ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Hereditary angioedema in Latin America: international recommendations, expert consensus, and reported implementation barriers.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 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
35 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Current international hereditary angioedema (HAE) guidelines and treat-to-target recommendations emphasize accurate diagnosis, early on-demand treatment, procedure-related short-term prophylaxis, individualized long-term prophylaxis (LTP), and routine assessment of disease control and quality of life. Evidence on implementation in Latin America remains limited. We aimed to assess concordance between international guidance and the consensus of a selected Latin American expert panel and to identify expert-reported implementation barriers. Methods: A scientific committee developed and externally validated a 74-item questionnaire (domains summarized in Supplementary Table S1) and conducted a two-round Delphi process among Latin American HAE experts. Consensus items were rated on a nine-point agreement scale, with consensus defined Results: Thirty experts from 10 countries completed the process (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela). The prespecified consensus threshold was met for core biochemical diagnostic work-up, selective genetic evaluation, first-line targeted LTP (pdC1-INH, lanadelumab, and berotralstat), continued availability of on-demand therapy, routine monitoring, and management of special populations. The principal expert-reported implementation signal was limited feasibility: frequent or constant prophylaxis-supply interruptions were reported by 19/30 experts (63%), including 13/23 (57%) practicing in settings where public or insurance coverage was reported. Cost (19/30; 63%) and medicine availability (8/30; 27%) were the most frequently reported barriers. These reports were not independently verified against reimbursement, procurement, formulary, or inventory data. Conclusion: Within this selected panel, expert consensus was broadly concordant with international HAE guidance. Panelists reported barriers involving diagnostic testing, financing, medicine availability, and continuity of supply; however, these findings are perceptions and reported practices, not representative national or regional estimates or audited health-system data. They identify candidate implementation priorities that require confirmation through patient-level registries and objective access data.
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.