【摘要】 變應(yīng)原特異性免疫治療(AIT)是通過(guò)誘導(dǎo)過(guò)敏原特異性免疫耐受來(lái)改變過(guò)敏性疾病進(jìn)程的唯一對(duì)因治療方法,由于全過(guò)程標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化質(zhì)量高,更加精準(zhǔn)可控,AIT中的變應(yīng)原皮下特異性免疫治療(SCIT)已成為目前國(guó)內(nèi)各大過(guò)敏中心采用的最主要的脫敏方式。然而常規(guī)治療方案初始階段存在局限性,患者需要每周返院注射,針次多、時(shí)間長(zhǎng),為此,臨床工作者一直在探索SCIT的優(yōu)化治療方案。塵螨是兒童致敏率最高的吸入性過(guò)敏原,文章就兒童塵螨變應(yīng)原SCIT的不同優(yōu)化方案和臨床應(yīng)用進(jìn)展進(jìn)行綜述,以期為SCIT的實(shí)施提供更充分的臨床依據(jù)。梳理文獻(xiàn)后發(fā)現(xiàn),相較于常規(guī)治療方案,加速遞增方案有助于提高治療依從性。但目前諸如沖擊免疫治療、單一濃度加速遞增方案的研究樣本量普遍較小,因此尚需要更大樣本量、研究方案更完善的大型研究來(lái)提供可靠的數(shù)據(jù)支持。
【關(guān)鍵詞】 兒童;過(guò)敏性疾病;塵螨;變應(yīng)原免疫治療;皮下特異性免疫治療
Research progress on subcutaneous specific immunotherapy of dust mite allergens in children
LIU Xiao1, LI Jiayu1, CHEN Zhuanggui1,2, ZHANG Pingping1,2
(1.Children’ s Medical Center, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510630, China;
2.Department of Allergy, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510630, China)
Corresponding author: ZHANG Pingping, E-mail: zhpingp@mail.sysu.edu.cn
【Abstract】 Allergen specific immunotherapy (AIT) is the only etiological treatment method that alters the course of allergic diseases by inducing allergen-specific immune tolerance. Subcutaneous specific immunotherapy (SCIT), due to its standardized process and high-quality control, has become the most predominant desensitization method in major allergy centers across the country. However, there are limitations in the initial phase of conventional treatment plans, requiring patients to return to the hospital weekly for injections, which involves a high number of needle sticks and a lengthy duration. Consequently, clinical practitioners have been continuously exploring optimized treatment strategies for SCIT. Dust mites are the most common inhalant allergens causing sensitization in children, this article reviews the different optimization strategies and clinical application progress of dust mite allergen SCIT in children, aiming to provide a more comprehensive clinical basis for the implementation of SCIT.After reviewing the literature, it was found that compared with the conventional treatment regimen, the accelerated escalation regimen was helpful to improve treatment compliance. However, at present, the sample size of studies such as rush immunotherapy and single accelerated concentration escalation schemes is generally small, so large-scale studies with larger sample size and more complete research are still needed to provide reliable data support.
【Key words】 Children; Allergic; Dust mite; Allergen immunotherapy; Subcutaneous specific immunotherapy
由于生存環(huán)境和生活方式的改變,全球過(guò)敏性疾病發(fā)病率持續(xù)上升,已成為全球第六大疾病,累及30%~40%的人口[1-2]。常見(jiàn)的過(guò)敏性疾病包括變應(yīng)性鼻炎(allergic rhinitis,AR)、過(guò)敏性哮喘(allergic asthma,AA)和特應(yīng)性皮炎(atopic dermatitis,AD),而誘發(fā)這些疾病最常見(jiàn)的致敏原即為塵螨(dust mites,DM)[3]。我國(guó)大型流行病學(xué)調(diào)查數(shù)據(jù)顯示,在AR和(或)AA人群中,兒童的過(guò)敏原致敏率遠(yuǎn)高于成人,且在常見(jiàn)的吸入性過(guò)敏原中,兒童DM致敏率高達(dá)65%[4]。此外,過(guò)敏性疾病不僅嚴(yán)重影響兒童的身體健康和生活質(zhì)量,還對(duì)其學(xué)業(yè)、情緒、行為、社交等方面產(chǎn)生負(fù)面影響[5-6]。
