ArticleAllergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology2019
Indirect comparison of intravenous vs. subcutaneous C1-inhibitor placebo-controlled trials for routine prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks.
Article in Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
LEVP2005-1/Part B: A Double-blind, Placebo-Controlled, Clinical Study to Investigate the Efficacy and Safety of Purified C1 Esterase Inhibitor (Human) as Prophylactic Treatment to Prevent HAE Attacks
A Double-blind, Randomized, Placebo-controlled, Cross-over Study to Evaluate the Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Subcutaneous Administration of Human Plasma-derived C1-esterase Inhibitor in the Prophylactic Treatment of Hereditary Angioedema
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Interventions for the long-term prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- The 2025 WAO Guidelines for the classification, diagnosis, and treatment of hereditary angioedema, with consideration of worldwide disparities.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2026Article
- Treatment of Hereditary Angioedema With Plasma-Derived C1 Inhibitor: A Review.Clinical and translational allergy · 2025Review
- Indirect treatment comparison of oral sebetralstat and intravenous recombinant human C1 esterase inhibitor for on-demand treatment of hereditary angioedema attacks.Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2025Article
- Real-world evidence of the effectiveness and utilization of subcutaneous C1INH long-term prophylaxis in patients with HAE in Spain and Germany.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Network meta-analysis for indirect comparison of lanadelumab and berotralstat for the treatment of hereditary angioedema.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2023Article
- Management of hereditary angioedema in resource-constrained settings: A consensus statement from Indian subcontinent.Asia Pacific allergy · 2023Article
- The international WAO/EAACI guideline for the management of hereditary angioedema - The 2021 revision and update.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2022Article
- Clinical manifestations of hereditary angioedema and a systematic review of treatment options.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2021Review
- Indirect Comparison of Lanadelumab and Intravenous C1-INH Using Data from the HELP and CHANGE Studies: Bayesian and Frequentist Analyses.Drugs in R&D · 2021Article
- What is new in dermatotherapy?Indian journal of dermatology, venereology and leprologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFor prophylaxis of hereditary angioedema (HAE) attacks, replacement therapy with human C1-inhibitor (C1-INH) treatment is approved and available as intravenous [C1-INH(IV)] (Cinryze
methodsTwo similar randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover studies were identified which evaluated either C1-INH(SC) (COMPACT; NCT01912456; 16 weeks) or C1-INH(IV) (CHANGE; NCT01005888; 14 weeks) vs. placebo (on-demand treatment only) for routine prevention of HAE attacks. Individual patient data from each trial were used to conduct an indirect comparison of treatment effects. Attack reductions (absolute and percent of mean/median number of monthly HAE attacks reduction over placebo) were compared between the two C1-INH formulations at approved/recommended doses: C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg twice weekly (n = 45) and 1000 U of C1-INH(IV) twice weekly (n = 22). Point estimates were adjusted using mixed and quantile regression models that controlled for study design.
resultsThe absolute mean monthly numbers of HAE attack reductions were 3.6 (95% CI 2.9, 4.2) for C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg vs. placebo and 2.3 (1.4, 3.3) for C1-INH(IV) vs. placebo; between-product difference, 1.3 (0.1, 2.4;
conclusionWithin the limitations of an indirect study comparison, this analysis suggests greater attack reduction with twice-weekly C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg as compared to twice-weekly C1-INH(IV) 1000 U for the routine prevention of HAE attacks.
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.