ArticleJournal of asthma and allergy2026
Biologic Underutilization and Healthcare Burden in US Patients with Type 2 Severe Asthma.
Article in Journal of asthma and allergy, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Detailed real-world evidence on the unmet needs and economic burden of patients with type 2 severe asthma, particularly in the biologic therapy era, remains limited. Purpose: To characterize unmet treatment needs and economic burden in patients with type 2 severe asthma and a history of frequent exacerbations who could benefit from biologic therapy. Patients and Methods: This retrospective cohort study used healthcare claims data from the US Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Results: Overall, 2827 patients met the study definition for type 2 severe asthma (GINA 4: n=1513; GINA 5: n=1314), with 11.9% of patients (GINA 4: 5.2%; GINA 5: 19.6%) receiving biologics at baseline. Systemic/oral steroid-defined exacerbations were most common at baseline and follow-up across GINA steps. Overall, similar proportions of patients at GINA 4 and 5 (71.6% and 70.5%, respectively) experienced ≥1 exacerbation during the follow-up period. The mean (SD) total number of exacerbations was 1.6 (1.8) at GINA 4 versus 1.7 (1.9) at GINA 5. Mean (SD) steroid-defined exacerbations were 1.3 (1.5) versus 1.4 (1.6), emergency-department (ED)-defined exacerbations were 0.2 (0.9) versus 0.2 (0.8), and hospitalization-defined exacerbations were 0.04 (0.3) and 0.06 (0.3) in the respective treatment groups. Patients at GINA step 5 receiving biologic therapies at baseline had lower asthma-related inpatient admissions costs versus those not receiving biologic therapies. Conclusion: Patients with type 2 severe asthma at GINA steps 4/5 experience similar disease burden. These findings highlight a potential unmet need for earlier phenotypic assessment in this population.
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.