↓ Skip to main content

The Allergic Rhinitis – Clinical Investigator Collaborative (AR-CIC): nasal allergen challenge protocol optimization for studying AR pathophysiology and evaluating novel therapies

Overview of attention for article published in Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
65 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Allergic Rhinitis – Clinical Investigator Collaborative (AR-CIC): nasal allergen challenge protocol optimization for studying AR pathophysiology and evaluating novel therapies
Published in
Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13223-015-0082-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anne K Ellis, Mena Soliman, Lisa Steacy, Marie-Ève Boulay, Louis-Philippe Boulet, Paul K Keith, Harissios Vliagoftis, Susan Waserman, Helen Neighbour

Abstract

The Nasal Allergen Challenge (NAC) model allows the study of Allergic Rhinitis (AR) pathophysiology and the proof of concept of novel therapies. The Allergic Rhinitis - Clinical Investigator Collaborative (AR-CIC) aims to optimize the protocol, ensuring reliability and repeatability of symptoms to better evaluate the therapies under investigation. 20 AR participants were challenged, with 4-fold increments of their respective allergens every 15 minutes, to determine the qualifying allergen concentration (QAC) at which the Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS) of ≥10/12 OR a Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (PNIF) reduction of ≥50% from baseline was achieved. At the NAC visit, the QAC was used in a single challenge and TNSS and PNIF were recorded at baseline, 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1 hour, and hourly up to 12 hours. 10 additional ragweed allergic participants were qualified at TNSS of ≥8/12 AND ≥50% PNIF reduction; the Cumulative Allergen Challenge (CAC) of all incremental doses was used during the NAC visit. 4 non-allergic participants were challenged with the highest allergen concentration. In the QAC study, a group qualified by only meeting PNIF criteria achieved lower TNSS than those achieving either TNSS criteria or PNIIF+TNSS (p<0.01). During the NAC visit, participants in both studies reached their peak symptoms at 15minutes followed by a gradual decline, significantly different from non-allergic participants. The "PNIF only" group experienced significantly lower TNSS than the other groups during NAC visit. QAC and CAC participants did not reach the same peak TNSS during NAC that was achieved at screening. QAC participants qualifying based on TNSS or TNSS+PNIF managed to maintain PNIF scores. Participants experienced reliable symptoms of AR in both studies, using both TNSS and PNIF reduction as part of the qualifying criteria proved better for qualifying participants at screening. Phenotyping based on pattern of symptoms experienced is possible and allows the study of AR pathophysiology and can be applied in evaluation of efficacy of a novel medication. The AR-CIC aims to continue to improve the model and employ it in phase 2 and 3 clinical trials.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 80 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 10 13%
Student > Bachelor 10 13%
Student > Master 7 9%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 12 15%
Unknown 30 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 11%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 30 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 05 September 2019.
All research outputs
#6,333,243
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology
#343
of 924 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,319
of 279,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology
#6
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 924 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
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 279,714 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.