ReviewPediatric investigation2019
The use of biologics in children with allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis: Current updates.
Review in Pediatric investigation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of Biologic Therapies in the Management of Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2024Review
- Anti-Allergic and Anti-inflammatory Effects of Bakuchiol on Ovalbumin-Induced Allergic Rhinitis in Mice.Applied biochemistry and biotechnology · 2024Article
- Influence of the Microbiome on Chronic Rhinosinusitis With and Without Polyps: An Evolving Discussion.Frontiers in allergy · 2021Review
- The use of biologics in children with allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis: Current updates.Pediatric investigation · 2019Review
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The therapeutic goals of the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) are symptom relief, avoiding complications, and improving quality of life. In the treatment of AR and CRS, several limitations of currently prescribed medicines have been identified. Antihistamine administration (both oral and topical) together with intranasal corticosteroids bring relief to the majority of patients, but their dependency on the medications and a necessity to maintain strict compliance with regular medication regimes pose a challenge. Immunotherapeutic agents are an option in some patients, but polysensitized patients, the risk of anaphylaxis, and the need for daily administration for years are limiting it from becoming the main therapy modality. Immunotherapy in any form requires commitment by the patient, which renders adherence and compliance issues particularly relevant. The procedure involved are generally time-consuming and entail an associated risk of severe adverse reactions. The use of biologics could overcome the limitations of other therapeutic modalities. They could be used as a monotherapy or combined with pre-existing medications. The benefits of targeted therapy include less adverse effects and optimal efficacy. The aim of the present review was to investigate the collective literature to date pertaining to the role of biologics in managing children with AR and CRS.
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.