Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32916135›Full record

Trial reportThe Lancet. Respiratory medicine2021

Composite type-2 biomarker strategy versus a symptom-risk-based algorithm to adjust corticosteroid dose in patients with severe asthma: a multicentre, single-blind, parallel group, randomised controlled trial.

Liam G Heaney, John Busby, Catherine E Hanratty, Ratko Djukanovic, Ashley Woodcock, Samantha M Walker, Timothy C Hardman, Joseph R Arron, David F Choy, Peter Bradding and 15 more

Erratum issued Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Lancet. Respiratory medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT02717689 (A Randomised Pragmatic Trial Of Corticosteroid Optimisation In Severe Asthma Using A Composite Biomarker Algorithm To Adjust Corticosteroid Dose Versus Standard Care), which is not on this map. Cited by 52 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
11.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT02717689 nacompletednot on this map

A Randomised Pragmatic Trial Of Corticosteroid Optimisation In Severe Asthma Using A Composite Biomarker Algorithm To Adjust Corticosteroid Dose Versus Standard Care

TypeinterventionalSponsorBelfast Health and Social Care TrustRan2016 to 2019Enrolled300ConditionsSevere Persistent AsthmaArmsBiomarker based adjustment of corticosteroid dose
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

52 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 131 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Observational
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Digitally assessed home FEVBMJ open respiratory research · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Asthma: Biomedical and Psychobiological Perspectives.Biopsychosocial science and medicine · 2025
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

25 authors at 16 institutions in 2 countries.

Liam G HeaneyCentre for Experimental Medicine, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University, Belfast, UK. Electronic address: l.heaney@qub.ac.uk.
John BusbyCentre for Experimental Medicine, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University, Belfast, UK.
Catherine E HanrattyCentre for Experimental Medicine, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University, Belfast, UK.
Ratko DjukanovicSchool of Clinical and Experimental Sciences, University of Southampton, NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, Southampton, UK.
Ashley WoodcockDivision of Infection, Immunity and Respiratory Medicine, School of Biological Sciences, University of Manchester and Manchester Academic Health Science Centre and NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Samantha M WalkerAsthma UK & British Lung Foundation Partnership, London, UK.
Timothy C HardmanNiche Science & Technology, Falstaff House, Richmond, UK.
Joseph R ArronGenentech, South San Francisco, CA, USA.
David F ChoyGenentech, South San Francisco, CA, USA.
Peter BraddingDepartment of Respiratory Sciences, Institute for Lung Health and Leicester NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Christopher E BrightlingDepartment of Respiratory Sciences, Institute for Lung Health and Leicester NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Rekha ChaudhuriNHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde Health Board, Gartnavel Hospital, and University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Douglas C CowanNHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Stobhill Hospital, Glasgow, UK.
Adel H MansurUniversity of Birmingham and Heartlands Hospital, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Stephen J FowlerDivision of Infection, Immunity and Respiratory Medicine, School of Biological Sciences, University of Manchester and Manchester Academic Health Science Centre and NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Robert M NivenDivision of Infection, Immunity and Respiratory Medicine, School of Biological Sciences, University of Manchester and Manchester Academic Health Science Centre and NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Peter H HowarthSchool of Clinical and Experimental Sciences, University of Southampton, NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, Southampton, UK.
James L LordanThe Newcastle upon Tyne NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Andrew Menzies-GowRoyal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Tim W HarrisonNottingham Respiratory NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Douglas S RobinsonUniversity College Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Cecile T J HolwegGenentech, South San Francisco, CA, USA.
John G Matthews23andMe, Sunnyvale, CA, USA.
Ian D PavordOxford Respiratory NIHR BRC, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
investigators for the MRC Refractory Asthma Stratification Programme
Queen's University Belfast · GBNIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre · GBUniversity of Manchester · GB23andMe (United States) · USBritish Lung Foundation · GBNewcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBNHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde · GBNIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre · GBNIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre · GBNottingham Biomedical Research Centre · GBRoyal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust · GBStobhill Hospital · GBUniversity College Hospital · GBUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Oxford · GBUniversity of Southampton · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/M016579/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAsthma treatment guidelines recommend increasing corticosteroid dose to control symptoms and reduce exacerbations. This approach is potentially flawed because symptomatic asthma can occur without corticosteroid responsive type-2 (T2)-driven eosinophilic inflammation, and inappropriately high-dose corticosteroid treatment might have little therapeutic benefit with increased risk of side-effects. We compared a biomarker strategy to adjust corticosteroid dose using a composite score of T2 biomarkers (fractional exhaled nitric oxide [FENO], blood eosinophils, and serum periostin) with a standardised symptom-risk-based algorithm (control).

