ArticleAsia Pacific allergy2025
Allergy to ustekinumab: Validating skin tests for diagnostic and therapeutic decision-making.
Article in Asia Pacific allergy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Monoclonal antibodies have gained prominence in treating cancer and inflammatory diseases, but their increased use is linked to rising hypersensitivity reactions. Our case report focuses on a 32-year-old female with Crohn's disease treated initially with adalimumab and later with ustekinumab. Despite ustekinumab's generally safe profile, the patient developed increasingly severe mucocutaneous reactions. Intradermal skin testing with a 1:10 (0.5 mg/ml) concentration, validated with negative controls, revealed a type I hypersensitivity reaction to ustekinumab. The patient's continuous need for the drug led to a desensitization protocol, with a generalized mucocutaneous reaction during the second cycle. This case report underscores the growing concern of monoclonal hypersensitivity and the need for accurate diagnosis and therapeutic adjustments. Skin testing, especially for type I and type IV phenotypes, is valuable but lacks standardized concentrations and accessibility. This report validates nonirritating concentrations for ustekinumab in skin testing for IgE-mediated reactions, a novel contribution to existing literature. Skin testing aided risk stratification and led to the development of a desensitization protocol. A broader application of these skin test concentrations, combined with in vitro testing, could enhance diagnostic accuracy and risk prediction for ustekinumab reactions, presenting skin testing as a promising diagnostic and stratification tool for future use.
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.