Ultra short pre-seasonal subcutaneous immunotherapy and pre-coseasonal sublingual immunotherapy for pollen allergy: an evaluation of patient's preference in real life
G. Manzotti, A. Pappacoda, M. Dimatteo, C. Scolari, G.G. Riario-Sforza, C. IncorvaiaBackground. Specific immunotherapy (SIT) efficacy and safety by subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual (SLIT) route is supported by literature data. Pre-coseasonal treatment is currently the more accepted option for pollen immunotherapy in terms of costs and patient's compliance. This retrospective study evaluated the patient's preference concerning subcutaneous or sublingual route in pre-coseasonal treatment.Materials andmethods.We evaluated 145 patients (79 males, 66 females, age ranging from 14 to 69 years), suffering from moderate-severe rhino-conjunctivitis or mild bronchial asthma and with homogeneous characteristic according to allergic disease severity. We proposed either SLIT, with extracts by different producers, or SCIT with Pollinex 4 (Allergy Therapeutics,Worthing, UK), a product designed for ultra-short administration in 4 injections, highlighting for each kind of SIT the major practical advantages or burdens. Results. Of 145 patients, 72 chose Pollinex 4 SCIT and 73 chose SLIT. SCIT-treated patients received a total of 90 vaccines (18 patients had double course of SCIT). SLIT-treated patients received a total of 87 vaccines (14 patients had double course of SLIT). In the SCIT group, there were 49 males and 23 females; in the SLIT group, there were 30 males and 43 females.Mean age was 36.5 years in SCIT group and 28.5 years in SLIT group.Males preferred SCIT (49 of 72 patients) and females preferred SLIT (43 of 73 patients).No severe reaction was observed either in SCIT or SLIT group.Conclusion. Patients are active subjects in decisional process.Trying to apply in real life the indications coming from guidelines about patient's preference is an important matter. In our patients SCITwith ultra short schedule and SLIT are similarly preferred.
FULL TEXT
