SynthesisInternational journal of molecular sciences2026
Efficacy of Histaglobulin in Allergic Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis with Implications for Allergic Rhinitis.
Synthesis in International journal of molecular sciences, 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
Abstract
Histaglobulin (histamine/immunoglobulin complex) has been used for decades as a non-allergen-specific immunotherapy for allergic diseases including allergic rhinitis, chronic urticaria, and atopic dermatitis. Despite growing clinical interest, no meta-analysis has synthesized the available evidence. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of histaglobulin across allergic diseases, with particular emphasis on implications for allergic rhinitis management. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to March 2026. Studies evaluating subcutaneous histaglobulin in patients with allergic diseases were included. For chronic urticaria studies reporting Urticaria Activity Score (UAS) as mean ± standard deviation, a random-effects meta-analysis was performed using the standardized mean difference (Hedges' g). Allergic rhinitis studies were synthesized narratively. Risk of bias was assessed using the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Quality Assessment Tools. The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). Fourteen studies (N = 754) met the inclusion criteria: six chronic urticaria studies with quantitative data (N = 190), three allergic rhinitis studies (N = 165), two atopic dermatitis/chronic spontaneous urticaria case series (N = 8), and three chronic urticaria studies with incomplete data. Meta-analysis of six chronic urticaria studies, all of which used an uncontrolled before-after design, demonstrated a large pooled within-group effect size (Hedges' g = 2.82; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.75-3.88;
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.