0.006 48). Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) verification of differentially expressed genes indicated that the relative expression level of HLA-G in prophylactic group was significantly lower than that in control group (0.23±0.19 vs 1.00±0.49,t=4.016, P=0.006). Conclusion: The prophylactic treatment of suplatast tosilate showed some benefit to the life quality of seasonal AR patients during the pollen season, and the potential mechanism might be related with the downregulation of IL-12 and IL-23 pathways and decreased expression of HLA-G.

The role of the barrier method in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis

The role of the barrier method in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis

Seasonal allergic rhinitis and the role of apitherapy

BackgroundApitherapy represents a certain form of complementary and alternative medicine that uses bee products in combination with other methods from this field. One of the basic concepts of this type of medicine is that all diseases can be treated using apitherapy. This study was performed to assess the recommendations from authors of books on apitherapy regarding the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis and compare them to findings from the scientific literature. MethodsOne hundred and twenty-nine books on apitherapy were analysed regarding recommendations for allergic seasonal rhinitis. Scientific evidence regarding the efficacy of using various bee products was searched via PubMed and JUSTfind. ResultsOnly 38.8% of the apitherapy books mentioned seasonal allergic rhinitis. Among these books, we found 29 different recommendations in favour of bee products and one against the use of honey. The most reasonable recommendation according to clinical studies on the subject, namely the use of a mix of honey and pollen, was only found once (0.8%). ConclusionsThe large discrepancies and number of different recommendations demonstrate that apitherapy is not a consistent type of medicine. The recommendations regarding seasonal allergic rhinitis in the vast majority of apitherapy books cannot be considered adequate when compared to the scientific findings.

Adherence to Prescribed E-Diary Recording by Patients With Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis: Observational Study.

BackgroundComplete diagnosis and therapy of seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis require evidence that exposure to the sensitizing pollen triggers allergic symptoms. Electronic clinical diaries, by recording disease severity scores and pollen exposure, can demonstrate this association. However, patients who spontaneously download an e-diary app show very low adherence to their recording.ObjectiveThe objective of our study was to assess adherence of patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis to symptom recording via e-diary explicitly prescribed by an allergist within a blended care approach.MethodsThe @IT-2020 project is investigating the diagnostic synergy of mobile health and molecular allergology in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. In the pilot phase of the study, we recruited Italian children (Rome, Italy) and adults (Pordenone, Italy) with seasonal allergic rhinitis and instructed them to record their symptoms, medication intake, and general conditions daily through a mobile app (Allergy.Monitor) during the relevant pollen season.ResultsOverall, we recruited 101 Italian children (Rome) and 93 adults (Pordenone) with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Adherence to device use slowly declined during monitoring in 3 phases: phase A: first week, ≥1267/1358, 90%; phase B: second to sixth week, 4992/5884, 80% to 90%; and phase C: seventh week onward, 2063/2606, 70% to 80%. At the individual level, the adherence assessed in the second and third weeks of recording predicted with enough confidence (Rome: Spearman ρ=0.75; P<.001; Pordenone: ρ=0.81; P<.001) the overall patient adherence to recording and was inversely related to postponed reporting (ρ=–0.55; P<.001; in both centers). Recording adherence was significantly higher during the peak grass pollen season in Rome, but not in Pordenone.ConclusionsAdherence to daily recording in an e-diary, prescribed and motivated by an allergist in a blended care setting, was very high. This observation supports the use of e-diaries in addition to face-to-face visits for diagnosis and treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis and deserves further investigation in real-life contexts.

A randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled study of intranasal standardized cinnamon bark extract for seasonal allergic rhinitis

ObjectivesThe aim of the study was to assess the safety and efficacy of a nasal spray containing a polyphenol-rich standardized extract of cinnamon bark (Cinnamomum zeylanicum) (IND02) for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). MethodsThis study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study conducted in otherwise healthy men and women, aged between 18 and 75 years old, who were experiencing acute SAR symptoms. Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to a nasal spray containing either IND02 (100 μg/100 μL) or matching placebo in each nostril, twice a day, for seven days. ResultsThe outcome measures were the rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire (RQLQ), the total daily symptom score comprising of day-time nasal, day-time eye, and night-time nasal symptom scores, the Work Productivity and Activities Impairment (WPAI:SHP), the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) and laboratory clinical parameters. ResultsThe IND02 group showed a statistically and clinically significant reduction in total RQLQ and the sub-domains; activity limitation, sleep problems, nose symptoms, eye symptoms, non-nose/eye symptoms, practical problems and emotional function. There was a significant reduction in the total daily symptom score and sub-domains of total day-time nasal, total day-time eye and total night-time nasal symptoms scores, and total work impairment and regular activity impairment in the IND02 group compared with the placebo group after treatment. The laboratory clinical parameters remained within healthy normal reference range. ConclusionThe use of a nasal spray of a standardized extract of cinnamon bark (IND02) over seven days reduced symptom severity and improved quality of life, work productivity and regular daily activities in participants experiencing SAR.

