ArticleThe World Allergy Organization journal2019
Learnings from real-life experience of using omalizumab for chronic urticaria in Latin America.
Article in The World Allergy Organization journal, 2019. 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, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Allergy in Latin America: Great Need, Even Greater Opportunity.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2026Article
- Cost-of-illness analysis of chronic urticaria clinical management in five countries of Latin America.Clinical and translational allergy · 2025Article
- Multicentric and Observational Study of Omalizumab for Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria in Real-Life in Colombia.Frontiers in allergy · 2022Article
- Expert consensus on the use of omalizumab in chronic urticaria in China.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2021Review
- Omalizumab treatment and outcomes in Chinese patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria, chronic inducible urticaria, or both.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2021Article
- Combination therapy with omalizumab and an immune-suppressive agent for resistant chronic spontaneous rrticaria - A real-life experience.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2020Article
- Omalizumab for chronic spontaneous urticaria in "complex" patients: data from real-life clinical practice.Drug design, development and therapy · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 10 institutions in 9 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUpdated urticaria guidelines recommend that patients should be assessed for disease activity, severity, control, and quality of life at baseline and follow up. Regarding treatment, guidelines consider second generation antihistamines as the cornerstone in therapy for chronic urticaria (CU), while other drugs, such as omalizumab, are conceived as second-line alternatives. In regards to omalizumab, despite advances in the management of CU, there are still open questions about timing, dosing, and objective measures for clinical response. This study was designed to portray the use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in chronic urticaria management, as well as the effectiveness and treatment patterns of omalizumab in CU, as seen in a real-life setting in Latin America.
methodsThis is a retrospective observational study, involving 72 Latin American patients with chronic urticaria treated with omalizumab. Patient reported outcomes and treatment patterns, response, quality of life improvement and discontinuation were analyzed.
resultsFrom the 72 patients, 91.7% (n = 66) were assessed through PROs, where urticaria control test (UCT) was the most used (79.2%; n = 57). Overall, 80.0% (n = 44) responded to omalizumab at some point of the treatment. Omalizumab 300 mg was associated with earlier response compared to lower doses. Regardless of dosage, most patients assessed with CU-Q2oL improved quality of life (80.8%; n = 21). With respect to omalizumab discontinuation, 20.8% (n = 15) patients interrupted omalizumab before the 3rd month of treatment (p = .000).
conclusionsThe present study highlights how the use of PROs and omalizumab in Latin America differ from guidelines' recommendations and clinical trials. Even though most patients were initiated under omalizumab 300 mg, most of them finished with lower doses. Regardless of dosage, most patients responded to omalizumab and improved quality of life at some point during treatment. However, such features were seen earlier with omalizumab 300 mg. Regarding treatment discontinuation, one-fifth of patients interrupted omalizumab before the third month.
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.