Skip to main content
. 2014 Jan 13;2014(1):CD003559. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003559.pub4

Solèr 2001.

Methods Randomised, double‐blind, parallel‐group, placebo‐controlled trial. Randomisation by random number sequences. Participants randomly assigned at visit three. Independent personnel were responsible for allocation
Participants N = 546 (1356 screened). Age range: 12 to 75, 268 male participants. Asthma diagnosed according to ATS guidelines
Inclusion criteria: asthma diagnosed for longer than one year, positive skin prick test to at least one allergen, serum total IgE level > 30 and < 700 IU/mL‐1, body weight < 150 kg, baseline FEV1 > 40% and < 80% predicted, increasing by > 12% within 30 minutes of taking salbutamol, mean total daily symptom score > 3 (max 9) during 14 days before randomisation, treatment with ICS 200 mcg BDP per day for > three months before randomisation, use of beta‐agonists on an as‐needed/regular basis
Exclusion criteria: unstable asthma, significant alteration to regular medication and acute exacerbation requiring additional corticosteroid treatment > one month before screening visit, oral steroids. 59 participants withdrew from the study (placebo: n = 40; omalizumab: n = 19). Reasons cited were withdrawal of consent (placebo: n = 14; omalizumab: n = 3), unsatisfactory therapeutic effect (placebo: n = 11; omalizumab: n = 8), adverse events (placebo: n = 5; omalizumab: n = 0)
Interventions Subcutaneous omalizumab ≥ 0.016 mg/kg/IgE (IU/mL) versus placebo over a core 28‐week period. Run‐in phase was four to six weeks with stabilisation of BDP. Stable and reduction phases of BDP followed randomisation. Trial extension phase lasted 32 weeks
Outcomes Number of exacerbations, change in serum free IgE, reduction in BDP, symptom score, rescue medication use, morning PEF, safety and tolerability
Notes Jadad score: 5
 Trial 009
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Randomisation by random number sequences. Participants randomly assigned at visit three
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Independent personnel responsible for allocation
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk Double‐blind
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk 20 participants did not complete the trial, and reasons for withdrawal are included in the trial report
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk No apparent indication of selective reporting bias