Two-Year Integrated Efficacy And Safety Analysis Of Benralizumab In Severe Asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
J Mark FitzGerald,1 Eugene R Bleecker,2 Arnaud Bourdin,3 William W Busse,4 Gary T Ferguson,5 Laura Brooks,6 Peter Barker,6 Ubaldo J Martin6 1Centre for Heart and Lung Health, The Lung Centre Vancouver General Hospital, UBC Institute for Heart and Lung Health, Vancouver, BC, Canada; 2Divisions of Pharmacogenomics and Genetics, Genomics and Precision Medicine, University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, AZ, United States; 3Department of Respiratory Diseases, Hôpital Arnaud De Villeneuve, Montpellier, France; 4Department of Medicine, Division of Allergy, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, United States; 5Pulmonary Research Institute of Southeast Michigan, Farmington Hills, MI, United States; 6AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD, United StatesCorrespondence: J Mark FitzGeraldThe Lung Centre, Vancouver General Hospital, Gordon and Leslie Diamond Health Care Centre, 2775 Laurel Street, Vancouver BC V5Z 1M9, CanadaTel +1604-875-4122Email mark.fitzgerald@vch.caBackground: Benralizumab is an interleukin-5 receptor alpha–directed cytolytic monoclonal antibody. Treatment with benralizumab significantly reduces exacerbations and improves lung function after 1 year for patients with severe, uncontrolled eosinophilic asthma.Objective: We explored whether benralizumab efficacy was sustained after an additional year of treatment while maintaining an acceptable safety profile.Methods: Data from the pivotal 48-week SIROCCO and 56-week CALIMA studies were integrated with data from the predefined 56-week adult phase of the BORA extension study to provide a 2-year integrated efficacy and safety analysis of benralizumab. BORA enrolled patients who had completed SIROCCO or CALIMA. Patients receiving benralizumab 30 mg subcutaneously, either every 4 weeks (Q4W) or every 8 weeks (Q8W; first three doses Q4W), were assessed. Efficacy was evaluated based on baseline blood eosinophil counts from the pivotal studies (≥300 and Results: Mean treatment exposures were 24.3 (Q4W, n=518) and 24.6 (Q8W, n=512) months. Exacerbation frequency reductions observed in SIROCCO/CALIMA were maintained; 50% of the patients had no exacerbations during the 2-year study period (crude exacerbation rate, Q8W: 0.56 exacerbations/year for patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥300 cells/μL). Lung function improvements with benralizumab were maintained for 2 years, as represented by increases in mean prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second from baseline of 0.343 L and 0.364 L with 1 and 2 years of benralizumab Q8W treatment, respectively, for patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥300 cells/μL. Health-related quality of life improvements with benralizumab observed in the pivotal studies were also sustained. Adverse events and serious adverse event rates were similar between the BORA extension and SIROCCO/CALIMA periods, with no new or unexpected occurrence of adverse events.Conclusion: This benralizumab 2-year integrated analysis further supports long-term use of benralizumab for patients with severe, uncontrolled eosinophilic asthma.Keywords: asthma, benralizumab, clinical features, eosinophilic inflammation, interleukin-5 receptor, safety
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 | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".