BACKGROUND: Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for perennial allergic rhinitis (AR) has not been extensively studied in preschoolers. We investigated the efficacy and safety of house dust mite (HDM) SLIT-tablet for children aged 1-4 years.
METHODS: Children aged 1-4 years with AR were divided into SLIT (n = 22) and control (n = 12) groups based on their guardians\' preferences. The SLIT group received a daily dose of 10,000 JAU of HDM SLIT-tablet for 12 months, whereas the control group received symptomatic treatment only.
RESULTS: The baseline median age was 41 and 34 months in the SLIT and control groups, respectively, and the median AR symptom score was 4 for both groups. Compared with baseline, the AR symptom score had decreased significantly in the SLIT group after 12 months (score: 3, p = .002), whereas it tended to increase in the control group (score: 6, p = .08). Adverse reactions to SLIT were mild and occurred in eight patients (36%). In the SLIT group, Dermatophagoides (D.) farinae-specific IgE (sIgE) levels increased during the first 6 months and decreased to baseline levels at 12 months. In the control group, D. farinae-sIgE levels had increased significantly at 12 months compared to baseline (p = .01). D. farinae-specific IgG4 and HDM IgE-blocking factor levels were significantly increased at 12 months compared to baseline in the SLIT group only (p < .001). A lower wheezing frequency was seen in the SLIT group (0.3%) compared to the control group (0.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study demonstrated the efficacy, safety, and immunomodulatory effects of HDM SLIT-tablet in preschoolers with AR.

Background: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is traditionally subdivided into seasonal AR (SAR) and perennial AR (PAR) according to the type of allergen and the occurrence of symptoms during the year. There are currently no reports on the comparison of trait profiles for SAR and PAR during the allergen exposure. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to analyze the clinical characteristics of SAR and PAR during respective allergen exposure periods to provide valuable information for the development of treatment strategies. Methods: This study was performed between August 1, 2021, and January 31, 2022, in the Department of Allergy, Beijing Tongren Hospital. We continuously included diagnosed SAR and PAR outpatients who volunteered to participate in the survey. A questionnaire with regard to medical history, severity of symptoms, and diagnosis and treatment status was collected. Results: A total of 296 patients with SAR and 448 with PAR were finally recruited. Patients with SAR had more severe rhinorrhea compared with patients with PAR (p < 0.001), whereas there was no statistically significant difference in the severity of itching, sneezing, and congestion between the two entities (p ≥ 0.05). Both the gritty and watery eyes of patients with SAR were noticeably more severe than those of patients with PAR (PTotal Ocular Symptom Score [PTOSS] < 0.001). AR symptom severity is mainly associated with the comorbid allergic conjunctivitis (odds ratio 1.94 [95% confidence interval, 1.21-3.09]). SAR patients and PAR patients show no statistically significant differences in terms of their frequency of visits, annual expenditure, and choice of medication treatment for AR (p > 0.05). The overall control under standard medication of both patients with PAR and those with SAR is not ideal, especially in SAR. Conclusion: The current cross-sectional study demonstrated that the patients with SAR exhibited more severe overall clinical symptoms than those with PAR, especially nasal rhinorrhea and gritty and watery eyes. Both of the two disease entities have poor control under standardized medication treatment, especially in SAR. Further multicenter longitudinal studies that involve larger and more diverse populations should be conducted to provide a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the condition.

