Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28675499›Full record

ArticleAllergy2018

Ultra-short-course booster is effective in recurrent grass pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.

O Pfaar, S Lang, U Pieper-Fürst, A Astvatsatourov, F Gerich, L Klimek, M F Kramer, Y Reydelet, K Shah-Hosseini, R Mösges

Open access · hybridAbstract readClinical Study
In one paragraph

Article in Allergy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. A recombinantFrontiers in immunology · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Modified Allergens for Immunotherapy.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2018
    Review
  14. Article
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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

O PfaarDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4374-9639
S LangInstitute of Medical Statistics, Informatics and Epidemiology (IMSIE), Faculty of Medicine, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
U Pieper-FürstInstitute of Medical Statistics, Informatics and Epidemiology (IMSIE), Faculty of Medicine, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
A AstvatsatourovInstitute of Medical Statistics, Informatics and Epidemiology (IMSIE), Faculty of Medicine, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
F GerichInstitute of Medical Statistics, Informatics and Epidemiology (IMSIE), Faculty of Medicine, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
L KlimekCenter for Rhinology and Allergology, Wiesbaden, Germany.
M F KramerBencard® Allergie GmbH, Munich, Germany.
Y ReydeletInstitute of Medical Statistics, Informatics and Epidemiology (IMSIE), Faculty of Medicine, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
K Shah-HosseiniInstitute of Medical Statistics, Informatics and Epidemiology (IMSIE), Faculty of Medicine, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
R MösgesInstitute of Medical Statistics, Informatics and Epidemiology (IMSIE), Faculty of Medicine, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1928-810X
University of Cologne · DEHeidelberg University · DEZentrum für Rhinologie und Allergologie · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA relevant proportion of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC) patients experience recurrent symptoms after successfully completing allergen immunotherapy (AIT). This prospective, controlled, noninterventional study used internationally standardized instruments to determine the clinical effects of a preseasonal, ultra-short-course booster AIT on clinical outcome parameters.

methodsThis two-arm study included patients aged ≥12 years with recurrent grass pollen-induced seasonal AR who had completed a successful course of any grass pollen AIT at least 5 years before enrolment. Overall, 56 patients received one preseasonal short-course booster AIT using tyrosine-absorbed grass pollen allergoids containing the adjuvant monophosphoryl lipid A (MPL

resultsThe CSMS in the peak grass pollen season was significantly lower in the booster AIT group (Δ=38.4%, P<.01). Moreover, significantly more patients in this group used no concomitant antiallergic medication throughout the peak grass pollen season. Twice as many patients in the booster AIT group as in the control group reported having a better state of health than in the preceding season. MiniRQLQ results showed significant differences favouring the booster AIT. The booster AIT was generally well tolerated, with only two patients reporting mild, grade 1 systemic adverse events.

conclusionBooster AIT using tyrosine-absorbed allergoids containing the adjuvant MPL

Indexed as

AdultAllergensAntigens, PlantConjunctivitis, AllergicDesensitization, ImmunologicFemaleHumansImmunization, SecondaryMaleMiddle AgedPollenRhinitis, Allergic, SeasonalAllergensAntigens, Plantboostercombined symptom and medication scoregrass pollen allergyrevaccinationsubcutaneous allergen immunotherapy

Identifiers

PMID28675499
PMCPMC5763416
OpenAlexW2731589462

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.