-
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 -
Acta Ophthalmologica Feb 2023To determine the prevalence of allergic sensitization in patients with vernal keratoconjunctivitis (VKC) and to provide an overview of published studies on this topic.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
To determine the prevalence of allergic sensitization in patients with vernal keratoconjunctivitis (VKC) and to provide an overview of published studies on this topic. We systematically searched 11 literature databases on 24 May 2021, for studies with cross-sectional data on the prevalence of positive allergy tests in patients with VKC. Our main outcome of interest was the prevalence of allergic sensitization and the allergens involved. Prevalence meta-analyses were made to provide summary estimates. We identified 33 eligible studies for qualitative review with 2122 patients with VKC. Studies were predominantly based on patients seen in ophthalmology clinics. Overall, studies reported that the most prevalent positive allergen tests were the inhaled allergens house dust mites and pollen. Twenty-nine studies were eligible for the quantitative analysis. Here, we calculated the prevalence of allergen-positive patients to 57.7% (95% confidence interval: 52.5%-62.8%). Subgroup analyses of pooled estimates on sensitization based on specific testing methods found prevalence estimates of 51.4% for conjunctival provocation test, 68.7% for total tear IgE, 58.9% for specific tear IgE, and 58.2% for skin prick test. The prevalence of allergic sensitization in patients with VKC is 57.7%, and mostly towards inhaled allergens. The most frequent positive allergens are house dust mites and pollen. Identifying possible clinically relevant allergens provide information that may aid in managing VKC, such as environmental allergy-avoidance or allergy-specific treatment.
Topics: Humans; Conjunctivitis, Allergic; Prevalence; Cross-Sectional Studies; Allergens; Immunoglobulin E
PubMed: 35848379
DOI: 10.1111/aos.15212 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Jun 2022This systematic review aimed to determine the comorbid dry eye (DE) and allergic conjunctivitis (AC) prevalence. We searched PubMed and EMBASE for articles published... (Review)
Review
This systematic review aimed to determine the comorbid dry eye (DE) and allergic conjunctivitis (AC) prevalence. We searched PubMed and EMBASE for articles published until 22 March 2022, combining the terms "(dry eye OR keratoconjunctivitis sicca) AND allergic conjunctivitis." Study-specific estimates (DE and AC incidence rates among patients with AC and DE, respectively) were combined using the one-group meta-analysis in a random-effects model. The initial search yielded 700 studies. Five articles reporting AC incidence among individuals with DE and six articles reporting DE incidence among individuals with AC were included in the qualitative synthesis. In these nine articles, the total sample size was 7254 patients. The DE incidence among individuals with AC was 0.9-97.5%; the AC incidence among individuals with DE was 6.2-38.0%. One-group meta-analysis using a random-effects model showed that 47.2% (95% confidence interval: 0.165-0.779; 320/1932 cases) of patients with AC had comorbid DE and 17.8% (95% confidence interval: 0.120-0.236; 793/4855 cases) of patients with DE had comorbid AC, as defined by each article. Complimentary screening and treatment for patients with DE and AC may improve long-term outcomes and prevent chronic ocular damage in highly susceptible populations.
PubMed: 35806928
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11133643 -
Journal of the European Academy of... Jun 2022Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, inflammatory skin disorder that most frequently occurs in children, but it can also affect adults. Even though most AD cases can be... (Review)
Review
Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, inflammatory skin disorder that most frequently occurs in children, but it can also affect adults. Even though most AD cases can be managed with topical treatments, moderate-to-severe forms require systemic therapies. Dupilumab is the first human monoclonal antibody approved for the treatment of AD. Its action is through IL-4 receptor alpha subunit inhibition, thus blocking IL-4 and IL-13 signaling pathways. It has been shown to be an effective, well-tolerated therapy for AD, as well as for asthma, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP), and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). However, an increasing incidence of dupilumab-induced ocular surface disease (DIOSD) has been reported in patients treated with dupilumab, as compared to placebo. The aim of this study was to summarize scientific data regarding DIOSD in AD patients treated with dupilumab. A search of PubMed and clinicaltrials.gov databases was performed. There was no limit to study design. All AD cases were moderate-to-severe. DIOSD was either dermatologist-, allergist-, or ophthalmologist-assessed. Evidence shows that DIOSD occurs most frequently in patients with atopic dermatitis and not in other skin conditions, neither in patients with asthma, CRSwNP, nor EoE who are on dupilumab treatment. Further studies are warranted in order to establish a causal relationship between dupilumab and ocular surface disease. Nevertheless, ophthalmological evaluations prior to dupilumab initiation can benefit AD patients with previous ocular pathology or current ocular symptomatology. Also, patch testing for ocular allergic contact dermatitis might be advantageous in patients with a history of allergic conjunctivitis. Furthermore, TARC, IgE, and circulating eosinophils levels might be important biomarkers for a baseline assessment of future candidates to dupilumab treatment. However, TARC measurements should be resumed for research purposes only.
Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Dermatitis, Atopic; Humans; Interleukin-4 Receptor alpha Subunit; Severity of Illness Index; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35122335
DOI: 10.1111/jdv.17981 -
Acta Ophthalmologica Feb 2022To systematically review the literature on the treatment of vernal keratoconjunctivitis (VKC) in children and young adults and conduct comparative efficacy analysis on...
PURPOSE
To systematically review the literature on the treatment of vernal keratoconjunctivitis (VKC) in children and young adults and conduct comparative efficacy analysis on clinical signs and symptoms using network meta-analyses.
METHODS
We systematically searched the databases PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central and Web of Science on 21 October 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCT). Studies considered had patients with VKC < 20 years of age randomized into either intervention (any medical intervention) or comparator (active treatment, placebo treatment or non-treatment control), where pre-defined outcomes (data from ≥2 weeks and as close as possible to 2 months) of symptoms (itching, tearing, photophobia and foreign body sensation) and signs (hyperaemia, punctate keratitis, Horner-Trantas dots and macropapillae) were reported. Risk of bias within studies was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Comparisons were made using network meta-analyses.
RESULTS
We identified 39 studies with data on 2046 individuals. Twenty-three studies were eligible for quantitative analyses. None were systemic therapy. Temporal trend analysis showed that an initial focus on topical mast cell stabilizers turned to a focus on calcineurin inhibitors and a more diverse variety of pharmacological strategies. Studies varied in population, treatment duration and quality. The quantitative analysis revealed that efficacy of different therapies differed substantially across important clinical signs and symptoms, but there was a general trend of superior efficacy when using topical corticosteroids with stronger efficacy of the more potent corticosteroids.
CONCLUSION
We provide an overview of RCTs comparing the efficacy of treatments for VKC in children and young adults, which we find differs across symptoms and signs. Overall, we saw a general trend of superior efficacy with topical corticosteroids. However, our findings highlight the need for better studies, consensus on core outcomes and potential for individualized therapy.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Child; Conjunctivitis, Allergic; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Network Meta-Analysis
PubMed: 33779061
DOI: 10.1111/aos.14858 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2020Atopic keratoconjunctivitis (AKC) and vernal keratoconjunctivitis (VKC) are severe and potentially sight-threatening allergic eye diseases characterised by chronic...
BACKGROUND
Atopic keratoconjunctivitis (AKC) and vernal keratoconjunctivitis (VKC) are severe and potentially sight-threatening allergic eye diseases characterised by chronic inflammation of the ocular surface. Both topical and systemic treatments are used. This Cochrane Review focuses on systemic treatments.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of systemic treatments (including corticosteroids, NSAIDS, immunomodulators, and monoclonal antibodies), alone or in combination, compared to placebo or other systemic or topical treatment, for severe AKC and VKC in children and young people up to the age of 16 years.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, the ISRCTN registry, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). There were no restrictions to language or year of publication. We last searched the electronic databases on 17 February 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that involved systemic treatments in children aged up to 16 years with a clinical diagnosis of AKC or VKC. We planned to include studies that evaluated a single systemic medication versus placebo, and studies that compared two or multiple active treatments.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methods expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
No trial met the inclusion criteria of this Cochrane Review. No RCTs have been carried out on this topic.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is currently no evidence from randomised controlled trials regarding the safety and efficacy of systemic treatments for VKC and AKC. Trials are required to test efficacy and safety of current and future treatments. Outcome measures need to be developed which can capture both objective clinical and patient-reported aspects of the condition and treatments.
