ArticleERJ open research2026
Eosinophil subtypes in asthmatic patients treated with mepolizumab, omalizumab and dupilumab.
Article in ERJ open 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Two eosinophil subtypes, resident (rEos) and inflammatory (iEos), have been identified, first in mice and later in asthmatic patients. The effects of different biologics on these subpopulations remain unclear. This study evaluates the impact of mepolizumab, dupilumab and omalizumab on the proportion of rEos and iEos in asthmatic patients over 52 weeks. Methods: We conducted a prospective study with 1-year follow-up of 82 patients with severe asthma: 28 were not receiving biologic therapy, 24 were treated with mepolizumab, 20 with dupilumab and 10 with omalizumab. Clinical variables included Asthma Control Test, exacerbation history and lung function. Blood samples underwent flow cytometry to classify eosinophils into (Siglec-8 Results: Mepolizumab significantly reduced eosinophil concentrations compared with other groups (p<0.001). Patients without biologics had a high iEos proportion (23.4±13.7%), comparable with the omalizumab and dupilumab groups (31.3±12.8% and 27.6±10.1%). Mepolizumab-treated patients had markedly lower iEos proportions (2.4±4.0%, p<0.001). Stratifying iEos by quartiles, there was a significant relation between the highest quartile and lower FEV Conclusion: Biological therapies differentially affect eosinophil subtypes, correlating with lung function and steroid use. Monitoring iEos and rEos may serve as a marker of asthma control.
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.