Trial reportAllergy2018
Response to omalizumab using patient enrichment criteria from trials of novel biologics in asthma.
Trial report in Allergy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
54 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 155 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety of biologics for the treatment of asthma in children and adolescents: a systematic review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2025Pooled it
- The clinical and pathological histology efficacy of biological therapy for severe asthma with a phenotype of type 2 inflammation - systematic review.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Pooled it
- Response to omalizumab using patient enrichment criteria from trials of novel biologics in asthma.Allergy · 2018Trial
- Recent Advances and New Therapeutic Goals in the Management of Severe Asthma.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2026Review
- Individualized precision therapy for severe asthma: clinical applications of biological agents and frontiers of cell therapy.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- A functional cell model using basophil activation test to study molecular mechanisms and biomarkers of response to omalizumab treatment in patients with asthma.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Biologics in severe asthma: a state-of-the-art review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2025Review
- Exploring Definitions and Predictors of Severe Asthma Clinical Remission after Biologic Treatment in Adults.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2024Article
- The Incredible Adventure of Omalizumab.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Low Serum IL-18 Levels May Predict the Effectiveness of Dupilumab in Severe Asthma.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2024Article
- Evidence-Based Approach of Biologic Therapy in Bronchial Asthma.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Influence of Genetics on the Response to Omalizumab in Patients with Severe Uncontrolled Asthma with an Allergic Phenotype.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Observational
- Characteristics of Severe Non-Eosinophilic Asthma: Analysis of Data from 1075 Patients Included in the FASE-CPHG Study.Journal of asthma and allergy · 2023Article
- Response to Omalizumab as an Add-On Therapy in the Treatment of Allergic Asthma in Adult Chinese Patients-A Retrospective Study.Vaccines · 2022Article
- Clinical implications of asthma endotypes and phenotypes.Allergy and asthma proceedings · 2022Article
- Eosinophilic Asthma, Phenotypes-Endotypes and Current Biomarkers of Choice.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Review
- The new era of add-on asthma treatments: where do we stand?Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2022Review
- Current unmet needs and potential solutions to uncontrolled asthma.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2022Review
- Asthma and Allergy: Unravelling a Tangled Relationship with a Focus on New Biomarkers and Treatment.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Challenges in severe asthma: Do we need new drugs or new biomarkers?Frontiers in medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecent efficacy studies of asthma biologics have included highly enriched patient populations. Using a similar approach, we examined factors that predict response to omalizumab to facilitate selection of patients most likely to derive the greatest clinical benefit from therapy.
methodsData from two phase III clinical trials of omalizumab in patients with allergic asthma were examined. Differences in rates of asthma exacerbations between omalizumab and placebo groups during the 16-week inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dose-stable phase were evaluated with respect to baseline blood eosinophil counts (eosinophils <300/μL [low] vs ≥300/μL [high]) and baseline markers of asthma severity (emergency asthma treatment in prior year, asthma hospitalization in prior year, forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV
resultsAdults/adolescents (N = 1071) were randomized to receive either omalizumab (n = 542) or placebo (n = 529). In the 16-week ICS dose-stable phase, rates of exacerbations requiring ≥3 days of systemic corticosteroid treatment were 0.066 and 0.147 with omalizumab and placebo, respectively, representing a relative rate reduction in omalizumab-treated patients of 55% (95% CI, 32%-70%; P = .002). For patients with eosinophils ≥300/μL or with more severe asthma, this rate reduction was significantly more pronounced.
conclusionIn patients with allergic asthma, baseline blood eosinophil levels and/or clinical markers of asthma severity predict response to omalizumab.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.