Topics: Adolescent; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Child; Conjunctivitis, Allergic; Humans; Immunologic Factors; Keratoconjunctivitis
PubMed: 33084033
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013298.pub2 -
Journal of Ophthalmic & Vision Research 2020Conjunctivitis is a commonly encountered condition in ophthalmology clinics throughout the world. In the management of suspected cases of conjunctivitis, alarming signs... (Review)
Review
Conjunctivitis is a commonly encountered condition in ophthalmology clinics throughout the world. In the management of suspected cases of conjunctivitis, alarming signs for more serious intraocular conditions, such as severe pain, decreased vision, and painful pupillary reaction, must be considered. Additionally, a thorough medical and ophthalmic history should be obtained and a thorough physical examination should be done in patients with atypical findings and chronic course. Concurrent physical exam findings with relevant history may reveal the presence of a systemic condition with involvement of the conjunctiva. Viral conjunctivitis remains to be the most common overall cause of conjunctivitis. Bacterial conjunctivitis is encountered less frequently and it is the second most common cause of infectious conjunctivitis. Allergic conjunctivitis is encountered in nearly half of the population and the findings include itching, mucoid discharge, chemosis, and eyelid edema. Long-term usage of eye drops with preservatives in a patient with conjunctival irritation and discharge points to the toxic conjunctivitis as the underlying etiology. Effective management of conjunctivitis includes timely diagnosis, appropriate differentiation of the various etiologies, and appropriate treatment.
PubMed: 32864068
DOI: 10.18502/jovr.v15i3.7456 -
PloS One 2020Existing evidence on the relationship between childhood lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI) and the subsequent atopy development is controversial. We aimed to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Existing evidence on the relationship between childhood lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI) and the subsequent atopy development is controversial. We aimed to investigate an association between viral LRTI at <5 years and the development of atopy at > 2 years.
METHODS
We conducted a search at Embase, Pubmed, Web of Science, and Global Index Medicus. We collected data from the included articles. We estimated the odds ratio and the 95% confidence intervals with a random effect model. We determined factors associated with atopy development after childhood LRTI using univariate and multivariate meta-regression analyses. We recorded this systematic review at PROSPERO with the number CRD42018116955.
RESULTS
We included 24 studies. There was no relationship between viral LRTI at <5 years and skin prick test-diagnosed-atopy (OR = 1.2, [95% CI = 0.7-2.0]), unknown diagnosed-atopy (OR = 0.7, [95% CI = 0.4-1.3]), atopic dermatitis (OR = 1.2, [95% CI = 0.9-1.6]), hyperreactivity to pollen (OR = 0.8, [95% CI = 0.3-2.7]), food (OR = 0.8, [95% CI = 0.3-2.5]), or house dust mite (OR = 1.1, [95% CI = 0.6-2.2]). Although not confirmed in all studies with a symmetric distribution of the 23 confounding factors investigated, the overall analyses showed that there was a relationship between childhood viral LRTI at < 5 years and serum test diagnosed-atopy (OR = 2.0, [95% CI = 1.0-4.1]), allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (OR = 1.7, [95% CI = 1.1-2.9]), hyperreactivity diagnosed by serum tests with food (OR = 5.3, [1.7-16.7]) or inhaled allergens (OR = 4.2, [95% CI = 2.1-8.5]), or furred animals (OR = 0.6, [95% CI = 0.5-0.9]).
CONCLUSION
These results suggest that there is no association between viral LRTI at < 5 years and the majority of categories of atopy studied during this work. These results, however, are not confirmed for the remaining categories of atopy and more particularly those diagnosed by serum tests. There is a real need to develop more accurate atopy diagnostic tools.
