MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2072806284 · doi:10.2147/jaa.s82077

A major step forward for sublingual immunotherapy: the quality of 5-grass pollen tablet is recognized also in Italy

2015· article· en· W2072806284 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Franco Frati, Giorgio Ciprandi

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Asthma and Allergy · 2015
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueAllergic Rhinitis and Sensitization
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineAllergen immunotherapyAllergic conjunctivitisAllergyImmunologyImmunotherapyAllergenImmunoglobulin EImmune system

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Dear editor After a century of allergen immunotherapy (AIT), for the first time, the Italian Agency for Drugs (AIFA [Agenzia italiana per il farmaco]) has just approved the full reimbursement (A class) for an AIT product, such as the 5-grass pollen tablet with the indication for treating allergic rhinitis (AR). On the other hand, AR represents a relevant health issue as the worldwide prevalence is approximately 20%.1 AR is sustained by an IgE-mediated inflammatory reaction that in turn induces typical symptom occurrence. Allergic inflammation is promoted by an allergen-specific defect of T-regulatory cells and a Th2 polarization.2 This impaired immune response characterizes the two main peculiarities of allergic reaction: systemic IgE production and nasal eosinophil infiltrate.3 AR has also a significant social burden both in terms of high costs and individual complaints, mainly negatively affecting quality of life. AR treatment is traditionally based on drug prescription, such as antihistamines and topical corticosteroids. However, the main limit of drug therapy is that it is essentially symptomatic and its efficacy quickly stops after suspension. On the contrary, AIT is the unique causal therapy of AR as it is able of inducing a long-lasting immunological and clinical tolerance toward the causal allergen.4 The mechanism of action of AIT is based on restored T-regulatory function and re-direction of immune response to a physiological Th1-oriented pathway.5 AIT consists of administering increasing doses of the causal allergen extract able to reduce allergic symptoms.6 There is strengthened evidence that AIT is effective and safe as recognized by the meta-analysis approach.7 At present, sublingual immunotherapy is commonly prescribed for AR patients as effective and well tolerated. The 5-grass pollen tablet according to a pre-co-seasonal course, has the indication for AR and/or conjunctivitis treatment in adult or pediatric (over 5 years) patients with severe symptoms as documented by two regulatory studies.8,9 AIFA’s decision of full-reimbursement for the 5-grass pollen tablet has been based on the qualified requirements of this product: allergen panel composition, effectiveness, safety, standardization, adequate dosage, and pharmaco-economic impact. First, sublingual tablets are composed of 5-grass pollens, belonging to Pooideae family (Dactylis glomerata, Anthoxanthum odoratum, Lolium perenne, Poa pratensis, and Phleum pratense). This 5-grass mixture is appropriate according to the production of pollen by the grasses as evidenced by phenological studies.10 In fact, the approach by phenology demonstrated that the different grasses yield their pollen in dissimilar times of the season in a specific geographical area in Italy and that some grasses, such as P. pratense, produce their pollen in periods out of the pollen peaks in the atmosphere, when patients have no more intense symptoms.10 Of course, the presence of a given grass species is closely related to symptom appearance in grass allergic patients. Thus, the 5-grass mixture extract has optimal characteristics to cover the whole grass pollination period, so assuring a clinical effectiveness for a large population of grass pollen allergic patients. In addition, it has been reported that the 5-grass pollen mixture has ideal immunological capability of inducing immunization in AR patients,11,12 considering that 5-grass pollen tablet contains a large array of allergens naturally occurring in the atmosphere, that trigger allergic symptoms. An immunological study demonstrated that in children living in the Mediterranean area the 5-grass mixture is more alike to natural grass exposure than P. pratense extract alone.13 Another interesting issue is the molecular aspect, because among the grass species there is a lot of differences in the amino acid sequence of the allergens from the group 1 and 5, as confirmed by a study of Moingeon et al14 who highlighted by mass spectrometry the different three-dimensional structure of these allergens between the Pooideae that results in a large number of epitopes that are not shared among the various species. Indeed, the characteristics of 5-grass pollen tablet have a clinical relevance as the administration of the 5-grass-pollen mixture allows to obtain quick effectiveness. In this regard, a study using the “Vienna chamber” model showed that 5-grass pollen tablet significantly reduced allergic symptoms after 7–30 days.15 Moreover, an economic evaluation stated that 5-grass pollen tablet is a cost-effective treatment in patients with grass pollen-induced seasonal AR.16 Another intriguing aspect is that its cost-effectiveness increases with the severity of AR symptoms as evidenced by a recent analysis concerning the higher clinical efficacy of the 5-grass pollen tablet treatment in patients with more severe AR.17 These outcomes should be thoroughly taken into consideration in the management of AR patients. It is also of note that 5-grass pollen tablet is a drug listed as treating grass allergy with AIT by the Canadian Drug Expert Committee. In conclusion, the AIFA decision about the full reimbursement of an AIT product for AR treatment has an outstanding importance for 5-grass pollen tablet, this fact provides a new consideration of AIT and paves the way to a new era in the centenary AIT history.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,427
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,279

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,041
Tête enseignante GPT0,325
Écart entre enseignants0,284 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations7
Publié2015
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Asthma and AllergyMême sujetAllergic Rhinitis and SensitizationTravaux en français237 207