Emilio Nuñez-Borque, Timothy E. Dribin, Pablo Rodriguez Del Rio, Carlos A. Camargo Jr, Vanesa Esteban, George du Toit, Rodrigo Jiménez-Saiz, Mattia Giovannini
<p>Anaphylaxis is a medical condition for which several definitions have been proposed (Table 1 is available in the repository information at https://osf.io/sc2ey/?view_only=f66e841be31b42418eecf639caa0b24d). Charles Richet and Paul Portier coined the term ‘anaphylaxis’ in 1902. If discovered earlier, it might have invigorated the ongoing scientific debate in the late 19th century between Rudolf Virchow and Iliá Méchnikov on the detrimental versus beneficial nature of inflammation [<span>1</span>]. While inflammation typically serves as a response to tissue damage or infection, to restore homeostasis, anaphylaxis is a classic example of an immunopathological reaction in which an exaggerated and inappropriate response can lead, although rarely, to potentially fatal outcomes. Precisely, the role of inflammation has been underlined as central in several atopic diseases, but, surprisingly, not in anaphylaxis.</p><p>The most common triggers of anaphylaxis are foods, insect stings and medications, but the aetiology may be unknown in some cases (idiopathic). This reaction is a multisystem condition that may involve different findings from the skin/mucosal, respiratory, cardiovascular and/or gastrointestinal systems. However, patients may rarely present isolated respiratory or cardiovascular involvement, and skin/mucosal participation may be absent. In addition, anxiety about the possibility of a new episode of anaphylaxis significantly impairs the quality of life of patients and their relatives, restricting daily activities and increasing the state of constant alertness [<span>2</span>]. The foundations of acute anaphylaxis management are removing the trigger, proper patient positioning, immediate administration of adrenaline and repeat adrenaline injections if severe clinical manifestations do not resolve. Moreover, this treatment can be supplemented with the use of second-line medications (e.g., β2-adrenergic agonists), as well as with the administration of supportive treatments (e.g., oxygen) [<span>2, 3</span>]. Most patients treated with adrenaline experience prompt resolution of symptoms and signs. However, a minority of patients may require three or more doses of adrenaline (refractory anaphylaxis) or have recurrence after an asymptomatic period (biphasic anaphylaxis) [<span>4, 5</span>].</p><p>Different signalling pathways can mediate anaphylaxis (Figure 1). Among them, the classical one is mediated by immunoglobulin (Ig)E. In sensitised individuals, secreted IgE binds to its high-affinity receptor (FcεRI) on effector cells (mainly mast cells and basophils), which store preformed pro-inflammatory granules. Then, allergen binding by cell-bound IgE triggers effector cell activation, leading to the immediate release of potent pro-inflammatory mediators, such as histamine, tryptase, platelet-activating factor (PAF), prostaglandins, leukotrienes and TNF-α, which are responsible for the rapid clinical manifestations of anaphylaxis [<span>6</span>]. Ho
{"title":"Anaphylaxis: Spotlight on Inflammation","authors":"Emilio Nuñez-Borque, Timothy E. Dribin, Pablo Rodriguez Del Rio, Carlos A. Camargo Jr, Vanesa Esteban, George du Toit, Rodrigo Jiménez-Saiz, Mattia Giovannini","doi":"10.1111/cea.14610","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cea.14610","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Anaphylaxis is a medical condition for which several definitions have been proposed (Table 1 is available in the repository information at https://osf.io/sc2ey/?view_only=f66e841be31b42418eecf639caa0b24d). Charles Richet and Paul Portier coined the term ‘anaphylaxis’ in 1902. If discovered earlier, it might have invigorated the ongoing scientific debate in the late 19th century between Rudolf Virchow and Iliá Méchnikov on the detrimental versus beneficial nature of inflammation [<span>1</span>]. While inflammation typically serves as a response to tissue damage or infection, to restore homeostasis, anaphylaxis is a classic example of an immunopathological reaction in which an exaggerated and inappropriate response can lead, although rarely, to potentially fatal outcomes. Precisely, the role of inflammation has been underlined as central in several atopic diseases, but, surprisingly, not in anaphylaxis.