ArticleAllergo journal international2018
SCIT with a high-dose house dust mite allergoid is well tolerated: safety data from pooled clinical trials and more than 10 years of daily practice analyzed in different subgroups.
Article in Allergo journal international, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances in Allergen Immunotherapy and Safety.Vaccines · 2025Review
- Novel Approaches to Allergen Immunotherapy for Respiratory Allergies.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- The evidence for commercial house dust mite immunotherapy products: A pragmatic systematic review with narrative synthesis.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global · 2024Review
- New approaches to immunotherapy in house dust mite allergy.Clinical and experimental pediatrics · 2023Article
- Towards definitive management of allergic rhinitis: best use of new and established therapies.Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2020Review
- Der p 2.1 Peptide Abrogates House Dust Mites-Induced Asthma Features in Mice and Humanized Mice by Inhibiting DC-Mediated T Cell Polarization.Frontiers in immunology · 2020Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEfficacy of house dust mite (HDM) allergen immunotherapy (AIT) in allergic rhinitis and controlled allergic asthma has been documented in controlled trials with adults and children. However, tolerability comparing clinical development and post marketing data, particularly in different subgroups, is missing.
methodsWe performed an analysis of pooled safety data for subcutaneous AIT (SCIT) with a high-dose house dust mite allergoid from 6 randomized, controlled trials (RCT) in HDM allergic respiratory disease (ARD) and of post marketing safety data from more than 10 years including different subgroups (age, gender, asthma status).
resultsIn all, 500 patients with ARD were treated in RCTs: 279 received the marketed dose of 1800 protein nitrogen units (PNU) high-dose HDM allergoid AIT (214 double-blind placebo controlled [HDM-DBPC], 65 children/adolescents usual care controlled [HDM-RCT(UC)]), and 221 placebo (PL). 38.8% adverse events (AEs) were observed with 1800 PNU in HDM-DBPC (31.2% PL, 35.5% HDM-ALL [1800 PNU]); the difference was primarily because of local reactions; there was no difference in systemic reactions (10.9% PL, 11.2% HDM-DBPC, 11.2% HDM-ALL); one out of 279 high-dose HDM allergoid-treated patients had a serious adverse event (SAE).Children (
conclusionSCIT with the marketed dose of high-dose HDM allergoid was well tolerated in clinical development and in daily practice. There was no increased risk for the investigated patient subgroups. Tolerability was comparable to HDM sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets.
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.