-
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical... Jan 2023Atopic dermatitis (AD, eczema) is driven by a combination of skin barrier defects, immune dysregulation, and extrinsic stimuli such as allergens, irritants, and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Atopic dermatitis (AD, eczema) is driven by a combination of skin barrier defects, immune dysregulation, and extrinsic stimuli such as allergens, irritants, and microbes. The role of environmental allergens (aeroallergens) in triggering AD remains unclear.
OBJECTIVE
We systematically synthesized evidence regarding the benefits and harms of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) for AD.
METHODS
As part of the 2022 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology/American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD Guideline update, we searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, LILACS, Global Resource for Eczema Trials, and Web of Science databases from inception to December 2021 for randomized controlled trials comparing subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT), sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), and/or no AIT (placebo or standard care) for guideline panel-defined patient-important outcomes: AD severity, itch, AD-related quality of life (QoL), flares, and adverse events. Raters independently screened, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias in duplicate. We synthesized intervention effects using frequentist and Bayesian random-effects models. The GRADE approach determined the quality of evidence.
RESULTS
Twenty-three randomized controlled trials including 1957 adult and pediatric patients sensitized primarily to house dust mite showed that add-on SCIT and SLIT have similar relative and absolute effects and likely result in important improvements in AD severity, defined as a 50% reduction in SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (risk ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.53 [1.31-1.78]; 26% vs 40%, absolute difference 14%) and QoL, defined as an improvement in Dermatology Life Quality Index by 4 points or more (risk ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.44 [1.03-2.01]; 39% vs 56%, absolute difference 17%; both outcomes moderate certainty). Both routes of AIT increased adverse events (risk ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.61 [1.44-1.79]; 66% with SCIT vs 41% with placebo; 13% with SLIT vs 8% with placebo; high certainty). AIT's effect on sleep disturbance and eczema flares was very uncertain. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were consistent with the main findings.
CONCLUSIONS
SCIT and SLIT to aeroallergens, particularly house dust mite, can similarly and importantly improve AD severity and QoL. SCIT increases adverse effects more than SLIT. These findings support a multidisciplinary and shared decision-making approach to optimally managing AD.
Topics: Adult; Animals; Humans; Child; Dermatitis, Atopic; Quality of Life; Bayes Theorem; Desensitization, Immunologic; Pyroglyphidae; Hypersensitivity; Asthma; Allergens; Sublingual Immunotherapy; Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus; Eczema
PubMed: 36191689
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2022.09.020 -
The Ocular Surface Oct 2019We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of different treatment for Demodex blepharitis. Parameters studied were mites count,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of different treatment for Demodex blepharitis. Parameters studied were mites count, improvement of symptoms and mites' eradication, stratified on type of treatments and mode of delivery of treatments (local or systemic).
METHOD
The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, Google scholar and Science Direct databases were searched for studies reporting an efficacy of treatments for Demodex blepharitis.
RESULTS
We included 19 studies (14 observational and 5 randomized clinical trials), for a total of 934 patients, 1741 eyes, and 13 different treatments. For mites count, eradication rate, and symptoms improvement, meta-analysis included fifteen, fourteen and thirteen studies, respectively. The overall effect sizes for efficiency of all treatments, globally, were 1.68 (95CI 1.25 to 2.12), 0.45 (0.26-0.64), and 0.76 (0.59-0.90), respectively. Except usual lid hygiene for mites count, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario ointment (CHEO) for both eradication rate and symptoms, and CHEO, 2% metronidazole ointment, and systemic metronidazole for eradication rate, all treatments were efficient. Stratified meta-analysis did not show significant differences between local and systemic treatments (1.22, 0.83 to 1.60 vs 2.24, 1.30 to 3.18 for mites count; 0.37, 0.21 to 0.54 vs 0.56, 0.06 to 0.99 for eradication rate; and 0.77, 0.58 to 0.92 vs 0.67, 0.25 to 0.98 for symptoms improvement).
