Mike Tankersley1, Joseph K Han2, Hendrik Nolte3. 1. Departments of Medicine, Pediatrics and Otolaryngology, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tennessee; The Tankersley Clinic, Memphis, Tennessee. Electronic address: mtanker6@uthsc.edu. 2. Department of Otolaryngology, Division of Rhinology and Endoscopic Sinus-Skull Base Surgery, Division of Allergy, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, Virginia. 3. ALK-Abelló, Bedminster, New Jersey.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is administered via tablets (SLIT-T) or liquid drops (SLIT-D). In North America, currently 4 SLIT-T formulations are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for allergy immunotherapy, and SLIT-D is an off-label use of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) extracts. OBJECTIVE: To compare and contrast aspects of SLIT-T and SLIT-D, including physical characteristics, mechanism of action, dosing, efficacy, safety, adherence, and cost. DATA SOURCES: PubMed literature review (no limits), product prescribing information, and manufacturer websites. STUDY SELECTIONS: Publications related to physical characteristics, mechanism of action, dosing, efficacy, safety, and adherence. RESULTS: Published evidence indicates that tablet and drop formulations differ in regard to physical characteristics, dosing, and strength of evidence for efficacy. Whether there are any differences in absorption and mechanism of action between the 2 formulations is currently unknown. Optimal dosing, efficacy, and safety have been established for SLIT-T. In contrast, in North America there is little support for efficacy of SLIT-D from randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, and dose ranges have not been appropriately evaluated. SLIT-T treats a single allergen, whereas in the United States SLIT-D often contains multiple allergens to treat polysensitization. The safety profiles of SLIT-T and SLIT-D appear similar, and both formulations are considered safer than SCIT. CONCLUSION: Professional guidelines should make a clear distinction between SLIT-T and SLIT-D in their recommendations to minimize confusion with the umbrella term SLIT.
BACKGROUND: Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is administered via tablets (SLIT-T) or liquid drops (SLIT-D). In North America, currently 4 SLIT-T formulations are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for allergy immunotherapy, and SLIT-D is an off-label use of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) extracts. OBJECTIVE: To compare and contrast aspects of SLIT-T and SLIT-D, including physical characteristics, mechanism of action, dosing, efficacy, safety, adherence, and cost. DATA SOURCES: PubMed literature review (no limits), product prescribing information, and manufacturer websites. STUDY SELECTIONS: Publications related to physical characteristics, mechanism of action, dosing, efficacy, safety, and adherence. RESULTS: Published evidence indicates that tablet and drop formulations differ in regard to physical characteristics, dosing, and strength of evidence for efficacy. Whether there are any differences in absorption and mechanism of action between the 2 formulations is currently unknown. Optimal dosing, efficacy, and safety have been established for SLIT-T. In contrast, in North America there is little support for efficacy of SLIT-D from randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, and dose ranges have not been appropriately evaluated. SLIT-T treats a single allergen, whereas in the United States SLIT-D often contains multiple allergens to treat polysensitization. The safety profiles of SLIT-T and SLIT-D appear similar, and both formulations are considered safer than SCIT. CONCLUSION: Professional guidelines should make a clear distinction between SLIT-T and SLIT-D in their recommendations to minimize confusion with the umbrella term SLIT.