Broad perspectives of allergen specific immunotherapy

W. Thomas

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2017.1374522

2017-09-01

Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics

Abstract:Allergen specific immunotherapy aims to subvert or divert immune responses to allergens to ones that do not cause immunological hypersensitivities. It is performed by the administration of the offending allergen usually in doses low enough not to elicit allergic reactions but high enough to induce protective immune responses or extinguish effector responses. Historically and even today the predominant strategy has been the subcutaneous injection therapy (SCIT) pioneered by Noon and published in 1911 for hay fever induced by pollen allergens. Many people receive benefit from this treatment that can be apparent during a single course of injections and if used for about 5 years can persist without further injections. The protracted injection therapy, the often-incomplete relief, adverse reactions and the expense of medical supervision leave enormous scope for improvements and for food allergens non-injection routes of administration can more effective and safer. Also immunotherapy with allergens other than pollen and for diseases other than rhinitis is not so well developed and might best be accomplished by different procedures. In contrast to pollen-induced rhinitis the symptoms from house dust mite and fungal allergy induced asthma are precipitated by insults such as viral infection on tissue inflamed by chronic allergy instead of acute exposure to allergen so different immunological outcomes might be required. Even within allergies caused by the same allergen recent studies of anti-IgE and anti-cytokine therapies have revealed that the damaging component of the allergic immune response differs between individuals. As well as the classical SCIT, sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for aeroallergens is now well-entrenched as is oral immunotherapy (OIT) for food allergens. It will however be abundantly clear from the papers in this issue that many types of allergen specific immunotherapy are being investigated and that they act by different mechanisms. Knowledge of the different mechanisms of action is important since the lack of definitive biomarkers is a major impediment to ascertaining when immunotherapy has been successful and for selecting subjects that would benefit from different types of immunotherapy. Perhaps relating to the lack of biomarkers many studies still attempt to measure antibody or T-cell responses with allergen extracts that contain highly variable amounts of different allergenic molecules as well as undefined non-allergenic components that impact on the innate immune system. Recombinant allergens are now available for such purposes but even for T-cell studies the purity and structural integrity needs to be established. A new peptide strategy for measuring house dust mite T-cell responses has also been published reporting excellent correlations with IgE titers and Th2 cytokine responses. Selectively interrogating different populations of immune cells is also a challenge but there have been enormous advances in understanding different cell lineages and trafficking and advances in the application of flow cytometry along with gene activation technology such as digital PCR. The first two papers in this series present snap shots of the use of SCIT and SLIT for two classical sources of allergen namely house dust mites and fungi. Concentrating on the statistical significance of the presence or absence of symptom improvement, Yang and Zhu analyze well controlled trials using house dust mite extracts concluding that they have shown efficacy but because of the absence of standardization, each extract produced needs to be evaluated individually for each targeted patient group. SCIT and to lesser degree SLIT showed efficacy and were considered safe for rhinitis and asthma patients and in a revision of previous recommendations SCIT might be useful for ameliorating atopic dermatitis. Their comments on the transference of studies done mainly in Europe with European reagents from a base in China is very thoughtprovoking considering the already high burden of HDM allergy in that extremely populous country. Bozek and Pyrkosz present the daunting task ahead for research to bring immunotherapy for fungal allergens to the state of development for pollen and even house dust mite allergy and, even then, only concentrating on the four most important genera Alternaria, Cladosporium, Aspergillus and Penicilium. A double blind placebo controlled trial and other studies have shown that SCIT with alternaria extract relieved symptoms in alternaria-allergic subjects with rhinitis and asthma although the review points to lack of even medium term data for its longevity. It was concluded that an insufficiency of controlled studies made it impossible to recommend immunotherapy for the other genera and the lack of standardized extracts, especially for Cladosporium were, as also assessed by others, seen as a major impediment. The association of allergy to fungi with severe asthma has been repeated recognized for two decades in several countries and so has the inadequacy of extracts but the subject does not seem to be attracting the attention required to improve its diagnosis and treatment.