MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4298149778 · doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2022.09.020

Allergen immunotherapy for atopic dermatitis: Systematic review and meta-analysis of benefits and harms

2022· review· en· W4298149778 on OpenAlexafffund
Juan José Yepes-Núñez, Gordon Guyatt, Luis G. Gómez-Escobar, Lucía C. Pérez-Herrera, A. Chu, Renata Ceccaci, Ana Sofía Acosta-Madiedo, Aaron Wen, Margaret MacDonald, Mónica Barrios, Xiajing Chu, Nazmul Islam, Ya Gao, Melanie Wong, Rachel Couban, Elizabeth García, Edgardo Chapman, Paul Oykhman, Lina Chen, Tonya Winders, Rachel N. Asiniwasis, Mark Boguniewicz, Anna De Benedetto, Kathy Ellison, Winfred Frazier, Matthew Greenhawt, Joey Huynh, Elaine Kim, Jennifer LeBovidge, Mary Laura Lind, Peter Lio, Stephen A. Martin, Monica O’Brien, Peck Y. Ong, Jonathan I. Silverberg, Jonathan M. Spergel, Julie Wang, Kathryn E. Wheeler, Lynda C. Schneider, Derek K. Chu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonToronto Public HealthUniversity of SaskatchewanMcMaster UniversityUniversity of OttawaHamilton Health SciencesImpact
FundersNational Institutes of HealthMcMaster UniversityTeva Pharmaceutical Industries
KeywordsMedicineAtopic dermatitisRelative riskAllergen immunotherapyAllergyAsthmaRandomized controlled trialGuidelineConfidence intervalAdverse effectQuality of life (healthcare)MEDLINEImmunologyInternal medicineAllergenPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD, eczema) is driven by a combination of skin barrier defects, immune dysregulation, and extrinsic stimuli such as allergens, irritants, and microbes. The role of environmental allergens (aeroallergens) in triggering AD remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: We systematically synthesized evidence regarding the benefits and harms of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) for AD. METHODS: As part of the 2022 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology/American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD Guideline update, we searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, LILACS, Global Resource for Eczema Trials, and Web of Science databases from inception to December 2021 for randomized controlled trials comparing subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT), sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), and/or no AIT (placebo or standard care) for guideline panel-defined patient-important outcomes: AD severity, itch, AD-related quality of life (QoL), flares, and adverse events. Raters independently screened, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias in duplicate. We synthesized intervention effects using frequentist and Bayesian random-effects models. The GRADE approach determined the quality of evidence. RESULTS: Twenty-three randomized controlled trials including 1957 adult and pediatric patients sensitized primarily to house dust mite showed that add-on SCIT and SLIT have similar relative and absolute effects and likely result in important improvements in AD severity, defined as a 50% reduction in SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (risk ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.53 [1.31-1.78]; 26% vs 40%, absolute difference 14%) and QoL, defined as an improvement in Dermatology Life Quality Index by 4 points or more (risk ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.44 [1.03-2.01]; 39% vs 56%, absolute difference 17%; both outcomes moderate certainty). Both routes of AIT increased adverse events (risk ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.61 [1.44-1.79]; 66% with SCIT vs 41% with placebo; 13% with SLIT vs 8% with placebo; high certainty). AIT's effect on sleep disturbance and eczema flares was very uncertain. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were consistent with the main findings. CONCLUSIONS: SCIT and SLIT to aeroallergens, particularly house dust mite, can similarly and importantly improve AD severity and QoL. SCIT increases adverse effects more than SLIT. These findings support a multidisciplinary and shared decision-making approach to optimally managing AD.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.033
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.128
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations92
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Allergy and Clinical ImmunologySame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207