Table 45Summary of strength of evidence regarding the effectiveness of sublingual immunotherapy versus subcutaneous immunotherapy

OutcomeNumber of Studies/Number of ParticipantsRisk of BiasTreatment FavoredConsistencyDirectnessMagnitude of EffectStudiesStrength of Evidence
Asthma Symptoms4/1714 medium3 SCIT
1 SLIT
ConsistentDirect3 moderate
1 weak
3 studies with medium RofB AND moderate magnitudeLow favoring subcutaneous
Rhinitis or Rhinoconjunctivitis Symptoms6/4121 high
5 medium
5 SCIT
1 None
ConsistentDirect1 strong
3 moderate
2 weak
1 study with medium RofB AND moderate magnitude
2 studies with medium RofB AND moderate magnitude
Moderate favoring subcutaneous
Medication Scores5/2195 medium2 SCIT
3 SLIT
ConsistentDirect1 strong
4 moderate
3 studies with medium RofB AND moderate magnitudeLow minimal difference-
Combined symptom and medication scores2/652 medium1 SCIT
1 CND
ConsistentDirect1 moderate
1 CND
1 study with medium RofB AND moderate magnitudeLow favoring subcutaneous

CND = could not define; SCIT = subcutaneous immunotherapy; SLIT = sublingual immunotherapy

From: Results

Cover of Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis and/or Asthma: Comparative Effectiveness Review
Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis and/or Asthma: Comparative Effectiveness Review [Internet].
Comparative Effectiveness Reviews, No. 111.
Lin SY, Erekosima N, Suarez-Cuervo C, et al.

PubMed Health. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.