Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38146800›Full record

ReviewClinical and translational allergy2023

Adrenaline auto injectors pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic studies and potential consequences for clinical practice.

Margitta Worm, Adam T Fox, Magnus Wickman, Johannes Ring, Motohiro Ebisawa, Guillaume Pouessel, Pete Smith

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical and translational allergy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. IgE and non-IgE-mediated pathways in anaphylaxis.Seminars in immunopathology · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Adrenaline Auto-Injectors for Preventing Fatal Anaphylaxis.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Alternatives to Injectable Adrenaline for Treating Anaphylaxis.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2025
    Review
  9. 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

7 authors at 7 institutions in 6 countries.

Margitta WormAllergology and Immunology, Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3449-1245
Adam T FoxChildren's Allergy Service, Guy's & St Thomas' Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3533-9798
Magnus WickmanDepartment of Environmental medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Hedetorp, Sweden.
Johannes RingTechnical University Munich (TUM), Department Dermatology Allergology Biederstein, Berlin, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8236-3152
Motohiro EbisawaNational Hospital Organization, Sagamihara National Hospital, Sagamihara, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4117-558X
Guillaume PouesselDepartment of Pediatrics, Allergology Unit, Children's Hospital, CH Roubaix and Pneumology and Allergology Unit, Children's hospital, Lille, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4118-6385
Pete SmithDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Griffith University School of Medicine, Southport, Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2629-8963
Centre Hospitalier de Roubaix · FRCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEGriffith University · AUKarolinska Institutet · SENational Sagamihara Hospital · JPSt Thomas' Hospital · GBTechnical University of Munich · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnaphylaxis is a sudden multisystem allergic reaction which may result in a fatal outcome if not treated promptly. Guidelines worldwide suggest intramuscular adrenaline as the first-line treatment for anaphylaxis outside a perioperative reaction. Adrenaline autoinjectors (AAIs) are widely used self-administrable devices, especially in community settings. Different commercial AAIs have been authorized to be marketed in Europe. For an AAI to be efficacious, a rapid adrenaline delivery in patients, including those who are overweight or obese, resulting in an optimal cardiovascular (CV) response, is a key feature. AAIs are designed to achieve this requirement, which is reflected in their differing functional properties such as primary container selection, drug delivery mechanism (cartridge-or syringe-based), needle length, needle gauge, and adrenaline dose (150 μg, 300 μg, or 500 μg). However, the differences in functional properties across these devices may play a critical role in achieving these requirements as well as the differences in ergonomics in the handling of these devices. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REVIEW: Considering the dynamic pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) profiles of different AAIs marketed in Europe and their effect on adrenaline delivery, the expert panel, also serving as author for this paper have carried out a detailed analysis of the PK/PD profiles of four AAIs, namely, Anapen, Emerade, EpiPen, and Jext, to delineate the adrenaline delivery and their subsequent physiological effects on the backdrop of device characteristics, dose strength, and the skin-to-muscle distances of the participants.

Indexed as

adrenaline autoinjectorsanaphylaxispharmacodynamicspharmacokineticsskin-to-muscle distance

Identifiers

PMID38146800
PMCPMC10728507
OpenAlexW4389952336

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.