CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 27Allergic Rhinitis and SensitizationFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis ResearchAsthma and respiratory diseases

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Efficacy of Sublingual Immunotherapy for House Dust Mite-Induced Allergic Rhinitis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Open access
Feng, Bohai, Xiang, Haijie, Jin, Haiyong, Gao, Jinjian, Huang, Saiyu, Shi, Yunbin, Chen, Ruru, Chen, Bobei·2017·Allergy, Asthma & Immunology Research
DOI 10.4168/aair.2017.9.3.220PMC PMC5352573
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

PURPOSE: Allergic rhinitis (AR) has become a global issue for a large part of the general population. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has been used extensively to treat persistent allergic rhinitis (PAR). Although systematic reviews have confirmed the effectiveness of SLIT for the treatment of AR, a considerable number of studies using extracts of house dust mites (HDMs) for immunotherapy found no consensus on basic treatment parameters and questioned the efficacy of SLIT. METHODS: In this study, we evaluated SLIT for PAR by a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library database searches were performed for RCTs on the treatment of PAR by SLIT that assessed clinical outcomes related to efficacy through May 2016. Descriptive and quantitative information was abstracted. An analysis was performed with standardized mean differences (SMDs) under a fixed or random effects model. Subgroup analyses were performed. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² metric. RESULTS: In total, 25 studies were eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis for symptom scores and 15 studies for medication scores. SLIT was significantly different from the controls for symptom scores (SMD=1.23; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.74 to 0.73; P<0.001). For medication scores, significant differences for SLIT were also observed versus the controls (SMD=-1.39; 95% CI=-1.90 to -0.88; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis indicates that SLIT provided significant symptom relief and reduced the need for medications in PAR. In this study, significant evidence was obtained despite heterogeneity with regard to the use of mite extract. Specifically, the mite extract used was provided by the patients with PAR. Furthermore, to confirm both the objective outcomes and the effective doses of HDM allergen extracts, experimental data should be obtained from large high-quality population-based studies.

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 · 10.4168/aair.2017.9.3.220

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Classification of material reviewed for this meta-analysis.
Fig. 1 Classification of material reviewed for this meta-analysis.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Fig. 2 Risk of bias summary.
Fig. 2 Risk of bias summary.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Fig. 3 Risk of bias graph.
Fig. 3 Risk of bias graph.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Fig. 4 Nasal symptom scores.
Fig. 4 Nasal symptom scores.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Fig. 5 Funnel plot for nasal symptom scores.
Fig. 5 Funnel plot for nasal symptom scores.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Fig. 6 Nasal medication scores.
Fig. 6 Nasal medication scores.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Fig. 7 Funnel plot for nasal medication scores.
Fig. 7 Funnel plot for nasal medication scores.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central

