Real-world use of sublingual immunotherapy and shared decisions in French observational study PRACTIS - 16/03/26
, Isabelle Bossé b, Julien Cottet c, Eric Fromentin d, Sylvie Guillevin e, Josiane Cognet-Sicé e, Silvia Scurati e, Pascal Demoly f
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
Article gratuit.
Connectez-vous pour en bénéficier!
Graphical abstract |
Highlights |
• | Key messages: What is already known about this topic? |
• | SLIT is an effective treatment for allergic rhinitis, with/without asthma. It is available in tablet or liquid form with a wide variety of allergen extracts and dose flexibility, enabling treatment personalisation in clinical practice. |
• | What does this article add to our knowledge? |
• | The PRACTIS study describes the modalities of use of SLIT in France highlighting that patient involvement in SLIT choice and flexible formulations increase satisfaction, adherence, and willingness to continue treatment. |
• | How does this study impact current guidelines |
• | Guidelines may emphasize personalised treatment plans with SLIT, considering patient preferences and allergen profiles, to enhance adherence and treatment success. |
Abstract |
Background |
Allergic rhinitis (AR) with/without allergic asthma (AA) can be treated with sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT). The PRACTIS study evaluated the short-term benefits of SLIT in AR patients in current practice in France. Here are specifically described the observed modalities of use and treatment plan.
Methods |
This prospective, non-interventional, longitudinal, multicentre study was conducted in patients ≥5-years-old, with clinically significant confirmed AR to one or more allergens and eligible for SLIT. Patients’ data were recorded at inclusion and after 6 (seasonal allergy) or 12 (perennial allergy) months of SLIT.
Results |
SLIT was prescribed in 1587 patients (mean age 25.8 ± 15.6 years, 52.7% female) and 1047 (66.0%) attended the end-of-study visit to assess the benefits and satisfaction with SLIT. Most (87.4%) patients had moderate-to-severe persistent AR, 31.8% had AA and 50.8% were poly-allergic. The main reasons for prescribing SLIT were discomfort severity (85.4%) and type of allergic symptoms (80.2%). Patients were involved in the treatment choice in 68.7% of cases. A single SLIT was prescribed to 88.0% of patients, mainly in liquid form (71.8%), most frequently house dust mite or grass pollen allergen extracts. Physician-patient agreement on satisfaction with SLIT was >80% for mono-allergic and poly-allergic patients at end-of-study. Overall, 85.7% of patients planned to continue treatment and 78.8% would recommend SLIT to someone else.
Discussion-Conclusion |
SLIT availability in tablet or liquid form, comprising a large number of allergen extracts and dose flexibility, enables treatment personalisation. The shared decision with the patients in the prescription type may improve SLIT adherence and satisfaction.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Keywords : (MeSH), Allergic rhinitis, Allergic asthma, Adherence, Hypersensitivity, Precision Medicine, Sublingual immunotherapy
Abbreviations : AA, AC, AIT, AR, ARIA, BAU, GINA, IR, IQR, SDTs, SmPC, SPT
Plan
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.