Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36204600›Full record

ArticleClinical and translational allergy2022

Systematic review of monotherapy with biologicals for children and adults with IgE-mediated food allergy.

Debra de Silva, Chris Singh, Stefania Arasi, Antonella Muraro, Torsten Zuberbier, Motohiro Ebisawa, Montserrat Alvaro Lozano, Graham Roberts

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and translational allergy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Managing food allergy: GAThe World Allergy Organization journal · 2022
    Review
  6. 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

8 authors at 7 institutions in 6 countries.

Debra de SilvaThe Evidence Centre London UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8413-5487
Chris SinghThe Evidence Centre Wellington New Zealand.
Stefania ArasiBambino Gesù Children's Research Hospital Roma Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8135-0568
Antonella MuraroFood Allergy Centre Padua University Hospital Padova Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5026-5862
Torsten ZuberbierDepartment of Dermatology Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin Berlin Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1466-8875
Motohiro EbisawaSagamihari National Hospital Sagamihara Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4117-558X
Montserrat Alvaro LozanoHospital Sant Joan de Déu Barcelona Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5528-8043
Graham RobertsPaediatric Allergy and Respiratory Medicine University of Southampton Southampton UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2252-1248
Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital · ITCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEHospital Sant Joan de Déu Barcelona · ESNational Sagamihara Hospital · JPNIHR Southampton Respiratory Biomedical Research Unit · GBThe Family Centre · NZUniversity of Padua · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Biological therapies relieve symptoms in allergic inflammatory diseases so we systematically reviewed the evidence about whether biological monotherapy could benefit people with IgE-mediated food allergy. Methods: We searched six bibliographic databases from 1946 to 30 September 2021 for randomised and non-randomised controlled trials about biological monotherapy in people with IgE-mediated food allergy confirmed by oral food challenge. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to narratively summarise findings from three trials with 118 participants. The studies were too heterogeneous and sparse to conduct meta-analysis. Results: We included one randomised trial about etokimab, one about omalizumab and one about the discontinued TNX-901. All were in people with peanut allergy in the USA, mostly aged 13+ years. There was a trend towards improved tolerance of peanut during treatment, with few side effects. However, we have very low certainty about the evidence due to the small number of trials and participants. No included trial reported on quality of life or cost-effectiveness. Conclusions: There is not yet enough certainty to support offering etokimab or omalizumab widely for food allergy. Clinicians may consider the merits for individuals, but large randomised trials with standardised measures are needed to confirm the safety, efficacy and most suitable candidates, doses and durations of treatment before more universal use.

Indexed as

biologicetokimabfood allergyIgE‐mediatedomalizumab

Identifiers

PMID36204600
PMCPMC9515515
OpenAlexW4297537681

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.