ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Little is known whether sublingual immunotherapy using Japanese cedar pollen extract (cedar SLIT) is effective for not only Japanese cedar pollinosis but also Japanese cypress pollinosis. We investigated the prevalence rate of Japanese cypress pollinosis, efficacy of cedar SLIT on cypress pollinosis and patients' wish to receive cypress SLIT. METHODS: We investigated a multi-center (31 institutions), cross-sectional survey using a self-administrated questionnaire with four questions for patients received cedar SLIT aged from 5 to 69 years old. RESULTS: 2523 subjects were enrolled for analysis. 83.4% of them had pollinosis symptoms during cypress season before cedar SLIT. In such patients, 37.4% experienced lessened efficacy of cedar SLIT during cypress season. Both the prevalence of cypress pollinosis and the lessened efficacy of cedar SLIT on cypress pollinosis were significantly seen in western Japan as compared to eastern Japan. 76.1% of the subject having cypress pollinosis before SLIT wished to receive cypress SLIT if it is available. CONCLUSION: A lessened efficacy of cedar SLIT during cypress season was broadly seen in Japan, and further showed a regional difference. Together with the finding of high wish by patients, these results suggest a development of cypress SLIT is desirable.
Subject(s)
Cryptomeria , Cupressus , Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal , Sublingual Immunotherapy , Humans , Child, Preschool , Child , Adolescent , Young Adult , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal/therapy , Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal/drug therapy , Pollen , Cross-Sectional Studies , Prevalence , Surveys and Questionnaires , AllergensABSTRACT
The only official method that can detect the skin sensitizing potential of chemicals, including the elicitation response, is the OECD test guideline (TG) 406. However, this guideline uses guinea pigs, which requires complex procedures. Since a simple and complete test method for evaluating skin sensitization is needed, especially for mechanistic studies of skin sensitization, this study confirmed the reactivity of mice to skin sensitizing substances. We set up a protocol involving one induction exposure of the test substance to the back skin, followed by three challenge exposures to the auricle (Protocol 2), and compared their skin sensitization responses with the results of two exposures to the auricle and back skin every 2 weeks (Protocol 1) and a local lymph node assay (TG442B). A hapten 2,4-dinitrofluorobenzene caused significant auricular thickening, skin inflammation, and enlarged auricular lymph nodes in Protocols 1 and 2. These changes were more pronounced in Protocol 2. Plasma IgE and IgG1 and gene expression of IL4, IFNγ, and perforin were significantly increased in Protocol 2. Cell proliferation in the auricular lymph nodes was observed in both protocols as in TG442B. These results indicate that Protocol 2 can be a good candidate for a relatively simple skin sensitization test.
