Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21154351›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2010

Sublingual immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis.

Suzana Radulovic, Moises A Calderon, Duncan Wilson, Stephen Durham

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 92 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
92citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

92 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Oral immunotherapy for milk allergy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  4. Allergen-specific oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Helminth therapy (worms) for allergic rhinitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Intradermal grass pollen immunotherapy increases TThe Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2017
    Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Development of cockroach immunotherapy by the Inner-City Asthma Consortium.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2014
    Trial
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

32 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Suzana RadulovicLEAP Study Team, Paediatric Allergy Research Department, St. Thomas' Hospital, Lambeth Palace Road, London, UK, SE1 7EH.
Moises A Calderon
Duncan Wilson
Stephen Durham

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in The Cochrane Library in Issue 2, 2003.Allergic rhinitis is a common condition which can significantly impair quality of life. Immunotherapy by injection can significantly reduce symptoms and medication use but its use is limited by the possibility of severe systemic adverse reactions. Immunotherapy by the sublingual route is therefore of considerable interest.

objectivesTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis in adults and children. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane ENT Group Trials Register; CENTRAL (2010, Issue 3); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; BIOSIS Previews; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; mRCT and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the most recent search was 14 August 2009. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of sublingual immunotherapy in adults or children. Primary outcome measures were symptom and medication scores. We also collected adverse event data. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent authors selected studies and assessed risk of bias. One author extracted data which was rechecked by two other authors. We used the standardised mean difference (SMD) with a random-effects model to combine data. MAIN

resultsWe included a total of 60 randomised controlled trials in the review. Forty-nine were suitable for pooling in meta-analyses (2333 SLIT, 2256 placebo participants). Overall, we found a significant reduction in symptoms (SMD -0.49; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.64 to -0.34, P < 0.00001) and medication requirements (SMD -0.32; 95% CI -0.43 to -0.21, P < 0.00001) in participants receiving sublingual immunotherapy compared to placebo. None of the trials included in this review reported severe systemic reactions or anaphylaxis, and none of the systemic reactions reported required the use of adrenaline. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThis updated review reinforces the conclusion of the original 2003 Cochrane Review that sublingual immunotherapy is effective for allergic rhinitis and has been proven to be a safe route of administration.

Indexed as

Administration, SublingualAdultAllergensChildDesensitization, ImmunologicHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRhinitis, Allergic, PerennialRhinitis, Allergic, SeasonalAllergens

Identifiers

PMID21154351
PMCPMC7001038

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.