SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2026
Efficacy of house dust mite allergen immunotherapy in allergic rhinitis: a network meta-analysis based on component-resolved classification.
Synthesis in Frontiers in immunology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: House dust mite allergen immunotherapy (HDM-AIT) trials in allergic rhinitis show substantial efficacy heterogeneity, traditionally evaluated by administration route. Whether clinical efficacy differs among HDM-AIT preparations with different allergen compositional breadth remains unclear. Objective: To compare HDM-AIT efficacy using a component-resolved framework that stratifies preparations by allergen compositional breadth. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL for double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trials of HDM-AIT lasting at least 12 months. Interventions were classified as comprehensive-component subcutaneous immunotherapy (CC-SCIT), major-component-dominant subcutaneous immunotherapy (MCD-SCIT), or major-component-dominant sublingual immunotherapy tablet (MCD-SLIT-tablet) using a prespecified component-resolved framework in which the breadth of treatment-induced component-specific IgG4 responses served as the primary node-defining criterion, with component-specific IgG and proteomic evidence used as supportive evidence. Frequentist pairwise and Bayesian network meta-analyses were performed. The primary outcome was symptom score; secondary outcomes were medication score and combined symptom and medication score. Results: Sixteen trials involving 7,329 participants were included. For symptom score, CC-SCIT showed the most favorable estimated treatment effect versus placebo (standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.40; 95% credible interval [CrI], -0.73 to -0.11; surface under the cumulative ranking curve [SUCRA], 82.6%), while MCD-SLIT-tablet showed a more precise estimate supported by a larger evidence base (SMD, -0.30; 95% CrI, -0.41 to -0.20; SUCRA, 60.7%). For medication score, CC-SCIT (SMD, -0.40; 95% CrI, -0.81 to 0.00; SUCRA, 79.8%) and MCD-SCIT (SMD, -0.38; 95% CrI, -0.72 to -0.05; SUCRA, 78.5%) showed similar estimated effects, whereas MCD-SLIT-tablet showed a smaller but more precise effect (SMD, -0.15; 95% CrI, -0.28 to 0.00; SUCRA, 39.9%). For combined symptom and medication score, CC-SCIT showed the largest estimated effect versus placebo (SMD, -0.84; 95% CrI, -1.53 to -0.37; SUCRA, 99.5%). The network was star-shaped, and comparisons among non-placebo treatment nodes were indirect. Posterior rank distributions also indicated uncertainty in the relative ordering of the treatment nodes, particularly those supported by fewer trials. Conclusion: Reported immunologic and compositional profiles of HDM-AIT preparations were associated with variability in trial-level efficacy estimates. These findings support product-level molecular characterization and direct comparative studies as priorities for future precision AIT. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/, CRD420261307571.
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.