ArticleClinical reviews in allergy & immunology2025
Comparative Efficacy of Combined and Standalone Oral Immunotherapies for Peanut Allergy: a Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of RCTs.
Article in Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPeanut allergy is a chronic IgE-mediated disease with potentially life-threatening consequences. While several immunotherapeutic strategies have emerged, including oral immunotherapy (OIT), omalizumab (OMA)-based therapies, and probiotic and peanut oral immunotherapy (PPOIT), the comparative effectiveness of these interventions remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the relative efficacy and safety of combined and standalone oral immunotherapies for peanut allergy using a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA).
methodsA systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science up to March 2025. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with IgE-mediated peanut allergy who received OIT + OMA, OMA monotherapy, OIT alone, or PPOIT. Outcomes included low-dose and high-dose desensitization, sustained unresponsiveness (SU), and safety outcomes (adverse events, AEs). The risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2. Analyses were performed using R software (version 4.4.3) with Bayesian NMA methods.
resultsNineteen RCTs involving 2040 participants were included. Based on Probability Scores (P-scores), OIT + OMA demonstrated the highest efficacy for both low- (P-score: 97.20%) and high-dose desensitization (96.69%), followed by PPOIT (70.15% and 51.16%), OIT third (64.40% and 52.72%), and OMA fourth (75.29% and 71.21%). PPOIT and OIT showed moderate efficacy for SU. OIT was associated with a higher frequency of AEs compared with placebo.
conclusionsCombination and modified immunotherapies may offer improved efficacy and safety profiles, though results should be interpreted in the context of limited data and study heterogeneity.
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.