Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 69
Filtrar
4.
5.
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol ; 132(4): 542-543, 2024 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38101769
6.
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol ; 131(6): 786-787, 2023 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37827389
7.
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol ; 131(3): 401-402, 2023 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37270026
9.
10.
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol ; 130(1): 120-121, 2023 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36191850
11.
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol ; 130(2): 259-260, 2023 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36191852
12.
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol ; 129(4): 535-536, 2022 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35850419
16.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract ; 10(7): 1864-1873.e10, 2022 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34848381

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Treatment options for peanut allergy are limited. In previous clinical trials, epicutaneous immunotherapy with a patch containing 250-µg peanut protein (Viaskin Peanut 250 µg [VP250]) was well tolerated and statistically superior to placebo in desensitizing peanut-allergic children. OBJECTIVE: To examine the safety of VP250 in children, using a study design approximating potential real-world use. METHODS: REAL LIfe Use and Safety of EPIT (REALISE) is a phase 3 multicenter study consisting of a 6-month, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled period followed by open-label active treatment. Children aged 4 to 11 years with physician diagnosis of peanut allergy received daily treatment with placebo (6 months) or VP250 (up to 36 months). Data from the 6-month, randomized, controlled phase of REALISE are reported. RESULTS: Three hundred ninety-three children were randomized 3:1 to receive VP250 (n = 294) or placebo (n = 99) for 6 months; 284 (72.3%) children had a history of peanut anaphylaxis. According to parent diary, all participants receiving VP250 and 83.8% receiving placebo reported at least 1 episode of local skin reaction, with frequency decreasing over time. Only 4 participants (1.4%) receiving VP250 discontinued because of adverse events (AEs). Epinephrine was administered for allergic reactions attributed to VP250 in 7 children (2.4%), of whom 5 remained in the study; none involved severe anaphylaxis. Overall, AE rates were similar among participants with and without a history of peanut anaphylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: In a study designed to mirror real-world use, VP250 was observed to be well tolerated in peanut-allergic children, consistent with previous phase 2b and 3 studies.


Asunto(s)
Anafilaxia , Hipersensibilidad al Cacahuete , Administración Oral , Alérgenos/uso terapéutico , Anafilaxia/etiología , Arachis , Niño , Desensibilización Inmunológica/métodos , Humanos , Factores Inmunológicos/uso terapéutico , Hipersensibilidad al Cacahuete/tratamiento farmacológico
17.
19.
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol ; 126(4): 444-445, 2021 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33450395
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...