ArticleClinical and translational allergy2026
Real-Life Safety of Japanese Cedar Pollen Sublingual Immunotherapy Tablets: A Post-Marketing Survey.
Article in Clinical and translational allergy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Real-Life Safety of Japanese Cedar Pollen Sublingual Immunotherapy Tablets: A Post-Marketing Survey.Clinical and translational allergy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundJapanese cedar (JC) pollen sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablets (5000 Japanese allergy units [JAU]) are licensed for the treatment of JC-pollinosis with no age restriction on the basis of the results of a 5-year clinical trial. However, there have been no large-scale surveys of 5000 JAU in an actual clinical setting.
methodsThis was a multicenter observational prospective study. We assessed the safety and effectiveness of the long-term use of 5000 JAU in patients with JC-pollinosis, with an observation period of two seasons of JC pollen dispersal, at clinical sites in Japan.
resultsOur safety analysis included 516 patients and the effectiveness analysis included 469 patients. Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) occurred in 68 patients (13.18%) and mainly comprised administration site-related events that occurred during the early phase of administration. Treatment discontinuation due to ADRs occurred in 18 patients (3.49%). No deaths, anaphylactic shock, or serious ADRs occurred. Regarding effectiveness, the severity of JC-pollinosis was rated as "almost asymptomatic + mild" in 82.19% of patients in Season 1 and 92.58% in Season 2. Quality of life was rated as "score 0 (Fine) + 1" in 75.83% of patients in Season 1 and 86.09% in Season 2. Overall improvement was rated as "improved + slightly improved" in 95.68% of patients in Season 1 and 96.38% in Season 2 following the initiation of JC pollen SLIT-tablets. Nasal and ocular symptom scores also decreased with increasing treatment duration. Treatment continuation rates were 89.53% in Season 1 and 78.29% in Season 2.
conclusionThe JC pollen SLIT-tablets appear to be safe and effective in an actual clinical setting during two seasons. No new safety or effectiveness issues were identified, and no additional safety or effectiveness precautions were required.
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.