ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Real-World and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Dupilumab and Other Biological Drugs for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease-A Systematic Review.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond inhaled medications: precision medicine and biologic therapies targeting the IL-33/TSLP/type 2 axis in COPD.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Efficacy and Safety of Dupilumab in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease with Type 2 Inflammation: A Single-Center Real-World Study.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2026Article
- Advancing COPD management through novel pharmacological agents: ensifentrine and dupilumab.Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2025Review
- Real-world evidence of tezepelumab for severe asthma: a retrospective multicentre cohort.ERJ open research · 2025Article
- The COURSE trial and beyond: rethinking chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation management with biologics.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Real-World Experience of Dupilumab Treatment for Patients with COPD - A Single Center Prospective Study.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2025Observational
- Dupilumab for the treatment of COPD: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOver the last few decades, the efficacy of biological therapies for COPD has been evaluated by different randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Still, the evaluation of real-world data and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have not been performed in this field before. In the current work, we present a systematic literature review of the real-world data and PROMs of biological treatments for COPD.
methodsThree large databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect) were utilized for the systematic literature review. Clinical studies (RCT, cohorts, case series/reports) assessing patients with COPD treated by any biological therapy were included.
resultsThe review resulted in twelve eligible studies (nine randomized controlled trials and three "real-world" case series/reports). The evaluation of PROMs in the included studies was mainly limited to the severity and burden of respiratory symptoms. Most biological therapies were associated with improved PROMs compared to the baseline, although not for the placebo. Dupilumab was the only biologic therapy with proven efficacy in RCT for both objective and subjective measures. One prior study reported patients' self-perceived drug effects, and none evaluated patients' perceived disease status. Only 25 patients were assessed in a real-world setting for all biologic therapies combined. Real-world data were retrospective in the form of case reports or series.
conclusionsThere are limited data on patients' experience with biological therapies for COPD. While real-world data and PROMs are missing, biases such as a placebo effect must be considered, requiring their incorporation with objective outcomes from prospective controlled trials.
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.