ReviewThe journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice
Allergen Extracts for In Vivo Diagnosis and Treatment of Allergy: Is There a Future?
Review in The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 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
59 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cockroach immunotherapy modulates dominant T-cell responses independent of allergen extract content.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2025Trial
- Exposome-driven molecular sensitization signatures in pediatric rhinitis and asthma across Spanish regions.Pediatric allergy and immunology : official publication of the European Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology · 2026Observational
- Proteomic Mapping of Allergenic Proteins Reveals Key Differences Between Black Tiger Prawn (Journal of proteome research · 2026Article
- Seasonality of Serum Allergen-Specific IgE Levels in Scandinavian Dogs Suspected of Allergy.Veterinary sciences · 2026Article
- Critical Knowledge Gaps for Shellfish Allergies: Insights from Global Market Presence and Trade of Shellfish.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- Transient Expression and Immunogenicity Assessment of theVaccines · 2026Article
- Engineering Chimeric Hypoallergens for Safer and More Effective House Dust Mite Allergy Vaccines.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2026Article
- Article
- A novel oral immunotherapy strategy using transgenic barley inducesFrontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Long-Term Administration of BTH2 Hypoallergenic Vaccine Candidate Induces Hallmarks of Allergen Immunotherapy in Murine Model ofBiomedicines · 2025Article
- Composition Heterogeneity and Low-Molecular-Weight Allergen Content ofVeterinary sciences · 2025Article
- Integrated Diagnostic Approach Using Basophil Activation Test and IgE Assays for Shrimp and Prawn Allergy.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Monitoring, distribution and clinical relevance of airborne pollen and fern spores in Southeast Asia - A systematic review.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2025Review
- Enhancing production and assessing IgE reactivity of dog allergen Can f 6 in Pichia pastoris and Escherichia coli.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Massive Screening of Food Extracts for Quality Assessment and Standardization of Allergenic Activity.Biosensors · 2024Article
- Heterogenous Induction of Blocking Antibodies against Ragweed Allergen Molecules by Allergen Extract-Based Immunotherapy Vaccines.Vaccines · 2024Article
- Cross-Reactivity of Ragweed Pollen Calcium-Binding Proteins and IgE Sensitization in a Ragweed-Allergic Population from Western Romania.Advances in respiratory medicine · 2024Article
- Insect Cell-Expressed Major Ragweed Allergen Amb a 1.01 Exhibits Similar Allergenic Properties to Its Natural Counterpart from Common Ragweed Pollen.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Linear epitopes of bony fish β-parvalbumins.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Today, in vivo allergy diagnosis and allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) are still based on allergen extracts obtained from natural allergen sources. Several studies analyzing the composition of natural allergen extracts have shown severe problems regarding their quality such as the presence of undefined nonallergenic materials, contaminants as well as high variabilities regarding contents and biological activity of individual allergens. Despite the increasing availability of sophisticated analytical technologies, these problems cannot be overcome because they are inherent to allergen sources and methods of extract production. For in vitro allergy diagnosis problems related to natural allergen extracts have been largely overcome by the implementation of recombinant allergen molecules that are defined regarding purity and biological activity. However, no such advances have been made for allergen preparations to be used in vivo for diagnosis and therapy. No clinical studies have been performed for allergen extracts available for in vivo allergy diagnosis that document safety, sensitivity, and specificity of the products. Only for very few therapeutic allergen extracts state-of-the-art clinical studies have been performed that provide evidence for safety and efficacy. In this article, we discuss problems related to the inconsistent quality of products based on natural allergen extracts and share our observations that most of the products available for in vivo diagnosis and AIT do not meet the international standards for medicinal products. We argue that a replacement of natural allergen extracts by defined recombinantly produced allergen molecules and/or mixtures thereof may be the only way to guarantee the supply of clinicians with state-of-the-art medicinal products for in vivo diagnosis and treatment of allergic patients in the future.
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.