...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of evaluation in clinical practice >Sublingual or subcutaneous immunotherapy for seasonal allergic rhinitis: An indirect analysis of efficacy, safety and cost
【24h】

Sublingual or subcutaneous immunotherapy for seasonal allergic rhinitis: An indirect analysis of efficacy, safety and cost

机译:舌下或皮下免疫疗法治疗季节性变应性鼻炎:疗效,安全性和成本的间接分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Rationale, aims and objectives The standard of preventive care for poorly controlled seasonal allergic rhinitis (AR) is subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) with allergen extracts, administered in a physician's office. As an alternative to SCIT, sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is now an option for patients with seasonal AR. Oralair?, a SLIT tablet containing freeze-dried allergen extracts of five grasses [cocksfoot (Dactylis glomerata), meadow grass (Poa pratensis), rye grass (Lolium perenne), sweet vernal grass (Anthoxanthum odoratum) and timothy grass (Phleum pratense)], and Grazax?, a SLIT tablet containing a standardized extract of grass pollen allergen from timothy grass (P pratenase), are two such agents currently available in many countries. However, head-to-head comparative data are not available. In this study, an indirect comparison on efficacy, safety and cost was undertaken between Oralair?, Grazax? and SCIT. Methods A systematic review was conducted for double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trials evaluating Oralair?, Grazax? or SCIT in patients with grass-induced seasonal AR. Using placebo as the common control, an indirect statistical comparison between treatments was performed using meta regression analysis with active drug as the primary independent variable. An economic analysis, which included both direct and indirect costs for the Canadian setting, was also undertaken. Results Overall, 20 placebo-controlled trials met the study inclusion criteria. The indirect analysis suggested improved efficacy with Oralair? over SCIT [standardized mean difference (SMD) in AR symptom control = -0.21; P = 0.007] and Grazax? (SMD = -0.18; P = 0.018). In addition, there were no significant differences in the risk of discontinuation due to adverse events between therapies. Oralair? was associated with cost savings against year-round SCIT ($2471), seasonal SCIT ($948) and Grazax? ($1168) during the first year of therapy. Conclusions Oralair? has at least non-inferior efficacy and comparable safety against SCIT and Grazax? at a lower annual cost.
机译:理由,目的和目标季节性控制不佳的季节性变应性鼻炎(AR)的预防护理标准是在医生办公室进行的皮下免疫疗法(SCIT),含变应原提取物。作为SCIT的替代方法,舌下免疫疗法(SLIT)现在已成为季节性AR患者的一种选择。 Oralair ?,一种SLIT片剂,其中含有五种草[赤脚(Dactylis glomerata),草甸草(Poa pratensis),黑麦草(Lolium perenne),甜春草(Anthoxanthum odoratum)和豆蔻草(Phleum pratense)的冻干过敏原提取物]和Grazax?(一种SLIT片剂),其中含有来自豆科草的标准化花粉过敏原提取物(P普雷滕酶),是目前在许多国家/地区可获得的两种此类药物。但是,没有头对头的比较数据。在这项研究中,在Oralair?,Grazax?之间进行了功效,安全性和成本的间接比较。和SCIT。方法对评价Oralair?,Grazax?的双盲安慰剂对照随机试验进行了系统评价。草诱发的季节性AR患者中使用SCIT或SCIT。使用安慰剂作为普通对照,使用元回归分析以活性药物作为主要自变量进行治疗之间的间接统计比较。还进行了经济分析,其中包括加拿大的直接和间接成本。结果总体而言,有20项安慰剂对照试验符合研究纳入标准。间接分析表明口服Oralair可以提高疗效。超过SCIT [AR症状控制中的标准平均差(SMD)= -0.21; P = 0.007]和Grazax? (SMD = -0.18; P = 0.018)。此外,由于疗法之间的不良反应,停药风险没有显着差异。奥拉莱尔?与全年SCIT(2471美元),季节性SCIT(948美元)和Grazax的成本节省相关? ($ 1168)在治疗的第一年。结论Oralair?对SCIT和Grazax至少具有非劣效的疗效和相当的安全性?以较低的年度成本。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号