</p><p>The most common triggers of anaphylaxis are foods, insect stings and medications, but the aetiology may be unknown in some cases (idiopathic). This reaction is a multisystem condition that may involve different findings from the skin/mucosal, respiratory, cardiovascular and/or gastrointestinal systems. However, patients may rarely present isolated respiratory or cardiovascular involvement, and skin/mucosal participation may be absent. In addition, anxiety about the possibility of a new episode of anaphylaxis significantly impairs the quality of life of patients and their relatives, restricting daily activities and increasing the state of constant alertness [<span>2</span>]. The foundations of acute anaphylaxis management are removing the trigger, proper patient positioning, immediate administration of adrenaline and repeat adrenaline injections if severe clinical manifestations do not resolve. Moreover, this treatment can be supplemented with the use of second-line medications (e.g., β2-adrenergic agonists), as well as with the administration of supportive treatments (e.g., oxygen) [<span>2, 3</span>]. Most patients treated with adrenaline experience prompt resolution of symptoms and signs. However, a minority of patients may require three or more doses of adrenaline (refractory anaphylaxis) or have recurrence after an asymptomatic period (biphasic anaphylaxis) [<span>4, 5</span>].</p><p>Different signalling pathways can mediate anaphylaxis (Figure 1). Among them, the classical one is mediated by immunoglobulin (Ig)E. In sensitised individuals, secreted IgE binds to its high-affinity receptor (FcεRI) on effector cells (mainly mast cells and basophils), which store preformed pro-inflammatory granules. Then, allergen binding by cell-bound IgE triggers effector cell activation, leading to the immediate release of potent pro-inflammatory mediators, such as histamine, tryptase, platelet-activating factor (PAF), prostaglandins, leukotrienes and TNF-α, which are responsible for the rapid clinical manifestations of anaphylaxis [<span>6</span>]. Ho","PeriodicalId":10207,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","volume":"55 1","pages":"8-10"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2025-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cea.14610","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142945708","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Hospitalisation Trends of Severe Paediatric Asthma in Tokyo 2015-2019.","authors":"Kazu Ishikawa, Kiwako Yamamoto-Hanada, Tatsuki Fukuie, Akira Ishiguro, Yukihiro Ohya","doi":"10.1111/cea.14620","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cea.14620","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10207,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2025-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142930711","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Mohamed H. Shamji and Robert J. Boyle, Prize-Winning Abstracts From BSACI 2024 Meeting. Clinical & Experimental Allergy, 54 (2024): 953–955. https://doi.org/10.1111/cea.14599
Some text was missing from the article. The extra text is below, and should be added at the end of the article:
7. Allied Health Category Winner: Odette Rodda, University Hospital Dorset, UK
Assessing the need for an allergy service for Adolescents and Young Adults—a pilot study.
Timely, appropriate diagnosis and treatment are imperative in food allergy. This service evaluation aimed to explore the need for a dedicated allergy clinic for adolescents and young adults (AYA).
AYA aged 12–20 years with food allergies and other allergic conditions were approached during routine clinic appointments over 6 months. Fifty questionnaires were collected. Most (86%) knew how to recognise an allergic reaction and most (81.6%) had an adrenaline auto-injectors. However, only 12.8% rated their allergies as potentially causing anaphylaxis. Most (62%) AYA used antihistamines as rescue medications (62%) and most (59%) did not carry their autoinjector. Only 18.4% of respondents would tell friends about their allergies. Most (62%) would like to attend clinic with other AYA and 81% would prefer clinics in the afternoon or evening. Thematic analysis identified three themes ‘I have to take responsibility’, ‘I need peer support’ and ‘what happens next’. This pilot study identified AYA understanding and behaviours about their allergies and transition to adult services.
We apologize for this error.
