ArticleJournal of asthma and allergy2025
A Retrospective Real-World Evaluation of the Clinical Outcomes of Biologic Therapy and Bronchial Thermoplasty in a Tertiary Severe Asthma Clinic.
Article in Journal of asthma and allergy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 4-Hydroxynonenal, a Potential Biomarker for Lung Inflammatory Diseases.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Asthma biologics and bronchial thermoplasty (BT) are both effective therapies for severe asthma but there are no direct comparisons between the two treatments. The aims of this study are to described the outcomes of patients with severe asthma managed at a tertiary centre severe asthma clinic with either biologics, BT, or both, and to compare the effectiveness of BT with currently available biologics. Methods: Data was retrospectively collected at pre-specified timepoints-baseline, prior to BT (for patients undergoing BT), and at a follow-up clinic visit in July 2025. Data collected included demographics, serum biomarkers, lung function, asthma control questionnaire (ACQ), frequency of oral corticosteroid (OCS) requiring exacerbations, maintenance OCS dose, initial treatment prescribed and treatment changes over time. Results: One hundred and fifteen consecutive patients' data were reviewed. Significant improvements in ACQ (3.4 (3-4.2) vs 1.8 (0.8-2.6), P<0.001) and number of OCS-requiring exacerbations (2 (1-4) vs 1 (0-1), P<0.001) were noted at follow-up compared to baseline. Sixty percent of patients who were on OCS at baseline were able to be successfully weaned off and 50% of the remaining patients were able to reduce their dose. Patients who underwent BT were either ineligible for (27%), or failed to respond to biologic therapy (73%). Despite this, significant reductions in ACQ (2.9 (2.2-3.5) vs 1.8 (1.2-2.5), P<0.001), OCS-requiring exacerbations (3.5 (2-6) vs 0 (0-1.3), P<0.001), and maintenance OCS dose were observed post BT. No significant difference was noted in the magnitude of change in key clinical outcomes between patients treated with biologics and those who underwent BT. Conclusion: In this retrospective real-world study, patients treated with BT had comparable clinical outcomes to those treated with asthma biologics. This included a subset of patients who were ineligible for, or failed to respond to biologic therapy. These results support the ongoing role of BT in the era of biologic therapy.
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.