↓ Skip to main content

Food-specific sublingual immunotherapy is well tolerated and safe in healthy dogs: a blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Food-specific sublingual immunotherapy is well tolerated and safe in healthy dogs: a blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12917-017-0947-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

E. Maina, M. Pelst, M. Hesta, E. Cox, Maina, Elisa, Pelst, Michael, Hesta, Myriam, Cox, Eric

Abstract

Food allergies are increasing in prevalence but no treatment strategies are currently available to cure dogs with food allergy. Over the past decade, experimental food allergen-specific sublingual immunotherapy (FA-SLIT) has emerged as a potential treatment for food allergies in human medicine. However, FA-SLIT has not been investigated in dogs. Therefore, the objective of this study was to prospectively evaluate the safety, tolerability and dispenser sterility of FA-SLIT in healthy dogs before testing it in food allergic dogs. Eight experimental healthy beagle dogs, never orally exposed to peanut, were randomized in two groups to receive SLIT with peanut or placebo for 4 months. Subjects were monitored daily for local and systemic adverse effects. Blood samples for complete blood count and serum biochemistry, and urine for urinalysis were collected and the dogs' body weight was recorded at day 0, 35 and 119 of the SLIT treatment. Sera for the determination of peanut-specific IgG and IgE were collected at day 0, 35, 49, 70, 91, 105 and 119. Intradermal tests were performed before (day 0) and after (day 119) the experiment. The content of each dispenser used to administer treatment or placebo was tested for sterility after usage. In order to assess the presence or absence of sensitization, dogs were challenged 6 months after the end of the study with 2000 μg of peanut extract daily for 7 to 14 days. All dogs completed the study. The treatment did not provoke either local or systemic side-effects. Peanut-specific IgG significantly increased in treatment group. Even though a significant increase in peanut-specific IgE was also seen, intradermal tests were negative in all dogs before and after the experiment, and the challenge test did not trigger any adverse reactions in the treated dogs, which shows the protocol did not cause sensitization to peanut, but nevertheless primed the immune system as indicated by the humoral immune response. All dispenser solutions were sterile. Our results demonstrate that the used peanut-SLIT protocol is well tolerated and safe in healthy dogs. Further studies should evaluate tolerability, safety and efficacy in dogs with food allergy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Student > Master 4 9%
Other 12 26%
Unknown 13 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 16 34%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 6%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 12 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 November 2017.
All research outputs
#18,518,987
of 22,940,083 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#1,927
of 3,058 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#309,207
of 418,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#35
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,940,083 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,058 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 418,282 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.