ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2026
Comparison of two omalizumab dose-reduction strategies in patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria during the control phase: standard dose maintenance therapy versus extended interval dose reduction.
Article in American journal of translational research, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare standard dose maintenance treatment (SDMT) and extended interval dose reduction treatment (EIDRT) in controlling patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) during disease control phase, mainly focusing on time to treatment discontinuation, relapse rate, and pharmacoeconomic outcomes.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 258 CSU patients treated with omalizumab (Xolair
resultsThe EIDRT group demonstrated a significantly longer time to treatment discontinuation (10.27 ± 1.23 mo vs 9.82 ± 1.18 mo, P=0.003) and a lower relapse rate within 6 months after discontinuation (11.59% vs 23.33%, P=0.012), compared to the SDMT group. The EIDRT group required fewer omalizumab administrations (8.21 ± 0.76 vs 9.82 ± 1.25 doses, P < 0.001) and outpatient visits (9.08 ± 1.37 vs 11.35 ± 1.42 visits, P < 0.001) than the control group, with superior pharmacoeconomic outcomes. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified EIDRT as an independent protective factor for relapse (OR=0.373, 95% CI: 0.189-0.739), whereas higher disease duration (OR=1.063, 95% CI: 1.014-1.115) and concomitant angioedema (OR=2.399, 95% CI: 1.330-4.329) were independently associated with an increased risk of relapse.
conclusionCompared to SDMT, EIDRT was associated with a longer time to treatment discontinuation, a lower post-discontinuation relapse rate, and improved pharmacoeconomic outcomes in patients with CSU during the control phase.
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.