ArticleYonago acta medica2024
Efficacy, Safety, and Continuation of Biological Therapy in Older Patients with Asthma in a Real-World Setting: A Retrospective Observational Study.
Article in Yonago acta medica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Recent Advances and New Therapeutic Goals in the Management of Severe Asthma.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Major randomized clinical trials have shown that biological therapy can reduce the exacerbation rate and oral corticosteroid (OCS) dosage in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. However, data on the continuation, efficacy, and safety of biological therapy in older patients with asthma are limited. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the differences in the continuation rate, efficacy, and safety of biological therapy between older (≥ 65 years) and younger (< 65 years) patients with asthma. Methods: In this single-center retrospective observational study, we collected clinical data of patients with asthma who were administered biological drugs such as omalizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab, and dupilumab between April 2009 and August 2022. We comparatively analyzed the continuation, efficacy, and safety of biological therapy between older (age ≥ 65 years) and younger patient (age < 65 years) groups. The reasons for discontinuation or switching of biological drugs were also evaluated. Results: Sixty-two (31 older and 31 younger) patients were treated with 91 biologics during the observational period. The mean age of older patients was 74.3 ± 5.1 years and that of younger patients was 48.0 ± 14.0 years. The continuation rate of biological therapy was not significantly different between the groups. Social background was the most common reason for discontinuation of biological therapy in both groups, and insufficient effect was the most common reason for switching to biological drugs. Asthma exacerbations decreased in both groups within the first 12 months of biologic therapy. The dosage of OCS tended to decrease in the older group and significantly decrease in the younger group. Conclusion: Biologic therapy for older patients with asthma can be continued, with efficacy and safety similar to those in younger patients with asthma.
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.