ArticleThe Laryngoscope2025
Impact of Biologics on Surgery in Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Polyps and Allergic Fungal Sinusitis.
Article in The Laryngoscope, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Allergic Rhinitis Amplifies Asthma Risk in Patients With Chronic Rhinosinusitis: A Large-Scale Retrospective Cohort Analysis.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2026Article
- Association of Adult Chronic Rhinosinusitis With Pediatric Tonsillectomy and Adenoidectomy.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
- Obesity and New-Onset Asthma Risk in Chronic Rhinosinusitis: A Population-Based Cohort Study.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2026Article
- Cannabis Use and Risk of Chronic Rhinosinusitis and Sinus Surgery.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025Article
- Utilization of dupilumab in an immunocompromised patient with extensive allergic fungal rhinosinusitis unsuitable for surgical intervention: A case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the efficacy of th2-targeted biologic medications (dupilumab, omalizumab, and mepolizumab) on absolute risk reduction (ARR) of functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) and allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS).
methodsThe TriNetX Research Network database was queried for each mAb's market lifespan through March 2024. Adults with CRSwNP were propensity score matched against non-mAb controls based on age, sex, race, and asthma diagnosis. The primary outcome was rate of FESS, with secondary outcomes including inpatient admission, emergency department (ED) visit, and incidence of acute sinusitis. Subgroup analysis was performed for patients with AFRS.
resultsAll mAbs decreased FESS risk (dupilumab, ARR 11.48%, 95% CI 9.82%-13.15%, p < 0.001; omalizumab, ARR 12.02%, 95% CI 4.36%-19.68%, p = 0.002; mepolizumab, ARR 10.32%, 95% CI 5.24%-15.40%, p < 0.001) in CRSwNP patients. Only dupilumab also reduced risk of inpatient admission (ARR 8.59%, 95% CI 7.04%-10.15%, p < 0.001), ED visit (ARR 5.94%, 95% CI 4.28%-7.61%, p < 0.001), and acute sinusitis (ARR 2.60%, 95% CI 1.09%-4.12%, p = 0.001). In AFRS patients, only dupilumab reduced the risk of all outcomes: FESS (ARR 6.97%, 95 CI 2.86%-11.09%, p = 0.001), inpatient admission (ARR 16.93%, 95% CI 11.30%-22.57%, p < 0.001), ED visit (ARR 13.15%, 95% CI 7.15%-19.14%, p < 0.001), and acute sinusitis (ARR 7.17%, 95% CI 2.18%-12.17%, p = 0.005).
conclusionAlthough all mAbs reduced FESS risk in CRSwNP, only dupilumab reduced secondary outcomes as well. Similarly, only dupilumab improved all outcomes in AFRS patients. These data demonstrate the potential of mAbs in reducing disease burden and enhancing patient outcomes in CRSwNP and AFRS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 135:593-601, 2025.
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.