In Vitro evaluation of allergen potencies of commercial house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy reagents

Kyung Hee Park, Mina Son, Soo Young Choi, Hey Jung Park, Jae Hyun Lee, Kyoung Yong Jeong, Joo Shil Lee, Jungwon Park

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The clinical efficacy of allergen-immunotherapy is known to be dose dependent. However, optimal maintenance dosage has not yet been determined for sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Furthermore, since companies adopt their own units for expression of allergenicity, the allergen concentrations of individual reagents cannot be compared easily. We sought to measure and compare the allergenicities of 3 commercially available house dust mite (HDM) SLIT regents and a subcutaneous immunotherapy reagent. Methods: We measured the HDM allergenic potency of the maintenance dosages of three SLIT reagents: Staloral® (300 index of reactivity [IR] /mL, recommended maintenance dosage [MD]: 120 IR), SLITone® (1,000 standard therapeutic unit [STU]/mL, recommended MD: 200 STU), Wolwopharma® (100 μg/mL, recommended MD: 20 μg), and subcutaneous immunotherapy regents of Hollister-Stier (10,000 allergy unit [AU] /mL). The allergenic potency was assessed by measuring the total protein concentrations, mite group 1 and 2 allergens using 2-site ELISA, and an inhibition test against IgE specific to Dermatophagoides farinae and Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus. Results: The protein content of the Wolwopharma® reagent was 1.5-261.4 times higher than that of the other 2 SLIT reagents. The concentration of group 1 major allergens in Staloral® (132.03 μg/mL) was 33- to 44.5-fold higher than in SLITone® (4.00 μg/mL) and Wolwopharma® (2.97 μg/mL). The concentration of group 2 major allergen was also 8.9- to 10.5-fold higher in Staloral® (15.7 μg/mL) than in SLITone ® (1.8 μg/mL) or Wolwopharma® (1.5 μg/mL). An ELISA inhibition study against HDM-specific IgE showed that the allergen potency of Staloral® reagent is 8.5-fold and 21-fold higher than that of SLITone® or Wolwopharma®, respectively. The differences between the maintenance dosages are further exaggerated by the differences in the recommended volumes of SLIT reagents. Conclusions: The allergen potencies of commercially available HDM SLIT reagents are markedly different. Consensus regarding the optimal allergen concentration for SLIT reagents used to treat HDM respiratory allergies is needed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)124-129
Number of pages6
JournalAllergy, Asthma and Immunology Research
Volume7
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014 Jan 1

Fingerprint

Sublingual Immunotherapy
Pyroglyphidae
Allergens
Maintenance
Immunotherapy
Immunoglobulin E
Hypersensitivity
Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay
Dermatophagoides farinae
Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus
Immunologic Desensitization
In Vitro Techniques
Mites
Proteins

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Immunology and Allergy
  • Immunology
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine

Cite this

Park, Kyung Hee ; Son, Mina ; Choi, Soo Young ; Park, Hey Jung ; Lee, Jae Hyun ; Jeong, Kyoung Yong ; Lee, Joo Shil ; Park, Jungwon. / In Vitro evaluation of allergen potencies of commercial house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy reagents. In: Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Research. 2014 ; Vol. 7, No. 2. pp. 124-129.
@article{750f24e23c6e424094985d49defb6eb3,
title = "In Vitro evaluation of allergen potencies of commercial house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy reagents",
abstract = "The clinical efficacy of allergen-immunotherapy is known to be dose dependent. However, optimal maintenance dosage has not yet been determined for sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Furthermore, since companies adopt their own units for expression of allergenicity, the allergen concentrations of individual reagents cannot be compared easily. We sought to measure and compare the allergenicities of 3 commercially available house dust mite (HDM) SLIT regents and a subcutaneous immunotherapy reagent. Methods: We measured the HDM allergenic potency of the maintenance dosages of three SLIT reagents: Staloral{\circledR} (300 index of reactivity [IR] /mL, recommended maintenance dosage [MD]: 120 IR), SLITone{\circledR} (1,000 standard therapeutic unit [STU]/mL, recommended MD: 200 STU), Wolwopharma{\circledR} (100 μg/mL, recommended MD: 20 μg), and subcutaneous immunotherapy regents of Hollister-Stier (10,000 allergy unit [AU] /mL). The allergenic potency was assessed by measuring the total protein concentrations, mite group 1 and 2 allergens using 2-site ELISA, and an inhibition test against IgE specific to Dermatophagoides farinae and Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus. Results: The protein content of the Wolwopharma{\circledR} reagent was 1.5-261.4 times higher than that of the other 2 SLIT reagents. The concentration of group 1 major allergens in Staloral{\circledR} (132.03 μg/mL) was 33- to 44.5-fold higher than in SLITone{\circledR} (4.00 μg/mL) and Wolwopharma{\circledR} (2.97 μg/mL). The concentration of group 2 major allergen was also 8.9- to 10.5-fold higher in Staloral{\circledR} (15.7 μg/mL) than in SLITone {\circledR} (1.8 μg/mL) or Wolwopharma{\circledR} (1.5 μg/mL). An ELISA inhibition study against HDM-specific IgE showed that the allergen potency of Staloral{\circledR} reagent is 8.5-fold and 21-fold higher than that of SLITone{\circledR} or Wolwopharma{\circledR}, respectively. The differences between the maintenance dosages are further exaggerated by the differences in the recommended volumes of SLIT reagents. Conclusions: The allergen potencies of commercially available HDM SLIT reagents are markedly different. Consensus regarding the optimal allergen concentration for SLIT reagents used to treat HDM respiratory allergies is needed.",
author = "Park, {Kyung Hee} and Mina Son and Choi, {Soo Young} and Park, {Hey Jung} and Lee, {Jae Hyun} and Jeong, {Kyoung Yong} and Lee, {Joo Shil} and Jungwon Park",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.4168/aair.2015.7.2.124",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
pages = "124--129",
journal = "Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Research",
issn = "2092-7355",
publisher = "Korean Academy of Asthma, Allergy and Clinical Immunology",
number = "2",

}

In Vitro evaluation of allergen potencies of commercial house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy reagents. / Park, Kyung Hee; Son, Mina; Choi, Soo Young; Park, Hey Jung; Lee, Jae Hyun; Jeong, Kyoung Yong; Lee, Joo Shil; Park, Jungwon.

