{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02475685234305924, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.658823529411765, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A comparison of immunotherapy delivery methods for allergen immunotherapy

Background: Allergic diseases are among the most common diseases in humans. Besides allergen avoidance, allergen-specific immunotherapy is the only causative treatment option. During recent years, many innovations of this therapy have emerged. Methods: Selective literature research in Medline and PubMed, under the inclusion of national and international guidelines and Cochrane meta analyses. Results: In several meta-analyses, the clinical efficacy of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) has been largely demonstrated. Recently, major research activities in mucosal immunotherapies focused on the sublingual application route. There are well-documented clinical data on the efficacy and safety of this form of immunotherapy. New application routes as well as new immune-modifying agents such as virus-like particles or CpG-motifs have also been investigated. Conclusion: SIT is accepted to be the only causative treatment option for allergies. New application routes and new immune-modifying agents will allow for different delivery methods in the future.