AllergyPhase 4SCITelderlyNCT02440243
Grass Pollen Subcutaneous Immunotherapy in Elderly Patients
A Phase 4 study testing Purethal in people with Allergy, run by Medical University of Silesia.
Trial summary
Background There is limited evidence indicating that specific immunotherapy in elderly patients is safe and effective. This study was performed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of specific subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) against grass pollen allergens in patients over 60 years of age with seasonal allergic… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 60 to 75 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Allergy
- What is being tested?
- Purethal
- Type of treatment
- Vaccines
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 120 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Jan 2011to Dec 2014
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 60 to 75 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- a positive skin prick test (SPT), were positive for specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE), and had positive nasal provocation tests (NPTs) with grass pollen mixture allergens
Who cannot join
- hypersensitivity to other allergens, bronchial asthma, non-allergic rhinitis (especially senile or vasomotor rhinitis) and severe non-stable diseases.
About this study
Official title: Grass Pollen Subcutaneous Immunotherapy: a Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study in Elderly Patients With an Allergy to Grass Pollen
Background There is limited evidence indicating that specific immunotherapy in elderly patients is safe and effective. This study was performed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of specific subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) against grass pollen allergens in patients over 60 years of age with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) and a confirmed allergy to grass pollen.
Objective This study assessed the safety and efficacy of SCIT for grass pollen allergens in elderly patients with SAR.
Methods This study included 62 60- to 75-year-old patients with SAR and grass pollen allergy confirmed using a skin prick test, nasal provocation, and serum IgE measurement. The patients were individually randomized to the active or placebo groups using a double-blinded method. There were 33 subjects in the SCIT group (Purethal, Grass pollen, HAL Allergy B.V, Leiden, Netherlands) and 29 subjects in the placebo group monitored for three years. The patients were required to record each use of anti-allergy medication in a diary and use a visual graphic scale. The main outcome measure was the area under the curve (AUC) for the combined symptom and medication score (SMS).
Read the detailed description
Methods Patients A total of 109 patients ranging from 60 to 70 years of age were recruited from the outpatient allergy clinic to assess their eligibility for inclusion in the study. The subjects had moderate or severe intermittent allergic rhinitis and fulfilled the ARIA criterion. Additionally, the patients included in the study all had a positive skin prick test (SPT), were positive for specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE), and had positive nasal provocation tests (NPTs) with grass pollen mixture allergens. Patients with any of the following characteristics were excluded from the study: hypersensitivity to other allergens, bronchial asthma, non-allergic rhinitis (especially senile or vasomotor rhinitis) and severe non-stable diseases. However, patients with stable coronary disease, diabetes, and arterial hypertension were permitted in the study. All subjects were required to abstain from anti-allergy drugs and glucocorticoid nasal drops for at least 6 weeks prior to the start of the study.
There were 62 patients individually randomized in comparable numbers to one of two "parallel" groups using a double-blind method. The groups were the active (n=33) treatment group and the placebo (n=29) group. There were 31 subjects in the SCIT group and 25 subjects in the placebo group that completed the three-year observation period. The groups were comparable at baseline.