變應(yīng)原特異性免疫治療(allergen specific imm-unotherapy,AIT)是目前唯一能夠改變過(guò)敏性疾病自然進(jìn)程的針對(duì)病因的治療方法,在誘導(dǎo)免疫耐受、改善疾病癥狀的同時(shí)還能夠預(yù)防新發(fā)過(guò)敏性疾?。?]。AIT主要的給藥形式有2種,即皮下特異性免疫治療(subcutaneous specific immunotherapy,SCIT)和舌下特異性免疫治療(sublingual specific immunotherapy,SLIT),均已被證實(shí)可以有效地改善過(guò)敏性疾病的癥狀[8-9]。目前,對(duì)于哪種AIT用藥途徑更優(yōu)的問(wèn)題尚未達(dá)成共識(shí),有限的幾項(xiàng)非安慰劑對(duì)照研究顯示SCIT的療效更佳,但SLIT的全身不良反應(yīng)(system reaction,SR)發(fā)生率更
低[5, 10]。在臨床工作中,相較于SLIT,SCIT具有在院內(nèi)治療的優(yōu)勢(shì),患者在治療中心留觀,給藥劑量由專(zhuān)科醫(yī)師根據(jù)患者個(gè)體情況確定,由護(hù)士規(guī)范記錄每次注射的具體情況,便于不良反應(yīng)的及時(shí)處理和追蹤。因此,SCIT的全過(guò)程標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化質(zhì)量高,更加精準(zhǔn)可控。真實(shí)世界研究證實(shí),SCIT的依從性顯著優(yōu)于SLIT,且兒童和青少年的SCIT依從性優(yōu)于成人[11]。但由于在初始治療階段患者需要每周返院,增加了不便利性和就診負(fù)擔(dān),導(dǎo)致部分患者依從性欠佳,影響了治療療效。近年來(lái),醫(yī)務(wù)工作者已經(jīng)逐漸認(rèn)識(shí)到了這一局限性,并開(kāi)始探索更優(yōu)的DM-SCIT方案,目的就是在保證療效和安全性的同時(shí)增加患者的依從性,從而進(jìn)一步提高療效。本文就兒童DM-SCIT臨床應(yīng)用方面的研究進(jìn)展進(jìn)行綜述,以期為治療提供更充分的臨床依據(jù)。
1 SCIT基本原理及兒童適用人群
1.1 基本原理和作用機(jī)制
SCIT的基本原理是通過(guò)皮下注射的方式多次給予患者疾病相關(guān)的變應(yīng)原提取物,并逐步增加劑量至維持劑量,從而誘導(dǎo)機(jī)體對(duì)該變應(yīng)原產(chǎn)生免疫耐受,明顯減輕甚至消除患者再次接觸該變應(yīng)原時(shí)的臨床癥狀[5]。
AIT作用機(jī)制復(fù)雜,通過(guò)多條免疫通路發(fā)揮作用,且具體機(jī)制尚未完全明了。與其他AIT方式一樣,進(jìn)行SCIT后,注射液所含的變應(yīng)原會(huì)被樹(shù)突狀細(xì)胞(dendritic cells,DC)攝取、加工并呈遞,同時(shí)遷移至局部淋巴結(jié)[12],被初始T細(xì)胞識(shí)別,誘導(dǎo)T細(xì)胞向輔助性T細(xì)胞1(T helper cell 1,Th1)轉(zhuǎn)化,進(jìn)而促進(jìn)Th1/Th2免疫應(yīng)答趨于平衡,SCIT還可以誘導(dǎo)調(diào)節(jié)性T細(xì)胞(regular T cell,Treg)的產(chǎn)生,這類(lèi)細(xì)胞能夠分泌白介素(interleukin,IL)-10和轉(zhuǎn)化生長(zhǎng)因子-β(transforming growth factor-β,TGF-β)等抗炎細(xì)胞因子,并促進(jìn)調(diào)節(jié)性B細(xì)胞的激活[13]。從而抑制免疫球蛋白(immunoglobulin,Ig)E的產(chǎn)生,并促進(jìn)IgG1、IgG4和IgA的分泌,特別是IgG4,它與IgE有相同的表位,可競(jìng)爭(zhēng)性結(jié)合過(guò)敏原,從而預(yù)防肥大細(xì)胞或嗜堿性粒細(xì)胞表面的IgE受體交聯(lián),抑制組胺釋放和脫顆粒[14-15],并減少黏液生成、抑制支氣管收縮、降低血管通透性,最終緩解過(guò)敏癥狀[16]。
1.2 適應(yīng)證及禁忌證
首先針對(duì)年齡因素,考慮到兒童免疫系統(tǒng)的發(fā)育成熟度以及安全性,SCIT通常在5歲以上的患兒中實(shí)施[17]。
以DM-SCIT為例,其適應(yīng)證包括:①輕-中度AA患兒,變應(yīng)原檢測(cè)證實(shí)DM是其唯一(或2、3種變應(yīng)原中主要)的變應(yīng)原,且無(wú)法完全避免接觸。②中-重度持續(xù)性AR患兒,變應(yīng)原檢測(cè)證實(shí)DM是其唯一(或2、3種變應(yīng)原中主要)的變應(yīng)原,且無(wú)法完全避免接觸。③輕-中度AA合并AR和(或)過(guò)敏性結(jié)膜炎患兒,變應(yīng)原檢測(cè)證實(shí)DM是其唯一(或2、3種變應(yīng)原中主要)的變應(yīng)原,且無(wú)法完全避免接觸。④輕-中度AA合并濕疹患兒,變應(yīng)原檢測(cè)證實(shí)DM是其唯一(或2、3種變應(yīng)原中主要)的變應(yīng)原,且無(wú)法完全避免接觸[18]。
為避免在應(yīng)用過(guò)程中發(fā)生嚴(yán)重過(guò)敏反應(yīng)或其他嚴(yán)重不良事件,應(yīng)嚴(yán)格掌握DM-SCIT禁忌證,包括:①?lài)?yán)重的或未被控制的AA[第1秒用力呼氣容積(one second forced expiratory volume,F(xiàn)EV1)小于70%預(yù)計(jì)值];②應(yīng)用第4或5級(jí)哮喘控制治療方案仍不能控制癥狀或肺功能持續(xù)降低者;③在免疫治療期間連續(xù)2次發(fā)生不明原因嚴(yán)重過(guò)敏反應(yīng)者;④正在使用β受體阻滯劑或血管緊張素轉(zhuǎn)化酶抑制劑(angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors,ACEI)治療者;⑤患有嚴(yán)重的心腦血管疾病、免疫性疾病(包括自身免疫性疾病和免疫缺陷性疾病)、惡性病、慢性感染性疾病者;⑥患者有嚴(yán)重的心理疾病、缺乏依從性或無(wú)法理解治療的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)和局限性[17, 19]。
2 DM-SCIT常規(guī)方案和優(yōu)化治療方案
在常規(guī)方案的初始治療階段,患者需要每周返院注射,由于其達(dá)到維持劑量所需的針次多、時(shí)間長(zhǎng),尤其對(duì)于兒童患者,皮下注射疼痛、監(jiān)護(hù)人擔(dān)心耽誤學(xué)業(yè)等原因使常規(guī)方案的依從性較差,這是影響療效的關(guān)鍵因素。為此,DM-SCIT注射方案的優(yōu)化已成為近10年的研究熱點(diǎn),優(yōu)化的基本原則包括在保證良好療效及安全性的基礎(chǔ)上,縮短遞增時(shí)間、減少針次、減少濃度瓶等,目前提出的加速遞增方案包括集群治療、沖擊治療和單一濃度方案。
2.1 常規(guī)方案