CONCLUSION
We reported the efficiency of the different treatments of Demodex blepharitis. Because of less systemic side effects, local treatments seem promising molecules in the treatment of Demodex blepharitis.
Topics: Animals; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Antiparasitic Agents; Blepharitis; Eye Infections, Parasitic; Humans; Ivermectin; Metronidazole; Miotics; Mite Infestations; Mites; Pilocarpine; Tea Tree Oil
PubMed: 31229586
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtos.2019.06.004 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2023Leaves of the Australian tea tree plant were used traditionally by First Nations Australians for treating wounds, burns, and insect bites. Tea tree oil, the essential...
Leaves of the Australian tea tree plant were used traditionally by First Nations Australians for treating wounds, burns, and insect bites. Tea tree oil, the essential oil steam-distilled from , is well-known for its medicinal properties, the evidence for most applications however is limited. This review aimed to critically appraise evidence from clinical trials examining the therapeutic efficacy and safety of tea tree oil on outcomes. Randomized controlled trials with participants of any age, gender, or health status, comparing tea tree oil to any control were included, without limit on publication date. Electronic databases were searched on 12 August 2022 with additional records sourced from article reference sections, reviews, and industry white papers. Risk of bias was assessed by two authors independently using the Cochrane risk-of-bias 1.0 tool. Results were summarized and synthesized thematically. Forty-six articles were eligible from the following medical fields ( = 18, = 9, = 9, = 6, = 3; and = 1). Results indicate that oral mouthwashes with 0.2%-0.5% tea tree oil may limit accumulation of dental plaque. Gels containing 5% tea tree oil applied directly to the periodontium may aid treatment of periodontitis as an adjunctive therapy to scaling and root planing. More evidence is needed to confirm the benefits of tea tree oil for reducing acne lesions and severity. Local anti-inflammatory effects on skin, if any, also require further elucidation. Topical tea tree oil regimens show similar efficacy to standard treatments for decolonizing the body from methicillin-resistant , although intra-nasal use of tea tree oil may cause irritation to mucous membranes. Tea tree oil with added iodine may provide an effective treatment for lesions in young children. More evidence on efficacy of tea tree oil-based eyelid wipes for mite control are needed. Side effects were reported in 60% of included studies and were minor, except where tea tree oil was applied topically in concentrations ≥ 25%. Overall, the quality of research was poor to modest and higher quality trials with larger samples and better reporting are required to substantiate potential therapeutic applications of tea tree oil. PROSPERO, identifier [CRD42021285168].
PubMed: 37033604
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1116077 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2023To systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis (AR) and provide evidence for clinical treatment. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
To systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis (AR) and provide evidence for clinical treatment.
METHODS
A literature search was performed on the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang database, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase database. Data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of sublingual immunotherapy for AR were screened and extracted from the establishment of those databases to November 2022. Subsequently, a network meta-analysis was performed using a statistical software R 4.2.
RESULTS
Totally 22 RCTs that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria and screened from 1,164 literature were included. A total of 4,941 AR patients were involved in the 22 trials, as well as five interventions including placebo, pharmacotherapy, subcutaneous immunotherapy_dust mite, sublingual immunotherapy_dust mite, and sublingual immunotherapy_ grass mix plus pollen extract. The results of network meta-analysis showed that, based on symptom scores after different interventions for AR, the most effective treatments for AR were in order as follows: sublingual immunotherapy_dust mite, subcutaneous immunotherapy_dust mite, sublingual immunotherapy_ grass mix plus pollen extract, placebo, and pharmacotherapy. Importantly, sublingual immunotherapy had fewer adverse reactions and higher safety.
