Tezepelumab in patients with asthma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Wenli Shang, Guizuo Wang, Dong Han

Abstract readReview

In one paragraph

Review in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Wenli ShangDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Shaanxi Provincial People's Hospital, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.

Guizuo WangDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Shaanxi Provincial People's Hospital, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.

Dong HanDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Shaanxi Provincial People's Hospital, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China. Electronic address: sesory@yeah.net.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveCurrent biological treatments are not suitable for many patients with severe asthma. The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine the efficacy of tezepelumab in patients with asthma.

methodsThe authors conducted systematic searches of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov without language restrictions. Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) on treatment of asthma with tezepelumab were reviewed. The authors summarized findings as Risk Ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and Weighted Mean Differences (WMD) for continuous outcomes, each with 95% Confidence Intervals (95% CI).

resultsSeven RCTs (enrolling 2050 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Tezepelumab showed significant effects on asthma exacerbation (RR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.65% to 0.80), percentage change in Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 s (FEV

conclusionsTezepelumab appears safe and effective; further long-term and real-world studies are warranted.

Indexed as

AsthmaEfficacyMeta-analysisTezepelumab

Identifiers

PMID42378864

DOI10.1016/j.clinsp.2026.101028

PMCPMC13330515

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.