Dermatophagoides farinae-specific immunotherapy in atopic dogs with hypersensitivity to multiple allergens: A randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled study

A systematic review of randomized controlled trials for prevention or treatment of atopic dermatitis in dogs: 2008–2011 update

“…Several studies added further limitations to their enrolment criteria. One trial of allergen‐specific immunotherapy (ASIT) selected only dogs with demonstrable hypersensitivity to Dermatophagoides farinae house dust mites 32 . One RCT selected only dogs with pedal lesions, 21 another selected dogs with at least mild signs, 30 while four studies enrolled dogs with moderate to severe AD (A. Puigdemont, personal communication 2012) 25–27 .…”

“…Four trials employed unvalidated scales modified from the first, second or third versions of the CADESI – the so called ‘modified CADESI’ or ‘mCADESI’– having changed the type of lesions, the body sites and/or the severity rating used (A. Puigdemont, personal communication 2012) 28,38,39 . One trial employed a scale derived from the ‘six area six signs AD’ (SASSAD) used in human patients with AD even though this scale had not been validated beforehand for canine AD 32 . Finally, one study used a simple but not validated six‐point categorical scale 40 …”

“…Seven trials evaluated the efficacy of a variety of interventions to treat dogs with AD. The tested interventions included D. farinae restricted immunotherapy in dogs hypersensitive to this plus other allergens, 32 the cyclooxygenase‐1, cyclooxygenase‐2 and 5‐lipoxygenase inhibitor tepoxalin (Zubrin; Intervet/Schering‐Plough Animal Health, Boxmeer, The Netherlands), 38 the type 1 histamine receptor inverse agonist (antihistamine) fexofenadine (Telfast; Sanofi‐Aventis, Ljubljana, Slovenia), 37 the phosphodiesterase inhibitor pentoxifylline with or without EFA (brands not specified), 33 embryonated eggs of Trichuris vulpis , 29 synthetic T‐cell receptor V‐β peptides, 22 and the tyrosine kinase inhibitor masitinib (Masivet or Kinavet; AB‐Science, Paris, France) 25 . Outcome measures are reported in Table 3.…”

“…Except for fexofenadine and masitinib, whose results are discussed below, the evaluation of our standardized measures of efficacy did not suggest any clinical benefit of these interventions. In general, this lack of efficacy was due to an inconsistency between positive outcome measures, 22,29,38 too low an effect compared with placebo, 29,32,38 a lack of available data to assess 33 and/or to a very small subject number per group, resulting in a study that was probably underpowered 22,29,33 …”

A therapeutic approach to allergic pruritus in the dog

“…Interestingly, skin infection may reduce this T reg/IL-10 response indicating that good control of bacterial and yeast infections may be essential during ASIT. Of course, allergen selection is key, and one well-designed study examining the efficacy of ASIT using Dermatophagoides farinae (house dust mite) proteins alone showed no better response than placebo (Willemse and others 2009). …”