CONCLUSION
Sublingual immunotherapy_dust mite for AR has the best efficacy, whereas traditional medicine has the worst. More high-quality studies with a large sample and multiple centers are needed to verify this conclusion in the future, so as to further provide more reliable evidence-based medical evidence for the clinical treatment options of AR patients.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Sublingual Immunotherapy; Network Meta-Analysis; Rhinitis, Allergic; Pyroglyphidae; Plant Extracts
PubMed: 37063866
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1144816 -
Clinical and Translational Allergy 2018Spider mites, including , , and , are common pests in gardens, greenhouses, and orchards. Exposure, particularly occupational exposure, to these organisms may lead to... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Spider mites, including , , and , are common pests in gardens, greenhouses, and orchards. Exposure, particularly occupational exposure, to these organisms may lead to the development of respiratory or contact allergies. However, the prevalence of sensitivity to spider mites is unclear.
METHODS
We examined the literature to generate an estimate of the global prevalence of allergies to spider mites.
RESULTS
Electronic databases were searched and twenty-three studies reporting the prevalence of sensitivity to spider mites (based on skin prick tests or IgE-based detection systems) in an aggregate total of 40,908 subjects were selected for analysis. The estimated overall rate of spider mite sensitivity was 22.9% (95% CI 19-26.8%). Heterogeneity was high and meta-regression analysis considering variables such as published year, country, number of study subjects, methods for allergen detection (skin prick test, ImmunoCAP, RAST testing, or intradermal test), and mite species revealed no single significant source. Twelve of the 23 studies reported rates of monosensitization (i.e., patients responsive to spider mites but no other tested allergen), yielding a global average of 7% (95% CI 5-9%), hence spider mites represent a unique source of allergens.
CONCLUSIONS
Spider mites are an important cause of allergic symptoms. However, the publication bias and heterogeneity evident in this study indicate that further trials using standardized detection methods are needed to determine the association of exposure and symptoms as well as the specific patient characteristics that influence developing spider mite sensitivity.
PubMed: 29946417
DOI: 10.1186/s13601-018-0209-8 -
Cureus Jul 2022The treatment of allergic rhinitis is important due to the burden that the disease causes globally. The objective of this review is to explore the efficiency of house... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The treatment of allergic rhinitis is important due to the burden that the disease causes globally. The objective of this review is to explore the efficiency of house dust mite and grass pollen extracts in allergic rhinitis treatment.
METHODS
We performed research in electronic databases and searched relevant articles on PubMed, CINAHL, OVID, ScienceDirect, Cochrane CENTRAL, and MEDLINE. We used keywords such as 'allergic rhinitis', 'sublingual immunotherapy', 'randomized controlled trials', 'grass pollen', 'allergen immunotherapy', and 'house dust mite'. We included nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Quality assessment of included studies was performed independently by two authors.
RESULTS
We included nine eligible RCTs in this review. Five RCTs were about grass pollen extracts and four RCTs were about house dust mite extracts. Most of the studies reported positive results and suggested further evaluation of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) treatment. Grass pollen extracts mostly used were Dactylis glomerata, Poa pratensis, Lolium perenne, Anthoxanthum odoratum, Phleum pratense, and Parietaria. House dust mite extracts used were from Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus and Dermatophagoides farina. According to the quality assessment, no bias was observed in the included studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Although sublingual allergen immunotherapy shows a benefit compared to placebo in the treatment of allergic rhinitis and rhino-conjunctivitis in adults, the results are interpreted with caution due to the high heterogenicity among studies in treatment protocols and dosing. More standardization among studies is needed.
PubMed: 36039254
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.27289 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2023To systematically compare the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in children with allergic rhinitis (AR). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIM
To systematically compare the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in children with allergic rhinitis (AR).
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched from inception to March 2, 2023. Outcomes included symptom scores (SSs), medication scores (MSs), symptom and medication scores (SMSs), new sensitizations, development of asthma, improvement, and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). The quality of the included studies was assessed by the modified Jadad scale and Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). Meta-regression was carried out to explore the source of heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis was further conducted in terms of study design [randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies], allergen [house dust mites (HDMs), grass pollen], treatment duration (≥ 24, 12-23 or < 12 months), allergen immunotherapy (AIT) modality (drops or tablets), and AIT protocol [continuous, pre-seasonal, co-seasonal, or after the grass pollen season (GPS)]. Sensitivity analysis was conducted for all outcomes. A Bayesian framework and a Monte Carlo Markov Chain (MCMC) model were developed for indirect comparison.
