4.5 Article

Early Response of SpecificIgEcan Predict Satisfaction with Sublingual Immunotherapy

Journal

LARYNGOSCOPE
Volume 131, Issue 3, Pages 467-472

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/lary.28762

Keywords

Allergic rhinitis; biomarkers; sublingual immunotherapy; house dust mites

Funding

  1. SNUH Research Fund [04-2012-0970]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study found that changes in Dp- and Df-specific IgE levels during the early response to sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for house dust mites may serve as indicators for predicting patient satisfaction with long-term treatment outcomes.
Objective To investigate predictive parameters at baseline and during the early response to sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for house dust mites in allergic rhinitis patients. Study Design Retrospective cohort study. Methods Patients were treated with SLIT for at least 3 years and serological tests performed at baseline and at 1-year follow-up to investigate predictive parameters. Satisfaction with SLIT, 4 nasal symptoms, and quality of life were evaluated before and after 3 years of SLIT. Sixty-one patients were enrolled and divided into two groups depending on their satisfaction after 3 years of SLIT: 43 were satisfied (70.5%) and 18 were not (29.5%). Results Immunological parameters at baseline did not differ significantly between the satisfactory and unsatisfactory groups. However, changes in bothDermatophagoides pteronyssinus(Dp)- andD. farinae(Df)-specific IgEs were significantly higher in the unsatisfactory group than in the satisfactory group during the early response to SLIT (P= .006 andP= .045, respectively). Conclusion The changes in both Dp- and Df-specific IgE levels during early response may be indicators for favorable long-term treatment outcomes with SLIT. These results suggest that clinicians could measure these immunological parameters 1 year after Dp and Df SLIT to indicate potential responders versus nonresponders. Level of Evidence 2bLaryngoscope, 2020

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available