ArticleBMC pulmonary medicine2025
Clinical outcomes after switching from omalizumab to anti-IL-5/IL-5R biologics in severe asthma: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMC 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.
- Therapeutic Switching of Biological Drugs in Paediatric Severe Asthma: Experience of a Referral Centre.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Immunosenescence and Allergy: Molecular and Cellular Links Between Inflammaging, Neuro-Immune Aging, and Response to Biologic Therapies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Impact of sputum neutrophilia on the efficacy of biologics in severe asthma.Frontiers in allergy · 2026Article
- Beyond inhaled medications: precision medicine and biologic therapies targeting the IL-33/TSLP/type 2 axis in COPD.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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSevere asthma (SA) is a heterogeneous disease composed of various clinical phenotypes, and criteria for selecting the most appropriate biological agent remain unclear. Therefore, when optimal control cannot be achieved with the initial biological therapy, switching between biological drugs is often performed.
methodsThis real-world study evaluated patients with severe asthma who initiated omalizumab treatment. Based on their treatment response, patients were divided into two groups: those who continued omalizumab and those who switched to mepolizumab or benralizumab. Clinical data were evaluated before biological treatment, after omalizumab therapy, and following the second biological therapy. Additionally, factors influencing the decision to switch and the effectiveness of the switch were analyzed.
resultsOf the total 51 patients, 45.1% (n = 23) switched to a second biological agent due to inadequate response to the initial treatment. In the "Switch" group, baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) levels were significantly lower, while blood eosinophil counts (BEC) and exacerbation frequency were higher (p < 0.05). Although limited clinical improvement was observed after omalizumab treatment, significant improvements in asthma control test (ACT) scores, FEV₁, BEC, exacerbations, and hospitalizations were noted following the second biological therapy (p < 0.001). Low baseline FEV₁, high BEC, and frequent exacerbations were the main predictors of the decision to switch.
conclusionsIn severe asthma patients who do not achieve adequate control with omalizumab, switching to interleukin-5 (IL-5) targeted biological therapies may provide clinically significant improvements. Baseline clinical parameters can serve as useful predictors for the need to change biological treatment.
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.