ArticleThe World Allergy Organization journal2019
Age does not affect the efficacy of anti-IL-5/IL-5R in severe asthmatics.
Article in The World Allergy Organization journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adverse event profiles of fenofibrate and gemfibrozil: a retrospective comparative study and literature synthesis.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Biological functions and clinical efficacy of IL-5/IL-5Rα-targeted therapies across eosinophilia-associated diseases.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Gene Expression Changes as Biomarkers of Immunosenescence in Bulgarian Individuals of Active Age.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Efficacy and safety of benralizumab in elderly patients with severe eosinophilic asthma.European clinical respiratory journal · 2024Article
- Characteristics of severe asthma patients on biologics: a real-life European registry study.ERJ open research · 2023Article
- Management of severe asthma during the first lockdown phase of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: Tips for facing the second wave.Pulmonary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2022Article
- Severe Asthma, Telemedicine, and Self-Administered Therapy: Listening First to the Patient.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Treating severe asthma: Targeting the IL-5 pathway.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2021Review
- Treatable Mechanisms in Asthma.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealthcare decisions made on the basis of insufficient evidence may potentially have ineffective or even harmful consequences. The proportion of older ages (over 65 years) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for severe asthma is not enough to establish whether anti-IL-5/IL-5R therapies are equally effective in the elderly as in younger subjects.
methodsIn order to assess the relationship between age and the efficacy of anti-IL-5 monoclonal antibodies (mABs) with respect to the risk of exacerbations and changes in FEV
resultsA total of 10 studies were analysed. Age did not modulate the efficacy of anti-IL-5/IL-5R treatment against the risk of exacerbation neither in the overall population (coefficient -0.007, P = 0.89), nor in patients with high blood Eos count (coefficient 0.075, P = 0.30). The blood Eos level drove the efficacy of anti-IL-5/IL-5R mABs against the risk of exacerbation regardless of age (coefficient -0.27, P < 0.001). Age did not significantly affect the efficacy of anti-IL-5/IL-5R mABs with respect to the change in FEV
conclusionsAge does not negatively affect the efficacy of anti-IL-5/IL-5R mABs. These findings support the use of anti-IL-5/IL-5R mABs in asthmatics of different age ranges.
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.