One-year evaluation of clinical and immunological efficacy and safety of sublingual versus subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy in allergic conjunctivitis
The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical and immunological efficacy and safety of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) in patients with allergic conjunctivitis (AC) and to compare between sublingual and subcutaneous routes of administration.
A prospective comparative case series study was performed on 100 patients with IgE-mediated AC. Patients were referred to allergy clinics for skin prick test (SPT) and AIT. Patients with positive SPT and high-serum IgE level were enrolled in this study. Patients were divided into two groups: sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) group (50 patients) and subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) group (50 patients). Both groups were followed for 1 year. Efficacy was assessed clinically by comparing pre- and post-treatment symptoms and medication scores and assessed immunologically by comparing pre- and post-treatment serum IgE level and wheal diameter of SPT. Safety of the therapy was assessed by the occurrence of adverse reactions and patient tolerability to the therapy.
Patients were either mono- or polysensitized to different allergens. Aeroallergens were significantly more common than food allergens (P = 0.00). The most prevalent aeroallergens were pollens (40%) and house dust (30%). At 12-month follow-up, both routes SLIT and SCIT led to a statistically significant clinical and immunological improvement (P < 0.05). This improvement was evident in all follow-up parameters including total ocular symptom score (TOSS), medication score, total serum IgE level, and wheal diameter of skin prick test (SPT). There was no significant difference between the two routes of administration (SLIT & SCIT) in any of the follow-up parameters (P > 0.05). Patients were able to tolerate the allergen therapy without developing any serious adverse events.
Aeroallergen polysensitization is common among patients with AC. SPT should be included in the diagnostic workup of those patients. AIT is a safe and effective treatment option for patients with AC as it has the potential to achieve significant reduction in symptom and medication scores without ocular or systemic side effects. There is no significant difference between both routes of administration either SLIT or SCIT in achieving clinical and immunologic improvement; so the patient can choose his preferred method for therapy.
KeywordsAllergic conjunctivitis Skin prick test Subcutaneous immunotherapy Sublingual immunotherapy
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in the study were in accordance with the ethical standards of institutional and national research committee and with 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This study does not present any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 1.Chigbu DI (2009) The pathophysiology of ocular allergy: a review. Cont Lens Anterior Eye:3–15Google Scholar
- 3.del Cuvillo A, Sastre J, Montoro J (2009) Allergic conjunctivitis and H1 antihistamines. J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol 19:11–18Google Scholar
- 4.Cox L, Williams B, Sicherer S et al (2008) Pearls and pitfalls of allergy diagnostic testing: report from the American college of allergy, asthma and immunology/American academy of allergy, asthma and immunology specific IgE test task force. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 101:580–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Bacharier LB, Boner A, Carlsen KH et al (2008) Diagnosis and treatment of asthma in childhood: a PRACTALL consensus report. Allergy 63:5e34Google Scholar
- 9.Huggins JL, Looney RJ (2004) Allergen immunotherapy. Am Fam Physician 70:689–696Google Scholar
- 14.SayedElah MA, Nasr N, Akr H (2015) Subcutaneous versus sublingual immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis therapy: which is superior. Int J Immunol:42–46Google Scholar
- 18.Navarro A, MD Colás C, Antón E et al (2009) Epidemiology of allergic rhinitis in allergy consultations in Spain:Alergologica 2005. J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol 19:7–13Google Scholar
- 23.Ciprandi G, Alesina R, Ariano R, Aurnia P et al (2008) Characteristics of patients with allergic polysensitization: the polismail study. Eur Ann Allergy Clin Immunol 40:77–83Google Scholar
- 26.Radtke M, Grammer L (2008) Subcutaneous administration of allergen vaccines. Clin Allergy Immunol 21:321–332Google Scholar
- 28.Yukselen A, Kendirli S, Yilmaz M et al (2012) Effect of one-year subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy on clinical and laboratory parameters in children with rhinitis and asthma: a randomized, placebo controlled, double-blind, double-dummy study. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 157:288–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 30.Prakash OM, Murthy KR (1992) Immunotherapy in allergic conjunctivitis. Indian J Ophthalmol 40:9–10Google Scholar
- 32.Saporta D (2012) Efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy versus subcutaneous injection immunotherapy in allergic patients. J Environ Public Health:492–405Google Scholar