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

Show all 4 references

Research works printed but not linked: 46

  1. Bousquet, 2007, Allergy, 62, 301, 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2006.01293.x · DOI
  2. Calderón, 2015, J Allergy Clin Immunol, 136, 38, 10.1016/j.jaci.2014.10.012 · DOI
  3. Miyazawa, 1996, Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol, 76, 170, 10.1016/S1081-1206(10)63418-7 · DOI
  4. Meltzer, 2011, Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol, 106, S12, 10.1016/j.anai.2010.10.014 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Yoo, 2016, Allergy Asthma Immunol Res, 8, 527, 10.4168/aair.2016.8.6.527 · DOI
  6. Brozek, 2010, J Allergy Clin Immunol, 126, 466, 10.1016/j.jaci.2010.06.047 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Burks, 2013, J Allergy Clin Immunol, 131, 1288, 10.1016/j.jaci.2013.01.049 · DOI
  8. Jutel, 2016, Allergy Asthma Immunol Res, 8, 191, 10.4168/aair.2016.8.3.191 · DOI
  9. Morjaria, 2014, Curr Allergy Asthma Rep, 14, 412, 10.1007/s11882-013-0412-6 · DOI
  10. Dong, 2016, Allergy Asthma Immunol Res, 8, 421, 10.4168/aair.2016.8.5.421 · DOI
  11. Canonica, 2009, Allergy, 64, 1
  12. Calderon, 2013, J Allergy Clin Immunol, 132, 1322, 10.1016/j.jaci.2013.09.004 · DOI
  13. Shekelle, 1999, BMJ, 318, 593, 10.1136/bmj.318.7183.593 · DOI
  14. Jørgensen, 2006, BMJ, 333, 782, 10.1136/bmj.38973.444699.0B · DOI
  15. Di Bona, 2015, JAMA Intern Med, 175, 1301, 10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.2840 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Radulovic, 2010, Cochrane Database Syst Rev, CD002893
  17. Compalati, 2009, Allergy, 64, 1570, 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2009.02129.x · DOI
  18. Aydogan, 2013, Respir Med, 107, 1322, 10.1016/j.rmed.2013.06.021 · DOI
  19. Bahçeciler, 2001, Pediatr Pulmonol, 32, 49, 10.1002/ppul.1088 · DOI
  20. Bergmann, 2014, J Allergy Clin Immunol, 133, 1608, 10.1016/j.jaci.2013.11.012 · DOI
  21. Bozek, 2013, Clin Exp Allergy, 43, 242, 10.1111/cea.12039 · DOI
  22. de Bot, 2012, Pediatr Allergy Immunol, 23, 150
  23. Eifan, 2010, Clin Exp Allergy, 40, 922, 10.1111/j.1365-2222.2009.03448.x · DOI
  24. Guez, 2000, Allergy, 55, 369, 10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00413.x · DOI
  25. Hirsch, 1997, Pediatr Allergy Immunol, 8, 21, 10.1111/j.1399-3038.1997.tb00138.x · DOI
  26. Huang, 2015, Lin Chung Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi, 29, 618
  27. Ippoliti, 2003, Pediatr Allergy Immunol, 14, 216, 10.1034/j.1399-3038.2003.00025.x · DOI
  28. Marcucci, 2003, Allergy, 58, 657, 10.1034/j.1398-9995.2003.00193.x · DOI
  29. Mosbech, 2015, Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol, 114, 134, 10.1016/j.anai.2014.11.015 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Mungan, 1999, Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol, 82, 485, 10.1016/S1081-1206(10)62726-3 · DOI
  31. Nolte, 2015, J Allergy Clin Immunol, 135, 1494, 10.1016/j.jaci.2014.12.1911 · DOI · Paper page
  32. O'Hehir, 2009, Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 180, 936, 10.1164/rccm.200905-0686OC · DOI
  33. Passalacqua, 1998, Lancet, 351, 629, 10.1016/S0140-6736(97)07055-4 · DOI
  34. Passalacqua, 2006, Allergy, 61, 849, 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2006.01095.x · DOI
  35. Potter, 2015, Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol, 114, 327, 10.1016/j.anai.2014.12.015 · DOI
  36. Shao, 2014, Am J Rhinol Allergy, 28, 131, 10.2500/ajra.2014.28.4006 · DOI
  37. Tari, 1990, Allergol Immunopathol (Madr), 18, 277
  38. Tseng, 2008, Asian Pac J Allergy Immunol, 26, 105
  39. Wang, 2013, Laryngoscope, 123, 1334, 10.1002/lary.23935 · DOI
  40. Yonekura, 2010, Allergol Int, 59, 381, 10.2332/allergolint.10-OA-0200 · DOI
  41. Yukselen, 2012, Int Arch Allergy Immunol, 157, 288, 10.1159/000327566 · DOI
  42. Nelson, 2014, Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol, 14, 542, 10.1097/ACI.0000000000000104 · DOI
  43. Cox, 2006, J Allergy Clin Immunol, 117, 1021, 10.1016/j.jaci.2006.02.040 · DOI
  44. Klimek, 2016, Expert Rev Clin Immunol, 12, 369, 10.1586/1744666X.2016.1144473 · DOI
  45. Lin, 2013, JAMA, 309, 1278, 10.1001/jama.2013.2049 · DOI · Paper page
  46. Larenas-Linnemann, 2013, Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol, 110, 402, 10.1016/j.anai.2013.02.017 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Feng, B., Xiang, H., Jin, H., Gao, J., Huang, S., Shi, Y., Chen, R., & Chen, B.
Affiliations
Wenzhou Medical University (CN)
Corresponding author
Chen, Bobei
ORCID
Venue
Allergy, Asthma & Immunology Research
Publisher
The Korean Academy of Asthma, Allergy and Clinical Immunology and The Korean Academy of Pediatric Al
Published
2017
Volume
9
Issue
3
Pages
220
ISSN
  • 2092-7355 (ISSN-L)
  • 2092-7363
DOI
10.4168/aair.2017.9.3.220
PMC
PMC5352573
OpenAlex
W2593174422
Cited by
27
References
4
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3
FWCI
0.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Allergy Asthma and Immunology Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Pediatric Respiratory of China (523302)
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, house dust mite allergy, allergic rhinitis, persistent allergic rhinitis, symptom scores, medication use, treatment efficacy

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