Trial reportBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2018
A step-down protocol for omalizumab treatment in oral corticosteroid-dependent allergic asthma patients.
Trial report in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Titration of anti-IL-5 biologics in severe asthma: an open-label randomised controlled trial (the OPTIMAL study).The European respiratory journal · 2024Trial
- Trial
- A step-down protocol for omalizumab treatment in oral corticosteroid-dependent allergic asthma patients.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2018Trial
- Clinical and Cost-Effectiveness of Omalizumab in Concomitant Asthma and Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps: A Real-World Exploratory Study.Journal of asthma and allergy · 2026Article
- Discontinuation of biologic therapy in severe asthma: Evidence and strategies for safe withdrawal: A scoping review.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2025Review
- Recent evidence for stepping down severe asthma therapies.Current opinion in pulmonary medicine · 2025Review
- The Incredible Adventure of Omalizumab.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Severe Asthma and Biological Therapies: Now and the Future.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Type 2 inflammation and biological therapies in asthma: Targeted medicine taking flight.The Journal of experimental medicine · 2023Review
- Advances and Challenges of Antibody Therapeutics for Severe Bronchial Asthma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- The Long-Term Effectiveness of Omalizumab in Adult Patients with Severe Allergic Asthma: Continuous Treatment Versus Boosting Treatment.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Clinical and economic impact of a one-year treatment with omalizumab in patients with severe allergic asthma within a drug programme in Poland.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2018Observational
- Two decades with omalizumab: what we still have to learn.Biologics : targets & therapy · 2018Review
- The Saudi initiative for asthma - 2024 update: Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma in adults and children.Annals of thoracic medicineArticle
- [Unmet Needs in Severe Allergic Asthma].Open respiratory archivesArticle
- GEMA 5.3. Spanish Guideline on the Management of Asthma.Open respiratory archivesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThere are no specific criteria for a step-down or withdrawal dose of omalizumab (OMA). Our purpose was to evaluate the viability of a protocol for OMAlizumab DOse REduction (the OMADORE study) in severe allergic asthma (SAA).
methodsThe study population included 35 SAA patients treated during a minimum period of 1 year with oral corticosteroids (OC) equivalent to a mean daily dose of 4 mg of methyl-prednisolone. To qualify for the protocol, the patients had to have received treatment with OMA for at least one and a half years, OC dose had to have reached the lowest tolerated dose and spirometry had to be greater than or equal to that at entry. The interventions were (a) OMA dose was reduced by half; (b) if patients were clinically stable after 6 months, the dose was halved again; (c) if repeated OC boosters were needed and/or spirometry worsened by more than 10%, OMA dose was raised to the previous figure until stabilization.
resultsMean age was 52.5 (17) years, median monthly OC dose was 120 (IQR: 225) mg. Pulmonary function: FVC: 79.7 (20.2)%; FEV
conclusionsThe OMADORE study found that in more than 50% of SAA patients on OC, OMA dose can be safely reduced or withdrawn based on a progressive dose reduction protocol.
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.