Topics: Allergens; Animals; Asthma; Child; Conjunctivitis, Allergic; Dermatitis, Atopic; Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus; Humans; Pollen; Respiratory Tract Infections; Rhinitis, Allergic; Skin Tests; Time Factors
PubMed: 32330171
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231816 -
Medicine Feb 2020Allergic conjunctivitis (AC) is a multifactorial and common type of ocular surface disease that affects many people. The quality of life for AC patients can be...
BACKGROUND
Allergic conjunctivitis (AC) is a multifactorial and common type of ocular surface disease that affects many people. The quality of life for AC patients can be significantly decreased caused by symptoms of ocular itching, swelling, redness, and tearing. Topical antihistaminics, mast cell stabilizers, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and steroids have been widely used to treat AC. Many clinical trials have indicated that olopatadine hydrochloride eye drops can provide quick relief of symptoms and signs. The purpose of this review is to evaluate systematically the effectiveness of olopatadine hydrochloride eye drops for treating AC.
METHODS
A systematic review of all of the randomized controlled trials on the effectiveness and safety of olopatadine hydrochloride eye drops for AC will be conducted. We will search PubMed, Web of Science (WOS), EMBASE (OVID), the Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Science and Technology Journal database (VIP), Wanfang Database, and CBM, from the database inception date to October 31, 2019. There are no language or publication status restrictions. Registers of clinical trials, potential gray literature, reference lists of studies, and conference abstracts will also be searched. Two reviewers will independently read the articles, extract the data information, and assess the quality of the studies. Data will be synthesized by a heterogeneity test. The primary outcomes include the main symptom and sign scores before and after treatment, the eye redness index, the presence of eosinophils in the conjunctival scraping. Quality of life, the total treatment efficacy, and safety will be evaluated as the secondary outcomes. RevMan V.5.3 software will be used for the meta-analysis.
RESULTS
The study will provide an objective and normative systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of olopatadine hydrochloride eye drops for the treatment of AC.
CONCLUSION
Our review will provide useful information to judge whether olopatadine hydrochloride eye drops is an effective intervention for patients with AC.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION
It is not necessary to obtain ethical approval as participants are not involved patients. The protocol and results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. The systematic review will also be disseminated electronically and in print to help guide health care practice and policy.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
PROSPERO CRD42019132232.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Conjunctivitis, Allergic; Humans; Olopatadine Hydrochloride; Ophthalmic Solutions; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32049778
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000018618 -
Acta Ophthalmologica May 2020To examine the rate and types of ocular adverse events among children wearing soft contact lenses. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To examine the rate and types of ocular adverse events among children wearing soft contact lenses.
METHODS
This study is a retrospective review of ocular adverse event data from six randomized controlled trials among a total of 581 myopic children (aged 7-15 years at baseline) administered daily disposable hydrogel contact lenses (etafilcon A).
RESULTS
During 816 patient years of contact lens wear, no significant or serious ocular adverse events were reported. A total of 86 non-significant ocular adverse events occurred in 53 children. The crude rate of ocular adverse events was 10.6 per 100 patient years with the estimated pooled incidence being 8.9 per 100 patient years (95% CI: 4.5-17.4). Two asymptomatic corneal infiltrative events were reported (both non-significant), which is an incidence of 0.3 (95% CI: 0.1-0.9) per 100 patient years. The most common ocular adverse events (n) were slit-lamp findings of Grade 2 or less requiring treatment (26), unspecified conjunctivitis (14), and allergic conjunctivitis (13). No cases of microbial keratitis were observed. Of the 86 adverse events, 37 were classified as highly likely or possibly lens-related, giving a crude incidence of 4.5 per 100 patient years for contact lens-related events. The crude incidence of ocular adverse events among spectacle wearers was 1.8 per 100 patient years.
CONCLUSION
These data suggest that daily disposable soft contact lenses can be safely worn by children. Additional studies will be needed to precisely quantify the adverse event rate of soft contact lenses in normal clinical practice.
Topics: Adolescent; Child; Conjunctival Diseases; Contact Lenses, Hydrophilic; Corneal Diseases; Female; Humans; Incidence; Male; Prospective Studies; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31654485
DOI: 10.1111/aos.14283