Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Is fast allergen immunotherapy safe for dogs compared to standard
By Herrmann, Ina et al.·Published in Veterinary dermatology·2020·Department of Clinical Sciences, United States·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Shortened immunotherapy dose-escalation saves time, but is it safe? A case-control study comparing the rates of adverse reactions between conventional and fast-escalation subcutaneous immunotherapy protocols during the induction phase.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 100 dogs undergoing allergen immunotherapy (AIT) for allergies was studied to see if a faster treatment method caused more side effects. The dogs were split into two groups: one received a conventional treatment and the other a faster version. The faster treatment group had a higher rate of mild side effects, with 22% experiencing reactions compared to just 2% in the conventional group. Most of these reactions were mild and went away on their own. While the faster method gets dogs to maintenance treatment more quickly, it's important to discuss any concerns about side effects with your veterinarian.
People also search for: dog allergy treatment side effects · immunotherapy for dog allergies · fast allergen treatment for dogs
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only intervention believed to change the course of atopic diseases. As dogs appear to have fewer severe adverse events (AEs) compared to people receiving AIT, a prolonged dose-escalation induction phase might not be needed. OBJECTIVES: To report the incidence and characteristics of AEs induced by a fast-escalation subcutaneous immunotherapy (f-SCIT) protocol compared to a conventional (c-SCIT) regimen. ANIMALS: One hundred dogs treated with either f- SCIT (Centre 1, 50 dogs) or c-SCIT (Centre 2, 50 dogs). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A case-control study retrospectively evaluating AEs during the induction of AIT. We determined the incidence and type of AEs in each SCIT group; we also assessed factors such as self-limitation and the need for AE-associated protocol changes. RESULTS: Twelve of 100 dogs (12%) developed a SCIT-attributable AE during the induction phase, with one dog having a local and 11 having systemic reactions (nine Grade I, two Grade II, none of grades III or IV). Dogs treated with the f-SCIT had a significantly higher rate of AEs (11 of 50; 22%) compared to those receiving the c-SCIT (one of 50; 2%). Most of the AEs (10 of 11; 91%) in the f-SCIT group were mild and self-limiting. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: The induction phase of f-SCIT is simpler, and the maintenance phase is reached faster than that of the c-SCIT. Despite its higher rate of AEs than with the c-SCIT regimen, the majority of f-SCIT-associated AEs were mild and self-limiting. Whether or not this f-SCIT protocol leads to a faster time-to-efficacy needs to be determined.
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/32940395/