{"title":"Correction to “Prize-Winning Abstracts From BSACI 2024 Meeting”","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/cea.14617","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cea.14617","url":null,"abstract":"<p>\u0000 <span>Mohamed H. Shamji</span> and <span>Robert J. Boyle</span>, <span>Prize-Winning Abstracts From BSACI 2024 Meeting</span>. <i>Clinical & Experimental Allergy</i>, <span>54</span> (<span>2024</span>): <span>953</span>–<span>955</span>. https://doi.org/10.1111/cea.14599\u0000 </p><p>Some text was missing from the article. The extra text is below, and should be added at the end of the article:</p><p>7. Allied Health Category Winner: Odette Rodda, University Hospital Dorset, UK</p><p><b>Assessing the need for an allergy service for Adolescents and Young Adults—a pilot study</b>.</p><p>Timely, appropriate diagnosis and treatment are imperative in food allergy. This service evaluation aimed to explore the need for a dedicated allergy clinic for adolescents and young adults (AYA).</p><p>AYA aged 12–20 years with food allergies and other allergic conditions were approached during routine clinic appointments over 6 months. Fifty questionnaires were collected. Most (86%) knew how to recognise an allergic reaction and most (81.6%) had an adrenaline auto-injectors. However, only 12.8% rated their allergies as potentially causing anaphylaxis. Most (62%) AYA used antihistamines as rescue medications (62%) and most (59%) did not carry their autoinjector. Only 18.4% of respondents would tell friends about their allergies. Most (62%) would like to attend clinic with other AYA and 81% would prefer clinics in the afternoon or evening. Thematic analysis identified three themes ‘I have to take responsibility’, ‘I need peer support’ and ‘what happens next’. This pilot study identified AYA understanding and behaviours about their allergies and transition to adult services.</p><p>We apologize for this error.</p><p>\u0000 \u0000 </p>","PeriodicalId":10207,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","volume":"55 2","pages":"205"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2025-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cea.14617","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143111306","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
William Fong, Kaci Pickett-Nairne, Manzi Venter, Veeresh Patil, Syed Hasan Arshad, Graham C. Roberts, Tara Dean, Ramesh J. Kurukulaaratchy, Carina Venter
Background
Adverse food reactions include food allergy (FA; immune-mediated) and food intolerances (non-immune-mediated). FA are classified into IgE- and non-IgE-mediated FA. There is limited information available about changes in FA prevalence over time.
Methods
Two cohorts of children were evaluated, born on the Isle of Wight (IOW) 12 years apart, the IOW birth cohort (IOWBC; 1989–1990) and the FA and Intolerance Research birth cohort (FAIRBC; 2001–2002). We compared the prevalence of parental reported reactions to foods (adverse food reactions), allergic sensitisation to foods and FA between the IOWBC and FAIRBC, at ages 1, 2, 3–4 and 10 years. FA included both IgE- and non-IgE-mediated FA.
Results
Reported adverse reactions to food and sensitisation rates remained stable between the two cohorts. For example, FA at age 3–4 years was reported in 9.1% (95% CI: 7.5, 10.7) in IOWBC and 8.3% (95% CI: 6.5, 10.1) in FAIRBC (p = 0.57) and food sensitisation by skin prick test at age 3–4 years was found in 3.2% (95% CI: 2.1, 4.3) in IOWBC and 4.5% (95% CI: 2.9, 6.1) in FAIRBC (p = 0.20). Confirmed FA prevalence was lower in FAIRBC than IOWBC at ages 1, 2 and 3–4, but these differences were not significant after adjustment for multiple comparisons. For example, FA at age 3–4 years was confirmed in 5.0% (95% CI: 3.8, 6.2) in IOWBC and 3.0% (95% CI: 1.9, 4.2) in FAIRBC (p = 0.03, significance threshold after Bonferroni correction p < 0.004). Confirmed cow's milk allergy rate was higher in IOWBC than FAIRBC at 3 years (< 0.001) but not at other time points.
Conclusion
Our data show no evidence of changes in rates of adverse reactions to foods, food sensitisation or food allergy during the first 10 years of life between two cohorts born in England in 1989–1990 and 2001–2002.