SCIT分為初始劑量遞增階段和維持治療階段,總療程約3~5年。在初始劑量遞增階段,常規(guī)方案為每周治療1次,每次注射1針,逐漸增加劑量,約3~4個(gè)月增加至維持劑量后進(jìn)入維持階段[20]。大量的雙盲、安慰劑對(duì)照研究證實(shí),SCIT可有效降低AA和AR患者的癥狀評(píng)分、減少藥物的使用、改善生活質(zhì)量并誘導(dǎo)特異性免疫標(biāo)志物的變化[11, 21]。SCIT可減少局部皮質(zhì)類(lèi)固醇的使用和改善特應(yīng)性皮炎患者的特應(yīng)性皮炎評(píng)分(scoring atopic dermatitis,SCORAD)[22]。有研究還顯示SCIT具有預(yù)防作用,可防止AR進(jìn)展為AA,還可預(yù)防新發(fā)致敏的發(fā)生[7, 23]。
2.2 集群免疫治療
集群免疫治療是指在劑量累加階段,每周治療1次,每次注射2~3針,約7~8周達(dá)到維持劑量[20]。與常規(guī)方案相比,集群免疫治療方案的劑量累加階段治療時(shí)間與就診次數(shù)均減少,有利于提高患者治療依從性。對(duì)于其與常規(guī)方案治療間臨床療效與安全性的差異,一項(xiàng)納入96例持續(xù)性AR患者的前瞻性研究顯示[24],在為期1年(52周)的DM-AIT治療期間,集群組和常規(guī)組的每周癥狀評(píng)分以及藥物使用評(píng)分均持續(xù)下降,且在治療第6周時(shí)與常規(guī)組比較,集群組的上述指標(biāo)下降更明顯,治療1年后,2組患者的生活質(zhì)量評(píng)分均顯著提高,組間比較差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。在客觀檢測(cè)指標(biāo)方面,集群組與常規(guī)組的皮膚試驗(yàn)指數(shù)均顯著降低,組間比較差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義,2組治療前后的IgE比值均無(wú)顯著變化。對(duì)于安全性,該研究顯示,無(wú)論在劑量累加階段或維持階段,2組間的局部不良反應(yīng)(local reaction,LR)的頻率、SR的類(lèi)型及頻率均無(wú)明顯差異,且在1年的免疫治療過(guò)程中均未發(fā)生3級(jí)或4級(jí)不良反應(yīng)。所有SR均發(fā)生在注射后20 min內(nèi),并成功治愈。另有一項(xiàng)針對(duì)兒童SCIT常規(guī)方案與集群免疫治療方案安全性的研究顯示[25],納入的84例AR和(或)AA患者,常規(guī)組與集群組的局部不良反應(yīng)的頻率、SR的類(lèi)型及頻率均無(wú)明顯差異,均未發(fā)生3級(jí)或4級(jí)不良反應(yīng),且2組間速發(fā)型和遲發(fā)性不良反應(yīng)的發(fā)生頻率和反應(yīng)類(lèi)型無(wú)明顯差異。上述研究結(jié)果提示,集群免疫治療方案與常規(guī)方案的療效和安全性無(wú)明顯差異,且治療起效時(shí)間早,患者依從性高。
2.3 沖擊免疫治療
2.3.1 一般方案
沖擊免疫治療(rush immunotherapy,RIT)是另一種加速遞增方案,在第1~3日內(nèi)連續(xù)多次注射,每隔15~60 min遞增1次,可以進(jìn)一步縮短劑量遞增階段的持續(xù)時(shí)間。RIT方案的優(yōu)勢(shì)主要有以下幾點(diǎn):①具有便利性,患者停止接受常規(guī)方案治療的主要原因之一是頻繁就診帶來(lái)的不便,而RIT方案大大縮減了就診次數(shù)并減少了注射針次。②使患者更快獲益,RIT方案能夠更快達(dá)到維持劑量,與常規(guī)方案相比,能使患者更快獲益。③減少劑量錯(cuò)誤風(fēng)險(xiǎn),注射劑量錯(cuò)誤是AIT期間SR的主要原因之一,更少的針次意味著更少的錯(cuò)誤機(jī)會(huì)[26]。RIT的缺點(diǎn)除了前期投入較高外,最主要的是其可能與SR的發(fā)生風(fēng)險(xiǎn)升高有關(guān)。為了減少這種風(fēng)險(xiǎn),在實(shí)施RIT時(shí)需要更加謹(jǐn)慎,包括嚴(yán)格篩查患者的潛在疾病或禁忌藥物,密切監(jiān)測(cè)AA患者的肺功能和哮喘癥狀,排除患共病的患者,排除FEV1小于80%預(yù)測(cè)值的患者等;此外RIT的預(yù)處理用藥及優(yōu)化方案均能有效控制SR的發(fā)生率[26-27]。
通過(guò)預(yù)處理用藥及優(yōu)化注射方案,能夠有效控制不良反應(yīng)發(fā)生率。Rattanamanee等[28]在6~15歲DM致敏AR患者中進(jìn)行了RIT治療,患兒在第1次治療前30 min口服糖皮質(zhì)激素和抗組胺藥,之后每日口服抗組胺藥物以控制不良反應(yīng)的發(fā)生,在2 d住院沖擊治療期間,119次注射中發(fā)生7次SR。Chu等[29]設(shè)計(jì)了為期1 d的門(mén)診優(yōu)化RIT方案(modified environmental rush immunotherapy,MERIT),MERIT當(dāng)日每隔1 h注射1次,共注射8次,此后按常規(guī)方案遞增。該研究共納入77例AR和(或)AA患者,包括34例兒童和43例成人,僅有1例兒童在MERIT當(dāng)日出現(xiàn)1次SR,在后續(xù)的劑量遞增階段,1例兒童和4例成人出現(xiàn)了SR,且兒童和成人不良反應(yīng)發(fā)生率沒(méi)有顯著差異。該方案將沖擊免疫治療方案和常規(guī)方案相結(jié)合,并通過(guò)預(yù)處理用藥提高了安全性。Yuenyongviwat等[27]將沖擊免疫治療方案與集群免疫治療方案進(jìn)行聯(lián)合,患者住院3 d(每日注射3次),隨后接受集群免疫治療方案(每周1 d,每日注射2次),該方案每次注射的SR發(fā)生率為3%。
2.3.2 超級(jí)沖擊方案
在RIT方案的基礎(chǔ)上,超級(jí)沖擊方案(ultra-rush schedule of subcutaneous immunotherapy,UR-SCIT)在治療第1日即達(dá)到維持劑量,短時(shí)間快速遞增用藥量可能會(huì)增加SR的發(fā)生風(fēng)險(xiǎn),而SR的嚴(yán)重程度和發(fā)生率與變應(yīng)原提取物的致敏效力相關(guān)[30],可以選擇不同的修飾或吸附類(lèi)型的變應(yīng)原提取物來(lái)增強(qiáng)安全性。Morais-Almeida等[31]選用脫色聚合變應(yīng)原提取物進(jìn)行UR-SCIT,治療當(dāng)日,在100例中-重度AR患者中有11例發(fā)生21次LR,2例發(fā)生輕度SR。在另一項(xiàng)有兒童數(shù)據(jù)的UR-SCIT研究中,研究者選用酪氨酸吸附的變應(yīng)原提取物,在1日內(nèi)達(dá)到維持劑量,結(jié)果顯示,6~11歲年齡組(16例)SR的發(fā)生率為0,12~18歲年齡組(124例)SR的發(fā)生率為4.8%[32]。
