ArticleThe journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice2025
Real-World Adherence to Biologic Therapy for Severe Asthma in Children.
Article in The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice, 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.
- Pediatric spontaneous-reporting patterns for biologics approved or used for asthma: Analysis of the FDA adverse event reporting system.Pediatric allergy and immunology : official publication of the European Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology · 2026Article
- Long-Term Adherence to Benralizumab and Sustained Clinical Benefits in Patients with Severe Eosinophilic Asthma: Insights from GALERNA, a Retrospective Real-World Study in Spain.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- The evolving global burden of asthma among children and adolescents, 1990-2040: trends, disparities, and future projections based on Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2021.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Depemokimab and the twice-yearly regimen: pharmacological implications and therapeutic positioning in severe eosinophilic respiratory diseases.Frontiers in immunology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBiologic medications improve asthma symptoms, spirometry, and exacerbation rates in patients with severe asthma. However, little is known about adherence to biologic medications in children.
objectivesTo describe adherence to biologic medications in pediatric asthma and evaluate cofactors and outcomes related to adherence.
methodsA retrospective chart review was performed of patients at a single medical center with severe asthma to calculate adherence during the first year on biologic therapy. The relationship of adherence with method of administration (ie, home nursing, clinic, or independent), medication dosing frequency, and insurance was examined using multiple regression models. The effect of biologic therapy on asthma outcomes was analyzed using generalized linear regression models.
resultsPatients demonstrated 84% adherence to biologic therapies during the first 6 months of therapy (SD, 19, n = 186) and 76% over 12 months (SD, 23, n = 155). Method of administration, insurance type, and dosing frequency impacted adherence. Outcomes improved on biologic therapy such that asthma exacerbations decreased by 0.8 (SD, 1.9) exacerbations per year, forced vital capacity z score improved by 0.26 (SD, 0.7), and FEV
conclusionsPatients with severe asthma demonstrated higher rates of adherence to asthma biologic medications than has been demonstrated for inhaled corticosteroids. Biologic therapies were associated with decreased asthma exacerbations and improved spirometry, and these changes were associated with adherence. Medication administration strategy, insurance type, and dosing frequency impacted adherence.
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.