Trial reportAmerican journal of rhinology & allergy
Perennial is more effective than preseasonal subcutaneous immunotherapy in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.
Trial report in American journal of rhinology & allergy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Trial With a Depigmented, Polymerized Mite Mixture Extract at Maximum Concentrations.Immunity, inflammation and disease · 2024Trial
- Summarizing the 2024 immunotherapy manual of the Canadian society of allergy and clinical immunology.Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2026Review
- Immunopharmacology in Vernal Keratoconjunctivitis: Current and Future Perspectives.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Allergen Immunotherapy for Local Respiratory Allergy.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2020Review
- EAACI Allergen Immunotherapy User's Guide.Pediatric allergy and immunology : official publication of the European Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology · 2020Review
- A contemporary look at allergic conjunctivitis.Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2020Review
- Impact of increasing treatment rates on cost-effectiveness of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) in respiratory allergy: a decision analytic modelling approach.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2018Article
- Induction of Bronchial Tolerance After 1 Cycle of Monophosphoryl-A-Adjuvanted Specific Immunotherapy in Children With Grass Pollen Allergies.Allergy, asthma & immunology research · 2016Article
- The efficacy assessment of a self-administered immunotherapy protocol.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2016Article
- Subcutaneous Immunotherapy Improves the Symptomatology of Allergic Rhinitis.International archives of otorhinolaryngology · 2016Article
- [Specific immunotherapy].Der Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete · 2014Article
- Patients' compliance with different administration routes for allergen immunotherapy in Germany.Patient preference and adherence · 2014Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTwo different regimens of subcutaneous immunotherapy (IT), perennial or preseasonal, may be used in the treatment of seasonal allergy. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of perennial IT (PIT) and preseasonal IT (PSIT) in patients suffering from seasonal rhinoconjunctivitis.
methodsThe study was planned as a randomized, double-blind, comparative study on the efficacy and safety of PIT and PSIT. The study group comprised 120 patients allergic to grass and rye pollen. After the observational season they were randomized to receive PIT or PSIT for 3 years. The effect of IT was assessed based on symptom severity and medication use recorded in diaries.
resultsNinety-nine patients completed the study. No difference was seen between the groups regarding combined symptom medication score (SMS) in the first season of IT. During the second season, the difference between PIT and PSIT regarding combined SMS was 27.9% (p = 0.063) and reached 42.7% (p = 0.012) in favor of PIT in the third season. Both treatments had a similar safety profile.
conclusionPIT was more effective than PSIT in the treatment of rhinoconjunctivitis in patients allergic to grass and rye pollens.
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.