SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2024
Epithelial immunotherapy for food allergy in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in immunology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Novel food processing technologies to reduce egg allergenicity: a review from allergen digestion to IgE-mediated responses.Food science of animal resources · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Traditional methods of treating allergies primarily revolve around avoiding allergens and promptly using rescue medications when allergic symptoms occur. However, this approach is known for its inefficiency and limited success in achieving long-term relief. Our aim was to conduct a comprehensive analysis of previously published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that explore the effectiveness and safety of epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) as a means to manage food allergies in children. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search across multiple databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library, to identify RCTs comparing EPIT versus placebo for the management of allergen-triggered allergic reactions in children. Only RCTs published in English that evaluated the efficacy and safety of EPIT in pediatric patients with allergic diseases were considered eligible for inclusion. The quality assessment of the included studies was performed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. The analysis comprised of seven RCTs involving a total of 1141 participants. The meta-analysis demonstrated that EPIT significantly facilitated desensitization in patients with food allergy (RR: 2.12, 95% CI: 1.74-2.59, P = 0.296, I² = 17.5%), particularly in individuals with peanut allergy (RR: 2.29, 95% CI: 1.83-2.86, P = 0.463, I² = 0%). However, it is important to note that EPIT was associated with an increased occurrence of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs; RR: 1.24, 95% CI: 1.14-1.34, P < 0.01, I² = 99.2%). Notably, there were no notable disparities in the frequency of serious adverse events or utilization of rescue medications between the EPIT and placebo groups. EPIT may potentially induce desensitization of peanut allergy in children, but also carries an elevated risk of TRAEs.
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.