ArticlePulmonary therapy2026
Small Airways Disease Adversely Impacts the Response to Biologic Therapies in Severe Asthma.
Article in Pulmonary therapy, 2026. 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.
- It's not all about small airways disease: key limitations of oscillometry interpretation.Frontiers in allergy · 2026Review
- Small airway dysfunction: a shared, early, measurable, and potentially treatable trait across COPD, asthma, and fibrotic lung disease.Frontiers in medicine · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSmall airways disease (SAD) is increasingly recognized as a relevant trait in severe asthma, but its influence on outcomes with biologic therapies remains uncertain. We assessed the prevalence of SAD and its association with real-world treatment response in a severe asthma cohort. We hypothesized that baseline SAD, particularly when identified by oscillometry, would be associated with non-response to biologic therapy over 12 months.
methodsThis single-center, retrospective cohort included adult severe asthma outpatients initiating biologic therapy. At enrolment, participants underwent clinical and biomarker evaluation, complete lung function testing (spirometry/plethysmography), and the Forced Oscillation Technique. SAD was defined by the coexistence of ≥ 1 oscillometry abnormality and ≥ 1 spirometry/plethysmography abnormality. "Non-responders" were defined as patients experiencing ≥ 2 exacerbations during 12-month follow-up. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of response, adjusting for biologic therapy and key confounders (including BMI).
resultsThe analytic sample comprised 156 patients (aged 55 ± 18 years, 91 females) treated with omalizumab (n = 60), benralizumab (n = 23), mepolizumab (n = 32), or dupilumab (n = 41). After 12 months, 24/156 patients (15%) were classified as non-responders. At baseline, SAD was present in 69/156 patients (44%) and was more prevalent in non-responders than in responders (75% vs. 40%, p < 0.01). Non-responders showed worse spirometric indices (FEV
conclusionsIn a real-world severe asthma cohort, baseline SAD, particularly when identified by oscillometry, was associated with subsequent non-response to biologic therapy, suggesting potential value for risk stratification.
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.