ArticleJournal of asthma and allergy2021
A Real-World Evaluation of Clinical Outcomes of Biologicals and Bronchial Thermoplasty for Severe Refractory Asthma (BIOTERM).
Article in Journal of asthma and allergy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bronchial thermoplasty reduces asthma exacerbation and improves quality of life in asthma with type 2 inflammation.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of anti-IL-5/5Rα biologics in severe asthma in real-world studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.ERJ open research · 2025Article
- Biologics and airway remodeling in asthma: early, late, and potential preventive effects.Allergy · 2025Review
- A Retrospective Real-World Evaluation of the Clinical Outcomes of Biologic Therapy and Bronchial Thermoplasty in a Tertiary Severe Asthma Clinic.Journal of asthma and allergy · 2025Article
- Interventional pulmonology for chronic inflammatory airway diseases.Chinese medical journal pulmonary and critical care medicine · 2024Review
- Asthma and COPD: A Focus on β-Agonists - Past, Present and Future.Handbook of experimental pharmacology · 2024Review
- S100A alarmins and thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) regulation in severe asthma following bronchial thermoplasty.Respiratory research · 2023Article
- Which Endoscopic Procedure to Use and in What Patient? Valves, Coils, Foam, and Heat in COPD and Asthma.Pulmonary therapy · 2023Review
- Comparison between clinical trials and real-world evidence studies on biologics for severe asthma.The Journal of international medical research · 2022Review
- Bronchial thermoplasty for severe asthma: potential mechanisms and response markers.Therapeutic advances in respiratory diseaseReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe important progress made on asthma phenotyping encouraged the development of new therapeutic strategies, such as monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and bronchial thermoplasty (BT). The aim of this study is to compare patients diagnosed with severe refractory asthma (SRA) who are currently being treated with omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab or BT and to evaluate the efficacy of these treatments over a 12-month observation period.
methodsOverall, 199 consecutive patients with SRA were included. The cohort was selected referring to the eligibility criteria for all available biologics and BT.
resultsAmong 32 patients treated with benralizumab, we found a 16.7% reduction in hospitalizations, a 66.6% reduction in exacerbations (p = 0.0001) and the greater improvement in FEV1 (+ 37.4%, p < 0.0001). Among omalizumab group (54 patients), there was a 85.7% (p = 0.012) reduction in hospitalizations and a 88.8% (p < 0.0001) reduction in exacerbations. In the mepolizumab group (83 patients), we found a 89.5% (p = 0.02) reduction in hospitalizations and a 92.1% (p < 0.0001) reduction in exacerbations. BT subgroup (30 patients) showed a 93.7% (p = 0.001) reduction in hospitalizations and a 73.5% (p < 0.0001) reduction in exacerbations. The best results in terms of OCS sparing effect were obtained by BT (- 76%, p < 0.0001) and mepolizumab (- 90.2%, p = 0.002). Omalizumab showed the highest percentage of super responder patients.
conclusionTo our knowledge, this is the first study to compare all marketed mAbs with BT, ending in more comprehensive and applicable results to clinical practice. All biologics, to varying degrees, reduced hospitalizations, exacerbations, and OCS use. The starting point for patients in the BT group was worse regarding hospitalizations, exacerbations and OCS, but despite this, even this non-pharmacological option obtained positive results, comparable to biologics.
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.