BACKGROUND: Surgical treatment is recommended for patients with severe allergic rhinitis (AR) refractory to medical treatment. Endoscopic posterior nasal neurectomy (PNN) is primarily performed to improve rhinorrhea in severe perennial AR, however studies on its long-term prognosis are lacking.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the long-term prognosis of PNN.
METHODS: A questionnaire survey was administered to 17 patients (12 men and 5 women) at least 1 year after PNN. Nasal symptoms and medications, as well as patient satisfaction with surgery at the time of survey, were scored. Furthermore, scores were compared between patients with postoperative periods of >5 years and <5 years.
RESULTS: Nasal symptoms and medication scores significantly improved after surgery. There was no significant difference between patients with a postoperative period of >5 years and <5 years in both preoperative and postoperative nasal symptoms and medication scores. No correlation was found between patient satisfaction with surgery and postoperative period.
CONCLUSIONS: PNN improved nasal symptoms and medication scores in patients with severe perennial AR. Furthermore, the study results suggest that the long-term effect of PNN for perennial AR lasts for >5 years. J. Med. Invest. 71 : 62-65, February, 2024.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed whether a modified immunotherapy schedule for allergic rhinitis could be safe and efficient. Ultra-rush immunotherapy (URIT) rapidly desensitizes patients to aeroallergens.
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop a modified URIT protocol in 3 days to achieve the target dose while observing whether it could improve this situation and decrease the time to achieve the maintenance dose.
METHODS: The URIT was exercised in 21 patients with perennial allergic rhinitis. Premeditations were given to the patients 3 days prior to the immunotherapy and during the 3 days injections immunotherapy: pred nisolone, ranitidine, and Airokast/montelukast. Finally, the T cell population frequencies of patients prior to and after immunotherapy, including T helper 1, T helper 2, cytotoxic T lymphocytes, and regulatory T cells, were studied using flow cytometry. During the URIT protocol, 21 patients received 291 injections.
RESULTS: Six patients (28.6%) showed systemic reactions in our study. All systemic reactions occurred on the third day by the 1:1 dilution of the maintenance dose. These systemic reactions occurred in three patients after 13 injections, and the three remaining patients showed systemic reactions following the last injection. No systemic reaction was observed on the first and second day of the therapy, and the risk of systemic reaction with every injection was about 2%. Among the T cell populations, CD3+ and CD8+ cells decreased significantly.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings emphasized that URIT, alongside premedication with a high dose of antihistamine, helped to achieve the maintenance dose and control clinical manifestations.

BACKGROUND: There is insufficient systematized evidence on the effectiveness of individual intranasal medications in allergic rhinitis (AR).
OBJECTIVE: We sought to perform a systematic review to compare the efficacy of individual intranasal corticosteroids and antihistamines against placebo in improving the nasal and ocular symptoms and the rhinoconjunctivitis-related quality of life of patients with perennial or seasonal AR.
METHODS: The investigators searched 4 electronic bibliographic databases and 3 clinical trials databases for randomized controlled trials (1) assessing adult patients with seasonal or perennial AR and (2) comparing the use of intranasal corticosteroids or antihistamines versus placebo. Assessed outcomes included the Total Nasal Symptom Score, the Total Ocular Symptom Score, and the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality-of-Life Questionnaire. The investigators performed random-effects meta-analyses of mean differences for each medication and outcome. The investigators assessed evidence certainty using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.
RESULTS: This review included 151 primary studies, most of which assessed patients with seasonal AR and displayed unclear or high risk of bias. Both in perennial and seasonal AR, most assessed treatments were more effective than placebo. In seasonal AR, azelastine-fluticasone, fluticasone furoate, and fluticasone propionate were the medications with the highest probability of resulting in moderate or large improvements in the Total Nasal Symptom Score and Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality-of-Life Questionnaire. Azelastine-fluticasone displayed the highest probability of resulting in moderate or large improvements of Total Ocular Symptom Score. Overall, evidence certainty was considered \"high\" in 6 of 46 analyses, \"moderate\" in 23 of 46 analyses, and \"low\"/\"very low\" in 17 of 46 analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: Most intranasal medications are effective in improving rhinitis symptoms and quality of life. However, there are relevant differences in the associated evidence certainty.

暂无摘要。

UNASSIGNED: Nasal obstruction, triggered by allergic rhinitis, often does not resolve with allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) alone, thus inferior turbinate reduction surgery (ITR) may be required. This study aims to investigate the impact of combined treatment on nasal obstruction, as evidence is currently limited.
UNASSIGNED: A retrospective cohort study of perennial allergic rhinitis patients experiencing nasal obstruction and undergoing ≥12 months AIT was conducted. Two groups were derived, those undergoing AIT-with or without an ITR. Patient reported nasal obstruction (evaluated with questionnaires) and nasal airway function (Nasal Peak Inspiratory Flow [NPIF] and Nasal Airflow Resistance [NAR]) were monitored. The change from baseline to 12 months post-treatment in each group were compared.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 118 patients (33.71 ± 14.43 years, 41.5% female) were recruited, 72% had AIT and 28% AIT&ITR. At baseline, the AIT&ITR group had a higher level of nasal obstruction (>moderate%; 63.6% vs 52.9%, P = .048). Post treatment, AIT&ITR group reported greater reduction in nasal obstruction (>1 category change: 75.8% vs 48.2%, P = .002). Similarly, the AIT&ITR group had greater improvement in nasal function by NPIF (-13.9 ± 110.3 L/minute vs -3.4 ± 78.1 L/minute, P = .049) and NAR (-0.120 ± 0.342 Pa/cm³/second vs -0.093 ± 0.224 Pa/cm³/second, P = .050).
UNASSIGNED: Allergic rhinitis patients, with moderate to severe nasal obstruction, who undergo combined AIT&ITR have greater relief of nasal obstruction and improved airflow analysis compared to AIT alone.