上述研究在豐富兒童人群的治療數(shù)據(jù)的同時(shí),提供了一些減少不良反應(yīng)發(fā)生風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的方案,包括但不限于改良的RIT方案、治療前預(yù)處理用藥以及使用修飾后的變應(yīng)原制劑。需要注意的是,上述研究雖然顯示了RIT在兒童人群中的使用安全性較佳,但在治療過(guò)程中仍需經(jīng)專(zhuān)業(yè)培訓(xùn)的兒科和過(guò)敏科醫(yī)師根據(jù)患者情況選擇方案,同時(shí)應(yīng)確保急救藥品和設(shè)備齊全,個(gè)別UR-SCIT方案甚至需提前建立好靜脈通道以便及時(shí)搶救[32]。
AIT需要達(dá)到推薦的目標(biāo)維持劑量才能使患者獲得免疫耐受性[28],因此RIT方案與常規(guī)方案相比,能夠更快地緩解癥狀。本課題組前期的真實(shí)世界、回顧性對(duì)照研究表明,與常規(guī)組相比,在治療后的第1個(gè)月,RIT組瘙癢視覺(jué)模擬評(píng)分法(Visual Analogue Scale,VAS)評(píng)分與癥狀和藥物綜合評(píng)分(Combined Symptom and Medication Score,CSMS)較基線值顯著下降,且在1年的隨訪中沒(méi)有患者脫落,而常規(guī)組脫落率達(dá)13.5%[33]。另有研究顯示,RIT組在達(dá)到維持劑量時(shí)(第8周),患者每月無(wú)鼻炎癥狀日數(shù)較基線值顯著增加,同時(shí)CD4+T細(xì)胞的干擾素-γ (interferon-γ,IFN-γ)與IL-5在第8周時(shí)明顯升高,CD4+CD25+FOXP3+ Treg數(shù)量增加,這些結(jié)果為RIT的深入研究提供了細(xì)胞生物學(xué)基礎(chǔ)[34]。
集群免疫治療和RIT的方案目前在國(guó)際上尚未達(dá)成共識(shí),不同免疫治療中心制定了不同的目標(biāo)維持劑量、遞增方案和預(yù)處理用藥方案,因此缺乏標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化一直是加速遞增方案推廣應(yīng)用的主要限制。
2.4 單一濃度加速遞增方案
單一濃度加速遞增方案(單一濃度方案)是最新的一種優(yōu)化加速遞增方案,其特點(diǎn)是初始劑量遞增和維持階段使用同一濃度,同時(shí)顯著減少針次、縮短遞增時(shí)長(zhǎng)。
Zhi等[35]的研究是第1項(xiàng)評(píng)估單一濃度方案在5~14歲DM過(guò)敏兒童中安全性的隨機(jī)對(duì)照臨床研究,該研究使用的是天然DM-SCIT產(chǎn)品,其常規(guī)方案的劑量遞增需要13~14周,從濃度1、濃度2到濃度3逐漸遞增,在注射14~15次后達(dá)到維持劑量。而單一濃度方案僅需5周時(shí)間,從濃度3開(kāi)始遞增,在注射6次后即可進(jìn)入維持階段。該研究顯示,單一濃度組LR的發(fā)生率為2.0%,50例中有5例發(fā)生SR(包括4例1級(jí)反應(yīng)和1例2級(jí)反應(yīng));常規(guī)組LR的發(fā)生率為7.8%,51例中有4例發(fā)生SR(均為2級(jí)反應(yīng)),2組的SR發(fā)生率差異沒(méi)有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。此外,單一濃度方案的耐受性評(píng)價(jià)略高于常規(guī)治療方案。該研究表明,在兒童中使用6次遞增注射的單一濃度方案的安全性和耐受性良好,總體上與常規(guī)方案相當(dāng)。
3 SCIT在不同過(guò)敏性疾病兒童中的應(yīng)用
SCIT在兒童AR和(或)AA中的療效已得到充分證明[36-37]。但將SCIT應(yīng)用于AD目前仍未達(dá)成共識(shí)。AD是兒童時(shí)期最常見(jiàn)的慢性炎癥性復(fù)發(fā)性皮膚病,發(fā)病率約20%,發(fā)病機(jī)制十分復(fù)雜,尚未被完全闡明,包括遺傳、免疫和環(huán)境因素等。約80%的AD患兒體內(nèi)總IgE水平升高,并對(duì)吸入性變應(yīng)原敏感,其中最重要的變應(yīng)原為DM[38-39]。
Lee等[40]的回顧性研究結(jié)果表明,217例AD患兒在接受SCIT 3年后,88.4%的癥狀得到改善。Sánchez Caraballo等[41]的研究納入了60例DM致敏的AD患兒,其病史均超過(guò)2年,且初始SCORAD>15分,SCIT組治療6個(gè)月后癥狀和藥物評(píng)分明顯下降,且DM特異性IgG4水平升高。一項(xiàng)SCIT治療AD長(zhǎng)期療效的回顧性分析表明,SCIT治療3年后,兒童組和成人組SCORAD和瘙癢VAS評(píng)分明顯下降,且非SCIT組出現(xiàn)新發(fā)致敏的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)更高[42]。
然而,近年來(lái)研究者對(duì)AD中AIT的有效性進(jìn)行了多項(xiàng)系統(tǒng)回顧和薈萃分析,發(fā)現(xiàn)大部分研究異質(zhì)性明顯,包括納入標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、治療時(shí)間、治療方案、主要和次要終點(diǎn)、伴隨治療方案、合并癥情況等,這些異質(zhì)性導(dǎo)致系統(tǒng)回顧和薈萃分析無(wú)法得出高質(zhì)量證據(jù)[5, 38]。2023年的一項(xiàng)薈萃分析納入了23項(xiàng)隨機(jī)對(duì)照試驗(yàn),包括1 957例主要對(duì)DM過(guò)敏的成人和兒童患者,研究結(jié)果表明,“SCIT使SCORAD降低50%”“皮膚病生活質(zhì)量指數(shù)改善4分以上”這2項(xiàng)均為中度確定性[43]。因此,還需要更多高質(zhì)量、大樣本量的隨機(jī)對(duì)照研究來(lái)進(jìn)一步驗(yàn)證AIT在AD中的療效,從而探索最佳的治療方案和治療標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。
目前部分指南建議,盡管AIT不應(yīng)成為所有AD患者的一線治療方法,但可以在選定的中-重度AD、對(duì)DM過(guò)敏和接觸變應(yīng)原后癥狀加重的患者中考慮采用AIT[44-45]。進(jìn)行AIT前應(yīng)評(píng)估風(fēng)險(xiǎn)與收益比值,并與患兒或監(jiān)護(hù)人進(jìn)行討論。實(shí)施AIT應(yīng)至少滿足3個(gè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn):①必須通過(guò)皮膚點(diǎn)刺試驗(yàn)和(或)IgE檢測(cè)證實(shí)對(duì)吸入性變應(yīng)原敏感;②接觸吸入性變應(yīng)原可誘發(fā)AD發(fā)作;③必須為AIT選擇一種標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化產(chǎn)品[46]。
