Literature DB >> 26833457

Patient preferences for route of allergy immunotherapy: a comparison of four delivery methods.

Jennifer G Chester1, Maria G Bremberg2, William R Reisacher2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Allergen-specific immunotherapy (IT) is a disease-modifying treatment for allergic rhinitis, and adherence to the treatment schedule is important for a successful outcome. Several methods for delivering IT are now available, but little information is known concerning patient preference for these options.
METHODS: Over a 12-month period, 228 adults scheduled to undergo outpatient allergy testing were offered a survey to rank 4 different IT delivery methods: subcutaneous IT (SCIT), sublingual IT using liquid extracts (SLIT), sublingual allergy immunotherapy tablets (AIT), and oral mucosal immunotherapy (OMIT) using a toothpaste delivery vehicle.
RESULTS: Of the participants who completed the survey, ranking scores (mean ± SD) for SCIT, SLIT, AIT, and OMIT, with 1 being the highest rank, were 3.36 ± 1.02, 2.03 ± 0.92, 2.30 ± 1.02, and 2.32 ± 1.05, respectively. The number of participants who ranked SCIT, SLIT, AIT, or OMIT as their number 1 choice was 24 (10.5%), 79 (34.6%), 61 (26.8%), and 64 (28.1%), respectively. When comparing first choice rankings, there were no statistically significant differences between SLIT, AIT, or OMIT, yet all 3 groups ranked higher than SCIT (p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: SCIT earned the lowest mean rank and had the least number of participants rank it as the most preferred method. Among the other 3 choices, by mean scores, SLIT was preferred most compared to either AIT or OMIT; but when considering first choices only, there were no significant differences in preference. Most of the study participants identified the convenience of home IT administration as the most important factor in their ranking.
© 2016 ARS-AAOA, LLC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  allergens; allergic rhinitis; allergy immunotherapy; immunotherapy; subcutaneous immunotherapy; sublingual immunotherapy

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26833457     DOI: 10.1002/alr.21707

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Forum Allergy Rhinol        ISSN: 2042-6976            Impact factor:   3.858


  4 in total

Review 1.  [Adherence in specific immunotherapy].

Authors:  M-L Lemberg; M-J Joisten; R Mösges
Journal:  Hautarzt       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 0.751

2.  Preference for Immunotherapy with Tablets by People with Allergic Rhinitis.

Authors:  Mike Tankersley; Tonya Winders; Mark Aagren; Henrik Brandi; Mikkel Hasse Pedersen; Anne Sofie Ledgaard Loftager; Mette Bøgelund
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2021-11-18       Impact factor: 2.711

3.  Preference for sublingual immunotherapy with tablets in a Spanish population with allergic rhinitis.

Authors:  Mette Bøgelund; Ana Rosado Ingelmo; Jose María Ausín Ruiz; Adolfo Galán Vivó; Henrik Brandi; Mikkel Hasse Pedersen; Anne Sofie Ledgaard Loftager; Mark Aagren
Journal:  Clin Transl Allergy       Date:  2022-02-04       Impact factor: 5.871

4.  Randomized controlled trial of ragweed sublingual immunotherapy tablet in the subpopulation of Canadian children and adolescents with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.

Authors:  Anne K Ellis; Remi Gagnon; David I Bernstein; Hendrik Nolte
Journal:  Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol       Date:  2021-12-09       Impact factor: 3.406

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.