ArticleCore evidence2012
An evidence-based review of the potential role of icatibant in the treatment of acute attacks in hereditary angioedema type I and II.
Article in Core evidence, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing Patient-Reported Outcomes in Acute Attacks of Hereditary Angioedema: Insights from a Mixed Methods Study of Participants Receiving Standard-of-Care Treatments in a Real-World Setting.Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2026Article
- Recurrent Intestinal Angioedema with Normal C1-Inhibitor: A Case Report.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Article
- Development and content validity testing of a patient-reported outcomes questionnaire for the assessment of hereditary angioedema in observational studies.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2015Observational
- The care pathway for children with urticaria, angioedema, mastocytosis.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2015Article
- Social costs of icatibant self-administration vs. health professional-administration in the treatment of hereditary angioedema in Spain.Health economics review · 2013Article
- Hereditary angioedema: epidemiology, management, and role of icatibant.Biologics : targets & therapy · 2013Article
- Experimental protocol of dental procedures In patients with hereditary angioedema: the role of anxiety and the use of nitrogen oxide.ORAL & implantologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIcatibant, a first-in-class B2 bradykinin receptor antagonist, appears to have a favorable efficacy and safety profile for the treatment of acute attacks of hereditary angioedema in adults.
aimsTo update the evidence and provide an overview of the available data on icatibant. EVIDENCE REVIEW: Peer reviewed articles published and listed in Medline Search and published updated guidelines for the treatment of acute attacks in hereditary angioedema type I and II in adults were reviewed. The validity and quality of evidence were evaluated. PLACE IN THERAPY: Clinical evidence for the treatment of acute hereditary angioedema attacks with icatibant is strong. Approximately 10% of the patients require a second dose. No serious adverse reactions have been reported. The only significant side effects consistently registered by 90% of patients are transient local pain, swelling, and erythema at the local injection site.
conclusionSubcutaneously administered 30 mg icatibant has been shown to be a safe and efficacious treatment in clinical trials. It is the only specific treatment authorized for self-administration by the subcutaneous route offering increased patient independence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.