PetCaseFinder

Peer-reviewed veterinary case report

Sublingual immunotherapy for food allergies in dogs with adverse

By Maina, Elisa & Cox, Eric·Published in Veterinary dermatology·2016·Ghent University of Veterinary Medicine·View original on PubMed

PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →

Original publication title: A double blind, randomized, placebo controlled trial of the efficacy, quality of life and safety of food allergen-specific sublingual immunotherapy in client owned dogs with adverse food reactions: a small pilot study.

Species:
dog

Plain-English summary

A group of dogs with food allergies were given a new treatment called food allergen-specific sublingual immunotherapy (FA-SLIT) to see if it could help reduce their symptoms. After six months of daily treatment, most owners reported that their dogs showed improvement in itching and skin issues compared to those who received a placebo. While two dogs had to stop the treatment due to worsening symptoms, the majority found the therapy effective and safe, with very few side effects. This suggests that FA-SLIT could be a promising option for managing food allergies in dogs.

People also search for: dog food allergies treatment · sublingual immunotherapy for dogs · dog itching relief · food allergen treatment for dogs

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Food allergen-specific sublingual immunotherapy (FA-SLIT) has emerged as a novel and successful approach for desensitizing human patients to specific food allergens. It has not been tested in dogs. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy, quality of life (QoL), tolerability and safety of FA-SLIT in dogs with adverse food reactions (AFR). METHODS: Dogs with proven AFR were randomized to treatment (T group; n&#xa0;=&#xa0;7) or placebo (P group; n&#xa0;=&#xa0;6) to receive either FA-SLIT (based on the results of a food elimination trial) or glycerinated saline, respectively. The treatment was continued daily for 6&#xa0;months with fortnightly dosage escalations. To evaluate the treatment, pruritus Visual Analog Scale (pVAS), Canine Atopic Dermatitis Extent and Severity Index (CADESI-04), QoL, faecal consistency scores, owner assessment, overall tolerability scores and blood analyses were assessed. RESULTS: Eleven dogs completed the study, two dogs in the T group were withdrawn by the owner after FA-SLIT exacerbated clinical signs of AFR. Statistical tests showed significant protection against food challenge induced clinical signs following FA-SLIT therapy, as indicated by reduced pVAS and CADESI scores (P&#xa0;<&#xa0;0.05). The QoL did not differ between groups. The treatment was rated as effective or quite effective by 80% of the owners, whereas placebo was rated as ineffective by all owners. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: FA-SLIT was effective, well tolerated and safe. No severe adverse events were recorded; erythema and pruritus were reported in association with only 0.7% of the dispensed doses. Larger clinical trials with more extended maintenance immunotherapy periods will be needed to provide more precise estimates of efficacy and frequency of adverse events.

Find similar cases for your pet

PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.

Search related cases →

Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27426929/