ArticleAllergy, asthma & immunology research2025
Impact of Biologics on Nasal Symptoms in Severe Asthmatics: Findings From the PRISM Study.
Article in Allergy, asthma & immunology research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative effectiveness of omalizumab in asthma-COPD overlap vs. asthma: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Efficacy of Biologics on Nasal Symptoms in Severe Asthmatics: We Need Additional Biomarkers or Strategies to Assess Phenotypes or Endotypes.Allergy, asthma & immunology research · 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
30 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe sino-nasal outcome test (SNOT-22) is a patient-reported outcome measure for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), assessing treatment response after 6 months of biologic uses in patients with severe CRS. We investigated score changes in each domain of SNOT-22 with biologics in patients with severe asthma.
methodsA total of 229 patients with severe asthma and nasal symptoms were enrolled from a prospective, observational, multicenter cohort study. After 6 months of treatment with biologics or conventional GINA Step 4-5 management, SNOT-22 changes were evaluated by analyzing total and rhinological, extranasal rhinological, ear/facial, psychological, and sleep domain scores.
resultsThe adjusted odds ratio (OR) of being a responder was significantly higher for dupilumab in the total (OR, 2.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08-4.87), extranasal rhinological (OR, 2.80; 95% CI, 1.20-6.56), physiologic (OR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.03-4.83), and sleep dysfunction (OR, 2.50; 95% CI, 1.14-5.47) domain scores of SNOT-22 than those for conventional or anti- interleukin (IL)-5 antibody treatment. After adjusting for the history of CRS diagnosis, dupilumab users had higher ORs for total SNOT-22 (OR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.02-4.77) and extranasal rhinological (OR, 2.77; 95% CI, 1.16-6.60) scores. When SNOT-22 was plotted by the type of treatment at 0, 1, and 6 months, an overall trend of decreased total/domain scores of SNOT-22 was observed in the biologic-treated group compared to the conventional group, with the most pronounced decrease in dupilumab-treated group.
conclusionsDupilumab demonstrates a significant improvement not only in total SNOT-22 scores but also in the extranasal rhinological, physiologic, and sleep dysfunction domain scores compared to conventional or anti-IL-5 treatment in patients with severe asthma and nasal symptoms.
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.