ReviewCurrent allergy and asthma reports2013
New directions in immunotherapy.
Review in Current allergy and asthma reports, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 61 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cluster subcutaneous allergen specific immunotherapy for the treatment of allergic rhinitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2014Pooled it
- Bibliometric and visual analysis in the field of two-dimensions nano black phosphorus in cancer from 2015 to 2023.Discover oncology · 2024Article
- New perspectives in allergen specific immunotherapy driven by big trials with house dust mite sublingual SQClinical and molecular allergy : CMA · 2020Review
- Antigen-Drug Conjugates as a Novel Therapeutic Class for the Treatment of Antigen-Specific Autoimmune Disorders.Molecular pharmaceutics · 2019Article
- Article
- International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2018Article
- Article
- Food allergy: immune mechanisms, diagnosis and immunotherapy.Nature reviews. Immunology · 2016Review
- Epicutaneous immunization with ovalbumin and CpG induces TH1/TH17 cytokines, which regulate IgE and IgG2a production.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2016Article
- Topical steroid therapy induces pro-tolerogenic changes in Langerhans cells in human skin.Immunology · 2015Article
- Stinging insect allergy: current perspectives on venom immunotherapy.Journal of asthma and allergy · 2015Review
- Venom immunotherapy: an updated review.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2014Review
- Immunotherapy in allergy and cellular tests: state of art.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2014Review
- Food allergy diagnosis and therapy: where are we now?Immunotherapy · 2013Review
- Recombinant allergen immunotherapy: clinical evidence of efficacy--a review.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2013Review
- Allergen immunotherapy: routes, safety, efficacy, and mode of action.ImmunoTargets and therapy · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is effective in reducing the clinical symptoms associated with allergic rhinitis, asthma and venom-induced anaphylaxis. Subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) with unmodified allergen extracts are the most widely prescribed AIT regimens. The efficacy of these 2 routes appears comparable, but the safety profile with SLIT is more favorable allowing for home administration and requiring less patient time. However, both require that the treatment is taken regularly over several years, e.g., monthly in a supervised medical setting with SCIT and daily at home with SLIT. Despite the difference in treatment settings, poor adherence has been reported with both routes. Emerging evidence suggests that AIT may be effective in other allergic conditions such as atopic dermatitis, venom sting-induced large local reactions, and food allergy. Research with oral immunotherapy (OIT) for food allergies suggest that many patients can be desensitized during treatment, but questions remain about whether this can produce long term tolerance. Further studies are needed to identify appropriate patients and treatment regimens with these conditions. Efforts to develop safer and more effective AIT for inhalant allergies have led to investigations with modified allergens and alternate routes. Intralymphatic (ILIT) has been shown to produce long-lasting clinical benefits after three injections comparable to a 3-year course of SCIT. Epicutaneous (EPIT) has demonstrated promising results for food and inhalant allergies. Vaccine modifications, such as T cell epitopes or the use of viral-like particles as an adjuvant, have been shown to provide sustained clinical benefits after a relatively short course of treatment compared to the currently available AIT treatments, SLIT and SCIT. These newer approaches may increase the utilization and adherence to AIT because the multi-year treatment requirement of currently available AIT is a likely deterrent for initiating and adhering to treatment.
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.