ReviewCurrent allergy and asthma reports2017
Allergen Immunotherapy Clinical Trial Outcomes and Design: Working Toward Harmonization of Methods and Principles.
Review in Current allergy and asthma reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The SQ tree sublingual immunotherapy tablet is effective and well tolerated in children-A pivotal phase III trial.Allergy · 2025Trial
- Efficacy and safety of SQ house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy-tablet (12 SQ-HDM) in children with allergic rhinitis/rhinoconjunctivitis with or without asthma (MT-12): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2025Article
- Clinical benefits with 300 IR HDM SLIT tablet in Europeans with house dust mite allergic rhinitis: Post hoc analysis of a large phase 3 trial.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2024Article
- Randomized controlled trial of ragweed sublingual immunotherapy tablet in the subpopulation of Canadian children and adolescents with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2021Article
- Clinical and immunological evaluation of cat-allergic asthmatics living with or without a cat.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2021Article
- Early nonreactivity in the conjunctival provocation test predicts beneficial outcome of sublingual immunotherapy.Clinical and translational allergy · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Progress has been made in the harmonization of efficacy and safety outcome measures for allergen immunotherapy (AIT) trials, but unresolved issues still remain. Furthermore, there are discrepancies in recommendations from professional medical societies and regulatory agencies regarding requirements for AIT trials. In this article, we reviewed published recommendations and current data from recent clinical trials, as well as the criteria applied by regulatory authorities for approval of AIT products, to provide updated considerations for conducting phase 3 AIT trials. Topics discussed include analysis of outcomes and trial designs for pediatric and asthma indications, as well as trial designs for perennial allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. In addition, the need for harmonization of safety reporting is emphasized. Considerations presented in this article may further effort to find common ground among professional medical societies and government agencies in developing future recommendations for AIT trial design.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28293909What 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.