SynthesisClinical reviews in allergy & immunology2025
Immunological Mechanisms and Outcomes of T-cell-Targeted Immunotherapy in Food Allergy: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Food allergy is an increasing public health concern characterized by inappropriate Th2-driven immune responses to otherwise harmless food antigens, leading to IgE-mediated hypersensitivity. Current management strategies rely on allergen avoidance and emergency interventions, which fail to address the root cause of immune dysregulation. Given the central role of helper T cells, particularly Th2 and regulatory T cells (Tregs), this systematic review evaluates the efficacy, safety, and immunological effects of three T cell-targeted allergen-specific immunotherapies: oral immunotherapy (OIT), sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), and epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT). Thirteen studies, comprising 14 study arms, from four databases were included following PRISMA 2020 guidelines and PICOS-based selection. Based on the study design, RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools were used to evaluate risk of bias. OIT demonstrated strong clinical and immunological outcomes, with high desensitization and sustained unresponsiveness (SU) rates, increased FOXP3⁺ Tregs, and suppression of Th2 cytokines (IL-4, IL-5, IL-13). SLIT showed moderate immunomodulatory effects with better tolerability, while EPIT provided the safest profile but limited T cell reprogramming. Overall, this review highlights the therapeutic potential of targeting T cells in food allergies and supports the use of OIT as the most effective current strategy, despite a higher risk of adverse events. While SLIT and EPIT remain promising, particularly in pediatric populations, further research is needed to enhance durability, personalize treatments, and combine immunotherapies with adjuncts such as biologics or Treg-promoting agents to achieve lasting immune tolerance. PROSPERO registration ID: CRD420251012358.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41428035What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.