Turn on cookies to sign in
Signing in saves your progress to your Curie account. We can only do that with cookies on — turn them on to continue.
Two common allergen immunotherapy approaches both improve asthma and rhinitis symptoms, but which one performs better depends on what you're measuring — and when. A real-world study found that injected therapy (SCAIT) had an early edge at 12 months, while sublingual therapy (SLIT) pulled ahead on several measures by 24 months. The takeaway: there's no one-size-fits-all winner.
Two widely used allergen immunotherapy approaches — sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT, taken at home) and subcutaneous allergoid-based immunotherapy (SCAIT, given in clinic) — both delivered meaningful improvements in asthma and rhinitis control over two years. But a new real-world study out of Mexico reveals that the "better" option shifts depending on the outcome measured and the time point assessed.
In a retrospective study of 180 adults followed for 24 months, SCAIT showed advantages in asthma-related quality of life and rhinitis control at the 12-month mark. By 24 months, however, SLIT had flipped the script, outperforming SCAIT on those same measures. Airway inflammation, tracked via exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), was also notably lower in the SLIT group at 24 months.
Key Takeaways:
Why it matters: Clinicians often choose between SLIT and SCAIT based on convenience or patient preference, but this study suggests the timing and type of outcome matter too. Long-term follow-up may be essential before drawing conclusions about which therapy is truly more effective.
