Author(s)
Aurelia S. Monk, BA
Shreyas Pyati
Meghan Norris, PA-C
Cristine Klatt-Cromwell, MD
Brian J. Thorp, MD, FARS
Brent Senior, MD, FARS
Adam Kimple, MD, PhD, FARS
Charles S. Ebert Jr., MD, MPH, FARS
Affiliation(s)
Department of Otolaryngology—Head & Neck Surgery at the University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill;
Abstract:
Background: Immunotherapy is an efficacious treatment for environmental allergies. However, limited access to allergy clinics and potentially high costs may hinder patient access to immunotherapy. In response, there has been an emergence of direct-to-consumer immunotherapy companies advertising through social media.
Methods: A web-based/social media search was performed to identify direct-to-consumer immunotherapy companies.
Results: Three companies were identified: Wyndly, Nectar, and Curex. Each offers at-home fingerprick in vitro allergy tests for “common allergens” like pollens, mold, and pet dander. Patients consult a physician via telemedicine and receive custom sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Nectar and Wyndly charge $199 and $249 respectively for their initial allergy tests. Nectar’s SLIT costs $99/month, while Wyndly charges $99-$110 based on billing frequency. Neither accept insurance but do accept FSA and HSA payments. Curex presents two options: an insurance-billed plan with telemedicine visits and a self-pay plan without visits. Curex requires a $49 onboarding fee for both plans. Self-pay entails a $199 allergy test and $99/month for SLIT with discounts for extended commitments. When billed through insurance, allergy test coverage varies, but SLIT costs $49/month. Customers are responsible for telemedicine co-pays, capped at $500 annually. FSA and HSA payments are accepted.
Conclusions: Three companies offer alternatives to in-office treatments, though testing accuracy, SLIT efficacy, and cost-effectiveness remain undetermined.