{"title":"Food Allergy Prevalence in Two Population-Based UK Cohorts Born 12 Years Apart","authors":"William Fong, Kaci Pickett-Nairne, Manzi Venter, Veeresh Patil, Syed Hasan Arshad, Graham C. Roberts, Tara Dean, Ramesh J. Kurukulaaratchy, Carina Venter","doi":"10.1111/cea.14605","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cea.14605","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Adverse food reactions include food allergy (FA; immune-mediated) and food intolerances (non-immune-mediated). FA are classified into IgE- and non-IgE-mediated FA. There is limited information available about changes in FA prevalence over time.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Two cohorts of children were evaluated, born on the Isle of Wight (IOW) 12 years apart, the IOW birth cohort (IOWBC; 1989–1990) and the FA and Intolerance Research birth cohort (FAIRBC; 2001–2002). We compared the prevalence of parental reported reactions to foods (adverse food reactions), allergic sensitisation to foods and FA between the IOWBC and FAIRBC, at ages 1, 2, 3–4 and 10 years. FA included both IgE- and non-IgE-mediated FA.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Reported adverse reactions to food and sensitisation rates remained stable between the two cohorts. For example, FA at age 3–4 years was reported in 9.1% (95% CI: 7.5, 10.7) in IOWBC and 8.3% (95% CI: 6.5, 10.1) in FAIRBC (<i>p</i> = 0.57) and food sensitisation by skin prick test at age 3–4 years was found in 3.2% (95% CI: 2.1, 4.3) in IOWBC and 4.5% (95% CI: 2.9, 6.1) in FAIRBC (<i>p</i> = 0.20). Confirmed FA prevalence was lower in FAIRBC than IOWBC at ages 1, 2 and 3–4, but these differences were not significant after adjustment for multiple comparisons. For example, FA at age 3–4 years was confirmed in 5.0% (95% CI: 3.8, 6.2) in IOWBC and 3.0% (95% CI: 1.9, 4.2) in FAIRBC (<i>p</i> = 0.03, significance threshold after Bonferroni correction <i>p</i> < 0.004). Confirmed cow's milk allergy rate was higher in IOWBC than FAIRBC at 3 years (< 0.001) but not at other time points.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Our data show no evidence of changes in rates of adverse reactions to foods, food sensitisation or food allergy during the first 10 years of life between two cohorts born in England in 1989–1990 and 2001–2002.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":10207,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","volume":"55 2","pages":"166-174"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142920759","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Oyindamola Stephanie Kayode, Cassim Akhoon, Annette Wagner, Olympia Tsilochristou, Stephen Till, Leonard Quok Chean Siew
{"title":"Introduction of Quick Response Coded Digital Allergy Patient Information Leaflets: Patient Perspectives and Key Digital Inclusion Considerations.","authors":"Oyindamola Stephanie Kayode, Cassim Akhoon, Annette Wagner, Olympia Tsilochristou, Stephen Till, Leonard Quok Chean Siew","doi":"10.1111/cea.14613","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cea.14613","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10207,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2024-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142853143","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Morten J Christensen, Annemarie Schaeffer Senders, Henrik Fomsgaard Kjaer, Carsten Bindslev-Jensen, Charlotte G Mortz
{"title":"Impact of Co-Factors in Primary Hazelnut Allergy.","authors":"Morten J Christensen, Annemarie Schaeffer Senders, Henrik Fomsgaard Kjaer, Carsten Bindslev-Jensen, Charlotte G Mortz","doi":"10.1111/cea.14611","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cea.14611","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10207,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142846069","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Magdalena Kraft, Samira Saleh, Guido Heine, Alexander Scheffold, Petra Bacher, Margitta Worm
{"title":"Detection and Characterisation of Wasp Venom-Specific T Cells Using the ARTE Method in Allergic Patients.","authors":"Magdalena Kraft, Samira Saleh, Guido Heine, Alexander Scheffold, Petra Bacher, Margitta Worm","doi":"10.1111/cea.14606","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cea.14606","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10207,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2024-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142827529","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
<p>In this month's issue of <i>Clinical and Experimental Allergy</i>, we highlight the prize-winners from the recent highly successful BSACI conference and present a Cochrane systematic review of topical anti-inflammatory treatments for eczema (atopic dermatitis). Prize-winner abstracts reflected the breadth and depth of research presented at the BSACI conference, which continues to grow and will move to a new, larger venue next year. Please mark 16–18 October at the International Convention Centre in Newport, Wales in your diary! The Cochrane review findings are striking. Not so much for the findings on effectiveness and safety of topical eczema treatments, but for the lack of independence and transparency in the included clinical trials. Eczema is a common, burdensome condition—probably the most burdensome skin condition affecting humans—and topical anti-inflammatory treatments have been used for generations to manage eczema symptoms. In this first comprehensive Cochrane review of the topic, authors