| Literature DB >> 24256166 |
Mario Di Gioacchino1, Luisa Ricciardi, Ornella De Pità, Mauro Minelli, Vincenzo Patella, Susanna Voltolini, Valerio Di Rienzo, Marina Braga, Enzo Ballone, Rocco Mangifesta, Domenico Schiavino.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This is the first randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (EUDRACT No. 2009-013923-43) evaluating nickel oral hyposensitizing treatment (NiOHT) in patients with "systemic nickel allergy syndrome" (SNAS), characterized by Ni-allergic contact dermatitis and systemic reactions after eating Ni-rich food.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24256166 PMCID: PMC4673509 DOI: 10.3109/07853890.2013.861158
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Med ISSN: 0785-3890 Impact factor: 4.709
Scheme of up dosing and maintenance of nickel oral hyposensitization of the four groups.
| Days | Group 1Ni dose | Group 2Ni dose | Group 3Ni dose | Group 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1–10 | 1 ng/day | Placebo | Placebo | Placebo |
| 11–20 | 10 ng/day | 1 ng/day | Placebo | Placebo |
| 21–30 | 0.1 μg/day | 10 ng/day | 1 ng/day | Placebo |
| 31–40 | 0.5 μg/day | 0.1 μg/day | 10 ng/day | Placebo |
| 41–320 | 0.5 μg 3 times a week | 0.1 μg 3 times a week | 10 ng 3 times a week | Placebo 3 times a week |
All eligible patients after one month of Ni-pour diet were randomly assigned to one of the four groups of treatment. Nickel dose was progressively increased in 40 days from 1 ng to 3 definite maintenance doses (10 ng, 0.1 μg and 0.5 μg) administered 3 times a week for a total of 12 months. In order to protect the blinding, patients randomized to lower doses received placebo during the first days of the up-dosing phase.
Foods by nickel content.
| Carrots Figs Lettuce Green Salad Licorice Mushrooms Plaice and Cod Rhubarb Rice Tea | Apricots Broccoli Corn Eggplant Lobster Onions Peppers Pears Raisins Zucchini | Artichoke Asparagus Beans Cabbage Cauliflower Green Beans Integral Flour Yeast Margarine Mussels Oysters Potatoes Peas Plums Spinach Tomatoes | Almonds Chickpeas Cocoa and Derivatives Concentrated Tomato Lentils Oats Peanuts Walnuts |
The reintroduction of Ni-rich foods started from the 5th month with foods with maximum 100μg/Kg nickel content, until 200μg/Kg during the 6th month, until 500 μg/Kg during the 7th month and then all other Ni-rich foods from the 8th month.
List of Ni content in foods has been derived from literature (26–29).
Figure 1. Enrolment, randomization and follow-up of the study.
Main baseline characteristics of patients in the four study groups.
| Variables | Group 1 (34) | Group 2 (36) | Group 3 (36) | Group 4 (35) | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex, no. (%) | 0.627¥ | ||||
| Male | 2 (5.9) | 1 (2.8) | 1 (2.8) | 3 (8.6) | |
| Female | 32 (94.1) | 35 (97.2) | 35 (97.2) | 32 (91.4) | |
| Age, yrs* | 27.6 ± 10.2 | 36.4 ± 10.2 | 38.7 ± 9.7 | 40.3 ± 9.8 | 0.415† |
| Weight, kg* | 61.8 ± 9.2 | 61.3 ± 9.0 | 60.4 ± 10.3 | 66.1 ± 17.2 | 0.201† |
| Height, cm* | 163.1 ± 6.2 | 163.7 ± 6.7 | 161.1 ± 5.8 | 163.9 ± 8.0 | 0.263† |
| BMI* | 23.2 ± 3.1 | 22.9 ± 3.5 | 23.4 ± 4.5 | 24.6 ± 6.4 | 0.436† |
| VAS, T0 | 1.9 (1.0–5.0) | 2.2 (1.0–6.0) | 3.0 (1.0–8.0) | 2.0 (1.0–6.4) | 0.233¥ |
| VAS, T1 | 8.0 (4.3–9.9) | 8.0 (4.3–10.0) | 8.0 (5.0–9.0) | 8.1 (3.5–9.7) | 0.575¥ |
| Skin symptoms (ITT pts) T0/NOC | 29/29 | 34/34 | 33/33 | 33/33 | |
| GUT symptoms (ITT pts) T0/NOC | 28/28 | 32/32 | 32/32 | 31/31 | |
| Cough (ITT pts) T0/NOC | 2/0 | 0/0 | 3/0 | 1/0 | |
| Headache (ITT pts) T0/NOC | 5/0 | 4/0 | 4/0 | 2/0 |
BMI: Body-mass index (weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters); NOC: Nickel Oral Challenge; ITT: Intention to treat analysis.
There were no significant differences between the four groups in demographic characteristics or severity of symptoms, rated on a visual analog scale (VAS) at enrollment and after one month of Ni-poor diet.
Distribution of symptoms in the four groups at enrollment and after NOC has been reported for patients included in the ITT analysis.
Skin symptoms comprehend, associated or not, the following: urticaria, angioedema, eczema in region without direct contact with nickel.
GUT symptoms comprehend, associated or not, the following: meteorism, gastric acidity, abdominal colic, diarrhea, vomit, acidity to the throat.
*Data are mean ± SD. †ANOVA; ¥Kruskal-Wallis test for independent samples.
Figure 2. Percent changes of VAS from baseline during the study. (A) No significant differences were found at T1, T2 and T3 visits, whereas at T4, when Ni-rich foods were re-introduced, the mean VAS score of group 1 (receiving the highest Ni dose) was significantly higher than the placebo group *p < 0.048, t-test. (B) Combining group 3 and group 4 raised this significance (groups 3 and 4 had similar results and group 3 dose can be considered a placebo).*p < 0.038, t-test.
Changes in gastrointestinal symptoms in group 1 compared to placebo at T4.
| Endpoint | Group 1 (ITT) | Group 2 (ITT) | Group 3 (ITT) | Group 4 (plb) (ITT) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
There were significant differences between groups 1 vs 3 and group 1 vs 4 at T4, during the re-introduction of Ni-rich foods.
ITT: Intention to treat analysis.
*Fisher’s exact test = 0.016; Risk difference (95% CI): 26.6 (5.1 to 46.1).
Figure 3. Percent of patients (respect to those included in the intention to treat analysis) with higher or lower/equal NOC doses at the end of the study respect to T1. The nickel oral challenge (NOC) was compared on the basis of the nickel dose required to induce flare-up of SNAS symptoms. After the treatment, oral challenge with higher Ni doses than at baseline were needed to cause symptoms to flare-up in significantly more patients given 1.5 μg Ni/week than placebo: Risk difference (95% CI): 27.6 (0.8 to 49.3); p = 0.05. Comparing Group 1 to Group 3 + 4 the significance increased: Risk difference (95% CI):38.1 (14.5 to 55.7); p = 0.002.
Figure 4. Positive and negative patch tests in the four groups at the end of the study; as per inclusion criteria, all patients were patch test-positive at baseline. Values are expressed as percentage of patients evaluated in the intention to treat analysis. There were significantly more patch test-negatives in group 1 (Risk difference (95% CI): 32.9 (9.0 to 54.8); p = 0.008). Pos: positive patch test; Neg: negative patch tests; ND: not done.