ReviewCurrent opinion in pulmonary medicine2025
Recent evidence for stepping down severe asthma therapies.
Review in Current opinion in pulmonary medicine, 2025. 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.
- High degree of remission in pediatric severe asthma patients treated with biologics in a real-world setting.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2026Article
- Predictive Factors And Treatments Associated with Clinical Remission in Severe Eosinophilic Asthma.Journal of inflammation research · 2026Review
- Determinants of Clinical Remission in Dupilumab-Treated Severe Eosinophilic Asthma: A Real-World Retrospective Study.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Expert Opinion and Evidence-Based Review on Maintenance Therapy Step-Down in Patients With Severe Asthma Controlled With Biologics.Open respiratory archivesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of reviewBiologics have proven safe and effective for severe asthma. Their introduction has offered hope for patients and prescribers with a growing list of novel medications and indications. While 'step-up' indications for biologic initiation are well described in guidelines, 'step-down' strategy remains poorly understood and thus guidance is limited. In this opinion article we aim to focus on recent practice changing evidence for stepping-down severe asthma management, tools for the assessment of biologic efficacy, propose a framework for the step-down of biologic and nonbiologic therapies and suggest topics of interest for future research. RECENT
findingsClinical tools have been developed to aid in assessing biologic response. Some patients experience marked improvement and may enter a period of clinical remission or even complete remission. Following positive response, add-on therapy may safely be approached for taper or withdrawal. SUMMARY: There is limited consensus but growing evidence for stepping-down therapies in patients who achieve clinical response and/or remission after biologic initiation. Further structured guidance would benefit clinicians who face clinical uncertainty when deciding to step-down therapy in patients with well controlled 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.