↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

How does the efficacy and safety of Oralair® compare to other products on the market?

Overview of attention for article published in Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
Title
How does the efficacy and safety of Oralair® compare to other products on the market?
Published in
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, May 2016
DOI 10.2147/tcrm.s70363
Pubmed ID
Authors

Désirée Larenas-Linnemann

Abstract

Due to differences between allergen immunotherapy (AIT) trials in patient populations, trial design (including primary efficacy variables), the definition of a pollen season, data analysis, and comparisons between AIT products with existing data, is not possible nor valid. The efficacy of two grass pollen AIT tablets, Oralair(®) and Grazax(®)/Grastek(®), should not be compared by looking at the percentage of score improvement in their respective trials. However, the evidence available concerning the efficacy and safety in trials can be compared by paying close attention to the scientific quality of the trials, details in the administration schedules, and safety issues. It can be concluded due to the high level of evidence available, that Oralair(®) is effective in a pre (2-months)-coseasonal schedule to reduce symptoms and medication use, and improve a patients' quality of life during the treatment season. For the long-term, where the quality of efficacy evidence is moderate at 2-year posttreatment due to a high dropout rate, the pre (4-months)-coseasonal schedule should be used. No clinical efficacy data exists for starting treatment in-season, but the clinical onset of action of Oralair(®) is detectable after only 1 month of treatment. In the pivotal trials in Europe and the USA, no tablet-related epinephrine was needed, though some rare severe local reactions have been reported. Research for Grazax(®)/Grastek(®) showed that the long-term efficacy needs a continuous 3-year administration (moderate-low quality evidence available), and in two patients, tablet-related epinephrine was given. Further details on the comparative efficacy of both tablets would only be possible if both were evaluated in the same, adequately powered trial.

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 3 18%
Other 3 18%
Librarian 2 12%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 6%
Researcher 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 6 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 24%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 18%
Social Sciences 2 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Unknown 7 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 30 May 2016.
All research outputs
#16,045,990
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#752
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,093
of 311,861 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#29
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 311,861 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.