RESULTS
Totally 50 studies with 10813 AR children were included, with 4122 treated with SLIT, 1852 treated with SCIT, and 4839 treated with non-SLIT or non-SCIT therapy. For direct comparison, the SLIT group had a similar SS to the SCIT group [pooled standardized mean difference (SMD): 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.46, 1.28, = 0.353]. Comparable MSs were observed in the SLIT and SCIT groups (pooled SMD: 0.82, 95%CI: -0.88, 2.53, = 0.344). For indirect comparison, no significant differences were found in SSs (pooled SMD: 1.20, 95% credibility interval (CrI): -1.70, 4.10), MSs (pooled SMD: 0.57, 95%CrI: -1.20, 2.30), SMSs (pooled SMD: 1.80, 95%CrI: -0.005, 3.60), new sensitizations [pooled relative risk (RR): 0.34, 95%CrI: 0.03, 3.58], and development of asthma (pooled RR: 0.68, 95%CrI: 0.01, 26.33) between the SLIT and SCIT groups; the SLIT group illustrated a significantly lower incidence of TRAEs than the SCIT group (pooled RR: 0.17, 95%CrI: 0.11, 0.26).
CONCLUSION
Considering both efficacy and safety, SLIT might be a more favorable AIT than SCIT in the treatment of pediatric AR, which may serve as a decision-making reference for clinicians.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO (CRD42023460693).
Topics: Child; Humans; Allergens; Asthma; Desensitization, Immunologic; Pollen; Rhinitis, Allergic; Immunotherapy; Sublingual Immunotherapy
PubMed: 38162647
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1274241 -
Parasites & Vectors Mar 2019Sarcoptic mange, caused by the Sarcoptes scabiei mite, is an infectious disease of wildlife, domestic animals and humans with international importance. Whilst a variety... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Sarcoptic mange, caused by the Sarcoptes scabiei mite, is an infectious disease of wildlife, domestic animals and humans with international importance. Whilst a variety of treatment and control methods have been investigated in wildlife, the literature is fragmented and lacking consensus. The primary objectives of this review were to synthesise the diverse literature published on the treatment of sarcoptic mange in wildlife from around the world, and to identify the qualities of successful treatment strategies in both captive and free-roaming wildlife.
METHODS
A systematic search of the electronic databases CAB Direct, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE and Discovery was undertaken. Data pertaining to study design, country, year, species, study size, mange severity, treatment protocol and outcomes were extracted from eligible studies and placed in a table. Following data extraction, a decision tree was used to identify studies suitable for further analysis based on the effectiveness of their treatment protocol, whether they were conducted on captive or non-captive wildlife, and the quality of their post-treatment monitoring period.
RESULTS
Twenty-eight studies met our initial inclusion criteria for data collection. Of these studies, 15 were selected for further analysis following application of the decision tree. This comprised of 9 studies on captive wildlife, 5 studies on free-living wildlife and 1 study involving both captive and free-living wildlife. Ivermectin delivered multiple times via subcutaneous injection at a dose between 200-400 µg/kg was found to be the most common and successfully used treatment, although long-term data on post-release survival and re-infection rates was elusive.
CONCLUSIONS
To our knowledge, this review is the first to demonstrate that multiple therapeutic protocols exist for the treatment of sarcoptic mange in wildlife. However, several contemporary treatment options are yet to be formally reported in wildlife, such as the use of isoxazoline chemicals as a one-off treatment. There is also a strong indication for more randomised controlled trials, as well as improved methods of post-treatment monitoring. Advancing this field of knowledge is expected to aid veterinarians, wildlife workers and policy makers with the design and implementation of effective treatment and management strategies for the conservation of wildlife affected by sarcoptic mange.
