Research Information System
Asian Pacific Journal of Allergy and Immunology, vol.41, no.1, pp.20-29, 2023 (SCI-Expanded)
Background: The clinical and immunological efficacy of preseasonal allergoid immunotherapy has been previously investigated, however, studies comparing the effectiveness of the two protocols are limited in the literature. Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the clinical and immunological efficacy of pre-seasonal and perennial allergoid immunotherapy. Methods: This is a prospective cross sectional two-arm study. During the season; symptom and medication scores were filled. Before and at the end of the season; RQLQ was applied, Phl p sIgE, sIgG4 and IL-10 levels were measured. Results: In preseasonal group patients had better symptom control for most of the weeks, particularly during the peak pollen period (April: w-2 & w-4, p = 0.04; May: w-2, p = 0.02; June: w-1, w-2, p = 0.02; w-3, w-5, p = 0.03; July: w-2, p = 0.01; w-3, p = 0.02; w-4, p = 0.04). In the perennial group, sIgG4 [1st time point: preseasonal 0.02 mgA /L vs perennial 0.13 mgA /L (p < 0.0001); 2nd time point: preseasonal 0.52 mgA /L vs perennial 0.33 mgA /L; 3rd time point: preseasonal 0.04 mgA /L vs perennial 0.12 mgA /L (p < 0.0001)] and IL-10 (1st time point: preseasonal 1.45 pg/ml vs perennial 2.03 pg/ml; 2nd time point: preseasonal 2.29 pg/ml vs perennial 2.19 pg/ml; 3rd time point: preseasonal 2.32 pg/ml vs perennial 2.16 pg/ml) levels were higher and more stable. Conclusion: Preseasonal immunotherapy provided better control of symptoms throughout the pollen season. However, the blocking antibody response was stronger and more permanent in the perennial immunotherapy group.