ArticleLung India : official organ of Indian Chest Society2026
COPD 2.0: Bronchodilators, biologics and beyond - A systematic review.
Article in Lung India : official organ of Indian Chest Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive respiratory disorder characterized by persistent airflow limitation and chronic inflammation. Conventional bronchodilators have been the mainstay of therapy; however, their efficacy in certain COPD phenotypes remains limited, and uncontrolled disease continues to be prevalent despite optimal conventional treatment. In recent years, biologic therapies have emerged as promising options, particularly for eosinophilic COPD phenotypes. This systematic review evaluates the efficacy, safety, and clinical implications of biologic agents and novel therapeutic approaches in COPD. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted for studies published up to March 2025, including randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and real-world evidence on biologic treatments. Several agents, including monoclonal antibodies targeting eosinophilic inflammation such as anti-interleukin (IL)-5 and anti-IL-4/13 therapies, have demonstrated significant benefits in specific COPD subgroups with frequent exacerbations and elevated eosinophil counts. These biologics have been associated with reductions in exacerbation rates and improvements in quality-of-life metrics, with an acceptable safety profile. Biologic therapies therefore represent a new frontier in the personalized management of COPD, especially in eosinophilic phenotypes. Further high-quality studies are warranted to better define their long-term safety, cost-effectiveness, and broader applicability in COPD populations.
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.