4 SCIT優(yōu)化治療方案的探索——生物制劑聯(lián)合免疫治療
盡管AIT是精準(zhǔn)醫(yī)學(xué)和對(duì)因治療的有效方案,但許多安全性問(wèn)題限制了其在臨床實(shí)踐中的應(yīng)用。AIT不良反應(yīng)的嚴(yán)重程度受給藥途徑、給藥方案、變應(yīng)原提取物的分子特征和個(gè)體易感性的影響。并且,在不穩(wěn)定性哮喘或AD患者中應(yīng)用SCIT可能會(huì)導(dǎo)致疾病失控和出現(xiàn)危及生命的嚴(yán)重癥狀。因此急需新的治療策略以提高AIT的安全性和有效性,且對(duì)其適應(yīng)證范圍應(yīng)考慮到高風(fēng)險(xiǎn)臨床因素。近年的研究顯示,生物制劑聯(lián)合免疫治療能實(shí)現(xiàn)過(guò)敏性疾病患者的多重獲益[47]。
4.1 更快控制癥狀以啟動(dòng)AIT
過(guò)敏性疾病發(fā)作急性期或癥狀穩(wěn)定前不適宜啟動(dòng)AIT,臨床醫(yī)師需要先控制患者的癥狀才能考慮后續(xù)的對(duì)因治療,而部分中-重度過(guò)敏性疾病患者,比如嚴(yán)重的AA、AD患者,常常難以在短時(shí)間內(nèi)較好地控制癥狀,因此需要更有力的靶向治療,一方面緩解患者的癥狀,改善其生活治療,另一方面盡快達(dá)到啟動(dòng)AIT的時(shí)機(jī),并且在后續(xù)的AIT中減少癥狀的反復(fù)和不良反應(yīng)的發(fā)生率。生物制劑在這方面具有獨(dú)特優(yōu)勢(shì),有研究者評(píng)估了奧馬珠單抗聯(lián)合SCIT對(duì)6 例嚴(yán)重AA患者的療效,結(jié)果顯示,在為期約8個(gè)月的奧馬珠單抗預(yù)處理后,患者的哮喘癥狀得到有效控制,從而能順利開(kāi)展SCIT ,即使在奧馬珠單抗停藥后,SCIT也可以在5例患者中順利實(shí)施,療效良好且沒(méi)有發(fā)生不良反應(yīng)[48]。Stelmach等[49]的研究納入了17例嚴(yán)重AA患兒,其中5例因病情惡化無(wú)法耐受AIT,奧馬珠單抗能有效緩解所有患兒的哮喘癥狀,且在實(shí)施AIT期間沒(méi)有發(fā)生不良反應(yīng)。
4.2 降低不良反應(yīng)及增加治療的依從性
本課題組一項(xiàng)針對(duì)DM敏感AR和(或)AS患兒的回顧性研究顯示,相較于單獨(dú)RIT,聯(lián)合治療組經(jīng)奧馬珠單抗治療1個(gè)月后,患兒的臨床癥狀、用藥評(píng)分明顯改善,治療期間2組不良反應(yīng)發(fā)生率無(wú)明顯差異,且聯(lián)合治療組的依從性更高[33]。一項(xiàng)單中心回顧性研究評(píng)估了度普利尤單抗聯(lián)合SCIT對(duì)難治性中-重度AD患兒的療效和安全性[50],結(jié)果顯示SCORAD、數(shù)字評(píng)定量表(numerical rating scale,NRS)、特應(yīng)性皮炎控制工具(atopic dermatitis control tool,ADCT)評(píng)分在附加治療開(kāi)始后的第4周和第12周顯著下降,并在維持治療期間趨于穩(wěn)定,且沒(méi)有發(fā)生嚴(yán)重不良反應(yīng)。
4.3 減少糖皮質(zhì)激素及對(duì)癥藥物的使用
Stelmach等[49]的研究顯示使用奧馬珠單抗控制癥狀后,接受AIT的嚴(yán)重AA患兒的糖皮質(zhì)激素維持治療次數(shù)也相應(yīng)減少。1例癥狀未被控制,需大量吸入及口服糖皮質(zhì)激素治療的AA患兒,在應(yīng)用奧馬珠單抗后癥狀得到控制并成功開(kāi)啟了AIT,且無(wú)需再予糖皮質(zhì)激素治療,由于腎上腺抑制癥狀減退,因此恢復(fù)了正常的生長(zhǎng)速度[51]。在評(píng)估SCIT聯(lián)合奧馬珠單抗對(duì)AR合并AA療效的2項(xiàng)研究中,聯(lián)合方案均較單獨(dú)SCIT方案的療效優(yōu),且能減少糖皮質(zhì)激素的使用[52-53]。
5 結(jié)語(yǔ)與展望
本文詳細(xì)綜述了過(guò)敏性疾病SCIT不同方案之間的臨床療效、安全性及患者依從性等方面的研究進(jìn)展,這些方案均能明顯改善患兒的臨床癥狀。相較于常規(guī)治療方案,加速遞增方案在初始階段就能更快達(dá)到維持劑量,使患兒更早獲益,并提高了治療依從性。在安全性方面,預(yù)先使用生物制劑后,快速遞增方案的不良反應(yīng)并不會(huì)增加。具體來(lái)說(shuō),集群免疫治療、RIT的相似之處在于初始階段均需要密集注射,1 d內(nèi)多次注射,注射部位LR的識(shí)別受限,難以根據(jù)不良反應(yīng)來(lái)調(diào)整注射量,且患者體驗(yàn)感較差,尤其對(duì)于兒童來(lái)說(shuō)接受度較低。單一濃度方案針次和時(shí)間顯著減少,僅需每周注射1次、每次注射1針,方便記錄速發(fā)和遲發(fā)型不良反應(yīng),無(wú)需聯(lián)合糖皮質(zhì)激素和生物制劑,可為患兒帶來(lái)更優(yōu)的體驗(yàn),且只使用1種濃度瓶,能降低藥瓶混淆風(fēng)險(xiǎn),方便臨床操作。然而,RIT及單一濃度方案的臨床實(shí)踐相對(duì)較少,且目前的研究樣本量較小,仍需樣本量更大、研究設(shè)計(jì)更完善的深入研究豐富這類(lèi)方案的臨床數(shù)據(jù),為臨床推廣提供更多循證醫(yī)學(xué)證據(jù)。
參 考 文 獻(xiàn)
[1] SANCLEMENTE G, HERNANDEZ N, CHAPARRO D, et al. Epidemiologic features and burden of atopic dermatitis in adolescent and adult patients: a cross-sectional multicenter study[J].
World Allergy Organ J, 2021, 14(12): 100611. DOI: 10.1016/j.
waojou.2021.100611.
[2] 張萍萍, 楊麗芬, 梁英, 等. 兒童變應(yīng)原免疫治療的臨床應(yīng)用進(jìn)展[J]. 新醫(yī)學(xué), 2022, 53(2): 87-92. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-9802.2022.02.003.
ZHANG P P, YANG L F, LIANG Y, et al. Research progress on clinical application of allergen immunotherapy in children[J].
