Semi-Depot House-Dust Mite Allergen Extract for Chinese with Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma

Li, Xiang; Wang, Xueyan; Lin, Xiaoping; Xu, Geng; Tao, Zezhang; Jiang, Weihong; Cheng, Long; Guo, Yong; Lai, He; Shen, Kunling

doi:10.2500/ajra.2016.30.4316

Cited by 8 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, one recent study in China has demonstrated good tolerance and safety of SLIT in children as young as 3 years old with Der f-induced AR with or without asthma (54). Similarly, another study has reported good tolerance and safety of HDM-SCIT in over 5 years-old children with a history of HDM-induced AR or asthma (47).…”

Section: Special Considerations In Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…AIT can prolong symptoms remission after discontinuation of treatment in children with AR (42)(43)(44)(45)(46)(47)(48). Significantly lower symptom scores and better quality of life scores were found in children treated with SCIT for 3 years, compared with either baseline scores or in children treated with conventional medication (42).…”

Section: Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A real-world, multicenter, single-arm, open-label study showed that SCIT with semi-depot HDM allergen extract was safe and effective in the treatment of AR and asthma in a Chinese population (47). Adverse events occurred with 1% of all injections, and study related adverse events occurred in 16.9% of all subjects; although no serious adverse events or serious systemic allergic reactions were reported (47). Another study suggested that SLIT with HDM extract was also effective and safe for children with AR (48).…”

Section: Special Considerations In Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several studies have reported SLIT and SCIT to be efficacious and safe in the treatment of allergic diseases (AR, allergic asthma) in Chinese children (46)(47)(48)131,132). A real-world, multicenter, single-arm, open-label study showed that SCIT with semi-depot HDM allergen extract was safe and effective in the treatment of AR and asthma in a Chinese population (47).…”

Section: Special Considerations In Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Chinese Guideline on allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Special Considerations In Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Special Considerations In Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Special Considerations In Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Chinese Guideline on allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The study performed by Frendø et al 9 showed the high frequency of asthma in patients with CRS, and, much like the study by Dogru, 5 indicated a need for upper-airway physicians to be cognizant and investigate for the presence of lower airway disorder. Xiang et al 10 evaluated the role for house-dust mite allergen extract subcutaneous immunotherapy and its response in China. They found very good safety and effectiveness in the treatment of both AR and asthma, and that, along with other medical approaches, immunotherapy should be considered.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Immunorhinology and Rhinosinusitis: Where are we Heading?

Sacks

2016

Am J Rhinol�Allergy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Immunorhinology and rhinosinusitis: Where are we heading? O ver the past 2 decades, multiple etiologic options have been published as to the cause of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). We have had excellent documents that relate to microbiologic organisms, including viruses, bacteria, and fungi. These have taken the form of a multitude of different pathologic entities, including immunologic response to fungi and bacteria, staph exotoxin, and bacterial biofilm, and, more recently, the importance of the microbiome. However, we are still left without any single etiologic factor involved in the development of CRS. This edition of the American Journal of Rhinology and Allergy has a number of extremely fascinating themes.The first theme is aimed at highlighting the sinonasal microbiome in CRS and potential factors in the stimulation of the inflammatory process. Anderson et al. 1 performed a systematic review of the sinonasal microbiome in CRS, and their findings indicated that, in fact, there is no clear single causative microbe. There was significant heterogeneity throughout their studied articles, with firmicutes, Actinobacteria, and bacteroides being identified in both the controls and the patients with CRS. There is clearly much more research required to fully define the role that the microbiome plays in CRS. In terms of factors that influence the inflammatory cycle, Shimizu et al. 2 presented a fascinating article that looked at the role that alarmins play in the pathogenesis of upper airway inflammation. They specifically looked at alarmin protein high mobility group box 1 (HMGB1). With sound methodology, they found significantly higher concentrations of HMGB1 in nasal secretions from patients with CRSwNP or with allergic rhinitis (AR) compared with the control. They noted that TNF-␣ stimulated the production of HMGB1, which, in turn, upregulated the production and secretion of interleukins 6 and 8, which indicated that HMGB1 does in fact play an important role in the pathogenesis of upper airway inflammation.Lee et al. 3 looked at the role of a number of cytokines in the nasal epithelium of patients with AR, and they showed that a decreased expression of epithelial junctional protein was found in patients with AR, with disruption of epithelial integrity via interleukins 4 and 5, and TNF-␣, which indicated a possible role in the pathogenesis of AR. There also are valuable data from Shun et al., 4 who evaluated the role that hypoxia plays in the formation of nasal polyposis by promoting autophagy in nasal polyp fibroblasts. The autophagy seems to be suppressed in hypoxia through the antiglycolytic activity of SIRT6, which is shown to be beneficial to nasal polyp formation. There are significant potential therapeutic benefits in the management of nasal polyposis if glucose metabolism through a SIRT6-based strategy can be found to be modulated.AR has long fascinated researchers and clinicians. The relationship between AR and asthma is well known. It, therefore, was interesting to see the article from Dogru 5 that showed ...

show abstract

The efficacy and safety of two commercial house dust mite extracts for allergic rhinitis: a head‐to‐head study

Yang

et al. 2019

Int Forum Allergy Rhinol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Several studies have demonstrated the efficacy of house dust mite (HDM) immunotherapy in allergic rhinitis (AR). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of 2 commercial HDM extracts in a Chinese AR population. Methods:This was an open-label study. HDM-associated AR patients were randomized into Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (Dp) extracts (Alutard SQ; ALK, Hørsholm, Denmark) and Dp/Dermatophagoides farinae (Df) extracts (NovoHelisen Depot [NHD]; Allergopharma, Reinbek, Germany) groups. All patients received subcutaneous injections for 1 year, and were followed every 3 months during that 1-year period. Symptom score, medication score, and adverse reactions were recorded. The primary endpoint was the total combined symptom and medication score (CSMS) during the efficacy evaluation period. Blood samples were taken for specific immunoglobulin E (IgE), IgG4, and IgE-blocking factor tests at baseline and a er the 1-year treatment.Results: A total of 230 AR patients were randomized; 29 patients dropped out. Analysis of the primary endpoint demonstrated significant reductions in CSMS of 1.8 vs 3.1 (p < 0.001) in the Alutard group and 1.8 vs 3.3 (p < 0.001) in the NHD group compared with baseline. The 2 groups presented equal effectiveness with regard to CSMS, symptom score, and medication score (p > 0.05). The treatment was well tolerated in both groups; 17 (14.8%) patients experienced systemic reactions (SRs) in the Alutard group and 13 (11.3%) in the NHD group. The rates of SRs showed no difference in the 2 groups (p > 0.05), and no anaphylaxis occurred. IgG4 and IgE-blocking factor to Dp and Df were increased significantly in both groups a er the 1-year treatment. Conclusion:Our study confirmed the equal efficacy and safety profile of both commercial extracts in HDMassociated AR patients. C 2019 ARS-AAOA, LLC. et al. The efficacy and safety of two commercial house dust mite extracts for allergic rhinitis: a head-to-head study. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2019;9:876-882.

show abstract

Semi-Depot House-Dust Mite Allergen Extract for Chinese with Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma

Abstract: HDM-SCIT was safe and effective in the treatment of allergic rhinitis and asthma in a Chinese population, with good compliance.

Cited by 8 publications

References 22 publications

Chinese Guideline on allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis

Chinese Guideline on allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis

Immunorhinology and Rhinosinusitis: Where are we Heading?

The efficacy and safety of two commercial house dust mite extracts for allergic rhinitis: a head‐to‐head study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About