Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22513973›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012

Helminth therapy (worms) for allergic rhinitis.

Ashley M Croft, Peter Bager, Sushil Kumar

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Frontiers in immunology · 2026
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Helminths in the hygiene hypothesis: sooner or later?Clinical and experimental immunology · 2014
    Review
  14. Glycoconjugates in host-helminth interactions.Frontiers in immunology · 2013
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Ashley M CroftHeadquarters SurgeonGeneral,Whittington Barracks, Lichfield,UK. Ashley.Croft810@mod.uk
Peter Bager
Sushil Kumar
Staffordshire County Council · GBStatens Serum Institut · DKUniversity of Minnesota · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAllergic rhinitis is a disorder of the nasal membranes and surrounding tissues, and a worldwide cause of illness and disability. Helminths are complex tissue-dwelling or lumen-dwelling organisms that inhabit larger organisms and are frequently asymptomatic. Helminths modulate the natural immune responses of their human hosts, and may prevent or cure immune-mediated or allergic diseases (e.g. allergic rhinitis) in the host. Non-randomised studies support this hypothesis.

objectivesTo assess the safety and effectiveness of helminth therapy in people with allergic rhinitis. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; BIOSIS Previews; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 24 June 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials where the intervention was any helminth species or combination of helminth species, administered to people with allergic rhinitis in any dose, by any route and for any duration of exposure. We accepted both intermittent and persistent allergic rhinitis patients. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently extracted data and assessed eligibility and risk of bias using a standardised data collection form. We resolved any disagreement through discussion. We combined dichotomous data using risk ratio (RR) and continuous data using mean difference (MD), presenting both with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN

resultsWe found five reports of two single-centre, placebo-controlled, double-blinded studies (130 participants). Participants in both studies were a mix of adults with either intermittent or persistent allergic rhinitis. Both studies had a low risk of bias. One study, with 12 weeks' follow-up, used a single percutaneous application of 10 Necator americanus (i.e. human hookworm) larvae. The other study, with 24 weeks' follow-up, used three-weekly oral dosing with 2500 Trichuris suis (i.e. pig whipworm) eggs in aqueous suspension. Of 17 outcomes evaluated in this review, eight were positive (i.e. favoured helminths). Participants taking helminths had no reduction in allergic rhinitis symptoms, percentage of well days (i.e. days with minimal symptoms and no use of medication for allergic rhinitis), lung function measures and quality of life scores. Total use of medication for allergic rhinitis (eye drops, nasal sprays, tablets) did not change; however, in the helminth group there was a statistically significant reduction in the percentage of days during the grass pollen season when participants needed to take tablets as rescue medication for their allergic rhinitis symptoms (MD -14.0%, 95% CI -26.6 to -1.40); in a typical 60-day pollen season this 14% reduction translates into 19 days when tablets would be needed in the helminth group versus 27 days when tablets would be needed in the placebo group. Participants taking helminths percutaneously (i.e. as hookworm larvae) had local skin itching and redness in the first few days after administration. Participants taking helminths were more likely to report any gastrointestinal adverse event (RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.31 to 2.45), moderate or severe abdominal pain (RR 7.67, 95% CI 1.87 to 31.57), moderate or severe flatulence (RR 2.01, 95% CI 1.06 to 3.81) and moderate or severe diarrhoea (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.18 to 3.37). There was no difference between the helminth and placebo groups in the incidence of serious adverse events, and in study withdrawals. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere is currently insufficient evidence on the efficacy, tolerability and likely costs of helminth therapy to support its use in the routine management of allergic rhinitis. Administered to humans in carefully measured doses, helminths appear to be safe. More preclinical studies should be performed, before larger and extended duration trials of helminths for allergic rhinitis are carried out. Future studies should collect and report comparative data on the costs of helminth therapy versus conventional pharmacotherapy.

Indexed as

AdultAncylostomatoideaAnimalsHelminthsHumansImmunotherapyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRhinitis, Allergic, PerennialRhinitis, Allergic, SeasonalTrichuris

Identifiers

PMID22513973
PMCPMC7388915
OpenAlexW1576339546

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.