CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 662Allergic Rhinitis and SensitizationFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis ResearchAsthma and respiratory diseases

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Sublingual immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis: systematic review and meta‐analysis*

Open access
Wilson, D. R., Torres Lima, M., Durham, S. R.·2005·Allergy
DOI 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2005.00699.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Allergic rhinitis is a common condition which, at its most severe, can significantly impair quality of life despite optimal treatment with antihistamines and topical nasal corticosteroids. Allergen injection immunotherapy significantly reduces symptoms and medication requirements in allergic rhinitis but its use is limited by the possibility of severe systemic reactions. There has therefore been considerable interest in alternative routes for delivery of allergen immunotherapy, particularly the sublingual route. The objective was to evaluate the efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), compared with placebo, for reductions in symptoms and medication requirements. The Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials Register, MEDLINE (1966–2002), EMBASE (1974–2002) and Scisearch were searched, up to September 2002, using the terms (Rhin* OR hay fever) AND (immunotherap* OR desensiti*ation) AND (sublingual). All studies identified by the searches were assessed by the reviewers to identify Randomized Controlled Trials involving participants with symptoms of allergic rhinitis and proven allergen sensitivity, treated with SLIT or corresponding placebo. Data from identified studies was abstracted onto a standard extraction sheet and subsequently entered into RevMan 4.1. Analysis was performed by the method of standardized mean differences (SMD) using a random effects model. P‐values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Subgroup analyses were performed according to the type of allergen administered, the age of participants and the duration of treatment. Twenty‐two trials involving 979 patients, were included. There were six trials of SLIT for house dust mite allergy, five for grass pollen, five for parietaria, two for olive and one each for, ragweed, cat, tree and cupressus. Five studies enrolled exclusively children. Seventeen studies administered the allergen by sublingual drops subsequently swallowed, three by drops subsequently spat out and two by sublingual tablets. Eight studies involved treatment for less than 6 months, 10 studies for 6–12 months and four studies for greater than 12 months. All included studies were double‐blind placebo‐controlled trials of parallell group design. Concealment of treatment allocation was considered adequate in all studies and the use of identical placebo preparations was almost universal. There was significant heterogeneity, most likely due to widely differing scoring systems between studies, for most comparisons. Overall there was a significant reduction in both symptoms (SMD −0.42, 95% confidence interval −0.69 to −0.15; P = 0.002) and medication requirements [SMD −0.43 (−0.63, −0.23); P = 0.00003] following immunotherapy. Subgroup analyses failed to identify a disproportionate benefit of treatment according to the allergen administered. There was no significant reduction in symptoms and medication scores in those studies involving only children but total numbers of participants was too small to make this a reliable conclusion. Increasing duration of treatment does not clearly increase efficacy. The total dose of allergen administered may be important but insufficient data was available to analyse this factor.

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 · 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2005.00699.x

Cites

29 of 29 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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Andre C, 2002, A double‐blind placebo‐controlled evaluation of sublingual immunotherapy with a standardised ragweed extract in patients with seasonal rhinitis, evidence for a dose–response relationship, Allergy, 57, 31

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 662

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Wilson, D. R., Torres Lima, M., & Durham, S. R.
Affiliations
  • University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • Imperial College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Durham, S. R.
ORCID
Durham, S. R.
Venue
Allergy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-12-03
Volume
60
Issue
1
Pages
4-12
ISSN
  • 0105-4538 (ISSN-L)
  • 1398-9995
DOI
10.1111/j.1398-9995.2005.00699.x
OpenAlex
W2132441138
Cited by
660
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 32 · 2013: 45 · 2012: 35
FWCI
4.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • Allergy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Immunology and Allergy › Allergic Rhinitis and Sensitization
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Immunology and Allergy › Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Asthma and respiratory diseases
Keywords
sublingual immunotherapy, allergic rhinitis, allergen immunotherapy, house dust mite allergy, grass pollen allergy, ragweed allergy, cat allergy, tree pollen allergy, symptom relief, placebo comparison, sublingual tablets, treatment duration, children, quality of life
MeSH terms
Administration, Sublingual, Allergens, Desensitization, Immunologic, Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal, Humans, Rhinitis, Allergic, Perennial

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