MedicalResearch.com Interview with:
Christopher S. Lee, PhD, RN, FAHA, FAAN, FHFSA
Professor and Associate Dean for Research
Boston College William F. Connell School of Nursing
Chestnut Hill, MA 02467
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Response: Although the efficacy of omalizumab (i.e. can it work?) in the treatment of chronic idiopathic (spontaneous) urticaria has been established in clinical trials, the effectiveness of omalziumab (i.e. does it work?) in the real-world management is less well established.
The purpose of this study was to synthesize what is known about the benefits and harms of omalizumab as used in real-world treatment of Chronic Idiopathic (Spontaneous) Urticaria.
MedicalResearch.com: What are the main findings?
Response: Synthesizing information across 67 published reports, the use of omalizumab in the treatment of chronic idiopathic (spontaneous) urticaria was associated with significant reductions in urticaria activity, an average complete response rate of 72.2% with an additional partial response rate of 17.8%, and an average adverse event rate at any level of severity of 4.0%.
MedicalResearch.com: What should readers take away from your report?
Response: The clinical benefits and safety of omalizumab in the real-world treatment of chronic idiopathic (spontaneous) urticaria meet or exceed results gleaned from clinical trials.
MedicalResearch.com: What recommendations do you have for future research as a result of this work?
Response: More research is needed on how dosing and duration of omalizumab therapy influence clinical benefits and harms, as well as the influence of other medications used in addition to omalizumab in the setting of chronic idiopathic (spontaneous) urticaria. Moreover, since the new definition of chronic idiopathic urticaria includes angioedema, we hope to gain more insight into the effectiveness of omalizumab in patient with chronic idiopathic urticaria with and without angioedema.
MedicalResearch.com: Is there anything else you would like to add?
Response: Variation in meta-analyses is just as if not more important as average effects. Hence, the full range of what might be expected in similar real-world studies or in clinical practice (are presented throughout the paper as prediction intervals).
Tharp MD, Bernstein JA, Kavati A, et al. Benefits and Harms of Omalizumab Treatment in Adolescent and Adult Patients With Chronic Idiopathic (Spontaneous) UrticariaA Meta-analysis of “Real-world” Evidence. JAMA Dermatol. Published online November 14, 2018. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2018.3447
The information on MedicalResearch.com is provided for educational purposes only, and is in no way intended to diagnose, cure, or treat any medical or other condition. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health and ask your doctor any questions you may have regarding a medical condition. In addition to all other limitations and disclaimers in this agreement, service provider and its third party providers disclaim any liability or loss in connection with the content provided on this website.