ArticleClinical and translational allergy2025
Delphi Consensus on Attenuated Androgen Use for Long-Term Prophylaxis in Hereditary Angioedema: AURA Project.
Article in Clinical and translational allergy, 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.
- Burden of Hereditary Angioedema in Adults: Impact of Disease and Patient Characteristics.International archives of allergy and immunology · 2026Article
- Delphi Consensus on Attenuated Androgen Use for Long-Term Prophylaxis in Hereditary Angioedema: AURA Project.Clinical and translational allergy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDanazol and other attenuated androgens (AAs) have been a cornerstone of Hereditary Angioedema (HAE) long-term prophylaxis (LTP) for decades, alongside intravenous plasma-derived C1INH (pdC1INH). Danazol's potential androgenic effects, however, present several limitations to its prescription and use. With the emergence of safer and more effective LTP drugs, guidelines are now shifting danazol to a second-line option. These changes in HAE therapy require a new framework to guide physicians in the appropriate use of danazol in HAE LTP.
methodsThis study aimed to develop a consensus on key aspects of danazol management, including discontinuation strategies, through a 2-round Delphi methodology. Statements were defined by a steering committee of both Endocrinology and Allergy and Clinical Immunology specialists, considering the available evidence. A panel of 23 experts in HAE management voted on the statements to reach a consensus.
resultsThis process resulted in 46 recommendations for the prescription, monitoring, and discontinuation of danazol in LTP, proposing specific strategies for appropriate danazol use. A consensus was achieved on contraindications for danazol usage in LTP, detailed parameters for ongoing monitoring, and instructions for therapy adjustment considering treatment effect and using patient-reported outcomes. Furthermore, seven recommendations provide guidance on the increasingly relevant challenge of danazol discontinuation in HAE patients.
conclusionThis Delphi study specifically addresses the gap in clinical guidance for danazol management in HAE patients. The resulting consensus document provides a valuable tool to aid the standardization of danazol discontinuation protocols and ensures that patients can access the safest and most effective treatment options available.
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.