ArticleInternational archives of allergy and immunology2026
Lanadelumab's Enduring Effectiveness and Safety in the Management of Hereditary Angioedema for Patients from Puerto Rico: Data from EMPOWER.
Article in International archives of allergy and immunology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03845400 (An Observational, Non-interventional, Study of Patients With Hereditary Angioedema in the United States and Canada), which is not on this 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.
An Observational, Non-interventional, Study of Patients With Hereditary Angioedema in the United States and Canada (EMPOWER Study)
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionReal-world data are needed to improve our understanding of hereditary angioedema (HAE) management in different geographic regions. Here, we report outcomes of patients from Puerto Rico who received lanadelumab for HAE prophylaxis in the noninterventional EMPOWER Study (NCT03845400).
methodsEligible patients with HAE due to C1-inhibitor deficiency who initiated lanadelumab treatment were classified as newly treated or established on lanadelumab based on number of lanadelumab doses received before enrollment (<4 or ≥4, respectively). Lanadelumab exposure data were captured using electronic case report forms. Effectiveness was assessed by change in HAE attack rate before vs. after lanadelumab initiation. Safety was assessed through treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).
resultsThe Puerto Rican site enrolled 9 patients (1 newly treated who was lanadelumab-naïve, 8 established on lanadelumab). All patients were of Hispanic/Latino ethnicity (median [range] age: 55.0 [36-73] years; female: 77.8%). Eight out of 9 patients received lanadelumab 300 mg every 2 weeks; 1 patient established on lanadelumab received dosing every 4 weeks. Average lanadelumab exposure ranged from approximately 2.3 years to >2.5 years for patients newly treated and established on lanadelumab, respectively. In the newly treated patient, the physician-reported HAE attack rate decreased by 76% (1.99 vs. 0.47 attacks/month pre- vs. post-lanadelumab initiation); most physician-reported attacks were mild (16.7%) or moderate (58.3%). In patients established on lanadelumab, the mean (95% confidence interval) physician-reported HAE attack rate was 0.26 (0.09-0.42) attacks/month; most physician-reported attacks were mild (25.7%) or moderate (56.8%). Real-world data on attack incidence reinforced the variability in presentation among patients; 2 were attack-free while on lanadelumab treatment. A total of 5 TEAEs were reported in 4 patients, none of which were serious or fatal. One patient experienced mild fatigue that was considered lanadelumab related.
conclusionFindings from this analysis support the clinical benefits and safety of lanadelumab treatment for HAE prophylaxis in patients from Puerto Rico.
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.