ArticleBMJ open respiratory research2026
Predicting clinical remission in biologic-treated severe asthma: development of a practical scoring system from a Japanese multicentre study.
Article in BMJ open respiratory research, 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
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBiologics have improved clinical remission (CR) rates in severe asthma; however, practical tools for predicting CR are lacking. Our goal was to create a straightforward, interview-based scoring system applicable across various care settings.
methodsThis retrospective multicentre study formed exploratory and validation cohorts of adults with severe asthma starting biologic treatment. The primary outcome was achievement of 3-domain CR (no maintenance OCS, no exacerbation, asthma control test (ACT) ≥23). Each baseline characteristic was tested using univariable logistic regression; those with p<0.05 were included in a multivariable model to identify independent predictors. These predictors were combined into a point-based score. Discrimination was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and externally validated.
resultsThe analysis included 281 patients in the exploratory cohort and 53 in the validation cohort. Three-domain CR occurred in 37.7% (106/281) of the exploratory cohort and 35.9% (19/53) of the validation cohort. In the exploratory cohort, male sex (OR, 2.34; 95% CI 1.22 to 4.57), ACT score ≥20 (OR, 3.75; 95% CI 1.96 to 7.36) and comorbid chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) (OR, 3.27; 95% CI 1.61 to 6.93) were associated with 3-domain CR. We developed a scoring system by assigning 1 point each for male sex (M), ACT ≥20 (A) and comorbid CRS (C), termed MAC score, which showed good discrimination (AUC 0.73; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.79) and was externally validated (AUC 0.76; 95% CI 0.60 to 0.91).
conclusionThe MAC score, a three-item metric derived from routinely accessible information, effectively predicts 3-domain CR and can be implemented across a range of healthcare settings, from primary care clinics to tertiary hospitals.
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.