Topics: Animals; Animals, Domestic; Animals, Wild; Conservation of Natural Resources; Humans; Injections, Subcutaneous; Insecticides; Ivermectin; Sarcoptes scabiei; Scabies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30867019
DOI: 10.1186/s13071-019-3340-z -
Respiratory Care Feb 2015Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is widely used in the management of allergic diseases such as allergic asthma. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is widely used in the management of allergic diseases such as allergic asthma. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SCIT in mite-sensitized subjects with asthma.
METHODS
Literature from January 1990 to February 2013 on the efficacy and safety of SCIT for mite-sensitized asthma patients was searched in electronic databases, including the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database, Wanfang, and Vendor Information Pages. Data were extracted from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) according to the selection criteria by 2 investigators independently. The quality of included trials was evaluated according to the Jadad scale standard.
RESULTS
A total of 796 subjects from 19 different RCTs were included in this analysis. SCIT significantly reduced the asthma symptom scores (standardized mean difference of -0.94, 95% CI -1.58 to -0.29, P=.004) and the asthma medication scores (standardized mean difference of -1.06, 95% CI -1.70 to -0.42, P=.001) compared with the control group. However, there were no significant differences between subjects receiving SCIT and the control group in lung function (peak expiratory flow, percent-of-predicted FEV1, percent-of-predicted FVC) and specific antibody (allergen-specific immunoglobulin E) levels of blood serum (P>.05). In the studies containing data on safety, the incidences of systemic and local adverse reactions were 9.1% (8/88) and 17.2% (23/134), respectively, in subjects treated with SCIT, and no severe adverse events were reported.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results suggest that SCIT is helpful in alleviating symptoms and reducing medication used in mite-sensitive asthma subjects, but with no improvement in lung function. The safety of SCIT is acceptable.
Topics: Allergens; Animals; Asthma; Desensitization, Immunologic; Humans; Hypodermoclysis; Immunoglobulin E; Mites; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 25389355
DOI: 10.4187/respcare.03399 -
BMC Infectious Diseases May 2020Scabies is an infectious disease that affects the skin caused by the mite Sarcoptes scabiei and it transmitted through close personal contact. Even though it is easily... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Scabies is an infectious disease that affects the skin caused by the mite Sarcoptes scabiei and it transmitted through close personal contact. Even though it is easily treatable disease, its prevalence is high and continuous as neglected tropical disease of resource-poor settings, and particularly affects young age groups. Despite of these facts, studies conducted in Ethiopia regarding to the prevalence and associated factors for scabies infestation have been highly variable and didn't well compiled. Due to that, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to estimates the overall prevalence of scabies and associated factors in all age groups in Ethiopia.
METHODS
International databases (PubMed/PMC/Midline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Google and Science Direct) were systematically searched from December 1, 2019, to January 18, 2020. All observational studies noted the prevalence of human scabies and associated factors in Ethiopia were included. Two authors (AG and G.T) independently extracted all necessary data using a standardized data extraction format. The data which is extracted each study were analyzed using STATA Version 14.1. Heterogeneity among the included studies was assessed through the Cochrane Q test statistics and I test. Lastly, a random effects meta-analysis model was computed to fix overall prevalence and associated factors of scabies.
RESULTS
Twelve studies were included in this meta-analysis after 410 articles retrieved. Of these, eight studies were analyzed for prevalence estimation. The overall prevalence of scabies infestation was 14.5% (95%CI: 1.5, 27.6%) in Ethiopia. Furthermore, the subgroup analysis revealed the highest prevalence was 19.6% in Amhara region. A person from a large family size (OR: 3.1, 95% CI: 1.76, 5.67), and sharing a bed (OR: 3.59, 95%CI: 2.88, 4.47) were significantly associated with scabies.
CONCLUSION
This study revealed the prevalence of scabies infestation was 14.5% in Ethiopia which was high. Persons from high family size and any contact with scabies case were factors associated with scabies.
Topics: Animals; Ethiopia; Family Characteristics; Humans; Prevalence; Risk Factors; Sarcoptes scabiei; Scabies; Skin
PubMed: 32460770
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-020-05106-3