Ras Liesbeth, de Groot Hans, Stengs Cornelis H M, van Weissenbruch Ranny
Stallergenes BV, Almere, The Netherlands.
Department of Allergology, Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis lokatie Diakonessenhuis, Voorburg, The Netherlands.
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2016 Jan;116(1):52-58.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.anai.2015.10.018. Epub 2015 Nov 17.
In patients with allergic rhinitis, treatment adherence to allergen immunotherapy varies greatly in randomized and real-life studies.
To evaluate the use of a 5-grass pollen tablet as sublingual immunotherapy, its treatment persistence, and the reasons for discontinuation in a real-life clinical setting.
This multicenter, prospective, open-label, noncontrolled observational study evaluated the use of sublingual immunotherapy with a 5-grass pollen tablet in a cross-sectional population of patients (≥5 years old) with grass pollen-induced allergic rhinitis with or without asthma. The primary objective was to determine the percentage of patients persisting with treatment across 1 season in a pre-co-seasonal scheme. Secondary objectives included evaluation of reasons for treatment discontinuation, safety and adverse events; effectiveness (based on physician and patient assessments), and treatment compliance.
The study included 196 patients (49.2% male, mean age 27.5 years, range 5.3-65.7 years), with treatment provided by 47 participating physicians. Sixty-seven percent of patients had polysensitivity and 32% had coexistent asthma. On average, patients were treated for 7 months with the 5-grass pollen tablet. After 1 month, 85% of all patients persisted with treatment, and 70% persisted after 7 months. Treatment discontinuation was due chiefly to known side effects (mild to moderate local allergic reactions). Most patients reported symptom improvement; 80% of all patients intended to continue treatment next season.
Most patients with allergic rhinitis treated pre-co-seasonally with a 5-grass pollen tablet persisted with treatment after the first pollen season. Patients were willing to continue their treatment in the following season owing to improvement of symptoms.
在变应性鼻炎患者中，随机试验和实际研究表明，变应原免疫疗法的治疗依从性差异很大。
评估一种5种草花粉片剂作为舌下免疫疗法的应用情况、治疗持续性以及在实际临床环境中停药的原因。
这项多中心、前瞻性、开放标签、非对照观察性研究评估了在一组横断面的草花粉诱发的变应性鼻炎患者（≥5岁）中，无论有无哮喘，使用5种草花粉片剂进行舌下免疫疗法的情况。主要目的是确定在季节前预治疗方案中，持续治疗1个季节的患者百分比。次要目的包括评估停药原因、安全性和不良事件；有效性（基于医生和患者评估）以及治疗依从性。
该研究纳入了196例患者（男性占49.2%，平均年龄27.5岁，范围5.3 - 65.7岁），由47名参与研究的医生提供治疗。67%的患者有多敏反应，32%的患者合并哮喘。患者平均使用5种草花粉片剂治疗7个月。1个月后，85%的患者持续治疗，7个月后70%的患者持续治疗。停药主要是由于已知的副作用（轻度至中度局部过敏反应）。大多数患者报告症状改善；80%的患者打算在下个季节继续治疗。
大多数在季节前使用5种草花粉片剂治疗的变应性鼻炎患者在第一个花粉季节后持续接受治疗。由于症状改善，患者愿意在下个季节继续治疗。