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a prevalent disease in childhood and adolescence. A type 2 inflammation characterizes AR and, mainly, sustains nasal obstruction. Budesonide aqueous nasal spray (BANS) is an intranasal corticosteroid (INCS) available since the early 1980s. BANS is indicated for treating allergic rhinitis. There is evidence about its efficacy in treating children and adolescents with seasonal and perennial AR. In addition, BANS is safe with negligible local and systemic side effects. Recent guidelines for patients with AR recommend the use of INCS as first line in many situations. In particular, AR patients (and their parents) may assess the perception of symptoms\' severity using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). A score ≥5/10 means uncontrolled symptoms and requires adequate treatment. BANS could appropriately be used in patients with uncontrolled symptoms and/or moderate/severe nasal obstruction. In conclusion, BANS represents a valuable option in managing children and adolescents with AR.

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma (AS) are prevalent and frequently co-occurring respiratory diseases, with mutual influence on each other. They share similar etiology, pathogenesis, and pathological changes. Due to the anatomical continuity between the upper and lower respiratory tracts, allergic inflammation in the nasal cavity can readily propagate downwards, leading to bronchial inflammation and asthma. AR serves as a significant risk factor for AS by potentially inducing airway hyperresponsiveness in patients. Currently, there is a lack of reliable predictors for the progression from AR to AS.
METHODS: In this exhaustive investigation, we reexamined peripheral blood single cell RNA sequencing datasets from patients with AS following AR and healthy individuals. In addition, we used the bulk RNA sequencing dataset as a validation lineup, which included AS, AR, and healthy controls. Using marker genes of related cell subtype, signatures predicting the progression of AR to AS were generated.
RESULTS: We identified a subtype of immune-activating effector T cells that can distinguish patients with AS after AR. By combining specific marker genes of effector T cell subtype, we established prediction models of 16 markers. The model holds great promise for assessing AS risk in individuals with AR, providing innovative avenues for clinical diagnosis and treatment strategies.
CONCLUSIONS: Subcluster T effector cells may play a key role in post-AR AS. Notably, ACTR3 and HSPA8 genes were significantly upregulated in the blood of AS patients compared to healthy patients.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to clarify the diagnostic and predictive factors for perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) onset in children by analyzing the results of the Chiba High-risk Birth Cohort for Allergy study, which examined newborns with a family history of allergies.
METHODS: Overall, 306 pregnant women were recruited. Their newborns were examined by otolaryngologists and pediatric allergists at 1, 2, and 5 years of age. Participants with clinical and laboratory data available at all consultation points were considered eligible.
RESULTS: Among 187 eligible participants, the prevalence rates of PAR were 2.1%, 4.3%, and 24.1% at 1, 2, and 5 years of age, respectively. AR-specific nasal local findings and eosinophils in nasal smear were observed in a substantial number of patients with PAR at 1 and 2 years of age. Factors present up to 2 years of age that were associated with PAR onset at 5 years of age, in descending order, were as follows: sensitization to house dust mites (HDM), nasal eosinophilia, and sensitization to cat dander. In 44 cases with HDM sensitization, nasal eosinophilia up to 2 years of age achieved a sensitivity of 76.0% and a specificity of 73.7% for predicting PAR onset at 5 years.
CONCLUSIONS: Rhinitis findings and nasal eosinophilia are useful auxiliary diagnostic items for pediatric PAR. Sensitization to HDM and nasal eosinophilia were the most influential factors associated with future PAR onset. A combination of these factors may facilitate the prediction of PAR onset.