identified almost 400 randomised controlled trials in over 50,000 people with eczema. One might hope that such a significant human effort would have yielded some reliable information to guide clinician, carers and people with eczema in making treatment decisions. However, the standout finding in this review was the lack of transparency in the field (Figure 1). Risk of bias was judged to be high in 89% of trials, with the most common issue being concern about selective reporting. While older clinical trials would not be expected to register their plans on a public clinical trial registry or to make their protocol publicly available—it is of some concern that even the modern trials commonly lacked appropriate trial registration. Trial findings were also rarely reported completely, meaning that for many trials and outcomes, it was not possible to include data in meta-analysis. A common issue here was trialists not stating the number of participants evaluated for an outcome.</p><p>This Cochrane review is a good example of the ways in which scientific progress, clinical practice and the health of relevant populations are held back when clinical trials are not conducted and reported in a transparent manner. It is relevant that only a tiny minority of these trials were funded independently—where stated, the funder was almost always the manufacturer of one of the topical treatments being tested. It is well-established that clinical trials funded in this way tend to report findings as more favourable, and in commercial trials, there are also obvious incentives for non-transparent reporting, unless this is legally mandated. While it is for the lawyers and regulators to legislate and oversee compliance with transparent reporting of clinical trials, journals also have a place in promoting better clinical trial practice. This is why <i>Clinical & Experimental Allergy</i> places great emphasis on transparency in reporting, especially for potentially influenti
{"title":"Research Integrity in the Field of Atopic Dermatitis Treatment","authors":"Robert J. Boyle, Mohamed H. Shamji","doi":"10.1111/cea.14601","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cea.14601","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In this month's issue of <i>Clinical and Experimental Allergy</i>, we highlight the prize-winners from the recent highly successful BSACI conference and present a Cochrane systematic review of topical anti-inflammatory treatments for eczema (atopic dermatitis). Prize-winner abstracts reflected the breadth and depth of research presented at the BSACI conference, which continues to grow and will move to a new, larger venue next year. Please mark 16–18 October at the International Convention Centre in Newport, Wales in your diary! The Cochrane review findings are striking. Not so much for the findings on effectiveness and safety of topical eczema treatments, but for the lack of independence and transparency in the included clinical trials. Eczema is a common, burdensome condition—probably the most burdensome skin condition affecting humans—and topical anti-inflammatory treatments have been used for generations to manage eczema symptoms. In this first comprehensive Cochrane review of the topic, authors identified almost 400 randomised controlled trials in over 50,000 people with eczema. One might hope that such a significant human effort would have yielded some reliable information to guide clinician, carers and people with eczema in making treatment decisions. However, the standout finding in this review was the lack of transparency in the field (Figure 1). Risk of bias was judged to be high in 89% of trials, with the most common issue being concern about selective reporting. While older clinical trials would not be expected to register their plans on a public clinical trial registry or to make their protocol publicly available—it is of some concern that even the modern trials commonly lacked appropriate trial registration. Trial findings were also rarely reported completely, meaning that for many trials and outcomes, it was not possible to include data in meta-analysis. A common issue here was trialists not stating the number of participants evaluated for an outcome.</p><p>This Cochrane review is a good example of the ways in which scientific progress, clinical practice and the health of relevant populations are held back when clinical trials are not conducted and reported in a transparent manner. It is relevant that only a tiny minority of these trials were funded independently—where stated, the funder was almost always the manufacturer of one of the topical treatments being tested. It is well-established that clinical trials funded in this way tend to report findings as more favourable, and in commercial trials, there are also obvious incentives for non-transparent reporting, unless this is legally mandated. While it is for the lawyers and regulators to legislate and oversee compliance with transparent reporting of clinical trials, journals also have a place in promoting better clinical trial practice. This is why <i>Clinical & Experimental Allergy</i> places great emphasis on transparency in reporting, especially for potentially influenti","PeriodicalId":10207,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","volume":"54 12","pages":"950-952"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2024-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cea.14601","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142799666","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：