ArticleAllergologie select2026
Expert consensus on the long-term use of lanadelumab in hereditary angioedema: Toward harmonized care.
Article in Allergologie select, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare, potentially life-threatening disease caused in most cases by C1 inhibitor deficiency. Lanadelumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting plasma kallikrein, is an effective long-term prophylactic (LTP) treatment for HAE. However, consensus on best practices remains lacking.
objectivesThis study aimed to report consensus statements on key principles on long-term lanadelumab therapy for HAE in Germany developed at an HAE LTP Expert Meeting in the year 2024 in Frankfurt, Germany. MATERIALS AND
methodsA multidisciplinary panel of seven German HAE experts participated in a consensus process to align current guidelines with real-world clinical practice. Following literature review and debate, keynotes were drafted, refined, and voted on. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% agreement. Key domains included: shared decision-making; flexibility in initiating or adjusting prophylaxis; structured patient education; self-administration; individualized dosing; emergency medication availability; and proactive follow-up, including specific guidance for women of childbearing age.
resultsTen core consensus statements were developed, achieving unanimous (100%, n = 9/10 statements) or strong (≥ 85%, n = 1/10 statements) agreement. It is recommended that the decision to initiate long-term prophylaxis be made through shared decision-making and that the decision made can and should be adjusted again in the further course of treatment. It is advisable to train patients in the technique of self-injection and to start therapy with lanadelumab with a 2-week injection interval in accordance with the product information. The injection interval should be adjusted to the individual patient, and all well-controlled patients should be offered the option of extending the interval without compromising the goal of complete disease control. Even and especially when the prophylaxis is well tolerated, emergency medication must not be neglected.
conclusionThese consensus statements provide a practical, expert-endorsed framework for implementing lanadelumab LTP in clinical practice emphasizing individualized treatment aligned with international guidelines and patient needs.
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.