J New Med, 2022, 53(2): 87-92. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-
9802.2022.02.003.
[3] ZHENG C, XU H, HUANG S, et al. Efficacy and safety of subcutaneous immunotherapy in asthmatic children allergic to house dust mite: a meta-analysis and systematic review[J]. Front Pediatr, 2023, 11: 1137478. DOI: 10.3389/fped.2023.1137478.
[4] WANG W, WANG J, SONG G, et al. Environmental and sensitization variations among asthma and/or rhinitis patients between 2008 and 2018 in China[J]. Clin Transl Allergy, 2022, 12(2): e12116. DOI: 10.1002/clt2.12116.
[5] GIANNETTI A, RICCI G, PROCACCIANTI M, et al. Safety, efficacy, and preventive role of subcutaneous and sublingual allergen immunotherapy for the treatment of pediatric asthma[J]. J Asthma Allergy, 2020, 13: 575-587. DOI: 10.2147/JAA.S234280.
[6] IIO M, HAMAGUCHI M, NAGATA M, et al. Stressors of school-age children with allergic diseases: a qualitative study [J].
J Pediatr Nurs, 2018, 42: e73-e78. DOI: 10.1016/j.pedn.
2018.04.009.
[7] GRADMAN J, HALKEN S. Preventive effect of allergen immunotherapy on asthma and new sensitizations[J]. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract, 2021, 9(5): 1813-1817. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaip.2021.03.010.
[8] YANG J, LEI S. Efficacy and safety of sublingual versus subcutaneous immunotherapy in children with allergic rhinitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Front Immunol, 2023, 14: 1274241. DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1274241.
[9] LIU W, ZENG Q, HE C, et al. Compliance, efficacy, and safety of subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy in children with allergic rhinitis[J]. Pediatr Allergy Immunol, 2021, 32(1):
86-91. DOI: 10.1111/pai.13332.
[10] NELSON H S. Subcutaneous immunotherapy versus sublingual immunotherapy: which is more effective[J]. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract, 2014, 2(2): 144-149;quiz 150-151. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaip.2013.11.018.
[11] JUTEL M, BRüGGENJüRGEN B, RICHTER H, et al. Real-world evidence of subcutaneous allergoid immunotherapy in house dust mite-induced allergic rhinitis and asthma[J]. Allergy, 2020, 75(8): 2050-2058. DOI: 10.1111/all.14240.
[12] FUJITA H, SOYKA M B, AKDIS M, et al. Mechanisms of allergen-specific immunotherapy[J]. Clin Transl Allergy, 2012, 2(1): 2. DOI: 10.1186/2045-7022-2-2.
[13] MATSUOKA T, SHAMJI M H, DURHAM S R. Allergen immunotherapy and tolerance[J]. Allergol Int, 2013, 62(4): 403-413. DOI: 10.2332/allergolint.13-RAI-0650.
[14] SHAMJI M H, DURHAM S R. Mechanisms of allergen immun-otherapy for inhaled allergens and predictive biomarkers[J].
J Allergy Clin Immunol, 2017, 140(6): 1485-1498. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2017.10.010.
[15] JUTEL M, AKDIS C A. Immunological mechanisms of allergen-specific immunotherapy[J]. Allergy, 2011, 66(6): 725-732. DOI: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2011.02589.x.
[16] CANONICA G W, BOUSQUET J, MULLOL J, et al. A survey of the burden of allergic rhinitis in Europe[J]. Allergy, 2007, 62(Suppl 85): 17-25. DOI: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2007.01549.x.
