{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022808267997148968, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0042765502494654314, 'mean_word_length': 4.974468085106383, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 2, '<?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 randomized double-blind comparative study of sublingual immunotherapy for cedar pollinosis.

BACKGROUND
Seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) induced by Japanese cedar pollen is a substantial problem in Japan. Sublingual immuno-therapy (SLIT) is safer than conventional antigen-specific immunotherapy, the only treatment modality by which complete cure of the disease can be expected. We investigated the safety and efficacy of SLIT in the treatment of cedar pollinosis patients compared to placebo.


METHODS
A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study was conducted in 61 cedar pollinosis patients. Increasing doses of standardized Japanese cedar extract or placebo were administered sublingually in intervals ranging from daily to once a week after six weeks. The primary efficacy variable was the mean of the daily total symptom scores (TSS) during the pollen dispersing period. Secondary efficacy variables included the QOL scores and related variables.


RESULTS
Primary efficacy variable scores were significantly lower for some days in the SLIT group than in the placebo group (P < .01 or P < .05). Secondary efficacy for the QOL score in SLIT group was almost of half of placebo group. There was no significant difference in the overall incidence of side effects between the SLIT group and the placebo group.


CONCLUSIONS
SLIT was effective and safe in the treatment of cedar pollinosis.