Эбастин в терапии сезонного аллергического ринита

Эбастин в терапии сезонного аллергического ринита

Efficacy and safety of olopatadine-mometasone combination nasal spray for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis

BackgroundGSP301 nasal spray is a fixed-dose combination of olopatadine hydrochloride (antihistamine) and mometasone furoate (corticosteroid). ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of GSP301 in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). MethodsIn this double-blind study, eligible patients (≥12 years of age) with SAR were randomized 1:1:1:1 to twice-daily GSP301 (665 μg of olopatadine and 25 μg of mometasone), olopatadine (665 μg), mometasone (25 μg), or placebo for 14 days. The primary end point—mean change from baseline in average morning and evening 12-hour reflective Total Nasal Symptom Score (rTNSS)—was analyzed via a mixed-effect model repeated measures (P < .05 was considered to be statistically significant). Additional assessments included average morning and evening 12-hour instantaneous TNSS (iTNSS), ocular symptoms, individual symptoms, onset of action, quality of life, and adverse events (AEs). ResultsA total of 1176 patients were randomized. GSP301 provided statistically significant and clinically meaningful rTNSS improvements vs placebo (least squares mean difference, -1.09; 95% CI, -1.49 to -0.69; P < .001) and vs olopatadine (P = .03) and mometasone (P = .02). Similar significant improvements in iTNSS were also observed with GSP301 (P < .05 for all). Furthermore, GSP301 significantly improved overall ocular symptoms, individual nasal and ocular symptoms, and quality of life vs placebo (P ≤ .001 for all). Onset of action for GSP301 was observed within 15 minutes and was maintained at all subsequent timepoints. Treatment-emergent AEs occurred in 15.6%, 12.6%, 9.6%, and 9.5% of patients in the GSP301, olopatadine, mometasone, and placebo groups, respectively. ConclusionGSP301 is efficacious and well tolerated vs placebo for treating SAR-associated nasal and ocular symptoms, with a rapid onset of action of 15 minutes in adult and adolescent patients 12 years and older. Clinical Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02870205.

Olopatadine/Mometasone Combination Nasal Spray for the Treatment of Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis: A Pooled Analysis of Efficacy and Safety

Olopatadine/Mometasone Combination Nasal Spray for the Treatment of Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis: A Pooled Analysis of Efficacy and Safety

Efficacy of a Novel Intranasal Formulation of Azelastine Hydrochloride and Fluticasone Propionate, Delivered in a Single Spray, for the Treatment of Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis: Results from Russia

Background: The novel intranasal formulation of azelastine hydrochloride (AZE) and fluticasone propionate (FP) in a single spray (MP-AzeFlu) was compared with a first-line intranasal antihistamine spray (AZE) in Russian seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) patients. Methods: Moderate-to-severe SAR/rhinoconjunctivitis patients (n = 149; aged 18–65 years) were randomized to receive MP-AzeFlu (137/50 μg AZE/FP per spray) or AZE (137 μg/spray), both as 1 spray/nostril twice daily, in a multicenter, open-label, 14-day, parallel-group trial. The primary outcome was change from baseline in morning and evening reflective total nasal symptom score (rTNSS). Secondary end points included: change from baseline in reflective total ocular symptom score (rTOSS), reflective total of 7 symptom scores (rT7SS), 28-item Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) overall score, and EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) questionnaire score. Results: When compared with AZE-treated patients, those treated with MP-AzeFlu experienced significantly greater reductions in rTNSS (difference: –2.47; 95% confidence interval [CI] –3.65 to –1.30; p < 0.001), rTOSS (difference: –1.62; 95% CI –2.32 to –0.92; p < 0.001), and rT7SS (difference: –4.34; 95% CI –5.98 to –2.70; p < 0.001). Superior relief observed on day 2 with MP-AzeFlu versus AZE was sustained throughout the study. MP-AzeFlu-treated patients experienced a greater improvement in QoL than AZE-treated patients as measured by overall RQLQ score (mean ± SD 2.91 ± 1.08 vs. 2.05 ± 1.15) and EQ-5D score (mean ± SD 87.4 ± 10.3 vs. 83.0 ± 12.8). MP-AzeFlu was well tolerated. Conclusions: MP-AzeFlu was superior to AZE in reducing moderate-to-severe SAR symptoms, providing earlier and more complete symptom relief.

A Meta-analysis of sublingual immunotherapy in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis

Objective:To systematically evaluate the efficacy and adverse reactions of sublingual immunotherapy for patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis.Method:Literature databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Medline, CBM, Wanfang, CNKI. The time of literature search was limited from January of 2008 to December of 2017.The literature of randomized controlled trials of sublingual immunotherapy for seasonal allergic rhinitis was screened,the quality of the included literature was evaluated,data was extracted,and meta-analysis was performed using RevMan5.3 software.Result:A total of 10 articles were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that for seasonal allergic rhinitis sublingual immunotherapy compared with the control group can reduce symptom scores （SMD=-0.30, 95%CI［-0.39,-0.21］,P<0.000 01) and medication scores (SMD=-0.18, 95%CI［-0.29，-0.08］, P=0.000 8); sublingual immunotherapy for seasonal allergic rhinitis is not restricted by age in the relief of symptoms, and there is no age restriction on reduce medication requirements; sublingual immunotherapy had a higher incidence of adverse reactions than the control group, but it was mostly localized, such as oral pruritus, ear pruritus, throat irritation.Conclusion:Sublingual immunotherapy can alleviate the symptoms and reduce medication requirements in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. The adverse reactions are slightly controllable.