Literature DB >> 24773171

A comparative analysis of symptom and medication scoring methods used in clinical trials of sublingual immunotherapy for seasonal allergic rhinitis.

M A Calderon1, D I Bernstein, M Blaiss, J S Andersen, H Nolte.   

Abstract

Symptom and medication use are the key outcomes for assessing the efficacy of subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT). Our objective was to explore the similarities and differences between existing scoring mechanisms used in clinical trials of SLIT for seasonal allergens and characterize the impact that such differences may have on efficacy reporting. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials investigating the efficacy of SLIT for seasonal allergic rhinitis (2009-2013) were selected for review. Simulated and published data were used to demonstrate differences in scoring methods. Symptom and medication scoring methods across trials, although all designed to achieve the same objective, included important differences. The maximum daily symptom score (DSS) can vary widely depending on the number of symptoms assessed, and terminology of symptoms is not consistent. Similarly, daily medication scoring (DMS) methods differ greatly among studies and are dependent on medications allowed and weighting of scores assigned to each medication. When published DSS and DMS scores were used to calculate simulated daily combined scores (DCSs) based on various published methods, changes from placebo ranged from 19% to 29% when assuming all variables other than the DSS and DMS methods were equal. Variations in trial design, analysis, and seasonal characteristics also have effects on symptom and medication scoring outcomes. We identified multiple differences in trial scoring methods and design that make comparison among trials difficult. Symptom, medication, or combined scores cannot be indirectly compared among trials without taking the methods of scoring and other trial differences into account.
© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24773171     DOI: 10.1111/cea.12331

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Exp Allergy        ISSN: 0954-7894            Impact factor:   5.018


  5 in total

Review 1.  Allergen Immunotherapy Clinical Trial Outcomes and Design: Working Toward Harmonization of Methods and Principles.

Authors:  Harold S Nelson; Moises A Calderon; David I Bernstein; Thomas B Casale; Stephen R Durham; Jens S Andersen; Robert Esch; Linda S Cox; Hendrik Nolte
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 4.806

2.  International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis.

Authors:  Sarah K Wise; Sandra Y Lin; Elina Toskala; Richard R Orlandi; Cezmi A Akdis; Jeremiah A Alt; Antoine Azar; Fuad M Baroody; Claus Bachert; G Walter Canonica; Thomas Chacko; Cemal Cingi; Giorgio Ciprandi; Jacquelynne Corey; Linda S Cox; Peter Socrates Creticos; Adnan Custovic; Cecelia Damask; Adam DeConde; John M DelGaudio; Charles S Ebert; Jean Anderson Eloy; Carrie E Flanagan; Wytske J Fokkens; Christine Franzese; Jan Gosepath; Ashleigh Halderman; Robert G Hamilton; Hans Jürgen Hoffman; Jens M Hohlfeld; Steven M Houser; Peter H Hwang; Cristoforo Incorvaia; Deborah Jarvis; Ayesha N Khalid; Maritta Kilpeläinen; Todd T Kingdom; Helene Krouse; Desiree Larenas-Linnemann; Adrienne M Laury; Stella E Lee; Joshua M Levy; Amber U Luong; Bradley F Marple; Edward D McCoul; K Christopher McMains; Erik Melén; James W Mims; Gianna Moscato; Joaquim Mullol; Harold S Nelson; Monica Patadia; Ruby Pawankar; Oliver Pfaar; Michael P Platt; William Reisacher; Carmen Rondón; Luke Rudmik; Matthew Ryan; Joaquin Sastre; Rodney J Schlosser; Russell A Settipane; Hemant P Sharma; Aziz Sheikh; Timothy L Smith; Pongsakorn Tantilipikorn; Jody R Tversky; Maria C Veling; De Yun Wang; Marit Westman; Magnus Wickman; Mark Zacharek
Journal:  Int Forum Allergy Rhinol       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 3.858

3.  Prolonged efficacy of the 300IR 5-grass pollen tablet up to 2 years after treatment cessation, as measured by a recommended daily combined score.

Authors:  Alain Didier; Hans-Jørgen Malling; Margitta Worm; Friedrich Horak; Gordon L Sussman
Journal:  Clin Transl Allergy       Date:  2015-05-22       Impact factor: 5.871

Review 4.  How does the efficacy and safety of Oralair(®) compare to other products on the market?

Authors:  Désirée Larenas-Linnemann
Journal:  Ther Clin Risk Manag       Date:  2016-05-27       Impact factor: 2.423

5.  Efficacy of Nasal Cellulose Powder in the Symptomatic Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Wiparat Manuyakorn; Natchanun Klangkalya; Wasu Kamchaisatian; Suwat Benjaponpita; Cherapat Sasisakulporn; Wanlapa Jotikasthira
Journal:  Allergy Asthma Immunol Res       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 5.764

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.