Efficacy of Intravenous Reslizumab in Oral Corticosteroid–Dependent Asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reslizumab displays efficacy in patients with inadequately controlled eosinophilic asthma; previous reports in oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma are limited. OBJECTIVE: To assess efficacy of reslizumab in oral corticosteroid-dependent patients and benefits on oral corticosteroid burden. METHODS: We report post hoc analyses of pooled data from duplicate, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials. Patients aged 12 to 75 years with inadequately controlled, moderate-to-severe asthma were randomized 1:1 to receive intravenous reslizumab 3.0 mg/kg or placebo every 4 weeks for 52 weeks, stratified by oral corticosteroid use at enrollment and by region. Assessments included efficacy and predictors of clinical asthma exacerbation response in oral corticosteroid-dependent patients, and systemic corticosteroids burden in the overall population. RESULTS: Patients were randomized to reslizumab (n = 477) or placebo (n = 476); 73 (15%) patients in each group were taking oral corticosteroids at baseline. Reslizumab was favored over placebo for all efficacy end points in oral corticosteroid-dependent patients, with numerically greater improvements in oral corticosteroid-dependent patients than the overall population. Having 2 or more versus 1 clinical asthma exacerbation in the previous 12 months was the strongest positive predictor of reduced exacerbation risk with reslizumab (risk reduction, 77.5% vs 15.2%; P ≤ .02). Significantly fewer new systemic corticosteroid prescriptions were issued per patient receiving reslizumab versus placebo (mean ± SD, 0.5 ± 1.07 vs 1.0 ± 1.52; P < .0001). Total and per-patient systemic corticosteroid burdens were lower: 121,135 versus 290,977 mg and 254 versus 611 mg/patient, respectively (both P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Oral corticosteroid-dependent patients benefited from reslizumab across asthma efficacy outcome measures. Reslizumab-treated patients required fewer new systemic corticosteroid prescriptions and had a lower systemic corticosteroid burden compared with placebo.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".