In: Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Research, Vol. 7, No. 2, 01.01.2014, p. 124-129.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - In Vitro evaluation of allergen potencies of commercial house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy reagents

AU - Park, Kyung Hee

AU - Son, Mina

AU - Choi, Soo Young

AU - Park, Hey Jung

AU - Lee, Jae Hyun

AU - Jeong, Kyoung Yong

AU - Lee, Joo Shil

AU - Park, Jungwon

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - The clinical efficacy of allergen-immunotherapy is known to be dose dependent. However, optimal maintenance dosage has not yet been determined for sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Furthermore, since companies adopt their own units for expression of allergenicity, the allergen concentrations of individual reagents cannot be compared easily. We sought to measure and compare the allergenicities of 3 commercially available house dust mite (HDM) SLIT regents and a subcutaneous immunotherapy reagent. Methods: We measured the HDM allergenic potency of the maintenance dosages of three SLIT reagents: Staloral® (300 index of reactivity [IR] /mL, recommended maintenance dosage [MD]: 120 IR), SLITone® (1,000 standard therapeutic unit [STU]/mL, recommended MD: 200 STU), Wolwopharma® (100 μg/mL, recommended MD: 20 μg), and subcutaneous immunotherapy regents of Hollister-Stier (10,000 allergy unit [AU] /mL). The allergenic potency was assessed by measuring the total protein concentrations, mite group 1 and 2 allergens using 2-site ELISA, and an inhibition test against IgE specific to Dermatophagoides farinae and Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus. Results: The protein content of the Wolwopharma® reagent was 1.5-261.4 times higher than that of the other 2 SLIT reagents. The concentration of group 1 major allergens in Staloral® (132.03 μg/mL) was 33- to 44.5-fold higher than in SLITone® (4.00 μg/mL) and Wolwopharma® (2.97 μg/mL). The concentration of group 2 major allergen was also 8.9- to 10.5-fold higher in Staloral® (15.7 μg/mL) than in SLITone ® (1.8 μg/mL) or Wolwopharma® (1.5 μg/mL). An ELISA inhibition study against HDM-specific IgE showed that the allergen potency of Staloral® reagent is 8.5-fold and 21-fold higher than that of SLITone® or Wolwopharma®, respectively. The differences between the maintenance dosages are further exaggerated by the differences in the recommended volumes of SLIT reagents. Conclusions: The allergen potencies of commercially available HDM SLIT reagents are markedly different. Consensus regarding the optimal allergen concentration for SLIT reagents used to treat HDM respiratory allergies is needed.

AB - The clinical efficacy of allergen-immunotherapy is known to be dose dependent. However, optimal maintenance dosage has not yet been determined for sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Furthermore, since companies adopt their own units for expression of allergenicity, the allergen concentrations of individual reagents cannot be compared easily. We sought to measure and compare the allergenicities of 3 commercially available house dust mite (HDM) SLIT regents and a subcutaneous immunotherapy reagent. Methods: We measured the HDM allergenic potency of the maintenance dosages of three SLIT reagents: Staloral® (300 index of reactivity [IR] /mL, recommended maintenance dosage [MD]: 120 IR), SLITone® (1,000 standard therapeutic unit [STU]/mL, recommended MD: 200 STU), Wolwopharma® (100 μg/mL, recommended MD: 20 μg), and subcutaneous immunotherapy regents of Hollister-Stier (10,000 allergy unit [AU] /mL). The allergenic potency was assessed by measuring the total protein concentrations, mite group 1 and 2 allergens using 2-site ELISA, and an inhibition test against IgE specific to Dermatophagoides farinae and Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus. Results: The protein content of the Wolwopharma® reagent was 1.5-261.4 times higher than that of the other 2 SLIT reagents. The concentration of group 1 major allergens in Staloral® (132.03 μg/mL) was 33- to 44.5-fold higher than in SLITone® (4.00 μg/mL) and Wolwopharma® (2.97 μg/mL). The concentration of group 2 major allergen was also 8.9- to 10.5-fold higher in Staloral® (15.7 μg/mL) than in SLITone ® (1.8 μg/mL) or Wolwopharma® (1.5 μg/mL). An ELISA inhibition study against HDM-specific IgE showed that the allergen potency of Staloral® reagent is 8.5-fold and 21-fold higher than that of SLITone® or Wolwopharma®, respectively. The differences between the maintenance dosages are further exaggerated by the differences in the recommended volumes of SLIT reagents. Conclusions: The allergen potencies of commercially available HDM SLIT reagents are markedly different. Consensus regarding the optimal allergen concentration for SLIT reagents used to treat HDM respiratory allergies is needed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84937862115&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84937862115&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4168/aair.2015.7.2.124

DO - 10.4168/aair.2015.7.2.124

M3 - Article

VL - 7

SP - 124

EP - 129

JO - Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Research

JF - Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Research

SN - 2092-7355

IS - 2

ER -