MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404925400 · doi:10.1542/peds.2024-069114im

Varying Doses of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy With Viaskin Milk Versus Placebo in Children With Cow’s Milk Allergy: A Randomized Clinical Trial

2024· article· en· W4404925400 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hunter Jackson Smith, Kristin Kan, Ruchi S. Gupta

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboAllergyRandomized controlled trialMilk allergyOdds ratioFood allergyConfidence intervalDouble blindImmunoglobulin EInternal medicineClinical trialPediatricsImmunologyAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Phase 1 and 2 trial to determine the safety, dose, and efficacy of epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) with Viaskin milk patches for children with immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated cow’s milk allergy (CMA).Children 2 to 17 years old with IgE-mediated CMA (n = 198) at 17 trial sites in the United States and Canada.CMA was confirmed before entry with a double-blind, placebo-control food challenge. A 2-part randomized, double-blind, placebo-control trial first assessed the safety of Viaskin Milk patches at 3 doses (150 µg, 300 µg, or 500 µg) with increasing application time (6 hours per day during week 1, 12 hours per day for week 2, and 24 hours per day for week 3) for 3 weeks. After safety was confirmed, children were randomized to receive 150 µg (n = 49), 300 µg (n = 49), or 500 µg (n = 47) or placebo EPIT for 12 months (n = 53). A positive response was defined as children tolerating a 10-fold or more increase in cumulative dose of cow’s milk protein (at least 144 µg) or a cumulative dose of 1444 µg or more at the 12 month double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge.Of the 95.5% of participants (mean age 8 years [SD: 4.17 years]; 62.6% male; 37.3% female) completing the survey, the highest response was observed in children taking 300 ug of Viaskin Milk, with 24 of 49 (49%) responding compared with 16 of 53 (30.2%) placebo responders (odds ratio, 2.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.91–5.41; P = .09), but was not statistically significant. When comparing prespecified age subgroups, children 2 to 11 years old receiving 300 µg had the highest response with statistical significance (22 of 38 [57.9%] responding versus 13 of 40 placebo responders [32.5%]; P = .04).Although a 300 µg of EPIT with Viaskin milk was not statistically significant across the entire sample, the result was significant for children 2 to 11 years old with IgE-mediated CMA. All doses had low rates of treatment-emergent adverse events.As targeted immunotherapy modalities for IgE-mediated food allergies continue to arise, this study evaluates the treatment safety and efficacy trial of Viaskin milk patches for CMA. Further research should be targeted to further FDA approval of treatment options for children with Ig-E mediated CMA.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePEDIATRICS→Same topicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research→French-language works237,207→