4.6 Article

EAACI Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy: Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

Journal

ALLERGY
Volume 73, Issue 4, Pages 765-798

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/all.13317

Keywords

allergen immunotherapy; allergic conjunctivitis; allergic rhinitis; allergy; rhinoconjunctivitis

Funding

  1. European Academy of Allergy AMP
  2. Clinical Immunology
  3. BM4SIT project [601763]
  4. Asthma UK [MRC-Asthma UK Centre, MRC-AsthmaUKCentre] Funding Source: researchfish
  5. Medical Research Council [G1000758B, G1000758] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (AR) is an allergic disorder of the nose and eyes affecting about a fifth of the general population. Symptoms of AR can be controlled with allergen avoidance measures and pharmacotherapy. However, many patients continue to have ongoing symptoms and an impaired quality of life; pharmacotherapy may also induce some side-effects. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) represents the only currently available treatment that targets the underlying pathophysiology, and it may have a disease-modifying effect. Either the subcutaneous (SCIT) or sublingual (SLIT) routes may be used. This Guideline has been prepared by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology's (EAACI) Taskforce on AIT for AR and is part of the EAACI presidential project EAACI Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy. It aims to provide evidence-based clinical recommendations and has been informed by a formal systematic review and meta-analysis. Its generation has followed the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) approach. The process included involvement of the full range of stakeholders. In general, broad evidence for the clinical efficacy of AIT for AR exists but a product-specific evaluation of evidence is recommended. In general, SCIT and SLIT are recommended for both seasonal and perennial AR for its short-term benefit. The strongest evidence for long-term benefit is documented for grass AIT (especially for the grass tablets) where long-term benefit is seen. To achieve long-term efficacy, it is recommended that a minimum of 3years of therapy is used. Many gaps in the evidence base exist, particularly around long-term benefit and use in children.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available