↓ Skip to main content

Similar Efficacy with Omalizumab in Chronic Idiopathic/Spontaneous Urticaria Despite Different Background Therapy

Overview of attention for article published in The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice, June 2015
Altmetric Badge
8

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
patent
2 patents
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Similar Efficacy with Omalizumab in Chronic Idiopathic/Spontaneous Urticaria Despite Different Background Therapy
Published in
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice, June 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.jaip.2015.04.015
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas B. Casale, Jonathan A. Bernstein, Marcus Maurer, Sarbjit S. Saini, Benjamin Trzaskoma, Hubert Chen, Clive E. Grattan, Ana Gimenéz-Arnau, Allen P. Kaplan, Karin Rosén

Abstract

Data from the 3 omalizumab pivotal trials in patients with chronic idiopathic urticaria/chronic spontaneous urticaria (CIU/CSU) represent the largest database of patients reported to date with refractory disease (omalizumab, n = 733; placebo, n = 242). The objective of this study was to compare results from ASTERIA I and II, which included only approved doses of H1-antihistamine as background therapy based on regulatory authority requirements, to those from GLACIAL, which permitted higher doses of H1-antihistamines as well as other types of background therapy, in a post hoc analysis. Efficacy data from the placebo, omalizumab 150-mg, and omalizumab 300-mg treatment arms of ASTERIA I and II were pooled and analyzed (n = 162 and n = 160, respectively). The 300-mg treatment arm analyses were compared with the analysis of data from GLACIAL (n = 252) using analysis of covariance models. The key efficacy endpoint was change from baseline to week 12 in mean weekly itch severity score (ISS); other endpoints were also evaluated. Safety data were pooled from all 3 studies. Mean ISS was significantly reduced from baseline at week 12 in the pooled ASTERIA I and II omalizumab 150- and 300-mg treatment arms and in the GLACIAL omalizumab 300-mg arm. The weekly ISS reduction magnitude at week 12 was similar between the omalizumab 300-mg groups in the ASTERIA I and II pooled and GLACIAL studies. Similar treatment effect sizes were observed across multiple endpoints. Omalizumab was well tolerated and the adverse-event profile was similar regardless of background therapy for CIU/CSU. The overall safety profile was generally consistent with omalizumab therapy in allergic asthma. Omalizumab 300 mg was safe and effective in reducing CIU/CSU symptoms regardless of background therapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 85 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 16%
Other 12 14%
Student > Bachelor 12 14%
Student > Master 10 12%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 19 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 47%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Computer Science 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 21 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 07 March 2024.
All research outputs
#4,369,647
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice
#1,201
of 4,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,077
of 280,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice
#11
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,308 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 280,651 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.