ArticleClinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology2016
Distinct modulation of allergic T cell responses by subcutaneous vs. sublingual allergen-specific immunotherapy.
Article in Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- How to Employ Trained Immunity and Trained Immunity-Based Vaccines to Inhibit Allergic Inflammation.Vaccines · 2026Review
- α2-3 Sialic Acids-Decorated Allergens Exert a Tolerogenic Effect on CD4+ T Cells from Der p 2-Allergic Patients.International archives of allergy and immunology · 2025Article
- Strategies and delivery systems for cell-based therapy in autoimmunity.Frontiers in drug delivery · 2024Review
- Comparison of National and Global Asthma Management Guiding Documents.Respiratory care · 2023Review
- Immune mechanisms induced by sublingual immunotherapy in allergic respiratory diseases.Clinical and experimental immunology · 2022Review
- Sublingual Immunotherapy: How Sublingual Allergen Administration Heals Allergic Diseases; Current Perspective about the Mode of Action.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Advancement of antigen-specific immunotherapy: knowledge transfer between allergy and autoimmunity.Immunotherapy advances · 2021Review
- EAACI Allergen Immunotherapy User's Guide.Pediatric allergy and immunology : official publication of the European Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology · 2020Review
- Antigen-specific regulatory T-cell responses against aeroantigens and their role in allergy.Mucosal immunology · 2018Review
- Synchronous immune alterations mirror clinical response during allergen immunotherapy.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2018Article
- Review
- Therapeutic vaccines for allergic disease.NPJ vaccines · 2017Article
- Immunodominance in allergic T-cell reactivity to Japanese cedar in different geographic cohorts.Annals of allergy, asthma & immunology : official publication of the American College of Allergy, Asthma, & Immunology · 2016Article
- Sequence conservation predicts T cell reactivity against ragweed allergens.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2016Article
- Basic science for the clinician: Mechanisms of sublingual and subcutaneous immunotherapy.Annals of allergy, asthma & immunology : official publication of the American College of Allergy, Asthma, & Immunology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAllergen-specific immunotherapy is the only curative treatment for type I allergy. It can be administered subcutaneously (SCIT) or sublingually (SLIT). The clinical efficacy of these two treatment modalities appears to be similar, but potential differences in the immunological mechanisms involved have not been fully explored.
objectiveTo compare changes in the allergen-specific T cell response induced by subcutaneous vs. sublingual administration of allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT).
methodsGrass pollen-allergic patients were randomized into groups receiving either SCIT injections or SLIT tablets or neither. PBMCs were tested for Timothy grass (TG)-specific cytokine production by ELISPOT after in vitro expansion with TG-peptide pools. Phenotypic characterization of cytokine-producing cells was performed by FACS.
resultsIn the SCIT group, decreased IL-5 production was observed starting 10 months after treatment commenced. At 24 months, T cell responses showed IL-5 levels significantly below the before-treatment baseline. No significant reduction of IL-5 was observed in the SLIT or untreated group. However, a significant transient increase in IL-10 production after 10 months of treatment compared to baseline was detected in both treatment groups. FACS analysis revealed that IL-10 production was associated with CD4(+) T cells that also produced IFNγ and therefore may be associated with an IL-10-secreting type 1 cell phenotype. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The most dominant immunological changes on a cellular level were a decrease in IL-5 in the SCIT group and a significant, transient increase of IL-10 observed after 10 months of treatment in both treated groups. The distinct routes of AIT administration may induce different immunomodulatory mechanisms at the cellular level.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.