Diagnostic procedures A careful examination of the eyes, ears, nose, and throat was performed on all patients. The severity of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) was assessed using the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines. The patients with other nasal problems such as chronic nasal obstruction, reduced olfaction, bacterial colonization, and chronic sinusitis were diagnosed based on a CT scan and nasal endoscopy. Several patients were excluded from further observation as a result of these problems. The subjects with other chronic or acute clinical disorders or with a history of respiratory tract infections within four weeks of the study initiation were also excluded. The SPT was performed using inhalant allergens (HAL Allergy B.V, Leiden, Netherlands) from the following panel: D. pteronyssinus, D. farinae, mixed 5 grasses (Phleum pratense, Dactylis glomerata, Anthoxanthum odoratum, Lolium perenne, and Poa pratensis), mixed tree, mugwort, Alternaria, Cladosporium, dog and cat allergens. There were also positive (10 mg/ml of histamine) and negative (saline) controls included. A grass pollen allergy was defined as having positive skin tests for 5 grass pollen allergens with a minimum wheal diameter of at least 3 mm greater than the negative control. The patients with negative tests for histamine sensitivity were excluded from further analyses. The sIgE reactivity to the single grass pollen allergen components (Phl p1, Phl p2, Phl p5, Phl p6, Phl p7 and Phl p12) was determined using ImmunoCAP (Phadia AB, Uppsala, Sweden) tests. The results were considered positive when the sIgE concentration was greater than 0.35 IU/ml (according to the manufacturer's instructions). NPTs were conducted using active anterior rhinomanometry with commercial grass pollen mixture allergens. The concentration was 10,000 AU/ml and the mixture was delivered as 1 puff per nostril (HAL Allergy B.V, Leiden, Netherlands) using the methods described by Bachert et al. and Dordal et al. A reduction in the peak nasal inspiratory flow greater than or equal to 40% and an increase in symptoms greater than or equal to 5 points were considered to be positive NPT criteria by Bachert et al. and Dordal et al. The NPTs were also repeated after three years of treatment. The patients monosensitized to grass pollen were included in this study.
Treatments The patients were randomly selected to receive Purethal Grasses 20,000 AUM/ml (pollen mixture extract solution of Agrostis stolonifera, Anthoxanthum odoratum, Arrhenatherum elatius, Dactylis glomerata, Festuca rubra, Holcus lanatus, Lolium perenne, Phleum pratense, Poa pratensis, Secale cereal, Loe edasi HAL Allergy B.V, Leiden, Netherlands) or placebo. The recruitment period was limited to three months (October-December). Purethal grasses (January-April) were administered as pre-seasonal therapy using the following regimen: 1 dose- 0.1 ml, 2 dose - 0.2 ml, 3 dose - 0.4 ml every week, and doses 4- 7 consisted of 0.5 ml every two weeks.
Using this schedule the average cumulative dose was 460,500 BAU (Bioequivalent Allergy Unit), which contains approximately 690 μg of Phl p5 administered to each patient undergoing active treatment for all three years of the study. The study consisted of two phases. The first phase was the baseline one season of follow-up visits without treatment and the second phase was three years of SCIT or placebo.
Assessment of efficacy The prime outcome measure was the area under the curve (AUC) for combined symptom and medication score (SMS) over the grass pollen season for baseline 2010 (before treatment) and in 2011, 2012 and finally in 2013 after three years of SCIT. The patients recorded symptom severity in a daily diary during the pollen season (May-August) by scoring the following areas: nasal itching, sneezing, running, blockage, and ocular itch on a separate Visual Analog Scale (VAS) with a continuous scale from 0 cm (no symptoms) to 10 cm (very severe symptoms). The rescue medication provided and scoring was a one point per spray for Azelastine nasal spray or eye drops (Levocabastine), or per 5 mg levocetirizine tablet. The score was two points per puff for mometasone fuorate nasal spray and three points per prednisolone 10 mg tablet. This combined symptom-medication score was calculated as a sum of the symptom score and medication score monitored daily with the use a diary as described. The SMS was derived by adding the VAS for each of these five symptoms.
The secondary outcome measures included quality of life, reduction of symptoms score, safety assessment and monitoring of IgG4. The local reactions were assessed at 30 min after injection and measured in cm. The systemic reactions were graded according to EAACI criteria.
Serum IgG4 measurements The serum concentration of IgG4 against birch alder and hazel pollens were determined in blood serum by ELISA tests according Lai et al. before and after the three-year SIT.
Quality of life Patient quality of life was evaluated with the RQLQ score for adults using questionnaires every grass pollen season during the study.
Pollen counts The local grass pollen counts were determined by volumetric pollen trap (Burkard, Scientific Ltd, Uxbridge, UK). The peak pollen count was defined as the day with highest grass pollen count for each season 3 weeks before and 3 weeks after the peak grass pollen count.
