Trial reportAllergy2026
Five-Grass-Pollen Sublingual Immunotherapy Drops Are Efficacious and Well Tolerated in Adults: The RHAPSODY Phase III Trial.
Trial report in Allergy, 2026. 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
Abstract
backgroundTablet formulations of allergen extracts are widely recommended over other formulations for the sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) of respiratory allergies. However, with adequate clinical trial evidence, SLIT (liquid) drop formulations may be a relevant allergy treatment option.
methodsThe RHAPSODY multinational, Phase III, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised clinical study of adults with moderate-to-severe, grass-pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC) with or without asthma was conducted at 45 investigating centres in six European countries. Participants received 26 months of continuous treatment with active 5-grass-pollen SLIT drops or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was the average daily total combined score (TCS, comprising a symptom score and a rescue medication score) during the second peak grass pollen season (PGPS).
resultsOf the 445 randomised patients (mean ± standard deviation (range) age: 32.6 ± 9.9 (18-63); males: 55.1%), 389 completed the trial. The primary efficacy endpoint showed a statistically significant difference in favour of active treatment versus placebo (average difference in the daily TCS: 1.88 (95% CI: 0.60-3.17); relative difference 26.51% (95% CI: 9.42-40.55); p = 0.0036). The difference (0.17 points) in the average weekly Rhinitis Quality of Life Questionnaire score during the second PGPS in favour of the active treatment was clinically relevant but not statistically significant. The differences in efficacy were generally driven by the medication score, rather than the symptom score. Most adverse events were mild and local.
conclusionsRHAPSODY was the first well-powered clinical trial to show the positive risk-benefit ratio of 5-grass-pollen SLIT drops in adult participants with moderate-to-severe grass-pollen-induced ARC.
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.