ArticleERJ open research2022
Clinical response to biologicals for severe asthma: any relevance for sex in different age ranges?
Article in ERJ open research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex, hormones, and lung health.Physiological reviews · 2026Review
- Durability of benralizumab effectiveness in severe eosinophilic asthma patients with and without chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: aFrontiers in allergy · 2025Article
- Chinese expert consensus on the diagnosis, treatment, and management of asthma in women across life.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Review
- Characteristics of severe asthma patients on biologics: a real-life European registry study.ERJ open research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Whether sex can influence the clinical response to biological treatment in patients with severe asthma has not been fully addressed. Aims and methods: The aim of this study was to investigate in patients with severe asthma undergoing biological treatment the individual evolution of lung function measurements and patient-reported asthma control scores over a 12-month follow-up period, in relation to patients' sex, in different age ranges. Second, the change in the administered dose of oral corticosteroids (OCS) before and after 12 months of treatment was investigated. Results: 64 patients (58% female and 42% male) with a median age of 52 years were enrolled in the study. There were no relevant differences between sexes in terms of lung function, patient-reported asthma control, exacerbation rate and daily OCS dose within the study timeframe. A separate sub-analysis by biological treatment confirmed the same finding. Stratifying individuals by age, we showed that older men had lower lung function parameter values (forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV Conclusion: According to our findings, sex does not act as a determinant of treatment response to biologicals in people with severe asthma. Although to be confirmed in larger studies, our data suggest that neither sex nor age should limit biological treatment prescription, once the eligibility criteria for that therapy are satisfied.
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.