Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29437007›Full record

ReviewCurrent drug targets2018

Blood Eosinophils as Biomarkers to Drive Treatment Choices in Asthma and COPD.

Konstantinos Kostikas, Caterina Brindicci, Francesco Patalano

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current drug targets, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

45 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 89 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Subsets of Eosinophils in Asthma, a Challenge for Precise Treatment.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Konstantinos KostikasNovartis Pharma AG, Postfach CH-4002, Basel, Switzerland.
Caterina BrindicciNovartis Pharma AG, Postfach CH-4002, Basel, Switzerland.
Francesco PatalanoNovartis Pharma AG, Postfach CH-4002, Basel, Switzerland.
Novartis (Switzerland) · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAsthma and COPD are complex, heterogeneous conditions comprising a wide range of phenotypes, some of which are refractory to currently available treatments. Elucidation of these phenotypes and identification of biomarkers with which to recognize them and guide appropriate treatment remain a priority.

objectiveThis review describes the utility of blood eosinophils as a surrogate biomarker of eosinophilic airway inflammation, a common feature of specific asthma and COPD phenotypes. The role of blood eosinophils in airway disease is described, as is their relevance in reflecting airway eosinophilia. Each disease is discussed separately as the manner in which blood eosinophils might be used as biomarkers differs. Focusing on patients with severe disease (persistent eosinophilic asthma and exacerbating COPD), we evaluate evidence examining eosinophils as biomarkers.

resultsIn asthma, the rationale for using blood eosinophils to guide treatment is clearly defined, backed by prospective, well-controlled studies. Higher eosinophil counts identify patients with more severe disease and poorer outcomes, patients for whom biologic therapies targeting allergic and/or eosinophilic pathways are recommended. In COPD, the evidence is less robust. High blood eosinophil counts are a modest predictor of future exacerbations, and may predict a favourable response to ICS on top of LABA/LAMA, especially in patients with a history of frequent exacerbations.

conclusionBefore extensive application in clinical practice, further evaluation of these findings in prospective clinical studies, and standardization of the appropriate thresholds of clinically relevant eosinophilia are needed, together with establishing whether single or multiple measurements are required in different clinical settings.

Indexed as

EosinophilsAsthmaBiological ProductsBiomarkersClinical Decision-MakingClinical Trials as TopicDisease ProgressionEosinophiliaHumansImmunosuppressive AgentsInterleukinsLeukocyte CountMolecular Targeted TherapyPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveReference ValuesSeverity of Illness IndexBiological ProductsBiomarkersImmunosuppressive AgentsInterleukinsairway inflammationasthmabiomarkersBlood eosinophilsCOPDtreatment options.

Identifiers

PMID29437007
PMCPMC6225326
OpenAlexW2786614616

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.