- Conditions
- Allergy
- Being tested
- Purethal, Purethal -placebo
- Medical subject headings
- Hypersensitivity
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
PurethalDrug
Also called Vaccine
prerseasonal course of SCIT - three years
Purethal -placeboDrug
preseasonal course of SCIT - three years
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Patients active | Active comparator | Purethal Grass Receives: Drug: Purethal |
| Patients placebo | Placebo comparator | Placebo Receives: Drug: Purethal -placebo |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
The symptoms reduction as a compsite measure
The prime outcome measure was the area under the curve (AUC) for combined symptom and medication score (SMS)
Measured: three years
Evaluation of symptomatic medication use reduction
Evaluation quantities of drugs based on patient diary.
Measured: three years
Secondary outcomes (2)
Number of patients with a local allergic reaction after injections
The local reactions were assessed at 30 min after injection and measured in cm.
Measured: three years
Number of patients with a systemic allergic reaction after injections
The systemic reaction were assesed after injection according EAACI criteria.
Measured: three years
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted12 May 2015 (estimated)
- Study startJan 2011
- Primary completionSep 2014
- Study completionDec 2014
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for AllergyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Investigator
- Enrolment
- 120 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Medical University of Silesia
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Andrzej Bozek, Medical University of Silesia
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02440243
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- MC56871/12
- Acronym
- SCITelderly
- Status last verified
- May 2015
- First submitted
- 22 Apr 2015
- Last updated
- 12 May 2015
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Bozek A, Kolodziejczyk K, Krajewska-Wojtys A, Jarzab J. Pre-seasonal, subcutaneous immunotherapy: a double-blinded, placebo-controlled study in elderly patients with an allergy to grass. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2016 Feb;116(2):156-61. doi: 10.1016/j.anai.2015.12.013.
PubMed 26815709
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 12 May 2015. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Grass Pollen Subcutaneous Immunotherapy: a Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study in Elderly Patients With an Allergy to Grass Pollen
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02440243
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- SCITelderly / MC56871/12
- Conditions
- Allergy
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 120 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Medical University of SilesiaUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jan 2011
- Primary completion
- Sep 2014 (actual)
- Study completion
- Dec 2014 (actual)
- First posted
- 12 May 2015 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Background There is limited evidence indicating that specific immunotherapy in elderly patients is safe and effective. This study was performed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of specific subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) against grass pollen allergens in patients over 60 years of age with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) and a confirmed allergy to grass pollen.
Objective This study assessed the safety and efficacy of SCIT for grass pollen allergens in elderly patients with SAR.
Methods This study included 62 60- to 75-year-old patients with SAR and grass pollen allergy confirmed using a skin prick test, nasal provocation, and serum IgE measurement. The patients were individually randomized to the active or placebo groups using a double-blinded method. There were 33 subjects in the SCIT group (Purethal, Grass pollen, HAL Allergy B.V, Leiden, Netherlands) and 29 subjects in the placebo group monitored for three years. The patients were required to record each use of anti-allergy medication in a diary and use a visual graphic scale. The main outcome measure was the area under the curve (AUC) for the combined symptom and medication score (SMS).
Detailed description
Methods Patients A total of 109 patients ranging from 60 to 70 years of age were recruited from the outpatient allergy clinic to assess their eligibility for inclusion in the study. The subjects had moderate or severe intermittent allergic rhinitis and fulfilled the ARIA criterion. Additionally, the patients included in the study all had a positive skin prick test (SPT), were positive for specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE), and had positive nasal provocation tests (NPTs) with grass pollen mixture allergens. Patients with any of the following characteristics were excluded from the study: hypersensitivity to other allergens, bronchial asthma, non-allergic rhinitis (especially senile or vasomotor rhinitis) and severe non-stable diseases. However, patients with stable coronary disease, diabetes, and arterial hypertension were permitted in the study. All subjects were required to abstain from anti-allergy drugs and glucocorticoid nasal drops for at least 6 weeks prior to the start of the study.
