Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34659627›Full record

ReviewThe World Allergy Organization journal2021

Dogmas, challenges, and promises in phase III allergen immunotherapy studies.

Pieter-Jan De Kam, Matthias F Kramer, Mohamed H Shamji, Kemi Oluwayi, Matthew D Heath, Erika Jensen-Jarolim, Markus H Berger, Uwe E Berger, Anke Graessel, Fiona Sellwood and 10 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The World Allergy Organization journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 41% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Allergy to Cats: Current Perspectives and Therapeutic Options.Clinical and translational allergy · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors at 13 institutions in 5 countries.

Pieter-Jan De KamAllergy Therapeutics (UK) Ltd, Worthing, United Kingdom.
Matthias F KramerAllergy Therapeutics (UK) Ltd, Worthing, United Kingdom.
Mohamed H ShamjiImmunomodulation and Tolerance Group, Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Inflammation, Repair & Development, MRC Asthma UK Centre Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Kemi OluwayiAllergy Therapeutics (UK) Ltd, Worthing, United Kingdom.
Matthew D HeathAllergy Therapeutics (UK) Ltd, Worthing, United Kingdom.
Erika Jensen-JarolimInstitute of Pathophysiology and Allergy Research, Center of Pathophysiology, Infectiology and Immunology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Markus H BergerAerobiology and Pollen Information Research Unit, Department of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Uwe E BergerAerobiology and Pollen Information Research Unit, Department of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Anke GraesselAllergy Therapeutics (UK) Ltd, Worthing, United Kingdom.
Fiona SellwoodAllergy Therapeutics (UK) Ltd, Worthing, United Kingdom.
Stefan ZielenDepartment for Children and Adolescents, Division of Allergology, Pulmonology and Cystic Fibrosis, Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany.
Christian VogelbergDepartment of Paediatrics, Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Germany.
Petra ZieglmayerVienna Challenge Chamber, Vienna, Austria.
Ralph MösgesInstitute of Medical Statistics and Computational Biology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany and ClinCompetence Cologne GmbH, Cologne, Germany.
Ludger KlimekCenter for Rhinology and Allergology, Wiesbaden, Germany.
Lawrence M DuBuskeDivision of Allergy and Immunology, Department of Internal Medicine at George Washington University Medical Faculty Associates in Washington, Washington, DC, United States.
Wayne G ShrefflerMassachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Jonathan A BernsteinDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, and Partner of Bernstein Allergy Group and Bernstein Clinical Research Center, Cincinnati, OH, United States.
Thomas M KündigDermatology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Murray A SkinnerAllergy Therapeutics (UK) Ltd, Worthing, United Kingdom.
Allergy Therapeutics (United Kingdom) · GBMedical University of Vienna · ATAsthma UK · GBBernstein Clinical Research Center · USGeorge Washington University · USGoethe University Frankfurt · DEHarvard University · USUniversity Hospital Carl Gustav Carus · DEUniversity Hospital of Zurich · CHUniversity of Cologne · DEUniversity of Veterinary Medicine Vienna · ATVienna Challenge Chamber · ATZentrum für Rhinologie und Allergologie · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The concept of treatment of an allergy with the offending allergen was introduced more than a century ago. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease modifying treatment of allergic diseases caused by inhalational allergens and insect venoms. Despite this, only few AIT products have reached licensure in the US or an official marketing authorization status in European countries. Moreover, most of these AIT products are provided on an individual patient basis as named patient products (NPP) in Europe, while individualized preparations of (mixed) allergenic extract vials for subcutaneous administration (compounding) is common practice in the US. AIT products are generally considered safe and well tolerated, but the major practical clinical development challenge is to define the optimal dose and prove the efficacy and safety of these products using state-of-the art Phase II and pivotal Phase III studies. In planning Phase II-III AIT studies, a thorough understanding of the study challenges is essential (e.g. variability and non-validated status of subjective primary endpoints, limitations of pollen season definitions) and dogmas of these products (e.g., for sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) trials double-blinding conditions cannot be maintained, resulting in stronger placebo responses in the active treatment group and inflated treatment effects in Phase III). There is future promise for more objective biomarker endpoints (e.g. basophil activation (CD63 and CD203c), subsets of regulatory dendritic, T and B cells, IL-10-producing group 2 innate lymphoid cells; alone or in combination) to overcome several of these dogmas and challenges; innovation in AIT clinical trials can only progress with integral biomarker research to complement the traditional endpoints in Phase II-III clinical development. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of these dogmas, challenges and recommendations based on published data, to facilitate the design of Phase III studies and improve the evidence basis of safe and effective AIT products.

Indexed as

Allergen immunotherapyBiomarkerBlindingPhase IIIPlacebo effect

Identifiers

PMID34659627
PMCPMC8487954
OpenAlexW3204614968

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.