4.6 Article

Randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of sublingual immunotherapy with a Pru p 3 quantified peach extract

期刊

ALLERGY
卷 64, 期 6, 页码 876-883

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2008.01921.x

关键词

food allergy; food immunotherapy; lipid transfer protein; peach; sublingual immunotherapy

资金

  1. ALK-Abello S.A. (Madrid, Spain)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Peach allergy is highly prevalent in the Mediterranean area; it is persistent and potentially severe, and therefore a prime target for immunotherapy. We aimed to study the efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) with a peach extract quantified in mass units for Pru p 3, the peach lipid transfer protein. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled (DBPC) clinical trial. The main efficacy outcome was the change in the response to a DBPC food challenge (DBPCFC) with peach. Secondary efficacy outcomes were the changes in skin prick test (SPT), and in specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) and IgG(4) to Pru p 3. Tolerance was assessed with a careful recording of adverse events. After 6 months of SLIT, the active group tolerated a significantly higher amount of peach (three- to ninefold), presented a significant decrease (5.3 times) in SPT, and a significant increase in IgE and IgG(4) to Pru p 3. No significant changes were observed within the placebo group. Statistically significant inter-group differences were only observed in the SPT and IgG(4) responses. No serious adverse events were reported. Systemic reactions were mild, and observed with a similar frequency in both groups. Local reactions were significantly more frequent in the active group (three times) and 95% of them restricted to the oral cavity. In this first exploratory clinical trial, SLIT for peach allergy seems to be a promising therapeutic option that could modify the clinical reactivity of the patients to peach intake and the underlying immunological response with a good tolerance.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据