There were 62 patients individually randomized in comparable numbers to one of two "parallel" groups using a double-blind method. The groups were the active (n=33) treatment group and the placebo (n=29) group. There were 31 subjects in the SCIT group and 25 subjects in the placebo group that completed the three-year observation period. The groups were comparable at baseline.
Diagnostic procedures A careful examination of the eyes, ears, nose, and throat was performed on all patients. The severity of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) was assessed using the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines. The patients with other nasal problems such as chronic nasal obstruction, reduced olfaction, bacterial colonization, and chronic sinusitis were diagnosed based on a CT scan and nasal endoscopy. Several patients were excluded from further observation as a result of these problems. The subjects with other chronic or acute clinical disorders or with a history of respiratory tract infections within four weeks of the study initiation were also excluded. The SPT was performed using inhalant allergens (HAL Allergy B.V, Leiden, Netherlands) from the following panel: D. pteronyssinus, D. farinae, mixed 5 grasses (Phleum pratense, Dactylis glomerata, Anthoxanthum odoratum, Lolium perenne, and Poa pratensis), mixed tree, mugwort, Alternaria, Cladosporium, dog and cat allergens. There were also positive (10 mg/ml of histamine) and negative (saline) controls included. A grass pollen allergy was defined as having positive skin tests for 5 grass pollen allergens with a minimum wheal diameter of at least 3 mm greater than the negative control. The patients with negative tests for histamine sensitivity were excluded from further analyses. The sIgE reactivity to the single grass pollen allergen components (Phl p1, Phl p2, Phl p5, Phl p6, Phl p7 and Phl p12) was determined using ImmunoCAP (Phadia AB, Uppsala, Sweden) tests. The results were considered positive when the sIgE concentration was greater than 0.35 IU/ml (according to the manufacturer's instructions). NPTs were conducted using active anterior rhinomanometry with commercial grass pollen mixture allergens. The concentration was 10,000 AU/ml and the mixture was delivered as 1 puff per nostril (HAL Allergy B.V, Leiden, Netherlands) using the methods described by Bachert et al. and Dordal et al. A reduction in the peak nasal inspiratory flow greater than or equal to 40% and an increase in symptoms greater than or equal to 5 points were considered to be positive NPT criteria by Bachert et al. and Dordal et al. The NPTs were also repeated after three years of treatment. The patients monosensitized to grass pollen were included in this study.
Treatments The patients were randomly selected to receive Purethal Grasses 20,000 AUM/ml (pollen mixture extract solution of Agrostis stolonifera, Anthoxanthum odoratum, Arrhenatherum elatius, Dactylis glomerata, Festuca rubra, Holcus lanatus, Lolium perenne, Phleum pratense, Poa pratensis, Secale cereal, Loe edasi HAL Allergy B.V, Leiden, Netherlands) or placebo. The recruitment period was limited to three months (October-December). Purethal grasses (January-April) were administered as pre-seasonal therapy using the following regimen: 1 dose- 0.1 ml, 2 dose - 0.2 ml, 3 dose - 0.4 ml every week, and doses 4- 7 consisted of 0.5 ml every two weeks.
Using this schedule the average cumulative dose was 460,500 BAU (Bioequivalent Allergy Unit), which contains approximately 690 μg of Phl p5 administered to each patient undergoing active treatment for all three years of the study. The study consisted of two phases. The first phase was the baseline one season of follow-up visits without treatment and the second phase was three years of SCIT or placebo.
Assessment of efficacy The prime outcome measure was the area under the curve (AUC) for combined symptom and medication score (SMS) over the grass pollen season for baseline 2010 (before treatment) and in 2011, 2012 and finally in 2013 after three years of SCIT. The patients recorded symptom severity in a daily diary during the pollen season (May-August) by scoring the following areas: nasal itching, sneezing, running, blockage, and ocular itch on a separate Visual Analog Scale (VAS) with a continuous scale from 0 cm (no symptoms) to 10 cm (very severe symptoms). The rescue medication provided and scoring was a one point per spray for Azelastine nasal spray or eye drops (Levocabastine), or per 5 mg levocetirizine tablet. The score was two points per puff for mometasone fuorate nasal spray and three points per prednisolone 10 mg tablet. This combined symptom-medication score was calculated as a sum of the symptom score and medication score monitored daily with the use a diary as described. The SMS was derived by adding the VAS for each of these five symptoms.
