Dupilumab Is Effective in Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Uncontrolled GINA-Defined Type 2 Asthma Irrespective of an Allergic Asthma Phenotype
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The Global Initiative for Asthma report recommends consideration of add-on biologics for patients with type 2 inflammation (blood eosinophils ≥150 cells/μL, fractional exhaled nitric oxide [Feno] ≥20 parts per billion or allergic asthma) whose asthma cannot be controlled by high-dose inhaled corticosteroids. In QUEST (NCT02414854), add-on dupilumab versus placebo was efficacious in patients with uncontrolled, moderate to severe asthma, including those with eosinophils greater than or equal to 150 cells/μL and/or Feno greater than or equal to 25 parts per billion. Objective To assess dupilumab efficacy in patients with a type 2 phenotype in the presence or absence of allergic asthma phenotype. Methods Patients aged 12 years or older received add-on dupilumab 200/300 mg versus matched placebo every 2 weeks for 52 weeks. Allergic asthma phenotype was defined as baseline serum total IgE greater than or equal to 30 IU/mL and 1 or more perennial aeroallergen-specific IgE level greater than or equal to 0.35 kU/L. Annualized rate of severe asthma exacerbations and changes from study baseline in prebronchodilator and postbronchodilator FEV 1 were evaluated in patients with allergic and nonallergic phenotype with baseline blood eosinophils greater than or equal to 150 cells/μL and/or Feno greater than or equal to 20 parts per billion. Results Of 1902 patients in QUEST, 83.3% had eosinophils and/or Feno above Global Initiative for Asthma thresholds; 56.9% had evidence for allergic asthma. Dupilumab significantly reduced the rate of severe asthma exacerbations in patients with (48.8%) and without (64.0%) evidence of allergic asthma and improved prebronchodilator and postbronchodilator FEV 1 in patients with elevated type 2 biomarkers, irrespective of whether they showed evidence of an allergic asthma phenotype. Conclusions In patients with type 2 biomarkers over Global Initiative for Asthma thresholds, dupilumab significantly reduced exacerbations and improved lung function. Efficacy was not impacted by allergic status.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".