Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35743438›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2022

Use of Dupilumab in Bullous Pemphigoid: Where Are We Now?

Roberto Russo, Niccolò Capurro, Emanuele Cozzani, Aurora Parodi

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Roberto RussoDepartment of Health Science (DISSAL), University of Genoa, 16132 Genoa, Italy.
Niccolò CapurroDepartment of Health Science (DISSAL), University of Genoa, 16132 Genoa, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1704-6799
Emanuele CozzaniDepartment of Health Science (DISSAL), University of Genoa, 16132 Genoa, Italy.
Aurora ParodiDepartment of Health Science (DISSAL), University of Genoa, 16132 Genoa, Italy.
Ospedale Policlinico San Martino · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is the most frequent autoimmune subepidermal bullous disease. At present, the main treatment options are represented by corticosteroids and immunosuppressant drugs. Steroids often need to be administered in high doses, with subsequent adverse events and safety issues, as BP mainly affects elderly people. As dupilumab, a recombinant fully human IgG4 monoclonal antibody with binding specificity to human interleukin-4 receptor IL-4Rα has become paramount in the treatment of atopic dermatitis, its use in autoimmune bullous diseases has been theorized and it has been used to treat patients with BP. Dupilumab seems to be an effective and safe option to treat recalcitrant BP. Here, we report the results of a literature review on the use of dupilumab in BP, including a total of 30 treated patients in 9 papers.

Indexed as

autoimmune blistering diseasesbullous pemphigoiddupilumab

Identifiers

PMID35743438
PMCPMC9224939
OpenAlexW4282595457

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.