Two-year integrated steroid-sparing analysis and safety of benralizumab for severe asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Treatment with benralizumab significantly reduces exacerbations and improves lung function after 1 year and decreases oral corticosteroid (OCS) use after 28 weeks for patients with severe, uncontrolled eosinophilic asthma. We assessed whether these effects on OCS reduction are sustained for up to an additional year of treatment while maintaining an acceptable safety profile. METHODS: Data on OCS maintenance dosage were collected for adult patients with baseline blood eosinophil counts ≥150 cells/μL treated with add-on benralizumab 30 mg (every 4 [Q4W] or 8 weeks [Q8W; first three doses Q4W]) from the 28-week ZONDA study and were integrated with results from the predefined 56-week adult completion phase of the BORA extension study. Efficacy and safety were summarized descriptively. RESULTS: For patients receiving benralizumab Q8W, the median daily OCS dosage reduction of 75% from baseline to end of treatment achieved in ZONDA was sustained at the end of the BORA extension period (median 67% reduction from baseline). This was estimated to result in a median cumulative OCS dosage of 2.98 g over the 1.5-year period for patients receiving benralizumab Q8W compared with 5.74 g if these patients had remained on their baseline OCS dosages prior to benralizumab initiation. All adverse event rates were similar between the BORA extension and ZONDA periods, with no new or unexpected safety findings. CONCLUSION: This benralizumab 1.5-year integrated analysis demonstrates that OCS reductions and safety were maintained with further follow up and supports long-term use of benralizumab for patients with severe, uncontrolled eosinophilic asthma.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".