The secondary outcome measures included quality of life, reduction of symptoms score, safety assessment and monitoring of IgG4. The local reactions were assessed at 30 min after injection and measured in cm. The systemic reactions were graded according to EAACI criteria.
Serum IgG4 measurements The serum concentration of IgG4 against birch alder and hazel pollens were determined in blood serum by ELISA tests according Lai et al. before and after the three-year SIT.
Quality of life Patient quality of life was evaluated with the RQLQ score for adults using questionnaires every grass pollen season during the study.
Pollen counts The local grass pollen counts were determined by volumetric pollen trap (Burkard, Scientific Ltd, Uxbridge, UK). The peak pollen count was defined as the day with highest grass pollen count for each season 3 weeks before and 3 weeks after the peak grass pollen count.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, investigator)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Patients active | Active comparator | Drug: PurethalPurethal Grass |
| Patients placebo | Placebo comparator | Drug: Purethal -placeboPlacebo |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 60 to 75 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- a positive skin prick test (SPT), were positive for specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE), and had positive nasal provocation tests (NPTs) with grass pollen mixture allergens
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- hypersensitivity to other allergens, bronchial asthma, non-allergic rhinitis (especially senile or vasomotor rhinitis) and severe non-stable diseases.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| PurethalAlso: Vaccineprerseasonal course of SCIT - three years | Drug | Patients active |
| Purethal -placebopreseasonal course of SCIT - three years | Drug | Patients placebo |
Primary outcome
The symptoms reduction as a compsite measure
Time frame: three years
The prime outcome measure was the area under the curve (AUC) for combined symptom and medication score (SMS)
Evaluation of symptomatic medication use reduction
Time frame: three years
Evaluation quantities of drugs based on patient diary.
2 secondary outcomes
Number of patients with a local allergic reaction after injections
Time frame: three years
Number of patients with a systemic allergic reaction after injections
Time frame: three years
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 12 May 2015.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 26815709Bozek A, Kolodziejczyk K, Krajewska-Wojtys A, Jarzab J. Pre-seasonal, subcutaneous immunotherapy: a double-blinded, placebo-controlled study in elderly patients with an allergy to grass. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2016 Feb;116(2):156-61. doi: 10.1016/j.anai.2015.12.013.
Related trials for Allergy
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
Hormone Therapy and Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy in Treating Patients With Metastatic Prostate Cancer
PSA Level Greater Than Two, Stage IV Prostate Adenocarcinoma AJCC v7
Active, not recruitingEarly Phase 1
Sensitivity of Angiotensin II Type II Receptors in Women Following Preeclampsia
Preeclampsia Postpartum
Active, not recruitingPhase 3
A Multicentre, Randomised, Double-blind, Parallel Group, Placebo-controlled, Time-to-first Asthma Exacerbation Phase III Efficacy and Safety Study of Benralizumab in Paediatric Patients With Severe Eosinophilic Asthma
Asthma
RecruitingPhase 2
PRA-216 Atopic Dermatitis Safety and Efficacy Study
Atopic Dermatitis (AD)
Not yet recruiting
Performance of the Basophil Activation Test in the Diagnosis of IgE-mediated Cow's Milk Allergy in Infants and Evaluation of Hydrolysate Allergenicity.
Milk Allergy
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 4 study testing Purethal in people with Allergy, run by Medical University of Silesia.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 12 May 2015. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 4 studies take place after a treatment is approved, to learn more about its long-term benefits and risks in everyday use.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
The symptoms reduction as a compsite measure (time frame: three years). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02440243, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 12 May 2015.