Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 413

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Randomized double-blind study of cyclosporin in chronic ‘idiopathic’ urticaria

Grattan, C.E.H., O’Donnell, B.F., Francis, D.M., Niimi, N., Barlow, R.J., Seed, P.T., Kobza Black, A., Greaves, M.W.·2000·British Journal of Dermatology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Histamine-releasing activity (HRA) is detectable in up to 50% of patients with chronic ordinary urticaria. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of cyclosporin on clinical features and HRA in patients with chronic urticaria. METHODS: Thirty patients with severe unremitting disease, responding poorly to antihistamines and showing a positive autologous serum skin test (ASST) as a marker of HRA, were randomized to 4 mg kg-1 daily of cyclosporin (Sandimmun, n = 20) or placebo (n = 10) for 4 weeks. Non-responders were offered open-label cyclosporin for 4 weeks. All were followed for up to 20 weeks or until clinical relapse; all took cetirizine 20 mg daily throughout the study. The primary measure of efficacy was a daily urticaria activity score (UAS) of weal numbers and itch (maximum score 42 per week). A positive response was defined as a reduction to < 25% of baseline weekly UAS and relapse as a return to > 75%. The effect of cyclosporin on serum HRA was assessed by in vitro basophil histamine release assays and ASSTs before and after treatment. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients (19 active, 10 controls) completed the randomized trial medication. Eight of 19 on active treatment but none on placebo had responded at 4 weeks (P < 0.05). Three others on active drug met the criterion for response at 2 weeks but not at 4 weeks. Mean reduction in UAS between weeks 0 and 4 was 12.7 (95% confidence interval, CI 6.6-18.8) for active and 2.3 (95% CI - 3.3-7.9) for placebo (P = 0.005). Seventeen non-responders (seven randomized to active and 10 to placebo) chose open-label cyclosporin and 11 responded after 4 weeks. Six of the eight randomized active drug responders relapsed within 6 weeks. Of the 19 responders to randomized and open-label cyclosporin, five (26%) had not relapsed by the study end-point. Mean in vitro serum HRA fell from 36% (95% CI 22-49%) to 5% (95% CI 1-8%) after cyclosporin treatment (n = 11, P < 0.0001). The ASST response to post-treatment serum was also reduced (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that cyclosporin is effective for chronic urticaria and provides further evidence for a role of histamine-releasing autoantibodies in the pathogenesis of this chronic 'idiopathic' disease.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-2133.2000.03664.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 413

Metadata

Authors
Grattan, C. E. H., O’Donnell, B. F., Francis, D. M., Niimi, N., Barlow, R. J., Seed, P. T., Kobza Black, A., & Greaves, M. W.
Venue
British Journal of Dermatology
Published
2000-08
Volume
143
Issue
2
Pages
365-372
ISSN
  • 0007-0963 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2133
OpenAlex
W1976551703
Cited by
413
References
1
FWCI
7.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Randomized double-blind study of cyclosporin in chronic ‘idiopathic’ urticaria. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2133.2000.03664.x
The paper
Grattan, C. E. H., O’Donnell, B. F., Francis, D. M., Niimi, N., Barlow, R. J., Seed, P. T., Kobza Black, A., & Greaves, M. W. (2000). Randomized double-blind study of cyclosporin in chronic ‘idiopathic’ urticaria. British Journal of Dermatology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2133.2000.03664.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.