ArticleScientific reports2017
Omalizumab efficacy in cases of chronic spontaneous urticaria is not explained by the inhibition of sera activity in effector cells.
Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-effective omalizumab dosage for chronic urticaria: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Archives of dermatological research · 2024Pooled it
- Comparative efficacy and safety of the treatment by Omalizumab for chronic idiopathic urticaria in the general population: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.Skin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI) · 2024Pooled it
- Understanding Tryptase Physiology, Clinical Significance, and Diagnostic Applications: Where Do We Stand?Biomolecules · 2026Review
- Comment on Manzoor, H. et al. Efficacy of Different Dosing Regimens of IgE Targeted Biologic Omalizumab for Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria in Adult and Pediatric Populations: A Meta-Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Efficacy of Different Dosing Regimens of IgE Targeted Biologic Omalizumab for Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria in Adult and Pediatric Populations: A Meta-Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Update on Omalizumab for Urticaria: What's New in the Literature from Mechanisms to Clinic.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Omalizumab (OmAb) is a humanized anti-IgE antibody approved for the treatment of chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU). OmAb's mechanism of action is known to include actions on free IgE and on pre-bound IgE. However, OmAb is equally and rapidly effective against autoimmune and non-autoimmune urticaria where IgE involvement is not clear, suggesting the involvement of additional mechanisms of action. In this study, we sought to investigate the ability of OmAb to inhibit mast cell and basophil degranulation induced by sera from CSU patients. For this purpose, we performed a comparison between the in vitro incubation of sera from CSU patients treated with OmAb and the in vivo administration of OmAb in a clinical trial. We found that OmAb added in vitro to sera from CSU patients did not modify the ability of the sera to induce cell degranulation. Similarly, the sera from patients treated with OmAb in the context of the clinical trial who had a good clinical outcome maintained the capacity to activate mast cells and basophils. Thus, we conclude that the beneficial activity of OmAb does not correlate with the ability of patient sera to induce cell degranulation.
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.