Objective: To explore the optimal regimen of standardized mite allergen immunotherapy for airway allergic diseases in children, and to observe the clinical efficacy, safety and compliance. Method: Use a retrospective real-world study, clinical data from 156 children aged 5-16 years who received subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) with double mite allergen preparation in the pediatrics department of the Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat sen University from June 2019 to September 2020 were selected for allergic rhinitis (AR) and/or allergic asthma (bronchial asthma, BA), including gender, age, total VAS(visual analogue scale) score and CSMS(combined symptom and medication scores) score at different time points (before treatment, 4-6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after initiation of desensitization), peripheral blood eosinophil counts (EOS), serum total IgE (tIgE), specific IgE (tIgE), and serum IgE (tIgE), specific IgE (sIgE), tIgG4, and incidence of local and systemic adverse reactions. All patients had a consistent regimen during the initial treatment phase (dose-escalation phase), which was performed as directed. Among them, 81 cases (observation group) continued to continue subcutaneous injection of 1 ml of vial No. 3 every 4-6 weeks during the dose maintenance phase, while 75 cases (control group) followed the old traditional regimen during the maintenance phase (i.e., change to a new vial to halve the amount of vial No. 3 by 0.5 ml, and then 0.75 ml after 1-2 weeks, and 1 ml in a further interval of 1-2 weeks). The clinical efficacy, safety and adherence to the treatment were compared between the two groups. Results: A total of 81 cases of 156 children were included in the observation group, of which 58 children with AR, 15 children with BA, and 8 children with AR combined with BA; 75 cases were included in the conventional control group, of which 52 children with AR, 16 children with BA, and 7 children with AR combined with BA. In terms of safety, the difference in the incidence of local and systemic adverse reactions between the two groups was not statistically significant (χ2=1.541 for local adverse reactions in the control group, χ2=0.718 for the observation group; χ2=0.483 for systemic adverse reactions in the control group, χ2=0.179 for the observation group, P value >0.05 for all of these), and there were no grade Ⅱ or higher systemic adverse reactions in any of them. In the control group, there were 15 cases of dropout at 2 years of follow-up, with a dropout rate of 20.0%; in the observation group, there were 7 cases of dropout at 2 years of follow-up, with a dropout rate of 8.6%, and there was a statistically significant difference in the dropout rates of the patients in the two groups (χ2=4.147, P<0.05). Comparison of serological indexes and efficacy (compared with baseline at 3 different time points after treatment, i.e., 4-6 months, 1 year and 2 years after treatment), CSMS scores of the observation group and the conventional control group at 4-6 months, 1 year and 2 years after treatment were significantly decreased compared with the baseline status (t-values of the conventional group were 13.783, 20.086 and 20.384, respectively, all P-values <0.001, and t-values of the observation group were 15.480, 27.087, 28.938, all P-values <0.001), and VAS scores also decreased significantly from baseline status in both groups at 4-6 months, 1 year, and 2 years of treatment (t-values of 14.008, 17.963, and 27.512 in the conventional control group, respectively, with all P-values <0.001, and t-values of 9.436, 13.184, and 22.377 in the observation group, respectively; all P-values <0.001). Intergroup comparisons showed no statistically significant differences in CSMS at baseline status, 4-6 months, 1 year and 2 years (t-values 0.621, 0.473, 1.825, and 0.342, respectively, and P-values 0.536, 0.637, 0.070, and 0.733, respectively), and VAS was no statistically significant difference in comparison between groups at different time points (t-values of 1.663, 0.095, 0.305, 0.951, P-values of 0.099, 0.925, 0.761, 0.343, respectively); suggesting that the treatment regimens of the observation group and the conventional control group were clinically effective, and that the two regimens were comparable in terms of efficacy. The peripheral blood eosinophil counts of the observation group and the conventional control group decreased significantly from the baseline status at 4-6 months, 1 year and 2 years of treatment (t-values of the conventional group were 3.453, 5.469, 6.273, P-values <0.05, and the t-values of the observation group were 2.900, 4.575, 5.988, P-values <0.05, respectively). 4-6 months, 1 year and 2 years compared with the baseline status tIgE showed a trend of increasing and then decreasing (t-value in the conventional group was -5.328, -4.254, -0.690, P-value was 0.000, 0.000, 0.492, respectively, and t-value in the observation group was -6.087, -5.087, -0.324, P-value was 0.000, 0.000, 0.745, respectively). However, the results of intergroup comparisons showed no statistically significant differences in serological indices and efficacy between the two groups in terms of peripheral blood eosinophil counts at baseline status, 4-6 months, 1 year and 2 years (t-values of 0.723, 1.553, 0.766, and 0.234, respectively; P-values of 0.471, 0.122, 0.445, and 0.815, respectively), tIgE (t-values of 0.170, -0.166, -0.449, 0.839, P-values 0.865, 0.868, 0.654, 0.403, respectively), tIgG4 (t-values 1.507, 1.467, -0.337, 0.804, P-values 0.134, 0.145, 0.737, 0.422, respectively). Conclusion: Both immunotherapy regimens for airway allergic diseases with double mite allergen subcutaneous immunotherapy have significant clinical efficacy, low incidence of adverse reactions, and the observation group has better patient compliance than the control group.
