SynthesisArchives of dermatological research2025
Efficacy and safety of Omalizumab in the treatment of CSU: a meta-analysis of a randomized controlled trial.
Synthesis in Archives of dermatological research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria in the Era of Targeted Therapy: From Pathogenic Mechanisms to Precision Medicine.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Targeting immune dysregulation in chronic spontaneous urticaria: beyond antihistamines.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in the treatment of chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) through a meta-analysis. PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing omalizumab with placebo in CSU. Two researchers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed quality. Efficacy outcomes, including the 7-day Urticaria Activity Score (UAS7), Itch Severity Score (ISS), hive count, and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), as well as safety outcomes (adverse event rates), were analyzed using RevMan 5.3 software across different doses (75, 150, 300, and 600 mg). Twelve RCTs involving 2,738 participants (2,090 in omalizumab groups, 648 in placebo) were included①Efficacy: The proportion of patients achieving UAS7 < 6 was significantly higher in the omalizumab group (OR = 3.29, 95% CI:1.16-9.38, P = 0.03), with the 300 mg dose showing optimal efficacy (OR = 7.60, 95% CI:5.44-10.62, P < 0.001).The 300 mg dose significantly reduced UAS7 (MD = 12.20, 95% CI:9.65-14.76), ISS (MD = 5.26, 95% CI:4.42-5.36), and hive count (MD = 6.83, 95% CI:5.73-7.94) compared to placebo (all P < 0.001).DLQI improvement was also greater with 300 mg (MD = 3.26, 95% CI:1.78-4.73, P < 0.0001).②Safety: Adverse events were more frequent in the omalizumab group (OR = 1.24, 95% CI:1.04-1.49, P = 0.02), though most were mild. Omalizumab effectively alleviates CSU symptoms and improves quality of life, with the 300 mg/month dose demonstrating optimal efficacy. Clinicians should prioritize this dose while monitoring short-term adverse effects. Further studies are needed to confirm long-term safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40439896What 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.