[17] 中華耳鼻咽喉頭頸外科雜志編輯委員會(huì)鼻科組, 中華醫(yī)學(xué)會(huì)耳鼻咽喉頭頸外科學(xué)分會(huì)鼻科學(xué)組, 小兒學(xué)組. 兒童變應(yīng)性鼻炎診斷和治療指南(2022年, 修訂版)[J]. 中華耳鼻咽喉頭頸外科雜志, 2022, 57(4): 392-404. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115330-20220303-00092.
Subspecialty Group of Rhinology of Editorial Board of Chinese Journal of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Subspecialty Groups of Rhinology and Pediatrics of Society of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery of Chinese Medical Association. Guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of pediatric allergic rhinitis (2022, revision)[J]. Chin J Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 2022, 57(4): 392-404. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115330-20220303-00092.
[18] 向莉, 趙京, 鮑一笑, 等. 兒童氣道過(guò)敏性疾病螨特異性免疫治療專(zhuān)家共識(shí)[J]. 中華實(shí)用兒科臨床雜志, 2018, 33(16):
1215-1223. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.2095-428X.2018.16.005.
XIANG L, ZHAO J, BAO Y X, et al. Expert consensus on mite specific immunotherapy for allergic airway diseases in children [J].
Chin J Appl Clin Pediatr, 2018, 33(16): 1215-1223. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.2095-428X.2018.16.005.
[19] 王瑋豪, 孔維封, 鄭瑞, 等. 廣州地區(qū)不同性別變應(yīng)性鼻炎吸入性及食入性變應(yīng)原譜特征分析[J]. 中山大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(醫(yī)學(xué)科學(xué)版), 2022, 43(1): 10-17.DOI: 10.13471/j.cnki.j.sun.yat-sen.univ(med.sci).2022.0102.
WANG W H, KONG W F, ZHENG R, et al. Pattern of inhalant and food allergens in patients with allergic rhinitis by gender in Guangzhou[J]. J Sun Yat-sen Univ(Med Sci), 2022, 43(1):
10-17. DOI: 10.13471/j.cnki.j.sun.yat-sen.univ(med.sci).
2022.0102.
[20] JUTEL M, AGACHE I, BONINI S, et al. International consensus on allergy immunotherapy[J]. J Allergy Clin Immunol, 2015, 136(3): 556-568. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2015.04.047.
[21] JUTEL M, KLIMEK L, RICHTER H, et al. House dust mite SCIT reduces asthma risk and significantly improves long-term rhinitis and asthma control: a RWE study[J]. Allergy, 2024, 79(4):
1042-1051. DOI: 10.1111/all.16052.
[22] WERFEL T, BREUER K, RUéFF F, et al. Usefulness of specific immunotherapy in patients with atopic dermatitis and allergic sensitization to house dust mites: a multi-centre, randomized, dose-response study[J]. Allergy, 2006, 61(2): 202-205. DOI: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2006.00974.x.
[23] COX L, CALDERóN M, PFAAR O. Subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy for allergic disease: examining efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of current and novel formulations[J]. Immunotherapy, 2012, 4(6): 601-616. DOI: 10.2217/imt.
12.36.
[24] ZHANG L, WANG C, HAN D, et al. Comparative study of cluster and conventional immunotherapy schedules with dermatophagoides pteronyssinus in the treatment of persistent allergic rhinitis[J]. Int Arch Allergy Immunol, 2009, 148(2): 161-169. DOI: 10.1159/000155747.
[25] 孫月眉, 劉麗萍, 邢海燕, 等. 兒童哮喘患者屋塵螨變應(yīng)原集群免疫治療與常規(guī)免疫治療起始階段的安全性[J]. 中華臨床免疫和變態(tài)反應(yīng)雜志, 2018, 12(1): 14-18. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-8705.2018.01.003.
SUN Y M, LIU L P, XING H Y, et al. Safety in the initial stage of cluster and conventional dermatophagoides pteronyssinus immunotherapy among asthmatic children[J]. Chin J Allergy Clin Immunol, 2018, 12(1): 14-18. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.
1673-8705.2018.01.003.
[26] GREIWE J, BERNSTEIN J A. Accelerated/rush allergen immunotherapy[J]. Allergy Asthma Proc, 2022, 43(4): 344-349. DOI: 10.2500/aap.2022.43.210108.
[27] YUENYONGVIWAT A, JINTANAPANYA N, SANGSUPA-WANICH P, et al. Safety of House Dust Mite Subcutaneous Immunotherapy with a rush and cluster combination protocol in the build-up phase[J]. Asian Pac J Allergy Immunol, 2023. DOI: 10.12932/AP-260922-1465.
[28] RATTANAMANEE T, LUMJIAKTASE P, KEMAWICHANURA N, et al. Immunologic changes after house dust mite modified rush subcutaneous immunotherapy in allergic rhinitis children[J].
Asia Pac Allergy, 2022, 12(1): e4. DOI: 10.5415/apallergy.
2022.12.e4.
[29] CHU C H, CALDWELL J W, CRISTIANO L M, et al. Safety of a modified environmental rush immunotherapy protocol in the pediatric population[J]. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol, 2022, 128(5): 600-601. DOI: 10.1016/j.anai.2021.12.011.
[30] CARDONA R, LOPEZ E, BELTRáN J, et al. Safety of immunotherapy in patients with rhinitis, asthma or atopic dermatitis using an ultra-rush buildup: a retrospective study[J]. Allergol Immunopathol, 2014, 42(2): 90-95. DOI: 10.1016/j.aller.2012.07.005.
[31] MORAIS-ALMEIDA M, ARêDE C, SAMPAIO G, et al. Ultrarush schedule of subcutaneous immunotherapy with modified allergen extracts is safe in paediatric age[J]. Asia Pac Allergy, 2016, 6(1): 35-42. DOI: 10.5415/apallergy.2016.6.1.35.
[32] LEE S H, KIM M E, SHIN Y S, et al. Safety of ultra-rush schedule of subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy with house dust mite extract conducted in an outpatient clinic in patients with atopic dermatitis and allergic rhinitis[J]. Allergy Asthma Immunol Res, 2019, 11(6): 846-855. DOI: 10.4168/aair.2019.11.6.846.
