Estonian
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 2012-Feb

The safety and efficacy of sublingual and oral immunotherapy for milk allergy.

Ainult registreeritud kasutajad saavad artikleid tõlkida
Logi sisse
Link salvestatakse lõikelauale
Corinne A Keet
Pamela A Frischmeyer-Guerrerio
Ananth Thyagarajan
John T Schroeder
Robert G Hamilton
Stephen Boden
Pamela Steele
Sarah Driggers
A Wesley Burks
Robert A Wood

Märksõnad

Abstraktne

BACKGROUND

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) are potential therapies for food allergy, but the optimal method of administration, mechanism of action, and duration of response remain unknown.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to explore the safety and efficacy of OIT and SLIT for the treatment of cow's milk (CM) allergy.

METHODS

We randomized children with CM allergy to SLIT alone or SLIT followed by OIT. After screening double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges and initial SLIT escalation, subjects either continued SLIT escalation to 7 mg daily or began OIT to either 1000 mg (the OITB group) or 2000 mg (the OITA group) of milk protein. They were challenged with 8 g of milk protein after 12 and 60 weeks of maintenance. If they passed the 60-week challenge, therapy was withdrawn, with challenges repeated 1 and 6 weeks later. Mechanistic correlates included end point titration skin prick testing and measurement of CM-specific IgE and IgG(4) levels, basophil histamine release, constitutive CD63 expression, CD203c expression, and intracellular spleen tyrosine kinase levels.

RESULTS

Thirty subjects with CM allergy aged 6 to 17 years were enrolled. After therapy, 1 of 10 subjects in the SLIT group, 6 of 10 subjects in the SLIT/OITB group, and 8 of 10 subjects in the OITA group passed the 8-g challenge (P = .002, SLIT vs OIT). After avoidance, 6 of 15 subjects (3 of 6 subjects in the OITB group and 3 of 8 subjects in the OITA group) regained reactivity, 2 after only 1 week. Although the overall reaction rate was similar, systemic reactions were more common during OIT than during SLIT. By the end of therapy, titrated CM skin prick test results and CD63 and CD203c expression decreased and CM-specific IgG(4) levels increased in all groups, whereas CM-specific IgE and spontaneous histamine release values decreased in only the OIT group.

CONCLUSIONS

OIT was more efficacious for desensitization to CM than SLIT alone but was accompanied by more systemic side effects. Clinical desensitization was lost in some cases within 1 week off therapy.

Liitu meie
facebooki lehega

Kõige täiuslikum ravimtaimede andmebaas, mida toetab teadus

  • Töötab 55 keeles
  • Taimsed ravimid, mida toetab teadus
  • Maitsetaimede äratundmine pildi järgi
  • Interaktiivne GPS-kaart - märgistage ürdid asukohas (varsti)
  • Lugege oma otsinguga seotud teaduspublikatsioone
  • Otsige ravimtaimi nende mõju järgi
  • Korraldage oma huvisid ja hoidke end kursis uudisteuuringute, kliiniliste uuringute ja patentidega

Sisestage sümptom või haigus ja lugege ravimtaimede kohta, mis võivad aidata, tippige ürdi ja vaadake haigusi ja sümptomeid, mille vastu seda kasutatakse.
* Kogu teave põhineb avaldatud teaduslikel uuringutel

Google Play badgeApp Store badge