methodsWe did a single-blind, parallel group, randomised controlled trial in adults (18-80 years of age) with severe asthma (at treatment steps 4 and 5 of the Global Initiative for Asthma) and FENO of less than 45 parts per billion at 12 specialist severe asthma centres across England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Patients were randomly assigned (4:1) to either the biomarker strategy group or the control group by an online electronic case-report form, in blocks of ten, stratified by asthma control and use of rescue systemic steroids in the previous year. Patients were masked to study group allocation throughout the entirety of the study. Patients attended clinic every 8 weeks, with treatment adjustment following automated treatment-group-specific algorithms: those in the biomarker strategy group received a default advisory to maintain treatment and those in the control group had their treatment adjusted according to the steps indicated by the trial algorithm. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with corticosteroid dose reduction at week 48, in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Secondary outcomes were inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dose at the end of the study; cumulative dose of ICS during the study; proportion of patients on maintenance oral corticosteroids (OCS) at study end; rate of protocol-defined severe exacerbations per patient year; time to first severe exacerbation; number of hospital admissions for asthma; changes in lung function, Asthma Control Questionnaire-7 score, Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire score, and T2 biomarkers from baseline to week 48; and whether patients declined to progress to OCS. A secondary aim of our study was to establish the proportion of patients with severe asthma in whom T2 biomarkers remained low when corticosteroid therapy was decreased to a minimum ICS dose. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02717689 and has been completed.

findingsPatients were recruited from Jan 8, 2016, to July 12, 2018. Of 549 patients assessed, 301 patients were included in the ITT population and were randomly assigned to the biomarker strategy group (n=240) or to the control group (n=61). 28·4% of patients in the biomarker strategy group were on a lower corticosteroid dose at week 48 compared with 18·5% of patients in the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1·71 [95% CI 0·80-3·63]; p=0·17). In the per-protocol (PP) population (n=121), a significantly greater proportion of patients were on a lower corticosteroid dose at week 48 in the biomarker strategy group (30·7% of patients) compared with the control group (5·0% of patients; aOR 11·48 [95% CI 1·35-97·83]; p=0·026). Patient choice to not follow treatment advice was the principle reason for loss to PP analysis. There was no difference in secondary outcomes between study groups and no loss of asthma control among patients in the biomarker strategy group who reduced their corticosteroid dose.

interpretationBiomarker-based corticosteroid adjustment did not result in a greater proportion of patients reducing corticosteroid dose versus control. Understanding the reasons for patients not following treatment advice in both treatment strategies is an important area for future research. The prevalence of T2 biomarker-low severe asthma was low.

fundingThis study was funded, in part, by the Medical Research Council UK.

Indexed as

Drug Dosage CalculationsAcute DiseaseAdrenal Cortex HormonesAlgorithmsAnti-Asthmatic AgentsAsthmaBiomarkersCell Adhesion MoleculesEosinophilsFemaleHumansLeukocyte CountMaleMiddle AgedNitric OxideRisk FactorsAdrenal Cortex HormonesAnti-Asthmatic AgentsBiomarkersCell Adhesion MoleculesNitric OxidePOSTN protein, human

Identifiers

PMID32916135
PMCPMC7783382
OpenAlexW3084228319

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.