[33] ZHANG P, BIAN S, WANG X, et al. A real-world retrospective study of safety, efficacy, compliance and cost of combination treatment with rush immunotherapy plus one dose of pretreatment anti-IgE in Chinese children with respiratory allergies[J]. Front Immunol, 2022, 13: 1024319. DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.1024319.
[34] KIM H B, JIN H S, LEE S Y, et al. The effect of rush immunotherapy with house dust mite in the production of IL-5 and IFN-gamma from the peripheral blood T cells of asthmatic children[J]. J Korean Med Sci, 2009, 24(3): 392-397. DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2009.24.3.392.
[35] ZHI L, BAI Y, LIAO W, et al. The safety and tolerability of a one strength dose-escalation scheme for subcutaneous immunotherapy with a native house dust mite extract in Chinese children: a multicenter, randomized, open label clinical trial [J]. Heliyon, 2024, 10(8): e29450. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e29450.
[36] WANG C, BAO Y, CHEN J, et al. Chinese guideline on allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis: the 2022 update[J]. Allergy Asthma Immunol Res, 2022, 14(6): 604-652. DOI: 10.4168/aair.2022.14.6.604.
[37] HUI Y, LI L, QIAN J, et al. Efficacy analysis of three-year subcutaneous SQ-standardized specific immunotherapy in house dust mite-allergic children with asthma[J]. Exp Ther Med, 2014, 7(3): 630-634. DOI: 10.3892/etm.2014.1469.
[38] RIDOLO E, MARTIGNAGO I, RIARIO-SFORZA G G, et al. Allergen immunotherapy in atopic dermatitis[J]. Expert Rev Clin Immunol, 2018, 14(1): 61-68. DOI: 10.1080/1744666X.2018.1401469.
[39] GALLI E, FORTINA A B, RICCI G, et al. Narrative review on the management of moderate-severe atopic dermatitis in pediatric age of the Italian Society of Pediatric Allergology and Immunology (SIAIP), of the Italian Society of Pediatric Dermatology (SIDerP) and of the Italian Society of Pediatrics (SIP)[J]. Ital J Pediatr, 2022, 48(1): 95. DOI: 10.1186/s13052-022-01278-7.
[40] LEE J, PARK C O, LEE K H. Specific immunotherapy in atopic dermatitis[J]. Allergy Asthma Immunol Res, 2015, 7(3): 221-229. DOI: 10.4168/aair.2015.7.3.221.
[41] SáNCHEZ CARABALLO J M, CARDONA VILLA R. Clinical and immunological changes of immunotherapy in patients with atopic dermatitis: randomized controlled trial[J]. ISRN Allergy, 2012, 2012: 183983. DOI: 10.5402/2012/183983.
[42] ZHOU J, CHEN S, SONG Z. Analysis of the long-term efficacy and safety of subcutaneous immunotherapy for atopic dermatitis [J]. Allergy Asthma Proc, 2021, 42(2): e47-e54. DOI: 10.2500/aap.2021.42.200126.
[43] YEPES-NU?EZ J J, GUYATT G H, GóMEZ-ESCOBAR L G, et al. Allergen immunotherapy for atopic dermatitis: systematic review and meta-analysis of benefits and harms[J]. J Allergy Clin Immunol, 2023, 151(1): 147-158. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2022.09.020.
[44] EICHENFIELD L F, AHLUWALIA J, WALDMAN A, et al. Current guidelines for the evaluation and management of atopic dermatitis: a comparison of the joint task force practice parameter and American academy of dermatology guidelines[J].
J Allergy Clin Immunol, 2017, 139(4S): 147-158. DOI: 10.1016/
j.jaci.2017.01.009.
[45] WOLLENBERG A, BARBAROT S, BIEBER T, et al. Consensus-based European guidelines for treatment of atopic eczema (atopic dermatitis) in adults and children: part Ⅱ [J]. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol, 2018, 32(6): 850-878. DOI: 10.1111/jdv.14888.
[46] CAMINITI L, PANASITI I, LANDI M, et al. Allergen immuno-therapy in atopic dermatitis: light and shadow in children[J]. Pediatr Allergy Immunol, 2020, 31(Suppl 26): 46-48. DOI: 10.1111/pai.13390.
[47] MALIPIERO G, MELONE G, PUGGIONI F, et al. Allergen immunotherapy and biologics in respiratory allergy: friends or foes[J]. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol, 2021, 21(1): 16-23. DOI: 10.1097/ACI.0000000000000707.
[48] LAMBERT N, GUIDDIR T, AMAT F, et al. Pre-treatment by omalizumab allows allergen immunotherapy in children and young adults with severe allergic asthma[J]. Pediatr Allergy Immunol, 2014, 25(8): 829-832. DOI: 10.1111/pai.12306.
[49] STELMACH I, MAJAK P, JERZY?SKA J, et al. Children with severe asthma can start allergen immunotherapy after controlling asthma with omalizumab: a case series from Poland[J].
Arch Med Sci, 2015, 11(4): 901-904. DOI: 10.5114/aoms.2015.48546.
[50] DENG S, WANG H, CHEN S, et al. Dupilumab and subcutaneous immunotherapy for the treatment of refractory moderate to severe atopic dermatitis: a preliminary report[J]. Int Immunopharmacol, 2023, 125(Pt A): 111137. DOI: 10.1016/j.intimp.2023.111137.
[51] FORBUSH J T, BANKS T A. Omalizumab and allergen immunotherapy in a patient with asthma and inhaled corticosteroid-induced adrenal suppression[J]. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol, 2016, 117(3): 335-337. DOI: 10.1016/j.anai.2016.07.017.
[52] KUEHR J, BRAUBURGER J, ZIELEN S, et al. Efficacy of combination treatment with anti-IgE plus specific immunotherapy in polysensitized children and adolescents with seasonal allergic rhinitis[J]. J Allergy Clin Immunol, 2002, 109(2): 274-280. DOI: 10.1067/mai.2002.121949.
[53] KOPP M V, HAMELMANN E, ZIELEN S, et al. Combination of omalizumab and specific immunotherapy is superior to immunotherapy in patients with seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and co-morbid seasonal allergic asthma[J]. Clin Exp Allergy, 2009, 39(2): 271-279. DOI: 10.1111/j.
1365-2222.2008.03121.x.
(責(zé)任編輯:洪悅民)