Allergy immunotherapy with a hypoallergenic recombinant birch pollen allergen rBet v 1-FV in a randomized controlled trial

Ludger Klimek, Claus Bachert, Karl-Friedrich Lukat, Oliver Pfaar, Hanns Meyer, Annemie Narkus, Ludger Klimek, Claus Bachert, Karl-Friedrich Lukat, Oliver Pfaar, Hanns Meyer, Annemie Narkus

Abstract

Background: Pollen extracts and chemically modified allergoids are used successfully in allergen immunotherapy (AIT). Recombinant extracts offer potential advantages with respect to pharmaceutical quality, standardization and dosing. A hypoallergenic recombinant folding variant of the major birch pollen allergen (rBet v 1-FV) was compared with an established native birch preparation. A pre-seasonal, randomized, actively controlled phase II study was performed in birch pollen allergic rhino-conjunctivitis with or without asthma, GINA I/ II. 51 patients (24 rBet v 1-FV, 27 native extract) started therapy with subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT). Primary end-point was a combined symptom medication score (SMS), changes in nasal provocation test, visual rating score and specific antibody responses secondary end-points.

Findings: After one pre-seasonal treatment course the combined SMS was 5.86 (median; IQR: 14.02) for the rBet v 1-FV group versus 12.40 (median; IQR: 9.32) for the comparator during the three weeks pollen season (p = 0.330). After treatment in the second year, scores were 3.00 (median; IQR: 6.50) and 2.93 (4.86) respectively. Allergen tolerance in a nasal provocation test improved to a comparable extent in both groups. Significant increases in birch pollen-specific IgG1 and IgG4 were observed in both treatment groups following the first treatment phase and remained significantly raised until the end of the study.

Conclusion: In this first in man, proof of concept phase II trial no statistical difference between rBet v 1-FV and an established natural pollen extract could be observed. rBet v 1-FV could be administered in higher doses than the native protein with no increase in adverse effects.

Trial registration: The study was registered in clinicalTrials.gov (NCT00266526).

Keywords: Allergic rhinitis; Allergy immunotherapy; Birch pollen; Folding variant; Hypoallergenic variant; Recombinant Bet v 1; Recombinant allergen; Rhino-conjunctivitis; Subcutaneous immunotherapy.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow chart documenting progress through the study of those patients included in the main data sets
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Course of daily median SMS and median pollen counts during the 21-day observational periods in the birch pollen season after one (above) and two courses (below) of SCIT, respectively
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Birch pollen-specific IgE, IgG1 and IgG4 concentrations. Median values with 25th/75th and 10th/90th percentiles represented by boxes and error bars respectively, outliers by points. Time points: 1, screening before SCIT; 2, after up-dosing first year; 3, after pollen season first year; 4, after up-dosing second year; and 5, after pollen season second year

References

    1. Bousquet J, Lockey RF, Malling HJ. WHO Position Paper - Allergen immunotherapy: therapeutic vaccines for allergic diseases - Geneva, January 27–29, 1997. Allergy. 1998;53(Suppl 44):4–42.
    1. Kahlert H, Suck R, Weber B, Keller W, Cromwell O, Fiebig H. Characterization of an hypoallergenic recombinant Bet v 1 variant as a candidate for allergen specific immunotherapy. Int Arch Allergy Immunol. 2008;145:193–206. doi: 10.1159/000109288.
    1. European Medicines Agency . ICH Topic E6 (R1). Guideline for Good Clinical Practice. Step 5. Note for Guidance on Good Clinical Practice. London: CPMP/ICH/135/95; 2002.
    1. Cromwell O, Fiebig H, Suck R, Kahlert H, Nandy A, Kettner J, et al. Strategies for recombinant allergen vaccines and fruitful results from first clinical studies. Immunol Allergy Clin N Am. 2006;26:261–81. doi: 10.1016/j.iac.2006.02.001.
    1. National Institutes of Health. Global Initiatives for Asthma (GINA). Global strategy for asthma management and prevention. 2004. NIH publication No 02–3659. Available at: .
    1. Riechelmann H, Bachert C, Goldschmidt O, Hauswald B, Klimek L, Schlenter WW, et al. Application of the nasal provocation test on diseases of the upper airways. Position paper of the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (ENT Section) in cooperation with the Working Team for Clinical Immunology. Laryng Rhinol Otol. 2003;82:183–8. doi: 10.1055/s-2003-38411.
    1. Häfner D, Reich K, Matricardi PM, Meyer H, Kettner J, Narkus A. Prospective validation of “Allergy-Control-SCOREC”: a novel symptom-medication score for clinical trials. Allergy. 2011;66:629–36. doi: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2010.02531.x.
    1. Ferreira F, Hirtenlehner K, Jilek A, Godnic-Cvar J, Breiteneder H, Grimm R, et al. Dissection of immunoglobulin E and T lymphocyte reactivity of isoforms of the major birch pollen allergen bet v 1: potential use of hypoallergenic isoforms for immunotherapy. J Exp Med. 1996;183:599–609. doi: 10.1084/jem.183.2.599.
    1. Purohit A, Niederberger V, Kronqvist M, Horak F, Grönneberg R, Suck R, et al. Clinical effects of immunotherapy with genetically modified recombinant birch pollen Bet v 1 derivatives. Clin Exp Allergy. 2008;38:1514–25. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2222.2008.03042.x.
    1. Jutel M, Jaeger L, Suck R, Meyer H, Fiebig H, Cromwell O. Allergen-specific immunotherapy with recombinant grass pollen allergens. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2005;116:608–13. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2005.06.004.
    1. Corrigan C, Kettner J, Doemer C, Cromwell O, Narkus A. Efficacy and safety of preseasonal-specific immunotherapy with an aluminium-adsorbed six-grass pollen allergoid. Allergy. 2005;60:801–7. doi: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2005.00790.x.
    1. Pree I, Reisinger J, Focke M, Vrtala S, Pauli G, van Hage M, et al. Analysis of epitope-specific immune responses induced by vaccination with structurally folded and unfolded recombinant Bet v 1 allergen derivatives in man. J Immunol. 2007;179:5309–16. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.179.8.5309.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonneren