| Title |
Will Sublingual Immunotherapy Offer Benefit for Asthma?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Allergy and Asthma Reports, September 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11882-013-0385-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carlos E. Baena-Cagnani, Désirée Larenas-Linnemann, Alvaro Teijeiro, Giorgio Walter Canonica, Giovanni Passalacqua |
| Abstract |
Evidence shows that sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is indicated in patients with allergic rhinitis (AR). In this article we discuss whether SLIT could offer benefit for children and adults with asthma.We reviewed individual trials on SLIT in asthmatic patients, but also asthma data reported in some SLIT trials conducted in AR patients. Findings were complemented with data from systematic reviews and metaanalysis on the subject since 2000 and some guidelines that mention immunotherapy for asthma treatment. In AR patients with concomitant persistent asthma, SLIT reduces medication needs while maintaining symptom control. This holds especially true for house dust mite SLIT. Data on pollen SLIT and lung symptom improvement with SLIT, however, are less convincing. Therefore, we suggest SLIT should be added as an optional add-on therapy for patients with asthma whenever a causative allergen has been demonstrated and AR is associated with asthma. For the future, SLIT should be studied in specifically designed asthma studies in allergic asthmatics without AR. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Argentina | 1 | 11% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 7 | 78% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 78% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 11% |
| Scientists | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 22 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 26% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 9% |
| Professor | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 61% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 9% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 4% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 5 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 September 2013.
All research outputs
#6,345,550
of 22,721,584 outputs
Outputs from Current Allergy and Asthma Reports
#275
of 803 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,174
of 198,457 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Allergy and Asthma Reports
#10
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,721,584 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 803 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 198,457 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.