ArticleAdvances in therapy2026
Challenges in Evaluating Clinical Remission in Severe Asthma: Insights from the Mayo Clinic.
Article in Advances in therapy, 2026. 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.
- Achieving clinical remission in moderate-to-severe asthma using inhaled triple therapy.ERJ open research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionClinical remission (CR) is an ambitious and achievable treatment goal for many patients with severe asthma. This study evaluated real-life care of patients in the U.S. using CR criteria defined by the American Thoracic Society; American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology; and American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study (GSK ID: 219744) utilized data from the Mayo Clinic's electronic health record database (January 1, 2014-March 31, 2023). Eligible adults had severe asthma, ≥ 1 respiratory biologic initiated, and ≥ 12 months of clinical activity post-index date. The primary objective quantified the proportion of patients with documented CR component criteria 12-months post-biologic initiation. Criteria included asthma exacerbations, systemic corticosteroid use for asthma, missed work/school due to asthma, ≥ 2 pulmonary function tests, controller medication use for asthma, ≥ 2 asthma control tests, and rescue medication use for asthma.
resultsOf 4623 patients receiving respiratory biologics, 707 were eligible. Documentation was available for ≥ 1 component in 94.2% of patients; none had all criteria documented. Overall, 90.2%, 83.2%, 55.4%, and 33.0% of patients had documented controller medication use, rescue medication use, systemic corticosteroid use, and asthma exacerbations, respectively. For patients with documentation, 91.2% achieved ≥ 1 criterion. However, the proportion achieving remission decreased with the number of components; 0.6% of patients achieved ≥ 5 criteria. Of 141 (19.9%) patients receiving mepolizumab, documentation was available for ≥ 1 component in all patients; none had all criteria documented. The proportion of patients with documentation, and who achieved ≥ 1 to ≥ 4 criteria, was higher versus the overall population.
conclusionThis study demonstrated infrequent documentation of the CR components in routine practice, thereby limiting the comprehensive evaluation of CR. Standardized assessment protocols encompassing all domains are needed to enable accurate assessment of CR, and for treatment targets to provide clear goals for clinicians and patients.
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.