ReviewClinical and translational allergy2026
Sesame Immunotherapy: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis.
Review in Clinical and translational allergy, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sesame allergy is associated with severe allergic reactions, low rates of spontaneous resolution, and significant psychosocial burden. Current management relies on strict avoidance and emergency treatment. Allergen-specific immunotherapy, particularly oral immunotherapy (OIT), has emerged as a potential disease-modifying approach, but evidence for sesame allergy remains limited. A systematic search was conducted through August 2025. Eligible studies included participants of any age with confirmed sesame allergy treated with allergen immunotherapy. Primary outcomes were desensitization and sustained unresponsiveness assessed by oral food challenge. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, epinephrine use, quality of life, and mortality. Risk of bias was evaluated using Joanna Briggs Institute tools. Nine studies met the inclusion criteria, including one study identified through citation searching. The evidence consisted, primarily small cohort studies and case series. Single-allergen sesame OIT achieved high desensitization rates (approximately 85%-97%) across heterogeneous protocols and age groups. Sustained unresponsiveness was reported in a limited number of mainly pediatric cohorts. Most adverse events were mild to moderate; severe reactions requiring epinephrine were uncommon, and no deaths were reported. Adjunctive omalizumab improved tolerability in high-risk adults. Sesame OIT shows promising efficacy with an acceptable safety profile in specialized settings. However, evidence is limited by small sample sizes, heterogeneity, and short follow-up. Randomized controlled trials are needed to define optimal protocols and long-term outcomes. TRAIL REGISTRATION: The protocol for this systematic review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; Registration number: CRD420251087250).
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.