目的： 探讨儿童气道过敏性疾病标准化螨变应原免疫治疗的优化方案，观察其临床疗效、安全性和依从性。 方法： 采用回顾性真实世界研究，选取2019年6月至2020年9月在中山大学附属第三医院儿科接受双螨变应原制剂皮下免疫治疗（Subcutaneous immunotherapy，SCIT）的变应性鼻炎（allergic rhinitis，AR）和（或）过敏性哮喘（支气管哮喘，bronchial asthma，BA）的5~16岁共156例患儿的临床资料，包括性别、年龄、不同时间节点（治疗前，启动脱敏治疗后4~6个月、1年、2年时）总VAS（视觉模拟量表）评分和CSMS（综合症状和用药评分）评分、外周血中嗜酸性粒细胞计数（EOS）、血清总IgE（tIgE）、特异性IgE（sIgE）、tIgG4、局部及全身不良反应发生率。所有患者在初始治疗阶段（剂量递增阶段）的方案一致，均按说明书进行。其中，81例（观察组）在剂量维持阶段持续继续每4~6周皮下注射1次，每次注射3号瓶1 ml；75例（对照组）维持阶段按照旧的传统方案进行（即换新瓶减半量3号瓶0.5 ml，1~2周后0.75 ml，再间隔1~2周1 ml）。比较两组患者治疗的临床疗效、安全性及依从性。 结果： 156例患儿中观察组共纳入81例，其中AR患儿有58例，BA患儿15例，AR合并BA患儿有8例；常规对照组共纳入75例，AR患儿有52例，BA患儿16例，AR合并BA患儿有7例。在安全性方面，两组患者的局部和全身不良反应发生率差异均无统计学意义（局部不良反应对照组χ2=1.541，观察组χ2=0.718；全身不良反应对照组χ2=0.483，观察组χ2=0.179，P值均>0.05），且均无Ⅱ级以上全身不良反应发生。对照组随访2年脱漏15例，脱落率20.0%；观察组随访2年脱漏7例，脱落率8.6%，两组患者脱落率差异有统计学意义（χ2=4.147，P<0.05）。血清学指标及疗效对比（在治疗后3个不同的时间节点即治疗4~6个月、1年及2年时与基线进行比较），观察组和常规对照组治疗4~6个月、1年及2年时CSMS评分较基线状态明显下降（常规组t值分别为13.783，20.086，20.384，P值均<0.001；观察组t值分别为15.480，27.087，28.938，P值均<0.001）；两组患者治疗4~6个月、1年及2年时VAS评分也均较基线状态明显下降（常规组t值分别为14.008，17.963，27.512，P值均<0.001；观察组t值分别为9.436，13.184，22.377，P值均<0.001）；组间比较结果显示，基线状态、4~6个月、1年及2年时CSMS差异无统计学意义（t值分别为0.621，0.473，1.825，0.342；P值分别为0.536，0.637，0.070，0.733），VAS在不同时间点的组间比较差异也无统计学意义（t值分别为1.663，0.095，0.305，0.951；P值分别为0.099，0.925，0.761，0.343）；提示观察组和常规对照组的治疗方案均临床显效，且两种方案疗效相当。观察组和常规对照组治疗4~6个月、1年及2年时外周血嗜酸性粒细胞计数均较基线状态明显下降（常规组t值分别为3.453，5.469，6.273，P值均<0.05；观察组t值分别为2.900，4.575，5.988，P值均<0.05），两组患者在治疗4~6个月、1年及2年时较基线状态tIgE呈现先升高后降低的趋势（常规组t值分别为-5.328，-4.254，-0.690，P值分别为0.000，0.000，0.492；观察组t值分别为-6.087，-5.087，-0.324，P值分别为0.000，0.000，0.745）。但组间比较结果显示血清学指标及疗效在基线状态、4~6个月、1年及2年时外周血嗜酸性粒细胞计数在两组之间无明显统计学差异（t值分别为0.723，1.553，0.766，0.234；P值分别为0.471，0.122，0.445，0.815），tIgE（t值分别为0.170，-0.166，-0.449，0.839；P值分别为0.865，0.868，0.654，0.403），tIgG4（t值分别为1.507，1.467，-0.337，0.804；P值分别为0.134，0.145，0.737，0.422）。 结论： 针对气道过敏性疾病双螨变应原皮下免疫治疗的两种免疫治疗方案均有显著的临床疗效，不良反应发生率低，观察组较对照组患者依从性更好。.